 |
ALL SCI-FI
The place to “find your people”.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17062
Location: North Carolina
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 7:10 pm Post subject: Green Lantern (2011) |
 |
|
This movie didn't please many movie goers, and it didn't make the studio heads very happy either. The budget was $200 million and the box office take was $220 million — instead of the expected $500 million.
I can't really say why it was unpopular, because I haven't made it all the way through it yet — a rare thing for me. I just couldn't get involved in the story, and I finally decided to save it until I was in the right mood.
That was a few years ago, and I'm still waiting for that mood.
The critics figuratively ran over it on purpose and then backed up for a second run. Wikipedia says Rotten Tomatoes summed up the critical consensus with, "Noisy, overproduced, and thinly written, Green Lantern squanders an impressive budget and decades of comics mythology."
Ouch . . . .
The part I saw and didn't care much for involved a lot of deep discussions about the green power of will and the yellow power of fear. I read the Green Lantern comics as a kid, and I seemed to have missed all that. What I remember is Gil Kane's great artwork and the coolest super-suit ever — except for the white gloves, which would get dirty real fast, and who needs that kind of aggravation, eh? The movie fixed that little problem, I'll give 'em that.
Meanwhile, back in the movie, the Guardians decided that the best way to fight the villain, Parallax (brother of Perpendiculax?  ) was to fight fear with fear by forging a yellow ring. Hal Jordan tried to warn them that fear leads to hatred, and hatred leads to the Dark Side, but the Guardians never saw Star Wars so they didn't realize how much danger they were in (not to mention a potential lawsuit from Lucasfilm . . . )
One thing the movie did right (well, almost right) was the way Green Lantern's costume was formed by his ring, making it quick and easy to get his work clothes on when duty calls.
It occurred to me that if the ring could give him an instant wardrobe change (doing who-knows-what with the clothes he wore a moment earlier), it could also give him the appearance of a different face, thereby solving the problem caused by a mask that looks just swell but does absolutely nothing to hide his identity.
I'm not suggesting they should have used this clever idea of mine, because if they had, the Green Lantern Fan Army would attack at dawn and kill the infidels in their beds.
Or maybe not. It took almost 75 years to happen, but Superman was finally allowed to make a screen appearance with his red shorts under his pants! 
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sun Dec 16, 2018 4:39 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
orzel-w
Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 19 Sep 2014
Posts: 1876
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2015 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
What I didn't buy about this interpretation was that Jordan could form any device for which he knew all the details. He then forms a jet fighter (because he's intimately familiar with every last component by virtue of being an engineer)... and flies it in outer space. Obviously, one crucial detail he didn't know about this jet was that jets won't fly in space. Furthermore, there's a sh!tload of detail in a jet aircraft, even for an engineer. The original comic book Green Lantern would have just formed a self-propelling bubble to travel in space.
_________________
...or not...
WayneO
----------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pow
Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 27 Sep 2014
Posts: 3421
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
I was rooting for this movie to be big.
Much as I like Superman & Batman, those were the only superheroes from DC we received in film time & time again.
Tons of DC heroes to adapt to the cinema but they, Warner Brothers, don't or won't do it, in spite of Marvel's enormous success in bringing so many of their characters to film.
I did not care for the movie for several reasons.
Thought Hal's character as a tired, old cliche. The intrepid jet pilot that acts like a randy teen, cannot settle down with the right girl, takes foolish risks, blah, blah, blah. Boring.
Not nearly enough time on Oa for training, meeting other GLs, learning what the corps stands for. Instead its all glazed over & in no time at all, voila, Hal's the bravest, rootin-tootinst finest GL ever.
Reluctant hero trope is played out: Yawn.
And the first major GL villain they have Hal battle is a big cloud. Whoopdee freakin' do.
I had no issue with the cast. FX were awesome. The Abin-Sur/origin story was great.
Love to see them take another run at GL. However, the scripting needs to be powerful. If it ain't on the page it ain't on the stage.
Hollywood continually needs to learn this vital lesson. The writing is indeed everything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17062
Location: North Carolina
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2015 1:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
___________________________________
Pow, you certainly nailed the problem. Excellent anaylsis.
Orzel-w, I didn't see enough of the movie to get to the part where it states Hal can only create objects he knows the details of.
Brother, what a crock that is! If that was how it worked, Green Lantern could only create simple objects. As a matter of fact, that's pretty much what the comics showed him doing — making things like giant green scissors to cut something.
But I've always assumed the ring was sort of a miniature "Krell machine" which took Green Lantern's basic command and then it provided the details needed to make it.
So, if Green Lantern needed a jet (which seems dumb, since he can fly), the ring would supply the details. Bear in mind that the "jet" really wouldn't need all the working parts to be able to fly, because it's made of energy and the ring can manipulate it just like it manipulates everything it makes.
So, in addition to the stupidity of flying a jet up into space, you're absolutely right that the story violated its own stated premise by having Hal supposedly create something far too complex for a person to know every component required to make it.
