New Titles For ‘Die Hard 5′ and the ‘Fantastic Four’ Reboot

Published 5 years ago by , Updated February 15th, 2014 at 4:24 pm,

7 Fantastic four reborn New Titles For Die Hard 5 and the Fantastic Four Reboot

According to Aint It Cool, the new title for Die Hard 5 will be Die Hard 24/7 and the Fantastic Four reboot will be called Fantastic Four Reborn.  This comes from one of their sources who is presumably inside or has connections at 20th Century Fox.

Truth be told, I can’t roll my eyes hard enough at both of those titles – especially Die Hard 24/7. However, there were an infinite number of titles being tossed around for Die Hard 4 before they settled on Live Free or Die Hard (or Die Hard 4.0 if you live outside of the U.S.), so I suspect this may not be the final word on the matter.

Regardless of how silly that Die Hard 5 title may be, it’s another indication that the project is picking up steam, so fans should be pleased to learn that we’ll probably be seeing John McClane again sooner, rather than later.

Bruce Willis has never been shy about his desire to return to the role. Last February, the project went past the point of speculation when Willis announced that they might start shooting as early as next year. He also indicated his desire to see the franchise go “worldwide” with the fifth installment. A few months later, we learned that Skip Woods (Wolverine, Hitman) was in negotiations to write the sceenplay. There are still no details regarding the plot of the film or which characters from previous films might return (if any).

We haven’t heard much about the Fantastic Four reboot since Fox confirmed it late last summer – other than Chris Evans stating that he would not be returning as The Human Torch (obviously).  If fans needed any further proof that Evans had vacated the role it came with the announcement that he had signed on to play Captain America. Apparently the Fantastic Four reboot is still chugging along though, and perhaps this means there will be more news on the project in the near future – such as who will play the new Fantastic Four.

Neither project has an official release date but we’ll keep you posted.

What do you think of the titles Die Hard 24/7 and Fantastic Four Reborn? Do you have any suggestions for something better?

Source: /Film via Aint It Cool.

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. Why not just continue F4 with new writers and actors? I would have said use the Skrulls but it seems like the Skrulls will be the villains in Avengers. I guess they could still use Super Skrull.

  2. I’m always up for Die Hard (seen one and four and loved them). However I’m not sure rebooting Fantastic Four will make it any more successful. The characters are just so silly outside the comic book world. And I don’t think there is any way to make it “darker.”

  3. I did not like the last Die Hard title… meh but it was more of an added title as it was always Die Hard 4: Live Free Die Hard for me.

    As for the FF title…
    FF Reborn is from a comic title when they returned from an Alt universe. I never really read it.

    I can only assume it will indicate a “fresh” start of the franchise with maybe a “breeze” over of their origins since we all already more or less know it.

  4. If there is no Jessica Alba, FF: reborn is a no go for me… unless they get someone as smokin’ as she was. They botched Galactus in the last one and really screwed up Dr. Doom. Who will they get for the next villain?

    • Jessica Alba may be hot but she was a terrible choice for the Invisible Woman. She doesn’t suit the character at all.

  5. I kinda agree witH Kahless about just continueing the franchise with a new cast except for Michael Chiklis as The Thing since he & Chris Evans were the best ones outta the group in the roles. I was hoping to see Frankie Become Galactus’s new harald and maybe use her to get revenge on the Silver Surfer for his betrayal. Other villains would be the Skulls, but with them being a choice of villains for The Avengers, id rather see them in the Avengers film or its sequels. The Title sounds like we gotta go through that whole origin/gettin their super powers again. As for the Die hard 5 title, im lost for words for, it makes John McClane would be staying up a whole week for no sleep trackin down terrorists or somthing. And John McClane goin Global wouldnt be such a bad idea, its somthing new, depending on where the film takes place though. I guess they dont wanna use a number 5 in the title because most people didnt like Die Hard 2.

    • How can you support that statement that most people didn’t like Die Hard 2? What was wrong with it? I thought it was a fun movie and I still enjoy watching it.

