Justice League Re-cast Hal Jordan for JL movie? Yay or Nay?

[Rowsdower!]

When Alan was Sentinel... that suit was badass. Not a fan of his original look though with the puffy sleeves and purple cape.

 

[Lantern Venom]

When Alan was Sentinel... that suit was badass. Not a fan of his original look though with the puffy sleeves and purple cape.

I'm not a fan of the original costume, either. There are just too many colors. Sadly, that was the only DCUC Scott figure made..no Kingdom Come (there is a pretty awful DC Direct one), no Sentinel, and not even a New 52 Scott.

I'm still hacked off about the War of the Green Lanterns 2-pack including Sinestro Corps Hal over Indigo Tribe John when there was already a DC Direct Sinestro Corps Hal. This is part of the reason why young kids don't know much about the other titular Lanterns except Hal. Hal has new toys in stores all of the time. The other guys are rare.

At least with the New Guardians storyline, I can hope for a White Lantern Kyle.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Alan's original costume is balls to the wall awesome and would be freaking jawsome to see in a period piece. Dat collar, dem sleeves, dat cape, dem sandals. GOT DAYUM.

 

[brainchild81]

Avengers only had one jokester on the team, and that seemed fine to me. And that's in the 'lighthearted' MCU.

Ditto. You only need one

Do we really need a team of five self-serious superheroes though? That would get really boring, fast.

What 5 are you talking about?

Therein lies the brilliance of the character. Jordan and Stewart were heroic long before the ring found them. Rayner was an akward twenty-something who sketched and lived in his imagination, as many of us who like comics are/were at some point. Suddenly, unimaginable power was thrust upon along with a few lethal, cosmic enemies.

A Kyle Rayner movie seems like something that would create a goldmine for WB. He could be a poor man's Spiderman if handled correctly.

Which may be a problem. He could just come off as a cheap imitation. I really don't see goldmine potential for Kyle

I'd say source material can be combined more than improved. Nolan modified Joker and Bane from stories like the Long Halloween and Knightfall, but the essence of both arc and character were still there.

The Green Lantern movie is a perfect example of not trusting the source material. It began as a fitting adaptation and had the makings of a great movie until about 1/2 through. The Green Lantern Corps and Hal's role in it was discarded to address Hal's relationship with Carol and Hector's daddy issues. I have no doubt that this was done because WB wanted to pacify the GA sheeple who might have been confused by the panoramic scope of the GLC.

There is a lesson there. A studio can a) make a movie that stands on pre-existing success or b) try to please everyone, including those with virtually no knowledge of the characters, and likely fail.

Just wanna make sure I'm following you right. You're saying the studio shouldn't try to please the GA?

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

I think he's trying to say don't try and worry specifically about them, so much as create a story that strikes the best balance between the essence of the character, the story you want to tell and it's commercial factor.

Imagine if in 2004 you were talking to someone about Batman Begins and you told them: "y'know Batman is only gonna be Batman for around a year in these films, then he's gonna retire for the better part of a decade, largely because his girlfriend died".

Do you think their first reaction would be to think of the 3 good films we got?

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

hal jordan and pa kent [YT]-b4Azjn9lfI[/YT]

 

[Lantern Venom]

I think he's trying to say don't try and worry specifically about them, so much as create a story that strikes the best balance between the essence of the character, the story you want to tell and it's commercial factor.

Imagine if in 2004 you were talking to someone about Batman Begins and you told them: "y'know Batman is only gonna be Batman for around a year in these films, then he's gonna retire for the better part of a decade, largely because his girlfriend died".

Do you think their first reaction would be to think of the 3 good films we got?

That's pretty much the case. A movie has to play to its strengths and the studio has to hope that satisfies the key demographic (the core audience) and the GA. When they try to juggle elements specifically for the uninitiated, it handicaps the writing.

Blade is a perfect example of what creative team needs to do. Goyer said that initially New Line ( or possibly another studio, I can't remember the word-for-word interview right now) wanted Blade to star a white actor and be campy because that would be more attractive to the GA sheeple of the 90s. Goyer was firm that not only could Snipes pull off a convincing leading man, but Blade could maintain it's horror element from the comics and still be successful.

Sure enough, the GA was introduced to an unapologetic, bloodletting hero and they liked it. The movie probably didn't appeal to people expecting to see something like a movie version of The Greatest American Hero, but it spawned two sequels, a short-lived TV series, and an animated series. Now imagine if it had been like Undercover Brother with vampires? A similar effect would be extremely unlikely.

