or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › Green Lantern Post-Release Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Green Lantern Post-Release Thread  

post #1 of 260
Thread Starter 

Have you seen the trailers? Congratulations, you've seen the movie.

 

It honestly feels like two different movies. Martin Campbell shoots this epic film as if there's no concept of time, with characters appearing on Oa and on Earth randomly. The other Green Lanterns are useless. Shit was dull.

post #2 of 260

New Bitmap Image.jpg

post #3 of 260

If accurate, this is disappointing but hardly surprising. I'm much more hopeful for ole Cap this summer, anyway.

post #4 of 260

You KNOW Blake Lively is hot in this. 

You KNOW Tim Blake Nelson is not in this.

post #5 of 260

I have a feeling that the reviews for this film are going to be more enjoyable then the film it'self.  I'll see it, but damn it looks like a mess.


Edited by MoonBaseNick - 6/14/11 at 2:27pm
post #6 of 260

sooo....its a bomb? what about the cosmic scope, the 3-D spec-TACULAR effects, the seductive chemistry between the Reynolds and Lively, the charm of a wisecracking Ryan Reynolds?!

 

i just dont understand!

post #7 of 260

I do feel bad for Reynolds, as it may very well hurt his career, and that was always my thing about this film. If it bombs, it sure as hell will not bomb quitely. I said it before, and I'll say it again, Martin Campbell was so the wrong guy to go to for this.

 

Oh, and there's this.... http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/archives/2011/06/13/green_lantern_reportedly_cost_300_million_martin_campbell_not_signed_for/ 

post #8 of 260

yeah its too bad for reynolds. but just from the trailer i have a feeling its either trying to be light and funny or cosmic and dramatic. and im assuming under Martin's direction the two didnt mesh quite as well as we had hoped

post #9 of 260

I always thought that GL looks the worst among the 4 superhero movies this summer, and although GL isn't one of my favorites I was hoping it'll do well since I like Ryan Reynold and his enthusiasm for being a comic book fanboy. The trailers thus far have been rather underwhelming, and while I like Martin Campbell it seems like a head-scratching decision to hire him as the director. At least Joe Johnson's Rocketeer can justify his hiring for Capt. America.

post #10 of 260

People are truly surprised by this?  Truly?  When the last trailer came out, it seemed like some residents of these boards were crying green tears of orgasmic joy over it, while I could not for the life of me understand what everyone was jizzing about.  Looked awful from the start.  Still looks awful now.

post #11 of 260

It's really hard to swallow that this film cost $300 million to produce.

 

Hey, maybe the CGI suit was a horrible goddamn money sink and a terrible idea, after all.

post #12 of 260

On the plus side, we may get more nude photos of Blake Lively before Friday.

post #13 of 260
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by D.T. View Post
It's really hard to swallow that this film cost $300 million to produce.
 

I'm guessing this includes p+a, right? Since this movie feels like it has about four real locations, and they all feel like soundstages.

 

Best part about it is the thing I thought I would hate the most, which is Peter Sarsgaard. He plays Hammond like a total dork who suddenly got superpowers overnight. What I DON'T buy is the weird-ass suggestion that either Sarsgaard, Lively and Reynolds grew up together, or Sarsgaard, in love with Lively, was a pedophile.

 

While most of the good/ok bits are in the trailer, the early clips also showcase a whole bunch of alternate scenes and shots. Which is weird, because this thing feels edited together with scotch tape, and the last thirty minutes play like it was cut from maybe forty five.

 

I'll just spoil the suspense right now - aside from Amanda Waller showing up, and some references to Star Sapphire, there are no attempts to link this to a bigger DC movie universe. And that includes the post-credits stinger, which will excite and surprise approximately ZERO people.

 

Spoilers for the similar draft of GL I read a couple of years ago...

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

They kept about 40% of it, and re-arranged certain scenes and moments. They cut a funny Guy Gardner cameo and a reverent Alan Scott bit, as well as the suggestion that Sups, at some point, a candidate to receive the ring.

