Excraft

If you haven't seen an epidemic of poorly written, poorly received girl bosses in movies and television over the last several years, then you aren't watching many movies or television. As far as the MCU is concerned, see the M-She U. Sue has always had more to do in the comics than just "being the mom". That's just one minor aspect of her character. So you feel that characters like Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley were "weak", "shallow" and the writing for their motivations was "pandering"? No doubt Hollywood studios are facing increased pressure from streaming as one of the contributing factors for the decline in business. The thing is, they have to do something to compete if they want to keep customers coming to movie theaters. If they don't produce films that people prefer to see in the theater instead of staying at home and streaming, that part of the industry is going to wither away. It could be that Hollywood may just shift to making streaming only content from here on out and let the movie theater industry die. Nobody really knows. Fact is, right now the industry is declining and they aren't producing a product that's getting people back into movie theater seats. Yes she was, briefly. For the overwhelming majority of the last 60 years, Reed has been the leader. The Ant-Man, She-Hulk, Spider-Man, Namor, Black Panther among several others have been members of the Fantastic Four in the comics, but we don't see any of them being included.

Bizarre response. If movie studios were producing content that people wanted to see and pay for, then they wouldn't be facing a decline. Why is the market moving toward streaming? Better product with better content that people are favoring over what they can get at movie theaters. Bizarre response. How's "diverging from the source material because its 2025" working out for them? Is the MCU getting more popular or less? Bizarre response. When did I say I was? Bizarre response. Ripley had a daughter in the sequel, which means she had that child in the first film. It's the "changing and evolving" characters and stories that you're on about. Newt wasn't Ripley's biological child and everyone knows that. Ripley's motivations for protecting Newt are obvious. Newt represented the child that Ripley lost. Bizarre response. Adults don't need matriarchs to help with the family and the matriarch of the family doesn't have a vital role in the family? What do you think someone like Queen Elizabeth was to the Windsor family? If you need something to help you understand what a matriarch is and how important they are to a family, watch The Crown. Bizarre response. Being "motherly" and a matriarch doesn't make a woman any less than any man. It's you who seems to have trouble understanding how this is a source of strength for a female character. It's you who has said that Sue being the mother/matriarch of the FF family is "shallow". You're the one having the difficulty here. Bizarre response. Once again, how is what Reed does in the comics any more unbelievable than Peter Parker getting bitten by a radioactive spider and gaining super powers? How is it any less believable than Bruce Banner surviving a full on nuclear blast? How is it any less believable than Lex Luthor building all kinds of technology to defeat Superman, who is for all intents and purposes a god who can do anything? How is it less believable than a warrior goddess being sculpted out of clay and her mother using magic to bring her to life? All of those things - not ridiculous, but Reed building a space ship and taking his girlfriend and pals on a space flight - ridiculous. That's truly bizarre. Rockets that can shoot into orbit have been around since the 1960s. World leaders and governments can have them produced. So can wealthy billionaires who are doing just that right now in real life. Again, truly bizarre.

Bizarre response. Try putting some thought into this - in the real world, Jeff Bezos (billionaire) launched William Shatner (92 year old actor), Katy Perry (singer) and his own girlfriend into space. Who gives a shit if he didn't design the rocket? He still did it and that's real life. You've got Elon Musk designing ships capable of sending real life people to Mars. But a super genius doing it is somehow not believable.

Bizarre response. If "modern audiences" were getting what they want from Hollywood and buying what movie studios are selling, then Hollywood and box office receipts wouldn't be in decline. Bizarre response. No one other than you is suggesting that Sue Storm is June Cleaver sitting around the house baking cookies, making Reed dinner and doing the laundry. That's not her character. Neither is her character being the leader of the FF and the boss lady, which she is rumored to be in this film. If that's the case, then that's diverging from the source material and the character that the built in fan base is familiar with. This isn't rocket science to understand. Bizarre response. Yes, Ellen Ripley was a mother in the first film. Watch Aliens again. Nice attempt to deflect though. No question Sarah Connor became a bad ass to protect her son. Bizarre response. That's complete bullshit. I've no issue with strong female characters. You seem to have a real disdain for anything feminine about the maternal instinct. That just shows you're very shallow and narrow minded and can't grasp that female characters asserting their maternal instincts doesn't make them "weak", "shallow", "boring", a "shit show" or whatever other bullshit you want to call them.

