Green Lantern: Grading, Review, Discuss, Tracking, Sequel? - Page 14

MacLeod · June 20 2011, 06:53 PM

Captain Craig wrote:

paudemge wrote:

And as a side note, I don't like polls with so much granularity, I don't see the need for A+,A,A- for example.

It's standard. Both Yahoo! Movies and Box Office Mojo also use the +/- grading system as well. Sometimes some viewers are going to need that variance. If you don't, cool, but some might and that is why the option is there.

I would agree to a ceratin extend, don't see the need for an A+, but as for the rest I would tend to agree sometimes you need a larger range

For example I would have given X-Men: First Class

a B- or a 7/10 or 3.5stars

without a greater range it would have been

C as It didn't warrent a B.

JoeZhang · June 20 2011, 07:13 PM

RAMA wrote:

Trekker4747 wrote:

So, The Green Lantern's powers have no effect on yellow-colored objects, right?

So who wins in a fight between him and The Bride?

Nope, its simply a color for various emotional states or thought processes, yellow is fear, green is will, etc. The relative strength of each is defined by the mastery and strength of the user, though generally it appears will and fear are the strongest. Its no longer an impurity in the battery.

RAMA

So if I urinated at him with enough force, I could kill him?

davejames · June 20 2011, 07:58 PM

flemm wrote:

I don't think it is incredibly different. It's just not an especially effective take on the same basic formula.

Well yeah, obviously if someone just finds this superhero movie less effective than others, there's not much one can argue with there.

Part of me wants to believe it's simply fans' hatred for Reynolds and the CGI suit that's coloring their judgement of the movie... but then I remember that most of the critics (who don't give a crap one way or the other) hated it as well. So THAT theory's out the window. lol

exodus · June 20 2011, 07:59 PM

Timby wrote:

Admiral2 wrote:

-Okay, so the casting people couldn't find a single fat Black woman capable of playing Amanda Waller? Really? Did they look, or just hope purists wouldn't notice the weight loss?

Of all the complaints to have with a movie, "the black woman wasn't fat enough" has to be one of the silliest I've ever heard.

Amen!

Admiral Buzzkill · June 20 2011, 08:02 PM

davejames wrote:

Well yeah, obviously if someone just finds this superhero movie less effective than others, there's not much one can argue with there.

That's true in either case.

DarKush · June 20 2011, 08:06 PM

Dennis wrote:

DarKush wrote:

Dennis wrote:

The scripts for the Iron Man films are slapdash messes, and depend largely on Downey's remarkable talent and charisma for any shred of humanity - subtract him and there's not much to draw people in. There's a lot more going on in terms of recognizable human relationships and interaction in Green Lantern than in most superhero films. Thor is completely vapid in that regard, though Captain America looks promising.

Though I suppose a large percentage of the audience for these things is more interested in debating how far someone can throw a magic hammer than in why anyone would care.

Though the Iron Man movies did rely heavily on RDJ, I think the first movie's plot worked.

I didn't say anything about the plot. I suppose it worked; the plots to most movies do. Plot is also the least interesting aspect of film for most moviegoers and in most cases is the element that has the least bearing on a film's success.

If you're not talking about the plot in the scripts then what are you talking about about being slapdash in the scripts? The dialogue?

I disagree with you that the plot is the least interesting thing. For some people it might be, but you make it sound like its some certainty. And I would argue that a strong plot holds a film together and it can help it weather shaky acting and FX.

Captain Craig · June 20 2011, 08:24 PM

Sindatur wrote:

Captain Craig wrote:

Dennis wrote:

I didn't say anything about the plot(re: Iron Man). I suppose it worked; the plots to most movies do. Plot is also the least interesting aspect of film for most moviegoers and in most cases is the element that has the least bearing on a film's success.

I can't tell if in your continued defense of GL in your statements are meant to be ludicris or you just really think your opinion is carte blanche correct for a large vast majority.

Plot is the least interesting aspect? I have to give that a big ole

Character Development + Plot = Reason to Care

I, nor anyone is suggesting you change your mind about GL. You loved it and that is great. I liked Prince of Persia and despite scores hating on it I still stand by it as a fun film. I get it. It does seem at this point some rose colored glasses are still being worn.

