Green Lantern (2011)

[Captaindemotion]

I've liked him since he so perfectly delivered the line ending in 'You cock-juggling thundercunt!' in Blade Trinity. What more can one ask from an actor, than he delivers such a priceless line as brilliantly as it deserves?

 

[Harvey]

Maybe if it's a bomb, they'll reboot the series with John Stewart and we'll finally get a black superhero in a major motion picture.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Yeah. That's not a good argument. You don't want a bland and generic lead in an action movie. Can you think of a successful movie with a bland and generic lead?

Every action movie since the movie studios started using CGI.

Care to be more specific? Rather than lashing out at a tool...

For example, Chris Pine in Star Trek, NOT bland, NOT generic, and I believe that movie used quite a bit of CGI.

And who's they? I thought GL teamed up with GA because he didn't know "America" or some shit.

Exactly, GL was the ultimate square and that's why they teamed him up with the loud and proud Green Arrow.

Exactly? That's the THEY you were talking about? Who is the THEY that was making fun of GL... Fans? Creators? Who?

AND, square doesn't equal bland and generic. Square actually means something. Square isn't a blank. Square means someone who is rigid, has a certain point of view.

 

[Dream]

Maybe if it's a bomb, they'll reboot the series with John Stewart and we'll finally get a black superhero in a major motion picture.

I thought John Stewart was awesome in the JLU cartoon. He was the first Green Lantern that I was exposed to as a character. I was almost disappointed they were using Hal.

 

[Harvey]

Yeah. That's not a good argument. You don't want a bland and generic lead in an action movie. Can you think of a successful movie with a bland and generic lead?

Every action movie since the movie studios started using CGI.

Care to be more specific? Rather than lashing out at a tool...

For example, Chris Pine in Star Trek, NOT bland, NOT generic, and I believe that movie used quite a bit of CGI.

Just looking at this list of ten action films made in 2010, I'd be hard pressed to describe either Robert Downey Jr. (Iron Man 2) or Danny Trejo (Machete) as bland or generic leads.

 

[JoeZhang]

The daily wail review has some nice zingers:

Hal Jordan's character development is that he changes from being the kind of cocky pilot Tom Cruise played in Top Gun into a galactic cop, doggedly dedicated to preserving peace, order and the right of wizened oligarchs to exercise absolute power.

Democratic ideals never enter his head, which seems odd for a modern American, but I surmise from Hal's unfurrowed brow and honed abs that his interest in current affairs may not extend beyond the sports pages.

Carol Ferris, is played by Blake Lively in a way that suggests her surname is ironic.

In this age of corporate calculation and a dopey proletariat seemingly content to whoop at anything put before them as long as it's sufficiently mindless, perhaps it is unreasonable to hope that a summer blockbuster might bring us freshness, flair or fun.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...w-Superhero-whos-nice--dim.html#ixzz1PTX64APV

 

[Dream]

Carol Ferris, is played by Blake Lively in a way that suggests her surname is ironic.

I gotta ask... why does Blake Lively have guy's first name?

 

[Kegg]

Maybe if it's a bomb, they'll reboot the series with John Stewart and we'll finally get a black superhero in a major motion picture.

I know nothing about this character so I chose to imagine him as Lance Reddick, who I already know has the physique of a superhero and a smouldering intensity way above what a summer movie would require.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Every action movie since the movie studios started using CGI.

Care to be more specific? Rather than lashing out at a tool...

For example, Chris Pine in Star Trek, NOT bland, NOT generic, and I believe that movie used quite a bit of CGI.

Just looking at this list of ten action films made in 2010, I'd be hard pressed to describe either Robert Downey Jr. (Iron Man 2) or Danny Trejo (Machete) as bland or generic leads.

Exactly. Why do people think CGI is some sort of CRIME. It's a freakin' tool. Blame the people who USE it, not the tool itself.

 

[Harvey]

Maybe if it's a bomb, they'll reboot the series with John Stewart and we'll finally get a black superhero in a major motion picture.

I know nothing about this character so I chose to imagine him as Lance Reddick, who I already know has the physique of a superhero and a smouldering intensity way above what a summer movie would require.

I'd pay $9.50 to see Lance Reddick play a superhero. Or anyone, really--it's a shame he hasn't branched out into more feature roles since The Wire ended.

 

[JD]

Care to be more specific? Rather than lashing out at a tool...

For example, Chris Pine in Star Trek, NOT bland, NOT generic, and I believe that movie used quite a bit of CGI.

Just looking at this list of ten action films made in 2010, I'd be hard pressed to describe either Robert Downey Jr. (Iron Man 2) or Danny Trejo (Machete) as bland or generic leads.

Exactly. Why do people think CGI is some sort of CRIME. It's a freakin' tool. Blame the people who USE it, not the tool itself.

Exactly, thank you. I don't get why some people seem to think using CGI automatically makes a movie bad. Personally, I love what CGI has allowed film and TV makers to do today.

 

[Yminale]

Care to be more specific? Rather than lashing out at a tool...

For example, Chris Pine in Star Trek, NOT bland, NOT generic, and I believe that movie used quite a bit of CGI.

