Green Lantern: The New Star Wars? [Archive]

MoonSylver

05-Nov-2010, 05:43 PM

as some of you already know, i am a huge fan of the green lantern, have been since i was a kid. i have been hoping for years that an extravagant film version would be made, so i will be checking this out for sure. i usually don't get up for superhero movies, matter of fact i haven't even seen most of the ones released recently, but this one most assuredly has my interest.

Which ones? 'Cause some are quite good (Iron Man I loved)

that show kicks all manner of ass doesn't it.

Yes, it does.

My only concern is the total CGI suit. We haven't seen it in action yet, so i'll hold off judgment until then.

I heard they are going to make some changes in it, which should make SOME HPotD's happy...

http://thisisthestoryof.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/red-bacon.jpg?w=479&h=642

bassman

05-Nov-2010, 05:47 PM

:lol:

That's awesome. I think you've just found Lou's new avatar...

darth los

05-Nov-2010, 05:51 PM

:lol:

That's awesome. I think you've just found Lou's new avatar...

:lol::lol:

Damn you BAss, you beat me to it !!! :mad:

:cool:

MoonSylver

05-Nov-2010, 05:54 PM

That's awesome. I think you've just found Lou's new avatar...

:lol:

Hell, I'm still not 100% convinced that ISN'T REALLY LOU!!!! :lol:

LouCipherr

10-Nov-2010, 02:14 PM

:lol:

Hell, I'm still not 100% convinced that ISN'T REALLY LOU!!!! :lol:

I ain't sayin' nothin'! :shifty:

deadpunk

10-Nov-2010, 03:56 PM

The CGI suit is like an itch I can't get rid of. (You know, one of those deep-seated ones in your nether regions that you can't scratch because you're out in public with a cute girl?) I'm trying not to let it dissuade me, because CGI can be a wonderful tool, but...

I like the casting of Reynolds. The guy has grown quite a bit as an actor in recent years. Sure he filled roles in every B-comedy thast was produced at the start of his career, but a guy has to get a foot in the door somehow. His recent roles seem to be more selective, and he doesn't do bad work, IMHO.

I'm a bit more interested to see this one. DC has religiously clung to Batman and Superman when it comes to the silver screen. The Lantern stuff is a bit more in-depth (character-wise). Its about time DC offered something substantial to the plate.

*fingers crossed*

bassman

10-Nov-2010, 04:15 PM

MoonSylver

10-Nov-2010, 08:04 PM

The CGI suit is like an itch I can't get rid of. (You know, one of those deep-seated ones in your nether regions that you can't scratch because you're out in public with a cute girl?)

We should have a thread devoted to that...waitaminiute...:lol:

I like the casting of Reynolds. The guy has grown quite a bit as an actor in recent years. Sure he filled roles in every B-comedy thast was produced at the start of his career, but a guy has to get a foot in the door somehow. His recent roles seem to be more selective, and he doesn't do bad work, IMHO.

I like him a lot. Knew back when he started on "Two Guys, A Girl, And A Pizza Place" that he was going to be big. But I get the same itch YOU'RE getting from the suit from HIM. I'm sure he'll be fine, good even, but I dunno. Weird. :|

Doc

11-Nov-2010, 02:04 AM

That's in the works, as well. A cartoon being ushered along by the same people behind the incredible Batman:TAS.

Is it taking place in the DCAU? :eek:

I'm a bit more interested to see this one. DC has religiously clung to Batman and Superman when it comes to the silver screen. The Lantern stuff is a bit more in-depth (character-wise). Its about time DC offered something substantial to the plate.

Probably, because almost everything that hasn't been Batman or Superman has been a bomb sadly. :(

Hopefully, Green Lantern is a success so maybe, it increases the chances of a Flash, Wonder Woman, and Aquaman movie.

MoonSylver

11-Nov-2010, 04:44 AM

Hopefully, Green Lantern is a success so maybe, it increases the chances of a Flash, Wonder Woman, and Aquaman movie.

Mmmm. Wonder woman I'd really like to see (for a number of reasons... :elol:), especially if they really played up the mythological aspects. The Flash would be cool too. Aquaman...eh...I know they've done a lot of work on the character to make him grittier/cooler, but...:| not a favorite.

Lessee...who else in the DCU would be movie worthy...Hawkman or The Atom? :| Dr. Fate or The Spectre? :hyper: Deadman would be cool. :) Firestorm? :)

deadpunk

11-Nov-2010, 05:15 AM

Didn't I hear rumors of a Wonder Woman movie with Megan Fox cast? Or were they just that? God...I fucking hope so...

MoonSylver

11-Nov-2010, 05:56 AM

Didn't I hear rumors of a Wonder Woman movie with Megan Fox cast? Or were they just that? God...I fucking hope so...

That's a project that's been floating in development limbo for years. Various directors have been attached, then moved on. (Was Abrams one at one point? Can't remember...). Megan Fox was a name (among others) that floated out there for a while, but I think it was just rumor. I doubt they'd pick her. Too much drama, bagagge & negative rep IMO. Yeah, they're gonna wanna bring the hot & sexy, but also maintain the "stong independent woman/positive role model" image, IMO. Classy. Kinda like a Scarlet Johanson type, if you know what I mean.

WW was originally designed, among other things, to be the female counterpart of Superman, but for girls. So think in those terms of the "all american" image the character embodies & I think (hope) that would be the type of casting they'd be looking for. :)

bassman

11-Nov-2010, 12:03 PM

I'm sure they'll get around to Wonder Woman eventually, but it will be a ways down the road. At least now they're giving some of their other characters a shot. Not just Batman. Green Lantern next summer and The Flash script is already in the works with plans to shoot in 2012.

As for Megan Fox....I highly doubt she would play WW. In fact, I doubt she'll be playing much of anything pretty soon. Quitting Transformers was the worst move she could have made. Then her next two films bombed, so....yeah. She's heading toward a Lohan type disaster. At least we'll probably get nude photos or a sex tape out of it. :evil:

MoonSylver

11-Nov-2010, 01:27 PM

As for Megan Fox....I highly doubt she would play WW. In fact, I doubt she'll be playing much of anything pretty soon. Quitting Transformers was the worst move she could have made. Then her next two films bombed, so....yeah. She's heading toward a Lohan type disaster. At least we'll probably get nude photos or a sex tape out of it. :evil:

http://toonlet.com/render/Aodan8/panelset/8159-Re__lmao_-sfull.png

bassman

13-Nov-2010, 01:49 PM

A few clips from the trailer. We get to see the suit in motion. Not sure how I feel about it yet...