      • I dont. I was only stating what others have talked about it before. I too Liked Die Hard 2, its not my favorite or best in the franchise but i enjoyed watching it. Most people always told me they didnt like it because of the plot, too many refererances to the first film, the fact the Bruce Willis himself said he didnt like it muc, etc. all kinds of things were said. They didnt get why someone was being flown to the US over on X-Mas to a civilian airport or why the terrorists hideout in a church was close to the airport when it should of been obvious, After all Joker was overlooking his work with the two ferrys in TDK as a example, so they should of known the terrorists used the church as a base of opperations close by to make it easier to keep tabs on officials at the airport to make sure they do their bidding. You have to ask others Andy, Im one of the ones who liked the film and thought it was a ok film. I wasnt that thrilled over Live Free Or Die Hard and not even a Car flying into a Helicoptor gives me a excuse to enjoy the film 100% or say it was way better. Till this day the first Die Hard is still my #1 favorite with Die Hard: With A vengance in #2, Between Die Hard 2 and Live Free Or Die Hard, not sure which would be my 3rd favorite, i enjoyed the 4th film except for how it ended but made sense due to McClane’s situation at that time.

        • I have to ditto that. I don’t get the hate for #2; my favorite is #1, but my runner up is #2. For me, it’s a toss-up between #3 and #4 for third place.

          • The problem with 2 is that it was obviously a sequel for the sake of being a sequel. Meaning they were just banking on the success of the first. While that’s basically true for any sequel, when it’s obvious during the movie, that’s bad, and it was obvious during Die Hard 2, even Bruce Willis has pointed it out. It just so happen to be Christmas again, then there was the reporter that mentions the events from the first movie, then later McClane even mentions the first movie with something in the lines of: “why does this keep happening to me on Christmas?” If that’s not enough, then his wife is coincidentally stuck on a plane with the same reporter she punched out from the first one, and they made sure to mention that. That’s four blatant references to the first movie within the first half hour of the movie… Bruce Willis have said during an interview that he was a bit annoyed during the shooting of that movie because he hates when a sequel references the movies that come before.

            But ok, let’s pretend those things didn’t happen, let’s look at the story itself. So you mean to tell me that they are flying a political prisoner aboard a military aircraft and they choose to land that military aircraft on a civilian runway, but not just any civilian runway, one part of a super busy international airport in Washington DC, AND during the busiest time of the year for travel?? I mean, seriously, were they ASKING for something bad to happen? Why didn’t they land it on a military air field like maybe Edwards Air Force Base or some other Air Force Base??

            Then there’s the issue of why cables and wires capable of intercepting the communications and power to their air traffic control can be accessed from OUTSIDE the airport… I thought all of those things would be internal so the only way to access them was from within the airport?? Why would they have them going outside the airport, then back in? Makes absolutely no sense.

            Then there was the scene where they had an ejection seat on a cargo plane (I’m not 100% sure, but I’m pretty sure they didn’t have that…), and grenades that took about 30 seconds to explode… I also wonder why they didn’t simply shoot him when they saw that he ejected from the plane…

            And I wonder if the movie makers know how planes work and how having a jacket stuffed under an aileron (or was it the flaps?) on the wing will keep it from taking off? The shape of the wing creates lift, not the ailerons or the flaps. In fact, the flaps should actually be down to help create more lift at (relatively) low speeds, otherwise known as reducing stalling speed, so if it was the flaps, then that doesn’t make any sense at all since they should be down anyhow. If it was an aileron that was jammed, then the most it would do is force a roll to one direction while in flight, which would probably cause a crash, but the plane should still lift off, lol. But either way, I’m sure the hydraulics on the wing is stronger than the jacket and would have unstuck itself quite easily…

            But yes, I know it’s just a movie, but it wasn’t any ONE thing that made the movie not as enjoyable as the rest, it’s the combination of all of those things. I do expect ridiculous stunts and crazy explosions, but not if there are so many aspects of the plot that is so contrived. Like how they are sending in the military against this guy and they don’t think twice about sending in someone that worked directly with the terrorist in the past… I would think they would at least make sure there are no connections between them to prevent any kind of conspiracy like those that happened in the movie.

