Green Lantern reboot ideas.

[Lantern Venom]

Has anyone considered GLs failure with general audiences may have something to do with the entire concept of Green Lantern? With the ring and the Oath and everything?

It can't really be compared to Star Wars/Trek in my eyes.

I don't consider GL a failure, just an underachiever. The biggest problem is that the movie had studio meddling written all over it. It actually should have been more Star Wars/Trek like and less like a generic hero tale. The movie's high point was the first sequence on Oa. It lost steam when it tried to focus on Carol and Hector.

But, you might have a point in that some people might consider GL's concept too weird because they actually have to think a little. Some of the negative reaction I heard of the 2003 Hulk was that it was "too psychological" and "too grim". Even many professional movie critics of the movie didn't understand that the Hulk comic stems from the Hulk being a manifestation of Bruce Banner's damaged psyche, and not just a man who turns into a monster. But some casual fans wanted a bodybuilder in paint and "Hulk Smash!". Likewise, a group of intergalactic peacekeepers who are chosen for a specific trait and are trained to do battle by manifesting their imagination through a type of harnessed cosmic energy might be a bit off-putting for some.

I don't exactly know what everyone wanted in Green Lantern, but the movie would have been more successful had it clung to it's comic roots instead of worrying about the hard-sell ticket buyers.

 

[Micromind]

It was not a failure simply because the OW numbers, GL scored a 53 mil OW, which is not bad (for comparison X-men: First Class had a 55 mil. opening weekend.)....not good but certainly not bad, after that poor wom and bad reviews killed the movie.

The main reason was ugly set designs, ugly villains, bad looking CGI, story that was just not interesting and uninspired direction / editing... The musical score by James Newton Howard was pretty bad too.

 

[The Endless]

Everything about GL was bad apart from Strong's Sinestro, who only had about 10 minutes screen time. What a waste.

There was just no imagination or creativity in the film. Which is so ironic considering the nature of the GL mythos.

But i just think space cops with "magic" rings who have a corny Oath is a bit too much for the GA to swallow. Even kids thought it was too hokey.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Everything about GL was bad apart from Strong's Sinestro, who only had about 10 minutes screen time. What a waste.

There was just no imagination or creativity in the film. Which is so ironic considering the nature of the GL mythos.

But i just think space cops with "magic" rings who have a corny Oath is a bit too much for the GA to swallow. Even kids thought it was too hokey.

Moreso than space cops with swords made of light who are led by a muppet? If the Jedi sell, so can the Green Lantern Corps. The GLC wouldn't have been around for 55 years had it not had mass appeal. The next GL movie just has to be unabashedly Green Lantern, and not try to copy the Iron Man formula.

 

[The Endless]

Laser swords and cosmic samurai's are a little cooler than magic rings and space cops in the eyes of kids i think. It's been around for 55 years sure, but it's not like GL is Supes or Bats or Spidey.

 

[Lantern Venom]

It was not a failure simply because the OW numbers, GL scored a 53 mil OW, which is not bad (for comparison X-men: First Class had a 55 mil. opening weekend.)....not good but certainly not bad, after that poor wom and bad reviews killed the movie.

The main reason was ugly set designs, ugly villains, bad looking CGI, story that was just not interesting and uninspired direction / editing... The musical score by James Newton Howard was pretty bad too.

WB's terrible marketing didn't help the movie either, and I'm still trying to figure out where that insane $200 million budget went. It certainly wasn't put on giving the other Lanterns names or personalities.

 

[Micromind]

Everything about GL was bad apart from Strong's Sinestro, who only had about 10 minutes screen time. What a waste.

There was just no imagination or creativity in the film. Which is so ironic considering the nature of the GL mythos.

But i just think space cops with "magic" rings who have a corny Oath is a bit too much for the GA to swallow. Even kids thought it was too hokey.

I think that the "Oath" part has to be re-interpreted, instead of saying the oath each time a GL wants to get his ring recharged (which I admit, sounds silly.)

They should show a GL member saying the oath at the time of their induction into GL Corps at the planet Oa, in front of the GL power battery, just one time as apart of recruitment ceremony.

The GL rings concept has to be explained as as high tech alien device, and not as a "magic ring" (which makes it look like a counterpart to Thor's hammer.)

 

[The Guard]

Laser swords and cosmic samurai's are a little cooler than magic rings and space cops in the eyes of kids i think. It's been around for 55 years sure, but it's not like GL is Supes or Bats or Spidey.