RrBwKMxhtXQ?fs=1&hl=en_US

Cool to see Kilowog....

MoonSylver

13-Nov-2010, 04:36 PM

A few clips from the trailer. We get to see the suit in motion. Not sure how I feel about it yet...

Hmmm. I dig it. Can't wait to see it bigger & in better detail. :)

deadpunk

13-Nov-2010, 06:28 PM

MoonSylver

13-Nov-2010, 11:21 PM

Hrrrrrrum...that didn't inspire me with a lot of hope, tbh. Not that I ever put much stock in trailers, but it looks like they're gonna push this thing utilizing Reynold's comedic background (and not as an action flick) in order to draw non-comic book fans. I hate that.

Yeah, that I did notce, but was focuse more on the look and forgot to comment. Then again, those could be the ONLY laughs in the whole move, & they just chose to cut them into the trailer trying to BANK on Reynolds commedic image. Look at Iron Man. You could cut a trailer on it that was goofy & silly looking if you ONLY included the few humerous bits. So I'm not giving up hope yet. :)

bassman

14-Nov-2010, 03:05 AM

Remember this...

It's ET. They always slice and dice things to fit their brainless "TMZ" viewing crowd. I'm sure the film will have comedy, but this edit is not something that represents the final product.

That being said...I'm cool with the comedy, but I think the CGI looks a bit rough. With more than six months between now and the final release, I'm hoping that will improve.

MoonSylver

15-Nov-2010, 05:06 PM

I like the casting of Reynolds. The guy has grown quite a bit as an actor in recent years. Sure he filled roles in every B-comedy thast was produced at the start of his career, but a guy has to get a foot in the door somehow. His recent roles seem to be more selective, and he doesn't do bad work, IMHO.

I like him a lot. Knew back when he started on "Two Guys, A Girl, And A Pizza Place" that he was going to be big. But I get the same itch YOU'RE getting from the suit from HIM. I'm sure he'll be fine, good even, but I dunno. Weird. :|

Ok, I take it all back. Turns out he's played a super hero before, so I'm sure he'll be JUST FINE.

7xT6LA8YNpM&feature=fvsr

rm_3bfAEpII&feature=channel

:lol:

Mitchified

15-Nov-2010, 05:10 PM

He played Deadpool as well. Sort of. Kind of. Well, the character was named Deadpool, anyway.

bassman

17-Nov-2010, 12:13 AM

Traileeeerrrr

sy5sjtkhjBg?fs=1&hl=en_US

I just came. Looks PERFECT. Oa, Sinestro, Abin Sur, AHHH. Looks great!

EDIT:

QUICKTIME HD (http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/greenlantern/)

I just came twice more....

MoonSylver

17-Nov-2010, 01:30 AM

I just came twice more....

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lbwuc6lvZf1qd2avdo1_400.gif

:lol:

NOICE!!!! Looks great. Don't know what the fears for the suit were about. it looks fine. Good stuff! :hyper:

deadpunk

17-Nov-2010, 01:49 AM

a much better look. This may be as awesome as it deserves to be...

darth los

18-Nov-2010, 03:53 PM

I don't know how i didn't see this sooner but i like the look. The actor however...

I like Reynolds but i just hope he doesn't ham it up too much and takes the role seriously.

I'd hate it to be an unintentional comedy. You know, sorta like survival.

:cool:

ProfessorChaos

18-Nov-2010, 04:03 PM

nothing is on the same level as survival...

BillyRay

18-Nov-2010, 04:35 PM

I'd hate it to be an unintentional comedy. You know, sorta like survival.

On that note:

817

darth los

18-Nov-2010, 04:53 PM

nothing is on the same level as survival...

On that note:

817

lolz guys.

What made the reboots of superman and batman in particular work, when for so long comic and video game movies were just awful, is that they took a darker more serious tone.

No deformed penguin men. No rubber nipples. No tongue in cheek stuff.

:cool:

bassman

18-Nov-2010, 04:54 PM

darth los

18-Nov-2010, 05:40 PM

:lol: at the muldoon.

Darth - I understand your worries considering that Reynold's career has been mostly comedies, but he's also got acting chops. He's had a few dramatic roles that were great. And I've yet to see it(really want to), but I hear his latest film, Buried is fantastic. Literally....the entire movie is him in a box. And it's getting awesome reviews.

Of course Lantern will still have comedy elements, but it's not going to be a parody of the material. I have faith in Reynolds and the director. Dude made Casino Royale. C'mon. And I also really enjoyed Edge of Darkness.

The scene with Hal meeting Abin Sur and the overlapped dialogue gave me chills. I think there will be more of this...

Oh I thought he was great in Amityville so the potential is definitely there.

Also, me thinks the best movies have a little of everything, thrills, scares, action and comedy. Think of every great movie and I'll bet most of them have all those elements in it, so I'm all for it.

I just don't want it to be a farce. Super hero films have definitely stepped it up in recent years and a tongue in cheeker isn't going to cut it for most people.

MULDOOOOOOOOOOOOON!!!!!!
:cool:

bassman

19-Nov-2010, 04:56 PM

In this article, this dumbass explains why Green Lantern is a rip off of all other superhero movies. :rolleyes:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-new-green-lantern-movie-looks-so-familiar/

MoonSylver

19-Nov-2010, 05:40 PM

bassman

19-Nov-2010, 06:03 PM

Although that used to be the case with cracked, now they also have regular reporting and op-eds.

MoonSylver

19-Nov-2010, 06:22 PM

Although that used to be the case with cracked, now they also have regular reporting and op-eds.

Okaaay....huh. That's a weird move, because there's a fine line between sarcasm for the purposes of humor & sarcasm for the purposes of opinion. As the former, that article works, as the latter, not so much, as someone would have to be purposely obtuse to draw some of the parallels they did...:confused:

bassman

19-Nov-2010, 06:24 PM

Okaaay....huh. That's a weird move, because there's a fine line between sarcasm for the purposes of humor & sarcasm for the purposes of opinion. As the former, that article works, as the latter, not so much, as someone would have to be purposely obtuse to draw some of the parallels they did...:confused:

Hey...maybe I'm just not smart enough to get it. :lol: But I know the guy's articles and they're not always satirical. He'll often just write about shit that he does or does not like. For instance....look up his article on how Lady Gaga should just go away. Nothing really sarcastic about it. Same with several others. That's why I took this one at face value...