 

 

post #14 of 260

How's Blake Lively? January Jones bad?

post #15 of 260
Thread Starter 

Not very Lively.

post #16 of 260

aw shucks

post #17 of 260

I haven't seen the film, but I don't care enough to go in "spoiler free". In fact, the only reason I'm planning on seeing it this weekend is because there were some projection issues during my showing of Super 8 on Saturday, and they handed out free passes as everyone was leaving the auditorium.

 

So, Sinestro is responsible for unleashing Parallax, right?

post #18 of 260

Hey dude i really feel bad for you . I think its really sad

 

post #19 of 260

Still hopefull :(

post #20 of 260

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Savage View Post

Still hopefull :(


You might want to check that hope: Drew's review. Summary: an awkward, disjointed mess. Drew says it has a few working elements, but even by mid-90s superhero film standards, it just doesn't work.

 

His review ends with some spoilers, so be warned. He gives ample warning about them, though.
 

 

post #21 of 260

 

Quote:
Third, I think Ryan Reynolds is a guy who is primed for stardom, and he's just looking for the right movie.

 

I find it interesting that Drew seems to be implying, "Well, I like the guy so let's allow him to fuck up as many franchises as he likes until he gets one that clicks."

post #22 of 260

eh, I had some mild hopes, but nothing about this screamed 'better then something that would have been churned out in the 80's if those nerds had access to the computers we do now'

 

hopefully it has some drunken-b-grade merit.

post #23 of 260

This early word is unfortunate. Green Lantern has been a roller coaster for me, as I'm a big fan of the character and concept. When I first heard about Campbell and Reynolds and a script that adheres to the comic book faithfully, I was ecstatic. Then I saw the teaser. It looked silly, and not in a good way. The recent trailers have lifted my hopes slightly, but Reynolds' Bale Batman growl of "Green Lantern's light!" made me giggle (and I've noticed in the TV spots has been toned down).

 

Green Lantern should be played like Star Wars, or better yet Flash Gordon (with a theme song by, hmmm, let's say Muse going something like "Greeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeen Lantern, across the universe in flight! Greeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeen Lantern, fights enemies with light!" *guitar solo*). What's with all the serious face and lack of imagination?

post #24 of 260

Just tried Hifix and it crashed Firefox, that is not a good sign.

post #25 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin4556 View Post

Hey dude i really feel bad for you . I think its really sad

 


Thanks for your concern dude, but Super 8 wasn't that good anyway.

 

(Yes, I know it's a spambot.)

 

post #26 of 260
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by D.T. View Post

So, Sinestro is responsible for unleashing Parallax, right?


 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Abin-Sur has Parallax contained before the movie begins, and he merely breaks out on his own. Sinestro is not involved in that.

 

post #27 of 260

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TzuDohNihm View Post

 

 

I find it interesting that Drew seems to be implying, "Well, I like the guy so let's allow him to fuck up as many franchises as he likes until he gets one that clicks."


Is that the implication? Sounds to me like he's simply stating that he digs Reynolds but finds it unfortunate that the movies he picks are never worthy of him... That's not something I believe, by the way, I find Reynolds to be charming, but not the type of guy who elevates any given role. He's best when he sticks to what he knows. If he does superhero, it should be something closer to Deadpool.

post #28 of 260

If Reynolds weren't so old and studly he would make a killer Peter Parker.

post #29 of 260

when are they greenlighting the sequel?

post #30 of 260

Fuck, i really wanted this to work.

post #31 of 260

"Not bad" was my reaction. Sarsgaard was enough to make it okay, it's just that 2/3 of the film is setting up Hal Jordan accepting the responsibility that nearly killed the film for me. I like the core ideas enough to not hate the film, and I liked it more than THOR, but I think both are basically the same movie. I just liked the structure of LANTERN better, and that Jordan's journey to being a hero is slightly more interesting.

post #32 of 260

Dre, don't throw that curveball. Everyone already gave up on this! 

 

You're the worst. 

post #33 of 260
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damon Houx View Post

"Not bad" was my reaction. Sarsgaard was enough to make it okay, it's just that 2/3 of the film is setting up Hal Jordan accepting the responsibility that nearly killed the film for me. I like the core ideas enough to not hate the film, and I liked it more than THOR, but I think both are basically the same movie. I just liked the structure of LANTERN better, and that Jordan's journey to being a hero is slightly more interesting.

