Fantastic Four (2015) Review: A Superhero Reboot Gone Wrong

Introduction

When Marvel’s Fantastic Four (2015) was announced, expectations were high. The iconic superhero team, known for its long history in comics and earlier cinematic adaptations, was being rebooted for the third time in less than a decade. Directed by Josh Trank, the film was meant to reintroduce Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm, and Ben Grimm to a new generation of fans. However, despite the hype and a promising cast, the film failed to live up to its potential and left audiences disappointed. In this review, we’ll dive deep into the reasons why Fantastic Four (2015) is considered a superhero reboot gone wrong.

The Plot: A Missed Opportunity

The plot of Fantastic Four (2015) centers around a group of young scientists who gain superpowers after an experiment goes wrong. The team consists of Reed Richards (Miles Teller), a brilliant inventor; Sue Storm (Kate Mara), a tech genius and Reed’s childhood friend; Johnny Storm (Michael B. Jordan), Sue’s impulsive brother; and Ben Grimm (Jamie Bell), Reed’s childhood friend with a rough exterior.

The film starts with Reed’s childhood fascination with science, and his relationship with Ben, who helps him with an important invention: a teleporter that could allow people to travel to other dimensions. With the support of a government agency, Reed and his team successfully create the teleporter, and they are sent to another dimension. However, things go awry, and the team is exposed to hazardous energies that transform them into superheroes.

While the plot initially seems intriguing, it quickly loses momentum. The characters’ powers are not well-developed, and the team’s dynamics feel forced. The middle portion of the film, where the team begins to learn how to use their powers, is slow-paced and lacks tension. There is also a huge missed opportunity to explore the new world the characters travel to, with the alternate dimension feeling underdeveloped and not as engaging as it could have been.

The Characters: Underdeveloped and Uninspiring

One of the most significant issues with Fantastic Four (2015) lies in its character development. The four main characters—Reed, Sue, Johnny, and Ben—are flat and lack the depth and complexity that fans have come to expect from superhero films.

Reed Richards (Miles Teller)

Reed Richards, also known as Mr. Fantastic, is portrayed by Miles Teller, who brings a youthful energy to the character. However, his performance lacks the gravitas required for a leader of the Fantastic Four. In the comics and previous adaptations, Reed is a brilliant but somewhat awkward genius, and while Teller captures the awkwardness, his portrayal doesn’t fully capture Reed’s leadership qualities or emotional depth. He often comes across as more of a detached scientist than a heroic figure, making it difficult for the audience to connect with him.

Sue Storm (Kate Mara)

Kate Mara’s portrayal of Sue Storm (Invisible Woman) is another weak link in the film. Sue is meant to be a strong, intelligent, and compᴀssionate character who holds the team together. However, Mara’s performance feels flat, and her character is underwritten. Sue’s powers, which are central to her character in the comics, are barely explored, and her relationship with Reed feels forced rather than organic. There’s a lack of emotional chemistry between the two, which makes their bond feel unconvincing.

Johnny Storm (Michael B. Jordan)

Michael B. Jordan’s portrayal of Johnny Storm (The Human Torch) is arguably one of the most controversial aspects of the film. Jordan brings a charismatic energy to the character, but the character itself is written in a way that doesn’t align with his fiery and rebellious persona from the comics. Instead of the brash, confident hero we expect, the film presents Johnny as a more subdued and angsty figure, which undermines his role in the team. His transformation from a reckless individual to a team player feels rushed and lacks the depth necessary for a satisfying arc.

Ben Grimm (Jamie Bell)

Ben Grimm, also known as The Thing, is another character who suffers from underdevelopment. Played by Jamie Bell, Ben’s transformation into the iconic rocky figure is depicted with impressive CGI. However, the emotional journey of the character is almost nonexistent. Ben’s internal struggle with his new appearance and powers is glossed over, and the film misses the chance to delve into his complex relationship with his friends, especially Reed. This lack of character depth makes Ben’s role in the film feel shallow, and his moments of heroism lack emotional weight.

Villain: Doom Falls Short

A superhero film is only as good as its villain, and Fantastic Four (2015) certainly falls short in this regard. Victor Von Doom (Toby Kebbell) is one of Marvel’s most iconic villains, but this iteration of Doom feels underwhelming and poorly developed.

In the film, Doom is a former member of the team who becomes the primary antagonist after gaining powers from the same experiment that transforms the heroes. Unfortunately, Doom’s character arc is rushed and lacks the complexity seen in previous versions of the character. His motivations for villainy are unclear, and his ultimate plan to destroy the world feels more like a plot device than a meaningful conflict.

Kebbell’s performance is overshadowed by the poorly written character, and Doom’s final confrontation with the team lacks the intensity needed to make him a formidable threat. Ultimately, the villain is one of the weakest aspects of the film, and the absence of a strong antagonist significantly detracts from the film’s overall impact.

Visual Effects: Impressive but Not Enough

Fantastic Four (2015) does have some impressive visual effects, particularly in the depiction of the characters’ powers. The CGI used for The Thing and Mr. Fantastic is well-done, and the transformation sequences are striking. However, these visuals cannot make up for the film’s lackluster story and character development.

The climactic battle sequence, where the team faces off against Doom, features some visually stunning moments, but the action feels empty. The special effects are flashy, but they fail to evoke the emotional stakes that are essential in superhero films. The film’s overall tone, which oscillates between dark and disjointed, further detracts from the visual appeal.

Direction and Pacing: A Rocky Journey

Josh Trank’s direction is perhaps the most criticized aspect of Fantastic Four (2015). The film’s pacing is erratic, with a slow build-up that leads to a rushed and unsatisfying conclusion. The first act, where the team is introduced and the experiment goes wrong, is slow and lacks urgency. The second act, where the characters are learning to use their powers, feels repeтιтive and drawn out.