I don't think it's entirely wrong to say that with Summer Popcorn flicks that great Action and 'splosions by themselves makes filling seats easier than good characterization and plot without the great 'splosions and action

Your adding qualifers that he didn't, "Summer Popcorn flick". Sure in that case a movie like Transformers, Pirates or Fast 5 might apply but still those are even a minority of cases for Summer films unless your an animated film.

Super 8, Thor and X-men have done well critically and commercially cause the characters are something to care about. A plot worth investing in, GL is all over the place and too shallow for most of it's run time that purty 'splosions just don't cover up.

Captain Craig · June 20 2011, 08:27 PM

Timby wrote:

Admiral2 wrote:

-Okay, so the casting people couldn't find a single fat Black woman capable of playing Amanda Waller? Really? Did they look, or just hope purists wouldn't notice the weight loss?

Of all the complaints to have with a movie, "the black woman wasn't fat enough" has to be one of the silliest I've ever heard.

Did someone actually make that comment here? I missed it but would

at that. That poster only inflates the "comic book guy" stereotype as portrayed on The Simpsons. Complaining about Amander Waller's girth is just stupid.

Sindatur · June 20 2011, 08:40 PM

Captain Craig wrote:

Sindatur wrote:

Captain Craig wrote:

I can't tell if in your continued defense of GL in your statements are meant to be ludicris or you just really think your opinion is carte blanche correct for a large vast majority.

Plot is the least interesting aspect? I have to give that a big ole

Character Development + Plot = Reason to Care

I, nor anyone is suggesting you change your mind about GL. You loved it and that is great. I liked Prince of Persia and despite scores hating on it I still stand by it as a fun film. I get it. It does seem at this point some rose colored glasses are still being worn.

I don't think it's entirely wrong to say that with Summer Popcorn flicks that great Action and 'splosions by themselves makes filling seats easier than good characterization and plot without the great 'splosions and action

Your adding qualifers that he didn't, "Summer Popcorn flick". Sure in that case a movie like Transformers, Pirates or Fast 5 might apply but still those are even a minority of cases for Summer films unless your an animated film.

Super 8, Thor and X-men have done well critically and commercially cause the characters are something to care about. A plot worth investing in, GL is all over the place and too shallow for most of it's run time that purty 'splosions just don't cover up.

I don't think Summer Popcorn Flick is an added qualifier, since we're in a Green Lantern Thread, discussing Green Lantern, which is a Summer Popcorn Flick.

With regards to Transformers, I gotta say there's nothing to that movie, but, the special effects. I never understood the Transformers Craze, thought they were stupid characters and stupid toys, so, when I watched it this weekend, I wasn't watching it through nostalgia. I was bored senseless watching it, and I've never heard anyone say anything positive about plot of character development in it, it seems to be pretty accepted, that it's a Special Effects eyegasm, and nothing more.

With regards to Green lantern, I haven't seen it yet, I'll be watching it when it's released on DVD (Or On Demand), so, I can't speak to the actual content of the movie, I'm hoping, I'll be one of the few who can actually enjoy it. I've never been a major comic book buff, but, I was always intrigued by the Character Green Lantern, so, I've been looking forward to it.

I think Thor and Pirates wouldn't have done so well, if they were stronger on story and character and really weak on effects, though. The effects is what drew people in, a great story was/would've been icing on the cake.

Captain Craig wrote:

Timby wrote:

Admiral2 wrote:

-Okay, so the casting people couldn't find a single fat Black woman capable of playing Amanda Waller? Really? Did they look, or just hope purists wouldn't notice the weight loss?

Of all the complaints to have with a movie, "the black woman wasn't fat enough" has to be one of the silliest I've ever heard.

Did someone actually make that comment here? I missed it but would

at that. That poster only inflates the "comic book guy" stereotype as portrayed on The Simpsons. Complaining about Amander Waller's girth is just stupid.

