World Do you think Green Lantern can work on TV?

[dnno1]

CW isn't a major network, but it's more major than SyFy. Arrow averages 3+ million viewers including DVR peeps. Yes it's maybe 2 million households, but SG1 at it's peak was only doing 1.3 million households.

The reason? Because Flash and Arrow have shown that changing and reimagining a franchise for a broader audience is more profitable and more awesome. Is there any greater set of motivations for producing a television series?

EDIT: Now, it's true, there may be a better fit to expand the CW DCU, if they ever plan to. They'll basically need to go with aliens or with magic if they want a setting with a distinct identity from that of Arrow and Flash. Green Lantern just seems like the highest profile, and thus, most potentialed candidate outside of Wonder Woman, who I'd guess is somehow off limits. I'd also like Zatanna, but that would overlap with the Constantine show. Perhaps Raven? Vixen might be able to be adapted into a supernaturalish thing. Shazam or Aquaman could also go in that direction, but I would prefer some diversity for the lead myself.

You should mix apples with apples. Stargate SG-1 in its heyday averaged 2 million viewers in over 1.3 million households on SciFi and that figure doesn't include DVR views. In its first couple of seasons (when it was on Showtime) the show averaged 1.5 million viewers. Okay, if the vision is to expand the television universe through Green Arrow using the same production team, then maybe it could exist on the CW network, but I dont thin that is the case (note that Constantine is on NBC and they were originally shopping Amazon on one of the major networks). Because of the similarity to shows on that network, I really feel that Green Lantern would be a better fit on SciFi channel.

 

[DrCosmic]

I don't mean to compare unfairly, but DVR ten years ago wasn't as big, and didn't affect ratings and therefore budget. What I'm saying is that because those channels seem to top out around 2 million, and CW seems to bottom out at 2 million, you'll have a smaller audience on SyFy. A successful show on SyFy is a canceled show on the CW. That means a smaller budget for SyFy GL than CW GL, that means less Green Lantern sci fi effects on SyFy than on CW.

So what makes it a better fit, exactly? I can understand shopping to a major network, as in the cases you mentioned, if you didn't care about connecting it to Arrow - I think it'd be awesome, myself. I don't understand why would you choose to shop a concept that asks for lots of effects to the channel that gives you the fewest?

 

[metaphysician]

Random suggestion: do it as a Netflix, or other streaming service, show. That way you could get a larger budget, and concentrate it into fewer episodes. It wouldn't resolve my objections to the show, but it would at least ameliorate them.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

No way! They couldn't afford it, not even on a doctor who budget!

Do it right as a movie

If budget is the issue Doctor Who has about half the budget of Game of Thrones.

 

[Luchador Bane]

My suggestion would be make it an HBO, Starz, or Showtime show. Heck, even AMC, they can get away with more violence and...dare I say it..."darker".

 

[Luchador Bane]

Random suggestion: do it as a Netflix, or other streaming service, show. That way you could get a larger budget, and concentrate it into fewer episodes. It wouldn't resolve my objections to the show, but it would at least ameliorate them.

Well, that's what Marvel is doing with Daredevil, Iron Fist, etc. I don't think DC wants to copy what Marvel is doing (look at how they are doing Justice League, no stand alone films first). That's why they're sticking to T.V.

 

[Silvermoth]

If budget is the issue Doctor Who has about half the budget of Game of Thrones.

Still wouldn't be enough. Game of thrones films in a lot of cool european historic places. Green lantern would need to be almost exclusively cgi

 

[dnno1]

I don't mean to compare unfairly, but DVR ten years ago wasn't as big, and didn't affect ratings and therefore budget. What I'm saying is that because those channels seem to top out around 2 million, and CW seems to bottom out at 2 million, you'll have a smaller audience on SyFy. A successful show on SyFy is a canceled show on the CW. That means a smaller budget for SyFy GL than CW GL, that means less Green Lantern sci fi effects on SyFy than on CW.

