Jack Black as GL? Why god...WHY?!

[ToddIsDead]

If Jack Black played Kyle Rayner, I don't know what I'd do, because I would be indescribedly angry. That would be the worst thing that they could possibly do. If Jack Black is indeed the star, then they should just make up a character, because I don' t want to see any of my favorite characters ruined.

 

[Manic]

If Jack Black was chosen to play Kyle, Hal, or Guy, how many of you would honestly go see the movie anyway? Just so you can complain?

 

[Katsuro]

If Jack Black was chosen to play Kyle, Hal, or Guy, how many of you would honestly go see the movie anyway? Just so you can complain?

I wouldn't. They're not getting a single cent of my money if they pull that crap. I'll wait for DVD where I can get it for free (work at a video store). Or perhaps i'll just see it in the theaters, but pay for a ticket for another, better movie. Either way, my money will never support such a bastardization of a great character.

 

[ObakeTora]

You know what? Queen Latifah once said on MTV that she wants to play Wonder Woman. Doesn't mean it's ever gonna happen.

The friction generated from those wonder thighs could power a bus and have enough juice left over for Taipei

just no, a he-he-hellllll no!

Catherine Zeta Jones for WW DAMMIT!!!?

 

[dnno1]

The friction generated from those wonder thighs could power a bus and have enough juice left over for Taipei

just no, a he-he-hellllll no!

Catherine Zeta Jones for WW DAMMIT!!!?

What woman wouldn't want to be Wonder Woman? That's just like having a big weding, being swept of their feet by a night in shining armor or prince charming and living happlily ever after. They all go together with women.

 

[bulok]

What woman wouldn't want to be Wonder Woman? That's just like having a big weding, being swept of their feet by a night in shining armor or prince charming and living happlily ever after. They all go together with women.

Exactly. Wonder Woman was the ultimate icon for feminism, at the very least the embodiment of an independent woman. Any self respecting actress would want to play WW.

I would not have a problem Queen Latifah being it.,

 

[Manic]

I would not have a problem Queen Latifah being it.

"Oooh, girl! Look out! I'm a big booty amazon!"

 

[dnno1]

I wouldn't. They're not getting a single cent of my money if they pull that crap. I'll wait for DVD where I can get it for free (work at a video store). Or perhaps i'll just see it in the theaters, but pay for a ticket for another, better movie. Either way, my money will never support such a bastardization of a great character.

That's kind of dumb. The only parties you are hurting then would be your employer.

 

[That-Guy]

Exactly. Wonder Woman was the ultimate icon for feminism, at the very least the embodiment of an independent woman. Any self respecting actress would want to play WW.

I would not have a problem Queen Latifah being it.,

Yeah, I think every girl wants to be Wonder Woman. My girlfriend is an actress and that's one of her dream roles.


However, I wouldn't wait to see Queen Latifah as Wonder Woman. Physically, she couldn't pull it off, because, I'm sorry, but Wonder Woman should have a slim figure. Latifah wouldn't slim down, at least not to the level she'd need to be to even slightly look the part. And I'm not trying to slam actors and actress who don't have the figures of models, but the fact of the matter is, superheroes tend to have flawless physiques, and if you want an actor or actress to accurately portray that character, they have to look the part. Also, Latifah has exactly ONE character she knows how to play. Yeah, she was good in Chicago, but she was still pretty much doing her usual "big-mouthed, wise-cracking badass" routine that she does in everything she's in. The only reason it worked was because the movie itself was pretty good, and she sang in it, so there was something to distract people from the fact that she has a very limited range, acting-wise. It is for this reason that I'd never want to see someone like Sarah Michelle Gellar or Jennifer Anniston play Wonder Woman either. When you can only play one type of character, you shouldn't be considered for roles that you don't have any remote chance of pulling off.

 

[shinlyle]

If jack Black plays GL, I assure you, these forums will get just as nasty as they did int he days of the CINO forums.

This would be the WORST desicion since....well, since Catwoman the Movie.

