the last son
Superhero
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2012
- Messages
- 5,349
- Reaction score
- 77
- Points
- 33
Which one is worse? Again I said the ones I've seen. I haven't seen like FF(94) or Batman 1966.
Then they must have hacked up the entire Movie, should that be the case. Because beyond a few scenes here and there, that were actually good, the rest is just forgetful.
secret origins shouldn't of been that hard to adapt what the heck went wrong is what i want to know
I think they should have kept the first one more Earth-bound and have Hal come to grips with the ring in a more rural setting. Plus it allows for them to go for more practical effects. Then if it was a success they would have a bigger budget for the sequel and be able to give justice to Oa.I know it's such a fantastic book aswell if they'd have just adapted that they'd have been fine. Like I said above they were in too much of a rush with the film.
Batman 66 is awesome, you've been fed lies my friend.
I think it might've been the script which was hacked up. Wasn't it getting good buzz?
Possibly when Geoff Johns got brought on it all went to pot. That terrible, terrible man.
Uh, NO. The Batman '66 movie & entire TV series & Batman Forever & Batman & Robin combined > The Green Lantern film.
I know it's such a fantastic book aswell if they'd have just adapted that they'd have been fine. Like I said above they were in too much of a rush with the film.
Secret Origin is such a great read its ridiculous how this wasn't adapted correctly. It practically could of made the films story for itself!
I agree, and I think this being a CGI-heavy project didn't help matters either, as that's not his forte. He's a wonderful action director in the old school sense (that is, for movies involving regular ol' fashioned stunt work), but he's never done anything with so much CGI before. I think his inexperience in that arena not only stifled his creativity on the action set-pieces, but is also largely to blame for allowing the budget to get out of control.Campbell is one of those people who can do amazing things when the people ahead of him in the food chain (producers) have a strong vision in place like Casino Royale. But when the producers are confused, like they so evidently were in this, he makes lesser films.
I know that book is unbelievably good, why didn't they just adapt it?
I wondered the same. I think they probably didn't want all the Atrocitus and Blackest Night stuff in it. But they could have easily swapped Atrocitus out with some other superpowered convict.
I agree with every single word in this post.I agree, and I think this being a CGI-heavy project didn't help matters either, as that's not his forte. He's a wonderful action director in the old school sense (that is, for movies involving regular ol' fashioned stunt work), but he's never done anything with so much CGI before. I think his inexperience in that arena not only stifled his creativity on the action set-pieces, but is also largely to blame for allowing the budget to get out of control.
Speaking of Secret Origin, I think the heart of the problem with the GL movie lies with one seemingly minor, but actually very major change from that comic: When Abin Sur is dying and asks Hal Jordan if he accepts this duty, in Secret Origin, Hal's answer is, "If I'm not dreaming...Absolutely." In the movie, when faced with the same question, Hal spends the entire movie basically saying "No, you've got the wrong guy!" His journey is about deciding to accept it. And with that "little" change, the writers completely missed what makes Hal Jordan who he is and turned him into Superhero-By-Numbers Guy ("the hero has to resist his true calling at first and learn that he's really a hero!"), thus, getting his entire character arc all wrong and making it as generic as possible. That's what really killed the movie for me.
Well that, the dodgy CGI, the flying turd they called "Parallax," and the fact that it was so much more interested in the Earthbound antics than in the intergalactic aspect that makes GL so fun.