How about David Hyde Pierce of 'Fraiser'?
The script is earning raves, and with the Justice League movie currently tabled, the WB is reportedly interested in a third Batman film, and a GL film.
I'm sure our friend inblackestnight must be happy about this.
I find the story's assertion that the character's sci-fi roots might not translate for a mainstream movie audience to be odd. Movie audiences don't like sci-fi? Since when? And when you think about, the GL mythos are PERFECT to translate into a film! You have thousands of intergalactic police of various different races (shades of Star Trek and Star Wars), mysterious elder Guardians (think Yoda, the Vulcans or Mr. Miyagi), a set of "rules" (can't use the rings on yellow, can't use the ring for personal amusement, can't kill), revelations here and there about the yellow impurity, the Book of Oa, and some compelling villains and stories over the past few decades. Granted, the sheer scope of the property might be well-suited to a multi-season TV series, which could give it the room needed to properly be explored, but it could certainly work in films too! Can you imagine how cool it would be if someone of the recent storylines--Green Lantern: Rebirth, Green Lantern Corps: Recharge, The Sinestro Corps War--were translated into a big screen, special FX extravaganza?
Although Green Lantern is probably my favorite comic book character, I haven't been too happy with cartoon adaptations of him. All the creations he makes, mostly as John Stewart, have been very elementary; beams and bubbles I think is what has been said. I didn't collect that many comics in my younger days in general and even though the majority is probably GL-related that still only makes about two-dozen issues. The person who wrote that seems to be hung up on the 'sci-fi roots' but I find them compelling. If they get the right person to play Hal (Nathan Fillion sounded good), and hopefully Guy Gardener, with a writer who knows something about the storyline it could be great! If everything doesn't line up like, they seemed to for Iron Man, it will be incredibly lame. Thanks for pointing that out Luigi, it made my day!
That's too bad, I don't care much for Ryan Gosling. He always looks so pretentious when he's acting, like he has something better he could be doing.
WB negotiating to get the director of Casino Royale.
Comicbookresources.com is reporting that the movie will have Hal Jordan as the Green Latern, and release date is December 17, 2010.
Chris Pine, who plays Captain Kirk in the upcoming Star Trek, has been offered the role of Hal Jordan.
He does look more like Hal Jordan than William Shatner to me.
Although I agree he looks more like Hal than Kirk, I still think Nathan Fillion is the better choice, I already like Pine better than Gosling though. Maybe if Pine played a younger Hal and Fillion was the main star it would be ok, but I agree with the posts talking about him being too young and waiting to see how well Star Trek does first.
I can totally accept Pine as Jordan, than I can as Kirk. In this case it would actually encourage me to see a GL movie.
As a villain, it should include that red-skinned guy that used to be part of the Lantern Corps (can't remember his name), but I think the Rock could play him pretty well.
I believe you're thinking of Sinestro. How do you figure the Rock, and big dude, to play that part? He was tall, skinny, and had a hispanic look to him.
Yeah, I guess you're right. I was thinking solely of the hairline. Wow...now that's a good reason to hire somebody!
How about David Hyde Pierce of 'Fraiser'?
Or Jim Parsons who plays Sheldon in The Big Bang Theory.
I don't recall much about Big Bang Theory but the former might not be so bad. Who would make a good moustache-twirler villain these days? That's what I think about when I see Sinestro.
You can see Parsons on The Big Bang Theory Mondays on CBS at 8pm. I still think he has the look, but modulating his voice to sound more sinister would be a good idea.
Release date pushed back to June 17, 2011
Interesting fan trailer.
The first minute or so is pretty good, but after that, the choice of images seems pretty arbitrary, and the reliance on shots from Star Trek becomes more and more of a cop-out. I applaud the author, jaronpitts, for piecing this together, and there are indeed some clever choices, like using the Jeffrey Combs' Shran from Enterprise as a Guardian, but I think he should've gone a bit further in creating original material in order to depict Sinestro (whom I merely assume was that figure present in a few shots who was surrounded by a yellow glow), and the corps (of whom we only saw a handful of members). If he could do that big establishing shot of Oa, he could've searched for some type of shot of a crowd scene, and used that to turn it into the Corps. Instead, he kept using more shots of Nero's plant drill from Star Trek, and Sarek (Ben Cross)' dialogue from that movie about Spock's right to choose to his own destiny, which doesn't really seem to fit into the most fundamental aspects of GL's motif.
Nonetheless, it was a pretty good effort.
Good effort indeed. So TPTB did end up with Nathan, unless the whole thing was made up. I caught scenes from Star Trek, and the music; Fantastic Four, a couple voice-overs by Hugo Weaving as Elrond, and as Luigi mentioned Sarek... did I miss anything? From what I saw as potential Green Lantern I do want to see more. Thanks Luigi!
