Green Lantern, please tell me it's not true!!!
| If it wouldn't be made for Green Lantern fans, then why are they using the property? Why not create a new character if you intend to alter the source material so much? By altering the character so radically, you're effectively killing its brand recognition, so why not go all the way and create a new franchise, instead of ruining the future of an existing one? |
I have no idea if this movie will be good, bad or indifferent.
But there are many, many people who have casual knowledge of Green Lantern and even more who have heard the name, but who care nothing for purity. As Gabe ;points out, name recognition is a big thing.
No one would make any movie for a small subset of ‘hard-core’ fans of relatively obscure ‘cult’ figures. And as already been pointed out, there are plenty of instances where drastic alterations did not kill the ‘brand’.
| If people like me aren't talking about the GREEN LANTERN movie (if, indeed, I am trashing the entire concept) who the heck will build buzz and word of mouth for it? |
Advertising will do a lot. It will get people like my wife, who goes with her friends to most comic, character-based movies of this type if they get reasonable reviews. So if it is (in reviews eyes) another Spiderman she (and others like her) will be there. If it is a bust she won’t be—but going or not going will have nothing to do with how accurately the movie reflects the source, nor how much buzz is created on the internet.
I have no data to back this up, but I think lots of people have heard of the Green Lantern and very few of those care much at all about detail.
The thing that I don't get, like a lot of people out there don't either, is that if a character in a comic book is writen interestingly enough to last 30-40 years, than why does it need any reinvention to be a good movie? all they have to do is take the story, boil it down to the essentials, and than try to stay pure to the ource material. All the "good" superhero movies have done this.
What I'm listening to right now!
This post is invisible! It also has the power to kill threads!
| If it wouldn't be made for Green Lantern fans, then why are they using the property? Why not create a new character |
They can just call the character the Green Latrine, and be done with it.

- bones
As for The Six Million Dollar Man being made into a comedy,it would not be my first thought. As a fan of the show when it originally aired, I guess I see it in that genre. That being said, there is also a part of me that thinks if anyone could pull this off, it would be Jim Carrey.
I just wish these people would treat the comic books they want to turn into films in the same light they were written in.
Just my opinion.
| Advertising will do a lot. |
You mean, like it got people to HULK, and (i'm betting) the forthcoming CATWOMAN, all movies that did or look to deviate from their source material?
| You mean, like it got people to HULK, |
I mean that it will create awareness, Chris. Since you had posted that only the hard-core fans could create the ‘buzz’ (or awareness) necessary to generate interest in the movie, I was just pointing out that there are other methods.
That advertising creates awareness is unquestionable. But it still won’t get many people to see a bad moive. The same would be true of the hardcore fans. A movie could be faithful to its comic book source, down to the last detail and if it were a bad movie I think that no more people would go see it than the two you mention.
BTW, I quite liked The Hulk and was disappointed at its overall reception by the public.
I guess what I'm saying is I don't think we can point to a single, successful comic book movie that was UNFAITHFUL to its source material. At least I cannot think of any of the top of my head.
And if you accept this assertion as true, then you have to ask why? And I think the reason is that if you betray your core audience, then it's not going to appeal to anyone else either.
Here is the link and since this is from AICN who knows if this is true or not.
Link

Also, sucess or failure. This will destroy any chance of a real GL movie or tv show for years to come.
Bring back John Doe! Or at least resolve the cliff-hanger with a 2hr movie or as an extra on a dvd release.
Film 1: Hal Jordan gets the ring and learning the ropes. The villian in this would be Sinestro.
Film 2: The villian will be the Mongul and the movie ends in a cliffhanger with Coast City being nuked.
Film 3: Emerald Twilight. You just adapt that story and end it with Kyle Rayner getting the ring.
Film 4: Kyle learns the ropes and must fight the Mongul who is out for revenge.
Film 5: Kyle decides to rebuild the GL Corps perhaps. Haven't give this one a lot of thought.
Film 6: Hal Jordan returns as an enemy at first, but it ends with Jordan sacrificing his life and the rebirth of the Green Lantern Corps.
|
Quote:
Patrick - I understand what you're saying... Unfortunately, our idea of "tongue-in-cheek" usually equates to a studio exec's reality of "someting-in-something else" (think cranium & rectum), and the next think you know, Halle Berry is Catwoman. Moe. |
How applicable...
Unfortunately, our idea of "tongue-in-cheek" usually equates to a studio exec's reality of "someting-in-something else" (think cranium & rectum), and the next think you know, Halle Berry is Catwoman Adam Sandler Jack Black is Green Lantern.
Britton, I love your idea. Unfortunately, I fear that it's too smart & involving a story to pass off on the WB execs.
Moe.
- Confidence implies the knowledge of one\'s limitations, while arrogance implies that one does not have any.
- There\'s no such thing as \"normal\". The secret is to find someone that\'s screwed up in a way that seems \"normal\" to you.
Nothing against Black since I like him as a comedic actor however this is going to be a very bad decision for him just like Halle Berry turn in Catwoman.
What's WB execs thinking???
I really hope that AICN is wrong and this never come to pass.
They need to retire.
"now, if that's a fact, tell me... am i lying?"
| the power is just too hokey. everybody would be complaining about the bad CGI (it's big and green!) |
I think the thing that makes it hokey is how the energy is manipulated at times (e.g. creating giant hammers and padlocks). Seeing THAT on film would put it on par with a movie like The Mask. But a good CG artist and art director could easily make those energy manifestations into something pretty cool and less (Tex Avery) cartoony.
He was one of those people who would be neither a follower nor a leader, but only an aspiring heart, impatient in the failing body which imprisoned it. -- T. H. White, "The Once and Future King"
I do like the Plastic Man/ Woozy winks idea though
What I'm listening to right now!
This post is invisible! It also has the power to kill threads!

The following was posted at the DC Comics message boards.
| The Jack Black-Green Lantern rumor was refuted at the DC Comics panel today at the San Diego Con by Dan Didio and Geoff Johns. Wonder Woman writer Greg Rucka said a new version of Wonder Woman screenplay is being drafted by a solid but unnamed screenwriter |
Bring back John Doe! Or at least resolve the cliff-hanger with a 2hr movie or as an extra on a dvd release.
Re: Green Lantern, please tell me it's not true!!!
Greg Berlanti Directing Green LanternPersonally, I think he's a great choice even though I never would have thought to pick him for the project. "Everwood" was one of the best TV series I've ever seen.
Bring back John Doe! Or at least resolve the cliff-hanger with a 2hr movie or as an extra on a dvd release.
Re: Green Lantern, please tell me it's not true!!!
i wonder if they'll make the ring just an raw energy/laser weapon (like Cyclops' power) instead of a whatever-you-can-think-of weapon. i could see it either way. seriously, this movie could spell trainwreck. the only thing i liked about GL as a kid was a) his uniform was pretty cool graphically, and different from most heroes. and b) the whole mythoglogy of the GL Corps as universal sheriffs."now, if that's a fact, tell me... am i lying?"