So what makes it a better fit, exactly? I can understand shopping to a major network, as in the cases you mentioned, if you didn't care about connecting it to Arrow - I think it'd be awesome, myself. I don't understand why would you choose to shop a concept that asks for lots of effects to the channel that gives you the fewest?

It's a better fit because Green Lantern is space based science fiction, which is one of the audiences that SyFy channel caters to. Another thing to point out is that the CW network only offers 2 hours of programming per night, while SyFy offers 24 hours a day. Furthermore, SyFy channel is broadcast in 18 different countries (just for ther record, even though "Stargate SG-1 averaged 2 million viewers in the domestic United States, it averaged 30 million worldwide), while the CW only brodcasts in the US and Canada. That is why I believe Green Lantern would be a better fit there. It caters to ther right market and there is the potential to get the brand exposure to a more global audience, wich will figure into any future film franchises.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Still wouldn't be enough. Game of thrones films in a lot of cool european historic places.

And Doctor Who films in uncool quarries in Wales.

Game of Thrones uses CGI to create cities, dragons, mammoths, giants, direwolves etc.

Green lantern would need to be almost exclusively cgi

Why is that, George?

 

[metaphysician]

My suggestion would be make it an HBO, Starz, or Showtime show. Heck, even AMC, they can get away with more violence and...dare I say it..."darker".

Why in god's name would anyone think the solution to making a good Green Lantern adaptation is "make it darker and more violent"?

 

[Tec15]

No, and nor should be it attempted. Considering all the nutpicking the movie's effect got, I can only imagine the reaction a tv version would inspire (Probably from the same people loudly proclaiming how it's so possible, using the example of completely unrelated past scifi shows).

 

[Rorschach2012]

No, and nor should be it attempted. Considering all the nutpicking the movie's effect got, I can only imagine the reaction a tv version would inspire (Probably from the same people loudly proclaiming how it's so possible, using the example of completely unrelated past scifi shows).

The major complaints about the movie's cgi were about the suit and Parallax. Constructs are doable on a tv budget. And those scifi shows I listed prove that good scifi can be done on a tv budget.

Green Lantern is possible on a tv budget. There would be some compromises to make it work though.

 

[DrCosmic]

It's a better fit because Green Lantern is space based science fiction, which is one of the audiences that SyFy channel caters to. Another thing to point out is that the CW network only offers 2 hours of programming per night, while SyFy offers 24 hours a day. Furthermore, SyFy channel is broadcast in 18 different countries (just for ther record, even though "Stargate SG-1 averaged 2 million viewers in the domestic United States, it averaged 30 million worldwide), while the CW only brodcasts in the US and Canada. That is why I believe Green Lantern would be a better fit there. It caters to ther right market and there is the potential to get the brand exposure to a more global audience, wich will figure into any future film franchises.

I see. I was looking for something that would result in a higher quality or more watched show on CW, and there's nothing to indicate that, unless you think Arrow is not also broadcast to tens of millions internationally. I'd love to see the source for your numbers by the way, I have no idea where to find international viewership.

So I'll take a bad fit if it means a better show, both in terms of character development and sci-fi budget. After all, there's nothing stopping SyFy's audience from coming to watch CW GL, but CW's audience will never watch SyFy GL. The only thing a SyFy GL would have over a CW GL is a lack of character drama, which, the more I think about it, isn't actually a good thing.

At the end of the day, for me, CW is proven when it comes to superheroes. SyFy isn't. I'll take The 100 over Defiance personally, but that's more a personal taste thing. Just because they specialize in sci-fi doesn't make them the best at it, and it certainly doesn't give them a bigger audience.

 

[Batmannerism]

My turn:

a GL tv series.....why not ?

To be honest, the GL brand has a big cast of characters, there's more scope for a TV series than films. Think about it, you have four main characters (Hal
, Guy, John, Kyle) and a huge supporting cast, with lots of memorable friends and foes. The writers would have limitless possibilities, in terms of settings and story angles.

