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

[TemporalFlux]

Skywalker wrote:

---

We know who they were, but the movie never showed us why Tomar-Re and Kilowog would break ranks and chase after Hal, because Hal never spent enough time around either character to really establish any sort of friendship.

In my mind, it wouldn't be so much an issue of friendship; it would be a statement of integrity as Tomar and Kilowog feel that abandoning anyone to their death is not the Corps they signed up for. Whether it be a person, a planet or a galaxy, the Lanterns keep fighting to the end. Up until that point, the civilizations that had died were because the Lanterns either couldn't get there in time or couldn't stop it despite attempting to; it wasn't until Earth that the Lanterns were being asked to just stand by and watch the planet die as an acceptable loss.

That's what we're missing with the scene I talked about. Without that scene, we're just jumping to "Oh, these were the other characters that talked to Hal, so that must it." I think the characters would have acted the same way even if it was someone else; I think it was a defining moment in the characters of Tomar, Kilowog and Sinestro. It laid the groundwork of why Tomar, Kilowog and Hal could be good friends; they all thought the same way.

Again, that's all speculation. Instead of the above, we got cardboard cut-outs that showed up to rescue Hal apparently just because they happened to talk to him earlier in the movie.

[Admiral_Young]

I think the development of the characters we were supposed to relate and become attached to as audience members got sacrificed at the expense of the ambitious nature of the overall plot and even the sub-plot with Hector. There wasn't really enough time in the film to have Hal interact with the Lanterns that he's supposed. Perhaps that is another thing that will be fixed in a potential sequel. Sinestro was well played by Mark Strong but I still feel like he didn't spend enough time with Hal. "First Flight" did a wonderful job even in a relatively short time focusing on their dynamic. I was thinking the live action film would be something similar.

[Guy Gardener]

I just finished watching Ryan in "The Nines" and he was fricking fantastic.

Green Lantern probably had a wonderful five hour script at some point but then they had to to slash the fucker in half anfd half againtill it barely made any sense.

If the movie bombs enough to warrant no sequel and the DVD comes out, I wonder how honest the commentaries will be? If they know the well is dry maybe they can talk about the short comings and suckiness with impunity, but then we've seen what happens to even the worlds most beautiful woman if she calls Michael Bay "Hitler".

[Admiral_Young]

I wonder if there will be commentaries on the DVD. That seems to be a hit and miss feature on DVD's now.

[Captain Craig]

The movie is already making it into the 'Flop' lists.

How many flops get direct sequels again?

The WB was blowing smoke, it's not getting a direct sequel folks.
It's sad. We all deserved better but WB/GJohns blew it.

The movie couldn't even hit $105m domestic over a long weekend in it's 3rd weekend. It's US total is now $103.6m

I seriously have to question if $120m domestic is still in play.

[Gep Malakai]

And in other news, the Transformers sequel made more in five days than Green Lantern in its entire run.

Remember, the audience is always right!

[MacLeod]

It's even worse when you see it's international takings, US$33.3m. At this rate it might be lucky to make it US$200m worldwide.

[davejames]

Oh well. A sequel would have been nice, but honestly I'm pretty content with the one movie we did get.

It's not a situation like SR where it felt like the story was just getting started and we never really got to see Supes cut loose and kick some ass.

[Admiral_Young]

The "Superman Returns" situation is quite different since Bryan Singer had moved on to film "Valkyrie" and really never got a green light from Warner Bros regarding a sequel. There were plans for one and Singer has since revealed what those plans would have been. Warner Bros sat on the franchise after Returns and allowed Brandon Routh's contract to run out (on purpose is my own personal theory). If things had stayed on schedule and a Returns sequel actually happened it would have come out probably sometime in the summer of 2009.

I will concede that the box office performance right now isn't doing a good job of convincing anyone that there will be a "Green Lantern" sequel. Perhaps DC Ent and Warner Bros are awaiting for possible DVD sales. We know studios factor those into their decisions.

