Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Don't Expect A Green Hornet Sequel Anytime Soon!!

The Kidd here...

If you were holding your breath for a sequel to last years' THE GREEN HORNET, you might want to let it go fairly soon or you'll end up dead. It doesn't look like it's going to happen for you.

Producer Neal Moritz recently spoke with The Hollywood Reporter when he explained why THE GREEN HORNET 2 was pretty much dead, and it has nothing to do with the quality of the first film, which wasn't much more than okay. In fact, THE GREEN HORNET actually pulled in nearly $228 million across the globe during its theatrical run, a decent profit from its reported $120 million budget. The problem though is that it didn't make enough, and that's what ultimately is squashing any chances of a follow-up happening.

The movie did almost $250 million and was actually very well liked, but we made the movie for too much money. One, we made it in L.A. for certain reasons, and two, we decided to go to 3D -- that added another $10 million. If I had done it in a tax-rebate state and not done 3D, it would have been considered a huge financial success for the studio. So we're not making a sequel right now.

So now only films with potential for HUGE financial success are likely to get the green light? Interesting.

I'm hardly a fan of THE GREEN HORNET, and I don't know that a sequel would have done anything for me, but that first film still made money. It didn't make assloads of cash, but it still ended up in the black for Columbia Pictures. 

That's a very worrisome area to be entering into though where only movies with the potential to score big bucks at the box office could be the ones getting to go-ahead. It's either go big or don't go at all seemingly, with moderate success deemed not worth the time, money or effort. Who wants to only make $50 million when those resources could be poured into something that could make five times that amount? That's quite the sad mindset to ignore smaller films in favor of only big budget blockbusters... but hopefully that's the exception and not the rule going around Hollywood right now, although you'd never know it with every comic book, fairy tale, board game, reboot, retelling, reimagining and remake somewhat exhausted to try capitalizing on the familiar to get people into the theatres and not necessarily the creative. 

Moritz was specifically asked about doing remakes over original content, since he's involved with both 21 JUMP STREET and TOTAL RECALL this year. His responding words pretty much confirm the assumptions us movie geeks have been making for quite some time.

 I do whatever is interesting to me. A movie we're going to make later this year called Invertigo is a huge disaster movie based on a completely original concept. I think we go for established brands because they can cut through the clutter. 21 JUMP STREET was a brand that was known to people over the age of 25, but we felt we needed a combination of two guys that was a great pairing. Jonah [Hill] first became involved, and it was obvious to us that we needed a complete opposite to him -- and Channing [Tatum] was the guy we wanted.

Established brands... established concepts... anything less is clutter.

Come on, Hollywood... you can do better than that, and, as paying customers, we should demand better than that... or at least we should try to demand better than that until our idiot neighbor ruins any progress we're trying to make by buying a ticket to JACK & JILL. Idiot.


-Billy Donnelly

"The Infamous Billy The Kidd"

Follow me on Twitter.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • March 14, 2012, 10:54 a.m. CST

    I wasn't, so there.

    by nobodycallsmcflyachicken

  • March 14, 2012, 10:55 a.m. CST


    by Joey Robinson

  • March 14, 2012, 10:56 a.m. CST


    by Joey Robinson

    i liked GH much more than i expected to, too bad

  • March 14, 2012, 10:59 a.m. CST

    Neal Moritz is a producer

    by OverMuch

    And producers care about making money. They don't care about art. They leave those concerns to the ones actually crafting the movie. So give the guy a break for being brutally honest.

  • March 14, 2012, 10:59 a.m. CST

    No Green Hornet 2? THANK YOU GOD!!!!!!

    by Jobacca

    I walked out of the first one....and I was so pissed off I wanted to punch someone. And keep in mind,I'm no Green Hornet "fanboy"(does the Green Hornet even have fanboys?). Seth Rogains "acting" in that flick was so far beyond horrible that it made me want to punch babies. He is the cinematic equivalent of nails on a fucking chalkboard. Somehow I had never actually WATCHED a Seth Rogain movie all the way through until this one....and I didnt even make it all the way though it. I sat there in misery until the fight scene between him and Kato....Pure. Fucking. Torture. Never again will anything with Seth Rogain get a goddamned dime of my money. Fuck that guy.

