Green Lantern 2

[DaveMoral]

It obviously wasn't my opinion alone since the film bombed.

That has no bearing on whether it was Reynolds or not though. Certainly not in any kind of objective way.

 

[BH/HHH]

That has no bearing on whether it was Reynolds or not though. Certainly not in any kind of objective way.

Thank you, the guy made a stupid statement based on opinion not fact

 

[NosfeRomas]

http://www.**************.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=70252

Sigh...

 

[Darth Rockwell]

I really want a second film. By no means was the first one great, but it wasn't horrible either. I think there is a firm basis to build off of an improve.

 

[Zionite1]

Gl2 is a pipedream. Gl failed to build an audience why on earth wld anyone want to continue a franchise that bombed?Reboot is the only way.And by reboot I mean reboot not quasi-sequels like Ghost Rider vegeance as thats will just be seen as a sequel in audience eyes.

That being said I dont want to see an origin movie for the reboot though.

 

[Arach Knight]

Gl2 is a pipedream.Gl fialed to build an audience why on earth wld anyone want to continue a frnchise that bombed?Reboot is the only way.And by reboot I mean reboot not quasisequels like Ghost Rider vegeance as thats will just be the same as a seuel in audience eyes.

That being said I dont want to see an origin movie for the reboot though.

This sums it up. Green Lantern coat $300 million and didn't even break even. The film generated $220 million. That's a disaster. Superman Returns made $390 million off of a $200 million budget and Warner considered that a failure in need of a reboot. Green Lantern won't be seeinf a sewuel, even in the form of a direct-to-video release. From here on out the options are reboot or reintroduce the character in a related film such as a Justice League film.

 

[BH/HHH]

Oh yeah it so t happen, GL will really have to standout in JL like Hulk did in Avengers (unfortunately that didnt even get Hulk a solo film). Real Shane WB screwed themselves over, infact I think GL had the potential to be the best Superhero film series yet.

 

[Deathstroke]

That has no bearing on whether it was Reynolds or not though. Certainly not in any kind of objective way.

It certainly reflects the film's lead if he couldn't draw people in and sell the film. The biggest issue with Reynolds is the general audience couldn't take him seriously in this.

It was already marketed as his typical goofy self in the first trailer that everyone saw. Even Warners admitted that was a misstep. Pair that with a cartoony CGI costume that looked ridiculous.

People just didn't want to waste their time and money on that crap, and justifiably so.

 

[The Guard]

I live for the day that people will realize that GREEN LANTERN'S failure had little to do with the public not being able to take Ryan Reynolds seriously (they weren't really asked to), or because he was the same goofy Ryan Reynolds they've paid to see in several films before, or the costume being overtly absurd, or the hamminess in a movie they didn't see to begin with...

It's that the bottom line is that not enough people gave a crap about the concept of GREEN LANTERN and what was in the movie to go see it, period

 

[Deathstroke]

Disagree. The film failed to sell the concept.

That was the problem.

Audiences have bought way more far out concepts than Green Lantern. Because all the elements of the film were lackluster (cast, characters, story, effects, direction), it didn't hit an audience.

 

[Edguy]

..and it was poorly marketed and distributed. I didn't follow film releases as closely then, as I do now, but nonetheless, I didn't even know about the film until after it's release. I don't even think it was screened at my local theaters.. Think about that, a $200M film..

 

[Deathstroke]

There were reports of 200M spent on marketing for this film, according to HWR and Variety.

It had a massive marketing budget. They just toned it down when the reviews hit and it became public that this film was a stinker.

Poor marketing could also reflect the lackluster first trailer.. though unfortunately, it ended up being an accurate indication of the lackluster quality of the film.

 

[The Guard]

Disagree. The film failed to sell the concept.

That was the problem.

Audiences have bought way more far out concepts than Green Lantern. Because all the elements of the film were lackluster (cast, characters, story, effects, direction), it didn't hit an audience

Yes, that was the problem.