Actually reading the comments the author of that trailer wrote this time I found it completely fabricated, still nice though. Nathan Fillion did look the part but his facial expressions made it seem like he was unsure of himself, and Hal Jordan rarely was. Upon second viewing I think I saw some scenes from the third Matrix movie and possibly The Day The Earth Stood Still with that UAV.
It's down to three candidates: Bradley Cooper, Ryan Reynolds, and Justin Timberlake.
Wow, Hannibal King, Deadpool and now Green Lantern? The guy's trying to beat James Marsden and Halle Berry for most number of superhero movies.
Anyone wanting to get a taste of what might be to come in the live-action movie would be interested in the direct-to-DVD animation, 'Green Lantern: First Flight' Very, very good. Makes me wish for a regular animated series, let alone the movie.
One disappoint; no making-of documentary about this film. Instead trailers for other DC dvd's and an 8-minute preview of the DC comic book epic series, 'Blackest Night'
Peter Sarsgaard in talks to play Hector Hammond.
Jackie Earle Haley, who played Rorschach in Watchmen, and Freddy Krueger in the new Nightmare on Elm Street movies, may be playing Sinestro.
Or maybe not.
Director Martin Campbell says that Blake Lively will play Carol Ferris, and that Mark Strong, who played Blackwood in Sherlock Holmes, is in talks to play Sinestro.
He also says that Tomar-Re and Abin Sur are in it. (Well, obviously Abin Sur has to be in it.)
I can't wait to see this!
That's too bad, I thought Haley would make a great Sinestro. Strong would be ok, as I'm sure he's much taller than Haley, but Jack has the face for it. I have NO problem with Blake Lively though! I really haven't seen her act much but she is one of the most beautiful women in the world, IMO
Tim Robbins with play Senator Hammond, the father of Hector Hammond.
I'm not up on the GL mythology; who are the Hammnds?
You can look it up on Wikipedia.
Booooooooooooo!
Curses! My laziness has been exposed!
Angela Bassett is Amanda Waller.
Who's Amanda Walker?
I know, I know.
Wikipedia.
Speaking of Abin Sur, it's a couple of weeks old, but it's Jango Fett playing him.
Oh, gross!
First shot of Peter Sarsgaard as Hector Hammond!
Poster and logo.
I would've gone more for a teaser poster, one which just had the tagline, lantern and maybe the date.
Also, the tagline isn't really accurate, since not "anyone" can be chosen.
Even though the movie is still over a year away, Warner Bros. has already hired writers to pen a sequel. And they're going to give the treatment to the Flash, too.
I like the suit but it just doesn't look right on Ryan, IMO. Maybe it's the mask, I'm not sure. Still excited to see it though, this and Tron: Legacy!
More shots here.
Clip from Entertainment Tonight, which will air tomorrow.
Maybe I'm overthinking this, since it's just a tiny clip, but the way Hal feels the need to pose when he changes into his costume seems a bit campy. And his "I know!" and "Go look for trouble" don't seem like a mature, fighter pilot-sorta thing to say, but more like a Van Wilder thing.
But hey, maybe I am hypersensitive to it. Let's wait until more comes out.
I don't think you're being hypersensitive to it Luigi. I kinda expected that to be the attitude portrayed here, not that it should be or am happy to see. Ryan Renolds seems to have a more Kyle Rayner or Guy Gardner way about him anyway, and let's face it, unfortunately more people these days can relate to that instead of the old-school heroic type that Hal really is. Look at what "they" did to the Green Hornet. Not as popular as Green Lantern I don't think but that's just the way TPTB do things these days, or am I overthinking now?
Full trailer.
I don't think I like it.
I don't understand why Hal comes off as a slacker, with a sloppy apartment, a slacker-looking buddy that I don't recall from the comics, a childish tendency to showoff his powers and costume, or the underconfident attitude with which he says that the Green Lanterns' requirement of fearlessness is not him. Hal is supposed to be a military test pilot. These guys are not just plucked off the unemployment line. They're supposed to be the best of the best. Fit, highly trained, disciplined, controlled, and yes, largely brave. Not fearless, but not so whiny and feckless like Hal seems to be. It's as if someone told Ryan Reynolds and the screenwriter to channel Van Wilder instead of Hal Jordan. It's like they're trying to give him a Peter Parker-type outlook, which is not just wrong-headed for the character, but is what went wrong with the print version of the character, and what led to the least-well-received story eras, culminating in "Emerald Twilight". Yeah, Andrew, I agree, and that's the problem. Hal Jordan isn't Kyle or Guy. If they wanted Kyle or Guy, why not adapt the film with Kyle or Guy?