BillyRay

19-Nov-2010, 06:30 PM

I remember when Cracked was "poor-man's Mad", chock full of alimony jokes.

Kids love alimony jokes...

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/original-cover-art/11-8.jpg

AcesandEights

19-Nov-2010, 06:55 PM

So in summation: the Green Lantern film is comparable to the policy boondoggle perpetrated by the military industrial complex and perpetuated as a means to have a blank check to explore the militarization of space?

Did I get that right?

darth los

19-Nov-2010, 07:53 PM

ProfessorChaos

20-Nov-2010, 01:00 AM

In this article, this dumbass explains why Green Lantern is a rip off of all other superhero movies. :rolleyes:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-new-green-lantern-movie-looks-so-familiar/

i guess i must be a dumbass as well because i agree with most of that article. i'm glad at least somebody is apparently as sick of superhero movies as i am. some valid points presented in there, i'd say. lots of shots from that green lantern trailer looked very, very familiar, even on my first (and only) viewing.

i'm not knowledgeable at all about green lantern and don't care to be, and i don't like having to look at shirtless ryan reynolds walking around flexing his abs every chance he gets for 90+ minutes, and am sick to death of comic films, so i doubt i'll ever see this. not hatin on it, i just don't care about it at all. nothing in that trailer looks at all remarkable compared with the other previews for the other 75, maybe 100 superhero films released lately.

EDIT: and this reminds me of a discussion me and bass had in the shoutbox the other day...it's not that i'm sick of comic books being adapted, because i'm a huge fan of TWD, both the printed and moving picture formats...mainly due to human characters behaving like humans, the fantastic or stupendous part is the world they're living in... i'm sick of comic book adaptations about superheros, that shit is played out to the max over the several years and it's not showing any sign of stopping anytime soon. seriously, sit down with a pen and paper (or MS word/whatever mac app you use if you're unfamiliar with the former) and write down all the superhero films since, let's say, 1990...no other genre of films has been so mainstream for the last 2 decades and i'm fucking sick to death of it. it's not that i hate them, it just floods the cinema with forgettable pop-corn action flicks with lots of product placement, catchy music, pretty-boys and too-hot/perfect for real life females, and CGI-overkill...which leaves little room for the type of movies i prefer, which are usually dramas and serious films about believable and flawed characters in a realistic world dealing with sometimes very peculiar, yet still believable events.

MoonSylver

20-Nov-2010, 01:35 AM

I think part of it is that #1 the technology has never been available to do them justice until now. #2 There are a lot of guys my age-ish who have always wanted to see these types of movies, but never thought they would because of reason #1. So between a built in audience + the tools to do them with= no big surprise.

I don't bear them any ill will one way or another. I don't see super hero movies automatically= less chance of "good" films being made. Hollywood is going to continue to adapt, remake, rip off & genrally crank out as much safe pap as they can, because it's all about business & they want to make as much money with as little effort & risk as possible. These movies don't change that one way or another.

So, I'm all for them as long as they're DONE WELL. GL LOOKS like it will be good, so I'd like to see it. Captain America & Thor? Not so much (to me), so I'll likely give 'em a pass, same as I did Daredevil, both Fantastic Four's, Wolverine, & any others that I can't remember that generally looked "dodgy" to me.

Now that I think about it, there probably have been as many misses as there have been hits on SH films. But that's the way it goes I guess. At least there HAVE been hits like Iron Man, Spider-Man, Dark Knight. If they turn out more films as good as THOSE, then I'll see 'em.

bassman

20-Nov-2010, 12:45 PM

Like or hate superhero movies, I thought this article was funny because he was labeling GL as a copy cat based on the first trailer. Trailers are meant to appeal to a wide audience and most likely this was cut in a way to showcase Reynold's comedy, Lively's looks, and an overall Iron Man-ish tone. They're trying to sell the film to the widest audience possible. Not just the comic fans that know how great this source material is.

On top of that....to say that GL is copying other superhero cliches of late is downright funny because the character was invented a good twenty years before the rest of them. The only one that comes close is Batman, and it was only one year before GL. Plus there aren't any similarities there. Other than both being DC.

I understand how you could be tired of the Superhero genre because it's had several duds, but the same could be said about every genre. Fairytale/Wizardry films like LOTR or Potter, action movies, remakes, first person horror, etc. All of these and more are basically outstaying their welcome. That doesn't mean you have to see everyone of them or no more should be made. Just weed out what looks good and what doesn't. Most of them are fluff, but a select few tell really compelling stories.

bassman

03-Apr-2011, 03:28 AM

THIS. Is fucking epic.

FbyJSbimX0Y

It may be deleted shortly, so my apologies if that happens. If not......whoa, right?

EDIT: replaced with better HD...

Danny

03-Apr-2011, 03:33 AM

HOLY FUCK.that looks rad.

clanglee

05-Apr-2011, 06:08 AM

Wow!! I wasn't sold on this before. . . but. . . . .just wow.

EvilNed

05-Apr-2011, 05:39 PM

bassman

05-Apr-2011, 06:30 PM

To be honest, it wreaks of another CG adventure with a stale plot. What is the plot anyway? A green dude with superpowers must save Earth?

Nobody really knows the exact plot other than what villains will appear. But in a nutshell, it's the story of a fighter pilot named Hal Jordan becoming a member of the Green Lantern Corps - a sort of "space police" that protect the universe.

This "trailer" was shown at a convention for fans with prior knowledge of the property, so it's a bit vague on the descriptions. Just something to make the fans geek out.

As I said earlier, the exact plot is not known but it's definitely going to be CGI-heavy. Considering it takes place not just on Earth but in space and on Alien planets, the reliance on CG was a bit of a given.

clanglee

05-Apr-2011, 07:41 PM

About the CGI. . .The CGI suit is what I was worried about initially, but when Hal is around all the other CGI it looks a lot better. I still feel that it looks a bit odd in the "real" world context. But just as odd as Captain America's tiny body CGI. that just looks hilarious.

MoonSylver

05-Apr-2011, 10:30 PM

Looks kinda lame to me. The whole design of the film seems pretty ridiculous.

To be honest, it wreaks of another CG adventure with a stale plot. What is the plot anyway? A green dude with superpowers must save Earth?

