Geoff to blame for underperformance of movie?

[Hypo Lil' Leaguer Find all posts View Profile Close Hypo]

You know what made the movie average? Ryan Reynolds shell acting, mishandled editing, and other problems. Geoff Johns should not be give credit nor blame if this a flop.

Must you always be the voice of reason?

Then why don't you do it and save everyone time trying to guess.

What he said.

[TazzMission Guardian of the Universe Find all posts View Profile Close TazzMission]

I won't say that The Dark Knight ruined every comic book film thereafter. Or that any comic book film that does not reach the Dark Knight level is a failure or cannot be enjoyable. I mean, almost every scifi flick is compared to the original Star Wars flicks, but it doesn't mean that any scifi flick is a failure because it doesn't live up to Star Wars.

A comic book movie has to be good enough to stand on it's own. It doesn't have to be the next Dark Knight, but rather the first great movie of its own franchise.

tdk was indeed a great film no doubt about it. but when you hear idiots go out there and say ooooooh green lantern needs to follow that sort of formula it makes me sick and i do feel as great a film tdk is its very over rated. the film is 3 years old and its time to move on.

i know i myself have posted threads regarding ideas for casting but the shit i have seen from people on sites like ign make this alot worse.

hell right now there saying sinestro is one of dc's worst charachters next to bane when it comes to films....

im sorry but those idiots have no fucking clue what there saying.


i think all us real lantern fans need to get together and honestly start writting our own ideas down because comic book films are for us ( comic fans)

[Tommy Boy Hal's Understudy Find all posts View Profile Close Tommy Boy]

I don't want to get into a debate,but most hardcore fans hate the new Bonds. If you liked watching James bond play Poker for half a movie,more power to you. Craig was so bad I wrote an apology letter to George Lazenby.lol But I guess taste is subjective. and the mob is not always right,but Bond is still dead to me now.

To each his own.

But for argument's sake, Casino Royale is easily the closest translation of an actual Fleming novel since From Russia, With Love. I won't assume whether or not you've read either, but a large part of the novel is Bond nailing SMERSH money man Le Chiffre at the baccarat table. Bond's first round loss, meeting Felix Leiter, Lynd's death, Bond's reaction to that death, his recovery from torture and escape with Lynd, all pulled directly from the novel. Outside of the modernization of the story and the introduction of Quantum with Mr. White (assuming this as a hybridization of SMERSH and SPECTRE), the film nailed Fleming's Bond short of his looks.

That, coupled with my personal experience along with that from hardcore Bond fans, says it's the truest Bond film in a long time. Which for many makes it one of the best.

[Medphyll Guy's Drinking Buddy Find all posts View Profile Close Medphyll]

To each his own.

But for argument's sake, Casino Royale is easily the closest translation of an actual Fleming novel since From Russia, With Love. I won't assume whether or not you've read either, but a large part of the novel is Bond nailing SMERSH money man Le Chiffre at the baccarat table. Bond's first round loss, meeting Felix Leiter, Lynd's death, Bond's reaction to that death, his recovery from torture and escape with Lynd, all pulled directly from the novel. Outside of the modernization of the story and the introduction of Quantum with Mr. White (assuming this as a hybridization of SMERSH and SPECTRE), the film nailed Fleming's Bond short of his looks.

That, coupled with my personal experience along with that from hardcore Bond fans, says it's the truest Bond film in a long time. Which for many makes it one of the best.

Yep! Off subject: have you read Carte Blanche? My copy arrives today.

[Tommy Boy Hal's Understudy Find all posts View Profile Close Tommy Boy]

Not yet.

Emphasis on "yet". I'm almost half afraid to. To me, there's Fleming Bond and Movie Bond with a clear gap between the two where Bond drives a supercharged Bentley, has a scar on his face, and is just as lucky as he is good withOUT all the laser/missile/grappling hook watch and submarine Lotus crap. I think I'd go nuts if the two were merged on the page.

[Bolerathon Avant Guardian Find all posts View Profile Close Bolerathon]

I won't say that The Dark Knight ruined every comic book film thereafter. Or that any comic book film that does not reach the Dark Knight level is a failure or cannot be enjoyable. I mean, almost every scifi flick is compared to the original Star Wars flicks, but it doesn't mean that any scifi flick is a failure because it doesn't live up to Star Wars.

I still don't get why people call Star Wars science fiction.

A comic book movie has to be good enough to stand on it's own. It doesn't have to be the next Dark Knight, but rather the first great movie of its own franchise.

When people draw comparisons with TDK I doubt the want the same structure. TDK had strong performances all through and did something more than look at surface. They didn't spend too long on the Batmobile or the trappings but instead looked at things like order vs chaos and the nature of heroism. Those are things that comic fans and non comic fans can connect with. There was more to it than fanboy baiting.

Had GL looked at something more universal then it could have met TDK. Since we have the guardians and their candidates for a superpowered ring why not look at the nature of authority or the criteria or being worthy? You don't have to be a reader to understand something like that and for it to engage you. They missed an opportunity and the film could have been so much more than it was.

[TazzMission Guardian of the Universe Find all posts View Profile Close TazzMission]

I still don't get why people call Star Wars science fiction.

well to an extent it is fiction. but it does also show science fact.


there was a show on history titled star wars tech that explained alot of real things and non real things.


heck even batman had one

[Bolerathon Avant Guardian Find all posts View Profile Close Bolerathon]

well to an extent it is fiction. but it does also show science fact.


there was a show on history titled star wars tech that explained alot of real things and non real things.


heck even batman had one

I would call it space opera. To me science fiction is based around science-y things. Blade Runner is based on the concept of man made life so that counts but Star Wars is an adventure story. The lightsabers and star ships are cool and all but could be replaced by swords and conventional transports and still work just as well.