I just don't understand how supposedly intelligent filmmakers can make such foolish mistakes. If the screenwriter is too damn dumb to avoid screw ups like that, you'd think somebody involved in the project — the director, the assistant director, the producers, even the cotton pickin' script girl — would take one look at the screenplay and say, "Wait a minute. This is goofy."
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sun Dec 16, 2018 4:43 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
orzel-w
Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 19 Sep 2014
Posts: 1876
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2015 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It gets even more ridiculous the more you think about it. In order to visualize something on the order of complexity of a jet aircraft, you need to know not only what every component looks like, but you need to know the clearances required between parts that fit together and the material properties. You don't want a part to be rigid if it's supposed to be flexible or brittle if it needs to flex. It's a lot of numbers, not just appearance.
_________________
...or not...
WayneO
----------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17062
Location: North Carolina
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2015 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Youtube has the scene in which Green Lantern creates two green jets that fly around Parallax and then start pulling on Green Lantern with straps attached to his waist while he faces Parallax and stares at it with grim determination.
Other than the quick scene a few minutes earlier where Green Lantern uses the ring to grab a multimillion-dollar communications satellite and throw it at Parallax (destroying the satellite and annoying the monster), I didn't see the point of anything our hero did.
Just what were the green jets supposed to be doing? I'd really like to know.
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Last edited by Bud Brewster on Wed Mar 28, 2018 2:04 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rocky Jones
Astral Engineer
Joined: 17 Dec 2014
Posts: 225
Location: North Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Most of what you guys are talking about seems to stem from the inherent problem of converting a comic book concept into live action with more of a "real world" feel. A comic reader probably isn't going to think for a second about GL not knowing every detail of a jet plane, but with live action we try to envision things as a bit closer to reality. Comics readers don't care if the Hulk instantly gains 1000 lbs or that a flying man couldn't stop in mid-air to change directions, but in live action those things seem goofy.
Anyway, I seem to have read the other day they're planning to reboot Green Lantern with a new actor in the lead. There seems to be so much international money to be made with comic book movies I guess the motivation is there to keep trying with these properties. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17062
Location: North Carolina
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rocky Jones wrote: | | Comics readers don't care if the Hulk instantly gains 1000 lbs or that a flying man couldn't stop in mid-air to change directions, but in live action those things seem goofy. |
I would have to disagree that comic book readers don't care about illogical story elements or incorrect science. You seem to be suggesting that someone reading a comic book isn't pondering the concepts and analyzing the story.
I would suggest that comic book readers do this more than movie watchers — not less. Reading a comic book or a novel engages the mind much more than watching a movie, because you have to imagine the things you're reading about — instead of just sitting there experiencing the story through your eyes and ears.
And a comic book or a novel allows you to stop anytime you want and think about what you've read. You can even go back and reread something if you're not clear about it — even if the explanation is in a different part of the book.
A movie just plows on ahead whether you're keeping up or not. 
What we're discussing here is what authors call "internal consistency". That just means the story should stick to the rules it established for itself.
So, if Green Lantern's ring is supposed to have a limit (no objects can be created that Hal can't visualize in full detail) than it "breaks the rule" if the ring creates a fully functional jet aircraft with all its working parts.
To be fair, however, after seeing that scene on Youtube I'd have to say that what the ring actually created during the battle with Parallelax were the glowing green images of two jets streaking around in space — not two fully functional jet aircraft with all their internal components.
In other words, the CGI jets we see on screen are basically the same things the ring created — RGI jets. (Ring Generated Images  ).
But I still think the ring (according to the comic book) was capable of interpreting Hal's intentions and creating whatever was needed without Hal having to provide a mental image in the conscious mind.
Example: If a missile was racing straight at Green Lantern and he pointed the ring at it, the ring would respond to his need to be shielded by literally creating a big green translucent Medieval shield in the air — complete with a coat of arms and handles on the back!
Why? Because the ring errs on the side of caution and creates a shield from Hal's memories of them from movies and museum displays.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, the ring is like a miniature Krell machine.
That was what I loved about Green Lantern. He and the ring were partners, in a way. The ring wasn't just a weapon that shot beams of green energy. It was a genie that granted wishes, and Hal didn't always know exactly what would appear. But whatever did appear was always appropriate for the occasion.
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sun Dec 16, 2018 4:50 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rocky Jones
Astral Engineer
Joined: 17 Dec 2014
Posts: 225
Location: North Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bud Brewster wrote: | | I would suggest that comic book readers do this more than movie watchers — not less. |
This is probably true now that most comic readers are adults, but you have to admit in '50s and '60s when we were first reading comics our youthful critical minds were not quite up to that yet. I still think the fact that the imagery of comics super heros being in graphic form allows them some leeway in the area of acceptance. You may have been an exceptionally critical comic reader, but I wasn't so concerned about the physics in my comics. Tights-wearing sci-fi heros seemed to fit well in a graphic medium, but to me they forever look silly in live action and a modern setting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pow
Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 27 Sep 2014
Posts: 3421
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Whenever I go to see any type of film, including superhero movies, my friends & I relish discussing the film afterwards.