As for Wonder Woman, I agree, it's the role every woman should want to play. It's the Superman of women....in a matter of speaking.

I'm not a big Superman fan....honestly. Still, if someone approached me to play Superman, I'd jump at the oppurtunity! I'd be F***ING SUPERMAN!!! Wonder Woman should be the same way. She's one of the 4 most iconic heroes in all of comic history (I hope you all know the other 3), and whoever plays her WELL will be immortalized in the same way that Christopher Reeves was immortalized as Superman.

Oh, and if Queen Latifa plays Wonder Woman, I'll personally disembowel the son of a b**** that okayed it. Sorry, but the star or such films as "Taxi" and "Beauty Shop" probably shouldn't play WW....just saying.

 

[dnno1]

Actually I'd want to be a GL or the Flash (in real life), but if someone offered me Superman I wouldn't turn it down. As far as Queen Latifa goes, no body said that she got the part of Wonder Woman. She only said that she always wanted to be Wonder Woman (and it seems like everybody agrees that there is nothing wrong with that). Let's not get off track here. The topic is about Green Lantern (and Jack Black, which seems to be a hoax). Let's keep it to that.

 

[shinlyle]

You're right.

Jack Black as Green Lantern = GLINO (Green Lantern In Name Only)

 

[GL1]

If it's a hoax, why did it come up again, is it just one JB's dreams or is it actually closer to fruition than last year when this EXACT same rumor came up?

Regardless, I still haven't figured out what's wrong with a Bruce Almighty-style Green Lantern movie. Undeserving schmuck gets ring, misuses it, learns to use it right and becomes a superhero.

I think they should call him Charlie Vickers. That'd be a big hoot actually, and I don't think it'd make to many fans mad since most GL fans don't know that there ever WAS a human Green Lantern named Charlie Vickers.

As for making a Jack Black Bruce Almighty styled GL film as opposed to an epic space opera sci fi Hal/John/Kyle film I should probably note that the dream GL film is not in development. Ever. It's not going to be in development and no one is trying to make it. This is not a choice between a GL Epic Trilogy and Jack Black. This is Jack Black or nothing people.

Anything a summer blockbuster Green Lantern would do for WB is well covered by the more dependable, profitable, and recognizable Batman Begins 2, Superman Returns 2 or Whedon Woman. There are several other problems with having FOUR summer blockbuster superhero franchises. Even FANFILM making fanboys won't make a GL film because it's too expensive.

BUT, they can easily make a nice fall or winter release superhero action-comedy with Jack Black in a city making cool green stuff... much cheaper, but will still bring out audiences and still bring out the most basic appeal of the character: the guy who can make anything.

 

[That-Guy]

If it's a hoax, why did it come up again, is it just one JB's dreams or is it actually closer to fruition than last year when this EXACT same rumor came up?

Regardless, I still haven't figured out what's wrong with a Bruce Almighty-style Green Lantern movie. Undeserving schmuck gets ring, misuses it, learns to use it right and becomes a superhero.

I think they should call him Charlie Vickers. That'd be a big hoot actually, and I don't think it'd make to many fans mad since most GL fans don't know that there ever WAS a human Green Lantern named Charlie Vickers.

As for making a Jack Black Bruce Almighty styled GL film as opposed to an epic space opera sci fi Hal/John/Kyle film I should probably note that the dream GL film is not in development. Ever. It's not going to be in development and no one is trying to make it. This is not a choice between a GL Epic Trilogy and Jack Black. This is Jack Black or nothing people.

Anything a summer blockbuster Green Lantern would do for WB is well covered by the more dependable, profitable, and recognizable Batman Begins 2, Superman Returns 2 or Whedon Woman. There are several other problems with having FOUR summer blockbuster superhero franchises. Even FANFILM making fanboys won't make a GL film because it's too expensive.

BUT, they can easily make a nice fall or winter release superhero action-comedy with Jack Black in a city making cool green stuff... much cheaper, but will still bring out audiences and still bring out the most basic appeal of the character: the guy who can make anything.

Then I'll take nothing, thank you.

Look, just because you may be right (and I'll admit, you probably are), you have about as much proof that there will never be an epic GL movie as I have that there will be one, unless you can actually show me something legit here. Granted, an epic GL film would most likely cost as much as Superman Returns, but that's only if the studios weren't careful with the budget (and it should be noted that a great deal of these reports for Superman Returns's huge budget have been greatly inflated... the total film cost around $200 million; the other $163 million was money WB wasted over the last 20 years trying to reinvent the franchise with various other directors, writers, actors, etc.; its ironic that Nicolas Cage probably made more money than any other actor to play Superman...and he never actually played him!). Remember, George Lucas made Star Wars episode 3 for $108 million. That's a lot of money, but not so much that it couldn't be made back if the film was good. A good GL film could be made for the same amount if they're careful and don't hire any huge name actors who are demanding $20 million paychecks. If they use a company like WETA for FX (and they should, because WETA is the best there is), then they could save money... Peter Jackson made three Lord of the Rings films for $300 million. Now, WETA's price has undoubtedly gone up since then, but something like GL doesn't necessarily HAVE to be as extravagant as Lord of the Rings or King Kong. What I mean by that is, yes, there would be huge, Star Wars-esque scenes that occur on Oa and Korugar, but a good bit of the story will also take place on Earth, probably in ordinary airport hangers (if they go with Hal Jordan) and normal looking cities, etc. Films like LOTR or Kong, were period pieces, thus nothing could look like it was set in the present day. All WB has to do is learn to stay on a fixed budget and make a good movie, and a GL film could be a success. It doesn't even necessarily have to be "epic" to be faithful. The first film could simply introduce the hero, Hal, the Corps (in moderation), the villain (probably Sinestro), the love interest (Carol Ferris, most likely), and feature some good battles between the heroic GL and the rogue one. It would have a decent sized budget, but not one so big that its impossible for the film to be made.

 

[GL1]

That-Guy, I have not doubt the movie could be made for $100 million, however, that means it would have to released in the summer to reocup that money. That means either stealing sales from another franchise or simply not making a movie about one of WB's three other summer blockbuster superhero franchises. All three of which are more popular and thus dependable than GL.

 

[That-Guy]

That-Guy, I have not doubt the movie could be made for $100 million, however, that means it would have to released in the summer to reocup that money. That means either stealing sales from another franchise or simply not making a movie about one of WB's three other summer blockbuster superhero franchises. All three of which are more popular and thus dependable than GL.

You're forgetting about the December market. Movies released around Christmastime tend to rake in a good amount of cash. In recent years, all of the Bond films have been released in the wintertime, as were all of the LOTR movies, Narnia, Kong and others that made a lot of money. Making a movie with a $100 million budget doesn't necessarily mean that it has to be in the summertime. And it could be if WB released say, Wonder Woman in May and GL in mid august. That wouldn't conflict. Now granted, there might be issue over the budget if both of the films were filming around the same time, but remember, WB released Constantine only a few months prior to Batman Begins, and later made V for Vendetta, which came out a few months before Superman Returns. Granted, neither of those are superhero movies in the conventional sense, but they are DC properties and did have decent sized budgets.

 

[dnno1]

If it's a hoax, why did it come up again, is it just one JB's dreams or is it actually closer to fruition than last year when this EXACT same rumor came up?...

If you mean the 2004 rumor and the recent one last week, I think it is still a hoax for publicity purposes. The 2004 rumor came out around the time that "King Kong" was filming and the latest rumor (coincedently) came out before the release of "Nacho Libre". I have noticed that it is not uncommon that actors express interest in these comicbook characters (Wonder Woman is a perfect example of this) just to temporarily focus the attention on them when needed and I don't think it's any different with Black. Take note that Black said that he hasn't seen a script yet. This is because there is no script. If the Cory Reynolds story is true, then there is definitely no script since no production company would own the rights to the character (and hence why Reynolds is trying to buy the rights to such a film).