I was really hoping that by now, filmmakers had learned to adapt the characters accurately from the source material. Has DC still not learned how to make adaptations outside of David Goyer and the Nolans?
I also don't think Blake Lively is a very good actress, if that one line about the important mission is any indication.
Still, I really do hope that I'm wrong, and that the trailer simply conveys an inaccurate message.
Yeah, it wasn't as thrilling as I'd hoped it would be. Hopefully, the movie is better than that teaser.
When I said I was expecting it to be like that I was in no way saying Ryan not acting like Hal was a good thing, but I'm sure you knew what I meant It really is very disappointing, especially since it wouldn't take much research to obtain a good feel for the character, and apparently either they didn't or they would rather him act like an insecure frat-boy (no offense to actual ones who didn't act like the stereo-type). I too hope that the trailer doesn't do the film as a whole justice.
I know exactly which line from Blake you're referring to Luigi and yes, didn't sound all that encouraging. I haven't seen much, if anything, with her so I couldn't say if she's good or not; though she is quite easy on the eyes IMO.
Yeah, I mean, it makes no sense for a military fighter pilot to be so neurotic and wimpy about his courage. It just makes no sense. Successful members of the military, especially people who make it their career, in particular those in a highly technical and dangerous job like being a fighter pilot, tend to be confident, clear-headed, brave, etc. In short, they own themselves. The trailer character's milquetoast attitude fits in with Jordan about as well as a Nazi at a B'nai B'rith meeting.
And yeah, it's not hard to research it. I mean, they're comic books. Is it too hard to read the Wikipedia entry on the character(s)? Maybe a few trade paperbacks here and there? How hard is that for a professional screenwriter? Hell, I only got into the Lanterns with Green Lantern: Rebirth, which was just six years ago. Prior to that, my knowledge of the characters was secondary.
Ooookaaaaay, this place is called 'Nitcentral', and we all get nit-picky here, but, guys? A single line from Blake Lively is making you guys WORRIED? I had the same misgivings about a single line of dialogue from new Doctor Who, Matt Smith, and was proven quite wrong to be so concerned. But you guys are acting like your enjoyment of a feature film depends on the quality of the main actress in one scene, uttering a line in a few seconds of footage, who won't even be in half the movie.
How was she supposed to utter those lines?:
Shaking her fists, grabbing his shoulders, wild-eyed psychotic expression on her face as she screams,
"HAAAALLLL! THISSSS MISSION...IS...IMPORRRRRTANT, D**N YOU, YOU s**pid freakin' little wimpy fighter jerk! GET INTO UNIFORM AND FLY YOUR PLAAAAAANNE, D**M YOOOOOUUU!"
Honestly, guys, sometimes I think we've been spoiled enough by the Dark Knight series that we've forgotten an important Hollywood fact; they will ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS change elements of our superhero origins and characters to make the movie THEY want, not what WE want. They're not appealing to Steve age 15 that read Green Lantern in 1976, they're aiming for the younger movie crowd of 2011.
They've changed stuff, and will ALWAYS change stuff, so we have to get used to it.
Topic for the 'Thor' movie board; Hollywood has changed Jane Foster from a Nurse to a scientist, further adding to my proof that if Hollywood wants to tinker at even small facts, they will.
On a personal note, I think the movie looks great, and am willing to give it a chance.
Changing elements in the process of adaptation is inevitable, and sometimes, is not only good, but makes the element superior in some respects to the source material. Examples:
-Making Batman's costume black body armor instead of a grey leotard under a dark blue bathing suit bottom. Similarly, making the X-Men's uniforms black leather instead of multi-colored spandex. Movies also typically give more detail to costumes that are spandex, as they did with Spider-Man's costume.
-Making the Batmobile look as it did in the first Tim Burton film, instead of that ridiculous-looking blue sportscar that, IIUC, was what Batman was using in the comics at the time.
-Filling the X-Men's mansion with children, in order to emphasize that it's a school, instead of the comics' depiction of it, which was just with a handful of adults and a handful of teenagers--which itself wasn't always a constant. (I know that at some point the comics changed this to fill the mansion with kids, but I'm not sure if they did this before or after the first film.)
-Establishing that Storm's eyes turn white only when she's using her power, instead of the inconsistent and arbitrary way artists would render them any which way in the comics.
-Making Spider-Man's spinnerets an organic part of his mutation, instead of things he invented.
-Making Tony Stark a rugged capitalist attacked in the Middle East instead of an anti-communist fighting various Vietnamese agents during the Cold War. (More of an update than a qualitative change.)