And I suppose it would be better if he were RED...?:rockbrow:

http://gatsbysmonologue.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/lenin1.jpg?w=300&h=436

:lol: :nana:

Neil

06-Apr-2011, 01:04 PM

Just an update on the film: Check it out.

http://movies.ign.com/articles/112/1129610p1.html

:cool:
I really don't know anything about this film... So hopefully if it's good it will be a nice surprise for me :)

EvilNed

06-Apr-2011, 05:15 PM

And I suppose it would be better if he were RED...?:rockbrow:

http://gatsbysmonologue.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/lenin1.jpg?w=300&h=436

:lol: :nana:

Uh, how about hell yeah? Red is cooler than green. Green is a pretty lame color to begin with!

MoonSylver

06-Apr-2011, 10:21 PM

Uh, how about hell yeah? Red is cooler than green. Green is a pretty lame color to begin with!

Here's the closest you're gonna get:

http://superherouniverse.com/art/data/648/red-bacon.jpg

(Oh Loooooooou.....!);)

bassman

06-Apr-2011, 10:25 PM

Actually..... Red Lanterns exist in the series. Don't know if they'll ever appear in the films, but they do exist. :shifty:

Danny

06-Apr-2011, 10:26 PM

Here's the closest you're gonna get:

http://superherouniverse.com/art/data/648/red-bacon.jpg

(Oh Loooooooou.....!);)

eh, it can go closer.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y91/khazrak/1235863716.jpg

MoonSylver

06-Apr-2011, 10:32 PM

:stunned:

Okaaayy..I know they've done black & yellow & all that, but what's next?

http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w10/greenlantern40/Sad%20Littles/PinkLantern.jpg

:lol:

bassman

06-Apr-2011, 10:37 PM

Got those too, moon. Star Sapphire. :lol:

MoonSylver

07-Apr-2011, 12:28 AM

Got those too, moon. Star Sapphire. :lol:

Well alrighty then...

WARNING: NOT WORK FRIENDLY!
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_hN7X5gUktas/TDzMnKoBL0I/AAAAAAAAC64/E4EGsSxTbJI/s1600/star-sapphire-corps.jpg

http://images.wikia.com/marvel_dc/images/3/32/Carol_Ferris_Star_Sapphire_Corps.jpg

:stunned:

To be fair, they're saying that's supposed to be violet though...

http://sportsman.greyarchive.info/megapolis/plantern.png

See, now THAT'S pink...:lol:

bassman

04-May-2011, 04:19 PM

New Trailer (http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/green-lantern.html?showVideo=1#belowNav)

kCJCHl2K4Dk

The trailers are getting better and better. Loved seeing the guardians and Hal's training with Sinestro and Kilowog.

Can't wait to see this next month! :hyper:

rongravy

05-May-2011, 01:11 AM

Pardon my French, but F*CK YEAH!
Awesome trailer. Can't wait. I may try to take off work early that day to beat the crowd. I wanna get superbaked for this, lay back, and trip out on it.

Neil

07-May-2011, 10:24 AM

So why should I be excited about this film? Why so much hype about it?

I'm just concerned this is another super hero film where the rules are too vague so it loses any real sense of grounding/reality/believability?

Danny

07-May-2011, 10:38 AM

Neil

07-May-2011, 10:55 AM

posting this in a forum about zombie movies.

not sure if serious....

You're missing the point... Consider the following two zombie films:-
1) The dead rise. They are slow shambling mindless monsters that if they see or hear you try and track you down and kill you.
2) The dead rise. They instantly have super human abilities such as being able to pounce, and roar with strange unatural voices. They seemingly are able to track you down no matter where you are, and although seemingly mindless, are able spring out and appear from no where when required.

Which film is more believable? Which would you invest more belief in, and therefore most likely care more about? I suspect most people would suggest (1) because the 'rules' are simpler and more believable.

This is the beauty of Romero's early films. You only have to accept the one 'leap of faith' that the dead have risen, and from there the rules are generally utterly fair and believable!

Now, let's move onto the Green Lantern. I know nothing about it, but I believe he can create anything he wants? As such the worry is because seemingly 'anything goes' that the 'rules' could be so contrived that it's untterly unbelivable. Any character could do anything at anytime? It's akin to the script cheating?

As I said, I know nothing about the film, hence I'd like to know why so much +ve feelings seem to be surrounding it?

EvilNed

07-May-2011, 11:18 AM

Neil

07-May-2011, 11:58 AM

I'm with Neil. But mostly because I think the film looks buttugly and ridiculous. Everything from the effects to the production design is just ridiculous. I can't invest any sort of emotion into this whatsoever. That guy who looks like a red elf makes me giggle. What the hell is up with that guys moustache?

The bits I liked least in Thor was the intangible "magic" stuff... It's all good fun hokum, but when the 'rules' are clear, it's hard to believe or invest in the film/characters...

You need good solid rules - what ever they may be.

Mitchified

07-May-2011, 02:17 PM

The bits I liked least in Thor was the intangible "magic" stuff... It's all good fun hokum, but when the 'rules' are clear, it's hard to believe or invest in the film/characters...

You need good solid rules - what ever they may be.

There were good solid rules in Thor. He was a Norse god, magic IS the rule. Somehow I don't think that a Norse deity is going to show up with a scientifically-altered hammer that follows all the laws of physics.

You're missing the point... Consider the following two zombie films:-
1) The dead rise. They are slow shambling mindless monsters that if they see or hear you try and track you down and kill you.
2) The dead rise. They instantly have super human abilities such as being able to pounce, and roar with strange unatural voices. They seemingly are able to track you down no matter where you are, and although seemingly mindless, are able spring out and appear from no where when required.

To be fair, neither one of those is believable, and who are we to say that option one is more likely to happen than option two if the dead were to rise? It would take quite the huge event to trigger real zombies, after all.

There's more than one huge leap of faith when it comes to watching Romero zombie movies as well. The dead rising, the dead wanting to eat people even though they don't actually have to eat to survive, a number of their senses still working, etc. I guess that's why I've never had a problem with fast zombies or superpowered zombies or whatever, because since I've decided to ignore so many problems already, what's a few more?

So why should I be excited about this film? Why so much hype about it?

I'm just concerned this is another super hero film where the rules are too vague so it loses any real sense of grounding/reality/believability?

