Thread Drift: The Fantastic Four movie and director Josh Trank's comment on Susan Storm's character

[SickAlice]

I wonder what his hiring standards are like? He seems like a man who clearly would value equality in the workplace. Imo of course.

Scientist + Slutty Secretary = Hired Girl/Lab Assistant = Ginger+Mary Ann to The Professor

[Joe Acro]

The use of the phrase "slutty secretary" is a poor choice. I have read both sides of this argument, and no one seems to agree that Sue is "slutty". At best, I see arguments for "sexual", and that has certainly been true. It is possible this was truly his intent, but we truthfully don't know. The notion that there are two versions of Sue is hard to understand, and appears to be as much a logical fallacy as "there are only two types of people in the world". All throughout Marvel's canon--which does include What If's, animated series, films, and a multitude of other realities--Sue herself may take different forms and different roles and be written different ways. I see no reason all of those stories cannot be taken into consideration, but I also believe they fail to support Trank's statement.

Under no context can we find "scientist Sue" vs. "slutty Sue" to be the two ways the character is written even if you were to broaden the definition of slutty to include things like "flirtatious" or "drawn/acting solely for sex appeal". The 616 version of Sue and various other portrayals have had been portrayed as flirtatious and sexually appealing, as have other versions (as so readily shown in the scans earlier). However, I don't think a version of the character fits simply into either category. Ultimate Sue and the Alba's Sue were portrayed as scientists, but we know that those two characters deviated from that being their sole characteristic. Arguably, either one fits both categories (again, depending on how broad a definition we use), but both also extend beyond those two categories as well. Conversely, you might say the Madame HYDRA Sue from Exiles was "slutty", but she was also evil and powerful.

I think Trank's intent was to bolster his own take on the character. Instead of "slutty secretary", he could have said things like "damsel in distress" or "objectified" or "underutilized" or "used for romantic entanglements". None of those support only two types of Sue's characterization and use either, but they are at least demonstrated in the various versions of the character. But the goal certainly seems to be for you to envision such a character, and then realize that he plans to portray the opposite. I would argue--and I'm sure many of you would, too--she has been the opposite most of the time.

[Kirby Krackle]

The use of the phrase "slutty secretary" is a poor choice. I have read both sides of this argument, and no one seems to agree that Sue is "slutty". At best, I see arguments for "sexual", and that has certainly been true. It is possible this was truly his intent, but we truthfully don't know. The notion that there are two versions of Sue is hard to understand, and appears to be as much a logical fallacy as "there are only two types of people in the world". All throughout Marvel's canon--which does include What If's, animated series, films, and a multitude of other realities--Sue herself may take different forms and different roles and be written different ways. I see no reason all of those stories cannot be taken into consideration, but I also believe they fail to support Trank's statement.

Under no context can we find "scientist Sue" vs. "slutty Sue" to be the two ways the character is written even if you were to broaden the definition of slutty to include things like "flirtatious" or "drawn/acting solely for sex appeal". The 616 version of Sue and various other portrayals have had been portrayed as flirtatious and sexually appealing, as have other versions (as so readily shown in the scans earlier). However, I don't think a version of the character fits simply into either category. Ultimate Sue and the Alba's Sue were portrayed as scientists, but we know that those two characters deviated from that being their sole characteristic. Arguably, either one fits both categories (again, depending on how broad a definition we use), but both also extend beyond those two categories as well. Conversely, you might say the Madame HYDRA Sue from Exiles was "slutty", but she was also evil and powerful.

I think Trank's intent was to bolster his own take on the character. Instead of "slutty secretary", he could have said things like "damsel in distress" or "objectified" or "underutilized" or "used for romantic entanglements". None of those support only two types of Sue's characterization and use either, but they are at least demonstrated in the various versions of the character. But the goal certainly seems to be for you to envision such a character, and then realize that he plans to portray the opposite. I would argue--and I'm sure many of you would, too--she has been the opposite most of the time.

Well said. Best post the entire thread.

[Darkspellmaster]

The use of the phrase "slutty secretary" is a poor choice. I have read both sides of this argument, and no one seems to agree that Sue is "slutty". At best, I see arguments for "sexual", and that has certainly been true. It is possible this was truly his intent, but we truthfully don't know. The notion that there are two versions of Sue is hard to understand, and appears to be as much a logical fallacy as "there are only two types of people in the world". All throughout Marvel's canon--which does include What If's, animated series, films, and a multitude of other realities--Sue herself may take different forms and different roles and be written different ways. I see no reason all of those stories cannot be taken into consideration, but I also believe they fail to support Trank's statement.

Under no context can we find "scientist Sue" vs. "slutty Sue" to be the two ways the character is written even if you were to broaden the definition of slutty to include things like "flirtatious" or "drawn/acting solely for sex appeal". The 616 version of Sue and various other portrayals have had been portrayed as flirtatious and sexually appealing, as have other versions (as so readily shown in the scans earlier). However, I don't think a version of the character fits simply into either category. Ultimate Sue and the Alba's Sue were portrayed as scientists, but we know that those two characters deviated from that being their sole characteristic. Arguably, either one fits both categories (again, depending on how broad a definition we use), but both also extend beyond those two categories as well. Conversely, you might say the Madame HYDRA Sue from Exiles was "slutty", but she was also evil and powerful.

I think Trank's intent was to bolster his own take on the character. Instead of "slutty secretary", he could have said things like "damsel in distress" or "objectified" or "underutilized" or "used for romantic entanglements". None of those support only two types of Sue's characterization and use either, but they are at least demonstrated in the various versions of the character. But the goal certainly seems to be for you to envision such a character, and then realize that he plans to portray the opposite. I would argue--and I'm sure many of you would, too--she has been the opposite most of the time.

Well said and it's a bit concerning to in that if he sees this of Sue, what of Ben's girlfriend? What would he see her as? A Blind girl or an artist? What also has me worried with this line is what is he going to do with Reed. If he is using Reed from UM then what of his less then stellar actions and becoming a villain? Unless he's going to ignore that factor about the character?

The thing about stories when directors say they're not using the source at all and using just the name of the character it makes me wonder, why not just make a movie with all new characters? But wait the FF will get fans into the seats, they think.