For all we know, perhaps making Jane Foster a scientist is being done for a similar rationale--maybe she's supposed to be in some research position that allows her to more easily interact or be an integral part of the plot. I mean, if the director is Kenneth friggin' Branagh, and he says he can make a better film with as a scientist, then I say, let him. For something like that, I'll give the benefit of the doubt, until I see the film, as it's not as integral to an adaptation of the source material.
But-- changing the a main character's fundamental personality is not among such legitimate changes, and this includes Hal Jordan a neurotic wuss.
As for Blake Lively, my perception is with her acting, not the level of emotion she displayed in delivering the line. Her delivery just seemed fake and wooden to me, like the acting in the Star Wars prequels.
Is it possible that I'm being hypersensitive to a scene that I'm completely wrong about, and that seeing the film will cause me to change my mind? Yes! And I said so above. I want to be wrong. But all I'm doing now is voicing my initial reactions. Is that wrong?
Neither one of us said we wouldn't see it; I for one am definately going to watch it! I also wouldn't say Lively's line worried us either. That line probably wasn't even shot the way it was presented in the trailer anyway, as it happens quite often. As I mentioned, I haven't seen much of her work, I now remember seeing the movie Accepted with her and she was ok, plus she's goregous IMO. I don't think any of us are surprised when film-makers make changes to already existing subject matter; it's when they make un-necassary changes like having Hal Jordan act like Peter Parker that makes us wonder why.
I hope I didn't come off as sounding like I was attacking you guys too much? It was done with a well-meaning pat on the back and a 'It'll be okay' intention, so if it sounded like I was stomping on your toes, sorry about that.
Anyone that's stopping by here is probably hoping it's a great movie, myself included, but I prefer the nitpicking after a movie is seen, rather than just a trailer. Then we can all blast it or rave about it-- for now all guess work, but just so that we're straight here, I do respect your opnions, even if I did, perhaps, come across as mocking. Maybe my imagined scene will be a DVD bloopers extra!
I'm a stickler for changes, however. It really depends on a movie to movie basis which ones I like, and which ones I feel cheated on. I'm a real super hero costume fanatic, and actually wish the X-Men had something a liiiitle closer to their costumes and not the black the leather-- one reason being that movies seemed to go towards black leather for everyone after that (or red leather in Daredevil's case). But I guess movie stars want to be seen, and not hidden by masks.
Spider-Man's organic spinnerest-- yes, good change, and I wish Stan Lee had done that originally.
Cool Batmobile instead of a blue car...does anyone really want The Bat to drive a Chevy Cavalier instead of a super-car???
And absolutely, Stark's weapons creation should be updated to represent -today.
At least they're sticking with the Green Lanterns being an intergalactic police force. A friend of mine didn't even know about that whole back history! And he was so far out of the loop, that he didn't understand anything about John Stewart and why he was featured on the Justice League Unlimited cartoons instead of Hal. He's a Marvel fan, but really? The Corps goes back to Issue 1! Hellloooo??? Maybe the Superfriends shows didn't feature anything about the Corps and that's to blame.
As for Blake's delivering that line, I suppose that was a director's call, and he wanted it to lead into the joke of pants and flying, and there could have been other clips of her used.
In her defence, I'll just point out that you could take any movie, ('Superman', 'Dark Knight', 'Gone With The Wind', 'Titanic', 'Rocky', 'Raging Bull'), classic, superhero, drama, whatever, and show a clip of a weak line and think that the actor or actress or movie is terrible, and yet if watched in context of the whole movie, can be overlooked, or give you a bad impression of the movie, despite it's brilliance in other areas.
And I hope Jane Foster's better job is relevant, and not just a writers change for the sake of change. I just think the role of nurse is nothing to think badly about and is quite a respectable job,.
No worries, Steve.
An image has been leaked of another character in the film, that I didn't know was going to be in it until now. If you don't want to know who it is, well, you've been warned.
Interesting poster image, but I still don't like the "visible muscle" look of the costumes. At first I thought they were just striations that the designer put on them that somewhat resembled muscles, but I now see that it covers the entire body, and appears to have been designed with the intention of actually resembling musculature. I'm guessing this has something to do with the greater level of detail that costume designers try to give to spandex superhero costumes, as seen in the recent Spider-Man and Superman movie costumes, but if so, it's a poor way to do it.
For some reason though, that look is only used with Jordan's costume. The other Lanterns' costumes seen in the trailer don't appear to exhibit it, but have different patterns.
Also, the "2" in the "2011" in the lower left-hand corner looks considerably wider than the other characters, particularly the lantern "zero".
The '2' is juuuust a teeny bit wider if you measure it, but you're right. It's one of those crazy optical illusions that trick the eye (like the two-pronged arrow drawing with the points angled back and one angled forward, making it appear the angled-forward one is shorter, when it isn't).
