Green Lantern: Grading, Review, Discuss, Tracking, Sequel?

[Mr Light]

Speaking as a huge fan of the comics, I was very disappointed. It wasn't terrible, but it was a pretty lame adaptation, reminding me of Last Airbender- well, not that bad

Hal Jordan is the ultimate cocky badass so seeing him as a self-doubting wuss really, really grated on my nerves. Hector Hammond is far and away the silliest and lamest villain in the GL mythos so why they decided to use him as the first movie villain is beyond me

The CGI (I saw it in 2D) was generally terrible and fake. Was it really necessary to CGI Hal's uniform at all times? It looked so fake. Just put a damn practical costume on him for crissakes. I wonder how many millions of dollars they wasted doing that... Parallax looked goofy as well. His "face" looked like some lame generic brand Halloween mask, and his full form looked like a massive cloud of brown turds sliding around. The Guardians didn't look that hot either. I'm not crazy with their redesign of Oa either but I'll admit it didn't look fake or anything.

I don't know why they used this story instead of something actually from the comics. "Secret Origin" would have been a workable storyline. A story that actually built on the relationship between Hal and Sinestro, showing them working together and not just sharing a couple scenes together. And they missed that classic line where Sinestro first meets him and explains how wonderful he is and how everyone follows his orders and Hal casually says "yeah, that's not gonna happen with me", something like that.

Maybe I blanked out for a moment there but someone explain something to me. The GLC is at war with Parallax. They sent a strike team to take him out but they fail. They're building a yellow ring to use against it. Hal declares he's going to fight Parallax himself. Nobody goes to help him. But once he's won, they all show up to save his butt. So were they literally just squatting outside the solar system watching him get killed and doing nothing? Pretty brave, Sinestro.

But I think the worst thing about the movie is that it was boring. Hardly anything happens until the ending. But I say the same thing about the Spider-Man movies and everybody loves those :-p

[DWF]

I rather liked the movie it had the nice light tone of the Donnor Superman movies instead of the darker one set in the Nolan Batman movies. Viaully it's great to look at Mark Strong was excellent as Sinestro, Ryan Renyolds was a bit smug though as Hal Jordan most of the time and I Like Blake Lively as Carol Ferris.

[Agent Richard07]

Mr Light wrote:

---

Was it really necessary to CGI Hal's uniform at all times? It looked so fake. Just put a damn practical costume on him for crissakes. I wonder how many millions of dollars they wasted doing that...

I thought it looked fantastic. It didn't look fake to me, it looked like another ring construct, which it was. I think they made the right decision in making it CGI. Actually, at times, I wondered if they were using a latex costume since parts of the outfit did look like real material in a few scenes.

[Gep Malakai]

Behold! The real reason for the all-CG uniform!

[Captain Craig]

Admiral_Young wrote:

---

Which was like I said maybe one or two a year. I think we're getting ahead of ourselves here though. GL is still on track for 60 million. I didn't expect more than 70 or 80 I think. It has another weekend to go before Dark of the Moon eats everything up.

Not anymore it isn't. Not after that Saturday drop.
The NEW weekend estimate has been down graded from $55m to $53m

As for the other question, why the drop? A number of factors I'd wager: Those who were eager did rush out, I point to the evidence of it's midnight showings actually topping Thor by $100K. Also, Joe Q moviegoer who may have been on the fence and if he uses RottenTomatoes he said, let me ask my friend who was eager for this. That kicks in WOM, he checks his FB page and no one is saying anything too great about it. In the 21st century of social media WOM can kick in fast. The Hangover 2 increased good on it's Saturday and Twitter/FB tracking showed heavily skewed positive WOM. GL ratio on Twitter was nearly flat. Something like 320 positive mentions on Friday to 280 Negative.

[JoeZhang]

C.E. Evans wrote:

---

^^^
That could spell trouble for future comic book movies. If general audiences become more like comic book fans, then it's all over...