  • March 14, 2012, 10:59 a.m. CST

    Thank God. Death to Kato-vision

    by The_Maltese_Vulcan

  • March 14, 2012, 11 a.m. CST

    3-D was still hot early last year

    by Samuel Fulmer

    If anything maybe the added cost of people paying for 3-D tickets (especially overseas where many times movies are shown 3-D only) more than offset the 10 million investment. It was a decent movie, but nothing special, why should it get a sequel???

  • March 14, 2012, 11:01 a.m. CST

    A little history on GH

    by Thurston_one

    My aunt is an actress who was cast in the film in a flashback sequence that was ultimately cut entirely from the flick (happens to her a lot, superstardom is probably not in the cards). She explained that Gondry was sidelined by the studio and the slick young producers almost from the get-go, and was seriously phoning it in by the end of the shoot since they wouldn't let him do much of anything he wanted to. I think he assembled a cut of it, but the producer re-cut it, Roggen then re-cut it, and the producer re-cut it again. I think you definitely saw the results of such a clusterfuck creative process on the screen.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:01 a.m. CST

    Kato was the only good thing in The Green Hornet

    by thelordofhell

    In both the TV Show and in the Movie

  • March 14, 2012, 11:02 a.m. CST

    What Hollywood bullshit talk from the producer

    by Rupee88

    The fact that they spent too much on the first one doesn't affect whether they would make a second one. They could just cut the budget considerably. they aren't making a sequel because the first one sucked and no one would go see the sequel.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:02 a.m. CST

    fucking numbers bullshit

    by BadMrWonkaSucksCock

    but i wasn't holding my breath for a sequel anyway.x

  • March 14, 2012, 11:04 a.m. CST

    Invertigo is...

    by XoanonTORN

    How much you want to bet it is a disaster movie about a polar shift in the planet... anyone care to place bets?

  • March 14, 2012, 11:05 a.m. CST

    Re: Go Big - the newest Hollywood thing

    by The Angriest Planet

    The death of the medium budget films that underperform or bomb have always been the bane of studio executive's existence. Lately the issue has gotten even bigger. When having a star basically means nothing to box office anymore, and everything costs so much, studios are only interested in making a lot or why bother. They want micro budget hits like Paranormal Activity or they want Pirates of the Caribbean. When a low budget film bombs, no big loss. When a tentpole's nobody's fault really because you threw everything at it...for better or worse...that you could. But when a $45 million katherine Hegl comedy drama really hurts. You spent millions, nobody cared and they won't care for cable or dvd either. This is not anything new but is an issue that seems to be coming back into the forground lately. Fox's cancellation of TERRA NOVA is example of this in the TV realm. They made money on it...just not enough.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:06 a.m. CST

    I've been speaking with my wallet for a few years

    by Kremzeek

    With the excpetion of a couple premieres I wanted to be at, I've quit going to the movies altogether (as of about 2008). I absolutely loathe the state of Hollywood filmmaking today. I can't stand the "I paid for my ticket so I can say or do whatever the fuck I want without regard for anyone else who paid for their ticket" mentality of theatre-goers. I refuse to pay for endless remakes of "established brands". It's all shit. Pretty sad when a film nerd like me hates seeing movies. Step it up, Hollywood. Currently, you suck ass.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:07 a.m. CST

    This movie had a terrible "goof"

    by Samuel Fulmer

    A beach ball noticeably bounced in to a swimming pool during a fight scene, and then in the next shot it was out of the water next to the pool.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:09 a.m. CST

    HATED the Green Hornet movie. And I dig the original series.

    by Quake II

    What a mess of a film. The action scenes were absurd, the comedy was forced and the cool serious vibe of the original show was thrown away for cheap laughs. Watch the original series this weekend on ME tv. They are having a Green Hornet marathon on saturday and since the original series is as rare as bigfoot these days it's worth a watch.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:10 a.m. CST

    Ha! Today's animation is funny (upper-left corner of the page).

    by Buck Turgidson

    Pineal gland "From Beyond!"

  • March 14, 2012, 11:12 a.m. CST

    I actually liked the Green Hornet movie

    by Samuel Fulmer

    But it does not need a sequel.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:12 a.m. CST

    Well thank God for that.

    by Orbots Commander

    Because The Green Hornet was a total piece of shit.

  • Er, yeah. Duh! Here, watch a REAL critic

  • March 14, 2012, 11:14 a.m. CST


    by BlueLando

    It was almost as bad as Kick Ass!

  • March 14, 2012, 11:15 a.m. CST


    by Cyrus Clops

    My comments at the time were, "Instead of Seth Rogen, they probably should have hired an actor" and "It's Seth Rogen playing Seth Rogen playing the Green Hornet."

