Official Green Lantern News & Discussion Thread - Part 8

[Mr. Earle]

It sounds like Campbell didn't have a vision at all, he just directed what WB wanted.

I prefer it this way. Frankly i'm tired of each director doing his thing and its about time we get some comic book movies that are close to the source material. I dont want:

- Realistic batman
- Stupid Catwoman
- Superman fighting giant spiders
- Grimdark Burton Superman
- Mopey stalker Superman
etc.

I want them to stick to the material which has been proven good. Secret Origins was good, but if of course just because it was a good comics it doesnt mean that it can be a good movie. And here's where Campbell should have stepped in and fixed any problems that would occur from the adaption.

 

[craigdbfan]

Spoiler

He's trying on a ring that he fully knows is being powered by the yellow power of fear. He clearly saw what happened with Kronas and the whole Parallax incident.

I'm sorry but it is really dumb. Whether he's willingly defecting or not putting on the ring for curiosity sake and with no apparent reason just makes it stupid.

They didn't bother in developing the character so they settled for the poor thought out latter reasoning.

 

[Mr. Earle]

From what i've read the movie sounds exactly like a Geoff Johns Green Lantern comic.

Flat, uninteresting lead who is said to be awesome, but never actually shown to be awesome. Thin, poorly developed supporting characters who are nothing but one dimensional cliches. Corny, overwraught exposition heavy dialogue. A plot that is more focused on big pay offs and surprises rather than naturally developing. But with cool action scenes.

I think he did the best he could with the pieces of cardboard that are Hal and his supporting cast. Also, Hal was often shown to be awesome.


So anyway, i have read a few pages of this thread but i havent understood. What's the main problem of this movie? You all say "he had no vision", "Geoff this" and "Geoff that", but what exactly was wrong with the movie?

 

[JAK®]

I prefer it this way. Frankly i'm tired of each director doing his thing and its about time we get some comic book movies that are close to the source material. I dont want:

- Realistic batman
- Stupid Catwoman
- Superman fighting giant spiders
- Grimdark Burton Superman
- Mopey stalker Superman
etc.

I want them to stick to the material which has been proven good. Secret Origins was good, but if of course just because it was a good comics it doesnt mean that it can be a good movie. And here's where Campbell should have stepped in and fixed any problems that would occur from the adaption.

But the problems with GL have nothing to do with it being close to Secret Origins from what I hear. The problems were pacing, bad characterisation and basically just rushing the film.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Spoiler

He's trying on a ring that he fully knows is being powered by the yellow power of fear. He clearly saw what happened with Kronas and the whole Parallax incident.

I'm sorry but it is really dumb. Whether he's willingly defecting or not putting on the ring for curiosity sake and with no apparent reason just makes it stupid.

They didn't bother in developing the character so they settled for the poor thought out latter reasoning.

This. I dont get why the best Green Lantern would do that. I could only see him go there after a major dispute with the Guardians, not in a "lets try some coke guys" way.


On another note, how did you guys find Hammond? I personally think that he looks like a 70ies porn star and when he becomes a villain he is not exactly cool. Sinestro is cool, Atrocitus is cool. Hammond is not cool. Yeah yeah he is not supposed to be cool, he's supposed to be pathetic, but guess what, people dont enjoy that.

I also heard he overacted his part.

 

[Mr. Earle]

But the problems with GL have nothing to do with it being close to Secret Origins from what I hear. The problems were pacing, bad characterisation and basically just rushing the film.

That's another problem altogether. I like that DCE exists and they re not handing their franchises over to various directors and their fetishes, but yeah they should have done a better job.

What was the audience's opinion of the CGI? I mean even if the quality isnt that great, those suits are pretty freaking epic. I just watched the post credits scene on Youtube and [BLACKOUT]the way Sinestro's suit changes colour is epic! [/BLACKOUT]

 

[moviedoors]

This. I dont get why the best Green Lantern would do that. I could only see him go there after a major dispute with the Guardians, not in a "lets try some coke guys" way.


On another note, how did you guys find Hammond? I personally think that he looks like a 70ies porn star and when he becomes a villain he is not exactly cool. Sinestro is cool, Atrocitus is cool. Hammond is not cool. Yeah yeah he is not supposed to be cool, he's supposed to be pathetic, but guess what, people dont enjoy that.

I also heard he overacted his part.

