I’m not going to try and pretend like I think Green Lantern looks good. Then again, the only piece of marketing I’ve actually watched the whole way through was that first teaser trailer, which received nothing but negative feedback. And, as is always the case, only afterward did the studio come out and make a statement acknowledging how bad it was as Warner Bros. marketing head Sue Kroll said, “We went out a little too early. For me it was a very important lesson. We had a great opportunity with Harry Potter, but we didn’t have enough of the movie finished.”
WB top dog Jeff Robinov also admitted the first trailer was underwhelming saying they were “on a learning curve in getting 3D materials and marketing materials on the same schedule.” That first trailer debuted on November 16, 2010 and it wasn’t until April 2, 2011 that anything new from the film was seen again as four minutes from the film began screening at comic book conventions and then found its way online. This time, people seemed less skeptical, but I still didn’t get the feeling everyone was on board. Yet, I was starting to get a sense for how much money this film could potentially make.
Thor has already hit theaters and opened to $65.7 million and is now just shy of $175 million domestically and over $431 million worldwide. The second superhero film out of the gate this summer was X-Men: First Class and it opened $10 million shy of Thor‘s opening number and dipped 54.6% in its second weekend. Neither are exactly lighting the box-office on fire compared to the Spider-Man, Batman and Iron Man films. Thor is just now creeping up on X-Men Origins: Wolverine and First Class will be looking at Fantastic Four kind of numbers unless it proves to have longer legs than it showed this last weekend.
So what does this mean for Green Lantern? Have we hit superhero fatigue or are audiences simply shying away from giving Thor and this latest incarnation of X-Men overwhelming support?
As of now, Green Lantern is tracking to take home $53-58 million this weekend as it opens against holdovers Super 8 and X-Men: First Class. Considering this is the one superhero movie I was beginning to think would be the superhero champion of summer 2011 that gives me pause.
I was working on the assumption it had, what I believed to be, the most recognizable lead actor in Ryan Reynolds between this summer’s four superhero films. At least “recognizable” in terms of general audience awareness. Plus, it looks like it is by far the biggest CG monstrosity the studio system has churned out in ages, even more so than the Transformers films (FYI, I’ve read Transformers: Dark of the Moon is tracking for more than $175 million in its opening six days). Of course, the idea of a CG monstrosity didn’t exactly work out for WB and Speed Racer, but unlike Lantern, Speed Racer had Emile Hirsch front and center. I think Reynolds is a little more well known than Hirsch was then and now.
Now comes the film’s reception. While I’ve only watched the film’s first teaser in its entirety, last week during the NBA Finals a TV spot for the film aired and as we were fast forwarding over the commercials I just happened to notice the Green Lantern spot had some critical quotes included. What the what? How could this be? To my knowledge the film hadn’t been shown to anyone, but over on Twitter I’ve been informed there was a press screening last Wednesday. I can only assume it was a “select” press screening considering I didn’t recognize any of the names quoted on the trailer and when I got my invite for New York and Los Angeles screenings they were both scheduled the same day as I’ll be seeing it here in Seattle, this Wednesday. So make of that what you will.
Why does any of this matter? Well, as the New York Times has pointed out in a recent profile on the film and its star Ryan Reynolds, it “cost an estimated $300 million to make and market” and is Warner’s “first superhero release since making management changes at DC last year”. With next month’s release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2 marking the end of that franchise, WB is hoping to cash in on their DC deal and it starts here and as of the last trailer for the film I posted people seemed to have started to come around.
Now I know that $300 million is a glaring number, but before you go off on it just know that the initial budget expected for the film was $150 million back in 2009 and then this April, WB tossed another $9 million at it to improve the visual effects and at that time the production budget was thought to be around $200 million. So I’m not saying the $300 million budget is wrong, I’m just saying we don’t often get budget reports with marketing added in. If we did, you can guarantee Super 8 wouldn’t be at the meager $50 million Paramount is reporting, after all it had a Super Bowl spot, something Green Lantern didn’t even have.
Nevertheless, Warner Bros. is gambling on this project, and it will be curious to see audience turn out. That $53-58 million tracking for opening weekend seems soft for a film of this size if you ask me and I can’t help but wonder if it will be another project that ends up hurt by 3D. I know here in Seattle, Warner Bros. has been kind enough to offer press a choice between seeing it in 2D or 3D, I’m choosing the former and hope they give us the same option with Harry Potter.
So just how well do you see Green Lantern doing? Are you planning on seeing it? If not, why not? Will it depend on the reviews?
