It's a Wrap: Principal Photography on Green Lantern Comes to a Close

@Wagner U tell me, we were suppose to get it months ago. lol Weeks I guess but u get it!

Thanks tobuttica! :)

I'm like a giddy school girl again!

Awesome! CANT WAIT!!!


BMP!

Damn, I was hoping they would be filming next week when I am in New Orleans.

Hopefully they will have a 3d trailer with tron maybe .

@gambitfreak - lol......giddy school-girl? Looks more like creepy nanny to me.

Cannot wait to see the movie

@WeaponX—i tend to agree... i've been defending the lively casting pretty consistently on this site... because the haters tend to hate hard. but when you put it the way YOU did, you're probably right. i'm not saying she's bad, because she's not... i've watched her stuff since hearing the casting, and i think she has the talent to pull it off. but since she's so young it's hard to imagine her elevating the role to a "great performance."

the problem is, i'm not sure who could do it better. acting ability is subjective once you reach a certain level. she's no bergman or streep or blanchett or bonham carter, or even a winslet or foster, because she's a kid. but neither is natalie portman or (ugh) liv tyler or kirsten dunst. portman is surely the "best" of those, but she's only as good as the movie she's in. she's not going to be "better" in thor than lively is in GL.

and neither of them can hold a candle to jennifer connelly, and look how much people loved her CBM! nuanced, hamartia-driven characterizations like connelly's betty ross get lost in the thunder of superhero dramas. or say, rachel weisz ... she's incredible in agora, but i'm pretty sure blake lively could've handled the mummy.

anyway, i agree with you but only to a point—i'd rather have someone else for the part... but i'd also rather have david niven for sinestro, paul newman for hal, and orson welles for hector hammond. i think for the movie they're making here, blake lively will be just fine. maybe eva green would have been a slightly better pick, maybe not. keri russell turned out to have a tv conflict, i think, so that was that. and i'm glad as HELL it isn't jennifer garner.

ohboyohboyohboyohboyohboyohboyohboyohboyohboyohboyohboyohboy

Great now can we see the trailer.

The trailer probably wont come out till November when Harry Potter comes out (WB does both)

@weaponx email me that is my yahoo cause I agree with ya

@Patriautism took the words out of my mouth

oh come on you guys saw the promo shot there's no reason she can't pass for 26 or 27. you're still thinking of her as the gossip girl chick but on that show she's PLAYING a character that's actually several years YOUNGER than her actual age. besides lol she's only three years younger than scarlett... he's 9 years older than his wife and 12 years older than blake. and MY new girl is... well never mind that. so whatever.

i know you're not fans of her casting and i'm not trying to argue [anymore]... i just think the AGE factor is... a NON-factor.

who cares about lively. it's the green lantern movie not the carol ferris movie.
everyone should be more concerned about more important things...

LIKE WHEN ARE WE GONNA SEE THAT DAMN TRAILER?!?!?!

@bigbgl- Carol Ferris plays a big role in Hal's story, so I think it counts as an important thing.

I'm just at a wait and see attitude with this film. I'm not seeing anything horrible or anything super great either. I can't wait for footage to get seriously hyped.

Oooooh Yeah!!!
(Said in my best Kool-Aid Man Voice)

@bigbgl—exactly, man... i think all gl fans are on the same page. i was just sayin the other day that this whole thing is such a rush since i thought we'd see bat3 AND man of steel, and then flash and wonder woman all before we EVER had a shot at a GL movie. the fact that it's so thorough and so faithful is a HUGE plus after the jack black heart attack i had in 08.

and i really DO want to see blake in that uniform lol... i just don't know if they can make that collar work on screen :)

AlternateNo4 @ Are you saying that Portman won't be better because of the character she's portraying and the material she has to work with, or because of her acting ability? Out of the 10 actresses you picked, 6 were Oscar winners including Portman. I have no idea how good of an actress Lively is, but I'd have to say if the characters and material are equal in substance than Portman will pull off a much better performance than her. Maybe I'm just confused about your point though

@puck—no, i don't think you're confused. i think you understood... but i don't think you agree! i'm saying that thor is thor, not "closer." i don't think it's going to be bad... in fact i think it'll be great. but it will be great for what it is, and i'm sorry but while i think it'll be an awesome CBM i don't think it will attain the artistic level of great cinema. nor, do i think, will "green lantern," and that's my point.

the arc and motivation of a character is what creates the opportunity for a stellar performance, and i'm predicting that the scope of the jane foster character isn't going to be bigger or more interesting than the carol ferris character. and i don't think either of them is going to be the type of rich, full-arced, well-rounded role portman had in "closer," "brothers," or even "v for vendetta."

i personally don't believe that "a great actress makes every role great"... streep didn't win an oscar for "death becomes her," and portman didn't win any awards for "mars attacks" or "star wars." and while i'm sure both foster and ferris will be better characters than those, they'll still be CBM roles. i think that even if portman is "better," it won't show—i think lively will do everything the role requires, and i don't think portman will be "better" because i don't think the role will give her the chance.

i LOVE these movies and that's why i'm here, but they aren't shakespeare. in MY personal opinion. :)