New Green Lantern trailer shows off the Guardians of the Universe - io9

[Edward Crosby]

http://on.io9.com/khCtPP

----------------------------------------
Have a Better One,
Edward Crosby
http://about.me/edwardcrosby

[Edward Crosby]

Something that just occurred to me while watching this trailer that has never occurred to me before. Yes, I am a Green Lantern fan and I sort of know the origin of Hal Jordan but why was Abin Sur in a spaceship when a GL can fly super fast through space without a spaceship? Was that ever explained or is that just poor story telling?

----------------------------------------
Have a Better One,
Edward Crosby
http://about.me/edwardcrosby

[Michael Bailey]

It was explained Post Crisis but I for the life of me cannot rememebr why.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Unique Geek" group.
To post to this group, send email to theuni...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to theuniquegee...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.

--
This post/e-mail was written by Michael Bailey, Superman Apologist

[Ronald Methvin]

He was injured so he took the spaceship to escape.

---

From: Edward Crosby <ecr...@gmail.com>
To: TUG group <theuni...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, May 4, 2011 4:18:33 PM
Subject: [The Unique Geek] Re: New Green Lantern trailer shows off the Guardians of the Universe - io9

[sh...@onceuponageek.com]

Believe it or not, there is an entire section on Wikipedia under Abin Sur about this very topic.  Lots of retconning has happened to answer this question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abin_Sur#Spaceship

The Irredeemable Shag
http://firestormfan.com
http://onceuponageek.com
http://twitter.com/onceuponageek

[James Peluso]

And this is why I love thug. :)

On May 4, 2011 6:09 PM, <sh...@onceuponageek.com> wrote:

[rave...@aol.com]

The music was kind of decent, built nicely.  Reynolds is kind of made for this sort of thing, very cute and cool.  Effects look terrible.  Mistake to make costume CGI.  Super-cheesy aliens, weapons, glowing eyes and, I dunno, evil fractals attacking the city.  Too much going on. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Edward Crosby <ecr...@gmail.com>
To: TUG group <theuni...@googlegroups.com>

[Luke]

Looks like a Green Lantern movie to me.

Of the comic book movies this year, Captain America is the one I want
to see the most. But this looks fun too.

Personally I am holding out for the Hawkman film directed by Marcus
Nispel. *wink* Conan with wings, right?

On May 5, 1:29 am, ravenf...@aol.com wrote:
> The music was kind of decent, built nicely.  Reynolds is kind of made for this sort of thing, very cute and cool.  Effects look terrible.  Mistake to make costume CGI.  Super-cheesy aliens, weapons, glowing eyes and, I dunno, evil fractals attacking the city.  Too much going on.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edward Crosby <ecro...@gmail.com>
> To: TUG group <theuni...@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Wed, May 4, 2011 8:56 am
> Subject: [The Unique Geek] New Green Lantern trailer shows off the Guardians of the Universe - io9
>
> http://on.io9.com/khCtPP
>
> ----------------------------------------
> Have a Better One,

> Edward Crosbyhttp://about.me/edwardcrosby

>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Unique Geek" group.
> To post to this group, send email to theuni...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to theuniquegee...@googlegroups.com.

> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Edward Crosby]

Yeah, I am confused why people keep stating that the CG looks bad (Ravenface and other TUG members). As compared to what? Avatar? Sure. Tron Legacy? Absolutely. Sucker Punch? Maybe. Iron Man 2? No way.

Widge made a really good point on the last recorded TUG podcast recording and I agree with him. He stated, and I'm paraphrasing, that we all have such a high standard of CG these days that if something comes along that meets or doesn't exceed the bar then we turn our heads in disgust. From what I have seen, the CG in this movie is by far some of the best we have seen in today's live action movies. I think another reason we turn our heads in disgust of the CG in this movie is because there is so much of it. But there has to be as this is a Green Lantern movie set mostly in a fictional world and fictional universe that has to be pulled out of one of the most extreme mediums that is the comic book. There is no way this movie could have been done well with all the CG needed five years ago.

I'm not making any judgement about this movie now, if I can help it. At first, yes, I judged the teaser trailer and cringed. Recent trailers give me more hope that this may be an entertaining movie. I know it will not be a blockbuster movie but I will reserve judgement of whether it is good or not after I have seen it when I see it opening weekend.

