Would you see it again if had 120 minutes in duration?

[Nitrobot]

I think that if the WB could rerelease the movie over 15 minutes, with new footage and other extended, perhaps the film could reverse the weak box office and the bad impression that has been left. What do you think?

 

[dark_b]

the other 100 minutes would stay the same right?

 

[HighFivingMF]

I'd see it again regardless.

 

[Poni_Boy]

I think that if the WB could rerelease the movie over 15 minutes, with new footage and other extended, perhaps the film could reverse the weak box office and the bad impression that has been left. What do you think?

Hell no. That's like tossing a few more shovels of **** onto the pile hoping to make it smell better.

And what 15 minutes would they add? More Hal/Carol? More Hector/Hal? More Hector/Senator? Pointless.

The movie needs to be sent back to the editing room with a grant for extra effects $. Then a re-cut/extended version would make sense.

 

[moviedoors]

Nope. Wouldn't go.

 

[Doc Phosphorus]

"Would you let me punch you again if this time I punch you harder?"

 

[DaveMoral]

I'd see it again if my financial situation allowed for it. As it is the summer is so packed with stuff I either really want to see(Cap and maybe Conan, Thor and GL once already) or stuff I need to take my son to(Cars 2 and Kung Fu Panda 2 earlier) I have to be reserved with my theater expenditure.

Would I like to see a new edit that shuffles some things around so they flow better and some extended scenes on Oa? Hell yes. And I would gladly buy the Blu-Ray 6 months after I bought the theatrical release Blu-Ray too.

 

[Ponyboy]

I think that if the WB could rerelease the movie over 15 minutes, with new footage and other extended, perhaps the film could reverse the weak box office and the bad impression that has been left. What do you think?

I would see it again but 15 more minutes can never save a bad movie.

 

[RoughNTumble]

the problem with this movie is that it's boring--nothing dramatically compelling ever happens. It was one of the longest 1hr 45min experiences I've ever had in a theater. When I got out, I swore it was longer than the dark knight. 15 more minutes of hal/carol/hector and you'd need to put me on suicide watch afterwards.

 

[cherokeesam]

Needs longer training sequences on Oa; longer one-on-one interactions between Hal and Kilowog, Tomar-Re, and Sinestro; an introductory "noob shakedown" mission to give Hal his first taste of space cop-dom; and longer fight sequences --- especially the blink-and-you-miss-it Sinestro 'n' friends vs. Parallax fight and the Hal vs. Parallax climax.

 

[WarBlade]

I didn't get paid to watch that one, but I wound up watching it anyway. If I had to sit through another 2 hours of it, somebody had better be paying for it.

 

[Octoberist]

I hate to say this..but no I would not..

 

[arman200]

If that was the only change? No.

 

[Sgt.Pepper]

Adding 15 minutes more to this movie would be useless, it's still terrible. To answer the OP's question; no, I wouldn't.

 

[Webhead38]

I've seen the film three times. I don't see the gripe people have with it. Especially since they can sit through a moronic Lucas production more than one time. Green Lantern looks Oscar worthy in comparison. I would love to see an extended cut.

 

[sethypants]

yes!!!!

 

[BlueLantern]

The film doesn't just need to be longer, it needs to be recut and rearranged. The scenes were all over the place.

Even if there isn't more Oa, there needs to be more coherency in the flow of the film.

 

[pattern40]

My reason why I think the green lantern flopped:

#1. Weird optical machine gun. Yes if you are looking to market the movie to video gamers. No for everyone else.

#2. You can't related to something that is not set on Earth. Star Wars got away with it, but that is about it. Imagine how much drastically the box office figures would have improved had most of the whole movie took place on Earth (aka begin with Krypton then move to Metropolis for the rest of film)...

 

[Liam_H]

My reason why I think the green lantern flopped:

#1. Weird optical machine gun. Yes if you are looking to market the movie to video gamers. No for everyone else.

#2. You can't related to something that is not set on Earth. Star Wars got away with it, but that is about it. Imagine how much drastically the box office figures would have improved had most of the whole movie took place on Earth (aka begin with Krypton then move to Metropolis for the rest of film)...

#1 I'm not sure if your being sarcastic or not but I'll assume you're not. This is basically a GL powers, no other way to get around it.

#2 This is not true, we can still relate to Hal Jordan because he's human. They just did such a poor job of world building with Oa and the rest of the GLC that it seemed pretty insignificant. Best parts of the movie was when he was on Oa.

 

[HighFivingMF]

#2. You can't related to something that is not set on Earth. Star Wars got away with it, but that is about it. Imagine how much drastically the box office figures would have improved had most of the whole movie took place on Earth (aka begin with Krypton then move to Metropolis for the rest of film)...

Really?

 

[pattern40]

Really?

Avatar was set on an "alternate Earth world" mostly populated by alien human beings...

Machine gun is cheap. Anybody can pull the trigger and declare themselve a "superhero". On the other hand, imagine how much more captivating for GL's powers to summon an optical sword (like a light saber, but GL-style)...


Green Lantern is to the movie what those pretend "Batmen" with the automatics were in The Dark Kngiht...

 

[Liam_H]

Avatar was set on an "alternate Earth world" mostly populated by alien human beings...

Machine gun is cheap. Anybody can pull the trigger and declare themselve a "superhero". On the other hand, imagine how much more captivating for GL's powers to summon an optical sword (like a light saber, but GL-style)...


Green Lantern is to the movie what those pretend "Batmen" with the automatics were in The Dark Kngiht...

But the point of that scene was that he was training, he barely started using his powers. All he did was come up with the first offensive type weapon that sprung to his mind, a gun. Acted on instinct. He's human after all, he's gonna come up with Earth based weapons and a gun is the most common one.

Even Sinestro mocks him for being so uncreative when he chose a sword. "A sword? how human..." shows that Hal is still thinking inside the box which is expected since he just started training. Later on in the movie he's a bit more inventive but they never really embraced what the ring can really do.

 

[pattern40]

They didn't have to use the machine gun pose to promote the movie. That pic ruined the whole box office figure. A sword? Lol, imagine in an alternate universe where the screenwriters wrote:

"A sword? how human... "  
GL then morphs the Victorian sword into a Samurai sword and places it across Sinestro's throat...  "How about this one then?"
And the Sinestro got all pissed off and started dueling with GL, shredding nearby objects into pieces with the rasor sharp blades....

 

[Liam_H]

They didn't have to use the machine gun pose to promote the movie. That pic ruined the whole box office figure. A sword? Lol, imagine in an alternate universe where the screenwriters wrote:

"A sword? how human... "  
GL then morphs the Victorian sword into a Samurai sword and places it across Sinestro's throat...  "How about this one then?"
And the Sinestro got all pissed off and started dueling with GL, shredding nearby objects into pieces with the rasor sharp blades....

The machine gun was used in the teaser because that was what they had finished at the time. And that shot did not ruin the movie, poor word of mouth due to a poor movie did. The movie had to be really good to sell the concept the GA found silly.

The training sequence was the most interesting part of the movie; there are much greater flaws to complain about than what constructs he came up with.

 

[dnno1]

I think that if the WB could rerelease the movie over 15 minutes, with new footage and other extended, perhaps the film could reverse the weak box office and the bad impression that has been left. What do you think?

It wouldn't have made any difference. There was a lack of intrest in the character and critics called the idea silly. What they really needed to do was change the stigma of the character.