Official Green Lantern News & Discussion Thread - Part 9

[FreeRadical]

I wonder how johns is doing to be honest

2009

Alfred: 'Know your limits Master Johns'

Geoff Johns: 'Geoff Johns has no limits!'

June 19th 2011

Geoff Johns: 'Quick, must close my Twitter and Facebook comments, I can't take criticisms from fans!'

 

[Doctor Jones]

Well at least the people who worked on this film are starting to know this movie wasn't good.

 

[Silver Surfer]

According to David Poland:

WB is admitting $200 million and $150m marketing… but that is said to be about $50m short by insiders who like to gossip.

So $350 million maybe even $400 million?

Why couldn't they just give that money to Africa or something.....

 

[TDK010]

Agreed. That Dmon guy is trying so hard to defend this film. Doesn't cry enough? Please, who wants that in their hero. That's one of the reason why the Spider-man movies sucked!

 

[WildcatNC]

I didn't think it was nearly as bad as some are making out. It wasn't great but I enjoyed it and it was entertaining.

I don't see the big fuss.

 

[Vartha]

Well haven't seen it JUST YET (I'm planning to see it today) I can see where these guys have problems with it.
I mean as a Thor fan I have some nitpicks on Thor too, there's nothing wrong, in MY book, about wanting your favorite hero's movie being what they had always imagined it to be.

 

[Sith Scotti]

Don't blame the film for the ridculous marketing costs . 150 million is way too much to spend on any film let alone a new potential franchise It really is supcious that the marketing costs keep going up and up though .... It seems like this film is just getting hit everwhere .

 

[dark_b]

i think 150 for marketing is a normal number for a summer with so many action movies.

the thing is we dont know how much was the marketing for TDK or for spiderman or for other superherosto compare.

 

[The Morningstar]

I can totally believe the marketing campaign cost that much. Maybe even more. Doesn't help when they have to change their entire strategy a couple of times.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

According to David Poland:

So $350 million maybe even $400 million?

Why couldn't they just give that money to Africa or something.....

Hi Mark Millar.

 

[DieSmiling]

I can totally believe the marketing campaign cost that much. Maybe even more. Doesn't help when they have to change their entire strategy a couple of times.

Yeah, I agree with this. I still think they really dropped the ball with that first trailer, and were in catch-up mode from then on.

They never knew precisely how they wanted to market it, or what it was supposed to be.

 

[Marvin]

Don't blame the film for the ridculous marketing costs . 150 million is way too much to spend on any film let alone a new potential franchise It really is supcious that the marketing costs keep going up and up though .... It seems like this film is just getting hit everwhere .

yea but they saved soooo much by avoiding the costs of a super bowl spot this year.

 

[DieSmiling]

yea but they saved soooo much by avoided the costs of a super bowl spot this year.

Well, it's clear that any money they saved from not airing a SB spot they pumped back into the marketing.

It just didn't pay off.

 

[Marvin]

Well, it's clear that any money they saved from not airing a SB spot they pumped back into the marketing.

It just didn't pay off.

maybe it did
maybe it saved them from an even worse fate

 

[The Guard]

What's kind of amusing is all the people *****ing about the fact that more of this film didn't take place in space, with more Corps members, etc...and we find out it cost somewhere around $200 million as is.

 

[The Morningstar]

Yea, so if it gets a sequel, we'll get more of the same. Unless they want to spend 500 million dollars on it.

Fact is, this movie didn't look like a 200 million dollar budgeted movie.

 

[KRIM]

What's kind of amusing is all the people *****ing about the fact that more of this film didn't take place in space, with more Corps members, etc...and we find out it cost somewhere around $200 million as is.

Money management.

The SW trilogy cost less and Avatar probably wasn't much more. With that type of money, you should at least be able to deliver a fair middle ground of large scale action-adventure taking place in the cosmos. GL approached nowhere near that.

Hell, TDK came off like a far grander film, and that took place in one city for the most part.

 

[Marvin]

I think if they were going to go for it and spend that much they really should have went all out a la Avatar which was somewhat sold on that fact alone.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

What's kind of amusing is all the people *****ing about the fact that more of this film didn't take place in space, with more Corps members, etc...and we find out it cost somewhere around $200 million as is.

perhaps if they hadn't concentrated so hard on ridiculous cgi suits that no one cares about that money and time could have been better spent on helping give the movie the proper scope the advertisements led people to believe it would have.

 

[The Guard]

There's a reason the new STAR WARS trilogy cost less money than it could have, and we all know what that is.

TDK had a budget of $185 million, so its not that far off what Green Lantern had to work with, really, if rumors of a $200 million budget are true. And The Dark Knight, while definitely a better overall film with better characterwork and story, easily had less fantastic action sequences. I suppose "grander" is in the eye of the beholder. Because while it may well be more satisfying viscerally, the action's scale in The Dark Knight, and the scale of the settings and surrondings (other than Gotham VS Coast City) doesn't really compare to what is found in Green Lantern.

Whiskey Tango, I've about had it with these nonsensical "the trailers fooled me" statements. The trailers showed what was in the film in terms of scale and story. If you imagined there to be more despite no one showing you more, well, that's on you.

 

[The Morningstar]

The Dark Knight had to basically rent out downtown Chicago. Green Lantern was mainly filmed on sound stages.

I can understand TDK being expensive despite not having much CGI. Because locations like Lower Wacker in Chicago are gonna be expensive to rent out.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Whiskey Tango, I've about had it with these nonsensical "the trailers fooled me" statements. The trailers showed what was in the film in terms of scale and story. If you imagined there to be more despite no one showing you more, well, that's on you.

Warner Bros' entire marketing strategy was misleading. This was a simple case of the classic bait and switch technique usually found when purchasing gizmos and gadgets from a street peddler or a lemon from a used car dealer. All of the promotions leading up to Green Lantern make promises of intergalactic action, adventure and heartfelt tension that somehow didn't make it into the film's final cut.

Bottom line: It was pitched (and quoted by cast/crew) as being the next Star Wars in scope; it's irrefutable that wasn't the case when 99% of the intergalactic scenes were revealed in the trailers/tv spots.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Whiskey Tango, I've about had it

oh no!

 

[The Morningstar]

Well to be fair, The Guard is right. The trailers showed what was in the film... LITERALLY.

All the best parts were in the marketing.

But to deny the fact that WB lied to us all is just idiotic. WB made this movie out to be a sci fi extravaganza. We spend about 20 minutes in space.

I mean look at all those posters with Boodika, Green Man and co on them. THEY WEREN'T EVEN IN THE ****ING MOVIE.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Coast City was barely there too. It looked boring as ****. I just saw New Orleans with some CG placement. TDK had a real grand scope to it. Watching it again on Friday for the umpteenth time, I got the scale Nolan wanted. It was an epic film within a city. Sure GL went into outer space and on the planet Oa, but it still didn't feel epic in scale. It was just all in the execution. And the problem wasn't that they weren't in space enough. It was just the utilization and execution of everything that made it look bad. The Earth scenes meant ****, therefore you couldn't eeally care about the Oa scenes. They were just as hollow because the other stuff seemed meaningless.