$300 million dollars to make and promote. Think about that for a moment. http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/archives/2011/06/13/green_lantern_reportedly_cost_300_million_martin_campbell_not_signed_for/#
You liked those other comic movies but disliked Thor? As for GL, sounds like what I was expecting, a major misstep, would have taken a serious effort to make that concept translate into a live action flick.
Yep, its really a massive mistake for WB, they'll be lucky to get anything near that money back, think I read yesterday that it's not being released into international territories until much later but with this terrible word of mouth it'll probably bomb overseas as well, even though a lot of comic movies do strong biz overseas.
I'll still watch at some point, at worst on Netflix....but this is starting to smell like an Incredible Hulk type money loser.
Agreed...Ive liked it since I was a kid...The ratings are only a guide which I rarely pay attention to... I will say $300MM is ridiculous....
reviews seem to be good eye candy but not much else, which is a shame because GL is an interesting character. Perhaps they went to hokey (Ryan Reynolds is a bit too goofy) and should have made it a little more along the Thor lines which managed to balance sci-fi and reality.
"Excuse me, can you show me the quickest way to a heap of FAIL, please? ... Do you speak english?" "Green" is extra funny given the $ spent. Not so much a beacon but a furnace for money.
I guess I don't understand how a film can be released that costs so much and is getting such lousy reviews from all over. Surely, this movie went through a bunch of test audience screenings and they knew it was bad from those screenings? Maybe they just couldn't fix it at that point because of all the money that had already spent? Or, the test audiences gave it thumbs up? It seems like if you spend so many millions on this film...you would want to do it right. I guess if you are working from a bad script...the rest of the production suffers and there is not much you can do later on about it. I just read a review over at Yahoo! that ripped it to shreds basically...one and a half out of four stars.
From what I understand the cost of the movie just continued to increase as they continued CGI work after they'd completed it. Think it was one of those cases where they bit off a lot more than they could chew, next thing they know the cost has reach a crazy amount. Also from what I've read the script is a mess and Campbell just doesn't sound like the right fit for the movie.
When one of the Kings of fanboy nerds gives it a thumbs down, then the movie is pretty much DOA. http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/motion-captured/posts/review-awkward-uneven-green-lantern-packs-no-punch
I think test-screenings allow you to tweak things, but not to fix a movie. Any movie that comes out of screening needing major reshoots still ends up being garbage. You can polish a turd, but it's still a turd.
i tried watching the green lantern emerald knights cartoon over the weekend and about 30 mins in i got bored as it skipped around from one story to another me and friend felt it was just way too disjointed stopped watching and watched the 1966 classic Batman movie with Adam West and Burt Ward instead. we made the right choice if the movie is anything like the cartoon film that was just released i am going to be real upset.
I went into Emerald Knights knowing that it was an anthology of several tales built around one main storyline, so I actually enjoyed it. I could see why one wouldn't like it though if they were expecting a traditional feature going in. Green Lantern: First Flight would be the animated feature that the live-action film would be most similar to (though it sounds like it can only hope to be half as good as GL:FF). I kinda wish the movie had gone the route of not doing a Hal Jordan origin, but rather a story about the ring passing on to Kyle Rayner or Jon Stewart, with explanatory conversations spread throughout. Not like that would've helped with the terrible CGI though.
21% on the tomatometer, OUCH!!!! <embed class="rev3PlayerEmbed" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://revision3.com/player-v8657" allowFullScreen="true" quality="high" allowScriptAccess="always" width="555" height="312" />
Too much green. Damn...it's like I'm in Ireland every day for the St. Patricks day with the green beer everywhere and all of these things (in my best Arnold Schwarzenneger voice). And, it's not even a good green. WhyTF am I going to sit in a dreary green movie for two hours? I'm not.
Reading bad stuff about it, but what stands out is that Ryan Reynolds is the only good part. I'll still see it because I'm a nerd and I like RR (like SO.....!).
This is dissappointing, I loved the Green Lantern comics as a kid and was really looking forward to this movie. DD
