The Official Green Lantern Review Thread - Part 3

[Chewy]

It made basically the same amount as Thor and X-Men at midnight. It had 3D which X-Men didn't and a June release date (more kids out of school) which Thor didn't.

 

[Anno_Domini]

For the last time, Spider 1 and 2 had good reviews. Even if you hated the films you can't deny that they had good reviews and audience support. Comparing them to GL in that regard is ridiculous!

Comparing the ratings? No, that's stupid. But comparing the chessy factors is something that should be obvious. I felt like GL was directed towards kids, and I always felt that with Raimi's trilogy.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Again, the budget WAS NOT $300m. Marketing is another animal and it's never mentioned with other films. I guess we should start by saying XFC is a huge failure because that cost $275m with Marketing costs.

Again, I said nothing about the budget. But here's the link since you don't believe me - http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl..._300_million_martin_campbell_not_signed_for/#

You can't just write-off the marketing costs when it doesn't suit your argument because I guarantee the execs aren't.

 

[K'Prime]

For the last time, Spider 1 and 2 had good reviews. Even if you hated the films you can't deny that they had good reviews and audience support. Comparing them to GL in that regard is ridiculous!

Call me with the Spider-Man comparasions when GL gets 88 and 93% repectively to agree that the movie is good or great and it has word of mouth and grossing 404 and 374mil respectively.

almost blasphemy if you ask me

 

[The Morningstar]

How do we know how much money they spent on Marketing for Thor and XFC?

I know XFC was around $275m, Thor has to be close to that as well.

How do you know that? XFC production budget was around 120 million. There is no way on gods green earth it's marketing costs are 150 million. There is just no chance of that.

Green Lanterns though? Yea, it's been spammed all over the place, to the point where it reeks of desperation (officially licensed COLOSTOMY BAGS! OH YEA!). I don't think i've ever seen a marketing blitz like Green Lanterns.

 

[Chewy]

How do we know how much money they spent on Marketing for Thor and XFC?

I know XFC was around $275m, Thor has to be close to that as well.

No way.

Thor was probably ~250M w/ marketing, X-Men ~225M.

There's a reason GL's 100M+ marketing budget is viewed as large by those in the industry.

 

[Milkman95]

How do you know that? XFC production budget was around 120 million. There is no way on gods green earth it's marketing costs are 150 million. There is just no chance of that.

Green Lanterns though? Yea, it's been spammed all over the place, to the point where it reeks of desperation (officially licensed COLOSTOMY BAGS! OH YEA!). I don't think i've ever seen a marketing blitz like Green Lanterns.

XFC budget was $160m, and to spend $115m in marketing can happen very quickly, and it did in this case.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Comparing the ratings? No, that's stupid. But comparing the chessy factors is something that should be obvious. I felt like GL was directed towards kids, and I always felt that with Raimi's trilogy.

You don't have a response to my point. You are letting your opinion of Raimi's film cloud your judgement.

Also Thor felt like a kids movie to me, so the f**k what?

 

[dark_b]

It shows me just how disorganized this production may have been, seriously any WB exec who thinks the marketing for this film was consistent is kidding themselves.

making a summer blockbuster is very hard. very complex. there is a lot of money in the game. a lot of people working on big things. i am no expert.

but for the love of god. Cambel was hired in 2009. they filmed it in 2010. we are now 2011. how could they not be prepared for a movie of this scale after all this years? there is no excuse for a rushed production. i can not accept in 2011 mistakes like this.

 

[Anno_Domini]

You don't have a response to my point.

I thought you were making that response at first towards me because I mentioned Raimi's films. I mean, I can see your point to compare the ratings, but I don't think we should just not compare Raimi's films at all. There is a decent comparison between at least the first film and GL.

 

[Denny67]

Again, I said nothing about the budget. But here's the link since you don't believe me - http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl..._300_million_martin_campbell_not_signed_for/#

You can't just write-off the marketing costs when it doesn't suit your argument because I guarantee the execs aren't.

A blog?

 

[Longshot777]

Going to see it tomorrow.


Which is better THIS FILM or the animated Film Green Lantern First Flight???

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Please...do tell. I went in, honestly expecting to hate this movie and found myself very entertained. Isn't that the point? As I said before. The movie had flaws but the good far outweighed the bad.

I don't need any convincing, I'm already planning on seeing it. I don't turn on a movie just because the critics don't like it. But telling people "It's even better than Ghost Rider!" isn't doing GL any favors and makes you sound like you're in denial. But I'm glad you had a good time, I expect I will as well sinbce I liked those other movies you mentioned.

Again, though, it doesn't change the fact that GL should have aspired to something better.

 

[Primal Slayer]

Did anyone elses theatre start flashing the GL symbol towards the end of the movie?

 

[The Morningstar]

XFC budget was $160m, and to spend $115m in marketing can happen very quickly, and it did in this case.

Where is it written that XFC budget was 160 million?

What i've read it was around 140 million, BEFORE tax discounts. After discounts it's around 120 million.

And if First Class' marketing campaign cost 115 million, GLs must have cost 200 million. It DWARFS First Class and Thor's marketing. It dwarfs any movies marketing ever.

 

[Quetzal]

How do we know how much money they spent on Marketing for Thor and XFC?

I know XFC was around $275m, Thor has to be close to that as well.

Not sure about Thor, but XFC was ~ 150-170...

Seriously, loling at your comments

 

[Chewy]

Going to see it tomorrow.


Which is better THIS FILM or the animated Film Green Lantern First Flight???

First Flight

 

[The Morningstar]

A blog?

The Playlist is actually a well respected and reliable hollywood news blog.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Which is better THIS FILM or the animated Film Green Lantern First Flight???

That's a tough choice. Actually, the best form of a film to incorporate GL, imo, would be Justice League: The Final Frontier.

Did anyone elses theatre start flashing the GL symbol towards the end of the movie?

Nope...that's weird, haha. Like...a GL rave or something?

 

[Whiskey Tango]

A blog?

Here, you can sneer at the NY Times instead.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/movies/ryan-reynolds-stars-in-green-lantern.html?_r=1&ref=movies

 

[FreeRadical]

This is the most interesting part of the article to me.

I remember when X-Men The Last Stand did the same by marketing the other mutants like Cyclops, Angel and Rogue in their uniforms, even though they were hardly in the film.

The marketing of Green Lantern in the UK is crazy, every bus, bus shelter and bill board seems to have Ryan Reynolds staring at us
I thought the marketing of Spider-Man was crazy, Green Lantern's marketing is close to the insanity of The Phantom Menace!

 

[Karelia]

Meant the scene "We go looking for trouble" wasn't in the movie, not "Not bad huh"

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I know the new defense of GL now and I'm going to try to ignore it. "But those Raimi movies that I either dislike or kinda liked but not loved was just like GL."

Bringing up Raimi's films is just an excuse to bash his films to make GL look better. Compare it to a recent film like Thor and I will start listening.

 

[Primal Slayer]

Nope...that's weird, haha. Like...a GL rave or something?

lol no they just started flashing the symbol on the ceiling for a couple of seconds every 5 mins or so.

 

[Chewy]

I know the new defense of GL now and I'm going to try to ignore it. "But those Raimi movies that I either dislike or kinda liked but not loved was just like GL."

Bringing up Raimi's films is just an excuse to bash his films to make GL look better. Compare it to a recent film like Thor and I will start listening.

But that's just an excuse to bash Thor to try to make GL look better