Warner Bros. Mulls "Green Lantern" Movie Relaunch

[MarvelMaster616]

I'm actually among those who liked the Green Lantern movie. Ryan Reynolds wasn't the best for the role, but he was more than serviceable and I think he definitely has the potential to carry that role. And I don't think they should just relaunch after two movies. If Marvel can give the Fantastic Four a sequel after the first movie underperformed, then there's no reason DC shouldn't give Green Lantern another shot. A movie that involves Sinestro, the Manhunters, or even the Star Sapphires could go a long ways towards helping this series. But if the second movie doesn't improve on the first, then yes. I agree DC should relaunch.

[Stressfactor]

Either that or hire Nathan Fillion like you should've done in the first place.

Okay, everyone asking for Fillion I'm assuming hasn't been watching "Castle" the last few years.

I love Fillion to death. The man has enough charm to power New York BUT he would have to lose probably at least close to 100 pounds now to play a superhero and on top of losing the weight he would also have to put on muscle.

I'm not sure he can or even would be willing to do that.


As for the first movie -- while I was disappointed I could see real glimmers in there where the movie WORKED. The opening dogfight with Carol and Hal? was AWESOME -- my heart was racing in that scene -- literally -- and I thought it summed Hal's character up in a quick, efficient, scene -- it was everything that MADE him a Green Lantern -- his willingness to take risks, and his determination to win. It was a very 'Captain Kirk' moment.

I loved the quiet scene where he and Carol talked. I loved that they went there with the whole "A little mask isn't going to stop me from recognizing you".

To me the problem was that the script was a little too splintered. There was actually a LOT of good stuff in there but they just needed to focus on some of it. Like Hal's relationship with his nephew -- lots of good potential in there. And the script writer could have put in some stuff about Hal's contentious relationship with his brother which was an interesting facet of the comic books for a while.

And they needed to make a decision -- if Hector Hammond was going to be the villain on Earth then he should have BEEN THE VILLAIN. And if they wanted to go with the villain space being Parallax then he SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE VILLAIN IN SPACE. The split-focus didn't do the movie any favors.


And the costume design was hideous. They needed to go somewhere else with that.


But honestly, yeah, I think there WAS a good movie buried under studio CRAP in the first "Green Lantern" film -- unlike say Catwoman where there never WAS a good movie in there -- and I'd be willing to let them have another shot at it -- even with Reynolds in the lead role.



But, then again, I'm apparently one of the only people on this planet who's just never connected with the John Stewart character -- no, not even in the Justice League cartoon.

Behind Hal my favorite human JL is...... Guy Gardner. Particularly as he's been written more lately with some of the worst of his sharp edges filed down a little.

[regnak]

I'm actually among those who liked the Green Lantern movie. Ryan Reynolds wasn't the best for the role, but he was more than serviceable and I think he definitely has the potential to carry that role. And I don't think they should just relaunch after two movies. If Marvel can give the Fantastic Four a sequel after the first movie underperformed, then there's no reason DC shouldn't give Green Lantern another shot. A movie that involves Sinestro, the Manhunters, or even the Star Sapphires could go a long ways towards helping this series. But if the second movie doesn't improve on the first, then yes. I agree DC should relaunch.

The problem with your idea is that the first FF performed well for it's budget. Over 3X in fact, so it was a financial success.

[kane]

Okay, everyone asking for Fillion I'm assuming hasn't been watching "Castle" the last few years. [snip]

Well, 100 pounds is too much (he is not that overweight), but I agree that he is not in shape for such a movie and probably too old (especially for a franchise movie with sequels and a least one JLA movie). Unfortunately this is also the reason he should not play Nathan Drake in a Uncharted movie, if such a movie will be made.

[Totoro Man]

Kill him. Replace with Rayner or Stewart.

