Let's not forget that even if a movie is made and set for release, they might back out at the last minute, anyway. Until you're in the theater watching it, it's not really "finished".

Y'know a Devil May Cry movie starring the "New" Dante was announced.

After reading this, I'm happy to say that I believe it will never be made.

Lots of bold text there, Bob. Great read, though. Keep it up!

superman lives is one such ill fated 'made but not made' movie

Wow, I can smell the cynicism from this one a mile away.

Great column, Bob!

Green Lantern was one of the worst movies I have ever watched in a movie theater. I was tempted to walk out, but I have to finish a movie I started watching. Atleast we will not have to view another green turd at the movie theater for a long time.

I think it's even more perverse when they make the big-budget movie . . . then decide that it's a clunker doomed to fail, and deliberately cut back its release and advertising to almost nothing. That's happened with several movies I can think of off the top of my head, such as Outlander (which had a very limited opening and no advertising) and Pathfinder (which had some very limited advertising early on that then disappeared - I didn't even know that it had been released when it was).

Wise Bass:
I think it's even more perverse when they make the big-budget movie . . . then decide that it's a clunker doomed to fail, and deliberately cut back its release and advertising to almost nothing. That's happened with several movies I can think of off the top of my head, such as Outlander (which had a very limited opening and no advertising) and Pathfinder (which had some very limited advertising early on that then disappeared - I didn't even know that it had been released when it was).

Yes, that leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy where the movie execs can pat themselves on the back at the end for "calling" the movie would do poorly.

Why wouldn't they make a sequel? Maybe they learned from their mistakes. Yes, it can happen. I mean, it can't be much worse anyway, can it?

It's much better than if they'd say - well, superhero movies don't make money, so we'll just make another street racing movie.

Was I the only guy here who LIKED Green Lantern? Sure, it was no Dark Knight, but I'd give it a B. Nothing fresh and new, but still not a disaster like everyone seems to say.

Sgt. Sykes:
Why wouldn't they make a sequel? Maybe they learned from their mistakes. Yes, it can happen. I mean, it can't be much worse anyway, can it?

It's much better than if they'd say - well, superhero movies don't make money, so we'll just make another street racing movie.

Nope. Superhero movies are making bank lately. See Batman/Thor etc. POS Superhero movies flop.

Unfortunatly you are right about street racing movies...Who watches that crap? I feel about Fast Furious like Bob feels about Transformers.

Nooners:
Was I the only guy here who LIKED Green Lantern? Sure, it was no Dark Knight, but I'd give it a B. Nothing fresh and new, but still not a disaster like everyone seems to say.

Well my preteen daughters liked it...

Theres always that bad movie that you kind of like.

As thrilled as I always am to read your writing, Bob...

Anything worth talking about that doesn't involve Green Lantern and how bad it was? I guess we're just in a serious deadzone of film news until the Captain hits theaters.

Nooners:
Was I the only guy here who LIKED Green Lantern? Sure, it was no Dark Knight, but I'd give it a B. Nothing fresh and new, but still not a disaster like everyone seems to say.

So, we should award mediocrity with above average grades...
If you really felt that way about Green Lantern then be honest, you'd be giving it a C.
Not bad is not good enough, we can do better.

Sgt. Sykes:
Why wouldn't they make a sequel? Maybe they learned from their mistakes. Yes, it can happen. I mean, it can't be much worse anyway, can it?

It depends on how well the Green Lantern actually does once the sales revenue of DVDs, Video-On-Demand rentals, and merchandise is factored in. If it's enough that they think a second Green Lantern movie could be made with stricter budget supervision, they'll make it.

That's what happened with the Narnia franchise. It was deemed successful enough despite the second movie's gigantic budget and marketing expenses to be profitable enough to make a third movie on a lower budget.

All that said, I don't think Green Lantern will get a sequel. The biggest reason why is the very weak foreign response to the film. Since high-budget comic book films are partially made because of the potential for massive world-wide sales, not getting those sales is devastating.

KingWumpus:
Let's not forget that even if a movie is made and set for release, they might back out at the last minute, anyway. Until you're in the theater watching it, it's not really "finished".

Honestly, I'd say that's not even the case any more. When you get directors and producers talking about all of the stuff they have planned for the eventual Ultimate Expanded Blue Ray Makes You Toast Edition before the theatrical release has even hit the screens, even sitting watching a "completed" movie doesn't mean it's completed.

bombadilillo:
Nope. Superhero movies are making bank lately. See Batman/Thor etc. POS Superhero movies flop.

Yes, but they're also expensive to make and they can flop pretty much randomly, regardless of quality. I have a feeling that movie producers are looking forward to the times when superheroes are no longer 'the big shit', so they can get back to the cheapo mainstream movies of the past. Every time a superhero movie flops, they might just decide that it's time to abandon the genre. And that would suck, because we really can't have indie superhero movies, they really need big budgets.

The same happened to sci-fi. When was the last time we saw a proper sci-fi movie or show? It always has to be mixed with something more mainstream. See examples like Battle LA or Transformers.

I've heard from two friends so far that they liked Green Lantern.
So, uh.

Wise Bass:

That's what happened with the Narnia franchise. It was deemed successful enough despite the second movie's gigantic budget and marketing expenses to be profitable enough to make a third movie on a lower budget.