I think a more specific point for WB will be made - the various political factions with the organisation will already be talking their favourite media sources with information about what wrong - the marketing guys are already at it, saying that they had the film too late to do anything with. I think what's going to come out of this is a narrative that the comic guys (specifically Johns) had too much control and in future more control needs to rest with the movie guys "who know what they are doing".

That's the sort of story I expect to see floating this week (the comic guys will more tell it the other way).

I don't think there will be much of a wider impact than that.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Saw this again in 3D, which is what I prefer. Liked it even better the second time.

[DarKush]

JD wrote:

---

Which sucks, because Super Max sounded really cool, and I would love to see them go back to it.

Hey, it's just my opinion. The idea for Super Max does sound cool, though I think it might work better in comic book form. I don't see it as a good origin film, or introduction to Green Arrow. Then again, because it isn't a standard origin film it might seem more fresh.

If Green Lantern is having some name recognition issues, and he's been plastered all over the comic book reading world for the last several years, and he's been around for decades and still hasn't broken through to the public consciousness until this film (with the possible exception of John Stewart from JL/JLU), I can only imagine how the suits would consider Green Arrow. Arrow's been around just as long as Green Lantern, roughly speaking, and is even lesser known, and without the cool, gee whiz special powers and intergalactic backstory that was ripe for a franchise. Smallville is the one thing that Green Arrow has going for him in terms of the mainstream, but how much support is there really for a Green Arrow film, with or without Justin Hartley?

I would love to see something based on Green Arrow: Year One, followed by the Long Bow Hunters, but Green Arrow is an even riskier proposition than Wonder Woman or Flash. Perhaps if they made a low budget, hardcore Arrow, grindhouse style, that might work, but I don't think that's DC's aim right now. I think they want bigger franchises.

[Samurai8472]

Dream wrote:

---

An absolutely awful Saturday for GL. Looks like there will probably be no sequel.

http://www.deadline.com/2011/06/gree...35m-midnights/

At least we will always have GL: First Flight.

Well look forward to alot more Batman movies in the next 10 years


Reposting

Variety is reporting WBs is expecting a 55-60 million dollar opening.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...DailyHeadlines
.

SATURDAY PM/SUNDAY AM, 4TH UPDATE: Warner Bros' Green Lantern ($21.6M Friday, dropping -21% for $17.1M Saturday, and only a $53M weekend

Well that's it then. I guess WB will blame bad word of mouth at Comic Con for this >_>

[Dream]

I repeat, at least we will always have Green Lantern: First Flight.

For those that haven't seen First Flight, check it out! It is very good.

[T'Baio]

I expect people will be dropping in on this and calling it a massive financial fail like they did with X-Men: First Class?

[Timby]

T'Baio wrote:

---

I expect people will be dropping in on this and calling it a massive financial fail like they did with X-Men: First Class?

Well, it did have an announced budget of $200 million (which doesn't factor in the added money from all the visual effects work that had to be offloaded to other studios in the last month and a half to meet the release date) and a marketing budget of $150 million. It's not a bomb (yet), but it isn't setting the world on fire.

[Dream]

T'Baio wrote:

---

I expect people will be dropping in on this and calling it a massive financial fail like they did with X-Men: First Class?

GL cost much more to make than FC, so it is going to be a bigger disappointment than FC. I doubt there will be a sequel now for GL.

[davejames]

Admiral_Young wrote:

---

I'm wondering if the negative reviews aren't keeping people away. Or other films currently out as alternatives.

I think it all comes down to the fact the marketing never convinced people that Green Lantern was a character WORTH seeing a movie about. The emphasis was all on the CGI and the weird aliens and the green videogame world, and not on why GL is such a cool and interesting character.

At least with Thor, they kinda played up the mystery of who this character was a bit.

[Samurai8472]

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/ente...-penguins.html

The glow of the "Green Lantern" was dimmer than Warner Bros. was hoping it would be at the box office this weekend. The film, one of the most expensive movies to be released this year, collected a studio-estimated $52.7 million, a figure below even Warner Bros.' modest expectations.

Even the expectation of 55 million was out of reach.

So I guess people will be pointing out the "#1 at boxoffice" but in reality it's not overall that great.