See, that's the thing about Green Lantern. It's never been based in reality. Don't look at it as a superhero film, look at it as a science fiction film. That's how the comic has been treated with a few exceptions. Is the ring really all that different from some of the things other sci-fi characters have used to gain extraordinary powers?

MoonSylver

07-May-2011, 02:47 PM

A character with over 50 years of continuity & you don't think there are rules goverening how his powers work? :rockbrow:

If really interested, here is the article on the Power Rings: Power Ring (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_ring_(DC_Comics))

Short awnser, no, they can't do "anything". There are limitations.

I feel another "Wanted" snit coming on...:lol:

Neil

07-May-2011, 04:58 PM

There were good solid rules in Thor. He was a Norse god, magic IS the rule. Somehow I don't think that a Norse deity is going to show up with a scientifically-altered hammer that follows all the laws of physics.But there was lots of intangible hokum. Weapons could/couldn't hurt people, and some things happened seemingly just to prop up the script rather than due to a coherant rule set...

To be fair, neither one of those is believable, and who are we to say that option one is more likely to happen than option two if the dead were to rise? It would take quite the huge event to trigger real zombies, after all.

There's more than one huge leap of faith when it comes to watching Romero zombie movies as well. The dead rising, the dead wanting to eat people even though they don't actually have to eat to survive, a number of their senses still working, etc. I guess that's why I've never had a problem with fast zombies or superpowered zombies or whatever, because since I've decided to ignore so many problems already, what's a few more?I think you're (trying to) miss the point? Why the fuss about Hinzman's cemetary zombie? Because it went against the simple rules :)

See, that's the thing about Green Lantern. It's never been based in reality. Don't look at it as a superhero film, look at it as a science fiction film. That's how the comic has been treated with a few exceptions. Is the ring really all that different from some of the things other sci-fi characters have used to gain extraordinary powers?
Not sure of your point? My concern is the premise of the Green Latern, that it may make the event so unaccountable that basically anything goes, so it feels completely unfair. Anyway, I'm sure as it was a populate comic book there are logical rules to the characters and what they can do etc, else it wouldn't have been popular :)

bassman

07-May-2011, 05:53 PM

Warner Brothers desperately needs to boost the marketing campaign on GL. Neil's comment/concerns are exactly what the general audience is seeing in the trailers. They're tailoring the marketing to the fans who are going to see the film regardless when they should be making the general audience understand a bit more.

So at this point I can understand the complaints. Anyone who knows about GL from the past source material is psyched for the film, while those without prior knowledge are left in the dark. It will be interesting to see what kind of word of mouth it gets closer to release.

Mitchified

07-May-2011, 06:39 PM

But there was lots of intangible hokum. Weapons could/couldn't hurt people, and some things happened seemingly just to prop up the script rather than due to a coherant rule set...

The Thor movie featured the same rules that the comics do. Now, granted, it wasn't explained all that well in the movie because it's not really a movie designed to have every detail analyzed, but there wasn't anything in it that didn't fit within the actual lore. Beings from Asgard (a realm of magic) and Midgard (a realm of science) interact differently with each other. Although a hammer to the face seems to work on both. Also, in the case of Thor himself, keep in mind that a lot of his power is tied in with Mjolnor. Without it, he's a lot less impressive.

I think you're (trying to) miss the point? Why the fuss about Hinzman's cemetary zombie? Because it went against the simple rules :)

I'm not missing the point. I get what you were trying to get at. I just happen to completely disagree with it. You can't say that one set of rules for the dead rising are more plausible than another because it's a situation that can't possibly happen. Would radiation that could bring back the dead also give them superpowers? Who knows!

Not sure of your point? My concern is the premise of the Green Latern, that it may make the event so unaccountable that basically anything goes, so it feels completely unfair. Anyway, I'm sure as it was a populate comic book there are logical rules to the characters and what they can do etc, else it wouldn't have been popular :)

My point is that Green Lantern is so fantastical and based so far out of reality that it doesn't have a real rules set. There are rules for the rings and lanterns, yes, and self-imposed rules by the Green Lantern Corps, but the rest of it is fair game. The guy once fought a living moon with a ring construct shaped like a boxing glove. If you're looking for a superhero movie, you won't really find one in Green Lantern. It's science fiction combined with fantasy and green tights. You have to be more open to the absurd to enjoy it.

Oh, and I highlighted that part for a reason. Don't be so sure that popular comic books have to have logical rules. After all, one of Marvel's most popular titles at the moment features this:

http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j373/tmsprague/RocketRaccoon.jpg

Yes, that's a raccoon. With a machine gun. In space.

Danny

08-May-2011, 02:25 AM

the green lanterns are a galaxy wide space force which chooses those with the ability to overcome great fear from every sentient species in the galaxy, with hal jordon being the first chosen from earth. the rings carry a charge of incredible power which recharges from the lanterns which act as batteries. The will power of the user is what shapes the energy. the only weakness is the yellow colour of the light spectrum which cancels it out and represents fear. thats about it. it's more space cop than super hero really.

Neil

08-May-2011, 07:39 AM

I'm not missing the point. I get what you were trying to get at. I just happen to completely disagree with it. You can't say that one set of rules for the dead rising are more plausible than another because it's a situation that can't possibly happen. Would radiation that could bring back the dead also give them superpowers? Who knows!

Nope, indeed neither scenario may happen, but it's how big a leap of faith you as an audience are asked to make, and indeed how often... If I'm asked to make one small leap of faith to enter a world populated by shambling dead bodies, I can absorb that. But if another film asks me to make a leap of faith into a world where not only are the living dead rising, but now their eyes instantly change so as to look like an animals. And also, so do their vocal chords to they sould like Godzilla, and so do their physical abilities so that can bounce around (and even walk along ceilings) with powers that their bodies never had before.... And now let's add that half way through this second film, the zombies start breathing fire and shooting lasers from their eyes...

The first film stands a far great chance of be more absorbing. You only have a small hurdle to jump to enter this alternative reality, and the rules on the other side seem simple and fair. With the second, the hurdles are bigger and greater in number and undoubtably result in you being less believing/trustnig of this alternative reality. The script would almost seem to be cheating?

It's akin to my pet hates about the last Indiana Jones film, with the rediculous fridge scene, and Marion driving a lorry down a tree seemingly knowing all will work out with a big grin on her face. Both these aspects just push the boundaries of believabilty and fairness (for me at least) too far! I've jumped one or two hurdles to get into Indiana's alternative reality, and now I'm expected to high jump over some more? Too much! My belief in a fair game while watching the film is broken. Anything can happen seemingly for any reason, so the film is in effect cheating... Why care about it?