Audiences have also bought into plenty of other films with lackuster casts, characters, stories and effects.

Lackluster films have made money for a long time. Not all of them, obviously, but its not unsual.

I really don't think the only reason that GREEN LANTERN didn't find an audience was that it was a less than stellar film. For whatever reason, it's just not a concept people bought into, period.

 

[Pondslider]

They threw too much at the audience at once. They should have spent more time on OA showing the audience how the Green Lantern corps works. Make it a simpler story. The animated Green Lantern: First Flight was described as Training Day in space. I think it would have been better if they had done something like that and made it a cop movie in space where the audience sees Hal Jordan grow into the role. The whole concept and parallax and Hector Hammond left the whole thing sort of half baked.

 

[Deathstroke]

Yes, that was the problem.

Audiences have also bought into plenty of other films with lackuster casts, characters, stories and effects.

Lackluster films have made money for a long time. Not all of them, obviously, but its not unsual.

I really don't think the only reason that GREEN LANTERN didn't find an audience was that it was a less than stellar film. For whatever reason, it's just not a concept people bought into, period.

And the reason is because the execution was terrible for the reasons mentioned above.

The concept of Green Lantern really isn't far off from Star Wars. It wasn't so far out there that audiences wouldn't find it appealing given the right approach.

Problem is they took the wrong approach. Personally, I knew this film was headed down the wrong road the second they announced the finalists for Hal Jordan were Bradley Cooper, Ryan Reynolds and Justin Timberlake...




This property was just handled all wrong. It's well deserved of it's 26% on RT.

 

[DrCosmic]

And the reason is because the execution was terrible for the reasons mentioned above.

The concept of Green Lantern really isn't far off from Star Wars. It wasn't so far out there that audiences wouldn't find it appealing given the right approach.

Exactly. This isn't dreams within dreams within dreams or hitchiking across the galaxy after the end of the world. This is: Guy gets mysterious powers out of the blue and saves the world with them. Maybe they thought the concept was so good that they didn't need outstanding performances, characters, story, villains, action or marketing. -shrug-

Edit: Another random thought I had about GL2011, they could have gone either way, as a space thing with the earth stuff as bookends, or an earth thing with Oa being teased at the end, but trying to develop both spheres in one installment is something even the comics don't do anymore.

 

[The Guard]

And the reason is because the execution was terrible for the reasons mentioned above.

Arguable. Regardless, audiences, if they haven't seen the film, don't know that.

And please don't give me "Well, the film got bad reviews so no one went" argument. PLENTY of films get terrible reviews and still make money.

 

[Arach Knight]

This thread reminds me of when the trailer first released and I made a detailed post about the many questionable things shown in it. So many people told me I was judging the film too soon, exaggerating, being buas etc. Oh how lovely it wpuld be to converse with those diehards and get their perspctive long after the fact. GL was a terrible film with too many characters and plot points. And the one set piece that could have made the film interesting (Oa) was severely underutilized. Oh well, live and learn.

 

[Zionite1]

Arguable. Regardless, audiences, if they haven't seen the film, don't know that.

And please don't give me "Well, the film got bad reviews so no one went" argument. PLENTY of films get terrible reviews and still make money.

The Trailers and the Word of mouth are the main reasons why the audience didnt see it.Especially the Trailers in my case

You have to understand I knew nothing about Green lantern outside of a few Jl cartoon episodes.The Gl movie was to be my first proper intro to the GL mythos just like the rest of the GA.And judging from the Trailers Green lantern wasnt that Great.

The Trailers completely turned off the movie for the following reasons

1.Lame looking Hero with lame powers
2.Lame looking Hero allies(Green lantern corps) with lame powers
3.Lame looking Villains with Lame powers
4.Fake-ish looking effects
5.Lame looking fight scenes obviously because of the lame powers and fakeish looking effects.
6.Generic looking superhero plot(The Trailers showed that Gl recieving his power from an alien and training in space and this scenes wld have made plot seem less generic if they werent ruined by the fake-ish looking effects)
7. Heros personality not really a draw.
8.Unfunny comedy scenes that made movie look sillier than it actually was.

