• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Green Lantern Corps Movie Announced by Warner Bros

Enterprise is Great

Vice Admiral
Admiral
article

The movie previously announced as Green Lantern will instead be Green Lantern Corps, Warner Bros announced at their San Diego Comic-Con 2015 panel Saturday. The film will presumably keep its June 19, 2020 release date, meaning it's still a bit off (and the current final film of WB/DCE's announced schedule).

:techman::techman:
Mostly set in space I hope.
 
article

The movie previously announced as Green Lantern will instead be Green Lantern Corps, Warner Bros announced at their San Diego Comic-Con 2015 panel Saturday. The film will presumably keep its June 19, 2020 release date, meaning it's still a bit off (and the current final film of WB/DCE's announced schedule).

:techman::techman:
Mostly set in space I hope.

Well seeing as Guardians of the Galaxy did so well and had pretty much fuck all to do with Earth maybe Warner Bros will wise up and go full cosmic.
 
I hope they have ALL the Corps colors in this. Can you imagine what a live-action Red Lantern would look like? :eek:

I hope they don't. Not in the first one at least. The problem I had with the GL movie (aside from the shitty writing) was that they crammed too much into the movie for the non-comic fan to digest. They should've kept it simple and focused on an Earth bound Hal with only a brief mention of the Guardians by Abin Sur as he is dying. Had they done this and gotten a sequel, they could've then introduced us to the more cosmic elements at a more natural pace, upping the danger ante' along the way.

The movie we got was trying to do too much. I couldn't tell if they were over excited or fearful that they wouldn't get a sequel and so crammed it full of stuff. Seriously, to a non-comic fan who did not know who Sinestro was, the ending where he turns into a Yellow Lantern probably made no sense. I knew who he was and it didn't make sense to me....I just knew that inevitably he'd go bad.
 
I'm still really surprised WB wants to do anything with Green Lantern anymore, after the reaction the previous movie got. But I guess they're counting on audiences warming up to the idea much more after all the other DC movies come out, and after seeing GL in the Justice League movie.
 
Everytime I feel good about how dead and buried that old Green Lantern project is, there's still this sick part of me who wonders what Blake Lively would look like as Star Sapphire.
 
I'm still really surprised WB wants to do anything with Green Lantern anymore, after the reaction the previous movie got. But I guess they're counting on audiences warming up to the idea much more after all the other DC movies come out, and after seeing GL in the Justice League movie.

I seriously doubt that DC even considered the 2011 film when they greenlit this. A crappy film that no one saw isn't going to deter audiences nearly a decade after it's release. Green Lantern Corps success will depend on the success of the DC films that precede it.
 
I seriously doubt that DC even considered the 2011 film when they greenlit this. A crappy film that no one saw isn't going to deter audiences nearly a decade after it's release.

It was the number one film in its opening weekend, though it dropped off quickly after that. I'd hardly say that no one saw it. It actually made a lot of money; the problem, as with so many blockbusters these days, is that the cost of production and promotion was so inflated that it would've had to do spectacularly well to come out ahead, instead of just reasonably well.

And I still say it's not really that bad a film. It's flawed, to be sure, but it isn't anywhere near as bad as, say, Catwoman or Jonah Hex. If it had come out six or seven years earlier, it would've been considered fairly good compared to its contemporaries. It just had the bad luck to come out in the same year as X-Men: First Class, Thor, and Captain America, so it suffered in comparison.
 
It was the number one film in its opening weekend, though it dropped off quickly after that. I'd hardly say that no one saw it. It actually made a lot of money; the problem, as with so many blockbusters these days, is that the cost of production and promotion was so inflated that it would've had to do spectacularly well to come out ahead, instead of just reasonably well.

The film only made $219 million worldwide. Even Ghost Rider made more money than that.
 
The first GL film was awful. It was also a really wasted opportunity, given the resources expended to bring that really fun universe to life. Here's hoping that the second time is the charm.
 
The film only made $219 million worldwide. Even Ghost Rider made more money than that.

Yeah, but just think about how insane the standards have gotten that you can use the word "only" to describe a fifth of a billion dollars. Most of us will never see a fraction as much money in our entire lives. It's just that the standards for financial success are so ludicrously high because the studios spend so wastefully to make and promote the movies. So there's no such thing as a modest success anymore. Anything that isn't immediately, enormously super-successful is considered a flop, which is a ridiculous standard.
 
Roger Ebert liked Green Lantern better than he liked Thor, because he was a smart, perceptive man who loved and understood movies. ;)
 
I'm still really surprised WB wants to do anything with Green Lantern anymore, after the reaction the previous movie got.

This...it's gotta be a GotG thing, otherwise I'd think that they wouldn't want to touch GL again so soon with a ten-foot yellow pole.

The film only made $219 million worldwide. Even Ghost Rider made more money than that.

Yeah, but just think about how insane the standards have gotten that you can use the word "only" to describe a fifth of a billion dollars. Most of us will never see a fraction as much money in our entire lives. It's just that the standards for financial success are so ludicrously high because the studios spend so wastefully to make and promote the movies. So there's no such thing as a modest success anymore. Anything that isn't immediately, enormously super-successful is considered a flop, which is a ridiculous standard.

Yeah, $200-ish million was a failure considering what the film was aiming for, but it's still a lot of butts in seats. A lower-budget film can make a quarter that and be considered a smash success.
 
I like the idea of a GL Corps movie. I wonder if we'll get some alien GL's done with practical effects, unlike the first GL movie (although some of the alien GL's just wouldn't work practically). That said, at the bare minimum I hope we get practical costumes. If any movie I've seen in the last few years went way overboard with the CG, it was Green Lantern.
 
I like the idea of a GL Corps movie. I wonder if we'll get some alien GL's done with practical effects, unlike the first GL movie (although some of the alien GL's just wouldn't work practically). That said, at the bare minimum I hope we get practical costumes. If any movie I've seen in the last few years went way overboard with the CG, it was Green Lantern.

Captain America: The First Avenger had roughly the same amount of visual effects shots that Green Lantern had and nobody complained about them going overboard. The CGI was used in a different way, but really CGI is useful for creating an totality alien rae of people.
 
I like the idea of a GL Corps movie. I wonder if we'll get some alien GL's done with practical effects, unlike the first GL movie (although some of the alien GL's just wouldn't work practically). That said, at the bare minimum I hope we get practical costumes. If any movie I've seen in the last few years went way overboard with the CG, it was Green Lantern.

Captain America: The First Avenger had roughly the same amount of visual effects shots that Green Lantern had and nobody complained about them going overboard. The CGI was used in a different way, but really CGI is useful for creating an totality alien rae of people.

Captain America wore an actual costume, and the Red Skull actually physically interacted with him. Captain America also had a decent amount of sets to go with the CG stuff. Green Lantern didn't have a costume, basically everything on OA was CG (including every other GL who wasn't Sinestro), and his main enemy was a big CG cloud. Its not about the number of visual effects shots. Green Lantern had more CG in basically every aspect of the movie, even when it wasn't needed, and it was a lot more obvious.

Now, Green Lantern has to have a lot of CG just because of his powers and the space stuff, but the GL movie went crazy. I actually don't dislike the GL movie, but it definitely overused CG.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top