            Not to mention, I would think that John McClane would know the difference between blanks and live ammo the second he started shooting…

            Oh, and speaking of shooting blanks, how he walked into their command center and fired off those blanks from the MP5 without being gunned down by all of the cops in that room still escapes me…

            I admit, I saw Die Hard 2 back when I was younger, and after that, I thought it was my favorite Die Hard. That is until more recently I watched them all over again and realized how bad Die Hard 2 was and how great the original was. The thing about Die Hard 2 is that the visuals are very nice. After watching it when I was younger and not really noticing the things I pointed out, I really enjoyed it and my memory had it as my favorite one. But that changed after I saw it again now that I’m more mature and more observant about these things. I can’t really decide if I liked Die Hard 3 or 4 more, but Die Hard 2 is definitely my least favorite of the 4 so far for the reasons above…

            • he couldnt have known they were blanks…it wasnt in the script….

      • as do i! :)

      • Die Hard 2 was horrible, sorry. The first Die Hard is probably close to being the best action movie of all time. Die Hard 3 was fun, but not as good as the first, and Live Free or Die Hard was nostalgic, had great cinematography, and was pretty fun too. Die Hard 2 basically has no redeeming qualities other than John McClane as a character being in it…

        • I agree about the original Die Hard being one of the greatest action films of all times, but I disagree about DH2. Enjoyed it then and enjoy it now. None of the things you mention are OBVIOUS to the average person and isn’t as glaring as say, cellphones working during 2012 when the world is ending. I’m sure if you dig deep in to any movie, Ken, you’ll find some stuff that doesn’t hold true. If they did every movie realistically, Mythbusters would be short of some quality episodes! :P

  6. Jessica Alba was horribly miscast as Sue Storm. Yeah, she’s hot, but she was wrong for the part. Except for Chris Evans and Michael Chiklis, the whole cast was wrong. I also have an issue with rebooting a series that is only FIVE years old. Either continue the series OR let it go on hiatus for 10 more years or so. I’m sure there are other projects Fox can ruin.

    As for Die Hard 5, sign me up. The title is a bit strange (are they doing this film a’la “24″?), but I enjoyed all the other films. I am sure that I will enjoy this one.

    • I totally agree, reboots (or rumors of reboots) are coming oto fast. FF could follow the same route that Hulk did and not show the origin, but tell a story that basically forgets the events of the first two movies. Techinically a reboot, but not as obvious I guess.

      There should be an unstated rule that NO comic book movie can have a montage (e.g. Torch doing the shaving cream joke on Thing, just painful to watch).

      • hollywoods newest trends=reboot writers? whats next hiring reality tv show writers to write these reboots??

        • Sorry at my age I do not want to wait 10 years to see what I have more or less waited a life time to see.

          I could give a rats patooie if they restarted every “character” every other year as long as it was “new” and done with respect to the history of that character. Not to mention done well.

          Stretching it a bit I know but guess what? Does it really matter? There is not a one of you there that will say… OMG Spiderman 4 didnt come out, Sam is not doing it and the last Spiderman was only here “x” amount of years ago IM NOT GOING…

          Yes you are. You know you will… Just like the Hulk and anything else.

          • theres really no need for rebooting anything, especially something like a spiderman/superman thing, and no, i have not seen any of the reboots, nor plan too, ever, nor will i be going to see any in the future, i saw ang lee’s Hulk and was put off by it, havent seen and will not ever see Nortons version of the hulk, probably wontbe seeing any of these other marvel reboots, or up coming comic book adapations either

            • Spiderman desperately needed rebooting and I’m looking forward to seeing the current reboot get a reboot by MARVEL STUDIOS when the time comes.

              In fact I’m looking forward to all the MARVEL STUDIO reboots in years to come. :-)

            • “i saw ang lee’s Hulk and was put off by it” That would be he whole reason to want/see a reboot, that is if you had any “love” for the character itself.

              What would be the reason for NOT rebooting? Story? Actors? Mythos?

              • reboots still arent neccessary at all. would any of you fanboys out there like to see the twilight series rebooted, sayyy next year??!? not that im a fan of that twilight crap.

