Are there any competent autopsies of the Green Lantern movie?

[Lantern Venom]

FAST COMPANY: What were your co-producing duties on Green Lantern?

GEOFF JOHNS: I was there as a Green Lantern guru. (Laughs.) I've been writing Green Lantern stories for seven years, so when they started talking about the film [in 2008], they brought me in to tap into what I was doing with the books and make sure we were celebrating everything that was Green Lantern. A lot of the heavy lifting for me was when Michael Goldenberg was writing a draft of the script. We worked a lot on the mythology, making sure that its foundation, which is about overcoming fear, and the core characters were represented. But it was a really collaborative effort. I wasn't a cop. It wasn't like, "Make his boots shorter!" That's useless. It was more about, "Why is Hal Jordan a compelling character? What is [arch-nemesis] Sinestro's real motivation? Why is he so driven? What are the attributes of the [Green Lantern Corps'] Guardians [of the Universe] that you want to accentuate?"
.

That was all before the fact, and it's obvious that the writers didn't listen or understand Johns. The last thing Johns would have done with Hal, who Johns has stated is the "greatest" and his personal favorite Lantern, is have him quit in fear of Sinestro. The putrid stench of Warner Bumbles is all over that move.

 

[DrCosmic]

That was all before the fact, and it's obvious that the writers didn't listen or understand Johns. The last thing Johns would have done with Hal, who Johns has stated is the "greatest" and his personal favorite Lantern, is have him quit in fear of Sinestro. The putrid stench of Warner Bumbles is all over that move.

The putrid stench? Like what I smelled in Man of Steel, BaleMan and Harry Potter? Okay, stinky stinky. Regardless, according to Johns ,it was collaborative. If you feel the writers didn't truly work with Johns, that's your take, and you're welcome to it.

I agree that the reason for Hal quitting probably was a product of a later draft after under someone else.

 

[Micromind]

The Guard,

The CGI in Green Lantern was awful because moreso than any other movie I've watched recently, it looked fake. It was so jarring how fake it looked, it felt like a 1990s TV show. Contrast for example to Zod's armor in Man of Steel, or the Hulk in the Hulk movies, or anything in the Star Wars prequels, those don't look nearly as fake.

That is aside from the fact that a lot of things were ugly to look at, like the two villains, Oa, et cetera.

Then there's also some plain laziness. There was a case where they reused the same shot twice in the movie, of the Lanterns firing their energy beams into space, I've never seen that before.

This.

The villains looked ugly (Hammond, Parallax, Krona), even those aliens who should have looked likable looked plain ugly (Kilowog, Tomar Re and Guardians), planet Oa looked dull and gloomy, the visual appeal is the first step in creating a movie buzz, Marvel Studios make a point to create movies aimed at wider demographic where characters look menacing but not ugly.

Then the ultra lack luster movie score by JNH, I guess he was just not interested in this type of movie. Director Martin Campbell was simply overwhelmed by the overuse of CGI and green screens, I guess he was the wrong guy in the director's seat.

Then the foolish use of 200 mil budget, why they needed a CGI suit and CGI mask ? The real suit could have been enhanced with a bit of CGI in post production, instead they wasted a lot of money.

Awful script was the other major factor for this movies failure. Also, they did not plan how they would have integrated this movie with the rest of DC movies that were to follow GL (for example where was the connection to MOS ?) No long term plans. Remember GL was released in 2011 and initially MOS was supposed to be released in 2012 winter.

 

[DrCosmic]

MOS was supposed to be released in 2012? I didn't know that... interesting

 

[Micromind]

WB swapped MOS release date with Hobbit an unexpected journey.

http://www.thinkmcflythink.com/movie-news/2011/12/7/everyday-wb-is-shufflin-release-date-swaps-for-hobbit-superm.html

Three was a lot of speculation going on back than -
http://www.johnbierly.com/5685

 

[DA_Champion]

The putrid stench? Like what I smelled in Man of Steel, BaleMan and Harry Potter? Okay, stinky stinky. Regardless, according to Johns ,it was collaborative. If you feel the writers didn't truly work with Johns, that's your take, and you're welcome to it.

I agree that the reason for Hal quitting probably was a product of a later draft after under someone else.

You really hated those three?

 

[DA_Champion]

The events of MoS and GL seem mutually exclusive to me.

 

[DrCosmic]

You really hated those three?

No, I was going for sarcasm.

"The putrid stench? Like what I smelled in Man of Steel, BaleMan and Harry Potter? Okay, stinky stinky. "

I actually didn't like Man of Steel when I saw it in theatres. My second viewing changed my life though. I suspect a Man of Steel in 2012 would have been notably different, and perhaps compatible with GL. Though I seem to vaguely recall a mantra about DC heroes "standing alone" also.