[Donald Draper]

I been a lifelong fan of DC Comics. But never particularly of Green Lantern in any incarnation. But when this was announced I had certain curiosity at another DC character finally being made in a film.

But nothing about it has looked good to me at all. From the casting to the design. Also there is this irritating pattern they are following of Marvel's of needing to present the most current changes in the comics to the origin. Parallax for example. Which has not yet shown it will survive the test of time.

So I decided not to see this at all. Now make no mistake, I have no delusions that my choice to not purchase a single ticket will affect the overall box office of this film. Its just a personal choice. Building over many years of seeing years of crappy superhero films, that are seemingly being churned about like sausage. Which I kept on seeing out of curiosity.

[davejames]

Admiral_Young wrote:

---

The "Superman Returns" situation is quite different since Bryan Singer had moved on to film "Valkyrie" and really never got a green light from Warner Bros regarding a sequel. There were plans for one and Singer has since revealed what those plans would have been. Warner Bros sat on the franchise after Returns and allowed Brandon Routh's contract to run out (on purpose is my own personal theory). If things had stayed on schedule and a Returns sequel actually happened it would have come out probably sometime in the summer of 2009.

Maybe, but regardless of Singer's schedule or talk of "plans", it seemed pretty clear to me that the WB was never terribly excited or motivated to make a sequel to SR.

I'm sure if they were, Singer (being the huge Superman fan that he is) wouldn't have hesitated to make room in his schedule for it.

[Admiral_Young]

^ That's my point though. The studio had no desire to continue the franchise with that incarnation. That doesn't negate anything that I stated. The studio's lack of motivation is probably what made Singer decide to go do "Valkyrie".

[CorporalCaptain]

I just saw it for the first time, in 3D. I gave it a B- in the poll. Here is some brief feedback.

Any problems I had with the look, effects, and actors were minor compared to the movie's most serious problem: the lack of a coherent story. It began very strong, but by the last act everything was definitely unraveling and going nowhere.

I felt that the central theme that the movie had to offer was the realization that Hal didn't need to be fearless, but rather that he could have fear if he could overcome it. This realization should have occurred exactly at the climax of the film, but alas this realization was dispensed with before the climax, which instead was just a light show with zero emotional impact. The idea that Parallax could be so easily destroyed also made no sense. In addition, I felt that the whole last act was padded out with too many throw-away scenes hinging on clichés, like the smooch before the final battle and the everybody-clear-the-street scene.

It's a shame that the movie had all of the technical components that it needed, and ironic that what plagues it is the most low-tech issue of all: writing.

Mark Strong was very, very good, and probably gave the best portrayal in the movie. To be honest, I thought the movie looked really great.

[davejames]

CorporalCaptain wrote:

---

I felt that the central theme that the movie had to offer was the realization that Hal didn't need to be fearless, but rather that he could have fear if he could overcome it. This realization should have occurred exactly at the climax of the film, but alas this realization was dispensed with before the climax, which instead was just a light show with zero emotional impact. The idea that Parallax could be so easily destroyed also made no sense. In addition, I felt that the whole last act was padded out with too many throw-away scenes hinging on clichés, like the smooch before the final battle and the everybody-clear-the-street scene.

Yeah Hal's fears and doubts were handled pretty superficially, but I thought the movie did just enough to make me care about and root for him when the final battle came-- and as Parallax pointed out, he was still struggling with his fear all the way through that. Which is what I thought made the battle (as brief as it was) so exciting to watch.

It didn't feel to me like everything was settled beforehand and he had already "conquered" all his problems.

[Captain Craig]

The bad news keeps mounting up for Green Lantern regarding box office domestic take. To finish out the week it pulled another $900K for a new domestic total of $106.5m on it's nearly 3,300 screens. Worldwide take is just $139m as of now.

This weekend when theaters get to dump screens going into it's 4th weekend GL is getting dumped hard. It's losing 1,200 screens. Which is harsh.

For comparison on their 4th weekend:
Thor lost 600 screens
XM:FC lost 750 screens

Theaters are dumping this movie hard. I doubt seriously if it'll even be at $110m after this weekend.