Anyway, back to the Green Lantern... So with this ring that allows them to make anything they want. What are the rules of it? What prevents them making a planet next to them for example? Or making a million more of themselves, all with similar rings? Can you see my concern, if the rules are not fair/consistant, it just becomes too intangible, and as anything could happen at anytime, it seems a little unfair?

Mitchified

08-May-2011, 04:22 PM

Anyway, back to the Green Lantern... So with this ring that allows them to make anything they want. What are the rules of it? What prevents them making a planet next to them for example? Or making a million more of themselves, all with similar rings? Can you see my concern, if the rules are not fair/consistant, it just becomes too intangible, and as anything could happen at anytime, it seems a little unfair?

While the constructs that can be created are only limited by the imagination of the user (which is technically why Kyle Rayner, not Hal Jordan, is the most powerful Green Lantern to be in the comics, since he had the most vivid imagination), keep in mind that the ring has a finite amount of power. It has to be recharged from time to time with one of the portable lanterns. It also only creates images with "force" behind them, meaning that it can't create life. I've always thought of it as basically the best Swiss army knife ever.

the only weakness is the yellow colour of the light spectrum which cancels it out and represents fear.

That was true until six or seven years ago, when in Green Lantern: Rebirth (which was fantastic, if you like Green Lantern) Parallax was removed from the Central Power Battery (the place where the lanterns get their power from). It was kind of a metaphor for the Green Lantern Corps being completely freed from fear, and now they're no longer hindered by the color yellow. Which was pretty stupid to begin with, as theoretically you could simply run into a Wal-Mart and dump yellow paint all over yourself to escape from them previously.

Eyebiter

08-May-2011, 05:00 PM

bassman

08-May-2011, 05:14 PM

Green Lantern suffers from the same problem that doomed The Green Hornet. The script writers took a mature dark superhero story and tried to make it into a comedy.

When did you get an advanced screening? :p

All kidding aside, Reynolds has addressed this concern in a few interviews. While the trailers showcase a good bit of comedy, he says it's actually only lightly sprinkled throughout and the film holds a pretty serious tone. Hal was typically a bit of a wise ass anyway, so that seems about right. Even The Dark Knight and Batman Begins have little jokes throughout, so it's nothing new for "serious" comic films.

Again, I think this all boils down to poor marketing. Which I can understand....this is a tough concept to sell. Hopefully they'll get it straightened out in the next month...

Neil

08-May-2011, 06:34 PM

When did you get an advanced screening? :p

All kidding aside, Reynolds has addressed this concern in a few interviews. While the trailers showcase a good bit of comedy, he says it's actually only lightly sprinkled throughout and the film holds a pretty serious tone. Hal was typically a bit of a wise ass anyway, so that seems about right. Even The Dark Knight and Batman Begins have little jokes throughout, so it's nothing new for "serious" comic films.

Again, I think this all boils down to poor marketing. Which I can understand....this is a tough concept to sell. Hopefully they'll get it straightened out in the next month...
So have we got some real excitement here for this film?

Mitchified

08-May-2011, 08:17 PM

Green Lantern suffers from the same problem that doomed The Green Hornet. The script writers took a mature dark superhero story and tried to make it into a comedy.

Instead of making Hal Jordan a mature and professional military test pilot, they cast him as a generation Y douchebag. Rewrites and extra CGI scenes will not save this film.

To be fair, with a few notable exceptions, Green Lantern was never that mature or dark. The only "mature" moments that I recall off the top of my head was the infamous racial issues of Green Lantern/Green Arrow, Hal Jordan (while possessed by Parallax) destroying Coast City, and Kyle Rayner's dead girlfriend being shoved into a refrigerator. The rest of it isn't any darker or mature than your standard comic, and it's a lot less dark than comics like Batman (R.I.P., Heart of Hush, etc.), X-Men (E is for Extinction, Riot at Xavier's, Messiah Complex), and especially the "Ultimate" and "Max" lines.

Also, while there's a lot of things that could be used to describe Hal Jordan at the beginning of his career, I don't think "mature" and "professional" are at the top of that list.

Green Hornet...yeah, it sucks what they did to that. They took a comic that was basically (at the time) the advancement of the noir style and turned into into whatever that abomination was.

bassman

21-May-2011, 12:01 AM

Finally they release a trailer that may help explain some more to people without prior knowledge of the character.

c17U93LTbmI

As with everything, I know there will always be skeptics and haters. But to me....this looks like an epic, EPIC movie. It looks like GL got the treatment he deserved.

Neil

21-May-2011, 07:48 AM

OK... Now I'm interested!

EvilNed

21-May-2011, 12:27 PM

Still looks ridiculous. But at least it now seems vaguely interesting.

Neil

22-May-2011, 03:01 PM

Still looks ridiculous. But at least it now seems vaguely interesting.

Agreed :)

rongravy

22-May-2011, 09:24 PM

I just watched it fullscreen with the old surround sound going through the room, baked, of course.
Looked pretty dang sweeet to me. I haven't been seeing alot of my movies lately in 3D, but this'll do, pig.
And heyyyyy, I liked Green Hornet. I don't think it was an abomination, grrrr....

Neil

07-Jun-2011, 12:42 PM

Some clips of at AICN - http://www.aintitcool.com/node/49932

AcesandEights

07-Jun-2011, 01:24 PM

Looks like they recruited Dead Pool to fight the Kodan Armada, to me, but I'll give it a shot eventually.

bassman

08-Jun-2011, 12:20 AM

From what I've read, the review embargo ends tomorrow or sometime before the end of this week. Most reviewers have seen it and some of them are taking to Twitter for mini-reviews.

"GREEN LANTERN was terrific fun. The fact that it works at all is a miracle, but it really does cook. The first ten minutes sold me." http://twitter.com/#!/BurnettRM

"Just saw Green Lantern... GOOD ****!" DavidAArnold

The best part about GREEN LANTERN? How it effortlessly skips between cosmic epic to Hal Jordan's story and back again. So much fun. BurnettRM

"Just done with Green Lantern screening and I must say, I really enjoyed it, jetlag and lack of sleep notwithstanding!" http://twitter.com/#!/jadeseah

"So-Frakking-Un-Believable!!! I'm still spinning w/ delight & utter fangirl satisfaction!! #GREENLANTERN IS GO!!"