Eh, The Last Airbender got quite a bit wrong, but, one of the things that irritated me most was that Iroh was a skinny white dude (That and the butchering of all the pronounciations)

Sindatur · June 20 2011, 08:43 PM

Oops, double post

Admiral Buzzkill · June 20 2011, 09:03 PM

Actuals for the weekend were slightly over 53 million. Warners' stock, surprisingly, is up a bit today.

Captain Craig · June 20 2011, 09:35 PM

Dennis wrote:

Actuals for the weekend were slightly over 53 million. Warners' stock, surprisingly, is up a bit today.

Is there commentary on that from an industry trade or is it just coincidence?

davejames · June 20 2011, 10:34 PM

Dennis wrote:

Actuals for the weekend were slightly over 53 million. Warners' stock, surprisingly, is up a bit today.

I know it's not the giant, franchise-starting hit Warner's was hoping for (and clearly it's not enough for a sequel)... but frankly 53 mil for a Green Lantern movie still seems pretty good to me.

It was probably wishful thinking to expect much more from a character like this.

DarKush · June 20 2011, 11:37 PM

I think WB/DC need to get out there and start spinning this. It underperformed, yet it seems like the media consensus is it bombed. It didn't bomb. It was the number one film of the weekend. That's not a bad start for a relatively unknown comic book character. Not great, but not horrible either, and for DC one of the better launches of a non-Batman/non-Superman character. Put this in comparison to Jonah Hex of this time last year. Or what about The Spirit? The Losers?

Dream · June 20 2011, 11:57 PM

That's a disappointing opening weekend for GL. No way to spin this. I think the biggest problem is the 200 million budget for GL, there is no reason for it being that big. You can make a decent blockbuster for much cheaper.

Thor cost 150 million and so far done 430 million worldwide, which means there is a great chance for a sequel. The good thing about Marvel is that they are smart about keeping costs down.

View Poll Results: How would you grade Green Lantern?
A+	5	3.52%
A	7	4.93%
A-	11	7.75%
B+	20	14.08%
B	18	12.68%
B-	23	16.20%
C+	10	7.04%
C	15	10.56%
C-	13	9.15%
D+	4	2.82%
D	3	2.11%
D-	3	2.11%
F	10	7.04%
Voters: 142. You may not vote on this poll

June 20 2011, 08:43 PM	#205
Sindatur Rear Admiral Location: Sacramento, CA	Re: Green Lantern: Grading, Review, Discuss, Tracking, Sequel? Oops, double post __________________ One Day I hope to be the Man my Cat thinks I am Where are we going? And why are we in this Handbasket?

June 20 2011, 09:03 PM	#206
Admiral Buzzkill The Man Location: Defying Gravity	Re: Green Lantern: Grading, Review, Discuss, Tracking, Sequel? Actuals for the weekend were slightly over 53 million. Warners' stock, surprisingly, is up a bit today. __________________ I had steak and a loaded baked potato for dinner on Sunday. As a steak I enjoyed it a lot, but as macaroni and cheese I thought it was disappointing.

June 20 2011, 11:37 PM	#209
DarKush Rear Admiral	Re: Green Lantern: Grading, Review, Discuss, Tracking, Sequel? I think WB/DC need to get out there and start spinning this. It underperformed, yet it seems like the media consensus is it bombed. It didn't bomb. It was the number one film of the weekend. That's not a bad start for a relatively unknown comic book character. Not great, but not horrible either, and for DC one of the better launches of a non-Batman/non-Superman character. Put this in comparison to Jonah Hex of this time last year. Or what about The Spirit? The Losers?

June 20 2011, 11:57 PM	#210
Dream Admiral	Re: Green Lantern: Grading, Review, Discuss, Tracking, Sequel? That's a disappointing opening weekend for GL. No way to spin this. I think the biggest problem is the 200 million budget for GL, there is no reason for it being that big. You can make a decent blockbuster for much cheaper. Thor cost 150 million and so far done 430 million worldwide, which means there is a great chance for a sequel. The good thing about Marvel is that they are smart about keeping costs down. __________________ TWoP Forums .

STAR TREK

CSI

ABOUT US