|
Post by Mr. McCluer on Jun 19, 2011 18:27:42 GMT -5
Personally as a huge GL fan, I was pleased, excited for the sequel, here's to hoping that parallax and Hal will become Spector and we can have a Jon or Kyle GL cameo
|
|
|
Post by Edgeman05 on Jun 19, 2011 18:30:52 GMT -5
Lol, I wasn't trying to come off as a prick or anything. Just thought your claim against critics was a little harsh due to you obviously already being a fan of this movie before release. I constantly defend MacGruber up and down even though it appeals to a very "particular" audience. I saw Green Lantern already last week and it was exactly what I expected it to be, trash. I REALLY wanted to like it, but I just couldn't. A bit of a cheap plug, but if you want to read my full thoughts on the matter than check out the site in my sig/ava. ;D And to your comment on Green Lantern making more than MacGruber, I'd almost be willing to say that if you adjust it for budget vs. gross ratio, MacGruber will wipe the floor with Green Lantern, domestically. MacGruber cost an estimated 10 million dollars to make and it closed with about 8.5 million. Green Lantern on the other hand cost Warner Bros an estimate of 300 million to make and the weekend is tracking it at opening around 57 million. With Transformers and Cars coming up soon and movies like Hangover, Super 8, Xmen, Bridesmaids and even Midnight in Paris playing strong, I strongly doubt Green Lantern will make that back in the United States. MAYBE the overseas numbers can help it, but that's doubtful. So MacGruber will have ended up costing Universal Studios much less than Green Lantern did for Warner Bros. We'll just have to wait and see I guess. I just think people are being way to hard on this movie. Oh I agree man. At the end of the day a comic book movie doesn't always need to get compared to The Dark Knight and such in terms of quality. I personally love the hell out of Watchmen and Punisher: War Zone. I don't know many that do enjoy those films, but I like them and that's all the matters. I give Green Lantern credit for bringing such a bold and odd character to the big screen. They fully embraced the cheesy and silly stuff from his world/universe and it just didn't click for everyone. That being said, I do want to see this in 2D. I feel that the 3D really took me out of the film and the fact that I was sitting in the theater waiting a good 45 mins for them to get there digital projector going.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Jun 19, 2011 21:06:03 GMT -5
Just walked in the door from seeing it and I can say it was a pretty decent movie. Much better than some are making it out to be. Didn't love it but it was enjoyable. Overall I'd give it a 7 outta 10.
|
|
|
Post by King Shocker the Monumentous on Jun 19, 2011 21:14:16 GMT -5
Not nearly as terrible as the critics say. As far as DC movies go, it's no Dark Knight, but it's sure as hell no Batman & Robin either.
|
|
MX5
Main Eventer
Joined on: Apr 10, 2005 0:27:57 GMT -5
Posts: 4,520
|
Post by MX5 on Jun 19, 2011 21:56:51 GMT -5
This movie was completely terrible and I'm a HUGE Ryan Reynolds fan. I'm not even sure how anyone was serious while filming it.
There must have been about 12 people in the theater last night when I saw it, including the group of 5 that I was with.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Ragnarok on Jun 19, 2011 22:25:03 GMT -5
We'll just have to wait and see I guess. I just think people are being way to hard on this movie. Oh I agree man. At the end of the day a comic book movie doesn't always need to get compared to The Dark Knight and such in terms of quality. I personally love the hell out of Watchmen and Punisher: War Zone. I don't know many that do enjoy those films, but I like them and that's all the matters. I give Green Lantern credit for bringing such a bold and odd character to the big screen. They fully embraced the cheesy and silly stuff from his world/universe and it just didn't click for everyone. That being said, I do want to see this in 2D. I feel that the 3D really took me out of the film and the fact that I was sitting in the theater waiting a good 45 mins for them to get there digital projector going. Yeah, I plan on seeing it again myself, but in 3D this time. I've never seen a movie in 3D so I'm pretty excited about it.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Ragnarok on Jun 20, 2011 0:10:04 GMT -5
|
|
Dexter Morgan
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 8, 2008 15:30:18 GMT -5
Posts: 3,130
|
Post by Dexter Morgan on Jun 20, 2011 0:19:11 GMT -5
Plan on waiting for it to come out on DVD. Doesn't look good at all but I'll found out later on. It seems like they tried putting to much in to one film and I'm not a fan of the full CGI suit.
