Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(FilmDrunk)   "Green Lantern" sequel promises to be greener and lanterner   (filmdrunk.uproxx.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, Green Lantern, first class, Fantastic Four, Punisher, sequels, Black Mans Guide, fanboy, hallucinations  
•       •       •

3213 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 27 Jun 2011 at 5:14 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



50 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2011-06-27 03:41:22 PM  
I vote no.
 
2011-06-27 03:41:40 PM  
More like "WB Plans on stringing people along until the DVD is released, then telling them that Green Lantern was a bomb and to expect a sequel approximately the twelfth of never."
 
2011-06-27 03:51:38 PM  
Warner $till planning Green Lantern $equel for $ome reason.
 
2011-06-27 04:08:00 PM  

Quasar: Warner $till planning Green Lantern $equel for $ome reason.


Yeah, but ths movie would have to make some money first.

With a $200 million budget, and $100 million in advertising, Green Lantern doesn't look like it's going to even make a profit.
 
2011-06-27 04:17:30 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: With a $200 million budget, and $100 million in advertising, Green Lantern doesn't look like it's going to even make a profit.


Good point; I had assumed it did better considering its opening.
 
2011-06-27 05:19:56 PM  
If they promise to have Blake Lively nude-ier and bare-ier, they can make a profit on the sequel and make up for losses on the first.

//eff you PG-13.
 
2011-06-27 05:23:53 PM  
doubling down on fog jizz

wat
 
2011-06-27 05:24:44 PM  
Who knows? First Star Trek was a dismal failure, gray suits and all.

Maybe they'll get JJ Abrams to direct and turn the whole thing into a cash cow.
 
2011-06-27 05:36:16 PM  
Let's skip the sequel and make room for a Deadpool movie instead.
 
2011-06-27 05:41:30 PM  
Maybe instead of greener or lanterner, gooder would be a better choice.
 
2011-06-27 05:42:34 PM  

Dog Welder: Maybe instead of greener or lanterner, gooder would be a better choice.


Never happen.

A Green Lantern movie would have to be able to be made without DC Comics or Warner Brothers having anything to do with it before it could begin to approach "good".
 
2011-06-27 05:44:50 PM  
My take on this:

The film was a pet project of one of the studio heads who refuses to admit they made a turkey. This person is so in denial that they're going to push through a second movie.
 
2011-06-27 05:44:51 PM  
There are three superhero movies I'm looking forward to:

The Dark Knight Rises
Spider-Man (love the Lizard)
and the Fantastic Four reboot, whenever that comes out.

Don't care for the Avengers or Green Lantern or whatever else. Most of these superheroes they're making films about are either mediocre or flat out suck.
 
2011-06-27 05:54:31 PM  

coeyagi: If they promise to have Blake Lively nude-ier and bare-ier, they can make a profit on the sequel and make up for losses on the first.

//eff you PG-13.


I've said it before, and I'll say it again. How do you cast Blake as Carol Ferris, and NOT find an excuse to get her into a Star Sapphire outfit, plot be damned?
 
2011-06-27 05:55:01 PM  
*SIGH*

The Deadpool movie ain't ever gonna get made...

/At least not with the only person who could pull it off.
 
2011-06-27 06:02:43 PM  

JustSeanV67: Who knows? First Star Trek was a dismal failure, gray suits and all..


You would be incorrect, sir. Star Trek: TMP is #3 for worldwide gross in the franchise, #4 domestically and was unbeaten in the franchise for domestic until Star Trek 4,

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/StarTrek.php
 
2011-06-27 06:17:59 PM  
It wasn't that bad, IMO.
 
2011-06-27 06:20:21 PM  

FerneJohn: There are three superhero movies I'm looking forward to:

The Dark Knight Rises
Spider-Man (love the Lizard)
and the Fantastic Four reboot, whenever that comes out.

Don't care for the Avengers or Green Lantern or whatever else. Most of these superheroes they're making films about are either mediocre or flat out suck.


I agree with the first one.
I don't care for the idea of a Spider-Man retelling. I'll probably see it but could do without.
Fantastic Four movies were terrible, starting with story, continuing on through casting and directing. So I don't care if this ever gets made.

Captain America and The Avengers are the two I am looking forward to.
 
2011-06-27 06:30:23 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: ...Fantastic Four movies were terrible, starting with story, continuing on through casting and directing. So I don't care if this ever gets made...