 

[DCnightwing23]

I'm all for either Hal Jordan or Stewart. If they do decide to continue on with Hal i don't think they'll bring back Reynolds. So with that being said, what are the chances WB get someone like a Chris Pine for the role? Long shot? Or what? Pine has really stood out for the role in my eyes, seems like a perfect fit. Plus he brings a "star" power to a JL film.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Reynolds definitely isn't coming back. WB don't want him, he doesn't want the role.

 

[brainchild81]

That's pretty much the case. A movie has to play to its strengths and the studio has to hope that satisfies the key demographic (the core audience) and the GA. When they try to juggle elements specifically for the uninitiated, it handicaps the writing.

Blade is a perfect example of what creative team needs to do. Goyer said that initially New Line ( or possibly another studio, I can't remember the word-for-word interview right now) wanted Blade to star a white actor and be campy because that would be more attractive to the GA sheeple of the 90s. Goyer was firm that not only could Snipes pull off a convincing leading man, but Blade could maintain it's horror element from the comics and still be successful.

Sure enough, the GA was introduced to an unapologetic, bloodletting hero and they liked it. The movie probably didn't appeal to people expecting to see something like a movie version of The Greatest American Hero, but it spawned two sequels, a short-lived TV series, and an animated series. Now imagine if it had been like Undercover Brother with vampires? A similar effect would be extremely unlikely.

Looks more like the studio was just waaay off in regards to what the GA wanted(same thing w/GL). It's a good thing Goyer was firm.

I'm all for either Hal Jordan or Stewart. If they do decide to continue on with Hal i don't think they'll bring back Reynolds. So with that being said, what are the chances WB get someone like a Chris Pine for the role? Long shot? Or what? Pine has really stood out for the role in my eyes, seems like a perfect fit. Plus he brings a "star" power to a JL film.

I just can't see him taking it without a mega paycheck. Otherwise it's gonna seem like a massive step down from Capt. Kirk. Also, "Chris Pine is taking the role that Ryan Reynolds turned down", just doesn't look right. If Hal is used it's probably gonna be somebody w/a career that needs the role more than the role needs him.

 

[Rowsdower!]

I still think it's doubtful we see GL for a while... Hal, Jon, Kyle, whoever. Consider that the GA doesn't know the character that well; GL's not like Batman or Superman in that the hero's true identity is just as well-known as their "super" name. And since so many people hated the GL movie, I have a feeling that if you brought GL back--regardless of which GL you use--many people in the GA would be like, "I'm not bother with this again."

I think that WB just needs to steer clear of GL for a while. If they can actually get this Justice League movie together and make it a big hit, then perhaps it will be the right time to reintroduce GL. But for now, just let the property alone and work on getting other characters on the screen.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I still think it's doubtful we see GL for a while... Hal, Jon, Kyle, whoever. Consider that the GA doesn't know the character that well; GL's not like Batman or Superman in that the hero's true identity is just as well-known as their "super" name. And since so many people hated the GL movie, I have a feeling that if you brought GL back--regardless of which GL you use--many people in the GA would be like, "I'm not bother with this again."

I think that WB just needs to steer clear of GL for a while. If they can actually get this Justice League movie together and make it a big hit, then perhaps it will be the right time to reintroduce GL. But for now, just let the property alone and work on getting other characters on the screen.

There is a quandry to the GL-in-JLA. Kyle is the best-suited for a solo film. He's a regular guy, not a guy with naturally heroic tendencies like Hal, John, and Guy. He's a quiet guy who likes to draw and live in his imagination. He had greatness thrust upon him and managed to thrive. His tale could be a huge hit with moviegoers.

The issue with Kyle is that he was designed to be more of a loner character. He had an antagonistic relationship with many JLA members at first. The JLA movie seems like it will have a "veteran-heroes-uniting" feel. That almost certainly means Hal again.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

The GL series could do well to have Kyle be the inexperienced young cop being mentored by the old dogs.

 

[Rowsdower!]

The GL series could do well to have Kyle be the inexperienced young cop being mentored by the old dogs.

Yeah but that's kind of what they tried to do with Hal and it wasn't well-received.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Yeah but that's kind of what they tried to do with Hal and it wasn't well-received.

That was the part of the movie that most people seemed to like. GL needed more Corps, less Hector and less Carol. The GLC shouldn't be window dressing.

 

[DChero]

I wouldn't say that people hated the GL movie. They simply forgot it. It wasn't anything special, but I've heard a lot worse about John Carter, Lone Ranger, etc.

I feel like they can use GL again soon (any of them). WB just can't bank on a solo movie yet.