  • March 14, 2012, 11:17 a.m. CST

    Then explain to me how JOHN CARTER 2 is in the works...

    by Logan_1973

    There was just a report that Stanton and co. are working on the script already.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:18 a.m. CST

    Good because it sucked. I turned it off after 20 minutes.

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    I'm glad I didn't pay money in the theater.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Movie Math

    by deacon27

    You have to understand how movie math works. Most films need to make back double what they cost in order to cover advertising costs. For a 120 million dollar film, they should have made at least 240 million worldwide. GH only made 228 million which means it actually lost money. Add to that most sequels will make less than the first (Dark Knight being an exception) and there's nothing giving the studio a good reason to make a sequel.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:19 a.m. CST

    We made it in LA and that cost too much

    by lv_426

    Yeah, made in the heart of the film industry and it cost too much to do that anymore. Another bullet point in the list of reasons Hollywood is retarded and not really the center of filmmaking like the original founders of our film industry intended. Also, how does something like Moon get made for 5 million, Source Code for 40 mil, and District 9 for only 30 million, yet a Seth Rogan Green Hornet film needs a 120 million dollar budget?

  • March 14, 2012, 11:19 a.m. CST

    logan_1973-Hey remember when for a few years it was

    by Samuel Fulmer

    Claimed the Singer was still doing a Superman with Routh after Returns didn't do too well. That didn't pan out did it. They can work on a script, doesn't mean it's getting made.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:21 a.m. CST

    Bad, Bad bad.

    by jellypop

    I wasn't expecting a sequel too much. I really thought the film had some strong moments but was let down by too many scrappy elements. So he states he only makes films that interest him? Well, that's were he is going wrong for a start. We the cinema goer are the ones that put the money in your coffers so you should listen to what we want. I want to see my movie dreams up on the big screen and not some turdy shit like your XXX movie, Mr Moritz.

  • There's more to that story obviously! I didn't even see it. Not my kind of Superhero flick!

  • March 14, 2012, 11:25 a.m. CST

    Green Hornet was beyond bad...

    by gringostar

    Seth Rogan was completely miscast (even though he cast himself), Jay Chou may be good at martial arts, but is a horrible actor (in an English language movie at the very least), Christoph Waltz was wasted and the plot was shite. I mean did anyone not gag at the gangsters paradise scene - painful to watch! All in all Green Hornet was a terrible film. A sequel would have been lunacy and certainly would have never made it's investment back. Fool me once... The Green Hornet television show (in my opinion) was also garbage (save Bruce Lee), and simply came about as a way to cash in on the Batman craze; this property never needed to be turned into a film. For the record I watched the Green Hornet once it available for free "on demand". I knew that it would be a complete waste of money, however it was so bad that I still felt ripped off even though it was free.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:26 a.m. CST

    Note to Hollywood, fans no more than you. We just don't have the money to produce.

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    I guarantee we could come up with better ideas than you starting with adding "of Mars" to the title of the latest Disney movie. There, was that so hard?

  • March 14, 2012, 11:27 a.m. CST

    know dammit. My fast fingers make my comment look stupid.

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

  • March 14, 2012, 11:28 a.m. CST

    the angriest planet, Hollywood can never make enough money

    by lv_426

    Or at least that is what they want us to believe. Did you know that 20th Century Fox considered the original ALIEN to be a box office flop back when it was released in 1979? It cost around 11 million and brought in between 90-100 million back then, not to mention that it also spawned one of the most iconic franchises of science fiction next to Star Wars and Star Trek. Greedy fucking Hollywood is dumber than a box of rocks. They'll try to bury things like Avatar, won't green light a Peter Jackson/WETA produced Halo film, yet they spend 120 million on a Seth Rogan Green Hornet film and 200 million on Battleship, a fucking movie based on a board game! FACT!

  • March 14, 2012, 11:29 a.m. CST

    Green Hornet Sucked / Neil Moritz

    by THX1968

    Another boring, bloated vanity flick courtesy action/comedy superstar Fuckwad McKenzie. I literally can't remember the fuck's name.... Seth Rogen! Dear lord, Seth fucking Rogen. Please, can I just have all my teeth pulled dry before I have to see that totally unfunny twat in another flick? Please? As for Neil Moritz, he's just keeping in line with all the other idiot producers, spouting producer babble whenever prompted (interviewed).