That's why I'm looking forward to the reboot.
 
2011-06-27 06:44:31 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: JustSeanV67: Who knows? First Star Trek was a dismal failure, gray suits and all..

You would be incorrect, sir. Star Trek: TMP is #3 for worldwide gross in the franchise, #4 domestically and was unbeaten in the franchise for domestic until Star Trek 4,

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/StarTrek.php


As a film, it was nothing but a family reunion.
 
2011-06-27 06:46:13 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: JustSeanV67: Who knows? First Star Trek was a dismal failure, gray suits and all..

You would be incorrect, sir. Star Trek: TMP is #3 for worldwide gross in the franchise, #4 domestically and was unbeaten in the franchise for domestic until Star Trek 4,

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/StarTrek.php


Interesting. Though their budget on that isn't in line with what wikipedia has. Link says 35 million, but wiki says 46 million. Backed up by the following exchange:

According to Bennett, he was called in front of a group including Jeffrey Katzenberg and Michael Eisner and asked if he thought he could make a better movie than The Motion Picture, which Bennett confessed he found "really boring".[18] When Bennett replied in the affirmative, Charles Bluhdorn asked, "Can you make it for less than forty-five-farking-million-dollars?" Bennett replied that "Where I come from, I can make five movies for that."[17]

/and I think the proper term is "lanternier"
 
2011-06-27 06:54:27 PM  
Looking at the box office receipts, I'm gonna go with UNLIKELY.
 
2011-06-27 07:04:55 PM  

Marshal805: It wasn't that bad, IMO.


agreed. It was much better than the 27% rotten tomato gave it.
 
2011-06-27 07:11:13 PM  
"The Deadpool movie ain't ever gonna get made..."

You're correct, the incessant bashing will kill that along with the GL sequel.
I realized the clown in the article was biased when he referred to the light from the rings as cum.
Real professional there, mr. paid reviewer.
Oh well, back to rom coms , documentaries and sci fi by the inept.
 
2011-06-27 07:16:49 PM  
I thought it was perfectly adequate comic-book fare, and enjoyed it fine given my low expectations. I'd probably go see a sequel (the one they clearly set up), but unless this thing goes crazy on the DVD release I'm going to agree with others on this:img1.fark.net
 
2011-06-27 07:35:45 PM  

FerneJohn: That's why I'm looking forward to the reboot.


IT JUST farkING CAME OUT.

Reboot superman for this generation.
Reboot the A-Team.

Studios won't be happy until each of them are releasing a 'reboot' every year like Vampires, Frankenstein and Godzilla movies in the 30s and 40s.
 
2011-06-27 07:49:43 PM  
Hopefully Blake Lively will become Star Sapphire in the sequel. Or at the very least we see a Red Lantern cat.
 
2011-06-27 08:14:39 PM  
i165.photobucket.com
 
2011-06-27 08:16:05 PM  
wizbangpop.com

take your ladies to see Green Lantern just for that one scene.
you know the one I'm talking about.
ryan reynolds in a wife beater and sweats. end of story.
 
2011-06-27 08:18:10 PM  
It wasnt terrible, saw it yesterday. It was no Daredevil or Ghostrider or X3, or F4 or Spider-man 3, etc... But otoh it was certainly no Dark Knight or Iron Man, thats for sure.

/hal was uninteresting, would have rather seen more of the other lanterns, but cgi is expensive
//looking forward to captain america next month
 
2011-06-27 08:30:05 PM  

fusillade762: http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/StarTrek.php

Interesting. Though their budget on that isn't in line with what wikipedia has. Link says 35 million, but wiki says 46 million.


Since preproduction of Star Trek: Phase II is routinely overlapped with TMP, they could both be right.
 
2011-06-27 08:38:18 PM  
Meh. DC is just trying to postpone the Reynoldsing as long as possible. Observe. (Pops)
 
2011-06-27 09:11:38 PM  
That was the least helpful review of all time. He just kept going on about colored semen and mom-farking. The author has issues.
 
2011-06-27 09:15:20 PM  

Cyno01: It wasnt terrible, saw it yesterday. It was no Daredevil or Ghostrider or X3, or F4 or Spider-man 3, etc... But otoh it was certainly no Dark Knight or Iron Man, thats for sure.

