Green Lantern Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 2

[DarKush]

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.

I think High Five and others have given some pretty good responses to your assertions, but let me ask you, have you read any of WW's adventures since the 70's? I'm not the biggest WW fan or reader, though I have checked out some of Gail Simone's and JMS's stories. I think WW has an underrated rogues' gallery and a lot of potential from what I've seen. It's unfortunate that her DVD is a low seller (personally the WW DVD was one of my favorites of all the DCAU films).

I do agree with you that DC has dropped the ball with her, but despite perhaps years of that, WW remains a well known character, a character that can get a greenlighted TV show, even if it failed. How many other comic heroes even get to that stage?

I also don't think her comic publishing history is a factor in whether she can have a successful movie. Blade has a much spottier record and they made gold with his movies. As others have said, with the right script, good casting, a reasonable budget, and a good marketing campaign, I think Wonder Woman could work. They might need to cast Milla Jovovich to make it all come together though.

I would only agree with you about GL getting the nod for a film before Wonder Woman based on his recent revival in the comics and how Johns set up a cinematic vision for the comic-boggles my mind that they failed to really convey this on screen.

Wonder Woman's backstory and world is no less convulted and actually perhaps more easy to grasp than GL's. The Hercules and Xena shows, Clash of the Titans, Percy and the Olympians, all of this product travels similar waters. And even stuff like Spartacus: Blood and Sand and 300; there is an audience for Greek mythology/ancient Grecian themes. And Thor made it work, even though he is a less well known character from a perhaps less well known pantheon of gods.

 

[MadVillainy]

And WW's DVD isnt the lowest selling DVD. I dont know where you got that
If I remember correctly, when I looked up the numbers for another thread, WW was the highest selling one that didnt feature Batman or Supes

 

[HighFivingMF]

Wonder Woman is the best-selling one besides Doomsday, Gotham Knight, and Public Enemies dollars-wise. Copy-wise it outsold everything but Doomsday, Public Enemies and Red Hood. Just an FYI.

 

[BatmanInc]

It made 1 mill on Monday....it might dip under 1 million at this rate.

 

[MadVillainy]

I have to call bullsh** when people say WW wouldnt work because a) she's a female hero and b) because her comic book history isnt the greateast or most known

a) If it's a good movie I really dont think many will care about gender. Sure you can cite Catwoman and Elektra but those didnt do poorly because of female heroes they did poor because they sucked. I dont get what's hard to understand about that. It's like saying "Oh GL didnt do so well so I guess no more sci fi movies". Also, I know it's not an action movie, but Bridesmaids is generally thought to be a good movie and hasnt it made over 150 mill? Pretty damn good. People just want to see good movies

b) At the end of the day, the comics dont matter that that much. IF you asked general people who TOny Stark was in 2006, a lot of them wouldnt have known. Now because of the movie people know him.

I still think the problem WW would have is merchandising. I dont know what it's like now, but I remember when I was really little I didnt wanna play with many female action figures (at least the non Batman related ones) and I know alot of other kidsd my age at the time felt the same

I really think that next superhero projects WB/DC should do if they want to are Flash and Green Arrow.
With Flash, I hear alot of people saying superspeed hasnt been captured in live action in a spectacular way. But if they do it I REALLY think they should do Wally. I know Barry is the Flash in the comics now, but idk with alot of people complaining about how generic GL was with it's origin I think it would help the potential movie if they dont handle the origin the standard way
And I think Green Arrow is good because, Im no expert, but I cant imagine it needing a huge $150 million budget. BUt I could also see people saying GA is generic or kinda a IRon Man/Rip off

I hope the lack of success with GL doesnt stop more DC heroes being brought on screen

 

[merced]

It made 1 mill on Monday....it might dip under 1 million at this rate.

If so it's because Tuesday wasn't a holiday.

 

[dnno1]

I have to call bullsh** when people say WW wouldnt work because a) she's a female hero and b) because her comic book history isnt the greateast or most known

a) If it's a good movie I really dont think many will care about gender. Sure you can cite Catwoman and Elektra but those didnt do poorly because of female heroes they did poor because they sucked. I dont get what's hard to understand about that. It's like saying "Oh GL didnt do so well so I guess no more sci fi movies". Also, I know it's not an action movie, but Bridesmaids is generally thought to be a good movie and hasnt it made over 150 mill? Pretty damn good. People just want to see good movies

b) At the end of the day, the comics dont matter that that much. IF you asked general people who TOny Stark was in 2006, a lot of them wouldnt have known. Now because of the movie people know him.

