Green Lantern Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 2

[Herolee10]

Interestingly enough, I didn't even know that John Stewart existed as a character until JLU, and the only human Lanterns that I was aware of were only Hal Jordan and Kyle.lol

 

[Energist]

Something, even a smaller character like Blue Beetle, Resurrection Man, Booster Gold, Manhunter....anything would be better than throwing more good money after bad in the form of a GL sequel.

If we're talking about Kate Spencer here, then I wish. I've been saying for a while now that a Manhunter television series could be awesome, but a movie would be just as cool in my eyes.

Let's also not forget that Hawkman has supposedly been eyed by Warner Brothers for a while now as having film potential. Personally, I just don't see it. Never mind his lack of popularity amongst general audiences, the look itself would be kind of difficult to pull off in a convincing matter on screen. I know there was that angel movie that came out a few years ago (Legion, I think it was called), but it's one thing to have angels flying around clubbing people on the head and another to buy that a guy is willingly dressing up like that to club evil people on the head all in the supposed name of love and justice.

Second mistake was making Hal Jordan the lead, it should have been John Stewart. I know that Hal is the most prolific Lantern in the comics and I will even agree that he "deserves" it BUT looking at it strictly from a business stand point, John was the safer bet. John was the most popular Lantern in the eyes of the GA thanks to JLU: The Animated series, I can't tell you how many times I have heard from friends or read online that: "Why is a white guy playing GL?" I remember when IM2 came out there was so much buzz around War Machine because people wanted to see a Black Superhero, even if he was a sidekick. If DC/WB heralded GL in as the first comic book Black superhero in the lead role, it would have drawn a lot of buzz.

It really would have only made a difference if his origin story grossly affected the overarching plot of the film, which I don't believe it would have. Reviews likely still would have been bad, and thus so, too, would have been the word of mouth.

Plus, I don't know how much pull DC or Johns specifically really had in this thing in the end, but with Hal being "the" Green Lantern of the comic books, I can't see the brass at DC wanting it to be John Stewart who ultimately got the film deal in the end. Especially Johns, whose favorites seem completely untouchable to continuity changes (not orchestrated by Johns himself, anyway) and deaths in the books themselves, so why should the films be any different?

But regardless of playing personal favorites, I can imagine the thought process being that it would have been counterproductive to the supposed cross pollination of movie-goers into budding comic book readers (though I doubt this mythical consumer even really exists, to be perfectly honest).

 

[KalMart]

Truth be told, DC made two big mistakes. One was making GL the first non Supes/Bats character to get a movie. It should have been Flash or WW, two characters who are not only popular in the GA but their concept is almost universally known and understood. GL falls short on both accounts.

How so?

Batman, Superman, iron Man, Spidey, and Xmen are because there's been popular movies. But WW and Flash? the only real exposure has been the JL cartoons...but how much of this GA really followed that show like comic fans did? I don't see WW or Flash having any edge over GL in general popularity or even awareness as anything but a comic character. The only real difference is perhaps how interested a general viewer would be in their respective concepts...much of which would rely on how they are reinterpreted for motion pictures.

Put it this way...GL was no less known or understood than Iron Man was before Iron Man the movie opened....and that lack of familiarity didn't hurt it. Now....if one were proposing that a guy who makes glowing green shapes from his ring and recites a rhyming poem out loud is inherently harder to take seriously than a guy who builds a tactical weapon from a metallic suit...you might be on to something.

 

[Silver Surfer]

How so?

Batman, Superman, iron Man, Spidey, and Xmen are because there's been popular movies. But WW and Flash? the only real exposure has been the JL cartoons...but how much of this GA really followed that show like comic fans did? I don't see WW or Flash having any edge over GL in general popularity or even awareness as anything but a comic character. The only real difference is perhaps how interested a general viewer would be in their respective concepts...much of which would rely on how they are reinterpreted for motion pictures.

Before the movie came out WW and Flash were way way more popular than GL. Everyone knows about Wonder Woman, she is the female superhero and prolly the biggest feminist icon in fiction, her name recognition alone is light years ahead of GL. WW is also a huge part of pop culture, her costume is well known, she is often referenced in TV shows, movies. It's not even close, you can walk down the street and ask people about WW and they will know what you are talking about. Heck my Grandparents knows about Wonder Woman, ask them about Green Lantern and they'll think you're talking about a lamp.

Flash, although not as popular as WW is still more popular than GL. People know what his deal is, he is well known as the fastest man alive, red and gold uniform, he's no A-lister but he's certainly ahead of GL in awareness and popularity.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

How so?