I'm gonna vote for Stewart as well (at the expense of Jordan and Rayner) -- when was the last time we saw a black comic book superhero on the silver screen? Blade? Hancock? I think it's time for another.

making GL gay would be okay as a tie-in for the comics, I guess... so there's a certain logic there. but the X-Men movies already did the gay subtext for every film-- and I think having a DC character in movies who isn't white would be the more interesting move. vote for Stewart. there's already tons of GLs out there-- so you wouldn't even have to kill Jordan. just have a new ring go to some other fellow.

[Legato]

I'm gonna vote for Stewart as well (at the expense of Jordan and Rayner) -- when was the last time we saw a black comic book superhero on the silver screen? Blade? Hancock? I think it's time for another.

making GL gay would be okay as a tie-in for the comics, I guess... so there's a certain logic there. but the X-Men movies already did the gay subtext for every film-- and I think having a DC character in movies who isn't white would be the more interesting move. vote for Stewart. there's already tons of GLs out there-- so you wouldn't even have to kill Jordan. just have a new ring go to some other fellow.

Hancock was never a comic book hero. I think he was Hollywood made

[Stressfactor]

Well, 100 pounds is too much (he is not that overweight), but I agree that he is not in shape for such a movie and probably too old (especially for a franchise movie with sequels and a least one JLA movie). Unfortunately this is also the reason he should not play Nathan Drake in a Uncharted movie, if such a movie will be made.

RDJ was 42 when he was hired on for the first "Iron Man" film and Ruffalo playing Banner over in "The Avengers" is 45.

But neither of them had as much weight to lose/muscle mass to gain.

[Surtur]

we dont need a rebood we just need new casting.

I think both are needed. Though yes..Reynolds just wasn't suited to play the role of Green Lantern. It's hard to take him seriously. He isn't exactly a terrible actor, but he was terrible for that part.

Also to me Parralax isn't someone you bring out in the first movie. That's a villain you have in the 2nd or 3rd film in the series. It has potentially cosmic scale, and could of played a part in a JLA movie. Hector Hammond alone would of been enough if done right.

[Lancerman]

Reynolds is a good actor and to be fair he probably executed the script well and performed the character that he was given well (that character just happened to more Kyle Rayner than Hal Jordan). His biggest issue is that he's type cast as Van Wilder and other characters like him and most people can't see him in roles outside of that and his movies suffer as a result. When me and my friends saw safehouse he did a great job in the role but when we left we kept talking about how hard it was to buy Ryan Reynolds as a badass government agent.

[Fast]

RDJ was 42 when he was hired on for the first "Iron Man" film and Ruffalo playing Banner over in "The Avengers" is 45.

But neither of them had as much weight to lose/muscle mass to gain.

Neither of them has to do stunt stuff so their characters can be believably old and still conceivably work. It doesn't matter if Stark is 20 or 40 since the suit does so much of the work, and same with banner since he could be 70 and still be terrifying hulked out. In fact being young and buff as banner wouldn't work since he is supposed to seem so unthreatening as a human.

[Stressfactor]

Neither of them has to do stunt stuff so their characters can be believably old and still conceivably work. It doesn't matter if Stark is 20 or 40 since the suit does so much of the work, and same with banner since he could be 70 and still be terrifying hulked out. In fact being young and buff as banner wouldn't work since he is supposed to seem so unthreatening as a human.

In the first movie Tony Stark is seen forging the first suit of armor. His arms HAD to look good for that scene. Additionally, he wandered around a lot of the first film again in a tank top or short sleeves and his arms were pretty well defined.

Banner, however, I will grant you -- although people might not have wanted to look at him in that scene where he was basically naked if he had looked like a big ol bowl of pudding.

You have to figure that there is a certain female demographic who are going to these movies just as much for the beefcake factor as for the action.

Just sayin'.

[kalorama]

In the first movie Tony Stark is seen forging the first suit of armor. His arms HAD to look good for that scene. Additionally, he wandered around a lot of the first film again in a tank top or short sleeves and his arms were pretty well defined.

But those things weren't actually required for the role. They showed it off because he did the work, but had he not, they'd have put him in a long-sleeved shirt and kept steppin.