If Reynolds came back to join Affleck and Cavill, the GA would forgive it. It's just people like us that would feel strongly for or against it.

 

[Rowsdower!]

That was the part of the movie that most people seemed to like. GL needed more Corps, less Hector and less Carol. The GLC shouldn't be window dressing.

That might be true, but those scenes are costly... so much so that a lot of them were supposedly left on the cutting room floor. WB isn't going to make a sequel/reboot to one of their greatest financial failures by spending MORE money than they did the last time.

 

[DChero]

If only they would have removed Hammond and focused solely on Hal's growth and Parallax as a villain.

 

[Lantern Venom]

That might be true, but those scenes are costly... so much so that a lot of them were supposedly left on the cutting room floor. WB isn't going to make a sequel/reboot to one of their greatest financial failures by spending MORE money than they did the last time.

The money spent on the CGI suits for Reynolds and Strong were an unnecessary expense. Likewise, the money spent on a Parallax and Hector should have been used to show the GLC functioning as cops, not just the normal hero-protecting-his-world fare. Unfortunately, the movie lost its momentum when Hal "quit" the GLC. I'm sure the studio execs felt the GA sheeple needed a love story, and that was creatively costly.

I'm not sure there will be a GL sequel or reboot. It seems to me that Jordan coming to Arrow (which is rumored) and showing up in the JLA movie will be the only live-action appearances in the coming years. We *might* see the JLA interacting with the GLC in the sequels, and that would give John/Kyle/Guy their chance to come into the DC film universe.

 

[Rorschach2012]

I wouldn't say that people hated the GL movie. They simply forgot it. It wasn't anything special, but I've heard a lot worse about John Carter, Lone Ranger, etc.

I feel like they can use GL again soon (any of them). WB just can't bank on a solo movie yet.

If Reynolds came back to join Affleck and Cavill, the GA would forgive it. It's just people like us that would feel strongly for or against it.

I would. When I saw the film in the theater, I kept thinking to myself, "this is the worst movie I've ever seen in theaters"

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

i want abin sur now.

 

[DChero]

I would. When I saw the film in the theater, I kept thinking to myself, "this is the worst movie I've ever seen in theaters"

We aren't exactly the GA though. The average person on the street may have barely heard of the Green Lantern, but they couldn't tell you who the villain was, the plot, what OA is, etc. To them, it was a Ryan Reynolds movie. They couldn't even name his character. That's why I say it's forgettable.

I guess the way that I'm looking at it is that it failed more because of lack of interest as opposed to it being an unimpressive movie, if that makes sense. Compare that to something like Superman Returns in which a lot of people have seen it, yet their reception was less than expected.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I would. When I saw the film in the theater, I kept thinking to myself, "this is the worst movie I've ever seen in theaters"

The question is how did you feel about the GL mythos going into the film? It seems to me that people who think GL was absolutely horrid were tough sells. I'm predisposed to ambivalent feelings on Superman, which is why it took 6 live-action films for me to finally enjoy one about him. On the GLC boards, members run somewhere between slight disappointment and satisfaction that GL got a live film. The fact that people are still arguing the merits (or lack of) of the film is proof to me that it couldn't have been "worst ever" material.

Movies like Man-Thing and Jonah Hex are more logical choices for worst comic book films. Those are the kinds of films that the GA don't even know exist. They came and went without notice, which is the true touch of death for a comic book adaptation. If it doesn't create any kind of buzz, therefore not making new fans, then it is truly a failure.

 

[Lantern Venom]

i want abin sur now.

The Secret Origin version of Abin and Atrocitus would have worked much better than the gutted version of Parallax. He would have been a more memorable villain.

 

[DChero]

The question is how did you feel about the GL mythos going into the film? It seems to me that people who think GL was absolutely horrid were tough sells. I'm predisposed to ambivalent feelings on Superman, which is why it took 6 live-action films for me to finally enjoy one about him. On the GLC boards, members run somewhere between slight disappointment and satisfaction that GL got a live film. The fact that people are still arguing the merits (or lack of) of the film is proof to me that it couldn't have been "worst ever" material.

Movies like Man-Thing and Jonah Hex are more logical choices for worst comic book films. Those are the kinds of films that the GA don't even know exist. They came and went without notice, which is the true touch of death for a comic book adaptation. If it doesn't create any kind of buzz, therefore not making new fans, then it is truly a failure.

I forgot the Man-Thing existed.

Maybe WB is doing the right thing and launching their characters off of a Justice League movie. I do think that had Justice League: Mortal happened,the Flash would be more popular than Thor, Hulk or Captain America.