  • 250 million for a shitty movie with no major names attatched to it. Sure the supporting cast was great with huge talent to pull from, but not so much as to draw a crowd to. Now between that and this what I'm reading in between the lines is that they cannot justify spending a shitload of money on a sequel, thus linging their own pockets, because the first did not turn enough profit. And we all know that to do a sequel you have to throw twice as much money into it. And how the fuck do you spend over a 100 million on the Green Hornet (which I did like more than I thought I would) let alone 250 million on John Carter. I'm sure that Gambit guy worked for peanuts because this was supposed to be his big break out role. Something smells fishy in Denmark.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:31 a.m. CST

    Green Hornet - worst movie I've seen in years

    by Raptor Jesus

    Seth Rogan in a movie? I don't go. Period, end of discussion. The guy is not funny, likeable, nor can he act.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Seriously, how do guys like Seth Rogen and Jonah Hill get work?

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    They are neither funny, nor action stars.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Garanteed Green Honet would have been better if


    They went with Stephen Chow as originally planned.

  • They had all the elements to make a great action/comedy, but it was a very unfunny and unfocused film. So I don't want a sequel.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:38 a.m. CST

    Hey The Kidd...

    by ColloquiallyBorn

    I think you aren't readin that statement quite right.. I think what he's saying is that the overall money intake was disapointing which means didn't get the money they planned for. At 228M$ that's big, but when you spent 120M$ on the movie the motive is to ensure that the overall return on it isn't just COST X 2 = PROFIT, you need that "buffer" it should at least make 3 time the amount in order to ensure a green light for a second movie for a character like Green Hornet. Normaly studios would like to bring in more money as some of the sequels tend to bring less money in than the original, but cost more to make. There are exceptions to the rules, like the Mission Impossible movie, the sequel made more money but then the tird one dropped under the first one's numbers, and the last one brought back enough money to make it a hit. But it's very hard to ensure future projects when you bring in only twice the amount of what it cost to make. It's one thing to say that they made 100M$ off of X movie, but in the end you forget that studios need to pay employees, taxes, and so much more that this 100M$ is probably gone within a few months of operations. What the Head of Studios do is ensure enough money in to make a profit to pay everyone and increase de budgets for next year. If they only make 1M$ to 50M$ profit on 100 movies, then they'll need to sell land, decrease their workforce ect, plus pay the % of the profits that is under contract to the people who either own the rights to the characters, or have agreed to play a part in the movie or behind the lens. So the actual profits gained can potentially become less than what is reported.. So when you look at Green Hornet, the potential earnings driven from the sequel must be lower than expected. The domestic numbers didn't even pay for the money spent on it. Since the Hornet is not a character with potential like Superman, Batman, Spiderman, or the Avengers they need to see what is the potential that it can bring in. Seeing the numbers and knowing that it didn't cover cost in the domestic market, you can potentially say that the sequel is dead as the public weren't actually "hooked" by the first one. Some movies will have a second chance, liek the Hulk.. Hulk cost 137M$ but took in 245M$in 2003; incredible Hulk cost 150M$ but only made 263M$ in 2008.. Ask any Marvel Studio exec to put out another Hulk movie right now and they'll say "NO!".. They rather have him join a cast in the Avengers than even try to make him the entire focus again and take in minimal craps. They even grabbed and generously paid Norton who was public choice no.1 to do the second movie, they re-casted everyone and hoped that they could send it off to franchise economic future.. all that it did was bring in less than what was expected, hence Norton decided not to return (And while I like Ruffalo's work I think he's totaly wrong for the role of Banner) and the studio hope that people will re-attach themselves to the big green beast in The Avengers.. So in other words, Movies will still get done, even the 50M$ profit ones, but the sequels are very tightly budgeted in order to ensure a future for the characters and those need to bring in more cash else they can potentialy bring a whole studio down..

  • March 14, 2012, 11:38 a.m. CST

    What's The Green Hornet?

    by borisdoris

    Is it something to do with the Vietnamese Horiton vert?

  • March 14, 2012, 11:41 a.m. CST

    Re: The Death Of Hollywood Creativity

    by ArmageddonProductions

    Well, kids, we can all thank JOHN CARTER for wiping out any hope of movies with a shred of originality in them. Thanks to the fallout from that one, Hollywood is about to take ten huge steps back and ONLY dump capital into the lowest common denominator, so we can probably expect at least a decade or more of pure shit. Unfortunately for them, even that rope will run out and the studio system will collapse like it did in the Seventies. Here's hoping ...