The only negative I've seen thus far was quoting someone else's positive review and saying "You're lying. LOL. It sucks" Wasn't sure if I could take that one seriously....

Hopefully full length reviews are allowed tomorrow as i've previously heard.

Neil

08-Jun-2011, 09:04 AM

^^ Fingers crossed then!

bassman

15-Jun-2011, 12:48 PM

Well the critic reviews are out there. It's kind of a mixed bag, but I get the feeling that it will have a reception like Superman Returns. Love it or Hate it.

Looking through most of them, it appears one key note is that it's not a particularly 'deep' film. It's more of a comic book, two hour entertainment romp.

Luckily the reviewers I tend to agree with seem to enjoy it on some level, so here's hoping I can do the same in a few days.

Neil

16-Jun-2011, 10:03 AM

The reviews have made stay away from it... Let me know your thoughts!

Mitchified

18-Jun-2011, 02:13 AM

To put it into comic book movie terms, Green Lantern is a lot closer to Ghost Rider than it is to The Dark Knight.

I was disappointed, to say the least. Taking my comic book fandom completely out of the equation, it wasn't a very good science fiction movie. It was a shame, too. Thor wasn't too shabby and X-Men: First Class was great, so I went into Green Lantern with fairly high expectations. What I got instead was a mediocre villain portrayed by a guy that seemed determined to win a Razzie at all costs and a story that just kind of fizzled out as the movie went along. The movie clearly borrowed heavily from Geoff Johns' Secret Origins story arc but seemed to completely miss what made that story such a good read. I left the theater feeling like Green Lantern was nothing more than DC trying to one-up the Marvel style (the style, not the plot) used for Iron Man and coming up way short.

If this is how DC is going to treat the movie versions of their characters (excluding Superman and Batman), I don't want a Justice League movie. I don't even want any more solo films with characters like Flash. DC needs to go back to the drawing board and figure out why the Avengers movie is so eagerly anticipated and why when their own films are announced the first thing everyone says is, "I hope it doesn't suck."

After seeing the movie and re-reading this thread's title, I can safely say that, yes, Green Lantern is indeed the new Star Wars. The Star Wars that's infested with Jar Jar Binks and emo Anakin.

blind2d

18-Jun-2011, 02:22 AM

Well-said, nemesis. I mean, um, Mitch. (Why do I dislike you? It doesn't even make sense to me!)
Saw it today, and... huh. Not quite as impenetrable as Superman Returns for me (god DAMN, that movie made action boring!), but... yeah... It was like, 15% of the film was Michael Bay, and the rest was... Well, I don't know what. Or as the French say, je ne c'est quois. (I hope I spelled that right, I'm rusty). Not good, though. And what's with the hero being the 'doer' (typical muscly daredevil), and the villain being the 'thinker' (science nerd)? Stereotypes abound, if you look for them. Except the black woman, I guess. She was my favorite character. But yeah, I don't give a damn about the comics, and this movie didn't make me want to. Also, there's an animated series for it on the way. Probably won't be as good as its relative relative, Buzz Lightyear: Star Command.
In conclusion, 2.3/5. X-Men: First Class gets 4/5.

Neil

18-Jun-2011, 07:13 AM

Not seen the film myself - the reviews have put me off - but those who have might get a kick out of this? http://www.cinemablend.com/new/16-Burning-Questions-About-Green-Lantern-Answered-By-A-Comics-Expert-25287.html

blind2d

18-Jun-2011, 05:45 PM

After a little mulling, I'd like to amend my rating of Green Lantern. 1.3/5.

rongravy

19-Jun-2011, 12:49 PM

I may try to catch it today. The reviews have been kind of offputting, but when I saw who was playing Sinestro...
That guy was awesome in Kickass.

bassman

19-Jun-2011, 08:25 PM

After the recent negative reviews, I went into Green Lantern expecting the disaster that everyone has made it out to be. Well.....it's pretty damn far from the disaster they've been describing. Sure, there are things that I would have changed but in the end I found it to be an enjoyable 105 minutes at the movies.

One of the worst superhero films ever? Comparing it to Ghost Rider? PUH-LEASE.:rolleyes: The film has it's faults but it's nowhere near THAT bad. Are people too damn critical to go to the cinema and have good time without picking movies to the bone? Even with it's faults, GL is a solid movie as a whole. It's getting a negative reaction that I just can't understand. I can understand if someone just doesn't like it but when they start comparing it to Ghost Rider and the worst movies ever made, I start to think there's some sort of built-in hatred for the character. It started with the first photos released, continued with the unfinished CGI effects in the trailers, and has come to a boil with the release of the film and reviews so negative that they seem to be calling for Martin Campbell's head on a stake.

Yet at the same time Iron Man gets praised as one of the best?? GL is no more memorable or forgetable than Iron Man. Both are just fun movies with basic plot points. The majority of reviews these days just baffle me...

Go into Green Lantern expecting a bit of fun and you should walk away with just that. It's on par with Iron Man. I had hoped for a bit more, but this movie is definitely no disaster. I'd give it a 6 or 7 out of 10.

MoonSylver

19-Jun-2011, 09:29 PM

What's with all the dislike for "Ghost Rider"? Y'all a bunch of haters, that's what it is. :lol:

clanglee

20-Jun-2011, 12:05 AM

I liked it. It entertained me sufficiently for 2 hours. Never bored. It came off as a bit cheesy, but not over the top cheesy. It's not a deep movie at all, definitely about the flash and bang. But that isn't always so bad. I don't put it up with Ironman at all, but I liked it as much as Supe returns and Wolverine:Origins.

Danny

20-Jun-2011, 12:25 AM

i liked it, i was entertained, but on the whole it wasn't dull it was...i guess a 'failure' i'd say. it showed the lamest parts of green lantern and we got mere glimpses of the best parts. i saw like 20 minutes of a great movie, the rest wasnt bad, just vanilla.

bassman

20-Jun-2011, 02:37 PM

What I got instead was a mediocre villain portrayed by a guy that seemed determined to win a Razzie at all costs...

I thought Hammond was great! He had a very creepy and sleazy vibe about him that worked well, imo. They changed the origins of the character around, but for the movie I thought the actor did a great job with making the character unlikable and creepy while on screen. He didn't make me as uneasy as say Heath Ledger as the Joker, but he did great with the material at hand. If I had to single out any actor as not fitting too well it would be Blake Lively as Carol. She wasn't particularly bad, she just didn't seem to "be there". She was just kinda filling in space. Ryan Reynolds did a fine job, I thought. By the end of the movie he really felt like Hal to me. I would have liked to have seen what Bradley Cooper could have done with the role, but Reynolds filled the shoes just fine.