No 1-5 are the main reasons why me and my friends avoided the movie in cinema-i only watched the movie 2 months ago on dvd.

Id blame the filmmakers for the listed flaws but some of those flaws are actually flaws with the concept itself- Like the costume and powers.

Gl costume has never been awesome its decent at best so its not fair to blame the filmmakers wholly for Gls costume. Gls powers were actually faithfully translated to the big screen.It just looks lame.It looks like Gls power is to create green lego holograms. Im sorry but thats what it looks like.

I think the costume and powers of the GL corps are actually a big flaw when translating into the big screen.They just are not cool enough-unlike other Space cops like Nova or Star Lord.I suspect the adapting the rest of the spectrum corps wld face the same challenges.

Another problem is the fact that Gl has some vital supporting cast members on earth e.g Carol his love interest and Tom Kalmaku.

This is why a Gl movie will struggle to keep away from earth scenes and focus on Galactic stuff.Only way they can pulll it off is by having Gls earth bound cast tag along with GL adventures in space-easier said than done.

Theres also the fact that his civilian life plays a role in the stories so it is not so easy to sidesttep earth scenes .

 

[The Guard]

The Trailers and the Word of mouth are the main reasons why the audience didnt see it.Especially the Trailers in my case.

Obviously...but why? Because it's yet another silly, average or generic looking movie (which, as I've pointed out, people pay to see all the time)...or because they didn't think the concept looked cool enough?

It's odd that it's Green Lantern's fan critics who accuse the trailers of "fooling people that it was a better movie".

1.Lame looking Hero with lame powers

So right away you think that Green Lantern is lame looking.

2.Lame looking Hero allies(Green lantern corps) with lame powers

So right away you think the visuals and concept of the Corps is lame.

3.Lame looking Villains with Lame powers

So right away you think Green Lantern's classic villains are lame.

5.Lame looking fight scenes obviously because of the lame powers and fakeish looking effects.

And because you think the powers are lame, you think the use of powers are lame.

6.Generic looking superhero plot(The Trailers showed that Gl recieving his power from an alien and training in space and this scenes wld have made plot seem less generic if they werent ruined by the fake-ish looking effects)

I guess my question is, how is that any different than any other generic superhero plot?

8.Unfunny comedy scenes that made movie look sillier than it actually was.

How can the scenes that were actually in the movie make the movie look sillier than it actually was?

Id blame the filmmakers for the listed flaws but some of those flaws are actually flaws with the concept itself- Like the costume and powers.

Thank you for proving my point.

Gl costume has never been awesome its decent at best so its not fair to blame the filmmakers wholly for Gls costume.

Gls powers were actually faithfully translated to the big screen.It just looks lame.It looks like Gls power is to create green lego holograms. Im sorry but thats what it looks like.

You're kind of proving my point. You don't appear to like the basic concept.

I think the costume and powers of the GL corps are actually a big flaw when translating into the big screen.They just are not cool enough-unlike other Space cops like Nova or Star Lord.I suspect the adapting the rest of the spectrum corps wld face the same challenges.

You're further proving my point.

Another problem is the fact that Gl has some vital supporting cast members on earth e.g Carol his love interest and Tom Kalmaku. This is why a Gl movie will struggle to keep away from earth scenes and focus on Galactic stuff.Only way they can pulll it off is by having Gls earth bound cast tag along with GL adventures in space-easier said than done. Theres also the fact that his civilian life plays a role in the stories so it is not so easy to sidesttep earth scenes .

True, but anyone who follows Green Lantern realizes that while a space opera is a big part of the concept, it is not the only thing the concept has going for it. That's just how it is. Especially in his earlier origin stories. He spends much of his time on Earth, and even after he became Green Lantern, he spent a lot of time on Earth protecting it. Does he go into space a lot too? Yes, that's part of his job, but people act like him not spending half the time in space in his origin film was somehow a huge blunder, or reasonable to expect.