One of my biggest gripes about the film is that 2/3rds you mention, because with all the interstellar happenings, it's honestly impossible to understand what period of time this film encompasses. Could be years, could be days, it could honestly go either way. Because of those dead spots, whenever a character is offscreen, we're left wondering, where did they go? What are they doing? How long is it taking them? Thor never seemed to have that temporal dissonance. Most damnedly, GL begins with that short, needless prologue set in deep deep space and then randomly says something like SIX MONTHS LATER. What does it matter how much later the rest of the movie occurs? And we're in another galaxy at that point - whose months are we talking? I think this would have been less of a problem if the film didn't feel truncated, but at less than two hours, it kind of feels pocket-sized at times in terms of incidence.
 

 

post #34 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evi View Post

 


Is that the implication? Sounds to me like he's simply stating that he digs Reynolds but finds it unfortunate that the movies he picks are never worthy of him... That's not something I believe, by the way, I find Reynolds to be charming, but not the type of guy who elevates any given role. He's best when he sticks to what he knows. If he does superhero, it should be something closer to Deadpool.


He follows up soon after my original quote by saying that Reynolds is not the man for the role then a paragraph later says he is well cast.  Sounds like bias towards Reynolds no matter the damage to the franchise until he finally gets his square peg personality into the correct hole.

 

As to Reynolds films not being worthy of him?  Reynolds isn't Dwayne Johnson waiting to break out of kid friendly films.  He has some serious comedy chops and did quite adequate in The Proposal but his action star time was not capitalized on after Blade III and I doubt it ever will be.  The GL concept was/is one that demands an actor with more gravitas and range than Reynolds could ever muster.

 

Full disclosure towards bias though, I have hated his casting from day one.  It bothers me as a GL fanboy the film seems poised to flop but from day one I knew the reason why, if it did, would be plain to see.

post #35 of 260

Perhaps something can be salvaged.  How's Newton Howard's score?  He can vary pretty widely.

post #36 of 260

This thing cost 300 million!  That's f'ing crazy!

post #37 of 260

 

I've never read a Green Lantern comic in my life but I know of the character and the basics of his Universe. I thought they made a critical error by hiring Ryan Reynold's because he's a complete douchebag and the only reason they hired him over, say, Zac Efron, Robert Pattinson, or some other prettyboy, is that the morons at Warner Brothers said "hey, we need someone who can crack annoying jokes every nanosecond" which is why they hired the poor mans Jason Lee despite the fact that he's dragged down everything he's ever been in not to mention that the comic book movies that he's already been in were all flaming bags of dogshit (Blade Trinity and Wolverine). There's nothing wrong with moments of levity but I can't stand that sort of wisecracking and Reynold's is intolerable in that regard.

Now, the first trailer was a DISASTER as it looked like another sequel to The Mask. However, trailer two (the comic con one) blew my ass off and made me a convert. Yes, Reynold's still comes off like a dickhead but the epic scope got me really excited as it seemed like they embraced the cosmic sci-fi elements of the material and I like that sort of thing, you know, weird aliens, planets and whatnot. The third trailer, the one about the Lantern Corps, was great as it really delved into the mythology and I loved that.

But then I started seeing the clips and it made me worry. Everything Reynold's does is filled with wisecracking ironic detachment which gets on my fucking nerves. Blake Lively can't act for s#it. Parallax looks problematic as a giant cloud doesn't have any real definition as it is amorphous thus difficult to establish what it can or can NOT do and, most importantly, how it can be defeated. Then there is the basic problem of Hal Jordan being a test pilot who has to "overcome fear", despite making a living flying experimental airplanes that could crash or explode. This makes me think that he doesn't have a problem wit the whole "fear" thing which I've written about in detail in another thread.

Hal Jordan should have been more in the mold of Luke Skywalker, an average guy who's life is changed when something literally drops out of the sky. He has to fight to survive, getting by on sheer determination and when things are at their darkest, he finds it within himself to overcome his fears and rise to the occasion. This is the reason why Star Wars has such a grip on the public's imagination as it speaks to the average person that no matter how small you think your life is, you can make a difference. Hal needed to be an underdog, not some hot shit test pilot.

