The Official Green Lantern Set Pic Thread

[echostation]

I'm only concerned that they may spend too much money on rendering a friggin costume and cut down the length and scope of the action scenes...

The same happened with both Iron Man films as each had like 180 million dollars but the action was incredibly lackluster in both

 

[Webhead2006]

i am sure budgeting being worked out right, with the right crew/producers/directors all that stuff could be fine. its different when we know we have folks on these production just blowing through cash willy nelly and all that.

 

[GoblinWhirlwind]

It should keep the same theme as the costume since they are both CGI generated. I would only use a traditional mask if if a CGI couldn't produce one and from what we have seen from films like POTC-2, 3, and Avatar, that should be no problem.

They should just get the team behind Davy Jones to do all character CGI from now on.

Hulk would actually look great if they did it.

 

[echostation]

maybe Rhythm and Hugh Hefner can try that again... this time they can do it with Halle Jordan

 

[Octoberist]

pttf on Rhythm and 'Hugh Hefner'..aka Rhythm and Hues.

 

[dnno1]

They should just get the team behind Davy Jones to do all character CGI from now on.

Hulk would actually look great if they did it.

I don't think the look was the problem with the Hulk films.

 

[Syncos]

I'm only concerned that they may spend too much money on rendering a friggin costume and cut down the length and scope of the action scenes...

The same happened with both Iron Man films as each had like 180 million dollars but the action was incredibly lackluster in both

Man. People demand too much action. I thought both Iron Man films had plenty of action. Especially the second one. With armor dogfights and such. Don't need an explosion every 2 seconds.

I don't think the look was the problem with the Hulk films.

Personally I didn't see any problems with TIH. Thought that movie was Incredible (no pun intended.)

 

[dnno1]

The cost of the CGI is already figured into the budget. Keep in mind the a film Like "Spider-Man 2" spent $65 million on visual effects (with CGI costumes) and came out only spending $200 millon on their budget. All CGI films like "Toy Story" and "Beowulf" were made for less ("Iron Man 1" was made for $140 million). "Green Lantern" is estimated at over $200 million. I don't see it getting that much more expensive based on the historical estimates for these kinds of films.

 

[batlovescatDC]

Yeah I don't think that budget is going to be a problem for this film. And with Martin Campbell, it's sure as hell not gonna be low on action.

 

[Kryptonian Warrior]

My friend said we were getting some Green Lantern footage before some movie in extra footage. True?

There is supposed to be a "Green Lantern Sneak Peek" on the Blu Ray for Clash of the Titans, and I'm sure that there will be footage shown at SDCC, in fact I can almost guarantee it.

 

[SpiderByte]

San Diego footage, then someone will upload a high-def trailer from the DVD when it comes out two days after ComiCon.

July will rule.

 

[Octoberist]

i doubt they would show any footage of Mark Strong as Sinestro, since he said (in an interview) that he might be shooting in July, rather than June. Which is rather late because I think the shoot finally will end in August or September.

I'm sure it's a pain to work around Strong's schedule due to his commitment to John Carter of Mars, but it's worth it.

 

[dnno1]

San Diego footage, then someone will upload a high-def trailer from the DVD when it comes out two days after ComiCon.

July will rule.

If they do it right, then you will probably find it at the Apple iTunes Movie Trailers in HD some time after that (and of course the WB website).

 

[marcvader]

Are you guy's expecting something being shown at CC? Has anyone in the know said as much?

 

[dnno1]

That's what **************.com reported.

 

[Dark Knight]

There will be plenty of time to get footage ready to be shown at SDCC.

WB's/DCE can't drop the ball on this one.

They need to generate BIG TIME buzz at SDCC for Green Lantern and they will!

 

[Dark Knight]

You're a little new to Blake Lively, eh?

Guess so.....since I never watched a chick show like Gossip Girl like some guys have in here I guess? LOL

 

[GoblinWhirlwind]

I don't think the look was the problem with the Hulk films.

Storywise, TIH was better than Ang Lee's, but I still thought it was just decent. The only time Hulk looked good was during the final battle, all other times the CGI was not good at all. Ang Lee's Hulk looked as real as you can get, especially during the desert scene.

Maybe if he ends up being the villain in Avengers, we'll finally get an awesome Hulk.

 

[Webhead2006]

YEa they will have plently of time to have something rendered in early cgi work for comic con and i cant wait to see what they will show. Also yea the whole budget vs cgi stuff i am sure they have it all worked out in the best way already. Plus campbell doesnt seem to be a guy to waste time or money on things.

 

[GoblinWhirlwind]

Yeah, I'd have faith in Campbell just from CR.

 

[echostation]

Syncos, I don't demand too much action... AT ALL actually... the damn fight between the drones vs Iron Man and War machine lasted a little over one minute... that's it, that's pretty pathetic

The Dark Knight's action scenes lasted longer and the entirety of the climax of Kick-Ass was longer than one minute and much more exhilirating than IM-2's lack luster action...

Asking for an action scene to last longer than one minute especially with what should have been done with the budget on IM 2 is not asking for too much, get real.

 

[Lone]

Storywise, TIH was better than Ang Lee's, but I still thought it was just decent. The only time Hulk looked good was during the final battle, all other times the CGI was not good at all. Ang Lee's Hulk looked as real as you can get, especially during the desert scene.

Agreed. I preferred the story of TIH and the Hulk character design but Ang Lee's had the better rendered Hulk which can still hold it's own against more recent CGI characters.

 

[Octoberist]

i just don't like Louis Letterier's directing style..

 

[Brian Braddock]

I'm only concerned that they may spend too much money on rendering a friggin costume and cut down the length and scope of the action scenes...

The same happened with both Iron Man films as each had like 180 million dollars but the action was incredibly lackluster in both

Man. People demand too much action. I thought both Iron Man films had plenty of action. Especially the second one. With armor dogfights and such. Don't need an explosion every 2 seconds.


Personally I didn't see any problems with TIH. Thought that movie was Incredible (no pun intended.)

Syncos, I don't demand too much action... AT ALL actually... the damn fight between the drones vs Iron Man and War machine lasted a little over one minute... that's it, that's pretty pathetic

The Dark Knight's action scenes lasted longer and the entirety of the climax of Kick-Ass was longer than one minute and much more exhilirating than IM-2's lack luster action...

Asking for an action scene to last longer than one minute especially with what should have been done with the budget on IM 2 is not asking for too much, get real.

I actually agree with Syncos here. I'm kind of surprised that the climactic action scenes in IM2 lasted as little as that as it seemed that they lasted a lot longer in the cinema. All I know is that I didnt come away with the feeling that I'd been short-changed in any way as the scenes where sheer quality.

I've seen longer action sequences in other films and been left totally wanting, so I guess it's a matter of quality over quantity?

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

well I definitley felt the shortness of the Vanko/IM/War Machine fight at the end. In retrospect though it doesn't bother me as the battle with the drones is included as part of the final climax, so I'll take it.