What you just said is what I hear from the average person who saw GREEN LANTERN. They didn't complain about the structure, or the quality of the writing. They said some variation of the following:

"A magic green ring? That looks stupid."

 

[DrCosmic]

This thread reminds me of when the trailer first released and I made a detailed post about the many questionable things shown in it. So many people told me I was judging the film too soon, exaggerating, being buas etc. Oh how lovely it wpuld be to converse with those diehards and get their perspctive long after the fact. GL was a terrible film with too many characters and plot points. And the one set piece that could have made the film interesting (Oa) was severely underutilized. Oh well, live and learn.

You can converse with me now. I defended this movie to the last, from trailer to the week after release. It wasn't until I saw it a second time at home that I realized how terribly weak a movie it was. Unfortunately, all WB learned was: don't launch heroes that aren't Superman or Batman.

Id blame the filmmakers for the listed flaws but some of those flaws are actually flaws with the concept itself- Like the costume and powers.

Gl costume has never been awesome its decent at best so its not fair to blame the filmmakers wholly for Gls costume. Gls powers were actually faithfully translated to the big screen.It just looks lame.It looks like Gls power is to create green lego holograms. Im sorry but thats what it looks like.

I think the costume and powers of the GL corps are actually a big flaw when translating into the big screen.They just are not cool enough-unlike other Space cops like Nova or Star Lord.I suspect the adapting the rest of the spectrum corps wld face the same challenges.

That is a fascinating perspective. I feel like the costume is something that can be changed and made cool relatively easily. That's what they tried to do, I believe, and failed. And honestly... while his powers do lend towards fake-ish looking CGI, his powers include those of Star Lord and Nova... would more focus on those powers have made him cooler, you think?

Obviously...but why? Because it's yet another silly, average or generic looking movie (which, as I've pointed out, people pay to see all the time)...or because they didn't think the concept looked cool enough?

It's odd that it's Green Lantern's fan critics who accuse the trailers of "fooling people that it was a better movie".

The trailer showed the lameness of the film. Had the movie been better, the trailer would have showed how cool the concept was. As you may know, the same concept can be cool or lame depending on how its presented.

So right away you think that Green Lantern is lame looking.

So right away you think the visuals and concept of the Corps is lame.

So right away you think Green Lantern's classic villains are lame.

And because you think the powers are lame, you think the use of powers are lame.

I guess my question is, how is that any different than any other generic superhero plot?

How can the scenes that were actually in the movie make the movie look sillier than it actually was?

Thank you for proving my point.

You're kind of proving my point. You don't appear to like the basic concept.

You're further proving my point.

True, but anyone who follows Green Lantern realizes that while a space opera is a big part of the concept, it is not the only thing the concept has going for it. That's just how it is. Especially in his earlier origin stories. He spends much of his time on Earth, and even after he became Green Lantern, he spent a lot of time on Earth protecting it. Does he go into space a lot too? Yes, that's part of his job, but people act like him not spending half the time in space in his origin film was somehow a huge blunder, or reasonable to expect.

What you just said is what I hear from the average person who saw GREEN LANTERN. They didn't complain about the structure, or the quality of the writing. They said some variation of the following:

"A magic green ring? That looks stupid."

He hasn't proved your point. He knew of the concept before, didn't have any problem with him, but when he saw the trailer, these particular visuals for the concept, he thought they were unimpressive. Listen to the people you're talking to. If the complaint is that it looks fake, why do you try to force them to say they had a problem with the concept itself?

 

[Zionite1]

Obviously...but why? Because it's yet another silly, average or generic looking movie (which, as I've pointed out, people pay to see all the time)...or because they didn't think the concept looked cool enough?

The Concept didnt look cool enough.That doesnt necessarily mean the Concept is bad though.

You're kind of proving my point. You don't appear to like the basic concept.

