Green Lantern Box Office Prediction Thread

[TheIncredibleSk]

To me I accept that because I know it's about introducing this concept and trying to get audiences to accept it. Then in the sequel you go all out with no fear.

 

[The Morningstar]

Exactly. I didn't mean it as a bad thing. With characters like GL and Thor, who are not that well known outside of comics and have pretty "out there" concepts, you've gotta play it a bit safe when introducing them.

Then like you say, in the sequels, once the universe and the characters are already established, you can go all out.

 

[jmc]

**** safety, either go all out or don't make the ****ing movie. I'm sick of this vanilla bull ****.

 

[The Morningstar]

Well then, if you made films they'd probably bomb.

For the first films of unknown characters they HAVE to play it a bit safe. Especially characters with far out concepts like GL and Thor.

With all the fancy "dressing" the story is gonna be cliche. The protagonists character arc is gonna be cliche. That's how it is.

And Hal Jordan is a vanilla character anyway, so vanilla suits him

 

[TheIncredibleSk]

Reynolds is gonna make vanilla Hal into a napoleon.

 

[jmc]

Well then, if you made films they'd probably bomb.

For the first films of unknown characters they HAVE to play it a bit safe. Especially characters with far out concepts like GL and Thor.

With all the fancy ''dressing'' the story is gonna be cliche. The protagonists character arc is gonna be cliche. That's how it is.

And Hal Jordan is a vanilla character anyway, so vanilla suits him

They don't have to play it safe, fortune favours the brave in film. Oh and thank you far assuming you know what I'd do if I made a movie.

 

[RoughNTumble]

batman 89 didn't play it safe at all, and that was enormous

 

[jmc]

Batman Begins didn't even play it safe. History is littered with films that took chances and reaped rewards. You want to play it safe then all you get is an easily forgotten superhero flick.

 

[BigThor]

Thor played not to lose rather than to win. The whole movie was walking on eggs shells.

That maybe but it definately won in my books and I'm sure that GL will also, so oh well.

*shrugs*

 

[04nbod]

JMC seems to think Thor should have strayed from its original concept. The fact it was stripped down to its essentials was a big part of Thor's winning formula.

 

[jmc]

No, JMC thinks Thor should have had the balls to do more than what it delivered.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

Oops.
http://***********/#!/Kiminz/status/79866600802619393

 

[KangConquers]

Seems like most predictions are coming in the mid to high 50's. That seems a little low for me. I figure it would do at least what Thor did opening week with the 3D.

I think people are more apt to see GL in 3D than they were for Thor, where half the movie is set in the New Mexico desert.

i think mid-high 50s sounds fair. June is kind of a rough month for non-sequels. Really Thor is the only hero movie imo that had a chance to break 400 M WW because it was so early in the Summer. Kick-off movies always do well.

Cap, X-Men, and GL will probably all wind up with roughly $350 M totals WW.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

GL will not be making Star Wars numbers or getting anywhere near a billion dollars. Don't be silly.

I remember this crazy James Cameron fanboy in the Avatar topic (in the film boards) that predicted Avatar will make over 2 billion. He was of course a laughing stock. But then the film went ahead and did close to 3 billion, let alone 2 billion!

Yes that was a parable -- except this guy is wrong.

 

[kedrell]

Batman Begins didn't even play it safe. History is littered with films that took chances and reaped rewards. You want to play it safe then all you get is an easily forgotten superhero flick.

Batman Begins had nothing left to lose. It was despiration time. For every movie that risked and won, there's many that did it and got slammed.

 

[kedrell]

batman 89 didn't play it safe at all, and that was enormous

Actually, I'd say it very much did play it safe. Casting Nicholson alone and agreeing to pay him whatever he wanted is proof enough of that to me.

 

[Micromind]

If the movie is mediocre then 300 mil. WW

If the movie is well received by fans, critics, GA then 400 mil WW.

anything in between --350 mil WW

 

[KRIM]

Actually, I'd say it very much did play it safe. Casting Nicholson alone and agreeing to pay him whatever he wanted is proof enough of that to me.

Casting Nicholson was the factor they needed to balance the scales, because frankly everything else was a risk. From the unproven comedian turned superhero, to an amateur director being given the reins to helm a blockbuster, to a "reinvention" of the Batman brand. It's rocky history is well documented. Burton himself has stated multiple times he had a hard time making the movie because of all the studio pressure.

 

[KangConquers]

If the movie is mediocre then 300 mil. WW

If the movie is well received by fans, critics, GA then 400 mil WW.

anything in between --350 mil WW

This.

While some say that they marketing smacks of desperation, WB has definitely forced awareness on everyone; there's a GL movie coming out next week, and more people I believe are aware of it than were aware of First Class or Thor.

Even if it is terrible, it won't completely bomb.

 

[DieSmiling]

No, JMC thinks Thor should have had the balls to do more than what it delivered.

Just curious, what ballsy, risky moves do you think Thor should have employed?

I don't really even understand your point.

 

[jmc]

Just curious, what ballsy, risky moves do you think Thor should have employed?

I don't really even understand your point.

It's so limited in it's scope, it's the smallest scaled epic film I think I've ever seen. Everything about it is so confined, all the sets in Asgard feel small, the fact that the whole Earth bound stuff is set in a small country town, the make shift government facility, it's like they were scared to go beyond a certain area. The better solution would have been to have Thor spend time around the world and make the journey epic, make him earn the right to wield that hammer again, and have the finale set in city where actual lives might have been in danger. They were too busy tip toeing around not trying to break anything as opposed to grabbing the bull by the horns and running with it.

 

[Visceral]

I'm okay with vanilla ******** but it doesn't hold up on repeat viewings.

Every action hero in someway adheres to the campbellian mono-myth, and though Batman Begins adhered to it in a existentially analytically way, the films don't need to do that in order to be good. Iron man did it in a fun way, though it is a consistently safe film. A superhero origin film is a formula that has been done to death already, so lets not fool ourselves into thinking that the film makers had alot of room for originality, with this one.

 

[jmc]

I'm okay with vanilla ******** but it doesn't hold up on repeat viewings.

And that's kind of the problem.

 

[Visceral]

And that's kind of the problem.

I'm curious what you would have them do? If you make anything other than a safe movie, maybe a brooding existential film like batman begins or Ang Lee's Hulk then you miss the character of Hal Jordan completely.

 

[The Sage]

Like I mentioned in the review thread, interesting discussion, but off topic...