I still think the problem WW would have is merchandising. I dont know what it's like now, but I remember when I was really little I didnt wanna play with many female action figures (at least the non Batman related ones) and I know alot of other kidsd my age at the time felt the same

I really think that next superhero projects WB/DC should do if they want to are Flash and Green Arrow.
With Flash, I hear alot of people saying superspeed hasnt been captured in live action in a spectacular way. But if they do it I REALLY think they should do Wally. I know Barry is the Flash in the comics now, but idk with alot of people complaining about how generic GL was with it's origin I think it would help the potential movie if they dont handle the origin the standard way
And I think Green Arrow is good because, Im no expert, but I cant imagine it needing a huge $150 million budget. BUt I could also see people saying GA is generic or kinda a IRon Man/Rip off

I hope the lack of success with GL doesnt stop more DC heroes being brought on screen

You're naive, guy. They can't even get a pilot of the character on a major television network. What makes you think that it's got a chance on the big screen? The track record of female superheroine films has not been good at all. That only adds to the risk factor associated with trying to make a WW picture.

 

[HighFivingMF]

They can't even get a pilot of the character on a major television network.

Yeah... That's not because it starred Wonder Woman. The network was clearly interested... Until they found out it was ****.

 

[dark_b]

 

[CaptainCraig]

^^^^ LOL

Best thing that can be said today is that GL didn't have the worst % drop in the Top 10 like has been the case before.

GL made another $1m+ for a domestic total of $104.6m

 

[craigdbfan]

 

[The Sage]

Glad we got back on topic in the last two posts.

 

[KalMart]

I would only agree with you about GL getting the nod for a film before Wonder Woman based on his recent revival in the comics and how Johns set up a cinematic vision for the comic-boggles my mind that they failed to really convey this on screen.

Maybe because Johns is not really a film visionary.

 

[Herolee10]

Man, at the rate we're going, GL will be a BIGGER box office bomb than Batman and Robin was, and we know on how infamous that film is.lol

Who would have thought one year ago that GL would FAIL this badly at the box office.

 

[Chewy]

(and the real fans of the properties loved it)

lol oh you

 

[KalMart]

Man, at the rate we're going, GL will be a BIGGER box office bomb than Batman and Robin was, and we know on how infamous that film is.lol

Who would have thought one year ago that GL would FAIL this badly at the box office.

When I heard the film was going to be made, I felt that I'd be surprised if it was really successful...just because the concept was one of the more 'comic-booky' ones out there. I figured it'd be something on the level of FF, and I conservatively predicted about $145M domestic. But I didn't think it would do this badly AND be so badly accepted/reviewed. It's too bad for GL fans, but in a lot of ways, big-budget movies that fail are a good wakeup call as well. I still feel that studios should concentrate on fewer superhero movies with better quality, instead of trying to flood the market with them.

 

[Silver Surfer]

Man, at the rate we're going, GL will be a BIGGER box office bomb than Batman and Robin was, and we know on how infamous that film is.lol

Who would have thought one year ago that GL would FAIL this badly at the box office.

I'd say it already is. B&R made 240 mil at the box office, GL even with 14 years of ticket inflations and 3D probably won't reach that mark.

 

[Gamma Burst]

lol oh you

Only the real fans loved it, Chewy.t:

 

[DarKush]

Maybe because Johns is not really a film visionary.

I'm starting to wonder about that. Reading Johns epic over the last several years it just felt like such a Hollywood-ready franchise. But now I wonder if it was just too complicated and convoluted to translate to film.

I'm currently reading Emerald Dawn and I think there are aspects, especially regarding Hal's characterization, that might have worked better (though I think they overemphasis how much he is a screw up) and with Legion, you had a villain you could actually punch and make into a neat toy. While reading ED I was also wondering if maybe WB erred in not getting Del Toro for Green Lantern. He's real good at doing strange creatures and stuff. I keep thinking about the Golden Army soldiers when reading Legion.

 

[Flemm]

Sheesh. I never would have expected these type of results. Oh the humanity!

 

[jmc]

I see the capitulation continues for GL. Don't know about anyone else but the entire process of how this film came about and it's ultimate doom is kinda fascinating to think about retrospectively. There was great anticipation from the start because now seemed the perfect time for the character, sci-fi was having a bit of a golden period in the movie world with Iron Man showing what can be done with a B-list comic character. Martin Campbell comes on board, the guy who rebooted Bond twice, and on paper was a solid choice of director, Reynolds is cast amid much division at first but ultimately winning over most of the fan base, a reasonably solid supporting cast is announced, a draft script gets out and looks a decent story, what could possibly go wrong? Kinda down hill from there, the great CG suit debate, the first trailers lack of oomph, word leaking out by some actors manager that the film would flop, the last minute extra $9 million on CGI, the total mismanagement of the marketing, the review embargo set until the day before release, the pounding by the critics and even some fans, and finally failing at the box office.