I actually like the basic concept very much.I mean the story is about a cool test pilot who recieves a cosmic power and becomes a Galactic cop hero.I eat the this concept up.

Howver the problem with this concept is the cosmic power he recieves looks rather lame and so those the uniform.Unfortunately Costume and powers are a very BIG factor when marketing a Superhero movie to the GA bigger than fanboys seem to reliaze.I was actually suprised that Flash didnt get a movie before Gl as he has the better costume and powers visually

I think GLs costume and powers need a good tweaking to be adapted to the big screen.This is very essential especially when you consider the fact that Gls allies(The Gl corps)more or less have the same powers and abilities as him

True, but anyone who follows Green Lantern realizes that while a space opera is a big part of the concept, it is not the only thing the concept has going for it. That's just how it is. Especially in his earlier origin stories. He spends much of his time on Earth, and even after he became Green Lantern, he spent a lot of time on Earth protecting it. Does he go into space a lot too? Yes, that's part of his job, but people act like him not spending half the time in space in his origin film was somehow a huge blunder, or reasonable to expect.
"

The Space opera is the most attractive part of the GL mythos-we have enough superheroes doing the protecting earth stuff.Its the "hook"of the Gl mythos in my view.Id rather see a movie with him him doing galacic stuff.

"A magic green ring? That looks stupid."

Problem wasnt the ring.It was what the Ring did that was stupid-and rather disappionting when you considerits supposedly the most powerful weapon in the universe

That is a fascinating perspective. I feel like the costume is something that can be changed and made cool relatively easily. That's what they tried to do, I believe, and failed. And honestly... while his powers do lend towards fake-ish looking CGI, his powers include those of Star Lord and Nova... would more focus on those powers have made him cooler, you think?

Im not sure the costume can be made cool relatively easily as you say,it might require inventiveness and a bit of deviation from the classic.

Costume wise Nova and Star lord are by far cooler.Star lord especially as he actually looks the part of a galactic cop,guns and all and a bad ass one that

Im sorry Im not overtly familiar with Gl mythos but as far as I know Gl doesnt have Star lords powers or Novas.

Star lord uses a gun that shoots Elemental attacks.
Nova has superhuman Strength and speed,and shoots energy blasts and can fly.

As far as I know Gl doesnt have any of this powers except energy blasts and they arent utilized anywhere near enough

I need to piont out that whilst Starlord and Novas powerset might not be the most inventive,they are the kind of powers that look freaking awesomse on screen and thatll make them far easier to market to the audience. Especiallly Star lord-hes going to be a hit with the audience come 2014

 

[The Guard]

He hasn't proved your point. He knew of the concept before, didn't have any problem with him, but when he saw the trailer, these particular visuals for the concept, he thought they were unimpressive. Listen to the people you're talking to. If the complaint is that it looks fake, why do you try to force them to say they had a problem with the concept itself?

First, "Thank you for proving my point" doesn't mean that he's actually proved my point. It's a saying.

Second, I can’t listen to something that someone hadn’t said yet at the time of my reply to them.

He originally said:

You have to understand I knew nothing about Green lantern outside of a few Jl cartoon episodes.The Gl movie was to be my first proper intro to the GL mythos just like the rest of the GA.And judging from the Trailers Green lantern wasnt that Great.

At no point prior to my reply did he say “I knew the concept and had no problem with it”, prior to my post. He states he saw a few episodes of a cartoon”. He then stated that the film was his first intro to the GL mythos outside the cartoon. His statement about Hal was “lame looking hero” with “lame powers”. Notice that he did not say “Lame looking powers” or “fake looking powers” there, he actually made a separate point about that, he said “lame powers”.

The times I talked about him proving my point were after he said the following:

Id blame the filmmakers for the listed flaws but some of those flaws are actually flaws with the concept itself- Like the costume and powers.

costume has never been awesome its decent at best so its not fair to blame the filmmakers wholly for Gls costume.