THOR took the same basic character, an arrogant warrior, and made it work because he was brought down by his own hubris and humbled when he realized what his actions had wrought upon those he loved. I don't see that sort of characterization in Green Lantern except for Hal losing his job by acting like a knob. But that's not enough as Thor was made to believe that his actions had killed his father and was banished from his home. Jordan has been written to be like Tom Cruise's character in Top Gun, a smirking *beep* who thinks he's all that, only to be taken down a peg by his own actions, only for him to save the day and have everyone realize how awesome he is at the end. They used the exact same model for the new Star Trek movie and I didn't like that either. A protagonist must define himself by using his brain and dealing with a situation using his intellect and feelings to find the right course of action. Top Gun has Cruise winning by just shooting and blowing s#it up. There's no characterization there just as there is none in Green Lantern.

 

In the original comic, the idea behind Hal being a test pilot was that he ejects out of his plane and, by chance, stumbles upon Abin Sur who bestows the ring upon him. But in the movie he's just sitting around and Sur's escape pod lands near by because the ring "chose" him. So, having Hal as a test pilot is redundant and I also don't like that they've resorted the usual "chosen one" bulls#it that we've seen in virtually every film series.

But Hal Jordan isn’t the underdog as he’s a test pilot who bangs hot women and seems to have everything in life. How am I supposed to identify with this character? How am I supposed to sympathize with him and want him to succeed. I'm just a working class slob in real life, so how can I cheer on some fuckface test pilot that gets top poon and has a flashy car?!? It's like giving Flash Thompson Spider-man's powers instead of Peter Parker. Hal Jordan is an alpha-male who, from what I've read of the movie, has the usual Daddy issues that Hollywood gives to every "hero" these days. He's not someone struggling to pay the rent and his bills and about the worst thing he could go through is not getting laid for a week. Then he becomes savior of the Earth. It's like "Hey man, see your AWESOME life, well, it's going to get just even more AWESOME now that you have superpowers".

I'm not a comic book fan, I occasionally pick up a graphic novel from time-to-time, but this seems to be the overall problem with DC superhero's vs. Marvel. Superman, Batman, Green Lantern and Wonder Woman never have to worry about the little stuff that you, I and everyone else has to put up with on a daily basis. That's why I seems to identify with Marvel hero's more as they are given some real world problems in between battling evil super-villains.

I really think they should have re-written the background of Hal Jordan for this movie. I know comic book nerds will scream about how that's the character but then those are the same morons who bitch that Wolverine isn't 5'2" and played by Joe Pesci.

Anyone else feel the same way?

post #38 of 260

Also:

 

SCIENCE BUILDING

post #39 of 260


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatchThatMan View Post


I'm not a comic book fan, I occasionally pick up a graphic novel from time-to-time, but this seems to be the overall problem with DC superhero's vs. Marvel. Superman, Batman, Green Lantern and Wonder Woman never have to worry about the little stuff that you, I and everyone else has to put up with on a daily basis. That's why I seems to identify with Marvel hero's more as they are given some real world problems in between battling evil super-villains.

I really think they should have re-written the background of Hal Jordan for this movie. I know comic book nerds will scream about how that's the character but then those are the same morons who bitch that Wolverine isn't 5'2" and played by Joe Pesci.

Anyone else feel the same way?


Can't speak to your criticism of the movie (haven't seen it), but I think this generalization of the difference between Marvel and DC just simply doesn't matter if the stories are or aren't good. There are some very good Spider-Man stories, but nothing that can quite match something like "For the Man Who Has Everything" or "All Star Superman" (my opinion, of course): the quality of a given story has nothing to do with how relatable a character is, as long as the characters and world are portrayed convincingly in a plot that feels like it matters.

post #40 of 260

The Onion joins the dogpile.

post #41 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMR View Post

The Onion joins the dogpile.



