• 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 movie might reboot

It's a superhero comic: cliche, bad dialogue and endless fight scenes.

Yeah, those are BAD superhero comics.... It doesn't HAVE to be that way. Iron Man, The Rocketeer, Dark Knight, Spider Man 2, all based on comics and comic book characters... and didn't need the excuse of "It's a superhero comic, that's why there's cliche, bad dialogue, and endless fight scenes..."
 
The arc could've been from one of pure ego to humility. That's what makes him different than Sinestro, Jordan is compassionate. So maybe the movie begins with WAHOO, I fucking ROCK! to Hey, I need to take this job seriously.

Except Marvel released that movie six weeks earlier and called it Thor. All it would've done was get the GL movie accused of being too imitative on top of everything else.
 
I can see the complaints about the movie perhaps not being as rich or epic as it could have been (and yeah, maybe Hal was a little too whiney early on), but it was still a pretty fun and engaging superhero flick all the same.

I just do not see how this is the huge, epic trainwreck people make it out to be. It seems like the second Ryan Reynolds was announced, fans were determined to hate everything about this movie.
 
I enjoyed it enough. Not a great movie, but not nearly as bad as some of the comments suggest. I'd hope if they do another they keep Reynolds but just make a better movie.
 
The arc could've been from one of pure ego to humility. That's what makes him different than Sinestro, Jordan is compassionate. So maybe the movie begins with WAHOO, I fucking ROCK! to Hey, I need to take this job seriously.

Except Marvel released that movie six weeks earlier and called it Thor. All it would've done was get the GL movie accused of being too imitative on top of everything else.

And Marvel released Iron Man and Spider Man how many years before Thor? It's not the arc, but the specifics OF the arc, how its handled. You're a writer, I shouldn't have to say it: but if you're starting with specific characters in specific situations, it's going to be different than other things with similar arc. And if it turns out well, no one will accuse you of being imitative.
 
Except Marvel released that movie six weeks earlier and called it Thor. All it would've done was get the GL movie accused of being too imitative on top of everything else.

And it was a critically weak aspect of Thor, as well. Basically, the guy's an overweening, thoughtless prick who, as a result of spending a week in the desert eating diner food with Natalie Portman, becomes a (somewhat) humble hero.

Weak sauce.
 
And Marvel released Iron Man and Spider Man how many years before Thor?

More than six weeks, so it wouldn't have felt so repetitive.


It's not the arc, but the specifics OF the arc, how its handled. You're a writer, I shouldn't have to say it: but if you're starting with specific characters in specific situations, it's going to be different than other things with similar arc. And if it turns out well, no one will accuse you of being imitative.

Don't tell me, tell the movie studios. We know that big movies in the past have had their story points changed to avoid the risk of comparison to earlier movies; for instance, X-Men: First Class famously scuttled a telepathic "dream combat" sequence because it was too similar to portions of Inception. So I really don't think the decision-makers at Warner Bros. would've okayed a storyline that was so similar to that of a Marvel movie coming out just six weeks earlier, close enough that they were almost direct competitors. And if they had, then hell yes, tons of critics and Internet whiners would've accused it of being imitative no matter how good it was, because such pat comparisons are the lazy fallback for critics of all stripes, and because the Internet is full of people looking for any excuse to bash.
 
Fans whine about the similarities of Avatar to cartoon movies they liked; fortunately Cameron's film has been so hugely successful and widely embraced that the kvetching has been of no consequence to the studio or filmmakers. ;)
 
The ring would have to be defective to pick Hal if Hal was defective.

But to be perfect he would have been clinically insane.

Fearless.

A test pilot.

Catch 22.

The ability to overcome fear is Kyles story because as Ganthet said when he found Kyle vomiting out side the back of a bar off his tits: "You'll do."

Pride cometh before the fall.

The arrogance that arrives hand in hand with fearlessness is what makes Jordan snap AND HEAD OUT ON A KILLING SPREE.

It's why Batman likes Kyle better (GL 100ish Emerald knights, timetravel arc, young Hal tours the future before he goes bad and dies.).

but really.

Kyle sucks.

If they wanted to make money.

The mvie should have focussed on Ch'p.

but really.

All I want for christmas is to see Blake for reals as Star Sapphire.

The photoshopping is nice.

But I'm ready for the real thing.

I just needs some winawish dying of cancer kid to have the same dreams and asperations as me.

Unless over on Gossip Girl they say "Go FuckYourself" to the public by dolling Blake up for a fancy dress party.

hells.

The producers wouldn't have to even tell her what she's doing.

Just want for th outcry afterward.
 
And it was a critically weak aspect of Thor, as well. Basically, the guy's an overweening, thoughtless prick who, as a result of spending a week in the desert eating diner food with Natalie Portman, becomes a (somewhat) humble hero.

Weak sauce.
Odin should have died as a result of Thor's ego and recklessness. That would have been a catalyst for real change.
 
1. Kyle is ten times the Lantern Jordan is, but he's still a gimp. With the glaring exception of Cosmic Odyssey if you want to get from a to b without baby babble wining about his bleeding heart hippy emotions or the alien princess getting knocked up, you tap John Stewart to save the day.

2. Imagine if Thor knocked up Jane Foster in the movie? The nature of his curse is that he would lose all of his godly powers every time he missed a child support payment.
 
And it was a critically weak aspect of Thor, as well. Basically, the guy's an overweening, thoughtless prick who, as a result of spending a week in the desert eating diner food with Natalie Portman, becomes a (somewhat) humble hero.

Weak sauce.
Odin should have died as a result of Thor's ego and recklessness. That would have been a catalyst for real change.

It would have, that's absolutely true. It would also have, of necessity, moved the dramatic and emotional focus of the film away from Thor's human interactions and back to his own world and the characters there - and that's doubtless one of the reasons it wasn't done.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top