Hammond is a non-character. Sarsgaard has fun playing him, but there's nothing there. We get no indication of who this guy is before he gets infected and the tiny bits of motivation they give him are on the nose and useless. Having a past with Hal and Carol might as well have been left out considering how little it actually mattered. His wig pre-transformation is really awful looking too. The seams are barely hidden and his actual shaven hairline is clearly visible. He looks sort of like a younger John Carpenter. When he starts getting ugly it looks a lot better, but by the time he gets in the wheel chair I couldn't help but think how much better that bulbous headed mutant in The Hills Have Eyes remake looked.

 

[maenalus]

This. I dont get why the best Green Lantern would do that. I could only see him go there after a major dispute with the Guardians, not in a "lets try some coke guys" way.


On another note, how did you guys find Hammond? I personally think that he looks like a 70ies porn star and when he becomes a villain he is not exactly cool. Sinestro is cool, Atrocitus is cool. Hammond is not cool. Yeah yeah he is not supposed to be cool, he's supposed to be pathetic, but guess what, people dont enjoy that.

I also heard he overacted his part.

I absolutely loved Hammond, he's now one of my favorite comic movie villains ever, right up there with Stamp's Zod, Pfeiffer's Catwoman, and Ledger's Joker.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Is the post credit scene worth waiting for? Because if this movie blows I probably won't want to stay and I'll just watch it at home.

 

[moviedoors]

Is the post credit scene worth waiting for? Because if this movie blows I probably won't want to stay and I'll just watch it at home.

I thought it was a slap in the face, but you don't have to wait for all the credits to end. It does the splash credits, then it's the cookie, then the typical scrolling credits begin, so you don't have to wait long. Maybe 2 minutes tops.

 

[dark_b]

Is the post credit scene worth waiting for? Because if this movie blows I probably won't want to stay and I'll just watch it at home.

Spoiler

as someone who was waiting to see the rise of Sinestro in teh first movie and then accepted that he will see it in the sequel.........i was insulted by the end credits footage. i didtn watch the movie yet. but just seeing what SInestro does at the end is bad for the sequel. where is the build up? nowhere.

i will still watch and pay for the movie.

 

[The Morningstar]

Yea, there should have been a whole film devoted to Sinestro's fall... not a cheap sequel bait tactic in the end credits.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I think he did the best he could with the pieces of cardboard that are Hal and his supporting cast. Also, Hal was often shown to be awesome.


So anyway, i have read a few pages of this thread but i havent understood. What's the main problem of this movie? You all say "he had no vision", "Geoff this" and "Geoff that", but what exactly was wrong with the movie?

I agree with JAK. A comic book movie isn't bad because it didn't stick to the source material. It sounds like the execution was bad.

There's nothing wrong with a director adding their own ideas to a film. It's happened with mixed results, but the positive ones are pretty great (although I know how you stand with Nolan's Batman) But it shouldn't be a slave to the source material.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Spoiler

as someone who was waiting to see the rise of Sinestro in teh first movie and then accepted that he will see it in the sequel.........i was insulted by the end credits footage. i didtn watch the movie yet. but just seeing what SInestro does at the end is bad for the sequel. where is the build up? nowhere.

i will still watch and pay for the movie.

Yea, there should have been a whole film devoted to Sinestro's fall... not a cheap sequel bait tactic in the end credits.

**** it. I will leave then.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I am always the one in my group that tells everyone to wait for the post credits scenes. Its usually me, my friends and very few other people that stay. Nobody else knows about it so they dont stay. Its one of the best post credits scenes though so its worth the wait.

 

[Doctor Jones]

But from what I hear, it sounds rushed and should have been devoted to a second film.

It depends on how much I like the movie. Plus a friend of mine and I are going with two girls. So it really doesn't matter to me.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I agree with JAK. A comic book movie isn't bad because it didn't stick to the source material. It sounds like the execution was bad.

There's nothing wrong with a director adding their own ideas to a film. It's happened with mixed results, but the positive ones are pretty great (although I know how you stand with Nolan's Batman) But it shouldn't be a slave to the source material.

I am confused now. I lost track of the discussion.

Eh... i agree with what you guys say. A good movie is a good movie, but i think DCE is a good thing and they should stick closer to the comics (which GL did) instead of letting each director apply his fetishes or preferences. Obviously some changes need to be made, like for example they had Parallax kill Sur because Atrocitus would have complicated things too much. Minor things like that dont matter.

