The Green Lantern Movie debate

[Trey Strain]

I don't know how much input Geoff Johns will have in the next GL movie, but if he has any say-so Hal will be the star.

[Desh]

Just John Stewart + the Corps. I'm not terribly interested in seeing him partnered with Hal Jordan.

[Anthony Shaw]

I don't know how much input Geoff Johns will have in the next GL movie, but if he has any say-so Hal will be the star.

A part of me thinks this is why we have so much of a delay in regards to casting, and set-up for Green Lantern.

I think one side is straight-up, Hal Jordan.....and everybody else.

The other side is......we need to mix this up to avoid another failure.

[Anthony Shaw]

Just John Stewart + the Corps. I'm not terribly interested in seeing him partnered with Hal Jordan.

We have already seen Iron & War Machine, plus Captain America & the Falcon.

Some folks may scream cliché with another such pairing on the DC side.

Even with the Cap & Falcon team, you now have Bucky to make them three brothers in arms.

I think Guy as Hal's rival, and a Katma/John partnership/romance would be a change of pace.

[Trey Strain]

I don't think the character of Hal caused the failure of the first movie, or that substituting John for him would have turned it around. It was just a bad story, and the CGI exploded the budget. At the same time, I think Guy is hands-down more entertaining than Hal, John or Kyle. I already predicted what I think will happen, but I think if you presented the four Earth Lanterns in an unbiased way to potential screen writers who weren't invested in any of the four and had no background in the comic, and you asked them to pick one, most would probably pick Guy. Movies are about entertainment, and he's the best one at that.

[Ascended]

No, Hal wasnt the reason the film failed. It failed because it tried to cram too much too fast, the script was slapstick terrible, the plot was full of holes (why go back to Oa to ask permission to fight Parallax when you've already quit, are already on earth, and still have a functional ring?) the villains weren't especially interesting (Hammond was creepy as hell though) and the final battle was against a big weird space cloud that lacked motivation and personality. Too much reliance on CGI, which took the emotion out of many of the Corpsmen like Tomar and Killowog.

The casting was decent. Mark Strong was amazing. The guy who played Hector Hammond did really well with what he had to work with. Most of the voice acting was fine, if not impressive. And Ryan Reynolds has the capability of playing a really good Hal. But he didnt play Hal, he played Van Wilder in a superhero movie. He didnt even comb his hair differently. Go watch The Nines and then tell me that Reynolds cant act. He can. He just didnt in that movie. Much like Brandon Routh in Superman Returns, I think the actor had the potential to do the role justice, but he was limited by a bad movie.

No matter who the lead character was, that film was going to fail. And they didnt even make Hal a very likable character. He was just a loser, and not even a likable loser like Star-Lord was in GotG either.

[Prime]

Wonder where was Hal when MOS happened?

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

No, Hal wasnt the reason the film failed. It failed because it tried to cram too much too fast, the script was slapstick terrible, the plot was full of holes (why go back to Oa to ask permission to fight Parallax when you've already quit, are already on earth, and still have a functional ring?) the villains weren't especially interesting (Hammond was creepy as hell though) and the final battle was against a big weird space cloud that lacked motivation and personality. Too much reliance on CGI, which took the emotion out of many of the Corpsmen like Tomar and Killowog.

The casting was decent. Mark Strong was amazing. The guy who played Hector Hammond did really well with what he had to work with. Most of the voice acting was fine, if not impressive. And Ryan Reynolds has the capability of playing a really good Hal. But he didnt play Hal, he played Van Wilder in a superhero movie. He didnt even comb his hair differently. Go watch The Nines and then tell me that Reynolds cant act. He can. He just didnt in that movie. Much like Brandon Routh in Superman Returns, I think the actor had the potential to do the role justice, but he was limited by a bad movie.

No matter who the lead character was, that film was going to fail. And they didnt even make Hal a very likable character. He was just a loser, and not even a likable loser like Star-Lord was in GotG either.

Spot on critique.

[Desh]

I don't think the character of Hal caused the failure of the first movie, or that substituting John for him would have turned it around. It was just a bad story, and the CGI exploded the budget.

I don't think anyone said anything to the contrary, did they?

However, that movie is there now and relatively few people like it. The studio can either risk recalling memories of it by using the same lead character, or do something to show that they're breaking away from it and going as different a route as they reasonably can. I, personally, would opt for option #2.