      • The ‘Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head’ montage in Spider-Man 2 wasn’t too bad.

  7. I don’t care what they call Die Hard 5 as long as it is rated ‘R’. I am tired of them wussifying our action movies.

    • The only problem with that Raven is that “Live Free or Die Hard” did REALLY well. Their strategy was to appeal to a broader audience with the PG-13 rating and the box office receipts send the message that it works. So I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this next one is PG-13 (with an unrated DVD) as well.

      As far as the title goes, I always liked “Old Habits Die Hard” for the next one. I know it’s incredibly silly, but no more so than the last two have been.

      • to be honest, i kinda like that title for the next movie. i mean none of the titles have been very good but i think that kinda fits:p maybe he’ll murder some more people in the gruber family! then it will definitely be “Old Habits Die Hard” haha :)

      • I actually like Old Habits Die Hard. Is that your baby or did someone else make that title up?

        • That’s my baby but I’m POSITIVE I’m not the first person to think of it or suggest it. It’s a pretty popular expression.

      • only reason it did well was because it was a LONG time between films, AND the fact that people have been wanting to see WIllis get back into action for some time with that character, timing was right, rating was wrong

        • Rambo 4 did really well too, and it was R, just something else to think about

          • Rambo did better than they expected it would but it wasn’t a massive hit. It certainly didn’t do the business LVODH did.

            I’m not saying the PG-13 rating was why the film made so much money. I’m only saying that I think the studio will interpret it that way.

            I don’t want another PG-13 Die Hard any more than the rest of you. Sadly, I’m pretty sure that’s what we’re going to get.

              • I’m with you. I enjoyed LVODH but understand how most people view it as Die Hard In Name Only. I’d much rather get something closer to the spirit of the first film. And I agree kids sneak into R rated movies anyway. I’m not arguing with you on any level. I’m just saying how disappointing it is that the studio is going to interpret the PG-13 rating as having something to do with film’s success.

                And I loved “Rambo” =-).

                • Rambo was great…just it was too short LOL. i rememebr seeing Scream(god help the sequelcoming out PG-13 anyone?)and seeing a group of 13-15 year olds in the theater, needless to say it ruined the experience, though i did get a big laugh when henry winkler was killed off by saying ” hey man they cant kill The Fonz off like that”

                • The keyword there is “sneak” into R movies, meaning they don’t buy the tickets, meaning they don’t get the box office revenue. So rating it PG-13 DOES increase revenue. It’s the number of tickets sold that matters, not how many people see it…

                  • no, it really doesnt some sneak, some, like myself as a kid had relatives buy tickets, or older friends, etc.

      • i stated this before, the rating for live free, in my opion didnt have that much of a factor in ticket sales, the fact that it was a long time between die hard movies, most everyone wanted to see how McClane was doing where he ended up over that long of a layoff in years between the titles

  8. I’m getting so sick of reboots.

    • right there with you pal!!

      • So what woudl you guys rather see no portrayal of these characters/stories? Continued crappy (subpar instead of crappy but I have to cover everything) portrayals of these characters/stories?

        Or a chance at a new/fresh/clean/correct portrayal of these characters/stories?

        Notice I said chance. Im not saying it will be better heck it may be worse but guess what you wont know until you try.

        • i’d rather not see the same mistakes twice(reboots)fresh ideas is where its at with me, i dont think im the only one that feels strongly on this too.

  9. The shaving cream joke was the best part of the movie lol

  10. I think I have to agree that the FF characters are a bit silly outside of the comic book.

    As for Die Hard 5. If skip woods is writing it, it will be horse s***. Wolverine and Hit Man were both film atrocities. There aren’t enough expletives to express how absolutely horrid those two films are. I think Wolverine is the worse of both of them. From shoddy writing to half-assed production value it is simply garbage. As are most films from the comic genre. Babied up and far removed from gritty reality. Steep a comic book in grit and realism and success is close behind. Why production companies can’t see this is beyond me.

    • Wow…I can not agree with you more. Yes, no expletives, or even words for that matter, can describe how horrible that movie was. But the thing that frustrates me is that people like you and I recognise this fact, but the movie still made a lot of money, and there will be more to come. Very unfortunate.