My minor problem with the poster is that they have Reynolds holding up the wrong hand-- the hand with the power ring should be prominently displayed, rather than his ring-less left hand, since the ring is what Green Lantern is all about.
If the personality/character given to Hal Jordan that I inferred from the trailers and clips we've seen so far gave me any reason to be worried, this story from The Los Angeles Times hasn't assuaged that worry.
In addition to the fact that I'm not the only fan who didn't care for the trailer released back in November, it's already March 29–just a bit more than a month and a half before the release date–and there's still no marketing campaign, because movie's intricate 3-D visual effects, including numerous space scenes set alien shots, are taking longer than anticipated.
Hell, according to Latino Review, they still haven't cast the voice of Kilowog yet! They're still "in talks" with Michael Clarke Duncan to fill out the part. Now I'm no industry expert, but it is typical–or for that matter–wise to have this done just less than seven weeks prior to the release date? I mean, they haven't even released a full trailer yet!
Shouldn't Warner Brothers have had their ducks lined up just a tad better than this for their first major attempt at mining the DC library outside of the Superman and Batman films, and what could be a franchise that will replace the Harry Potter films once they're done?
Couple of nice shots of Kilowog at the Latino Review piece, including a nice front shot that I hadn't seen before.
Here's a shot of a poster hanging at CinemaCon. Geez, they worked overtime on Photoshopping his but and thighs, didn't they?
quote:Luigi Novi: it's already March 29–just a bit more than a month and a half before the release date–
Well, it depends on how you define "just a bit".
Luigi was correct, for valus of "just a bit" equal to one month
No, you were right, I meant to say "two and a half months", and "eleven weeks" rather than seven.
Geoffrey Rush is voicing Tomar-Re.
I think it's funny that the very first post in the LA Times article you posted Luigi says The lukewarm trailer response was because Ryan Reynolds was playing Ryan Reynolds and not Hal Jordan. I agree with that, and hope I am sadly mistaken. I'm still optomistic with some of the other characters though; like Sinestro, Tomar-Re, and Kilowog. Was Guy Gardner suppose to be in this movie as well?
WB has a great opportunity with DC and there are several characters that could do well in movies; at least better than some of the terrible movies based on Marvel characters, but that of course wasn't due to the characters themselves. I still look forward to this movie though, so it'll be a long 11 weeks.
The cast appeared at Wondercon this weekend to promote the film, so I think we can stop worrying about a lack of publicity. here's the report from Comicbookresources.com:
"Warner Bros.' upcoming "Green Lantern" film is easily one of the most talked about subjects in San Francisco at this year's WonderCon. Anticipation has been riding high for the Martin Campbell-directed DC Comics adaptation starring Ryan Reynolds, Blake Lively, Peter Saarsgard, and Mark Strong, with plenty of fans left nervous in the wake of a questionable Entertainment Weekly cover and debut trailer that many found underwhelming.
With the film opening June 17, WonderCon represents one of the final opportunities for Warner Bros. and DC Comics Chief Creative Officer Geoff Johns to get directly in front of the fans and prove that this is a film worthy of excitement. Perhaps in acknowledgment of this fact, Friday's "Green Lantern" presentation started off with very little preamble. Johns took to the stage, said the footage being shown was made especially for the con -- the next trailer will run in front of "Thor" on May 6 -- and then dove right in.
The first thing you should know: stop worrying.
The footage opened with Abin Sur delivering grave tidings to Sinestro, who is shown as a hologram. The planet Ventara has been decimated, and there is no one left to evacuate. The exchange continues for a few moments... until Parallax bursts in and a chase ensues. Great visual effects here, lots of big, explosive action.
Abin Sur manages to get away in an escape pod... and we jump to Earth. Here's Hal Jordan, coming across the crashed pod containing the dying Green Lantern. We see Abin give him the ring and tell him to wear it in front of the lantern and speak the oath.
Cut to Jordan's apartment. There's the lantern sitting on the coffee table. A jokey moment; Hal sits down and ponders what the heck the oath could be. Spouts out a string of nonsense, including part of the Pledge of Allegiance. Suddenly the lantern flares to life. Hal is entranced by the green glow, and his take on the same hue as he speaks the proper Green Lantern oath.
It's on, folks.
Now we cut to Oa, and Hal meeting Tomar Re. Another funny scene. Ryan Reynolds isn't pulling out straight comedy, but the sharp, sarcastic wit is very much there. We see a brief skyline shot of Oa, and then Sinestro addressing the assembled Green Lantern Corps in a yawning cavern at the base of a giant Green Lantern logo. Parallax is coming, he warns.