 

[HighFivingMF]

Come on, guys, this is what you wanted and it basically got mixed reviews. Even though NBC wouldn't admit it, that is probably why the dropped the pilot.

You're wrong.

Now, enough with the Wondy talk. This is for Green Lantern.

 

[KalMart]

I'm starting to wonder about that. Reading Johns epic over the last several years it just felt like such a Hollywood-ready franchise. But now I wonder if it was just too complicated and convoluted to translate to film.

It's not so much whether his ideas would look/feel good on film...it's more about actually being involved with a big film on an authoritative/influential level. There are skillsets and disciplines unique to working in film that don't directly translate from other mediums....and a lot of times it comes down to whether you have a knack for it or not, regardless of how good you are/were in another art form...even in a supervising/producing role. That's why I'd still choose a Spielberg, Nolan, Bruckheimer, or Cameron as an actively-involved executive producer/producer on any comic-based film over even the most accomplished comic writer/supervisor/etc....if you want it to be the best film it can be.

 

[solidsnake86]

I see the capitulation continues for GL. Don't know about anyone else but the entire process of how this film came about and it's ultimate doom is kinda fascinating to think about retrospectively. There was great anticipation from the start because now seemed the perfect time for the character, sci-fi was having a bit of a golden period in the movie world with Iron Man showing what can be done with a B-list comic character. Martin Campbell comes on board, the guy who rebooted Bond twice, and on paper was a solid choice of director, Reynolds is cast amid much division at first but ultimately winning over most of the fan base, a reasonably solid supporting cast is announced, a draft script gets out and looks a decent story, what could possibly go wrong? Kinda down hill from there, the great CG suit debate, the first trailers lack of oomph, word leaking out by some actors manager that the film would flop, the last minute extra $9 million on CGI, the total mismanagement of the marketing, the review embargo set until the day before release, the pounding by the critics and even some fans, and finally failing at the box office.

Completely agree with this. In fact after reading the original script, coupled with the cast and director I don't think I could have imagined it doing this bad. That's why I don't really think there will be a reboot. The timing for the character was just right with the comics and people involved.

Everything in hindsight is 20/20. They changed the script so much from that first draft they would have been better off putting atrocitus in there and having it take place on earth to save money, they probably could have crafted a tighter story. Also, they seemed like they bit off more than they could chew in terms of effects, but I would imagine those things are all priced out from the beginning.

I think what sucks the most is that even a lot of fans hated it. With the people involved that shouldn't have happened. It will be interesting to see how DC moves forward in terms of secondary characters and if they will attempt the flash.

 

[Energist]

The problems with translating Johns' stories directly to silver screen are two-fold, and intimately connected, at that: 1.) He can't write dialogue very well. It very well might read perfectly fine in your mind, but try reading a Johns' comic book sometime out loud and see just how organic his dialogue sounds to the naked ear. This is an old trick I learned in college, and you'd be surprised at how bad what you thought sounded great in your head actually is when you can hear it spoken.

Compounding this is 2.) He constantly, constantly tells rather than shows, and he typically meanders on and on while doing so (again, see #1). "Hal Jordan? Why, aren't you the greatest Green Lantern of sector 2814? Didn't you do this awesome feat that I'll now go on about for half-a-paragraph now?" Or, "Barry, I know you. You wear your heart on your shoulder. You're going to stick to this case to the bitter end until you find that murderer, because that's just who you are, good buddy."

Johns very rarely shows the audience anything that he wants to get across about a character, and instead just tells them overtly so he can concentrate on something else he deems more important to his story. For a film, though (and I would argue for a comic book, too, but that's another discussion), an audience really needs to see character growth over the course of the picture. They needed to see that Hal was more of a screw up firsthand, instead of having Blake Lively tell everyone--and rather dryly, at that--that, "Today is important, and I can't have any more of those classic antics of yours, you little devil, you." They needed to see him go from goof-off to buttoned-down, no-holds-barred Green Lantern.

I'm not blaming Johns for the quality, or rather, lack thereof of this film, mind you. However, I think if the filmmakers had lifted the script page for page from a Johns-penned story, the finished product wouldn't have been any better than what we got, and it possibly could have been even worse.