This.

GREEN LANTERN is a cool concept, but obviously not to everyone.

Kids and adults alike.

 

[The Endless]

Well yea i think it's cool, and obviously a lot of comic readers do.

But it's like, would a Captain Planet movie be a big success? Naa i don't think so lol. Some concepts are just inherently much harder for general audiences to like.

 

[DrCosmic]

Has anyone considered GLs failure with general audiences may have something to do with the entire concept of Green Lantern? With the ring and the Oath and everything?

It can't really be compared to Star Wars/Trek in my eyes.

I considered that, at the same time I was considering that Catwoman, Fantastic Four, Watchmen and Superman: 4's failures had to do with the concept and not with them being, y'know, poor films.

But i just think space cops with "magic" rings who have a corny Oath is a bit too much for the GA to swallow. Even kids thought it was too hokey.

cosmic cops, cosmic samurai, laser swords and force magic, glowing rings with will magic, it's all hokey. The only difference is, is the movie well made or not. Does it invite the audience into the hokiness on the story's terms, or does it just throw the hokiness on them and say 'like this or GTFO?' Star Wars does the former, Green Lantern did the latter.

If GL had been about cosmic samurai with magic force instead of cosmic cops with magic rings, it would not have done better, because it was a poor film.

WB's terrible marketing didn't help the movie either, and I'm still trying to figure out where that insane $200 million budget went. It certainly wasn't put on giving the other Lanterns names or personalities.

It went to an unprecedented amount of CGI. The vast majority of the film had prominent CGI.

 

[The Guard]

I considered that, at the same time I was considering that Catwoman, Fantastic Four, Watchmen and Superman: 4's failures had to do with the concept and not with them being, y'know, poor films.

You know, it is possible for movies to have different reasons audiences don't go see them. It's not always that a movie is bad.

CATWOMAN quite obviously failed because it was both a terrible movie and there was limited interest Halle Berry as the title character.

FANTASTIC FOUR isn't a financial failure so much, as it got a sequel. I think it's arguable that there was limited interest in the concept from the getgo, though.

WATCHMEN didn't make much money because it was a movie with mature themes that was obviously not for everyone, not because of it being a "poor film" in any real sense.

GREEN LANTERN's case is probably closer to what happened with SUPERMAN RETURNS; a combination of the fact that it was a medicore film and the fact that the general audience just wasn't that into the concept itself that much.

 

[brainchild81]

Catwoman was flat out horrible & would've failed regardless of what actress was cast.

FF had enough interest from the getgo, superhero films were hot. The films just weren't good enough to maintain or raise it. Such a shame. What a waste.

Watchmen is extremely underrated. GA just didn't get it. Shame

SR failed because it was a weightlifting movie

Laser swords and cosmic samurai's are a little cooler than magic rings and space cops in the eyes of kids i think. It's been around for 55 years sure, but it's not like GL is Supes or Bats or Spidey.

Not even close. GL's popularity is often blown way out of proportion by GL comic fans.

I've said before that the GL concept is a tough sell. That film did absolutely none of the things necessary to make it an easier one. I knew it was gonna fail when I first heard what GL they were using, before any negative buzz had even started. It might have been an uphill battle regardless, but they didn't do themselves any favors w/the decisions they made. It was a horrible film & failed horribly because of it. The tragedy is the damage that POS may have done to the brand, tainting it from the start. A good GL film might fail now.

 

[Destructus86]

I don't think the failure of the film has anything to do with the source material. It was just a poorly done story.

 

[metaphysician]

I would say that hokiness contributed to GL's failure, but it wasn't intrinsic unavoidable hokiness. It was bad decision making. For example, they didn't need to include any talk of emotions at all, and if they stripped that out, it would have probably sold better. Instead, we get babble about the emotions having both colors and energies, which just looks and sounds silly in a story about space cops.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Sinestro's yellow ring powered by fear and the Corps rings powered by willpower kind of staples of the mythology. On the same respective level as the death of the Waynes', Krypton exploding, Uncle Ben dying.

That specific brand of hokiness is unavoidable in a GLC film.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Laser swords and cosmic samurai's are a little cooler than magic rings and space cops in the eyes of kids i think. It's been around for 55 years sure, but it's not like GL is Supes or Bats or Spidey.