By the time the film reaches its climax, the audience is likely to feel disengaged, as the build-up to the final battle is underwhelming. The film’s dark tone and lack of emotional depth make it difficult for viewers to connect with the characters, resulting in a lack of investment in the outcome.

Comparison to Previous Versions: Why It Didn’t Work

Compared to previous Fantastic Four adaptations, this 2015 reboot falls short in almost every aspect. The 2005 and 2007 films, while not perfect, captured the lightheartedness and camaraderie of the team, offering a fun and entertaining superhero experience. The 2015 reboot, on the other hand, takes itself too seriously and fails to capture the essence of what makes the Fantastic Four a beloved group of heroes.

The 2015 film attempts to explore darker, more complex themes, but it never fully commits to them. This results in a film that feels tonally inconsistent and lacks the charm that the Fantastic Four franchise is known for.

Final Verdict: A Missed Opportunity

Fantastic Four (2015) had the potential to be a successful reboot of one of Marvel’s most iconic superhero teams, but it ultimately falls short. The underdeveloped characters, weak villain, and inconsistent pacing make it a forgettable entry in the superhero genre. While the visual effects are impressive, they cannot compensate for the film’s lack of heart and character depth.

For fans of the comics and previous films, this reboot is a disappointment. However, for newcomers to the Fantastic Four franchise, it might still offer some entertainment value, though it fails to live up to the standard set by other superhero films.

A Farmer’s Misplaced Hammer Led to the Largest Roman Treasure in Britain

---

November 16, 1992 was the day which changed Suffolk-resident Eric Lawes’ life in a huge way. What he thought would have been an innocent search for a hammer he had misplaced on his farm in Hoxne Village, Suffolk, England ended up bringing him much more than he had bargained for — namely, uncovering the hiding spot of a long-hidden treasure. Based on the Guardian’s coverage of the story, Eric Lawes had been previously gifted a metal detector upon his retirement as a parting token. He decided to put his retirement gift to good use in order to locate the hammer which he had had some trouble finding. According to a 2018 Smithsonian Magazine article, when the device started recording that there was a strong signal coming from the earth, he knew that he was about to discover something big. As he started digging, it soon became clear to him that he had unearthed a treasure trove.

The Guardian reports that, when Lawes saw that his preliminary digging had yielded a few gold coins and silver spoons, he immediately contacted both the local archaeological society and the police department. Archaeologists came to the property the following day and had the area of earth holding the treasure carefully sectioned-off and removed. Their hope was that at a later stage, in their laboratory, they could examined the items in order to identify both their age and how they were stored.

When all was said and done, close to 60 pounds of items made from silver and gold were found on the site. These included more than 15,000 Roman coins, 200 gold objects, and several silver spoons. For archaeologists, this find — which later became labeled as the Hoxne Hoard — was an incredible discovery. AP News reported that archaeologist Judith Plouviez was over-the-moon about the discovery, saying that it was “an incredibly exciting and amazing find.” What’s more, another archaeologist, Rachel Wilkinson, told Smithsonian Magazine that this discovery was “the largest and latest ever found in Britain.”

Ordinarily, archaeologists would use radiocarbon dating as a means of identifying the age of ancient relics. However, they couldn’t locate any suitable material from the haul. Consequently, they determined the age by examining writing on the coins, as well as the ruler carved into them, estimating that the treasure was probably buried in either 408 or 409 AD.

Roman-era archaeologist Peter Guest told Smithsonian Magazine that “if you look at them a little more carefully, then they should be dated to the period after the separation of Britain from the Roman Empire.” He offers as part of his evidence the fact that almost all of the coins found in the Hoxne Hoard were clipped – in other words, small chunks of their edges had been taken off. These clippings would have been used to create coins which were similar to the Roman coins of that era.

Guest has a logical reason for this, arguing that “The Roman Empire wasn’t supplying Britain with new gold and silver coins, and in light of that, the population tried to get over this sudden cutoff in the supply of their precious metals by making the existing supplies go further.”

Archaeologists also believe that the treasure belonged to a Romano-British family. During that time, considering that there was so much societal discord and upheaval, it was common for Romans who had settled in Britain to bury their most prized possessions.

That said, one archaeologist is of the belief that the hoard had a lot of sentimental value for the Romano-British family to whom it is believed to have belonged. In her book The Hoxne Late Roman Treasure: Gold Jewellery and Silver Plate, Catherine Johns claims that the manner in which the treasure was kept supported this claim. Some of the items which were recovered had been packaged in small, wooden boxes which were lined with leather. What’s more, pieces of wood, locks, and nails, among other things, surrounded the gold and silver pieces. This leads Catherine to assert that the package was carefully buried and not simply chucked away in a rush.

Interestingly enough, the items unearthed might shed some light on the identity of the family who owned them. They cite a gold bracelet bearing the inscription “UTERE FELIX DOMINA IULIANE,” which roughly translates to “use this happily Lady Juliane”. A second name “Aurelius Ursicinus” has also been discovered. This has consequently led some to believe that Juliane and Aurelius were the couple and the original owners of the treasure. That said, that has yet to be confirmed.

All in all, the discovery was a real treasure for archaeologists, and by extension, for Lawes. According to Smithsonian Magazine, in recognition of his discovery and willingness to contact authorities, the British government rewarded him with over £1.7 million, an amount which he shared with the farmer whose land was dug out in order to get the treasure. Funnily enough, apart from the treasure, Lawes also found his lost hammer — which now resides in the British Museum.