----------------------------------------
Have a Better One,
Edward Crosby
http://about.me/edwardcrosby

[sh...@onceuponageek.com]

For me it's not a case that the CGI looks bad, it's the sheer volume of CGI.  In some shots there is simply too much going on (all done by CGI).  For example, in Revenge of the Sith, the space battle featured too many things going on (all done by CGI).  So while the battle was more massive than the space battle in Return of the Jedi, there was just too much to see.  The space battle in Revenge of the Sith is less exciting than the Return of the Jedi battle for that reason.

In regard to the Green Lantern costume, the choice to go with CGI is disappointing.  It makes the costume harder to believe it's real.  It just doesn't look like it could exist in the real world.  A simpler real-world costume with a CGI aura might have worked better.

Just my two cents.

The Irredeemable Shag
http://firestormfan.com
http://onceuponageek.com
http://twitter.com/onceuponageek

[Edward Crosby]

Again, I have no problem with the CGI costume, I think it looks fine. And, I think it does look like it could exist in the real world. Remember, the GL's costume in the comic books, for the most part, is energy constructed by that GL. I can imagine the costume having that glow in the real world.

----------------------------------------
Have a Better One,
Edward Crosby
http://about.me/edwardcrosby

[Luke]

I'm more disappointed by the CGI monster in the new Conan trailer than
any of the CGI in the Green Lantern trailers, frankly. That's the
visual vocabulary of the present cinematic age.

You want an eye opener? Go read some contemporary genre magazines
when Empire or Jedi came out. Cinefantastique especially lambastes
some of ILM's work. We idealize these physical effects in our minds,
but I still cringe everytime I watch the original version of Empire
with the God awful travelling mattes in the asteroid field. Even as
late as 89 (Last Crusade) its pretty easy to spot complaining
criticism of ILM's work. So not liking special effects and thinking
things look "fake" is a time honored nerd tradition.

On May 5, 10:05 am, Edward Crosby <ecro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Again, I have no problem with the CGI costume, I think it looks fine. And, I
> think it does look like it could exist in the real world. Remember, the GL's
> costume in the comic books, for the most part, is energy constructed by that
> GL. I can imagine the costume having that glow in the real world.
>
> ----------------------------------------
> Have a Better One,

> Edward Crosbyhttp://about.me/edwardcrosby

[Michael Bailey]

The CGI looked much better in the latest trailer but it still has a really good video game look to it.  I think dumping another 9 million to give it another pass is the right thing to do.  

While I agree with Ed that the costume is a construct of the ring the CGI costume may not have been the way to go.  We'll see how it looks in the final product.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.

[rave...@aol.com]

The snake thing in Conan looks dumb in the same way the Clash of the Titans trailer was ruined by that fifty-million dollar yawn-monster at the end.  What's around the corner, Perseus, what's making that noise?  It's....it's....COMPUTER MATH.  

Fact is, the throne room scene in Flash Gordon (1980) looks more exotic and exciting than the sweeping video game cut-scene they're calling Oa.   

It's possible kids will accept the "visual vocabulary of the present cinematic age," in the way we, as kids, accepted the skeletons in Jason and the Argonauts or King Kong, etc, but...I don't think any kids are excited about this movie.  

I mean maybe a few nerdads are pushing them toward it.  

Kid: I wanna see Thaw.

Nerdad:  What about, Green Lantern, buddy?  Don't you wanna see a guy who has a ring?

Kid: Like...the one you got for mom?  Thaw has a hammaw.  

Nerdad: Ha, ha, no no, like the...ok, let's see Thor.

Thor has a kajillion effects in it, but....Thor himself looks like a person.  You can relate to him.  I think a "glow" or something around a real costume would have gotten across the idea of the ring generating clothing.  Maybe it's an "uncanny valley" issue.  Like Shag articulated, its not that the effects look baaaad, it's that the whole thing is effects.  Like with Lord of the Rings, I guess, the idea is people will buy the DVD and pause every few seconds so they can jizz over all the detailed design work at whichever speed they jizz at, but...that aint gonna help opening weekend.