I like to think that this video is directed entirely at TzuDohNihm and his lantern.

post #42 of 260



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatchThatMan View Post

But Hal Jordan isn’t the underdog as he’s a test pilot who bangs hot women and seems to have everything in life. How am I supposed to identify with this character? How am I supposed to sympathize with him and want him to succeed. I'm just a working class slob in real life, so how can I cheer on some fuckface test pilot that gets top poon and has a flashy car?!? It's like giving Flash Thompson Spider-man's powers instead of Peter Parker. Hal Jordan is an alpha-male who, from what I've read of the movie, has the usual Daddy issues that Hollywood gives to every "hero" these days. He's not someone struggling to pay the rent and his bills and about the worst thing he could go through is not getting laid for a week. Then he becomes savior of the Earth. It's like "Hey man, see your AWESOME life, well, it's going to get just even more AWESOME now that you have superpowers".
 

 

What are your thoughts on Tony Stark?

post #43 of 260
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CatchThatMan View Post
In the original comic, the idea behind Hal being a test pilot was that he ejects out of his plane and, by chance, stumbles upon Abin Sur who bestows the ring upon him. But in the movie he's just sitting around and Sur's escape pod lands near by because the ring "chose" him. So, having Hal as a test pilot is redundant and I also don't like that they've resorted the usual "chosen one" bulls#it that we've seen in virtually every film series.


But Hal Jordan isn’t the underdog as he’s a test pilot who bangs hot women and seems to have everything in life. How am I supposed to identify with this character? How am I supposed to sympathize with him and want him to succeed. I'm just a working class slob in real life, so how can I cheer on some fuckface test pilot that gets top poon and has a flashy car?!? It's like giving Flash Thompson Spider-man's powers instead of Peter Parker. Hal Jordan is an alpha-male who, from what I've read of the movie, has the usual Daddy issues that Hollywood gives to every "hero" these days. He's not someone struggling to pay the rent and his bills and about the worst thing he could go through is not getting laid for a week. Then he becomes savior of the Earth. It's like "Hey man, see your AWESOME life, well, it's going to get just even more AWESOME now that you have superpowers".

I'm not a comic book fan, I occasionally pick up a graphic novel from time-to-time, but this seems to be the overall problem with DC superhero's vs. Marvel. Superman, Batman, Green Lantern and Wonder Woman never have to worry about the little stuff that you, I and everyone else has to put up with on a daily basis. That's why I seems to identify with Marvel hero's more as they are given some real world problems in between battling evil super-villains.


A few points:

(light spoilers)

1) What's interesting is that the moment in the trailer where Abin-Sur crash-lands by Jordan isn't in the movie. In one of the oddest scenes of the film, Abin-Sur crashes alone, and orders his ring to summon someone worthy. Cut to Jordan walking to his car, then a gelatinous green orb overtakes him and throws him into the sky, "Evil Dead II"-style, chucking him miles away and towards the dock. When he lands, he has no idea where he is, but he sees the spaceship, and his IMMEDIATE reaction is to run towards it and save who's inside. Is he not worried that some sort of space orb just swallowed him and chucked him into the sky? The moment in the trailer makes sense. What happens in the movie is spectacularly, unnecessarily strange, I honestly didn't know what to make of it.

 

2) I think your argument about someone awesome becoming more awesomer kind of invalidates a lot of comic book movies, but in regards to this movie, you certainly have a point. The movie crosscuts the "origins" of Hal-as-GL and Hector-as-supervillain, except that Hector appreciates his gifts, despite them making him into a pariah and a physical beast. There's a moment where you realize Hector's opposition towards Hal comes from jealousy and Ryan Reynolds has to stand up and say something like, "You COULD be me, you know." Of course, Reynolds is dressed casually and is very handsome in this moment, whereas Sarsgaard-as-Hector is grotesquely mutated and disgusting, and you can almost see Reynolds trying to hold back a laugh. Turning this from dubious to mildly sad is that in this scene Hector tries to take control of the ring, only to be told by matinee hunk Reynolds that "he wasn't chosen." From that point on, I was 100% in Hector's corner, even though he ends up being a secondary villain to the Blob Of Doom.

 

For the record, according to an early script I read from the same team of writers... (SPOILERS ABOUT THE END)

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

I expected there to be a conflict in this film about the ring running out of energy, since Jordan needs the lantern to recharge. But then his ring loses power approximately ONCE during the movie, and it is NOT AT ALL at a moment of tension. In the script I read, I can't recall, but he either loses the ring or it runs out of energy and he is forced to save the day Rocketeer-style, as a regular human helped out by his fellow Lanterns. THAT made perfect sense. Instead, the goddamned guy PUNCHES THE ENEMY INTO THE SUN.