Analyzing, critiquing, disagreeing, you name it. It's as much fun as the movie for me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17062
Location: North Carolina
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rocky Jones wrote: | | Bud Brewster wrote: | | I would suggest that comic book readers do this more than movie watchers — not less. |
This is probably true now that most comic readers are adults, but you have to admit in '50s and '60s when we were first reading comics our youthful critical minds were not quite up to that yet. |
A valid observation, sir.
I should point out, however, that I was commenting on the difference between reading a novel (graphic or otherwise) and watching a movie. Regardless of the age of the reader or viewer, reading a story requires more thought and encourages more analysis than simply watching it on screen.
Naturally we all become more critical and less gullible as we get older, but the fact remains that when we read a comic book, we think more about the concepts than when we watch a chapter of the old Flash Gordon serial on Saturday morning (which is what they showed on TV in the 1950s when I was a kid.)
In other words, I'm not comparing me then to me now. I'm comparing me reading a book to me watching a movie.
| Pow wrote: | Whenever I go to see any type of film, including superhero movies, my friends & I relish discussing the film afterwards.
Analyzing, critiquing, disagreeing, you name it. It's as much fun as the movie for me. |
Ah yes, a man after my own heart! The deep contemplation we don't get to do during a movie can definitely be done after the fact. For years after the fact, in fact.
How often have you heard your less cerebral friends say something like, "Why do you always have to pick the movie apart? Why can't you just enjoy it?"
And you stammer and sputter and stare goggleyed at your friends while you try to think of a kindly way to state the freakin' obvious.
"I AM enjoying the movie! I'm not picking it apart, I'm thinking about it. Not thinking about a movie is like not tasting your food. That's the point of eating — not just looking at it while you shove it into your mouth!"
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sun Dec 16, 2018 4:53 pm; edited 5 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
orzel-w
Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 19 Sep 2014
Posts: 1876
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rocky Jones wrote: | | Bud Brewster wrote: | | I would suggest that comic book readers do this more than movie watchers -- not less. |
This is probably true now that most comic readers are adults, but you have to admit in '50s and '60s when we were first reading comics our youthful critical minds were not quite up to that yet. |
When I was still a pre-teen, back in the late 1950s to early '60s, DC comics introduced their Letters to the Editor column. It wasn't long before it fell into a blooper-spotting routine. I'm sure it put somewhat of a damper on the creative talents of the writers and artists, having to watch their backs in addition to plying their craft. When Marvel began featuring recurring super heroes, along with Letters to the Editor, they quickly quashed the blooper-spotting, much to their credit.
| Bud Brewster wrote: | | "I AM enjoying the movie! I'm not picking it apart, I'm thinking about it. Not thinking about a movie is like not tasting your food. That's the point of eating -- not just looking at it while you shove it into your mouth!" |
I can't even begin to tell you how much more I've enjoyed 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (Disney) and Forbidden Planet since buying the DVDs. I've spent a number of years analyzing especially 20k to spot the "anomalies" and try to figure out what went into their occurrence.
_________________
...or not...
WayneO
----------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17062
Location: North Carolina
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| orzel-w wrote: | | I can't even begin to tell you how much more I've enjoyed 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (Disney) and Forbidden Planet since buying the DVDs. I've spent a number of years analyzing especially 20k to spot the "anomalies" and try to figure out what went into their occurrence. |
Ditto. I've spent over 50 years watching Forbidden Planet on TV and in revival houses, recording Forbidden Planet on audio tapes from the TV in the 1960s, watching and recording Forbidden Planet on VHS tapes in the 1980s, writing about Forbidden Planet endlessly on message boards in the 2000s, and talking about Forbidden Planet until late in the night with friends throughout every decade I just named.
And that movie (as the best example of what we're all agreeing about here), continues to dazzle me with new and interesting elements I missed in all that time.
From the long discussions about whether Morbius knew what the animals really were to Butch's revelation about the mysterious gray partition under the ship in one scene, Forbidden Planet seems to be an inexhaustible supply of interesting subjects to discuss.
I certainly hope nobody does a remake. I'll be lucky if I can finish talking about the original before I die!
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sun Dec 16, 2018 4:56 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rocky Jones
Astral Engineer
Joined: 17 Dec 2014
Posts: 225
Location: North Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pow wrote: | | Analyzing, critiquing, disagreeing, you name it. It's as much fun as the movie for me. |
One of my favorite people to follow on the Internet is Mad Magazine writer and "Gizwiz" Dick DeBartolo. Dick has spent the last 55 years writing movie parodies for Mad and for all that time has had to watch most popular movies with a notepad in his hand. I don't think he's really been able to enjoy many movies since he started that job. Most of his favorite films are those made from the 50s and back. He's a big TCM fan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
orzel-w
Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 19 Sep 2014
Posts: 1876
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rocky Jones wrote: | | He's a big TCM fan. |
Likewise, I'm a big fan of DeBartolo's movie and TV parodies. I think of him as "a film critic, only with talent".
_________________
...or not...
WayneO
----------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