I mean.....without spoilers....the scene in the big battle where Reynolds quietly recites the oath? That was spot on. I had goosebumps and my eyes watered up with joy. Total nerd moment there. I wanted to stand up and scream the last lines of the oath with him! :lol: The whole time you-know-who was trying to corrupt him? Just awesome.

In all, I think the space and Oa scenes are what really made the movie for me. I would have liked to have seen more of those. BTW.....anyone see it in 3D? Thoughts? I went with 2D...

And in case you're one of those people that dart out of the theater when the credits start rolling....you missed a scene after the main title credits. :)

rongravy

21-Jun-2011, 01:54 AM

I would have liked to have seen what Bradley Cooper could have done with the role, but Reynolds filled the shoes just fine.

I was pulling for the Bradster. There should be some kind of rule. Play a superhero, or supervillain, type of character and that's it. No more for you. I'm like, "Oh look, it's Deadpool. No wait, it's Green Lantern. No wait, it's Deadpool again..."
I'll forgive it this time, but if he comes up playing someone else, I'm gonna be pissed, lol.

krisvds

21-Jun-2011, 09:09 AM

Or as the French say, je ne c'est quois. (I hope I spelled that right, I'm rusty).

Close but no sigaar ;-)

bassman

21-Jun-2011, 12:46 PM

I was pulling for the Bradster. There should be some kind of rule. Play a superhero, or supervillain, type of character and that's it. No more for you. I'm like, "Oh look, it's Deadpool. No wait, it's Green Lantern. No wait, it's Deadpool again..."
I'll forgive it this time, but if he comes up playing someone else, I'm gonna be pissed, lol.

I never had the deadpool problem. Wasn't a big fan of Wolverine or his character in Wolverine, so it didn't really make a difference. If anything, I kept seeing him as the guy from "Waiting...", "Just Friends", "Smokin Aces", etc. But I suppose Bradley Cooper would have just been "They guy from The Hangover and A-team"...

rongravy

21-Jun-2011, 09:36 PM

Ehhh, I guess I just pulled more for Coop when he was in the running, like I wanted Crispin Glover as the Joker instead of Heath. I thought, and hoped, he'd also make A TEAM not suck, but that was a huge turd . I guess I will weigh in on Ryan when I finally get to see this. Still trying to find time.
And bud.

MoonSylver

21-Jun-2011, 10:21 PM

And bud.

I hear that stuff grows like a weed...:lol:

darth los

22-Jun-2011, 03:03 PM

Anyone agree/disagree with this criticism?

http://movies.ign.com/articles/117/1177005p1.html

:cool:

bassman

22-Jun-2011, 03:39 PM

Anyone agree/disagree with this criticism?

I disagree with Parallax Diahrea, the CGI failing, Hector Hammond, and it ruining DCU's plans. While I agree they may have ruined something great in combining Krona and Parallax, I thought the effect of parallax was quite effective. The skeletons and flames made it kinda creepy. The CGI, with the exception of a few shots, was great. Hal's costume(a huge concern with fans) was actually quite good. Hector Hammond was a creep. I thought the actor did a fine job. He wasn't really scary, but a sleazy kind of guy you wouldn't want your kids around. The way his story is told parallel to Hal's is great, imo. As for DCU's plans? They've already said they're going to totally reboot the franchises in the next few years, so GL doesn't interfere with that at all.

I do agree with the others. We could have seen a lot more of the Corp, and Sinestro/Hal's relationship could've been a bit more explored, but these are things that can be improved on in sequels. I get the feeling these things may have been cut from the film to give it a shorter run time. Studio interference may have been an issue, as well.

These among other things keep the film from being great and set it only in the "alright" category...

blind2d

22-Jun-2011, 07:38 PM

I didn't like the costumes, and totally agreed with MovieBob from The Escapist that watching him flying in the suit just looked kinda like a CGI mess with his head floating around.
Paralax was... Okay, I really didn't have any issues there.
The Corps really should've gotten more screen time, and Sinestro just seemed like... A guy who was there... Y'know? Except for that one moment. But that was so brief and seemed pointless... *sigh* I dunno.

Neil

26-Jun-2011, 07:08 PM

Sequel talk - http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/warner-bros-pursue-green-lantern-205703

bassman

26-Jun-2011, 09:07 PM

Hopefully whoever directs the sequel can improve upon the original and deliver a movie that Green Lantern deserves rather than just 'okay'. It's kinda suspect that Martin Campbell announced he wouldn't return for a sequel months before the first film was even released. Another sign that leads me to believe too many studio heads had their hands in the pie...

Good to hear they're going ahead with it. GL definitely has the potential to be a great franchise.

Doc

30-Jun-2011, 06:57 AM

You know I think most of the folks who complain the effects were complete shit just don't like cgi t obegin with. And hell I'm one of them. :-X But even I have to admit the effects are fine. In fact, that seems to be the one thing all reviews have come to a consensus on.

rongravy

09-Jul-2011, 04:22 PM

I have to admit I was kind of disappointed after it was over. The villain is a giant floating head thangie who kind of goes down in the end like a pussy. I was too busy laughing at that guy whose head started to look more like a giant walnut throughout the movie. It wasn't a horrible movie, but I was sandwiched into the first row, and they had banished it to one of their smallest theaters.
I'm sure that might have influenced me some, but the lack of story left me sad all in my tummy. I never read any of the comics, but he was always one of my favorites on Saturday morning. I really wanted this one to be the Star Wars epicness talked about. It really had alot of hope, but they could've done alot more. Like when he was training. Looked like he was passed along/beaten every 5 minutes until he quit, might as well've just made a montage of his training to some hip new band's new hit single to the punishment inflicted.
The Paralax thing looked cool, but the fight at the end blew it, though. Sinestro also needed alot more screen time, I wanted to see more of his dislike for Hal and insults. Just lots of things. Was I expecting too much going in?
Other than Batman, WTF is wrong with DC movies?
I hope whatever sequel they do to GL has something better to offer than this. While it wasn't the worst, I wasn't any better for seeing it.
C+ at best.
What will they ruin next... Hawkman?!?!?