Official Green Lantern Casting and Discussion Thread

[The Man of Steel]

They were both minor characters (Cyclops was barely in the X-Men movies). If he was playing both Superman and Batman,for example, than I'd see the problem.

yeah, He needs a biger role

 

[batnkevlar]

James Marsden is... David Boreanaz is... Guy Pierce is... Justin Bruning is... Jensen Ackles is...

pretty much, Fillion aint good looking, and Krause is good looking in an middle aged man sorta way... not what this franchise needs... no Dempsey characters...

 

[TheVileOne]

They also produced Batman Begins, V For Vendetta and 300. What's your point?

For one they are definitely inconsistent.

For two, no one can offer legitimate explanations or examples to my question, only examples that were FAILURES.

 

[Matt.S99]

James Marsden is... David Boreanaz is... Guy Pierce is... Justin Bruning is... Jensen Ackles is...

pretty much, Fillion aint good looking, and Krause is good looking in an middle aged man sorta way... not what this franchise needs... no Dempsey characters...

guy pierce isnt that good looking, hes a good actor though, he has the right face proportions for the question IMO

 

[project13]

Well who is good looking enough for Hal then?

This guy:

Michael Trucco

 

[Dr. Fate]

This guy:

Michael Trucco

I think I saw him recommended for Superman in a JLA casting thread a while back. Guess he could work as Hal visually but I haven't seen any of his work.

 

[Matt.S99]

David Boreanaz for Hal Jordan

 

[TheLongestDay]

I like David Boreanaz but theres nothing about him that relates atall to Hal Jordan for me,in fact he seems a better fit for how Kyle is portrayed these days...

 

[Matt.S99]

isnt he too old for kyle though?

 

[Dr. Fate]

isnt he too old for kyle though?

Probably.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

I like David Boreanaz but theres nothing about him that relates atall to Hal Jordan for me,in fact he seems a better fit for how Kyle is portrayed these days...

That's funny considering he does the voice for Hal in 'New Frontier'. So, technically, he has already played Hal.

 

[TheVileOne]

So has Kevin Smith. Kevin Smith was the first person to play Hal Jordan in animation since Super Friends.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

So has Kevin Smith. Kevin Smith was the first person to play Hal Jordan in animation since Super Friends.

When did that happen? In what?

 

[TheVileOne]

The awesome Paul Dini Duck Dodgers series that featured a whole episode with the Green Lantern Corps.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

Thanks, VileOne. I've never actually seen that. Do you know if it's on DVD?

 

[Dr. Fate]

Thanks, VileOne. I've never actually seen that. Do you know if it's on DVD?

If not DVD, then it's most likely on You-Tube.

 

[GL1]

If not DVD, then it's most likely on You-Tube.

And if it is on DVD, then it's most DEFINITELY on Youtube.

 

[TheVileOne]

As far as I know, the Duck Dodgers series that Paul Dini did for a couple seasons on Cartoon Network is yet to be collected on DVD.

Too bad, it was a funny show. The two greatest episodes: 1 would be the Green Lantern crossover. The second would be the Samurai Jack crossover featuring the late, great Mako as AKU.

Also good news guys. JL is apparently falling apart. Why is that good? Hopefully it means that GL will stay together and hopefully it starts with Hal Jordan instead of the stupid idea of going from JOHN STEWART to HAL JORDAN which audiences would not have liked.

 

[GL1]

Mako was Aku? WORD!

...the stupid idea of going from JOHN STEWART to HAL JORDAN which audiences would not have liked.

Why would they not have liked it?

 

[TheVileOne]

Mako was Aku? WORD!


Why would they not have liked it?

Do I have to explain this again? Put John Stewart in the JL film, and then make the solo films about Hal Jordan. Audiences would NOT have accepted that, especially if they grew attached to Stewart, it would screw everything up. It was freaking bass ackwards idea to do a GL spin-off movie with momentum from JL and not even have the same GL.

The only examples people could cite are XXX 1 to XXX 2 and Fast and The Furious 3. Well you know, XXX 2 was a big freaking bomb. And Tokyo Drift was garbage that well even though the other two are garbage, Tokyo Drift did nowhere near as well.

 

[GL1]

The only examples people could cite are XXX 1 to XXX 2 and Fast and The Furious 3. Well you know, XXX 2 was a big freaking bomb. And Tokyo Drift was garbage that well even though the other two are garbage, Tokyo Drift did nowhere near as well.

So if Vin was in xXx 2, it wouldn't have bombed? It was a bad movie, from start to finish, that's not evidence that going from John to Hal would be hated by "everyone."

