He spends his precious minutes on screen dispensing pat “I will destroy you!” dialogue as the film descends into the obligatory boom and pow. Teller duly responds with similarly on-the-nose “He’s stronger than any of us, he’s not stronger than all of us” rallying cries in-between super-stretchy double-handed punches. The franchise catchphrases you presumed forbidden are promptly crowbarred in as “It’s clobbering time!”, “Flame on!” and the title drop land like a giggle fit at a mortuary. After all that effort at authenticity, Fantastic Four wants it both ways: funereal and fun. The first part of a two-part film you can’t watch just yet, Fantastic Four ends on an optimistic, just-you-wait-for-the-sequel note. But as an origin story that’s all origins and no story, there’s a hollow, stale feeling to this occasionally admirable attempt to Nolanise Marvel’s dysfunctional family. [2/5]
http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/rev ... FID=139047After taking forever to arrive, the foursome’s big team-up moment feels illogical and perfunctory – not to mention spectacularly ugly, with blurry special effects and some inexplicable stylistic flourishes. Doom’s famous metal mask, for instance, is nowhere to be seen: in its place is a smooth, swirly face which unnervingly resembles the Monkey Jesus painting on the wall of a Spanish church that became a minor internet sensation a few years ago. The harder a film strains to shut ridiculousness out, the more likely it is to seep back in at the worst possible moment. And while there’s no reason that superhero films can’t be serious, they forget their comic roots at their peril. [2/5]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/fantastic-four/review/You can feel this giant film straining for indie cred. Mara’s character listens to Portishead to unwind. Teller and Jordan share a nice moment where dorky Reed Richards responds to Johnny’s fist bump with a gentle open-palmed pat. Yet none of these details fit into the whole. They’re just weird kinks, mumblecore-y elements in another shiny franchise picture whipped out for a quick buck. The Fantastic Four, introduced in 1961, were Marvel’s original superhero ensemble. After the cheeseball 90s incarnation and Tim Story’s unremarkable double act of 2005 and 2007 they’re now on their fourth underwhelming feature adventure. A sequel has been announced for June 2017. Do you know what would be really fantastic? Leaving them on the page. [2/5]
http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/au ... o-dawdlingFollowing a spot of genuinely unnerving body horror courtesy of Teller’s infinitely extendable arms, the second half is nothing more than a sub-‘Avengers’ roundelay of superhero tics: naff catchphrases, brain-grinding exposition and lifeless punch-ups, the talented cast totally overwhelmed by the duff CG special effects. It’s a shame, because there are points early on where this promises to transcend its silly source material and become a worthwhile addition to an increasingly overstuffed and predictable genre. [2/5]
http://www.timeout.com/london/film/fantastic-four-2015Fantastic Four comes out more removed from the previous pair of adaptations than their detractors could ever have dreamed. The controversial casting yields strong results, particularly in the cases of Michael B Jordan and Toby Kebbell, and it's really nothing like any other screen version of the source material. But on the flip side, it's not a big crowd-pleaser and, in a market where Ant-Man is still playing, fans and casual viewers alike may find themselves disinclined to come back for the next instalment.[2/5]
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/fantast ... z3hyUYYMYTThe final act feels so insanely rushed, and this title takes a turn for the worse dramatically, getting really rather bad, and really rather quickly – which is a shame given the opening hour is so easy to immerse yourself in. It’s almost as though Trank looked at his watch one afternoon and thought, ‘gooseberry fool, we’ve got to wrap this movie in two days – shoot the ending – quickly’. Because this is where the film falls short – as there’s so much set-up and yet no pay-off. It feels as though we’re actually spending the entire time building up to another movie, a sequel. However the problem is, there’s a pretty good chance that may never come to fruition – and you can see why. [1/5]
http://www.heyuguys.com/fantastic-four-review/Trapped in such bog-standard myth-making, the five young leads gamely try to punch the worn spandex clichés across with panache. But with such by-the-numbers scripting, loads of silly exposition and the naive assumption that now commonplace scenes of epic destruction will cause awestruck surrender no matter what, they fail, like Trank, to make Fantastic Four feel anything more than an elongated trailer for the next episode. Taking ages to really get started, then flatlining when Reed escapes his Area 57 cell to go into jungle hiding (a completely pointless interlude), before revving up to a trite finale, this is a tedious, underwhelming and hardly fantastic experience all round. [2/5]
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-08- ... mes-reviewThere is a constant debate among comic book and industry observers about whether or not a true auteur driven effort could or should be implemented in expensive superhero movies, or whether a studio, or someone like Marvel guru Kevin Feige, has a right to dictate a particular artistic direction. The answer, of course, is that a compromise that is satisfying to both parties is the ideal resolution. And if anything, "Fantastic Four" is an example of what happens when a director and studio are clearly not working in sync. Often out of alignment, and missing a clear creative guiding vision, "Fantastic Four" is not ready for the multiplex battle ahead. [D]
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/ ... n-20150805