Your best response is CHRIS PINE one of the least talented actors since Shia LeBeouf. Honestly his protrayal of Kirk was so bad it almost ruined the movie (the God Awful plot did all the work).

Honestly you could have picked some one who actually has talent like Christian Bale or Eric Bana.

Exactly? That's the THEY you were talking about?

The Comic book writers in the 60's. especially those who did GL/GA

AND, square doesn't equal bland and generic. Square actually means something. Square isn't a blank. Square means someone who is rigid, has a certain point of view.

Square also means conformist which in the 60's means being a bland and generic white guy.

 

[Yminale]

Exactly, thank you. I don't get why some people seem to think using CGI automatically makes a movie bad. Personally, I love what CGI has allowed film and TV makers to do today.

Because it's obvious that CGI is being used to mask the lack of plot, direction, acting and basically anything that makes a film good.

That's not to say CGI is bad, but as Green Lantern proved one good actor working his heart out and a bunch of CGI do NOT make a good movie.

 

[Captain Craig]

Maybe if it's a bomb, they'll reboot the series with John Stewart and we'll finally get a black superhero in a major motion picture.

Does Blade no longer count? Marvel comics daywalking vampire slayer played by Wesley Snipes in 3 films.

 

[Yminale]

Maybe if it's a bomb, they'll reboot the series with John Stewart and we'll finally get a black superhero in a major motion picture.

Heh what about "Blade" with Wesley Snipes. Honestly w/o Blade and Blade 2 we probably wouldn't have all these decent superhero films and we certainly wouldn't have David Goyer around.

 

[JD]

Exactly, thank you. I don't get why some people seem to think using CGI automatically makes a movie bad. Personally, I love what CGI has allowed film and TV makers to do today.

Because it's obvious that CGI is being used to mask the lack of plot, direction, acting and basically anything that makes a film good.

That's not to say CGI is bad, but as Green Lantern proved one good actor working his heart out and a bunch of CGI do NOT make a good movie.

Sure that might be the case in some movies, but that doesn't mean that just because a movie has CGI effect it's going to be bad. The Lord of the Rings movies had a ton of CGI stuff, and I was under the impression that most people loved those movies. Iron Man had alot of CGI and most people seemed to like it.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Care to be more specific? Rather than lashing out at a tool...

For example, Chris Pine in Star Trek, NOT bland, NOT generic, and I believe that movie used quite a bit of CGI.

Your best response is CHRIS PINE one of the least talented actors since Shia LeBeouf. Honestly his protrayal of Kirk was so bad it almost ruined the movie (the God Awful plot did all the work).

Honestly you could have picked some one who actually has talent like Christian Bale or Eric Bana.

Well. We'll disagree on Pine. But, clearly we don't on Bale and Bana. So... then, what about your point about bland and generic leads after the use of CGI? You're sorta putting yourself in a corner there...

Exactly? That's the THEY you were talking about?

The Comic book writers in the 60's. especially those who did GL/GA

AND, square doesn't equal bland and generic. Square actually means something. Square isn't a blank. Square means someone who is rigid, has a certain point of view.

Square also means conformist which in the 60's means being a bland and generic white guy.

So... what you're saying is... Almost ALL of the DC characters in the 60s where bland and generic... as pretty much all of them were white.

And again, conformist, from a story telling point of view ISN'T bland and generic. A conformist can be a compelling character, especially in situations when they are confronted BY their conformity. For example YOUR suggestion of the teaming of GL and GA. So, again, GL wasn't bland and generic. He was a conformist in a noncomforming time. Sounds interesting.

 

[Kegg]

Because it's obvious that CGI is being used to mask the lack of plot, direction, acting and basically anything that makes a film good.

Focusing on spectacle to the detriment of all else isn't CGI.

It's Hollywood.

They were doing this back in those 'cast of thousands' pictures, mixing in subpar writing and acting with lots of expensive looking costumes and sets and huge armies of extras.

Go watch The Conqueror, or better yet, don't.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Because it's obvious that CGI is being used to mask the lack of plot, direction, acting and basically anything that makes a film good.

Focusing on spectacle to the detriment of all else isn't CGI.

It's Hollywood.

They were doing this back in those 'cast of thousands' pictures, mixing in subpar writing and acting with lots of expensive looking costumes and sets and huge armies of extras.

Go watch The Conqueror, or better yet, don't.

QFT.

Lots of things over the past 100 years have been used to mask a lacking plot, talentless actors. Effects, boobs, all sorts of things. CGI is just another tool.

If Green Lantern is bad, and that's an opinion, it's not because of the CGI. It's how they chose to use it, but, the CGI isn't the reason. That's, again, if it's a bad movie.

Let's think about this, was Iron Man good BECAUSE of the CGI? Or Lord of the Rings?

 

[Harvey]

Maybe if it's a bomb, they'll reboot the series with John Stewart and we'll finally get a black superhero in a major motion picture.

Does Blade no longer count? Marvel comics daywalking vampire slayer played by Wesley Snipes in 3 films.

Blade had a mid-range budget at $45 million, though it surely is a superhero movie.