Gls powers were actually faithfully translated to the big screen.It just looks lame.It looks like Gls power is to create green lego holograms. Im sorry but thats what it looks like.

I think the costume and powers of the GL corps are actually a big flaw when translating into the big screen.They just are not cool enough-unlike other Space cops like Nova or Star Lord.I suspect the adapting the rest of the spectrum corps wld face the same challenges

None of these statements, the ones I advised were proving my point, are really about the quality of the effects. I made no statement at all about his thoughts on the quality of the effects.

Seeing as how my point was that some people just think the basic concepts/visuals aren’t that great (or are stupid), he kind of is proving my point.

Also, it was AFTER my post that he said that he likes the basic concept very much.

Maybe don’t jump on a poster for not taking into account something that someone hasn’t actually said yet next time, and think about the content and context of my post before you reply.

 

[DrCosmic]

None of these statements, the ones I advised were proving my point, are really about the quality of the effects. I made no statement at all about his thoughts on the quality of the effects.

Seeing as how my point was that some people just think the basic concepts/visuals aren’t that great (or are stupid), he kind of is proving my point.

Also, it was AFTER my post that he said that he likes the basic concept very much.

Maybe don’t jump on a poster for not taking into account something that someone hasn’t actually said yet next time, and think about the content and context of my post before you reply.

He did say it. He said "looks" over and over and over. He made several statements about fake-ish looking. Why you didn't pick up on it is beyond me. Perhaps because you think ideas and visuals are the same thing - which is also beyond me. I'll try spelling it out one more time:

First Person comes up with idea for a superhero - that is a concept.
Second Person draws/films the idea - those are the visuals.
Third person comes along and dislikes the way it looks, but likes the concept. That means they're two different things.

Im not sure the costume can be made cool relatively easily as you say,it might require inventiveness and a bit of deviation from the classic.

Costume wise Nova and Star lord are by far cooler.Star lord especially as he actually looks the part of a galactic cop,guns and all and a bad ass one that

Im sorry Im not overtly familiar with Gl mythos but as far as I know Gl doesnt have Star lords powers or Novas.

Star lord uses a gun that shoots Elemental attacks.
Nova has superhuman Strength and speed,and shoots energy blasts and can fly.

As far as I know Gl doesnt have any of this powers except energy blasts and they arent utilized anywhere near enough

I need to piont out that whilst Starlord and Novas powerset might not be the most inventive,they are the kind of powers that look freaking awesomse on screen and thatll make them far easier to market to the audience. Especiallly Star lord-hes going to be a hit with the audience come 2014

I think you hit it on the head when you said GL's powers weren't utilized enough. In the movie we saw him use flight, energy blasts, superstrength and super speed, but not in a way that was cool or impressive or you would have remembered it. He's always been able to do that in the comics as well as make anything, including cool guns that shoot cool stuff. They instead went with the 70s sort of toys and boxing gloves "hologram legos" Green Lantern instead of the modern sort of summoner/reality bender/practical GL.

On the costume, they already deviated quite a bit form the classic, they should have deviated to something cool instead of something that was supposed to be 'cutting edge' and just wound up looking weird in a bad way.

 

[The Guard]

He did say it. He said "looks" over and over and over. He made several statements about fake-ish looking. Why you didn't pick up on it is beyond me. Perhaps because you think ideas and visuals are the same thing - which is also beyond me. I'll try spelling it out one more time:

He did, but as I've pointed out, I didn't even address his comments about them being "fakish looking". None of what I resonded to involved these comments. I addressed his comments about whether he thought the powers themselves were "lame".

You don't need to spell it out for me, I understand the English language perfectly fine. I interpreted his statements about how he feels about the concepts based on the information he provided. Given his clarification after my post, I don't think I was far off.

He admitted in the same post that he doesn't think Green Lantern's powers, as they are depicted in the comics themselves, are all that impressive. That he considers them and the costume an inherent flaw within the concept itself. Which is the point that I responded to and addressed.

I'm not sure why you're even arguing this point with me.