/hal was uninteresting, would have rather seen more of the other lanterns, but cgi is expensive
//looking forward to captain america next month


Agreed. It wasn't nearly as bad as the reviews said it was. I went on a cheap night, granted, and didn't expect much. But I was mildly entertained at times. And since I only started reading Green Lantern when Kyle Rayner was introduced, I didn't have any preconceptions about Hal, the Green Lantern Corps, Oa, etc. So can't speak for any butchery of the character or the history.
 
2011-06-27 10:00:24 PM  
I thought GL was just dull. And that's not really how you want to showcase a superhero story.

Plus the end, the between credits end, made absolutely no sense based on the story told for the preceeding 90 minutes.
 
2011-06-27 10:31:55 PM  
Are they going to fly through an asteroid belt between the earth and the moon this time?
 
2011-06-27 10:36:05 PM  
Batman Begins did underwhelming boxoffice, and the sequel was killer.

I vote yes.
 
2011-06-27 11:51:26 PM  
What a pathetic state the movie business is in when a movie that no one outside of ComicCon nerds gives a damn about is made, will fail spectacularly at the box office and they *still* want to make a second one just because they need a "franchise". Meanwhile, those of us who prefer movies that actually have sharp writing, excellent acting and direction that doesn't involve CGI and lots of things exploding find it more difficult to find anything worth going to see.

/Why the hell are you still on my lawn, you damn kids?
 
2011-06-28 12:44:04 AM  
In brightest day or blackest night,
A "Green Lantern" viewing? Pure cinematic blight;
And those who giddily predicted that 3-D might
Make nary a difference-were oh so very right!

/Wish a magenta ring of disdain existed.
 
2011-06-28 12:47:45 AM  

Techhell: Cyno01: It wasnt terrible, saw it yesterday. It was no Daredevil or Ghostrider or X3, or F4 or Spider-man 3, etc... But otoh it was certainly no Dark Knight or Iron Man, thats for sure.

/hal was uninteresting, would have rather seen more of the other lanterns, but cgi is expensive
//looking forward to captain america next month

Agreed. It wasn't nearly as bad as the reviews said it was. I went on a cheap night, granted, and didn't expect much. But I was mildly entertained at times. And since I only started reading Green Lantern when Kyle Rayner was introduced, I didn't have any preconceptions about Hal, the Green Lantern Corps, Oa, etc. So can't speak for any butchery of the character or the history.



There wasnt much butchery tbh, no complaints about that as far as im concerned, but im not an uber nerd. Well, i am, jut not SUPER familiar with GL. It was just kinda meh, but afaik they didnt change anything major.

If this was supposed (supposedly) to be a vanguard to the Superman/Batman reboots and possible WW and flash movies for a shared movie universe like what Marvel is doing, i could have used a bit more in universe stuff... Just one nod would have been enough.

Maybe when Agent Waller was like "Contrary to what the nuts believe, this is the first alien to ever visit our planet.", she could have added "Although we have our suspicions about a certain citizen of metropolis." and Hector could have just gone "Ahhhhh..." and nodded. That would have been plenty.
 
2011-06-28 02:01:33 AM  
I kinda liked the movie, to be honest. I'd love to shiat on it like most critics, but for the most part I was entertained. And a few times I actually wondered what was going to happen next. Maybe it was just because my expectations were so low. Ryan Reynolds was probably the worst thing about the movie, and he's not really terrible per se. IMHO he is tolerable in comedies (haven't seen "Buried" yet), but he just seems too much like a goofball for me to suspend my disbelief when it came to picturing him as an action hero. But he was okay, not anything special or horrible.

But I liked the effects for the most part. I even liked the suit, except for the mask, and even that was made into a clever joke. The CGI was only distracting when cutting between the Guardians and any real people. Also, a crowd of people standing around dumbly watching a helicopter go out of control 20 feet over their heads verged on stupid, but that was really the only time the movie almost lost me. The rest of it held my interest reasonably well. I liked the elephant man villain and I really liked the look of the evil space creature. When it was oozing over the city, I thought that looked pretty cool. These bad guys actually seemed like sort of a real threat, and that they would pose a serious challenge to a superhero who I always considered overpowered.

Sinestro was great. He's the only reason I'd like to see a sequel, because I'd love to see more of him. I think that guy's performance really had a pitch perfect tone for this kind of movie. I'll have to look the actor up later and see what else he was in, but I thought he did a great job.
 