 

[jmc]

I will agree with one thing mentioned in the previous page, WB didn't know how to market the movie. However, I do think that in part comes down squarely to the film itself not being good in the first place and not the character itself. The thing is in retrospect everything about GL has a complete misjudgment. I don't even think the problem with the film was studio interference, I honestly just think WB thought the film would be far easier to bring to screen than it ended up being. On paper at least GL should be the easiest 2nd tier DC character to bring to screen, but I don't think there was enough thought put into how best to bring it to screen, or who was the best person to bring it to screen. The sad thing is there were 4 superhero films in 2011 that came out and out of all of them GL had to be the one that worked and left a mark. GL had so much hatred geared towards it long before camera's began rolling, unfair hatred with people rooting for its demise, that it was WB job to ensure they were proven wrong. Not only were they not proven wrong in some instances I saw haters actually feel pity for just how bad the film was, at the same time all the DC fans who were eagerly hoping it would be the start of a DC universe on film were once again left disappointed and in some cases very angry. Ultimately it didn't really matter in the long run, a DCU of sorts is coming together, albeit not the one most people wanted, but the odds of the character getting it's own film again I would guess are very slim. In its wake the only thing really lost is a different DCU on film.

 

[DrCosmic]

^I don't want to oversimplify it, because I agree with pretty much everything you just said, but it comes down to overconfidence. I can picture WB in their offices like, Geoff Johns will make sure the fans like it, the Martin will make sure our lead has that James Bond appeal, Ryan Reynolds will make the ladies swoon... WHAT COULD GO WRONG?

 

[jmc]

I just think things quickly got out of hand and they didn't know how to fix it. It looked good on paper. I personally had no issue with Ryan Reynolds or Martin Campbell, regardless of the lack of Sci-fi in his catalog, and from all reports the script was solid. But at the end of the day I think the main problem was there wasn't a genuine love for the character from everyone involved. For WB, it felt more like them dipping their toe in the water outside of Batman and Superman, more of an experiment than a genuine desire to do a great GL movie. When it became clear it wasn't going to be very good they tried to spin it into an event movie, with an increasingly desperate and almost pathetically sad flurry of advertising more or less begging people to watch it in the final weeks.

 

[Micromind]

^ I agree with those points, WB thought that they had approved a 200 mil. budget, an upcoming hot Star (Ryan Reynolds) and then they got a reasonably talented team for the movie, I mean , look at this -

- Director Martin Campbell who was highly successful for Goldeneye, Casino Royale and Mask of Zorro.

- Stuart Baird, academy award winning Film Editor whos works includes SkyFall (2012).

- Production Designer Grant Major who had worked on Lord Of The Rings Trilogy.

- Ngila Dickson who won academy award for costume Design for LOTR movies.

- Neville Page, who designed creatures for movies like Cloverfield and Super 8.

- Acadamy Award winning Music composer James Newton Howard.

 

[DrCosmic]

Exactly. Not to mention Geoff Johns overseeing the writers at some point. From an executives point of view, they really couldn't have done their job much better.

I would agree that genuine love for the character would have brought all those pieces together. But honestly, genuine love for anything would have brought the movie together, imho.

 

[Micromind]

GL's failure has left them clueless as to how to approach non Superman-Batman, DC movies.

 

[jmc]

Which is why from here on in I think the MoS Universe is the biggest the DC Universe is going to get. What I mean by that is we probably won't be getting spin off movies, it will essentially be team up films from here on in. As long as either Batman or Superman are present in the movies there's no need to be doing solo films for other characters, it get's them their superhero quota without them having to take further risks like GL. It's a win-win situation for WB.

 

[mace1]

Which is why from here on in I think the MoS Universe is the biggest the DC Universe is going to get. What I mean by that is we probably won't be getting spin off movies, it will essentially be team up films from here on in. As long as either Batman or Superman are present in the movies there's no need to be doing solo films for other characters, it get's them their superhero quota without them having to take further risks like GL. It's a win-win situation for WB.

I AGREE to a point but what do think ABOUT THE shazam movie?and justice league dark if they have one.

What about the other wb/dc movies coming out?

You don't think they would be connected to the MOS Universe?

 

[DA_Champion]

Justice league dark and shazaam are just rumours.

We could see WB developing a cheap DC movies division. There are examples. Dredd3D was produced for 45 million.

 

[Lantern Venom]

GL's failure has left them clueless as to how to approach non Superman-Batman, DC movies.

Which is why from here on in I think the MoS Universe is the biggest the DC Universe is going to get. What I mean by that is we probably won't be getting spin off movies, it will essentially be team up films from here on in. As long as either Batman or Superman are present in the movies there's no need to be doing solo films for other characters, it get's them their superhero quota without them having to take further risks like GL. It's a win-win situation for WB.

