Forgot to post in this thread, but I saw it last week. For context, I will say that I have recently read Hickman's run on Fantastic Four. I haven't read Kirby's run, which apparently this is quite faithful to. But Hickman's run leads directly into Secret Wars in the comics, and this is where this film is going, so it's probably relevant that I just read the comic arc that is going to be close to the film.
Anyway, I loved it. I thought the setting was spot on, and the setting combined with the early family interactions gave us a really efficient origin story that worked. There are two things in particular about this that I really liked.
The first is how Galactus was portrayed. I think for those who haven't read Galactus stories, he's just seen as a massive, all powerful being that eats planets. He is very powerful, but in reality the character is much more nuanced than that. The portrayal here both of that power visually but also of a being that is actually suffering because of the hunger that he endures was pretty much spot on in my view.
The second is some of the nuances to Pedro Pascal's Mr Fantastic. Again, something that those who haven't read the comics won't realise is that Mr Fantastic is a very complex character morally. He is exceptionally intelligent, but genuinely grapples with the morality of a lot of the things that he can do, but may choose not to. That happens in Waid's run with the way he deals with Doom and Latveria (directly before Hickman's), and in Hickman's run it's demonstrated by an exceptional story called the Council of Reeds (which involves the Bridge, which was in the film, but in a very different way). That is a story I don't want to spoil for those who haven't read it, but suffice to say that it shows us just how close Reed Richards is to actually being evil. In the Ultimate Marvel universe from the early 2000s, he actually does turn evil and becomes a supervillain that pops up at various other points in comics from that point. So Reed Richards' morality, and how close he is to not being a superhero at all, is a consistent theme of that character in the comics. What I really liked here is how that was portrayed, with Sue not only checking his tendency to prefer logic over morality, but actively calling him out on it. The acting performances there were perfect with those interactions, I think it was pretty skilfully woven into the film.
As for the other portrayals, we didn't see a lot of the Thing, but the fact that others see him as physically strong whilst he is a much more sensitive personality (again, a running theme in the comics) comes through, and I really do like how they dealt with Johnny. In the comics he does move between idiot/jock and someone who has a bit more to give, but in the context of this film he had to be more than that because he had to be one of the best people to be on the original trip. Again, I think they dealt with that well and the fact of him cracking the Surfer's language really worked from that perspective.
The only thing I didn't like was Sue having the ability to push Galactus into the portal herself, which I don't think works either from the perspective of the comics or the film. But I understand why it was needed, and it didn't spoil the film for me in any way. I genuinely thought this was top tier MCU, and we've waited a long time for one of those.
On the Franklin thing, like Vash I'm sad they cut Val out, but again, I can see how they didn't have time to incorporate her. I don't think an angsty teen story is coming either. Franklin has a specific relevance to the Secret Wars storyline, and I expect that relevance will be used in some way in the MCU. But there's no need to turn him into an angsty teen for that (the comics actually alternative between him as a primary schooler and him meeting his grown up future self), and I don't think that'll happen.