|
|
|
Post by Edgeman05 on Jun 20, 2011 8:26:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Lord Ragnarok on Jun 20, 2011 10:52:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by T R W on Jun 20, 2011 10:54:09 GMT -5
Unless a movie is actually filmed in 3D like Avatar, I never see the 3-D versions of movies. It's a waste of money, and detracts from the film.
|
|
|
Post by deskjet on Jun 20, 2011 13:58:34 GMT -5
Great movie. Much better than Thor. Best DC movies I've seen including black knoght. Sick of seeing 50 million versions of batman beside sthe storyline is aweful, anyway not to get into bashing other stuff. GL, had a good plot, helped new viewers understand what was going on and served as a good platform for future movies. Hopefully in the sequel they'll delve more into the intergalactic struggle. The spoiler after the credits ios what most would anticipate it to be, but still interesting nonetheless.
|
|
|
Post by sean™ on Jun 20, 2011 14:02:49 GMT -5
.......I'll just say this and save some time and effot. I'm really.....really......really really really glad I didn't actually pay to see this movie. Because in no way, shape, or form would it have been worth it.
I love superhero movies. Of all kind, from Meteor Man to Donnie Darko ( I will gladly debate anyone on DD being a superhero movie) But this is one of those movies that I walked out of the theatre, wishing I hadn't seen it.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Ragnarok on Jun 20, 2011 21:57:25 GMT -5
Unless a movie is actually filmed in 3D like Avatar, I never see the 3-D versions of movies. It's a waste of money, and detracts from the film. That's why I saw it in 2D first. I know 3D isn't all that great, but I just really want to see at least one movie in 3D, so I figured this would be the perfect film.
|
|
Dexter Morgan
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 8, 2008 15:30:18 GMT -5
Posts: 3,130
|
Post by Dexter Morgan on Jun 20, 2011 23:40:48 GMT -5
Unless a movie is actually filmed in 3D like Avatar, I never see the 3-D versions of movies. It's a waste of money, and detracts from the film. That's why I saw it in 2D first. I know 3D isn't all that great, but I just really want to see at least one movie in 3D, so I figured this would be the perfect film. If you've never seen a film in 3D your first one should be filmed in 3D because post-production 3D looks like an after thought and could turn you off 3D use in movies altogether. If this is post-production 3D I would advise against making it your first 3D movie.
|
|
|
Post by Edgeman05 on Jun 20, 2011 23:43:57 GMT -5
Unless a movie is actually filmed in 3D like Avatar, I never see the 3-D versions of movies. It's a waste of money, and detracts from the film. That's hard to do in my area. Piranha only played in 3D. One screen in MN had it on 2D and it was pretty far away. Green Lantern 3D seems to be showing like 10 times a day while 2D is only 2 times. I hate when they do that.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Ragnarok on Jun 20, 2011 23:52:44 GMT -5
That's why I saw it in 2D first. I know 3D isn't all that great, but I just really want to see at least one movie in 3D, so I figured this would be the perfect film. If you've never seen a film in 3D your first one should be filmed in 3D because post-production 3D looks like an after thought and could turn you off 3D use in movies altogether. If this is post-production 3D I would advise against making it your first 3D movie. Is the last Harry Potter movie filmed in 3D? If so, then maybe I'll watch that in 3D then.
|
|
|
Post by King Shocker the Monumentous on Jun 21, 2011 16:37:57 GMT -5
Unless a movie is actually filmed in 3D like Avatar, I never see the 3-D versions of movies. It's a waste of money, and detracts from the film. That's hard to do in my area. Piranha only played in 3D. One screen in MN had it on 2D and it was pretty far away. Green Lantern 3D seems to be showing like 10 times a day while 2D is only 2 times. I hate when they do that. Because a 3D ticket costs more. Had Avatar only been available in 2D, with no 3D or Imax, it probably wouldn't be the top-grossing film of all time.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 14:01:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2011 11:46:32 GMT -5
I am very big Green Lantern and Ryan Reynolds fan and i just didn't like this film at all. In fact i left before it even ended. I think A. a super hero epic needs to be a minimum of 2 hours and 15 minutes. Green lantern seemed rushed and unimagined
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 14:01:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2011 19:33:27 GMT -5
I really enjoyed it
|
|