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 On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Cary Preston <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm thinking $60 mil. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On May 6, 2011, at 8:50 AM, Jason Service <[email protected]> wrote: > > New thread open for the bet Raven suggested! > On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Luke < <[email protected]> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> 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. >> >> On May 5, 10:06 pm, [email protected] wrote: >> > 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! >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Luke <[email protected]> >> > To: The Unique Geek < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> >> > Sent: Thu, May 5, 2011 3:45 am >> > Subject: [The Unique Geek] Re: New Green Lantern trailer shows off the >> Guardians of the Universe - io9 >> > >> > 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 <[email protected]> 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 >> > >> > > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 9:55 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > 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://firestormfan.com >> > > > <http://onceuponageek.com/>http://onceuponageek.com >> > > > <http://twitter.com/onceuponageek>http://twitter.com/onceuponageek >> > >> > > > -------- Original Message -------- >> > > > Subject: Re: [The Unique Geek] Re: New Green Lantern trailer shows >> off >> > > > the Guardians of the Universe - io9 >> > > > From: Edward Crosby <[email protected]> >> > > > Date: Thu, May 05, 2011 9:47 am >> > > > To: <[email protected]>[email protected] >> > >> > > > 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>http://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 >> <[email protected]>[email protected]. >> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > > > <theuniquegeek%[email protected]> >> [email protected]. >> > > > For more options, visit this group at >> > > > <http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.-Hide> >> 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 <[email protected]> >> [email protected]. >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> <theuniquegeek%[email protected]> >> [email protected]. >> > For more options, visit this group >> > athttp://<http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.-> >> 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 <[email protected]> >> [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> <theuniquegeek%[email protected]> >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit this group at >> <http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en> >> http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en. >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Unique Geek" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Unique Geek" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Unique Geek" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.