The GL animated series was fantastic, a million times better than the live action film. If anything it demonstrated that the show doesn't have to revolve around Hal, and can be both exciting and tremendous fun.
Plus, the storylines that the GLC deal with probably lend themselves better to
episodes, i.e. a TV series, rather than a 2 hour film.


Given what's doable with special effects these days, even if some of the CGI isn't perfect, who cares ?

I think casting would be absolutely key though. As long as you have good leads, (and Ryan Reynolds was miscast IMO) you can do a lot.

So, IMO, yes. Who knows it could be a spin off of the Flash?

 

[mace1]

I agree.

 

[Beige Lantern]

My problem isn't just the constructs, but all the aliens. God, I love the GL aliens. On a TV budget, you're going to end up with a lot of forehead prosthetics al la ST:TNG.

I would much rather see limited CGI than to see CGI done badly. It would cause me actual physical pain to see Sharknado level graphics come from Hal's ring.

 

[Batmannerism]

My problem isn't just the constructs, but all the aliens. God, I love the GL aliens. On a TV budget, you're going to end up with a lot of forehead prosthetics al la ST:TNG.

I would much rather see limited CGI than to see CGI done badly. It would cause me actual physical pain to see Sharknado level graphics come from Hal's ring.

LOL, I love that someone brought up STNG prosthetic foreheads, that's hilarious.....and so true !

Thing is, a lot of adventures would happen on Earth, so not necessary to have tons of aliens every week.

The crappy construct thing is a legit concern. We'll have to see how the Flash comes off. The truth is though, that often the constructs look crappy in the comics. I loved Jim Lee's constructs in JLA rigins, but there have been plenty of terrible constructs over the years.

However, I think that even with the odd crappy construct, GL would still be a terrific TV series- so long as they use the right tone of green.

 

[DrCosmic]

My problem isn't just the constructs, but all the aliens. God, I love the GL aliens. On a TV budget, you're going to end up with a lot of forehead prosthetics al la ST:TNG.

I would much rather see limited CGI than to see CGI done badly. It would cause me actual physical pain to see Sharknado level graphics come from Hal's ring.

I think a better comparison is Dr. Who aliens, as that's a sci fi show produced this decade. Prosthetics have come a long way since the late eighties.

 

[luis4u]

remember this or this

 

[Boy Scout]

I guess I don't know why the abilities aren't being showcased. The hero still comes up with cool random constructs to save the day.

What? Didn't you say that constructs would rarely be used?

They need to be bigger to be done justice?

Not necessarily. It depends on the construct and the purpose behind creating it in the first place.

Constructs need to be the primary form of combat in order to be done justice?

The primary form of combat? Again, not necessarily. There isn't anything wrong with using energy blasts. However, if you have to resort to using them simply because constructs would be too expensive to render (and they probably would be on television), you should probably think about looking into another medium.

Constructs have been a part of the Green Lantern mythology for a long time. They are a widely recognized part of every Green Lantern's power set. If your excuse for not using them is because you can't afford to, why bother adapting the character to that medium in the first place? It'd be like creating a Superman series where the only powers at his disposal are heat vision and super strength.

Green Lanterns shooting lasers, as they often do, isn't a good representation?

If that's pretty much all they're doing, then yes, I'd say it's a pretty poor representation of their abilities.

Abilities. Not character.

Is it that constructs should be created whimsically instead of in response to a crucial need?

I'd say combat would or could require constructs, which means we should expect to see them on a fairly regular basis. Granted, they don't all need to be the size of Godzilla.

But Hal? John? Guy? Every non human GL? They make stuff that can be done practically 9 times out of 10.

Uh...okay. If good looking constructs can be created using practical effects, why would I object to that method? More importantly why couldn't the aforementioned method be used during action scenes?

I'm beginning to think there's been some kind of miscommunication. I was under the impression that you were generally against the use of constructs for any reason, with the exception of season finales or whatever.

 

[DrCosmic]

What? Didn't you say that constructs would rarely be used?