As you point out, Luke, people complained about the effects in SW (though isn't there something about it looking different on tv than on the big screen?  Like, those yellow squares around the TIE Fighters were a tv thing?  Someone?), but...people saw SW in the theater and continued to see it and talk about it.  No one will see Green Lantern.  Bomb ahoy.

Should we have another bet thing like with Watchmen and Scott Pilgrim?

I say it gets crushed by....Mr. Popper's Penguins!!!  You down with MPP?!!

That trailer, btw, was cut by amateurs.  It looks teerrrrrible!  And yet....it will kiiiilll Green Lantern!!  Then, GL will be buried by Cars 2 the following week to disappear forever!  Sinestro wins!

[Edward Crosby]

Okay. Let's make predictions.

Even though I don't see this movie being a huge success or summer blockbuster, I still think it will do better than most geeks think, even those on this panel. And, the reason I state this is because of the recent talk at the water cooler at work. Yes, I work in IT but that doesn't mean I work with sci-i geeks. In the past few days, maybe since the release of this new trailer, I have heard quite a few people in my department have one of those exciting talks, you know, the one where they say, "Whoa, have you seen the Green Lantern preview? That looks awesome". These are guys who are in their 50's and 60's (I work with a lot of old people) who aren't comic book geeks by no means but remember the comics from when they were kids. Seriously, I have this mainframe guy that sits next to me that is a text book/movie stereotype Italian who, when you hear him talk, sounds like he is straight out of a Coppola or Scorsese flick who said to me just yesterday while watching it on the Yahoo trailers, "Bada bing! Eddie! You see dis preview for da Green Lanern? Dat's gonna be a good moovie." I kid you not, those aren't misspells, that's how he talks. And he doesn't even know I'm a GL fan.

So, in saying that, I think this is going to be one of them popcorn action flicks that will be a surprise hit because of the Mundies like that who see an action, all be it sci-fi, movie coming to their local theater.

My prediction for the first weekend: $75 million

----------------------------------------
Have a Better One,
Edward Crosby
http://about.me/edwardcrosby

[James Peluso]

Hahahahaha re: stereotype italian. I laugh because I work with one. You forget the "ah forgetabboutit" on another note hammer will do better than ring in no imo. Om a side note listen to cake song italian guy hilarious.

Jim

[Edward Crosby]

Oh yeah. "forgetabboutit" comes out of his mouth almost every other sentence. Just in that particular conversation he decided to leave it out. And, what is funny, Jim, he is originally from around your area.

----------------------------------------
Have a Better One,
Edward Crosby
http://about.me/edwardcrosby

[Edward Crosby]

By the way, here's your poll. I voted for Transformers.

http://on.io9.com/iQ8mju

----------------------------------------
Have a Better One,
Edward Crosby
http://about.me/edwardcrosby

[James Peluso]

Haha it figures! There are a lot of us up here :)

[Cary Preston]

Hey, those penguins are damn cute. 

[Luke]

Maybe I am missing something, but are you suggesting that the LOTR
trilogy was not successful in it's effects work and that it was
somehow hurt by that? People flocked to see the LOTR films multiple
times in the theater because it was an immersive and fascinating
world. Much like Star Wars (I am told; obviously I was not alive yet
to see that one in the theater let alone multiple times). And please
don't misunderstand me, I love the effects in the Original Trilogy,
but there are flaws there too. As humans we are acclimated to reality
and something which looks fake will look fake no matter what technique
is used to create it. The Death Star Trench sequence holds up as well
as it does now some... let me count because you folks made fun of me
for my bad math in an earlier thread... 34 years after the fact
because the Dykstraflex did its job perfectly, and the ILM model team
paid attention to the details to the point that those ships WERE real
as far as the eye is concerned. (Lucas basing the fight on WW2 footage
helps this as well.) That the asteroid field in Empire looks like
garbage is because of the technique being used was not perfected at
the time and there was no other way to achieve it with the Dykstraflex
without the traveling matte. (By comparison, watch The Black Hole,
which features similar shots of objects moving across each other --
the use of the ACES camera and the Mattescan device allowed this to be
smoothly done without the need for the travelling matte from Empire).
So it stands out because it breaks "reality" in a way the ships or the
suits or animatronics do not.