Batman, Superman, iron Man, Spidey, and Xmen are because there's been popular movies. But WW and Flash? the only real exposure has been the JL cartoons....

Both have also had live-action tv shows. GL has not.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Until this movie was announced I had no idea there was a white GL. I always thought John was the only GL and I loved him in the Justice League cartoon.

You're not alone. My daughter is in high school, and when the trailer first came out, many of her friends asked me why he wasnt black. (they know i read comics).

 

[dnno1]

Yes, Tobberoff as part of his fee from the heirs is going to get a big portion of their share of the rights.

So the rights are split between DC, the heirs and Tobberoff. Toberoff clearly wants to use his rights to make Superman films and start a film company.

However, WB and DC will sue anyone who tries to do anything Superman. Just as the heirs will sue WB if it tries to do anything Superman.

Bottom line, Supeman is dead as a franchise after mid-2013. The legal battle will probably go on for a decade. Ironically by the time it is settled andthe heirs can use their portion the the rights they will only have a few years to exploit those rights as all the rights go public in 2030. No one owns Superman at that point.

So no Superman film will be made the name goes into public domain, and Marvel will change the name of Sentry to Superman. The end.

 

[DaveMoral]

How so?

Batman, Superman, iron Man, Spidey, and Xmen are because there's been popular movies. But WW and Flash? the only real exposure has been the JL cartoons...but how much of this GA really followed that show like comic fans did? I don't see WW or Flash having any edge over GL in general popularity or even awareness as anything but a comic character. The only real difference is perhaps how interested a general viewer would be in their respective concepts...much of which would rely on how they are reinterpreted for motion pictures.

Put it this way...GL was no less known or understood than Iron Man was before Iron Man the movie opened....and that lack of familiarity didn't hurt it. Now....if one were proposing that a guy who makes glowing green shapes from his ring and recites a rhyming poem out loud is inherently harder to take seriously than a guy who builds a tactical weapon from a metallic suit...you might be on to something.

I find the idea that the Flash is any more popular than GL kind of funny, because I had a conversation at work with a couple guys that have fun at superhero films and read comics as kids. It consisted of this "the Flash sucks."

 

[CaptainCraig]

Something, even a smaller character like Blue Beetle, Resurrection Man, Booster Gold, Manhunter....anything would be better than throwing more good money after bad in the form of a GL sequel.

If we're talking about Kate Spencer here, then I wish. I've been saying for a while now that a Manhunter television series could be awesome, but a movie would be just as cool in my eyes.

We are. I specifically tossed in a female lead property in addition to WW and other than Birds of Prey(failed TV show).

Has everyone seen the Yahoo!Movies list of "Flops of 2011...so far"? That's right GL made the list.
For all those clinging to the smoke blown by Warners that a sequel was on track tell me again how many flops, heck dissapointments, get direct sequels???

 

[merced]

Before the movie came out WW and Flash were way way more popular than GL. Everyone knows about Wonder Woman, she is the female superhero and prolly the biggest feminist icon in fiction, her name recognition alone is light years ahead of GL. WW is also a huge part of pop culture, her costume is well known, she is often referenced in TV shows, movies. It's not even close, you can walk down the street and ask people about WW and they will know what you are talking about. Heck my Grandparents knows about Wonder Woman, ask them about Green Lantern and they'll think you're talking about a lamp.

Flash, although not as popular as WW is still more popular than GL. People know what his deal is, he is well known as the fastest man alive, red and gold uniform, he's no A-lister but he's certainly ahead of GL in awareness and popularity.

The top selling books at DC are Batman, GL, Flash and JL.

Superman is way back selling less than 30,000/month.

It's why the reboot will see Superman dropped to just 2 titles and Batman and GL increased to 5 or 6.

So DC sees where the popularity is based on sales of it's comic, toys and t-shirts.

Given this, I'd think there is a way for Flash and GL to be big film franchises. Bigger than Supes if not as big as Bats.

Hope someone is annalyzing the DC numbers and sales figures.

 

[Docker2.0]

Good thing you said that Merced because I've been saying for years that WW would not succeed in a film. Why? 1) Because they can't even get her right in the comics, how the f are they going to get her right on film? 2) Female superheroes normally don't do well, they just don't for whatever reason. 3) WW's popularity is way overblown. She is known but not popular which is two different things. Honestly as a comic book reader, her story is going to be difficult to tell which is why I understand how they changed her story on the tv show to be a business woman. Can you imagine that story being told about a island full of hot women made of clay with super powers and references to an invisible jet? yeah I thought not.

