Green Lantern Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 1

[jmc]

Haven't see it, but I'm sick of hearing the blame going toward critics for the film's poor performance.

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

Haven't see it, but I'm sick of hearing the blame going toward critics for the film's poor performance.

I figured as much. I'm sure when you see it, you'll hate it now. If you like it, you might have to admit that in retrospect
some of the negative reviews might have been a little OTT. I went in not expecting much after I read many many reviews. Imagine my surprise when it turned out to be very enjoyable.


I thought Thor was excellent, (a strong 8.5 to 9) and yet the New York Times gave it a horrendously bad review. Oh and btw, you are right. WB shares some of the blame for the lackluster first trailer, and the initial costume reveal on the cover of EW. Those two things together fueled the negative buzz which essentially chummed the waters for a lot of critics.

 

[K'Prime]

Haven't see it, but I'm sick of hearing the blame going toward critics for the film's poor performance.

agreed.when the early bad reviews were coming in.people were saying well the general audience will make or break the movie.not the critics.now that its not doing well its.the critics broke the movie...wolverine origins made a lot of money despite getting not so great reviews and coming off a bad x-3 movie

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

agreed.when the early bad reviews were coming in.people were saying well the general audience will make or break the movie.not the critics.now that its not doing well its.the critics broke the movie...wolverine origins made a lot of money despite getting not so great reviews and coming off a bad x-3 movie

I think there is more of a rabid fan base for Wolverine than GL, and Jackman can put a certain amount of butts in seats. Also the Wolverine character had the benefit of being exposed to the GA in three previous movies that GL didn't have. I thought Wolverine was pretty crap to be honest.

 

[Liam_H]

I think there is more of a rabid fan base for Wolverine than GL, and Jackman can put a certain amount of butts in seats. Also the Wolverine character had the benefit of being exposed to the GA in three previous movies that GL didn't have. I thought Wolverine was pretty crap to be honest.

Very true, GA loved Wolverine from the previous films. And Origins was a POS, fails to even be a dumb action movie.

 

[K'Prime]

I think there is more of a rabid fan base for Wolverine than GL, and Jackman can put a certain amount of butts in seats. Also the Wolverine character had the benefit of being exposed to the GA in three previous movies that GL didn't have. I thought Wolverine was pretty crap to be honest.

well thats a fair point.wolverine did have more exposure.boy did that movie suck.......but I guess a more accurate comparison would be the first fantastic movie in the sense that it got bad reviews but still made a fair amount of money and got a sequel even

 

[KalMart]

I think there is more of a rabid fan base for Wolverine than GL, and Jackman can put a certain amount of butts in seats. Also the Wolverine character had the benefit of being exposed to the GA in three previous movies that GL didn't have. I thought Wolverine was pretty crap to be honest.

So basically, you don't blame the critics for not liking the movie, but for how they expressed it...making it out to be the 'stay way from it if you value your sanity' movie of the year (after Sucker Punch)? I can see that. I do think there's at least a tiny element of 'piling on' that happens with some films.

But then again...it doesn't really seem to happen with good films. So it stands to reason that something about the movie itself...as a movie...must have opened itself up to it. But there could be a point where it does become a bit unfair...and maybe there's something to that in this case.

 

[Poni_Boy]

But then again...it doesn't really seem to happen with good films. So it stands to reason that something about the movie itself...as a movie...must have opened itself up to it.

Who are we blaming the film isn't doing well now?

 

[KalMart]

Who are we blaming the film isn't doing well now?

Some are blaming the critics.

 

[Liam_H]

well thats a fair point.wolverine did have more exposure.boy did that movie suck.......but I guess a more accurate comparison would be the first fantastic movie in the sense that it got bad reviews but still made a fair amount of money and got a sequel even

Good comparison but FF at least had a consistent tone of cheesy mediocrity, GL tone is all over the place. It's editing also wasn't as choppy and jarring as GL. It got a sequel cause it made enough (around 330 WW), at this point im not so sure GL can even break 300 WW.

A few months ago I never thought I would be comparing GL to the FF movies let alone defending FF ....can't believe it turned out so bad.

 

[HighFivingMF]

I blame the yellow impurity.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Some are blaming the critics.

That's ridiculous

I blame the yellow impurity.

That makes more sense

 

[KalMart]

Good comparison but FF at least had a consistent tone of cheesy mediocrity, GL tone is all over the place. It's editing also wasn't as choppy and jarring as GL. It got a sequel cause it made enough (around 330 WW), at this point im not so sure GL can even break 300 WW.

A few months ago I never thought I would be comparing GL to the FF movies let alone defending FF ....can't believe it turned out so bad.

I got some pretty nasty reactions when I likened it to FF when the first trailer came out...and I wasn't even being smarmy about it. I also said that if GL appeals to audiences on a basic fun/entertaining level, that's all it may need to be...yet some scoffed at that and said that GL is way too 'deep' or what have you to settle for that. And now here we are...hoping that GL will at least make FF numbers, and that audiences will appreciate it as good, simple, fun entertainment.