Regarding visual vocabulary, I think my claim is valid. Afterall,
this is an age where entertainment media pundits fall all over
themselves to elevate video games to high art or "true"
entertainment. Obviously the rendered, ful CGI style visual image is
an accepted one for the masses, since video gaming has become not just
accepted but now mainstream and "hip."

Folks won't go see Green Lantern multiple times in the theater
nowadays because of the nature of the Hollywood tentpole cycle. Like
you say, Cars 2 is right on it's heels, and more afterwards. The
filmgoer today is conditioned to think that what's hot and new this
week is old next week, because there is something else wihch is now
hot and new. It takes something outrageously out of the ordinary to
break that, and the LOTR films are like that. This summer, the only
film I predict will be like that is HP 7.2, just because ITS THE LAST
ONE DUN DUN DUNNNN! and all that. The fact that 7.1 was a marked
improvement over the snoozefests that were 5 and 6 helps, too.

In any event I am probably going to go see the film. For one thing I
would like to see a DC movie in the theater which is not a snoozer
like Superman Returns nor Super Serious And Important! like Batman
Begins and The Dark Knight. Plus my buddy Joe is a huge GL fan (being
an Air Force brat will do that to you) and obviously he is jazzed for
it.

> > >http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.-Hide quoted text -

>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
> Unique Geek" group.
> To post to this group, send email to theuni...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to theuniquegee...@googlegroups.com.

> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.- Hide quoted text -

[Jason Service]

New thread open for the bet Raven suggested!

[Cary Preston]

I'm thinking $60 mil. 

Sent from my iPhone

[Edward Crosby]

I forgot to mention that I base my prediction mostly on Ryan Reynolds, not the movie in itself. Mr. Reynolds has mass appeal, especially to the ladies, and I think he will be the one to draw the crowds.

So, when you make your predications, keep this factor in mind.

----------------------------------------
Have a Better One,
Edward Crosby
http://about.me/edwardcrosby

[Michael Bailey]

I am now of the opinion that GREEN LANTERN is going to be a surprise hit.  This thing is going to come out and be HUGE.  It's this bizarre feeling I have and for some reason I see news pieces about how surprised everyone is that it did so well.

[rave...@aol.com]

If that ends up being true, it would have to be because there is nothing else that week.  I was surprised to see the only thing up against it is Mr. Popper's Penguins, so...maybe it's one of those "perfectly positioned" releases where people shrug their shoulders and go.

Maybe they'll think it's a sequel to Green Hornet.

Your instincts may be on to something, Bailey.

[rave...@aol.com]

I mentioned LOTR in reference to scope of the effects.  There was so much going on in the battle scenes, it was impossible to see it all, and it was a big deal for folks to be able to do the blow-by-blow on their TV at home.  Of course they were very popular (one of them won Best Picture), and the effects didn't hurt.  And why not?  Probably because there were so many actual people running around. If Gandalf's cloak or Gimli's armor been all glowing CGI, all bets would have been off.

It was also a story millions of people were familiar with and had loved for decades.  Sometimes with something like that, all you have to do is not blow it. 

Regarding visual vocabulary - Yes, sweeping CGI vistas are familiar, and god bless all the companies cashing checks for cranking 'em out, but I don't think it's the default or the expected or the preferred.  Final Fantasy, all CGI, was a disaster, the Jason Bourne movies, no apparent CGI, were massive hits.

It's something people see and have seen, and it's a tool in the box, but it's often the wrong tool.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Luke <lja...@gmail.com>

[Luke]

And yet Avatar, seemingly all CGI, is the (fake) highest grossing
movie of all time. (Sorry, when you charge 150% for your tickets I
consider that gross to be fake.)

FWIW Final Fantasy: Spirits Within bombed because the movie was pure
garbage. :)

I think we're both saying the same thing here. I am not defending
full CGI use, just saying that to the majority of filmgoers they not
only have no problem with overly CGI shots, they actually have come to
expect them from the tentpole films they pay money to see.

This represents a shift in perceptions because the eye can always tell
something which exists in reality and something which does not. But
it seems thr majority of filmgoers either don't make this distinction
or simply don't care (more likely) so long as they enjoy the 2 hours
they are in the theater. In other words, are they entertained. ARE
YOU NOT ENTERTAINED? ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?! IS THIS NOT WHY YOU
ARE HERE?!

/Maximus

> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -