Green Lantern Script Review

[The Squirrel]

Except for the dead Latino crystal meth dealer. El Mayimbe was pretty pissed about that.

So what's worse?

Showing a dead Latino male? Or being that upset that the dude happens to be Latino?

 

[Hypestyle]

...if John Stewart is eventually dealt with, hopefully his character will be written intelligently instead of as a parody...

 

[dnno1]

So what's worse?

Showing a dead Latino male? Or being that upset that the dude happens to be Latino?

What's worse is having no Latinos showing up to see the movie because of a mis-characterization like that (a dead Latino crystal-meth dealer). According to the MPAA, Hispanic's/Latino's make up about 18% of the movie going audience (about 28 million people). In addition, that demographic is the most frequently attending of all moviegoers at 86%. They could pay for a film like this by themselves technically, and that is why El Mayhimbe has a legitimate beef.

 

[Franklin Richards]

Take Jerry Springer off the air and I'll start worrying about stereotypes.

 

[The Squirrel]

What's worse is having no Latinos showing up to see the movie because of a mis-characterization like that (a dead Latino crystal-meth dealer). According to the MPAA, Hispanic's/Latino's make up about 18% of the movie going audience (about 28 million people). In addition, that demographic is the most frequently attending of all moviegoers at 86%. They could pay for a film like this by themselves technically, and that is why El Mayhimbe has a legitimate beef.

I'm sorry but I don't see a difference on whether or not the drug dealer is Latino, White, Black or Asian.

And it's stupid to threaten to boy cot a movie cause you don't like the race of a dead guy.

Ok, maybe they should leave out race descriptions in the actual script, but if he remains Latino in the movie, I don't buy complaining over that.

 

[Spade]

That last part was amazingly stupid. I'm Latino, and I wouldn't be offended by it in the least. Drugs don't know an ethnic group. People of all races deal and abuse them. That he went on that huge diatribe in what was a good review and practically threatened the screenwriters is nothing short of juvenile.

 

[dnno1]

The public will buy anything as long as its executed properly. LOTR was all about a magic ring that corrupts its wielders. GL has a mythos much less abstract then that. It also deals with technology not magic. That will make it easier to explain how things work.

That is not necessarily true. The public will buy what they like or are interested in seeing (not necessarily anything that is executed properly - remember "Blade Runner"?). They will also tend to follow a trend if it is popular. LOTR had a big following in it's readers over the decades. Had it not been altruistic to the novel it would not have sold well to the Tolkien fans and, hence would have diminished its popularity. The Green Lantern mythos does not have near as large of a following, but it does have elements that could draw in science fiction and fantasy fans. My argument has always been if you try to lure in that market, not only will it get great box office numbers, but it will turn it into a multi million dollar franchise with merchandising, conventions, and novels.

Green Lantern
(the next Star Wars?)

Believe me. There are fans out there and people willing to become fans. Tap the right market and the WB will strike oil!

 

[The Guard]

That's an awful, awful review. He doesn't really reveal anything. He just states that they got the obvious stuff right.

"It's great, but I won't tell you how".

Absurd.

 

[TheVileOne]

I'm continually sickened by El Mayimbe and his terrible, ****ty script reports.

Not that I hope the movie doesn't get made because I hope it does. I would love to see a big, serious Green Lantern movie like Iron Man since it's finally back on track from that Jack Black nonsense.

El Mayimbe just does terrible script write-ups, proven by his little diatribe about ethnicity portrayal in the script.

Totally in agreement with The Guard.

Did Arabs not see Iron Man because there are Arab terrorists in it?

 

[dnno1]

That's an awful, awful review. He doesn't really reveal anything. He just states that they got the obvious stuff right.

"It's great, but I won't tell you how".

Absurd.

If he told you the entirety of the story. Would you still be interested in seeing it? I don't think everybody would and he might be trying to prevent that from happening and it is an indication of how good the script might really be.

 

[DarkSuperman]

If he told you the entirety of the story. Would you still be interested in seeing it? I don't think everybody would and he might be trying to prevent that from happening and it is an indication of how good the script might really be.

I liked his review it got me really excited to see this film made!

P.S.

I know this has nothing to do with anything, but I bought a comic con GL ring off Ebay yesterday...just cuz I love the character and when the film drops in about 2 years I'm gonna wear my GL shirt and the ring together! LOL :gl:

 

[The Major]

That is not necessarily true. The public will buy what they like or are interested in seeing

A good execution does help, though.

It can't hurt a movie.

(not necessarily anything that is executed properly - remember "Blade Runner"?).

Didn't BR's quality make it a cult classic years later?

They will also tend to follow a trend if it is popular.

True, but they will like something new, as well. otherwise new trends wouldn't begin at all. The product just has to be good enough to make them enjoy it.

LOTR had a big following in it's readers over the decades.

Properties don't only need big followings to the public to enjoy them if what they see is good enough material. Many franchises simply start from scratch.

I'm sure most of the public didn't know much about LOTR before the movies. At most they probably knew some of the basics but not the details or how complex the mythos in the trilogy was.

Had it not been altruistic to the novel it would not have sold well to the Tolkien fans and, hence would have diminished its popularity.

Can you be more specific. Not sure where you're coming from with this sentence.

The Green Lantern mythos does not have near as large of a following, but it does have elements that could draw in science fiction and fantasy fans. My argument has always been if you try to lure in that market, not only will it get great box office numbers, but it will turn it into a multi million dollar franchise with merchandising, conventions, and novels.

Green Lantern
(the next Star Wars?)

Believe me. There are fans out there and people willing to become fans. Tap the right market and the WB will strike oil!

Agreed.

That script review makes me even more certain Berlanti is not who should to direct it. They need a veteran sci-fi director like Proyas or Whedon to bring GL to life.

 

[dnno1]

Did Arabs not see Iron Man because there are Arab terrorists in it?

I'm going to tell ya. The film got goose eggs in countries like Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and The UAE (it only made $578,668 in Israel - was it even worth it?). The truth of the matter is that they don't make up 18% of the movie going public and don't have an 86% frequency rate for attendance. That's how they got away with doing that. I don't know if you can do the same with the Hispanic demographic since it is significant.

 

[Spade]

No offense, but if people miss out on movies because they don't fit their close-minded views on "the world," then they deserve to miss out. The truth of the matter is that people will still come in droves because no one on their right mind would be turned off by something as trivial as this.

 

[dnno1]

Didn't BR's quality make it a cult classic years later?

They haven't made another one in decades because of poor attendance at the box office.

True, but they will like something new, as well. otherwise new trends wouldn't begin at all. The product just has to be good enough to make them enjoy it.

You are misunderstanding me. What I mean by a trend is that if they see that a film is popular they will be persuaded into seeing the film. A perfect example of this is "The Dark Knight" or "Spiderman". People flocked to see the film after positive reviews or stunning box office results. In other words, people will follow a crowd.

Properties don't only need big followings [for] the public to enjoy them if what they see is good enough material. Many franchises simply start from scratch.

That's a more difficult route. You will see that the majority of successful films use some sort of gimmick, be it a popular novel or actor to lure in fans. The "follow the crowd" mentality then pursues.

I'm sure most of the public didn't know much about LOTR before the movies. At most they probbaly knew some of the absics but not the details or how complex the mythos in the trilogy was.

The books are required reading material in a good number of college literature courses. You've got to be kidding me. A lot more people know about J. R. Tolkien and the LOTR trilogy than you think.

Can you be more specific. Not sure where you're coming from with this sentence.

They stuck to the source material. That's where I'm coming from.

That script review makes me even more certain Berlanti is not who should to direct it. They need a veteran sci-fi director like Proyas or Whedon to bring GL to life.

That's left to be seen, and I have a feeling that Greg Berlanti will be the one to make that decision.

 

[protocida]

El Mayimbe is a good writer and i loved the script review, because it revealed plenty of stuff, like Hector Hammond's origin and Alan Scott's envolvment, but i got to say:

Try to boycout a movie because there's a Latino body on a scene that problably would't have event 5 minutes of screen time? Come on, that's a big stupidy!