Where's the guy on fire and the guy made of rocks?

Bizarre response. Jeff Bezos launched William Shatner, Katy Perry and his girlfriend into space. That's real life. But some super intelligent guy bringing his girlfriend and her brother and his best friend into space isn't believable.

Bullshit. Let's see whose responses are "bizarre" here... Bizarre response. It's a film based on a comic that started in the 1960's and has had a loyal following since then. Look at the setting and set design in the trailer. They're quite clearly going for something of a 1960's retro period piece. The Fantastic Four has had a loyal following ever since their creation. It's absolutely about what happened in the comics throughout their 60+ year history. That's what the fan base is familiar with. The last FF film changed the characters radically. It failed. Miserably. Bizarre response. Sue not being the "mother type" figure she's always been is "unreasonable" and "unbelievable" and "shallow", but characters being literal invincible gods, getting bitten by radioactive spiders and gaining super powers, surviving full on nuclear blasts and turning into unstoppable green rage monsters, having magical powers are all "reasonable" and "believable". Bullshit. Bizarre response. They've already "lost the viewers". Changing the characters and the plots people are familiar with that drew them to the characters and have held their interest for decades is what the built in fan base is looking for, not "re-imaginings" for "modern audiences". See the previous FF film. How's changing characters people have adored for decades working out for Disney with their princess flicks? Superhero films and films in general are unquestionably on the decline. Box office receipts prove that. "Modern audiences" aren't buying what they're selling. Bizarre responses. These show a severe lack of understanding on your part on what a mother type figure is. Why is being a mother "shallow" and "disappointing"? WTF do you think Sarah Connor is? What was she doing in T2? Anything and everything she possibly could to protect her fucking child. That's a strong mother type character. WTF was Ellen Ripley doing in Aliens protecting Newt? That's a strong motherly instinct kicking in for a strong mother type figure. Sue looking after her family and doing what she can to protect them isn't "shallow" or "weak" or "boring" or "disappointing". Not in the least.

You do realize that Johnny is a man-child, right? And Reed is an ass. Makes perfect sense for her to be a mother type character. That's fitting. Strong female characters don't need to be the invincible know it all girls boss who kicks the ass of all comers. You do realize these are the same comic books where there are literal gods running around alongside people who were bitten by radioactive spiders or survived a full on nuclear blast and such, right? It's a comic book. It's not supposed to be realistic storytelling.

Given that Hollywood and box office receipts in general is and has been in decline, changing familiar stories and characters "to appeal to modern audiences" isn't working to "putt butts in seats", is it? Namor being Spock in a green speedo is the character people were familiar with and wanted to see, not that absolutely godawful version of whatever he was in the MCU. The Mandarin and Ancient One being changed was entirely to appease China so they'd play the films there. Hollywood has been banking on the Chinese market for a long time now. More often than not, adaptions are being made to sell toys to kids, so we won't see Hank Pym being a domestic abuser.

I agree with you on all points and not all changes are inherently bad. However - These are the kinds of things that I see as wholly unnecessary and more often than not, done poorly. It's changing the characters from what people know and are familiar with to something totally different that just winds up alienating the built in fan base. I just don't get the need for it, not in the MCU or other IPs. The Fantastic Four has been around since 1961 and has been selling comics since then. They're one of the most popular, most recognizable comics of all time. There have been and still are people of all races, genders and orientations who enjoy the FF comics, have since the start and have never needed "someone who looked like them" for them to enjoy the characters and reading the stories.