Except you'll not the 3rd movie was NOT associated with Disney... Disney dropped out from the probject, I believe 20th Century Fox came onboard for the budget portion, while Walden still did the work. The 2nd movie was a terrible adaptation anyway, especially when compared with the first one. The 3rd was pretty good, and what they did change made sense in the context of a movie, so I was okay with it. I'll be curious to see if they make a 4th and whether it will be The Magicians Nephew or if it will be The Silver Chair.

Oh, and Uhm... OT: Thanks for the info Bob, I've always been sort of curious about where 'movies' disappear to after they are 'announced' and then years later 'cancelled.'

drakythe:
Except you'll not the 3rd movie was NOT associated with Disney... Disney dropped out from the probject, I believe 20th Century Fox came onboard for the budget portion, while Walden still did the work.

That's true, but it doesn't change my point. Someone saw the value of the Narnia franchise in spite of the relative failure of the 2nd film, even if it wasn't Disney.

Warner Bros. just needs to wait about 5 years for the stink to wear off the Green Lantern Franchise and reboot the series, except this time about Kyle Rayner instead of Hal Jordan. "Fans hate Hal movie, flock to Kyle movie" is so ironic that this can't possibly not work.

AvauntVanguard:
I've heard from two friends so far that they liked Green Lantern.
So, uh.

It's well-documented that the standards of "average, typical" moviegoers are quite low. I have friends bugging me to see the new Transformers, does that make it good and the critics wrong? Hell no.

Yojoo:

AvauntVanguard:
I've heard from two friends so far that they liked Green Lantern.
So, uh.

It's well-documented that the standards of "average, typical" moviegoers are quite low. I have friends bugging me to see the new Transformers, does that make it good and the critics wrong? Hell no.

No, but it can say one should judge for themselves.
Who knows. I might like Green Lantern because I lack the knowledge Moviebob has.

uhh.....Jon Stewart?

OH! Different Jon. Thank you, google.

They should get Jon Stewart the pundit to play Green Lantern. Colbert should be Sinestro.
Wait up...that could actually work so well...
Stewart's senior correspondents could be other members of the corps, and Kieth Olbermann could be Green Arrow or something.

Hollywood spins press info? Wait, you mean to tell me that one of the biggest entertainment industries on the globe frequently misinforms the public for the sake of business?
That statement is only slightly less obvious than predicting that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow morning.

Press Buzz and Marketing exists solely to get you pumped; to get you to spend. It doesn't really matter what the overall quality of the movie is.
Those sexy trailers you saw in advertisements and online? Those are sometimes the only good parts of the movie.
Those casting announcements? I've seen A-list actors give completely abysmal performances due to direction and writing (Natalie Portman immediately springs to mind).

MovieBob is absolutely correct here: Every movie exists as mere POTENTIAL(for better or worse) until your ass in the seat and the movie is on the screen. Now, there obviously must exist some substance to these rumors, or people will just start ignoring them entirely.

MovieBob:
"They had a director (George Miller) a cast of actors (Armie Hammer as Batman and hip-hop star Common as the Jon Stewart Green Lantern, most notably) and a whole production set up in Australia. They'd made costumes, built sets, were all set to go ... and then it was suddenly scrapped."

"...a cast of actors (Armie Hammer as Batman and hip-hop star Common as the Jon Stewart Green Lantern, most notably) and a whole production set up in Australia..."

"...hip-hop star Common as the Jon Stewart Green Lantern..."

...Common...

That would have been such a sweet casting I would have seen it in a flash. (Not being the type that has a previous emotional/nostalgic attachment to the franchise).

Well, although it doesn't matter that much, that's pretty much a retrospective potential £11 lost from me.

Maybe, just maybe ... a Directors Cut DVD of the Green Lantern will be released, and will be awesome. And once everyone is on board with the awesome Green Lantern version, the sequel can commence.

Aside from Bat-nippl- err, Green Veiny suit, a lot of the problems in GL could have been fixed in post production. Sure the CGI was kinda meh (especially Ryan Reynolds disembodied head floating through space) and the actors were phoning it in ... but a decent narrative would have made the whole silly mess at least palatable, imo.

Easy example in the first 5 minutes. You start with the HUGE exposition explaining exactly who/what Parallax is. Then Parallax escapes and kills Abin-Sur, who just barely manages to send a message to his buddy Sinestro: "Parallax." To which Sinestro replies: "huh?"

It's jarring, as an audience member, to spend time learning about what's going on and then have the characters in the movie NOT know what's going on, literally 2 minutes later. That whole exchange would have been better without the exposition at the beginning. That way, while Sinestro doesn't know what Parallax is, neither does the audience (not counting the geeky fans who already know everything) Easy, simple, and allows a bit more empathy with the character. Especially as Sinestro butts heads with the Guardians about info regarding Parallax.

..I liked Batman & Robin. :/

Nooners:
Was I the only guy here who LIKED Green Lantern? Sure, it was no Dark Knight, but I'd give it a B. Nothing fresh and new, but still not a disaster like everyone seems to say.

I thought it was OK. Not that good, but enjoyable. Also related: there's evidence that if it turned out how the director wanted it to, it could have been much better. That's an annoying waste of potential.

In terms of point #2, I think another good example could be Tom Hanks talking about the making of a Toy Story 4. Unless the studio says they are in fact not making it (hopefully), people that have worked on previous movies will be like "Yeah, we'll see."

Great article Bob, I kinda wish this kinda thing had an "extra credits" style video. I don't have problems reading it, but I have several friends who are more likely to start a video than a multi-page article.