Thread Manager
Moderator
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2011
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 1
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]376941[/split]
the only thing keeping SR from having a sequel was the the cost to make.
How did they drop the ball on the evident JL movie?
Why couldn't they pull this off?
They still can. They have eternity to do it.
DoomsdayApex said:Like I said, me personally, I thought IM2 was not significantly better than GL, in any shape or form.
I never indicated otherwise. I said both suffered script issues, but Green Lantern's actors did a far better job than what was expected.
And I wouldn't praise Cheadle. Howard might have been the lesser actor but he had more chemistry (w/RDJ) and charisma for the role of Rhodey than Don did in IM2.
Nope. Both are on the same level. So far, Blake and Scarlett have had only one role that was considered (from what I've seen) performance-worthy. And if you claim that ScarJo did a far better in IM2 than Blake did in GL, then you're loco.
Your opinion is still among the minority and of course, its not wrong. Even if IM2 is far from a stellar movie, IM is clearly not a debased franchise after IM2. Non-comicbook reading people are still looking forward to the next IM, the actors are enthusiastic to do another round. GL as a franchise is tainted after GL. Admit it, your interest of watching the GL universe "inflates" what you perceive over the quality of GL. Unbiased people dont see the magic as they can see the flaw of GL instantly. They see GL is just another cartoon/comic turned for live action. Little substance, just cartoon drawing turned into living men.
If GL script turned out to be that bad (it was), then I pity the GL actors.
But better acting performance is better acting performance, bad script notwithstanding. Script is even somewhat unimportant in IM2 that RDJ acted some of his performances unscripted as he interpreted some of the scenes improptu.
Vicky Christina Barcelona and Lost in Translation is where Scarlett have shown that she could act. Where have Blake Lively shown she could act? The Town? She's actually channeling herself, when she's high on crack.
1. Green Lantern was heavily CGI and people are tired of that.
2. Green Lantern casting.
3. Heroes are only as interesting as their villains (thus Spiderman and Batman movies are easy compared to Aquaman, Flash, and Wonder Woman).
4. Superman Returns violated issue three when the character has powerful villains like Darkseid, Kalibak, and Doomsday.
5. Man of Steel once again has a boring villain.
1. Green Lantern was heavily CGI and people are tired of that.
2. Green Lantern casting.
3. Heroes are only as interesting as their villains (thus Spiderman and Batman movies are easy compared to Aquaman, Flash, and Wonder Woman).
4. Superman Returns violated issue three when the character has powerful villains like Darkseid, Kalibak, and Doomsday.
5. Man of Steel once again has a boring villain.
Yup, you're ungodly wrong.1. Green Lantern was heavily CGI and people are tired of that.
2. Green Lantern casting.
3. Heroes are only as interesting as their villains (thus Spiderman and Batman movies are easy compared to Aquaman, Flash, and Wonder Woman).
4. Superman Returns violated issue three when the character has powerful villains like Darkseid, Kalibak, and Doomsday.
5. Man of Steel once again has a boring villain.
1.) ...Then Avatar would have flopped, by your logic.
2.) The casting was fine.
5.) Says who? You? Zod is an interesting villain, and the perfect one for an origin story.