[SD80MAC Not a True Fan Find all posts View Profile Close SD80MAC]

"Science fantasy" works, too.

[Bolerathon Avant Guardian Find all posts View Profile Close Bolerathon]

"Science fantasy" works, too.

The thing is the science part is still there. It might be just because I think space opera sounds cool but since Lucas said that Star Wars is a combo of Flash Gordon and WWII in space it just doesn't sit with me.

[JohnnyV Pictionary Master Find all posts View Profile Close JohnnyV]

Science fiction is a genre of fiction dealing with the impact of imagined innovations in science or technology, often in a futuristic setting.

[Bolerathon Avant Guardian Find all posts View Profile Close Bolerathon]

Science fiction is a genre of fiction dealing with the impact of imagined innovations in science or technology, often in a futuristic setting.

Yeah but the stuff in Star Wars isn't really effected by the science. It's all adventures of an old knight, a young squire, a roughish pirate and a headstrong princess. The story isn't changed by the hyperdrive or the aliens. That's what I'm getting at.

[Lantern A-train Guardian of the Universe Find all posts View Profile Close Lantern A-train]

Science fiction is a genre of fiction dealing with the impact of imagined innovations in science or technology, often in a futuristic setting.

But it was a long time ago in a galaxy far away

[Darth_Primus Guardian of the Universe Find all posts View Profile Close Darth_Primus]

I still don't get why people call Star Wars science fiction.

There was a debate about this issue on this message board. My thought is because it fits the criteria set forth in the definition of "science fiction." The quality of the science of that fiction is debatable.

There is a fundable flaw (or two) to the Green Lantern movie, but no one has yet mentioned it (at least I haven't seen it).

Then why don't you do it and save everyone time trying to guess.

Because I didn't want to be only one to voice this opinion. I didn't want to sound like an average fanboy or a person with an axe to grind. Bolerathan and Tommy Boy appear to be on the same way length as myself on finding this fundamental flaw.

Tommy Boy posted on the GL Movie News Discussion Thread:

Anyone else pissed at how they did the story of Martin Jordan?

He's taking off, then BLAM. Your dad's dead, kid.

No display whatsoever of his overcoming the fear of certain doom to steer the plane away from the crowd, sacrificing himself to save others. That seems like the most CLASSIC example of an explanation of why Hal has what he has inside. That innate ability to overcome fear. Because he got it from his old man.

and Bolerthon posted above:

Had GL looked at something more universal then it could have met TDK. Since we have the guardians and their candidates for a superpowered ring why not look at the nature of authority or the criteria or being worthy? You don't have to be a reader to understand something like that and for it to engage you. They missed an opportunity and the film could have been so much more than it was.

The basic fundamental flaw of this movie is that it did NOT demonstrate why Hal Jordan is the Greatest Lantern of all. How he succeeded when the "most elite Lanterns" failed. Instead we got some Top Gun fly at the seat of you pants Maverick bullshit on how Hal defeated Parallax. This did not demonstrate Will Power or "the ability to overcome fear." It was an act of foolishness and desperation that any Green Lantern could have performed.


I said this many times before on various place on this message board, that I became a fan of Green Lantern because of the Sinestro Corps storyline. Why? Because the elements of universe appeal and the parallel tie to the original Star Wars films.

The Jedi are the Green Lanterns of their respective universe; keepers of the peace. And much like how the Green Lanterns use Will Power, the Jedi use a force created by all living things to give them their power. Moreover, like the Green Lanterns' ring, the Jedi use the lightsabers as weapons to keep the peace and neutralize threats. The Force chooses its Jedi Knights, much like The Ring selects its Emerald Knights.

The Sith are like Sinestro and his Corps. They use the power of fear as their ally.


YouTube Video Clip of Star Wars promo using the phrase:
"Fear...
Fear attracts the fearful. The strong. The weak. The innocent. The corrupt. Fear...
Fear is my ally."

That above is also the reason I hated when the Guardians forged a Yellow Ring and the special scene mid credits. It hurts the Fall of Sinestro. Sinestro betrays the Corp and Guardians because they are without emotions. The Guardians much the Jedi Council would probably says something like, "Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering." Sinestro's views of emotions is in direct conflict with the Guardians, a constant theme in the Green Lantern mythos.


Will Power is the Force that defeats fear. It's the element that evokes courage; the power to fight instead of flee in the face of fear. Hal's Will power and ability to overcome is the reason he becomes the greatest of all the Lanterns. The universal appeal that Bolerathon notes above. That in the blackest night and the darkest hour, will power can become a beacon of light and overcome fear and desperation. This is a universal quality share by the greatest of heroes.

Hal not using his "Will Power" to defeat Parallax is akin to a Jedi not using the Force and Lightsaber to subdue an enemy. So say all you want about Thor, but at least he used his hammer to reach a final resolution.

Hal not using his ring or demonstrating his will power is a crime I cannot look past.

[Darth_Primus Guardian of the Universe Find all posts View Profile Close Darth_Primus]

Yeah but the stuff in Star Wars isn't really effected by the science. It's all adventures of an old knight, a young squire, a roughish pirate and a headstrong princess. The story isn't changed by the hyperdrive or the aliens. That's what I'm getting at.

Yes, those are universal themes. The Jedi and Green Lanterns (aka Emerald Knights) share many of the same elements, and therefore would consider Star Wars as much as part of the science fiction genre as Green Lantern.