A flash of images followed, including a few shots of Peter Sarsgaard as Hector Hammond. Overall, this is great stuff. Much better than that first trailer and a huge improvement in the visual effects department.
Following presentation of the footage, Johns, Reynolds and co-star Blake Lively, who plays Carol Ferris, fielded questions from Johns and from the crowd. There were no major revelations, though the Reynolds-Lively duo brims with chemistry and Reynolds himself was full of jokes, as always. Johns also suggested that, while the Red Lantern Atrocitus does not appear in the film, there may be plans for him in a "Green Lantern" sequel.
Asked if he preferred playing a hero like Hal Jordan to a "villain" like Deadpool in "X-Men Origins: Wolverine", Reynolds replied, "Deadpool is not a villain. He's an a--hole."
Then he got serious. "Both are a lot of fun, but getting to immerse yourself wholly in this way [is great]," he said, adding, "We're sticking to the mythology pretty closely." Cheers from the crowd naturally followed.
Mentioning Deadpool of course opened the door for the inevitable question about what the status of that project is. "I'm not going to get into the 'Deadpool' stuff," Reynolds said.
"There are so many unknowns there. There are things that I would've changed [in 'X-Men Origins'] but I don't finance these movies." Then he added, "If I ever make one, it's going to be made in the right way, just hard R."
The only other newsworthy item concerned the recent talk of a 'Justice League' movie. Asked if he's going to be involved, Reynolds replied, "It's not something that anyone's talked to me about." Then he looked pointedly at Johns, who said to the crowd, "I can't really talk much about 'Justice League,' except [to say that] it's in development."
Overall, a great panel and a powerful sales pitch to fans. "Green Lantern" might have gotten off to a rocky start, but once after seeing the footage -- which the Internet seems to think will be arriving online sometime this weekend -- those doubts should fade. Stay tuned for more from our roundtable chats with Reynolds and Lively, along with plenty more WonderCon coverage as the weekend unfolds!"
Four minutes of footage from WonderCon.
My faith might not be completely restored, but that certainly helps. A lot.
The costume shows Hals' toes.
Wow, this just gets better and better doesn't it?
Aie-yi-yi-yi. 
This just might be worse than Batman's nipples.
It does look horrible. IIRC, in the comics, GL's costume was a manifestation of the power ring. Hal Jordan willed the outfit into existence. If I had to guess, I'd say the movie version of the costume is supposed to be some sort of energy field generated by the ring that acts as a costume. That might explain the overall look of the outfit. Believe me, I'm only trying to explain it, not excuse it. It's an eyesore.
Cool Tomar-Re poster and Jordan poster.
More images, including Sinestro and Kilowog posters, plus some others of Hal and Tomar-Re, including one of Hal with a ring conjuring, which gives me cause to think that this is one of those films that is over-relying on CGI as a crutch.
Look at the bright side. If this movie disappoints, you can console yourselves with Emerald Knights. Unless that disappoints, too.
COOL banner poster with a lineup of twelve lanterns!
I'm guessing that's Boodikka on the left, Stel to the right of her, then one of the Surs (either Abin or his son, I guess), and over Kilowog's left shoulder, in the distance, is that the lantern that in the comics, is depicted as a large eye with tentacles? This version has the eye proportionately smaller.
New trailer! This one shows the Guardians, and the Sinestro Corps Lantern symbol.
If you wait until after the advertisment there is a second trailer that shows even more of Oa et al. I have to say these two trailers are looking pretty good and is making me even more anxious to see the flick. However, it seems as though this entire movie was shot in front of a green screen and while that alone is not a bad thing it can take away from other parts of the whole. It also seems like TPTB are trying to cram too much into this movie. Couldn't they have just stuck with the original Sinestro betrayal and left it at that?
Pretty cool Peter Sarsgaard-as-Hector-Hammond poster.
New trailer.
I think I like this one the most. It explains the Green Lantern concept for those unfamiliar with it.
The Onion pokes fun at how Green Lantern is not as well known among the public as other, more iconic superheroes.
Suddenly I have an unstoppable urge to poke fun at The Onion at how it is not as well known among the public as other, iconic newspapers.
The Onion? Seriously? Who-dat?
I trust my crazy old mother-in-law's opinioon more than theirs!
What opinion? It's just satire, Steve.
Oops.
Never read it.
Well, there's not much to read, since it's a video.
I just saw it. It was okay, and not much else. I think the reviews more or less are accurate. They took several story arcs' worth of material from the comics, some of which were rather epic in scope, and crammed it into one microwave-movie, in which the main villain is done away with by one GL--that is, Hal--rather neatly and simply, when a dozen veteran GLs could not.