2011-06-28 07:19:03 AM  
I saw it on Saturday, and thought it was pretty good, if not for everyone. The article is immature crap. I do want to see more of Sinestro.
 
2011-06-28 11:12:40 AM  
Saw Cars 2 and this at a drive-in over the weekend.

Cars 2 was garbage. First true "miss" (although that "Rat" movie was close too) for me with that company.

Maybe it's because I hated Cars 2 so much, I just know I enjoyed Green Lantern. CGI is finally getting to a point where you can make these kind of comic book movies. I enjoyed it more then either FF movies. Not as good as the Batamn reboots, not as bad as crap like Spiderman 3 and such.
 
2011-06-28 12:19:25 PM  

Marshal805: It wasn't that bad, IMO.


The X-men movie was. Christ what a stinker
 
2011-06-28 12:23:03 PM  

Henry Holland: Meanwhile, those of us who prefer movies that actually have sharp writing, excellent acting and direction that doesn't involve CGI and lots of things exploding find it more difficult to find anything worth going to see.


Really? The Bridesmaids movie was hilarious, I heard Midnight in Paris was good, and hell, Hollywood's been churning out movies for the past century. You really have trouble finding good movies to watch?
 
2011-06-28 12:43:01 PM  

darkscout: FerneJohn: That's why I'm looking forward to the reboot.

IT JUST farkING CAME OUT.

Reboot superman for this generation.
Reboot the A-Team.

Studios won't be happy until each of them are releasing a 'reboot' every year like Vampires, Frankenstein and Godzilla movies in the 30s and 40s.


Hey, it's not my fault those FF movies sucked. Get them done right.
 
2011-06-28 01:24:32 PM  
How about a break from comic book movies for awhile? It will do everyone some good.
 
2011-06-28 01:55:54 PM  

thatguyoverthere70: Sinestro was great. He's the only reason I'd like to see a sequel, because I'd love to see more of him. I think that guy's performance really had a pitch perfect tone for this kind of movie. I'll have to look the actor up later and see what else he was in, but I thought he did a great job.


Agreed. Mark Strong is a great villain, and I like what he did here; his Sinestro is a sympathetic character, and he'll carry the next film...provided a) it gets made, and b) he reprises his role, either of which could easily fall through.
 
2011-06-28 03:52:34 PM  
I have to agree that Mark Strong was the best casting choice in the film. I think, though, that the creation of that after/during credits scene wasn't well thought out. Most fans of the GL mythos are going to expect the Sinestro Corps War storyline, conveniently forgetting the number of properties WB won't get (and would confuse the average movie-goer anyhow): Mogo, Ranx, Mongol, Prime, Anti-Monitor, anything involving Qward or Daxam, etc. etc. What we'll be left with is the green guys vs. the yellow guys, with a PG rating limiting what the yellow guys are capable of. The fans will weep and wail that it's isn't the story they expected, the casual viewers will go "WTF" and wonder what just happened. Even if Johns pens the storyline and the scriptwriter doesn't change a thing (even less likely), I don't see how they can pay off that scene in a way that will get the butts in the seats. They're better off going D2V and getting the licenses they need to pull off that story.


/Would pay full price if they did involve Mogo
//Would pay the 3D tax if they kept Prime out of it
 
2011-06-28 04:13:28 PM  

praxcelis: I have to agree that Mark Strong was the best casting choice in the film. I think, though, that the creation of that after/during credits scene wasn't well thought out. Most fans of the GL mythos are going to expect the Sinestro Corps War storyline, conveniently forgetting the number of properties WB won't get (and would confuse the average movie-goer anyhow): Mogo, Ranx, Mongol, Prime, Anti-Monitor, anything involving Qward or Daxam, etc. etc. What we'll be left with is the green guys vs. the yellow guys, with a PG rating limiting what the yellow guys are capable of. The fans will weep and wail that it's isn't the story they expected, the casual viewers will go "WTF" and wonder what just happened. Even if Johns pens the storyline and the scriptwriter doesn't change a thing (even less likely), I don't see how they can pay off that scene in a way that will get the butts in the seats. They're better off going D2V and getting the licenses they need to pull off that story.


/Would pay full price if they did involve Mogo
//Would pay the 3D tax if they kept Prime out of it


What licenses would they need? Warner Bros. owns DC Comics. If they can't use a character it's because of their own damn rules on cross pollination.
 
Displayed 50 of 50 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report