The Official Green Lantern Set Pic Thread

And did 3D help those movies from sucking? :huh:

First of all, these are horror films and operate on relatively low budgets. Take for example "Jaws 3D". On an $18 million production budget, it made over $87 million (a more than 480% return). "House of Wax" made $23 million on a $1 million budget (that's a 230% return). "Creature from the Black Lagoon" is considered a classic. In fact, most of the films I listed are still franchises today. Whether they sucked or not is irrelevant. The real point here is that history has proven that horror movies have been produced in 3D and that they are a fit for the genre.
 
yea will probably be awhile to we see hal in costume. They will probably do first in costume stuff in studio. Then maybe if its released while filming still is on going say in may. Maybe then more location stuff in costume.
 
True, but not this early in shooting. If it were in the next few weeks, maybe, but not this early.

I just realize they have completed their whole first week of shooting. AWESOME!
 
First of all, these are horror films and operate on relatively low budgets. Take for example "Jaws 3D". On an $18 million production budget, it made over $87 million (a more than 480% return). "House of Wax" made $23 million on a $1 million budget (that's a 230% return). "Creature from the Black Lagoon" is considered a classic. In fact, most of the films I listed are still franchises today. Whether they sucked or not is irrelevant. The real point here is that history has proven that horror movies have been produced in 3D and that they are a fit for the genre.

Creature is good I'll give it that, but the film is great without the 3D. 3D is still a gimmick that only works if used correctly. Something like Avatar that is shot in 3D and meant to be like that. 3D drives ticket prices up which makes the film earn more in a cheap way. Studios now are taking advantage of this. It's not right. Horror films don't need 3D. Maybe Ridley Scott can change my mind with the Alien prequel in 3D. But for now what I've seen, it's done nothing to benefit the film.
 
Creature is good I'll give it that, but the film is great without the 3D. 3D is still a gimmick that only works if used correctly. Something like Avatar that is shot in 3D and meant to be like that. 3D drives ticket prices up which makes the film earn more in a cheap way. Studios now are taking advantage of this. It's not right. Horror films don't need 3D. Maybe Ridley Scott can change my mind with the Alien prequel in 3D. But for now what I've seen, it's done nothing to benefit the film.

It might be a gimmik, but it is making money for Hollywood and the movie theater industry right now. The IMAX-3D experience is booming and may soon be available in the home and I would expect 3D to do the same. 3D has been a part of horror films since it's inception more than 50 years ago. I find it inappropriate to say that it didn't add anything to the experience when it was used.
 
now it makes sense..

I think the WB is taking their security thing a little too seriously (Ryan Reynolds wasn't wearing the GL suit or had the script on hand). I mean, there were a lot of set pics taken during TDK's production shoot in Chicago and while that had tight security, they were a bit more lenient about amateur photography (or fans got more creative about how to bypass it).

I guarantee that more set pics of GL will surface, just probably in the next few weeks. Maybe someone will get a good look at the production when they move to Madisonville's Lake Pontrictrain.
 
First of all, these are horror films and operate on relatively low budgets. Take for example "Jaws 3D". On an $18 million production budget, it made over $87 million (a more than 480% return). "House of Wax" made $23 million on a $1 million budget (that's a 230% return). "Creature from the Black Lagoon" is considered a classic. In fact, most of the films I listed are still franchises today. Whether they sucked or not is irrelevant. The real point here is that history has proven that horror movies have been produced in 3D and that they are a fit for the genre.

Jaws answers to me. I'm Aquaman.
 
yea will be cool for any set photos we get. or heck even once they move to studio shoots to have actors leaving the studio to go have dinner/go to their hotel or what not.
 
Good going with the photos so far.:up:

Here's two more not so exciting one's of Reynolds on set.

March 17, 2010...4:49 pm

A Spring Break Photo Contest
Today marks the launch of the Spring Break 2010 Photo Contest, and this is the first call for submissions.

The rules are simple. Take a few pictures. Send them by mail or e-mail to friends. Wait for their responses.

To inspire you, I’d like to offer a couple of examples.My friend, Tracy, is in New Orleans, evidently stalking Ryan Reynolds, who is filming The Green Lantern in the Crescent City. She snaps photos and e-mails them, taunting her friends who are not in New Orleans with her. She uses colorful and descriptive adjectives with each submission. These adjectives all apply to Ryan Reynolds. You can figure those out on your own.


The e-mail message that preceded this attachment went like this: "I know this isn't a great picture, but..." She is really selling herself short, don't you think? The always-giving Ryan Reynolds donated his time to this PSA, whose working title is "Do You Have Glaucoma?" If you don't see the blinding white light to the left, then you probably have glaucoma.


And this:


What's going on here? A photo of a camera screen? The faceless apparition to the right is Tracy's 10-year-old daughter. I think. If you look closely, you will see that Ryan Reynolds looks a little like a hostage. His eyes may even be darting. In the upper left corner is the sign of doom--that the camera battery may not make it through this photo shoot. Let's hope Tracy is packing some spare Duracells in her Levi's.
Source:http://amycates.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/a-spring-break-photo-contest/
 
in that last photo he does look like a hostage! Hahaha. he doesn't want to stick around for strange family photos.
 
In that family pic it kinda looks like his face is bruised up. Maybe fake bruises from the bar fight scene?
 
ryanreynolds.jpg


I was in New Orleans at Lucy’s Retired Surfer Bar on Tchoupitoulas and Girod, a couple of men were in there. One came over to ask us what to do on Saint Paddy’s Day and he had on a badge for The Green Lantern, he was an executive something another. I didn’t want to stare at his badge. LOL. They closed the bar down early because it was the bar manager’s birthday. So at about 1 AM we stumbled out of the bar and headed back down towards our hotel on Tchoupitoulas Street and we looked over to the right and there was the movie set. We stood outside with about five other people and in between re-setting the set for the action scene Ryan would come out and sign autographs and take pictures. It was definitely a great moment. He was super nice and laughed at a man who only had a 50.00 bill for him to sign. He laughed at that guy. We watched filming for about ten minutes before heading home because there was a light rain at the time.

http://www.onlocationvacations.com/...lantern-set-where-theyll-be-filming-tomorrow/
 
That's a telltale sign of a great actor. Going out amongst fans to meet and greet between takes instead of sitting on his ass or hiding. Major props to Reynolds.
 
I hope Green Lantern is not only a good film, but also does well at the box office.
 
great shot of ryan with that fan. Sucks today(monday) is a studio shoot date. We will probably not hear much what happened there.
 
great shot of ryan with that fan. Sucks today(monday) is a studio shoot date. We will probably not hear much what happened there.
 
he's been working out since 2006; super cut.

if you mean he's bigger, it's hard to say. To me, his face is thinner.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"