FANTASTIC FOUR from 2005 isn’t nearly as bad as people say it is

The premiere of Fantastic Four: First Steps is fast approaching — a spectacle that will finally bring Marvel’s first superhero team into the MCU. This marks the third big-screen incarnation of the team, and interestingly, each one has come out roughly a decade apart. In 2015, we saw the critically panned Fant4stic by Josh Trank, and in 2005, Tim Story’s Fantastic Four, which is also generally remembered in an unflattering light. But does the latter truly deserve its bad reputation and a mere 27% positive rating from critics on Rotten Tomatoes?

Since my son has recently become passionate about Marvel comics, I had the chance to read a dozen or so Fantastic Four issues from the 1960s. Later, we watched the 2005 movie together to see the titular team in action on screen. My son was very excited, and to my surprise, I found it to be an enjoyable watch — better than I remembered.

The 2005 Fantastic Four is an origin story, structurally somewhat similar to Sam Raimi’s earlier Spider-Man. Alongside the birth of the heroes — or in this case, a group of heroes — emerges their greatest nemesis from the comics (Raimi had the Green Goblin; here, it’s Doctor Doom gaining his powers), who causes them considerable trouble. Upon rewatching, I was surprised to realize that Story’s film actually captures the spirit of the 1960s comics quite faithfully — comics that may now seem outdated but still manage to be fun and engaging.

Just like in the original comics, the movie emphasizes the relationships between the heroes, pushing the villain into the background, only occasionally letting him speak of or carry out his evil plans. The cast delivers solid performances — Ioan Gruffudd not only resembles the comic book Reed Richards visually, but also portrays his personality well: science-obsessed, socially awkward, and unable to express his feelings for Sue. Chris Evans is great as Johnny. Today he’s best known as Captain America in the MCU, but his earlier comic-book movie outing still holds up — during the film, you don’t think of him as Steve Rogers. Jessica Alba as Sue is less convincing. It’s hard to avoid the impression that her casting was based more on looks, although that does align somewhat with the spirit of the old comics, where the Invisible Girl was often portrayed as a mere object of desire (some of the dialogue around this reads uncomfortably today).

The strongest performance comes from Michael Chiklis as Ben Grimm/The Thing. He’s essentially the emotional center of the story, with the film focusing on his tragedy and constantly highlighting his bitterness and rage (in the original comics, the Thing is often seen grumbling and arguing with the others). I never had much of a problem with his suit, even though the design is far from perfect — at least it hasn’t aged badly, since it wasn’t CGI. Personality-wise, Grimm is close to his comic-book counterpart, and his relationships with the team are well-developed. Chiklis gives it his all beneath the layers of prosthetics.

Julian McMahon’s portrayal of Doom decently conveys the character’s growing madness (though not on the level of Willem Dafoe’s Green Goblin) and looks great in costume — it’s hard to imagine a more faithful visual adaptation of Doom from the comics. I used to think the final battle with him was laughably short, but… that too mirrors the style of old Fantastic Four comics, where villains were often defeated in a few panels through some clever trick. Sure, one could argue that an action film should have more action, but there’s a kind of consistency in this approach.

So yes — only now did I notice how much Story’s film draws from classic Marvel, sometimes lifting elements straight from the comics (like the man on the bridge). I also really liked how the team’s powers are shown in everyday life (e.g., Johnny heating popcorn on his palm like a microwave) — there’s a certain charm in that.

Visually, the film still holds up decently — Reed’s stretching effects have aged poorly and sometimes look like a video game cutscene, but the Human Torch flying through the city still looks good (the moment when he “ignites” to escape Doom’s missile is probably the film’s most thrilling sequence).

Interestingly, I found myself appreciating Fantastic Four more in today’s context. It seems that the simple plot and shorter runtime (1.5 hours) actually work in the film’s favor now — especially at a time when the MCU has plunged into multiversal conflicts. This simplicity is also what made the recent Thunderbolts so well received — a movie focused primarily on its characters.

I hope that the MCU’s Fantastic Four will also be one of the successful entries (the trailers certainly suggest so). It’ll undoubtedly improve on some elements from the 2005 version — Sue will likely be more than just a love interest and instead the emotional heart of the team, and the Thing’s design is more accurate. But it turns out that even Story’s film can be a solid pick for a movie night with a young Marvel fan.