Its actually available….
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Marvel/DC
re_zuleta — 19 years ago(July 03, 2006 03:09 PM)
Last year, in 2005, I friend of mine acquired a Bootlegg copy of what he thought was the New 'Fantantic Four'(2005) movie. But what was really inside the DVD-R was a digitized version of this atrocity. I mean the special effects are like 1970's retro-style .I mean they're terrible. The funny thing ismy friend was sold a DVD-case with the poster-art and pictures from the New! "Fantastic Four"(2005) movie. That movie is good to sit down and watch it, knowing how awful its going to be.
"Rezuleta"
re_zuleta@yahoo.com -
cyberdynesystems101 — 19 years ago(July 14, 2006 10:53 AM)
This is nothing new. There have been hundreds of illegal copies of this movie floating around everywhere, eBay's got tones of 'em, but I got mine at a convention last year. And of course the effects are terrible, the budeget was rather low, and they never actually intened to release it.
-
trevorwomble — 19 years ago(October 29, 2006 01:10 PM)
I suppose when you consider the miniscule budget of 1.5 million dollars, and that the film was made in 1994 when cgi was in its infancy, then its not a bad effort. It's got an elaborate film score that was written especially for it too. Apparently the only film print no longer exists (it was supposedly deliberately destroyed)so i guess it will never get a proper release even if one was wanted.
I suppose if anyone is desperate to see it then one way is to go and hunt down a dodgy vhs copy. However you may find it easier just to go to the site below and watch it for free.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X7mdpSsqNsM&mode=related&search=
Enjoy -
gatchaman — 18 years ago(May 31, 2007 05:33 AM)
"was made in 1994 when cgi was in its infancy"
The first Jurassic Park came out in 1993 and the cgi in that was amazing (although they did have more money to spend!) so you can't really use that as an excuse. the effects were just naff, period.
Having said that, this film is great in a cheesy sort of way, but it's certainly not going to win any awards. -
Ucklak — 18 years ago(June 17, 2007 09:56 AM)
Not everybody had cheap access to that type of rendering equipment at that time.
In 1994, everyone had cheap access to the qualty of The Last Starfighter which was the quality of the F4-1994 movie.
Just because 2 rendering houses had it doesn't make it available so it is a valid reason. -
tylerrabbit — 12 years ago(May 09, 2013 12:03 AM)
In an issue of WIRED in the early 90s there was an article called "Make Movie Visual Effects in Your Basement" about VFX legends Scott and Minky Billups who were doing the VFX for this flick single handledly in their basement. I found it incredibly inspiring and decided to go into low budget indy CGI myself.
-
helderuto — 12 years ago(December 06, 2013 05:59 AM)
The first Jurassic Park came out in 1993 and the cgi in that was amazing (although they did have more money to spend!) so you can't really use that as an excuse. the effects were just naff, period.
The first Jurassic Park had a 100 million budget. Try YOU to do the same thing with 1.5 million. I dare you. -
Newz_Dawg — 19 years ago(January 12, 2007 08:36 AM)
You can see this film in its entirety (though in 9 segments of 9:59 each) at Youtube.com. Simply enter (as written here)
Roger Corman Fantastic Four
in the search and knock yourself out. It's mental clobberin' time! As for me, I commented there thusly (unabridged version below):
It has everything you would expect from a superhero film produced by B-movie master Roger Corman, the man who introduced moviegoers to man-eating talking plants, psychotic beatnick artists, Lee Van Cleef vs. a Space Carrot Alien, and Jack Nicholson. It was made to be enjoyed with popcorn, Goobers, and Coca-Cola, and not taken seriously. Cheesy good fun from the celluloid cheese-meister that views the way a 60s Fantastic Four comic reads. And really, the Thing looks pretty good, more formidable than the new version's Thing, who looks more like a steroid-enhanced burn victim. Three stars.
And so it goes. It's worth viewing by any comic devotee for its sheer curiosity value.
"I hate people I don't like."
Newz Dawg -
DaveOctopus — 19 years ago(February 09, 2007 02:31 PM)
It's funny that they say never released, but I remember watching it when I was young and seeing it in many video stores, unless there all buying bootlegs too lol. I remembered it being cheesy but it's pretty vague to me now. Probably just as good as the new one would be if they didn't have todays effects.
-
gorebagkiller — 18 years ago(June 18, 2007 03:19 PM)
theres no way you have seen it back then davehaddad. The leaked copy of it was not available until 1997, that was when it first started turning up and the chances a video store actually renting out a bootleg copy of a purposefully unreleased film is not possible. No video store owner would risk his lively hood because it was already known to be a bootleg publicly and if it came back to the video store they would have been sued for millions. Actually, if thatdid happen, then maybe they could have afforded to release the film. It could have sold well, little kids were superhero crazy then.
-
DaveOctopus — 17 years ago(June 08, 2008 01:06 AM)
All I can tell ya is that I watched it a long time ago on VHS, rented from the video store, way before the DVD renting days, they had some laser disks at the time. So maybe it wasn't 94 but I know it wasn't 98 I moved from there in 97 so I don't even care anyways its a movie.
-
Newz_Dawg — 19 years ago(April 04, 2007 11:47 AM)
What really ticks me is that Stan Lee lavished huge praise for the very silly Japanese
Spider-Man
TV show, with its giant monsters and robots, and Spider-Man telepathically communicating with his mentor who has become a spider, while dissing the Corman-produced
Fantastic Four
. Cheese is cheese, no matter what nation it comes from. Looks like Stan the Man, who's ego has outgrown Jim Shooter's, needs to meet Doc Samson for a few sessions.
"I hate people I don't like."
Newz Dawg -
-
Astrolupine — 18 years ago(December 13, 2007 02:19 PM)
I bought a copy at a comic con 3 years agofor $20. Yes, you heard that right, but that was the price of all the bootleg DVDs there being sold, and I was desperate to see this film in all its cheesy glory. (The other bootlegs I have are Batman: Dead End, Star Wars Holiday Special and Harvey Birdman Season 1) I've watched it a couple of times and all I can say that's its decent, with a good-looking Thing, Rebecca Stabb as Sue and a Doom that resembles the comic version better than Julian McMahon did.
There's so much pressure to like monkeys.