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

So basically, you don't blame the critics for not liking the movie, but for how they expressed it...making it out to be the 'stay way from it if you value your sanity' movie of the year (after Sucker Punch)? I can see that. I do think there's at least a tiny element of 'piling on' that happens with some films.

But then again...it doesn't really seem to happen with good films. So it stands to reason that something about the movie itself...as a movie...must have opened itself up to it. But there could be a point where it does become a bit unfair...and maybe there's something to that in this case.

If anything I think GL needed about 20 minutes more character development. Hopefully for the Blu-Ray we'll get a longer version. 10-15 mins more on Oa, and Hal's interaction with other GL's would have been nice. Green Lantern: First Flight was good in this regard.

 

[KalMart]

If anything I think GL needed about 20 minutes more character development. Hopefully for the Blu-Ray we'll get a longer version. 10-15 mins more on Oa, and Hal's interaction with other GL's would have been nice. Green Lantern: First Flight was good in this regard.

From the sounds of it...most of the cut footage was due to unfinished effects.....which will stay unfinished unless they put even more money into finishing them. So that may be too much to ask after its box-office run.

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

I got some pretty nasty reactions when I likened it to FF when the first trailer came out...and I wasn't even being smarmy about it. I also said that if GL appeals to audiences on a basic fun/entertaining level, that's all it may need to be...yet some scoffed at that and said that GL is way too 'deep' or what have you to settle for that. And now here we are...hoping that GL will at least make FF numbers, and that audiences will appreciate it as good, simple, fun entertainment.

Which is what it is. Good, simple, fun entertainment

 

[Liam_H]

I got some pretty nasty reactions when I likened it to FF when the first trailer came out...and I wasn't even being smarmy about it. I also said that if GL appeals to audiences on a basic fun/entertaining level, that's all it may need to be...yet some scoffed at that and said that GL is way too 'deep' or what have you to settle for that. And now here we are...hoping that GL will at least make FF numbers, and that audiences will appreciate it as good, simple, fun entertainment.

I've never read any FF stuff so I can't comment on its source material or mythology but after seeing those movies I never cared to learn more. Most of my friends watching GL have the same feeling; they're like 'meh'. That's such a shame because GL to the GA now is just a cheesy/silly hero while I'm just the dude (along with a lot of you guys) claiming how awesome he is.

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

From the sounds of it...most of the cut footage was due to unfinished effects.....which will stay unfinished unless they put even more money into finishing them. So that may be too much to ask after its box-office run.

I keep reading that, but they may have stuff that was finished and simply edited out.

 

[KalMart]

Which is what it is. Good, simple, fun entertainment

Apparently. But again, for some, the prospects of just that and nothing more was selling it short.

 

[KalMart]

I keep reading that, but they may have stuff that was finished and simply edited out.

I dunno...seems like a lot of stuff if the movie is as choppy and unrhythmic as many are saying it was...and it's still only 1hr 45min.

Think about this, too...scenes are written/filmed to be complete from start to finish...they depend on having everything in there to make sense and have a logical completeness to them. So if you have a scene that's, say, seven minutes, with only 30 actual seconds out of that seven minutes needing effects that aren't done...it doesn't mean that you can still use the remaining 6:30. the whole scene has to be there with everything completely finished, or none of it can be. Especially if the narrative during those scenes has something to do with the ring's power or what have you. So just a few seconds of unfinished effects can easily negate several minutes of screentime.

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

Apparently. But again, for some, the prospects of just that and nothing more was selling it short.

Well this was never going to be TDK.

 

[Liam_H]

Well this was never going to be TDK.

No one wanted this to be the TDK, which would have been an awful direction to go. We just wanted it to live up to its source material. Wasted potential essentially; what was great about Iron Man was that it embraced what it was. Nowhere near the type of movie as TDK but almost as great and to some even greater.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I don't know about fans going back two or three times to see it happening so much. He seems to be a big fan of the movie and GL, so there's a lot of wishful thinking. He doesn't mention the other movies opening like Transformers 3. He really wants WB to keep the superhero franchises going.

A lot of that article did have a lot of "what ifs" that seemed a little preposterous, but he did bring up some good points such as the movie performing rather well during the mid-week which was what WB really wanted and it's also very franchiseable and would cost less to promote now that it's out there.

However, I don't think that it's guaranteed to make as much money as the article says, it can possibly do it, but it's no way certain to make that much based on the film's current performance. And it would be risky to make a sequel that is hard to gauge how much genuine interest there is in one.

 

[KalMart]

Well this was never going to be TDK.

Neither was FF. So is it okay to compare GL to FF on a simple, fun level? Maybe FF should get more credit/appreciation than it did.

Or...are we trying to elevate mediocrity in light of some hurt fan pride or something?

 

[Rock Sexton]

That's your opinion. The critics share a big chunk of that blame, and that's my opinion.

LOL .... the ol' boogeyman critics .... I can't believe anyone is naive enough to ever make that their argument. How does one explain the financial success of Transformers 2 then? Critics roasted that film and yet audiences seemed to like it (me not being one of them).