From then on, yeah, its all about how well you do it. Marvel has proven that superheroes work, you just have to make good movies and suprisingly it seems that Campell failed.

Spoiler

as someone who was waiting to see the rise of Sinestro in teh first movie and then accepted that he will see it in the sequel.........i was insulted by the end credits footage. i didtn watch the movie yet. but just seeing what SInestro does at the end is bad for the sequel. where is the build up? nowhere.

i will still watch and pay for the movie.

Yea, there should have been a whole film devoted to Sinestro's fall... not a cheap sequel bait tactic in the end credits.

These. A thousand times these posts!

 

[The Morningstar]

I've seen it. It's a cool looking scene.

Spoiler

But it seems completely shallow and wastes the Sinestro character. There should be a whole movie focused on him going bad. Show him on Korugar, starting to lose the plot a bit, starting to use fear to control the civilians etc.

But what they did is condense that down into a cheap sequel bait after credit scene.

 

[Troy_Parker]

Is there a scene after the credits? I don't wanna read any spoilers seeing as how I'm seeing this tomorrow. lool

 

[moviedoors]

On its own, that clip isn't bad and Mark Strong sells it. Look at that guy's awareness of his presence on camera. The way he knows just how to look up in just the right way. He's a great actor. But in the bigger picture, it's cheap and lazy. That moment is antithetical to everything we saw previously in the movie and it makes zero sense in the context it's presented in. It was fanboy lip service and nothing more. Completely unearned.

 

[maenalus]

On its own, that clip isn't bad and Mark Strong sells it. Look at that guy's awareness of his presence on camera. The way he knows just how to look up in just the right way. He's a great actor. But in the bigger picture, it's cheap and lazy. That moment is antithetical to everything we saw previously in the movie and it makes zero sense in the context it's presented in. It was fanboy lip service and nothing more. Completely unearned.

Yep. That's how I felt about it to.

 

[phillyboy]

The post credit scene is like putting Anakin into the Vader suit during the credits... at the end of The Phantom Menace. Sinestro is under-developed as it is, so they decide to throw his defining character moment into a 10 second post credit scene? As if I didnt feel sick enough from having to pay to see such a **** 'film', the post credits scene was just one final kick in the nuts.

 

[The Morningstar]

Well it's sequel bait. They're obviously not bothered about making a decent product here... they're just bothered about selling it.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I am confused now. I lost track of the discussion.

Eh... i agree with what you guys say. A good movie is a good movie, but i think DCE is a good thing and they should stick closer to the comics (which GL did) instead of letting each director apply his fetishes or preferences. Obviously some changes need to be made, like for example they had Parallax kill Sur because Atrocitus would have complicated things too much. Minor things like that dont matter.

From then on, yeah, its all about how well you do it. Marvel has proven that superheroes work, you just have to make good movies and suprisingly it seems that Campell failed.


These. A thousand times these posts!

I agree something like a Burton Superman film probably wouldn't have worked. He had interesting ideas in there somewhere, but design wise, Jesus. It didn't help it was being butchered by Jon Peters either.

Although I will admit, I was curious to see how a Burton Superman film with Nic Cage would have turned out. At least it might have been some crazy entertaining ****.

Something what contrasts so differently with the tone and essentials of the comics and the director isn't a good move. Singer was hired because of his handle with ensemble in The Usual Suspects, although you could get a Raimi who hadn't done anything similar to Spider-Man but his passion showed through and got the job.

I think my sig sums it up when approaching comic book films.

I don't think any of us here want to see a particular adaptation or retread of what already happened in the comics. For one, it already happened and two, it wouldn't be very exciting. These movie cost so much anyway so you should come up with your own story. Why do it again while it already happened and done alot cheaper and fit for its medium?

 

[DaveMoral]

I'm wondering if that's the done deal though? Sinestro's after power right?

Caveat, I have not yet seen the film. Watched the credit scene though. I'm just wondering if he tries it on, but in the next film he doesn't just come out as wielding it and being the evil Sinestro at the beginning. Perhaps he tries to convince the Guardians that the yellow power has some kind of merit the green doesn't. I don't know. I'd hate to think they'd just plunk down into yellow Sinestro and the formation of the Sinestro Corps for the next film.