      • Um. No expletives? He says “yippie-kay-ay mother f***er” at the end. You can say that (once) in a PG-13 movie and he did. I don’t care if there is little swearing as long as he says that famous line.

        • We’re talking about wolverine.

          • Oops. Yeah, I realized that right after I posted it. I completely misunderstood what you were talking about. Thanks for being polite about it!

            • Its all good, but yeah, that lines the best! :)

    • How much moolah did “grit and realism” pull in for Watchmen? That movie, IMO, was a chore to watch. Since Watchmen wasn’t the cash cow that most people thought it would be, studios aren’t going to plunk down piles of cash for movies that aren’t going to sell toys, shirts, lunchboxes, etc. Besides, certain characters aren’t set up to be gritty. The Fantastic Four are such characters. Batman naturally lent itself to becoming darker and grittier, but ALOT of Marvel’s characters are very “comic booky.” Daredevil would be perfect for gritty treatment, Spider-Man not so much. Gritty and realism are good for some characters, fantastic is better for others. As long as the writing is good and the character is developed, the movie will be good.

      • “studios aren’t going to plunk down piles of cash for movies that aren’t going to sell toys, shirts, lunchboxes, etc.”

        No… and it’s exactly why a super hero movie will never win an Oscar. “Watchmen” was one of the few movies that aspired to take the genre to upper realms. Audiences have grown too accustomed to trite Kitschy trash to appreciate the seriousness, the implications, the thought provoking that went into the original myths that spawned the genre in the first place…

      • I would much rather watch the QUALITY “grit and realism” of “Watchmen” any day over the QUANTITY of a moolah CRAP fest like “Twilight” , “X-Men” or “SpiderTEEN”

        “but ALOT of Marvel’s characters are very comic booky.”

        I don’t get what you mean with that statement. All comic book characters like any fictional character, be it sci-fi, fantasy, horror (pick any genre) can lend themselves to serious mature and realistic dramatic characterization. Good writers know how to do that.

        When was the last time you picked up an “Amazing Spiderman” comic book? Try issue #634 – “Grim Hunt” Part One. You may be impressed. :-)

        This pre conceived notion that comic book movies should somehow just reflect the kiddies TV cartoons is beyond me. Why denigrate illustrated literary texts as substandard to other forms of literature?

        It’s interesting that a lot of people seem to think that comic books are for kids only and that they should just provide entertainment, devoid of intelligent dramatic dialogue and social commentary, when in fact comic books have been a great study resource because of their anthropological reflections.

        I want to be entertained as much as anyone else by a fun action packed movie based on a comic book, but without all the other elements that have made the books great over the decades, all you get is a cartoon on steroids without much substance.

        Look at what Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, Steve Ditko and many other great storytellers and artists did in the 60s at Marvel Comics. Super hero comic books that were wonderfully entertaining, incredibly scripted, dialogue that was realistic, dramatic, fun, quirky, serious and occasionally touching on social commentary. What a great balance.

        • Watchmen the book was great, the movie was a sad representation of it. Very sad.

          Agreed that movies and comics alike can and should be entertaining AND serious / inspiring (can’t think of a better word).

        • Here here Magnetic Eye and the fullness of the creations can’t be realized with one hand tied behind your back and with a blindfold on! Read, Fox and Sony’s handling of the franchises. They don’t have the experience or the full pantheon of characters to draw from, they don’t know the stories or the stories character, little alone the characters in the stories. They can’t balance the characterizations properly. They get Johnny Storm doing one thing consistent with what you’d expect then you see Sue Storm doing something that’s out of character. Her power of invisibility for example. Plenty of story on how she can project that on other objects in the comics, cartoons, well everywhere but your suppose to believe in the first movie she can’t project that to encompass her clothes. Then in the second movie she Can amazingly project that on a wall when in the compound they were being held at in the second. Where does that even leave the casual viewer that just knows this person has this ability and that person has that ability? It looks like they’re making it up as they go along when it’s really been fleshed out forever. That’s just a teeny tiny example, a baby example really of what’s wrong with the franchises being “handled” by amateurs. Then they just ruin a quality opportunity to extend the Surfer/Galactus story to another movie. You guys want an awesome story of powerful conflict, Roland Emmerich style apocalyptic scenes, heartfelt drama and stunning mental exercise… Well, forget all that they’re going to reboot this sucker… :(

          The only problem is Marvel isn’t doing the booting! I’d love to loan them my size 12 overshoes if only they had the right.