I'll be happy if the Justice League movie actually comes to pass and is at least adequate. What Warner Bumbles should have given us is a massive, shared universe with 2-3 movies for the Big 5, 3 or more installments of JLA, live-action versions of Aquaman, Martian Manhunter, and at least a couple of the other titular Lanterns. Now, I'll settle for a just seeing the JLA in live-action.

I've learned to approach Warner Bumbles' translation of DC characters the way an adult approaches seeing the artwork of his 5-year-old. Most of the time, the adult just has to placate the kid because the final product is barely recognizable as anything beyond scribbling. But once in a blue moon, the child draws something discernible. Then, I can pat them on their heads and say, "Aw, good clueless studio execs."

 

[jmc]

I AGREE to a point but what do think ABOUT THE shazam movie?and justice league dark if they have one.

What about the other wb/dc movies coming out?

You don't think they would be connected to the MOS Universe?

I'm very skeptical those films will get made at all.

 

[jmc]

I'll be happy if the Justice League movie actually comes to pass and is at least adequate. What Warner Bumbles should have given us is a massive, shared universe with 2-3 movies for the Big 5, 3 or more installments of JLA, live-action versions of Aquaman, Martian Manhunter, and at least a couple of the other titular Lanterns. Now, I'll settle for a just seeing the JLA in live-action.

I've learned to approach Warner Bumbles' translation of DC characters the way an adult approaches seeing the artwork of his 5-year-old. Most of the time, the adult just has to placate the kid because the final product is barely recognizable as anything beyond scribbling. But once in a blue moon, the child draws something discernible. Then, I can pat them on their heads and say, "Aw, good clueless studio execs."

In their defence turning the MoS universe into the DCU universe and going with just team up movies simplifies things for them whilst also maximizing potential for box office/merchandising returns.As long as Batman or Superman (or both) are in the film there's lower risk involved. It's win-win situation for them without them having to invest in any new franchises. The upside is we get all these characters on screen, the downside is we won't get solo films for Aquaman or GL or Flash or WW but I think for WB it's an acceptable compromise and if I'm honest I would think the same as well.

 

[Micromind]

Which is why from here on in I think the MoS Universe is the biggest the DC Universe is going to get. What I mean by that is we probably won't be getting spin off movies, it will essentially be team up films from here on in. As long as either Batman or Superman are present in the movies there's no need to be doing solo films for other characters, it get's them their superhero quota without them having to take further risks like GL. It's a win-win situation for WB.

Agreed, the plan seems to make Justice League a franchise (like X-Men movies) and make an occasional Superman movie.

I suspect there won't be any solo Batman movies for some time, as long as Ben Affleck is Batman, which is why they thought to make use of Batman property in the form of "Gotham" TV series.

 

[DrCosmic]

Why would Affleck not make a solo Batman movie? Wouldn't he get to be the director?

I don't quite appreciate WB's compromise, it makes me sad.

 

[jmc]

Honestly though, as much as fans may want the whole expanded universe thing, from a WB perspective keeping things Superman/Batman centric is going to save them a hell of a lot in terms of resources, personnel and money. It also keeps a level of consistency that can easily get out of hand with multiple creative groups across different movies. They don't have the luxury of being in Marvel's position where there is a central group controlling all projects and ensuring things run smoothly, the studio isn't built for that to be an option really. If there's one franchise running it makes life easier and cheaper. Yeah it sucks from a fan perspective, but the way i look at it this might be as good as it gets, it's not perfect but at least it's something.

 

[KangConquers]

For starters, Parallax is the fear entity that was trapped in the CPB and eventually infected Hal. Contrast that to the movie version.

White circles train for weeks or months on Oa, not one session.

Hal has never shown fear of Sinestro, and he certainly never quit the Corps out of cowardice. When a GL does quit, their ring either returns to Oa or finds another bearer (depending on the various continuities), but they don't just keep it.

A GL speaks the Oath to charge their ring each time, it doesn't just make a "bloop" sound and expel energy automatically.

When Abin is injured (from Legion or Atrocitus, not Parallax) the ring selects Hal by engulfing the flightless simulator in will energy.

Fear/Yellow energy is harnessed and made into weaponry on Qward, not Oa.



Need I go on? WB shouldn't have dumbed down these elements just because some of the GA sheeple might have been confused.

These are all changes that only upset fans though. This doesn't explain why it's a poor piece of cinema.

 

[DrCosmic]

His argument, if I understand it correctly, is that without those changes, the film would have been more unique, thus more interesting, thus higher quality. How much higher quality he thinks that would make it I haven't figured out.