 

 

3) The dichotomy for me between Marvel and DC is that Marvel is the interpretation of Marvel characters as real life personalities, and DC heroes as gods, myths and legends. It's harder to make the latter relatable, but not impossible, as seventy years of comics proves. I think you can mind interesting comedy from GL in a film format, but it needs to be contrasted with a deadly serious space epic tone (from people who get this sort of thing - Martin Campbell never seemed to have the BOUNDLESS IMAGINATION you would need for a movie about a guy who can use jewelry to make ANYTHING). With the casting of Reynolds, and the stupid TV-level script, they tried to liberally sprinkle sitcommy humor and snide quipping instead of character-based laughs. Even Reynolds, who I am not a fan of, seems to be struggling within this format, like a square peg in a round hole.

post #44 of 260

It felt overlong, and yet also like it was edited within an inch of its life.  There's clearly some sort of Reynolds, Sarsgaard, Lively backstory (at least more than is revealed in the really, really last minute confession that Sarsgaard always liked her) stripped away, and chunks of connective tissue are clearly missing.  How exactly did Hal know that Hammond was fucking up Secret Government Lab and about to fry daddy?

 

Also, when it comes to big "save a faltering aircraft and reveal yourself to the public" scenes... Bryan Singer pwned Martin Campbell, as they say.

post #45 of 260



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cccc View Post

This thing cost 300 million!  That's f'ing crazy!



The breakdown seems to be 175 Million for the actual film,and 125 on marketing/advertising.

If you spend that much on marketing, you have damn well better have a hit, or all you have down is make the whole world aware of the huge bomb you have just dropped..and looks as though Warners has just dropped a Nuke.

 

 

post #46 of 260

A good chunk of that budget had to have gone toward the rendering of that outfit alone.  Wonder how much they would have saved if the outfit was not CG?

post #47 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMR View Post

The Onion joins the dogpile.


 I really love those mock posters.

post #48 of 260

See in the comics there IS a character sort of like that. In the comics Hal Jorden goes nutso and kills off all the Green Lanterns. In desperation the Guardians send a Ring to Earth to find someone to preserve the Corps. The Ring ends up with an Art Student (!) named Kyle Rainer who was GREAT! By turns self confident and lacking in confidence, he would have been a much better choice.


That said, Thor and Iron Man both feature douche bags who engage our sympathy, so a better script might have pulled it off.

 

Really sorry this blows. The second trailers got my hopes up.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatchThatMan View Post

 

Hal Jordan should have been more in the mold of Luke Skywalker, an average guy who's life is changed when something literally drops out of the sky. He has to fight to survive, getting by on sheer determination and when things are at their darkest, he finds it within himself to overcome his fears and rise to the occasion. This is the reason why Star Wars has such a grip on the public's imagination as it speaks to the average person that no matter how small you think your life is, you can make a difference. Hal needed to be an underdog, not some hot shit test pilot.

 

post #49 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarleyQuinn22 View Post



 

 

What are your thoughts on Tony Stark?

You might as well add Bruce Wayne to that question.
 

Bruce Wayne is consumed with avenging the death of his parents and he has to pretend to live the playboy lifestyle as a part of his cover. Yeah, the guy is loaded, bangs top shelf beaver and probably enjoys that a bit but his quest to save Gotham is what drives him. Iron Man worked in the same way that Thor did in that Tony Stark was a self absorbed asshole until an event changed him that made him he reassess his life. But what exactly is the life changing event that transforms Hal Jordan? He gets fired from his job for fucking up? An alien gives him a magical ring? I just don’t see anything in the character that explains his motivation the way that, say, Spiderman does with Peter Parker doing what he does because of the guilt he feels for Uncle Ben’s death and how he could have stopped it. Green lantern doesn’t have that crux.


 

 

post #50 of 260
As a fairly intense Green Lantern fan, my hopes that this is yet another film that the critics hate, but finds an audience and makes scads of money from.

What's coming out to compete with it?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
This thread is locked  
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › Green Lantern Post-Release Thread