  11. @ Ken J. I agree, die hard 1 is one the best action movies of all time…as for number 2, yes it’s horrible, but please spare us the rant next time :)

    • they call this site “screenrant” for a reason LOL. everyone has the right to rant about what they want

  12. Suggestion for something better? Yeah FF should go back to Marvel where it belongs. FOX should stick to things it knows like generating McClane movies…

  13. Die Hard 3 was the worst POC ever. That was the first taste of how Samuel Jackson can ruin a “mutha f’in’” film. I really like 2 just watched it on cable the other day.
    The FF reboot should be called FF:JATAINLITM or Fantastic Four”Jessica Alba’s Talentless Ass I No Longer In This Movie.

  14. OH wow greenknight no, no. I can appreciate you wanting them to fail, but man! If Box is going to do another F.F. I’m hoping in their infinite wisdom they choose to do the mole man. He has to be one of the most challenging villains to make interesting and of course they’ll fail miserably. If you can mess up the Galactus story with all the awesome potential, to give them characters like Thanos, Surfer, and Warlock?! Man that’s like going from here kid instead of playing with that nitro here’s an H-bomb! I would expect a mushroom cloud in short order. ;)

    No argument that would be a great story but in the hands of Marvel not fumble fingers Fox. If you gave them the Musée du Louvre they would demolish it just to put a big TV dish on the property…

  15. I’d like to see the negative zone with Annihlus and Blastarr but that would probably be too expensive.

    So maybe the Inhumans saga. CGI could do a cool Medusa and Lockjaw. It would be a true adventure. Not just the FF hanging around New York the most overdone location ever.

  16. Fantastic Four Putting The Horse On Life Support

  17. I guess i’m the only one happy about a FF reboot. I mean the film probably won’t be shown until 2013 which gives us time to sort of forget the last two and while it’s difficult to make a FF movie it’s still possible. With the right cast and writer / director it could be good. A slightly more serious film but not TDk serious of course.

    Die Hard is the best straight forward action film known to man and the reason they can’t recapture that with the sequals is that it gets bigger and bigger. It went from a building to an airport to an entire city and the last one was a threat to the country. What made the first one so great was one man stuck in a building trying to take out all these guys as best he could. If the next one is global than it’s completely turned it’s back on the qualitys of the first film the only thing keeping it die hard is the title and Bruce. I would question why a guy who stopped terroists several times is still just a simple low level detective. Where is Alan?

    As far as the title goes I can’t wait to see John fight side by side with Baur …. Oh that’s not happening?

  18. hollywood wasting money on reboots is just sad…..

  19. Actually ur wrong I’m more than happy to tell u that I won’t be watching the new spiderman in theaters due to decisions Sony has been making and if their choice in cast is what has been stated I won’t purchase the DVD or make a trip to the dollar theater for it. That’s a promise u can take to the bank. If the spiderman casting is true they will not see one cent from me. If it’s not I might give it a chance but not during it’s major release when it’s much cheaper maybe.

  20. Jermey Irons needs to play Dr. Doom. I didn’t think the FF movies were as bad as you fanboys think they were. I was never a big fan of the FF but they were always pretty cool. I thought they did a fair job bringing it to life on the big screen. It was no where near as good a the first couple of Spider-man movies were, but they were a lot better than either of the Hellboy movies. I was not impressed however with Galactus. That was just disgusting. They could have at least put him in the middle of the storm or something. I would also like to see Dr. Doom played a little better. The guy that played him did alright but I don’t think anyone could play him as well as Jermey Irons. His voice is just made for the part.