The subpar acting Blake Lively displayed in her first two scenes with Hal was thankfully not the pronounced in the rest of the film, and I was pleasantly surprised at her reaction to his attempt to conceal his identity while on her balcony, and overall, it was an okay way to spend a couple of hours, but it was not a film I was thrilled to pay for, and not one I'm dying to see again.
---NITS & NOTES
One of the gaping plot holes in the comics origin story was why Abin Sur was traveling in a spaceship if Lanterns can fly through space. Writer Geoff Johns answered this in the comics in 2008 with "Secret Origin", a 7-part retelling of the origin story that explained this. But the plot points and premises involved in that story are not present here, yet the movie never offers a replacement explanation. Yes, he was wounded, but he was traveling in starship before he was wounded.
If the Air Force recovered an extraterrestrial, it�s ridiculous to think that they�d have just one scientist examine him, rather than a whole team, or multiple teams, or that any senator, even one who sits on certain committees, could have the power to determine otherwise.
Narratively, I understand why those three co-workers of Hal were angry about him, but had I written the script, it would�ve been important to me to get the audience on Hal�s side by having him best three people who were completely unsympathetic, like muggers, attempted rapists, gang members, or whatever. While what that trio did was wrong, they weren�t entirely unsympathetic, since they were right in that Hal cost them his jobs. So on top of that, he ended up kickin the living snot out of them.
In fact, he put one of them through a brick wall. Wouldn�t that have killed him? In the comics, don�t the rings prevent the bearer from doing stuff that�s evil, illegal, or harmful to innocents? Hell, only in recent years (I believe it was Green Lantern #25, the finale to the �Sinestro Corps War�) was the Book of Oa revised to allow use of lethal force. Prior to that, they couldn�t even kill in self-defense.
When a human body, or any other object goes through a brick wall, the bricks that are knocked off the wall tend to fall apart into what are mostly individual bricks (with some that clump together, of course). But the portion of the wall that is knocked off remains mostly in one whole piece.
When Hal instantly exhibits knowledge of Tomar-Re�s home sector , Tomar-Re explains that the GL induction process grants him an appropriate knowledge base. This is a fairly reasonable idea, and is certainly convenient, but then Tomar-Re proceeds to�you guessed it�explain to Hal all about the Corps, Oa, the Guardians, and how his ring works. So was Hal�s knowledge base only on Tomar-Re?
So the rings can not only create energy constructs, but can simulate the mass and gravity of suns? Wow?
And if Kilowog and the other Lanterns know this, why does Hal need to be the one who use this to kill Parallax? Why couldn�t the other Lanterns, like that group led by Sinestro to confront the creature, do this?
As I stated before from the previews and early concept info, I do not buy the wishy-washy, woe-is-me, �I�m not fearless� schtick from a guy so ballsy that he did what Hal did to beat those unarmed gets in the beginning of the film.
Dang it Luigi, that's two films in a row you've beat me to the punch I saw it this morning in 3D and maybe it's just me but all the 3D movies I've seen the last couple years have been a waste of (extra) money IMO. Anywho: SPOILERS!!
Despite the name on the movie posters et al, from a personality standpoint Ryan Reynolds is not playing Hal Jordan, he's Kyle Rayner. I understand why TPTB chose Hal instead of Kyle but it isn't Hal at all.
The antagonist of the movie is Parallax, whom the narrator says is an entity that embodies the yellow energy of fear. However, later in the story we find that one of the Guardians went to the yellow energy source and essentially became Parallax. Also, Hal defeats him by having him pulled into the sun, even though he's a being of energy and should have little-to-no mass. So here comes the part that I repeat my earlier thoughts that TPTB should've just stuck with Sinestro! The way Parallax is portrayed here he isn't much different than Galactus, and why would the Guardians approve forging a yellow ring if even one of them can't handle the yellow power!?
One thing I really liked is the individualized GL suits. However, if the suit is a construct of the ring then why did it leave a hole on Hal's left shoulder when something hit it? For one thing it should also be sort of a force field, and secondly if it's not really there anyway why wouldn't it re-form over damaged areas?
LN: In fact, he put one of them through a brick wall. Wouldn't that have killed him?
Perhaps that wall was about to fall over anyway?
LN: When Hal instantly exhibits knowledge of Tomar-Re's home sector , Tomar-Re explains that the GL induction process grants him an appropriate knowledge base.
Hmm, I must've mis-interpreted that part. I assumed the info came from his ring, like IIRC it does in the comics, but yes then he reveals info that he should also know, for our benefit of course.