 

[DarKush]

How so?

Batman, Superman, iron Man, Spidey, and Xmen are because there's been popular movies. But WW and Flash? the only real exposure has been the JL cartoons...but how much of this GA really followed that show like comic fans did? I don't see WW or Flash having any edge over GL in general popularity or even awareness as anything but a comic character. The only real difference is perhaps how interested a general viewer would be in their respective concepts...much of which would rely on how they are reinterpreted for motion pictures.

Put it this way...GL was no less known or understood than Iron Man was before Iron Man the movie opened....and that lack of familiarity didn't hurt it. Now....if one were proposing that a guy who makes glowing green shapes from his ring and recites a rhyming poem out loud is inherently harder to take seriously than a guy who builds a tactical weapon from a metallic suit...you might be on to something.

Depsite his TV show, which only lasted a season, some 20 years ago, I agree that Flash is probably about on the same level as GL. But not Wonder Woman. She has nearly universal name recognition, she had a successful TV show, and she has factored in DC's marketing a whole lot longer than either GL or Flash IMO. Wonder Woman is a far more popular character, a more consequential character than GL or Flash.

Now that's not saying that her publishing history has been as good as GL's. I don't know if she has anything that can rival what Geoff Johns has done with GL over the last five years or so. But still, she has the name recognition that GL and even Flash don't have. Her look is also more iconic.

 

[Docker2.0]

double postilicious!

 

[HighFivingMF]

2) Female superheroes normally don't do well, they just don't for whatever reason.

You mean Supergirl, Elektra, and Catwoman? I don't think those did poorly because they starred women.

Tomb Raider, Charlie's Angels, Kill Bill, Resident Evil, and Salt were action movies that did good worldwide numbers starring just women. They all had sequels that did just as well or even better, Salt aside. If you make a good enough Wonder Woman movie on a not ridiculously huge budget with a likable lead and a strong supporting cast (especially the villain) there'll be a profit.

 

[Docker2.0]

Depsite his TV show, which only lasted a season, some 20 years ago, I agree that Flash is probably about on the same level as GL. But not Wonder Woman. She has nearly universal name recognition, she had a successful TV show, and she has factored in DC's marketing a whole lot longer than either GL or Flash IMO. Wonder Woman is a far more popular character, a more consequential character than GL or Flash.

Now that's not saying that her publishing history has been as good as GL's. I don't know if she has anything that can rival what Geoff Johns has done with GL over the last five years or so. But still, she has the name recognition that GL and even Flash don't have. Her look is also more iconic.

LOL if you think WW will sell. Her cartoon dvd is the lowest selling dvd out of the Marvel/DC rivalry at one point and that says a lot about a character that had her own tv show. It may have changed now but for a minute it was true. The tv show has failed but you have to look at the reason how it failed. 1) the costume. How many times did it change and they STILL couldn't get it right without her coming off corny or just odd? 2) the concept. A business woman? We heard a lot of fan backlash but let's be honest, what could they do. Honestly people were saying she deserves a movie not a tv show but she hasn't done anything noteworthy since the freakin 70's! Whether it be a tv show, movie or cartoon(other than JLA, and she wasn't even integral there). People say all the time at how popular she is but DC dropped the ball with her. After she had a tv show in the 70's, they should have followed up with a movie in the 80's or 90's. Now it's been over 30 years and now they want to re-introduce her to the public. I just don't see it going so well. WB did the right thing by going for either GL or Flash as their next property. They should have just lowered the budget or did something to get more involved with the script or something. Can't believe John's was involved in the movie and let it go down this route.

 

[KalMart]

Both have also had live-action tv shows. GL has not.

And how strongly do those shows still resonate with moviegoers these days?


Did Iron Man need a live-action TV show?

 

[MadVillainy]

You mean Supergirl, Elektra, and Catwoman? I don't think those did poorly because they starred women.

Tomb Raider, Charlie's Angels, Kill Bill, Resident Evil, and Salt were action movies that did good worldwide numbers starring just women. They all had sequels that did just as well or even better, Salt aside. If you make a good enough Wonder Woman movie on a not ridiculously huge budget with a likable lead and a strong supporting cast (especially the villain) there'll be a profit.

This what Ive been saying.

 

[Docker2.0]

You mean Supergirl, Elektra, and Catwoman? I don't think those did poorly because they starred women.

Tomb Raider, Charlie's Angels, Kill Bill, Resident Evil, and Salt were action movies that did good worldwide numbers starring just women. They all had sequels that did just as well or even better, Salt aside. If you make a good enough Wonder Woman movie on a not ridiculously huge budget with a likable lead and a strong supporting cast (especially the villain) there'll be a profit.