And i believe in Greg Berlanti! He'll make a kick-ass movie! And please, no Nathan Fillion.

 

[dnno1]

El Mayimbe is a good writer and i loved the script review, because it revealed plenty of stuff, like Hector Hammond's origin and Alan Scott's envolvment, but i got to say:

Try to boycout a movie because there's a Latino body on a scene that problably would't have event 5 minutes of screen time? Come on, that's a big stupidy!

And i believe in Greg Berlanti! He'll make a kick-ass movie! And please, no Nathan Fillion.

No, the guy's got a legitimate beef. Portraying Latinos as crystal meth dealers when they are not sends the wrong message to a lot of people. That's even more morally wrong than Superman having an illegitimate child (because this alienates real people). In addition, Latinos do have a strong representation (and possibly influence) among moviegoers so this is the appropriate time to lobby that scene out of the script.

 

[Keyser Soze]

The question I have is...if its just a dead guy on a slab, why exactly do they have to specify him as a LATINO meth dealer anyway?

 

[dnno1]

The question I have is...if its just a dead guy on a slab, why exactly do they have to specify him as a LATINO meth dealer anyway?

That's right. Why? Doing so singles out that demographic in a negative light. It's kind of a slap in the face especially when they are loyal customers to the industry.

 

[The Major]

They haven't made another one in decades because of poor attendance at the box office.

True. But no-one would remember it at all without that quality.

You are misunderstanding me. What I mean by a trend is that if they see that a film is popular they will be persuaded into seeing the film. A perfect example of this is "The Dark Knight" or "Spiderman". People flocked to see the film after positive reviews or stunning box office results. In other words, people will follow a crowd.

It wasn't just that which made those films successes. Though it did help them, I agree.

Both are multi-generational, worldwide, major merchandizing, iconic super-heroes most of the planet knows the mythos about before the audience saw the first scene.

TDK was a sequel to a critically acclaimed film which made the franchise relevant to movie-goers and the film had an even higher level of praise by critics, as well.

That's a more difficult route.

True.

You will see that the majority of successful films use some sort of gimmick, be it a popular novel or actor to lure in fans. The "follow the crowd" mentality then pursues.

Agreed.

The books are required reading material in a good number of college literature courses. You've got to be kidding me. A lot more people know about J. R. Tolkien and the LOTR trilogy than you think.

Okay.

They stuck to the source material. That's where I'm coming from.

Didn't they alter a signicant amount of it?

That's left to be seen, and I have a feeling that Greg Berlanti will be the one to make that decision.

Guess he'll be directing then.

 

[dnno1]

No offense, but if people miss out on movies because they don't fit their close-minded views on "the world," then they deserve to miss out. The truth of the matter is that people will still come in droves because no one on their right mind would be turned off by something as trivial as this.

Are you trying to say that Latinos are crystal-meth dealer or what are you trying to say?

 

[Keyser Soze]

I don't think it was really intentional racism on the part of the writers. Probably just a bit of sloppy writing that was cleared up in the redraft.

Like I said, the writers just need to ask themselves...if this random dead guy on a slab happened to be white, would it affect the scrpt in any way? And if the answer is "no" (as I assume it would be), then having the drug dealer be specified as Latino is rather unnecessary.

 

[dnno1]

I think you were on the right track by not specifying the race at all. In fact if it was a burnt corpse, you could tell who it was anyway.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I think you were on the right track by not specifying the race at all. In fact if it was a burnt corpse, you could tell who it was anyway.

Yep, I doubt any race mentioned in the script will have any relevance - or even get a mention - in the actual film. So best just to not specify it. It's a dead meth dealer. That's all that's really important, if the scene is about establishing Hector Hammond as a forensic scientist or whatever.

 

[protocida]

No, the guy's got a legitimate beef. Portraying Latinos as crystal meth dealers when they are not sends the wrong message to a lot of people. That's even more morally wrong than Superman having an illegitimate child (because this alienates real people). In addition, Latinos do have a strong representation (and possibly influence) among moviegoers so this is the appropriate time to lobby that scene out of the script.

Yeah, because there isn't such thing as a Latino drug dealer.