Inhumans99

Chad...naw, if GL fans are lucky, an attempt will be made to reboot the franchise in around 5-10 years. Read the comment below the article you linked too referencing Superman Returns.

Hokeyboy

So much for "dead in the water"...

I say don't bother with a sequel to or a reboot of a lousy movie. Marvel makes better movies, DC makes better animated movies/series, and BOTH comic lines are terrible these days. DC should drop live-action (except for Batman) and keep making kickass cartoons, Marvel should keep on with their movies as is and forget their lousy animation, and both should stop with the lousy comics already.

ardathbey

Pretty sure as long as they have one of the two factors going (critical acclaim/revenue), their streak IS still intact.

Dragon Tattoo

Saying you liked GL more than Avatar is not exactly high praise.

Super X

I saw this story elsewhere, as well. They are bound and determined to make a franchise out of this. Marvel is succeeding at making franchises, but DC/Warner really needs to start thinking more about making a good movie first, then think about franchising it after they've done so.

What stands out from the successful Marvel films of the last several years is that the studio has made an effort to get talent behind these films that complement the strengths of the characters they were dealing with. Warner hasn't been as successful in that regard. Bryan Singer is known for characters with more complexity than Superma"Gren has or needs. Martin Campbell was known for action with a sense of fun of the Bond films and the Zorro movies, he hadn't done much with a science fiction based character like Green Lantern. (Maybe he'd have gotten away with it had he not had to use the Green Lantern Corps and a cosmic menace in the film.) The studio needs to get better at matching a voice to their characters. I don't necessarily believe that Zack Snyder is a step in the right direction, either.

Matthew Chmiel

Bad Teacher has a Cinema Score of C+ which in the realistic equivalent of an F.

fitprod

The bigger concern for Hollywood is that Cars 2 only drew 40% of ticket sales from 3D.

I think if Transformers and Harry Potter do not bring in at least 55% of their revenue from 3D, 2012 will be the last big year for 3D releases.

fitprod

RoboDad

The only 3D showings of Cars 2 in my area are in an IMAX theater. I like 3D, but combining the added 3D cost with the added IMAX cost would make the tickets over $20 each. Given that, I chose to see it in 2D.

So, I don't think that makes a fair case to indict 3D.

B5Erik

My daughter was very excited to hear about that. I told her yesterday that it didn't look good for a sequel. She loved the movie (she's 11).

Honestly, I thought it was OK. It was entertaining in a big summer popcorn movie kind of way. A sequel could actually be really good if they flesh out the GL VS Sinestro thing.

Michael Corvin

Maybe but you bet your ass that unanimous hate by critics won't go unnoticed around the Pixar offices. After all, mediocre movies that make bank is Dreamworks' territory.*. Also, we're only three days in, next week's drop off will be more telling.


*How to Train Your Dragon notwithstanding.

fumanstan

I guess jeffkjoe deleted his Dreamworks defending post

Daytripper

From:
jeffkjoe
DVD Talk Gold Edition


Mediocrity, huh? Says you.

That's an unfounded generalization, since we've had quite our share of accolades too, but yeah, you're right.

We are laughing all the way to the bank.

....Jeff, I keep trying to respond to your post but you keep editing it. Anyway, from your most recent one above......Huh!??? What's this "we" and "our" you are talking about?

Michael Corvin

Yes it was a poor generalization, I apologize.

Daytripper

He did indeed. See my post.

fumanstan

He works at Dreamworks.

fumanstan

As someone who also works at a well known entertainment company, you really need thicker skin. I know you want to defend your work, but you shouldn't take these things so personally.

jeffkjoe

Yeah, I work there, and I'm proud of my company.

Artman

The artistry is top notch no doubt. Big productions, whether it's films (or in my case, games) are really out of most of the crew's hands once they get rolling, you hope that the people in charge know how to steer things, but it doesn't always happen. At the end of the day it's still a great feeling and accomplishment to be able to say you had a part in a project like that.

jeffkjoe

Well said, Artman.

Thanks for putting it into perspective too, fumanstan.

No need to get all riled up about every little comment that'll get buried in a pile of other mundane comments.

notkevinbacon

Sad to see the critical response to Cars 2, but it's not completely out of left field. I was pleasantly surprised with the first Cars, as it was a fun little movie and way better than what I had heard about it. Really, if Paul Newman was still with us to come back to be in the sequel I'd have been there opening night because that was a big draw for me originally.

All that being said, I have a 5 year old brother who is OBSESSED with the Cars franchise. He has Cars everything. And I mean everything. I'd suspect this has to be Pixar's most profitable film in regards to merchandise. I'll catch the sequel on Blu, but this will be the first Pixar movie I don't see theatrically in some time.

Personally, Pixar is still one of the most exciting studios around today, period. And not just measured against animation houses, as if that distinction matters too much.

If we are playing this game, the closest thing to "Pixar magic" in a computer animated film I've seen in recent years was easily Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs. That was a fantastic movie.

And I also agree, that How to Train Your Dragon was quite good.


Other than that, keep on chugging along Super 8! My favorite of the summer so far.

And despite the fact I know my old roommate and long time lantern fan is disappointed, GL looked like a mess from the get go.

Ash Ketchum

Damn, a lot of company men on this board. SPIES!!!!

Hokeyboy

FWIW I think Dreamworks Animation has been on a big creative upswing over the past few years.

Thinking more about CARS 2, you sorta have to accept it as a total kiddie adventure movie. On that level, I think it succeeds pretty well. But in the end, it's unnecessary. Look at Toy Story through Toy Story 3, how the characters grow, how their worlds expand, how relationships are built, developed, and matured over time. CARS 2 was all about the thrills, entertainment, visceral excitement. On that level, it succeeds. I was very entertained. But I couldn't care less about anything that was happening offscreen.

It wasn't intelligently or emotionally engaging. But then again, anyone looking for that from CARS 2 is flipping the proverbial bacon-trampoline.

davidh777

We've come to expect that engagement from Pixar, though--as you mention in the Toy Story series. That's why the original Cars disappointed me (haven't seen 2 yet).

RichC2

So if C+ is relastically an F, what is an F? Does that mean Solaris (2002), The Box, Bug, Wolf Creek and Darkness are all really F--?

(You are right though, a B- or lower means universally lousy word of mouth. The last movie I saw that had such a low score was Let Me In (C+))

Cars 2 got an A-.

Green Lantern pulled a B and still toppled, that movie deserved the D, D- range at best.

Giles

over at Tysons' AMC booked 'Cars 2' on the ETX screen and at $16.50 - that's just wrong, highway robbery at it's finest ...