 

[Katsuro]

That's kind of dumb. The only parties you are hurting then would be your employer.

How would i be hurting my employer? I get free movies, i'm not talking about stealing it. In fact i'm helping my emplyoer, because we're supposed to watch the movies so we can give our opinions when customers ask.

And yes, I realize WB wont be crying over the loss of my $10 movie ticket, but I figure if everyone does the same maybe they'll get the point and stop bastardizing comic movies.

 

[Logan Howlett]

I think its pretty inane to call anything that hasn't even entered into production "bastardization" simply because you don't like the actor.

 

[Katsuro]

I think its pretty inane to call anything that hasn't even entered into production "bastardization" simply because you don't like the actor.

you (and a lot of other people) are making the mistake of thinking this is the first Jack Black rumor we have. It isn't. There was rumor in 2004 of Jack Black starring in a zany comedic Green Lantern film in the vein of The Mask. So it's not just the actor i'm upset about, but the entire tone and theme. Read a Green Lantern comic, it's not some zany adventure full of fart jokes, which is what Jack Black and WB are/were going for.

 

[Logan Howlett]

I wouldn't want it to be zanny either. My idea was for a dramedy. But keep in mind those were RUMORS and like most hold NO standing. I doubt with the success of BB and SR that the WB is going to do anything that doesn't fit somewhere within that realm. Trust me.

Tell me, what would you think if the movie was done seriously with some comedy and Jack Black was the star, if it wasn't "zany"?

 

[Katsuro]

I wouldn't want it to be zanny either. My idea was for a dramedy. But keep in mind those were RUMORS and like most hold NO standing. I doubt with the success of BB and SR that the WB is going to do anything that doesn't fit somewhere within that realm. Trust me.

Tell me, what would you think if the movie was done seriously with some comedy and Jack Black was the star, if it wasn't "zany"?

I'd still be upset. I like the existing GL characters, and there's no way Jack Black would play either of them. He just doens't look like them. So he would have to play a new, made up character. He's also nowhere near physically fit enough to be a GL, which IS important. As other posters explained, some average joe cant just pick up a ring and use it, it's very physcially taxing. So even if this movie tried to take itself seriously, it would be disrespecting the comic mythos and I'm offended by that. Catwoman wasn't a zany comedy, but I still hated that.

 

[Logan Howlett]

Ok well Tobey Maguire went from scrawny as a toothpick to buff bod to play Spidey, what IF JB actualy took the time to get in shape for it? Hmm? And what if he played Kyle Rayner?

 

[dnno1]

How would i be hurting my employer? I get free movies, i'm not talking about stealing it. In fact i'm helping my emplyoer, because we're supposed to watch the movies so we can give our opinions when customers ask.

And yes, I realize WB wont be crying over the loss of my $10 movie ticket, but I figure if everyone does the same maybe they'll get the point and stop bastardizing comic movies.

WB would still be getting their money since your employer would be paying for the DVD for you. If you don't take the DVD and your employer sends it back to the distributor (which more than likely would be a division of WB) that would mean they would get that much less in revenue. If you want to bocott (which I don't advise) you have to be willing to make sacrifices in order for it to work. Are you really willing to do that?

 

[dnno1]

you (and a lot of other people) are making the mistake of thinking this is the first Jack Black rumor we have. It isn't. There was rumor in 2004 of Jack Black starring in a zany comedic Green Lantern film in the vein of The Mask. So it's not just the actor i'm upset about, but the entire tone and theme. Read a Green Lantern comic, it's not some zany adventure full of fart jokes, which is what Jack Black and WB are/were going for.

You are not considering the fact that the 2004 rumor may have been just that (a rumor). To this day there is no indication that there is a script or a producer. Even Jack Black admitted in his radio interview that he hasn't seen a script. If Corey Reynolds is indicating that he is trying to buy the rights to the film then it must mean there is no producer (yet) and the direction of the film could go anywhere at this time.