Resident Evil barely made it's money back. Charlie Angel's sucked, both of them. Kill Bill, Resident Evil and Salt were good so I'll give you them. But they all had good leading ladies with good directors with good to semi-good plots. I honestly have tried to look at WW and can't even think of any memorable comics that she has been in that can translate to film but I just can't. She's just a tough sell. And honestly for the movies you just named that did well, let's be honest you can name like 50 more that did bad.

 

[KalMart]

Before the movie came out WW and Flash were way way more popular than GL. Everyone knows about Wonder Woman, she is the female superhero and prolly the biggest feminist icon in fiction, her name recognition alone is light years ahead of GL. WW is also a huge part of pop culture, her costume is well known, she is often referenced in TV shows, movies. It's not even close, you can walk down the street and ask people about WW and they will know what you are talking about. Heck my Grandparents knows about Wonder Woman, ask them about Green Lantern and they'll think you're talking about a lamp.

Flash, although not as popular as WW is still more popular than GL. People know what his deal is, he is well known as the fastest man alive, red and gold uniform, he's no A-lister but he's certainly ahead of GL in awareness and popularity.

I think you're confusing popularity with familiarity outside of comics fans. They'll know the names and basic gist of what they are, but outside of Superman or Batman, everyone else is basically just the stuff of comics.

Just like Iron Man was before they made a popular film. So whether it's GL, WW, or Flash...any one of them would have come into theaters with the same lack of popularity outside of comics...GL didn't have more of a handicap than the others. It's up to the movie to take them out of the 'funny pages' and make them popular...some, like Xmen and Iron Man, do it well. Others, like GL, FF, and Ghost Rider, don't.

 

[The Sage]

I'd like chime in on Wonder Woman, but this isn't the thread or section for that. Redirect it to the DC Comics films, guys.

 

[HighFivingMF]

Resident Evil barely made it's money back. Charlie Angel's sucked, both of them. Kill Bill, Resident Evil and Salt were good so I'll give you them. But they all had good leading ladies with good directors with good to semi-good plots. I honestly have tried to look at WW and can't even think of any memorable comics that she has been in that can translate to film but I just can't. She's just a tough sell. And honestly for the movies you just named that did well, let's be honest you can name like 50 more that did bad.

Resident Evil cost 30 million or so and made 100 million worldwide.
Resident Evil 2 was 45 million and made 130 million worldwide.
Resident Evil 3 made almost 150 million worldwide.
Resident Evil 4 was 60 million and fell just shy of 300 million worldwide.

Regardless of Charlie's Angels' quality, it still made money. McG did something right.

You can't think of any good Wonder Woman comics? What are those things on movies that come up with stories? I forget their name.

" She's just a tough sell. And honestly for the movies you just named that did well, let's be honest you can name like 50 more that did bad."
You can do that with any type of movie.

 

[Docker2.0]

Resident Evil cost 30 million or so and made 100 million worldwide.
Resident Evil 2 was 45 million and made 130 million worldwide.
Resident Evil 3 made almost 150 million worldwide.
Resident Evil 4 was 60 million and fell just shy of 300 million worldwide.

Regardless of Charlie's Angels' quality, it still made money. McG did something right.

You can't think of any good Wonder Woman comics? What are those things on movies that come up with stories? I forget their name.

" She's just a tough sell. And honestly for the movies you just named that did well, let's be honest you can name like 50 more that did bad."
You can do that with any type of movie.

You are talking about worldwide numbers and those are not outstanding. They are basically average numbers. Domestically they barely made their budget back if they did. And that's what studios look at.

I'd like chime in on Wonder Woman, but this isn't the thread or section for that. Redirect it to the DC Comics films, guys.

Yes sir!!

I hate that you outrank me on SHH!

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Because I liked him I do wish they would have used Stewart, provided the script was way better than what we ultimately got.

And it's a fact because of the cartoon that most normal people were more familar with Stewart than Jordan and as was said, from a business prospective it would have been smarter to use Jordan. But the studios think that the general public is racist so...

 

[EML420]

What did GL make this weekend? Any one got the numbers and I would have loved it if Stewart was used but it would have made just has many people angry that they didnt use Hal.

 

[CaptainCraig]

^^^
Actuals still weren't up last I checked about 15min ago but it's looking like just under $8m with a domestic total of about $103.6m aka craptacular still. I think it was another hard 66% weekend drop again.