Well, they aren't magic rings. I know not everyone can have an extensive history of each character, but if someone walked away from Tomar's speech to Hal about the induction process activating the ring's higher functions and giving him a working knowledge of the galaxy and somehow still think "magic", that person isn't paying attention.

I would say that hokiness contributed to GL's failure, but it wasn't intrinsic unavoidable hokiness. It was bad decision making. For example, they didn't need to include any talk of emotions at all, and if they stripped that out, it would have probably sold better. Instead, we get babble about the emotions having both colors and energies, which just looks and sounds silly in a story about space cops.

Actually, I thought they needed more of that. The movie needed to be specific about GL's opening up their will to interface with the Central Power Battery. Tomar touched on that, but it wasn't enough.

 

[DrCosmic]

You know, it is possible for movies to have different reasons audiences don't go see them. It's not always that a movie is bad.

CATWOMAN quite obviously failed because it was both a terrible movie and there was limited interest Halle Berry as the title character.

FANTASTIC FOUR isn't a financial failure so much, as it got a sequel. I think it's arguable that there was limited interest in the concept from the getgo, though.

WATCHMEN didn't make much money because it was a movie with mature themes that was obviously not for everyone, not because of it being a "poor film" in any real sense.

GREEN LANTERN's case is probably closer to what happened with SUPERMAN RETURNS; a combination of the fact that it was a medicore film and the fact that the general audience just wasn't that into the concept itself that much.

Catwoman was flat out horrible & would've failed regardless of what actress was cast.

FF had enough interest from the getgo, superhero films were hot. The films just weren't good enough to maintain or raise it. Such a shame. What a waste.

Watchmen is extremely underrated. GA just didn't get it. Shame

SR failed because it was a weightlifting movie

Good call on Watchmen, that was not a poor film, not sure why I said that. We know SR didn't fail because of the concept, because the concept has been successful in the past with Superman: The Movie and most recently with MOS. SR was poor film. GL was a poor film. With FF, there was enough interest in the concept for it not to flop, even though it was a poor film. The concept was not so strong that you could make two poor films successful.

I've said before that the GL concept is a tough sell. That film did absolutely none of the things necessary to make it an easier one. I knew it was gonna fail when I first heard what GL they were using, before any negative buzz had even started. It might have been an uphill battle regardless, but they didn't do themselves any favors w/the decisions they made. It was a horrible film & failed horribly because of it. The tragedy is the damage that POS may have done to the brand, tainting it from the start. A good GL film might fail now.

Another reason why this franchise needs Dwayne Johnson.

That aside, I totally agree, the concept is not as easy to sell as, say, Batman or Iron Man. It is however, totally sellable if you don't make the worst possible decisions every step of the way, as GL 2011 did. The only thing they didn't totally screw up on was casting the supporting cast.

I knew it was going to suck when I saw the costume. I had hopes before that, but that trailer was so empty, and the costume let me know they had spent a lot of effort on something that should have been simple, which meant they didn't spend a lot of effort on things that should have been complicated, for example, as others have mentioned, what the lantern technology is and feels like.

 

[metaphysician]

Sinestro's yellow ring powered by fear and the Corps rings powered by willpower kind of staples of the mythology. On the same respective level as the death of the Waynes', Krypton exploding, Uncle Ben dying.

That specific brand of hokiness is unavoidable in a GLC film.

No, no they are not. The rings being powered be emotions wasn't a feature until Geoff Johns remade the whole comic in recent years. To compare them with the Waynes being dead is to selectively rewrite history.

 

[The Guard]

I don't understand the statement that somehow the movie didn't spend enough time explaining and exploring the lantern technology.

 

[DrCosmic]

It was pretty slapshod. They took some buzzwords from Geoff Johns' run, but it wasn't a deep or comprehensive explanation, and there wasn't any reason that we should really care about it. Then it did random unexplained stuff, like beep and somehow communicate to him exactly where the bad guys were.

Hector Hammonds powers were much better explained and explored. We saw exactly where he got them from, he had an intuitive power set, and we saw how it weighed on him emotionally, and it was in a way that made perfect sense.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

I'm with you, Doc. It didn't show us why he is the way he is besides an awful flashback to a far more underwhelming death for his father. In Secret Origin-

Hal's mother and father have a rocky marriage due to his job.
Hal sees his father choose to die, saving people at the air show.
He still sees his father as a hero, and continues to hang out at Ferris Air, his mother becomes overbearing, preventing him having a life and he acts out.
One brother kicks the crap out of him, for stressing out their mom, the other looks up to him in the same way Hal did to Martin.
Hal runs away to join the military.
His mother is dying, but will not speak to Hal if he's flying planes.
Hal gets dishonourably discharged and rushes to his mother, he never gets to reconcile and his brother hates him.