This is absolutely beautiful work. I like the minimalist functional design for the research facility giving you the essential base functionality while opening up the alien vista to explore. It's a shame that there aren't more people on Indom to appreciate this. Love the story behind all of these bases and the Paragon Corps. It's a fun amalgamation of Trek, Stargate and the Lantern Corps. Will there be Paragon Corps bases on other servers?

I've been pleasantly surprised at how good this was. I'm looking forward to more. Definitely worth watching.

I'll wait and see with this. If I'm being honest, reading that there's been character revisions for "modern audiences" is a huge red flag for me.

Well it's definitely better than the brooding, sullen Superman in the Snyderverse. I don't know if the pendulum has swung too far to the other extreme now though. Wait and see I guess. This is my hesitation with this film as well.

Thanks, I did read it. It's about encouraging people to take a tour of bases entered into the most recent contest. To me, that kind of discussion belongs in the bases sub-forum.... where there is already threads about entries, asking questions and such. That's what the bases sub-forum is for, just like we have sub-forums for bugs, suggestions and ideas, comic and hero culture etc. to help organize topics. I'm not suggesting people shouldn't visit bases or enjoy bases or admire and appreciate the hard work people put into them. Far from it.

I never suggested that Jar Jar Binks was anything other than ridiculous and awful. Hayden Christensen didn't exactly give an Oscar worthy performance for sure in the prequels, but he's looked upon a lot more fondly now and being brought back for more work as the Anakin/Darth Vader for Obi Wan and Ahsoka. That's because of how awful the new stuff is. I don't see anyone clamoring for more Finn or Poe or another Han Solo film .....

This should go into the Bases sub-forum.

I disagree. The prequels for sure weren't as well received or regarded as the original trilogy, however you needed the new Kathleen Kennedy/JJ Abrams/Rion Johnson crap to put things in perspective and to realize just how much worse the franchise could get. Lucas adding digital effects back into the original trilogy was done to re-release them and make more money selling the same VHS/DVDs again, and to satisfy his desire to do things with the story he couldn't do at the time due to lack of technology. Personally, I'll gladly take Ewoks any day of the week over any of the crap from the new films. It's the same with Star Trek Enterprise. That show was thought of as the worst of the worst for the Trek franchise at the time. It took garbage like Discovery and absolute sewage like Section 31 to show just how much worse the franchise could could get.

With respect, I don't think we want to start barring people from the forums, even temporarily, for suggesting workarounds to an issue or not supporting an idea.

No. There is no way to know what existing characters played "the correct/righteous way" in order to get the badge.

The "hide and deny" behavior isn't isolated to just Focused Feedback threads. I can give examples if needed.

Sometimes a point needs to be repeated in order for it to sink in.

I'm sure that there are people here now looking for more obscure insults they can use to skirt the "continuum".

Thank you for this clarification. Apologies if my point wasn't clear. I was more questioning the "continuum of insults" part. The neckbeard example is a pretty good one in that it is meant as an insult, and from what I can gather it was reported. Since a GM didn't think someone being called a neckbeard is insulting, no action was taken, so the person who reported it is left feeling like others weren't dealt with fairly. But whatever. I wasn't trying to make a big deal out of it. I get that you all don't want people arbitrarily reporting stuff just to silence others as that makes perfect sense. I wasn't responding to you, nor was I suggesting that GMs should automatically action anything that gets reported just because someone reports a post. You misunderstood my post.

I agree with this 100%. The ignore feature is a wonderful thing. More people should use it in my opinion. I could very well be wrong, but this reads to me as if our opinion really isn't as important as yours or any GM. So long as you all don't find something rude of take offense, whatever behavior was reported is acceptable. That "continuum" of insults can go both ways on many topics. Now, let me clarify since "intent" is difficult to judge by reading text on an internet forum. Please allow me to say that I mean no disrespect by making that statement. I am not looking to start an argument with you, nor am I suggesting you're doing anything wrong. I'm simply sharing my observation to your post and it is meant as no personal insult toward you or any other GM. As to the topic at hand, I agree with those who've said just continue what you're doing.