[nightrider]

I don't think anyone said anything to the contrary, did they?

However, that movie is there now and relatively few people like it. The studio can either risk recalling memories of it by using the same lead character, or do something to show that they're breaking away from it and going as different a route as they reasonably can. I, personally, would opt for option #2.

Daredevil tanked horribly, I don't see marvel swapping out Matt Murdock with someone else. Ben Affleck likewise, failed daredevil but seemingly successful batman. If association is going to cause any failure, they everything associated with the film will risk recalling bad memories. You need to start being objective and stop pushing your own agenda.

[Anthony Shaw]

No, Hal wasnt the reason the film failed. It failed because it tried to cram too much too fast, the script was slapstick terrible, the plot was full of holes (why go back to Oa to ask permission to fight Parallax when you've already quit, are already on earth, and still have a functional ring?) the villains weren't especially interesting (Hammond was creepy as hell though) and the final battle was against a big weird space cloud that lacked motivation and personality. Too much reliance on CGI, which took the emotion out of many of the Corpsmen like Tomar and Killowog.

The casting was decent. Mark Strong was amazing. The guy who played Hector Hammond did really well with what he had to work with. Most of the voice acting was fine, if not impressive. And Ryan Reynolds has the capability of playing a really good Hal. But he didnt play Hal, he played Van Wilder in a superhero movie. He didnt even comb his hair differently. Go watch The Nines and then tell me that Reynolds cant act. He can. He just didnt in that movie. Much like Brandon Routh in Superman Returns, I think the actor had the potential to do the role justice, but he was limited by a bad movie.

No matter who the lead character was, that film was going to fail. And they didnt even make Hal a very likable character. He was just a loser, and not even a likable loser like Star-Lord was in GotG either.

Great post. I also believe too much canon from the comics was squeezed into the film. I also agree that Hal's personality was changed unnecessarily. He seemed more like a weird Guy/Kyle mash-up, to me. WB/DC still keep messing with his personality with the animated films. I believe GL First Flight is the best modern interpretation of Hal outside of comics.

[SmokeMonster]

I don't think the character of Hal caused the failure of the first movie, or that substituting John for him would have turned it around. It was just a bad story, and the CGI exploded the budget. At the same time, I think Guy is hands-down more entertaining than Hal, John or Kyle. I already predicted what I think will happen, but I think if you presented the four Earth Lanterns in an unbiased way to potential screen writers who weren't invested in any of the four and had no background in the comic, and you asked them to pick one, most would probably pick Guy. Movies are about entertainment, and he's the best one at that.

I also think Guy Gardner would make the biggest impact as GL. Noone's gotten around to the meathead superhero yet. Luckily, movies can have more than one character, so I'd definitely have John as a main character as well. His whole architect/soldier duality really gels well with the GLCorps concept.

Hal is a distant third for me, though I won't personally be mad if we see him first in the Justice League movie as I'm still a Hal fan.

[mace11]

Daredevil tanked horribly, I don't see marvel swapping out Matt Murdock with someone else.

Daredevil did okay/well.

Daredevil
Production Budget: $78 million
Domestic: $102,543,518
+ Foreign: $76,636,200

= Worldwide: $179,179,718

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=daredevil.htm

[Desh]

Also, is Daredevil slated to get another big budget movie? I could be wrong, but not that I heard. Last I knew, it was relegated to being a Netflix show, but I don't keep up with it. Also, Daredevil isn't nearly as interchangeable as Green Lantern, so I think that's a poor example to use on both fronts.

EDIT:
Oh. And if there has to be some team up, I'd rather John and Guy than John and Hal, personally. Although, I don't know how likely that is to happen.

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

Also, is Daredevil slated to get another big budget movie? I could be wrong, but not that I heard. Last I knew, it was relegated to being a Netflix show, but I don't keep up with it. Also, Daredevil isn't nearly as interchangeable as Green Lantern, so I think that's a poor example to use on both fronts.

EDIT:
Oh. And if there has to be some team up, I'd rather John and Guy than John and Hal, personally. Although, I don't know how likely that is to happen.

John and Hal are both doyen personalities. Team Guy with John and you have contrasting personalities which make for a better interplay between characters. Give Hal a cameo to set up his next film. Just my take.