Your opinion has no basis in reality, and furthermore, your opinion presumes a bunch of other people's opinions on a hypothetical. I do the same thing sometimes, but I usually explain the process in depth and provide examples so at least it makes sense that I could come to that conclusion, even if I'm wrong. Feel free to link your arguement if you don't feel like posting it again.

 

[TheVileOne]

So if Vin was in xXx 2, it wouldn't have bombed? It was a bad movie, from start to finish, that's not evidence that going from John to Hal would be hated by "everyone."

XXX was far from a good movie, but it was still a sizable hit, and it did well mainly due to Vin Diesel. Also, GL1, the person cited that as the idea that XXX 1 and 2 are examples where it WORKED. So you make no sense there.

And yes, people do not like it when they switch stars or roles of the main characters for sequels and it usually bombs after the first movie is a hit.

National Treasure 2 would not be as big a hit as it is WITHOUT Nicholas Cage.

Also look at Bruce Almighty to Evan Almighty. They made a sequel to Bruce Almighty WITHOUT Bruce. It TANKED. I can name many others.

Your opinion has no basis in reality, and furthermore, your opinion presumes a bunch of other people's opinions on a hypothetical. I do the same thing sometimes, but I usually explain the process in depth and provide examples so at least it makes sense that I could come to that conclusion, even if I'm wrong. Feel free to link your arguement if you don't feel like posting it again.

Look at the examples above, my opinions are based on the reality of failed sequels and spin-offs for movies that people like you refuse to acknowledge.

Here's the basis: Make a JL movie starring John Stewart GL in order to give a jump start on a SOLO GL movie. Then you jettison Stewart in the spin-off movie to Hal Jordan. THAT DOES NOT COMPUTE for movie audiences. Just because the comics have Green Lanterns trading places every week doesn't mean it will work at the movies.

 

[cerealkiller182]

I didnt think they were gonna use JL to spinoff characters but to spark interest with the characters. I dont think it would have been hard for audiences to understand that Hal and Jon were part of a much larger collective of GLs.

 

[Katsuro]

Also good news guys. JL is apparently falling apart.

Any recent sources on that? I've had a feeling lately that it was falling apart, due to a complete lack of any news, but then just this week there was that announcment about Weta doing the costumes, so I dont know. I keep praying this thing'll get canned.

 

[GL1]

XXX was far from a good movie, but it was still a sizable hit, and it did well mainly due to Vin Diesel. Also, GL1, the person cited that as the idea that XXX 1 and 2 are examples where it WORKED. So you make no sense there.

And yes, people do not like it when they switch stars or roles of the main characters for sequels and it usually bombs after the first movie is a hit.

National Treasure 2 would not be as big a hit as it is WITHOUT Nicholas Cage.

Also look at Bruce Almighty to Evan Almighty. They made a sequel to Bruce Almighty WITHOUT Bruce. It TANKED. I can name many others.



Look at the examples above, my opinions are based on the reality of failed sequels and spin-offs for movies that people like you refuse to acknowledge.

Here's the basis: Make a JL movie starring John Stewart GL in order to give a jump start on a SOLO GL movie. Then you jettison Stewart in the spin-off movie to Hal Jordan. THAT DOES NOT COMPUTE for movie audiences. Just because the comics have Green Lanterns trading places every week doesn't mean it will work at the movies.

Wow, you're confusing 'acknowledgement' with 'agreement.' I acknowledged your point by stating a counterpoint: The change in cast was not the cause. Something which you have yet to disprove. If logic is the standard, then the ball is still in your court. All you did was give another example in which someone made a bad movie with a different actor and claimed, without reasoning, that the change in actor was the cause.

Unless your point is that this phenomenon only applies to bad movies which are carried by good/popular actors, in which case, yes, that would be true. But a good premise carries itself, even if the actors change. James Bond, for instance. They don't even PRETEND to have continuity there.

Perhaps if I say xXx and Fast and Furious over and over again, you will understand that I have acknowledged and refuted your points and that you have yet to come up with a counterpoint. "People like me" have to do that sometimes.

I've bolded my counterpoint in the hopes that you might actually reply to it instead of naming more examples of what you percieve to be a trend. Perhaps I should name a bunch of sequels that kept the actor and tanked as well. Would that kind of useless illogical foolishness seem like a logical argument to you?

EDIT:
You remind me of a movie executive. You just seem to be looking at trends and drawing conclusions based on arbitrarily selected cause and effect relationships, referencing what "everyone" will think based on these trends. You don't seem to spend any time questioning the why and how of the trends you perceive, and as such, while you can feel completely justified, you aren't actually using logic, just assumption.