Woohoo!! GreenLantern opening bested Thor's midnight premier!!

#1 Edited by Chunksie101 (19 posts) - - Show Bio
#2 Posted by Nocall (32 posts) - - Show Bio

Some interesting quotes:
 
Meanwhile, marketing was not happy with the movie which production delivered, and saw the finished film extremely late in the game. A source tells me. "In this case, marketing didn't have access to more than 70% of the finished movie until two weeks ago." The result is that, at a time when $35M is the average marketing cost and $70M the domestic norm for a big summer tentpole, Warner Bros spent  $55M on Green Lantern's domestic TV ads, and a total $100 million for the overall domestic campaign. 
 
That's a lot of cash.
 
My sources tell me that Warner Bros film chief Jeff Robinov and DC Entertainment "pressured the campaign to feature the alien characters too much in the name of 'franchise building'." But not everyone was on board having to feature these side characters so much especially given their marginal roles in the finished film." 
 
Uggh. Typical executive sleaze.
 
Hollywood is expecting director Martin Campbell to be made the scapegoat on this one if it underperforms; Campbell has already publicly suggested he won't be back if there's a sequel.

#3 Posted by cattlebattle (12672 posts) - - Show Bio

Not to be a hater, but this movie still sucked, Batman and Robin made a lot of money too you know

Online
#4 Posted by Osiris1428 (1349 posts) - - Show Bio
@cattlebattle said:
Not to be a hater, but this movie still sucked, Batman and Robin made a lot of money too you know
Yup. I think they yank production on the sequel which was already in full swing.
#5 Posted by MydLyfeCrysis (106 posts) - - Show Bio
@cattlebattle said:
Not to be a hater, but this movie still sucked, Batman and Robin made a lot of money too you know
You saw it? Why do you say it 'sucked'?
#6 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (32993 posts) - - Show Bio
@MydLyfeCrysis said:
@cattlebattle said:
Not to be a hater, but this movie still sucked, Batman and Robin made a lot of money too you know
You saw it? Why do you say it 'sucked'?
I thought it was really good, people are quick to jump on the band wagon and slag it off but I think its just as good as Thor
#7 Edited by Osiris1428 (1349 posts) - - Show Bio

If you come in surprised Thor was good, really surprised X-Men: First Class was really, really good, you will be disappointed if you thought this movie was going to catch on to that momentum. Go back and watch Ghost Rider, Daredevil, Electra, and the Joel Schumacher era Batman movies. There. Now you're set.

#8 Posted by Chaos Burn (1781 posts) - - Show Bio

Thor was good, but I don't think epic-enough in the small town America scenes.... still better than what GL looks (and sounds) like

#9 Posted by Jo_Bug (23 posts) - - Show Bio

that's because Thor sucked. sorry guys; i know everyone seems to have loved Thor, but i thought the plot was weak and the characters shallow. and please; like 1 night of drinking in your 48 hours on earth is enough to turn you from an idiot into a deep, caring dude. graphics were awesome but i thought the rest sucked.  
 
i like green lantern though. believable characters and story line.
#10 Posted by Omega Ray Jay (7659 posts) - - Show Bio

Money means little, Thor was a much better movie.

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.