  21. Bob please tell me that was a joke. The dislike for the FF films isn’t about fan boys it’s simply about bad film making. I’d like to state I’m not a fan boy of FF or Hellboy I’ve read maybe one issue of hellboy and my FF experience is soley based from major marvel events like civil war and the 90s cartoon. Never read an issue of the comic. So my opinion is soley basedon the quality of the film not the source material. Hellboy was excellant and the FF films were terrible. I’m not as upset about the casting ad most in fact I’m ok with all the casting choices except for Doom which was terrible almost as bad as making Evans Capt. The problems with FF aside from Dooms casting were terrible writing and directing. I think the cast had a horrible script and story to deal with and gave it their all with bad plots and horribly scripted cheesy dialogue. Hellboy was simply put superior in every way. Pretend these were original stories and not based on any comic at all soley based on film making merits FF was bad Hellboy was not.

    • Even if these weren’t comic movies I would still say that Hellboy was one of the dumbest movies I have ever seen. You say that it was superior in every way. I strongly disagree. The writing was cheesy and the story was just dumb. Even though I haven’t read alot of FF comics, I have watched all the cartoons that have been made of the FF. The script for those movies was very similar to not only the cartoons but to the limited FF comics I have read. I thought they did an acceptable job bringing those characters to life. I don’t know exactly what you were expecting when you went to see it but with the exception of Dr. Doom, I thought it fit the bill. If you were looking for Oscar winning writing, directing, and acting, then you need to stop watching comic movies.

  22. Doctor Doom is one of Marvel’s greatest villains, and it’s a shame to see him languishing in the hands of Fox when he could be fighting the Avengers with Marvel Studios.

  23. I wish Fox would let their option on Dr. Doom lapse. I am hankering to see Iron Man take on Dr. Doom. That would be epic.

  24. I liked the die hard title because he always risking his life in each movie and hes got be aware 24/7. Why are they making a FF4 reboot. That isnt even necessary.I would rather see a spawn reboot

  25. Wow Anthony you realty should re think your stance on reboots. Don’t think of it as a reboot just another take on a character. I mean Ang Lee made a horrible movie but Ed Nortons Hulk was awsome very good film. I honestly thought it was better than Iron Man by a hair. You really should give it a chance your missing a good movie because u decided to blindly hate the word reboot.

      • “its not the word i hate, its the fact that hollywood has lost ALL sense of originality:( ”

        You do know none of this stuff is original right? Its been in Print, Cartoons, TV, stage……

        The biggest “original” thing I saw and it was even transferred to the comics (and dropped) was the organic webshooters. People across the world almost had cows all at the same time. Me included. although it appeared to “work”.

        So dont blame Hollywood for being original with the characters I grew up with. Quite frankly I DONT want them to be original. Update them a little (Ironman) but leave my childhood basically intact.

        • so, movies like The Usual Suspects wasnt original??

  26. when live free or die hard came out, i was actually shocked about the PG-13 rating it got, soo i waited for the unrated directors cut to come out, and enjoyed the many McClane f-bombs:) as far as all these comic book movies go, some are good some bad, i tend to like the ones that marvel isnt associated with a little better LOL

    • I bought the Director’s cut, and after watching it, the f-bombs felt kind of forced. I actually thought the dialog flowed much better in the theatric release… So I bought the theatrical version blu-ray, lol.

      • i dont know if they were forced really, i think that Willis didnt want the PG-13 rating, Wiseman caved in my opinion

  27. I have to agree Anthony, your stance on reboots is going to cost you some great movie going experiences. Unfortunately, SOME reboots are just as bad as the first go. Others are extremely better. As for the Hulk, well, I actually VERY much enjoyed Ang Lee’s movie. Just as much as the Norton version, in fact. Lee’s was campy but really felt like the comic book came to life. The key statement being that the COMIC BOOK came to life. The Norton version is approached as though they were trying to mesh the Hulk into a more genuine portrayal of reality.

    As for the Fantastic Four… I really don’t know if that can be made into as solid a film as some of the other Marvel properties.

    I like reboots because sometimes (look at the Batman franchise) film makers utterly destroy properties with great, great potential.

    • i have mixed feelings about the batman movies lol but i wont get into that just yet

    • i probably wouldve seen the FF movies had Thing was CGI lol