Everything that makes Hal a character was scrapped in favour of making him a caricature.

No, no they are not. The rings being powered be emotions wasn't a feature until Geoff Johns remade the whole comic in recent years. To compare them with the Waynes being dead is to selectively rewrite history.

Sinestro's ring being powered by fear might only be about a 10 year old concept (still close to 20% of his history though), but the Green Lantern Corps has always been powered by willpower.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I'm with you, Doc. It didn't show us why he is the way he is besides an awful flashback to a far more underwhelming death for his father. In Secret Origin-

Hal's mother and father have a rocky marriage due to his job.
Hal sees his father choose to die, saving people at the air show.
He still sees his father as a hero, and continues to hang out at Ferris Air, his mother becomes overbearing, preventing him having a life and he acts out.
One brother kicks the crap out of him, for stressing out their mom, the other looks up to him in the same way Hal did to Martin.
Hal runs away to join the military.
His mother is dying, but will not speak to Hal if he's flying planes.
Hal gets dishonourably discharged and rushes to his mother, he never gets to reconcile and his brother hates him.

Everything that makes Hal a character was scrapped in favour of making him a caricature.



Sinestro's ring being powered by fear might only be about a 10 year old concept (still close to 20% of his history though), but the Green Lantern Corps has always been powered by willpower.

Agreed on all counts. Hal isn't one of DC's marquee characters for no reason. The movie glossed over his childhood, and even the extended edition didn't add much of the great story points you mentioned from Secret Origin.

Hal's rivalry with Sinestro is among the greatest rivalries in comics. First Flight did a better job at telling that story, although the GL movie did a competent job of setting it up for the sequel we'll never get. Every time I see Strong put on the yellow ring in the post-credits scene, it makes me nauseous to think what might have been.

 

[Hypestyle]

bring on Will Smith and make it work for the Justice League team-up.

 

[The Guard]

It was pretty slapshod. They took some buzzwords from Geoff Johns' run, but it wasn't a deep or comprehensive explanation, and there wasn't any reason that we should really care about it. Then it did random unexplained stuff, like beep and somehow communicate to him exactly where the bad guys were.

They took phrases and ideas from a number of versions of Green Lantern. Not just Johns. While there are good elements in SECRET ORIGINS (many of which were already in the comics in some capacity), there's more to Hal Jordan than Johns' SECRET ORIGINS, which is somewhat overrated as an origin story for the character. I don't think what was featured in the movie about the powers was anymore slapshod than the comics have ever depicted the nature of the powers and the lantern, really.

And the power ring has pretty much always done random things like beep and communicate when there's trouble in the comics. The film pointed out that it could do these things as well.

There isn't a "deep comprehensive explanation" because it's not a deep and comprehensive concept. It's channeling emotion into solid light images through focused willpower. And there is an entire sequence/series of sequences devoted to exploring different aspects of this idea.

Hector Hammonds powers were much better explained and explored.

How so?

The dude touched a piece of alien shard.

We saw exactly where he got them from, he had an intuitive power set, and we saw how it weighed on him emotionally, and it was in a way that made perfect sense.

I feel like you didn't watch the movie very closely if you really think that Green Lantern's powers didn't also feature these elements.

 

[DrCosmic]

I don't remember many of the details anymore (which is testament enough that it wasn't compelling), but the whole Hal needing a pep talk made no sense. This is the guy who deals with his fears by diving in head first?

As for Hammond, they gave him a motif as though he was being corrupted, it started with a little spark and then it kept growing, until he came into full contact with the source and was consumed. Not only was it thematically sound and consistent, we got to see him grow slowly through his powers, and how it took him from this sort of loser professor into an self-possessed madman. It made sense, that's exactly how a loser teacher with daddy issues would react to that kind of power.

And the idea of making willpower concrete is extremely deep on several levels. At least as deep as hope for Superman or fear for Batman, but even more profound because it's literally a concrete thing for Green Lantern. A ring that can do anything is extremely comprehensive. The movie didn't think it was a deep or comprehensive concept either, and that's part of why it was so forgettable. It's not the concept that was the problem, it was that it was dealt with with a sort of kids cartoon level of detail, and a compelling movie for adults needs more than that.