-
1 Attachment(s)
[QUOTE=Bored at 3:00AM;4995286]
Dennis Quaid would have been perfect about 20 or 30 years earlier.[/QUOTE]
I've always thought this. (also said it many times :)) When he played a pilot in "The Right Stuff" he was too young for Hal, and when he played a pilot in "Flight of the Phoenix" he was a bit too old, but somewhere in between there...
-
[QUOTE=Bored at 3:00AM;4995286]Who would you have wanted as Hal? I thought Reynolds did the best he could given the hostile director he was working with. I think Campbell's perferred choice of Bradley Cooper could have worked, too, but even he would have been saddled with that script, which was clearly the product of too many producers and studio executives rewriting the thing to death.
Timothy Olyphant would work best in my view, particularly for Morrison & Sharp's more laconic 60s/70s version. He's the closest to a Paul Newman-type that's out there these days.
I think Tom Cruise also would have worked just fine for the now abandoned Hal/John GLCorps film, despite my discomfort with Cruise's creepy Scientology stuff.
Dennis Quaid would have been perfect about 20 or 30 years earlier.[/QUOTE]
Not really sure, fan casting isn’t really a thing I’ve done much of so I’m not really good at it. Olyphant wouldn’t be a bad pick. But yeah, I don’t blame the movie on Reynolds, the problems with the movie weren’t with the actors.
-
[QUOTE=Frontier;4995103]Yeah, I think to some degree...while not perfect, the movie gets a bum rap.[/QUOTE]
imagine hbo re-editing some of its movies. i don't know how a directors cut would be different. just fun to speculate.
-
[QUOTE=liwanag;4995591]imagine hbo re-editing some of its movies. i don't know how a directors cut would be different. just fun to speculate.[/QUOTE]
The extended cut is essentially the director's cut, but Campbell was still pissed about the studio casting Reynolds
-
Campbell should have been more focused on making sure he had a better script.
-
Maybe he did, but the morons in charge did whatever they liked. Reynolds, for as irritated as I am with his stupid antics that keep hurting this character all these years later, does have my sympathies when he says they started shooting the movie with no full script.
-
Just from a performance standpoint I think Bradley Cooper would've been a little convincing as Hal, at least in my book.
[QUOTE=Johnny;4995746]Maybe he did, but the morons in charge did whatever they liked. Reynolds, for as irritated as I am with his stupid antics that keep hurting this character all these years later, does have my sympathies when [B]he says they started shooting the movie with no full script.[/B][/QUOTE]
Well, I guess they were trying to create their own Iron Man...
-
Ugh. Don’t go with Parallax right off the bat either. So many potential villains to start with, Parallax should have been the third movie culminating with the Sinestro War storyline.
-
Atrocitus and the Red Lanterns would have a made decent starter villain. Or the Manhunters, especially if they went for a look like in Earth One.
[IMG]https://blogofoa.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/GL-E1-MANHUNTER.jpg[/IMG]
-
[QUOTE=Shadowcat;4995877]Ugh. Don’t go with Parallax right off the bat either. So many potential villains to start with, Parallax should have been the third movie culminating with the Sinestro War storyline.[/QUOTE]
I think the reasoning behind going with Parallax right off the bad was because they probably didn't want movie Hal to become a bad guy. Not that it means anything now since I think that's exactly what they're going to do should Hal ever show up in live-action again.
-
[QUOTE=Gaius;4995887]Atrocitus and the Red Lanterns would have a made decent starter villain. Or the Manhunters, especially if they went for a look like in Earth One.
[IMG]https://blogofoa.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/GL-E1-MANHUNTER.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
I’m working on a bunch of scripts I’ve been actively trying to pitch to dc for their movies. The first movie would have Hector, Dr. Polaris, and the Manhunters. Second film would introduce the other Corps, with the Red being the main antagonists. We’d see Sinestro forming his corps after being disgraced at the end of the first film. Third would be the Sinestro Corps, with a Justice League film of Blackest Night.
-
[QUOTE=Johnny;4995894]I think the reasoning behind going with Parallax right off the bad was because they probably didn't want movie Hal to become a bad guy. Not that it means anything now since I think that's exactly what they're going to do should Hal ever show up in live-action again.[/QUOTE]
I also think they needed a bigger villain to fight instead of just Hammond and they didn't want to start off with Sinestro.
-
[QUOTE=Frontier;4995903]I also think they needed a bigger villain to fight instead of just Hammond and they didn't want to start off with Sinestro.[/QUOTE]
Atrocitous is the easy go to. You should not be doing the different colored Lanterns right off the start. Begin small: newly inducted Hal has to track down a criminal who has revelations about the failings of the Guardians (Atrocitous’s people were genocided by the Manhunters). He’s working along Sinestro his mentor who portrays authoritarian tendencies.
Second movies is Hal and the GLC vs. the Manhunters with Sinestro’s fall incorporated there too.
Last film is Sinestro Corps War with Hal being infected by Parallux and having to fight off two enemies on two fronts.
-
[QUOTE=Johnny;4995746]Maybe he did, but the morons in charge did whatever they liked. Reynolds, for as irritated as I am with his stupid antics that keep hurting this character all these years later, does have my sympathies when he says they started shooting the movie with no full script.[/QUOTE]
I think it was more about stopping the Robert Smigel, Jack Black film WB had actually already green lit, and were ready to go into production.
A comedy about a slacker with a cartoony imagination that gets the ring.
Pretty much the MASK but with a GL ring instead, a plot two stoners could come up with in 5 min.
Others with less power felt they needed (and tried) to push an alternative option out there quickly, so WB wouldn't steer their potential DCU into the comedy direction.
What we got was the weird, to many cooks pulling in different directions overblown mess.
Meanwhile yeah Marvel had already created their shared universe which was exploding on screen, while WB without a clue was still seeing most DC properties (other than Batman Superman) as comedies.
Higher ups could not let go of the idea that the main character had to be somewhat mocking, sarcastic, and self derisive of the idea of a Green Lantern.
Hence Reynolds was chosen as a middle ground.
[QUOTE=Frontier;4995800]
Well, I guess they were trying to create their own Iron Man...[/QUOTE]
Huge difference is the Marvel U was launched from the bottom up, creators first, who actually loved and were steeped in the material, and had a great vision for it, that vision is what drives the production.
It's how they got Jon Favreau and his vision of (then non "trending") Downey Jr. on Iron-Man.
WB makes their properties from the top down, a Producer completley disinterested in the material, but who has contacts, and just moves the available "pieces" into a slot; [I]I have ...this property, + this directer (he doesn't care about the property but he's competent) + this "now trending" actor (doesn't mater if he's right for the part he's tending!), + this product placement contract (hot-wheels, yeah it's cars and this a space opera movie, $o what?), ...put it together that's a movie! [/I] Even if the pieces don't fit.
.
-
Cool art by Liam Sharp from The Green Lantern Season Two #3 (June, 2020):
[img]https://i.imgur.com/PxD1q3w.jpg[/img]