The movie isn't bad but it's not that great either. It was good to see a non-animated GL on screen, and there were some continuity nods such as the sapphire symbol on Carol's helmet and the mid-end credits scene with Sinestro, but it's a short movie that tries to cram too much into it. I'll have to look up that "secret origins" because I've always wondered why Abin-sur needed a ship.
Agh, I always forget something!
Did Parallax sound like Dr. Claw, the bad guy from Inspector Gadget, to anybody else, or am I confused with another cartoon villain?
Why didn't Hal mentally recall his ring off of Hector instead of nearly getting killed trying to physically get it back?
I assumed the info came from his ring
The ring wasn't the one saying it; Hal was. Tomar-Re introduced himself, and when he mentioned his sector, Hal rattled off how many galaxies and star systems were in it. He then said, "How do I know that?", and Tomar-Re said the induction process put the knowledge in his noggin.
In fact, that's another thing that was missing from the film: Hal communicating with his ring, and his ring noting when its energy levels were depleting. That's a staple of the comics, yet it never comes up in the film, even when he's battling Parallax.
And speaking of sectors, Hal mentions something to the effect of Tomar-Re's sector having over a thousand galaxies. So each GL patrols multiple galaxies? Isn't this like assigning a beat cop to his own country? I don't recall any mention in the comics of sectors being that big!
I thought Parallax's voice was just Generic Gravelly-Voiced Bad Guy.
Either the mental recall is not a premise that's present in the film, or Hal doesn't know that it has that feature.
Hal said it but I figured he was having another out of body experience like he did when he first said the Oath after hitting the battery with his ring, since he didn't know that either. I guess I was confused by that scene because I thought his ring was communicating through Hal and the induction process makes a stronger mental link between the two. It makes sense in my crazy head after only two hours of sleep before seeing the movie I get it now though, thanks!
quote:Luigi Novi: As I stated before from the previews and early concept info, I do not buy the wishy-washy, woe-is-me, �I�m not fearless� schtick from a guy so ballsy that he did what Hal did to beat those unarmed gets in the beginning of the film.
Agree regarding Blake Lively. I've seen better acting at a Tijuana donkey show.
The planet Ryut in the "Lost Sector" (how do you lose a sector anyway?) is shown with several planets looming in the background. As I've noted on the Predators board, this is astronomically unlikely. Those planets are too large and thus too close to Ryut. I personally really don't wanna think about what gravity must be like on Ryut, much less in that solar system.
Hal is told that the power ring creates a mask when it's necessary to protect Jordan's identity as a Green Lantern. Thomas Kalmaku knows Hal is the Green Lantern and wants a demonstration. Even though there is no identity to protect (Thomas Kalmaku already knows the secret), the ring still projects a domino mask on Hal Jordan's face. It does the same thing later in the film when Hal is talking to Carol Ferris, even though Miss Ferris is well aware of Jordan's dual identity.
Too often in this film, Ryan Reynolds as Green Lantern looked like Ben Stiller to me. This is not a good thing.
In the comics, the Lanterns have a weakness: They cannot affect anything yellow. This weakness apparently does not apply to the movie version of the Green lantern Corp. Both Abin Sur and Hal Jordan strike at the Parallax, who is predominantly yellow, with energy from their power ring. The fact TPTB ditched this secret weakness is a good thing, as it doesn't really make that much sense.
It makes perfect sense now at least, since Geoff Johns explained it in the Green Lantern: Rebirth miniseries. It has since become an ongoing premise reflected in subsequent stories, such as Green Lantern Corps: Recharge, and the "Secret Origin" story arc that ran just before "Blackest Night" in the main monthly series. Besides, that's a classic part of the character!
Depends, I suppose. The Justice League cartoon ignored it and I never thought it hurt the character. Though that reminds me of a nit for First Flight...
HBO will premiere this movie (IIRC) on March 17, 2012.
On the greenest day of the year
Here is a comparison between 104- and 114-minute versions of the movie. The writer states that the 114 minute version is the "extended version," but that's the only version I know of; it's what played in U.S. theaters last year and is now running on HBO.
Sorry Adam--you're wrong on this one.
The version shown in theaters was the 104 minute version of the film--there is little footage devoted to Hals father. if fact all I remember is the scene with the crash.
The blue-ray version includes some time of Hal with his father(who gives him the jacket Hal's wearing during thhe crash scene), a meeting between young Hal and a young Carol, and explains why Hal was there during the crash(he skipped school to watch the flight).
I bought the special edition with both versions of the film(the 104 minute on DVD, and the extended cut in blue-ray). I re-watched the original, and watched the blue-ray at a friends house.
I felt the extended footage was a total waste of time, repeating things that were clear from the original without really adding anything.
But it was the 104 minute version that I saw in the theater, and when I saw the added footage I knew it.