Not necessarily. It depends on the construct and the purpose behind creating it in the first place.

The primary form of combat? Again, not necessarily. There isn't anything wrong with using energy blasts. However, if you have to resort to using them simply because constructs would be too expensive to render (and they probably would be on television), you should probably think about looking into another medium.

Constructs have been a part of the Green Lantern mythology for a long time. They are a widely recognized part of every Green Lantern's power set. If your excuse for not using them is because you can't afford to, why bother adapting the character to that medium in the first place? It'd be like creating a Superman series where the only powers at his disposal are heat vision and super strength.

If that's pretty much all they're doing, then yes, I'd say it's a pretty poor representation of their abilities.

Abilities. Not character.

I'd say combat would or could require constructs, which means we should expect to see them on a fairly regular basis. Granted, they don't all need to be the size of Godzilla.

Uh...okay. If good looking constructs can be created using practical effects, why would I object to that method? More importantly why couldn't the aforementioned method be used during action scenes?

I'm beginning to think there's been some kind of miscommunication. I was under the impression that you were generally against the use of constructs for any reason, with the exception of season finales or whatever.

Yeah, my view has changed slightly as far as what's possible, but even in the original, I was thinking big constructs, like a suit of power armor would be for season finale's, but simple stuff: guns, bats, unique tools, solid walls would happen once or twice per fight scene, not that there'd be a big action sequence every episode.

So overall, it would be like a Superman show where the main character only has super strength and super speed (Smallville) or a Green Arrow show with little to no trick arrows (Arrow). So it's not so much that I was against the use of constructs, it's just... I can enjoy Arrow without trick arrows... why can't I enjoy GL without constructs? Especially since there actually would be *Some* constructs.

And while I'd agree that constructs are a widely used and popular part of the power set, when I look at GL comics, and certainly animated adaptations of GL, constructs are surprisingly rare, especially amongst alien lanterns. Think of all the times Kilowog has appeared... has he ever had any memorable constructs? Maybe the sun in the movie... it's just so rare that constructs are actually have an effect on the story. If pretty much just shooting lasers is a poor representation of their abilities, then most adaptations are poor representations of their abilities. That's generally an Earth Lantern thing, in my experience.

What I was theorizing last was, what if you could do practical large constructs, and actually have large scale devices and creatures done practically and then they'd just have to be rendered green as opposed to being rendered from scratch like CGI would. I don't really know how hard that is.

 

[Zionite]

Agree with the Dr and I would love to see a GL tv series

 

[Zionite1]

However the main issue with a tv show is the set pieces for the various planets.Wonder how theyd pool it off with their budget

 

[DrCosmic]

Yeah, I think I did gloss over that a wee bit.

You pretty much just have to have a boss-arse set design team who can make an alien locale on a soundstage every week or so. You split time for that with going to 'undeveloped' planets and shooting in barren areas with a filter. Of course all of it is under standings sets of Oa. Basically, the Stargate method. Having a bigger budget than any of those helps too. But yeah, you're not going to hit up three alien planets in a single episode unless you have a really fancy shooting schedule. A typical week could be like:
Sunday/Monday: Alien Planet of the Week Scenes Soundstage 2/On Location
Tuesday: Green Screen/SFX/Space Scenes, Soundstage 2
Wednesday/Thursday: Oa Scenes, soundstage 1
Friday: Review Scripts for next week/Rehearse choreography/shoot miscellany
Saturday: Rest/Day Off

Another thing I glossed over: You don't want to do green screen with guys in green costumes. They'd have to do blue screen, basically, which can be a little less crisp at times.

 

[Loki882]

To do GL right, with all of the different powers, races, planets, space-opera stuff. No, there's no way that it can be done on a TV show budget. They couldn't even really do it justice with a $200 million summer blockbuster. If you're doing GL, then I want you to DO GL. No "compromises," no shortcuts, no limiting the effects due to money issues, either go all out with it or don't do it at all. The movie even failed at that by barely featuring the GLC and setting the movie mostly on Earth.