  • March 14, 2012, 11:46 a.m. CST

    How bout a sequel to the Other Guys. That shit was funny

    by atlatl

  • March 14, 2012, 11:53 a.m. CST


    by Tony

  • March 14, 2012, 11:55 a.m. CST

    First movie was fun...

    by Jay

    God forbid a super hero movie not take itself too seriously. But I'm guessing it's more of a Rogan hate than anything, though. I know how hard it is to see your own kind become successful while you whine in envy on the Internet.

  • It's a shame they'll never get any creative freedom to nail it in a sequel. One of the worst? Hardly. Still made with much more love and craft than most shit that passes for that kind of movie. As a Green Lantern fan... now THAT was a terrible clusterfuck. Green Hornet was solid. Kiss my ass etc.

  • March 14, 2012, 12:01 p.m. CST

    And the business is called show BUSINESS for a reason...

    by Jay

    Stop pretending like money isn't a factor in your favorite movies. Even people like Coppola flat out say Godfather 2, and especially 3, was made for the money. One just ended up being really good. You have to understand that every aspect (Well, almost) of film-making is unionized. That is not cheap. That's why movies made in Indonesia cost barely anything. If you're willing to put up 10 - 30 million dollars for a possibly good movie, then by all means do so. People seem to not understand that these big movies are what pay for the smaller movies.

  • March 14, 2012, 12:01 p.m. CST

    Makes sense to me

    by xsikal

    If the first movie had been critically loved, but not made a huge profit, the studio would be more likely to greenlight a sequel, counting on the goodwill generated by the first to hopefully grow the audience for the second (or at least keep that audience fairly stable) Since it was seen as an average movie at best, the profit would have to have been larger to warrant a sequel. Basically, because the first movie got lukewarm reviews, the studio can project that the audience for a sequel would be much smaller (a fair number of the people who saw the first one would not bother with the second). That smaller audience would obviously reduce the chances that the sequel would make a profit. That makes sense to me.

  • March 14, 2012, 12:08 p.m. CST

    You hater scumbags make me laugh

    by Chadley BeBay

    I couldn't care less about Seth Rogan, but GH was fucking funny, exciting and cool. Go fuck yourselves

  • Green Hornet did not need to be in 3D. I did enjoy the movie and my girlfriend at the time loved it. I think we saw it twice in theaters. I'm not worried about it being a standalone flick.

  • March 14, 2012, 12:08 p.m. CST




  • March 14, 2012, 12:09 p.m. CST

    I'm SHOCKED there will be no Green Hornet sequel

    by Jaster Mareel

    Considering it sucked ass and bombed.

  • March 14, 2012, 12:14 p.m. CST

    Jack & Jill was original at least.

    by happybunni

    Give me remakes over crap original movies anyday

  • March 14, 2012, 12:19 p.m. CST

    No sequel?

    by shran

    And the movie sucked. This is a shocking development for Hollywood. I thought they were going to tentpole every crap movie. Yay Hollywood!

  • March 14, 2012, 12:22 p.m. CST

    Green Hornet was almost unwatchable.

    by Playkins

    Horrible POS. I can imagine the execs on this one: "I have an idea! Let's make a superhero movie where the hero is completely unlikeable! Yeah, that'll get them in the seats!"

  • March 14, 2012, 12:23 p.m. CST

    said my piece about this in the robocop thread.

    by rakesh patel

    though.. source code made for $40 million and green hornet was made for $120? really? wtf? honestly they need a jonah hill moneyball stats type guy sitting down with some of these fucks and saying.. listen, if you make a movie with seth rogen, eddie murphy, adam sandler, vin diesel, Will Ferrell and its projected at over $100 million. cut your losses, if you're gonna gamble with $100 mil finance smaller productions and spread your losses.

  • March 14, 2012, 12:23 p.m. CST

    Gondry can direct, Rogen/Goldberg can write...

    by DukieMichaelNamondRandy

    ...but "Green Hornet" mostly sucked. could you imagine if Stephen Chow had stayed part of it? would that have changed it immensely?

  • March 14, 2012, 12:27 p.m. CST

    "Hollywood" is just divisions of multi-national coorporations

    by Rupee88

    Sony, Disney, Time Warner, Fox...and they make plenty of profit because people are stupid and Pirates 4 and Transformers 3 each brought in $1 billion at the box office. Making good movies is not necessary to do their jobs right and maximize profits so of course they don't do so.

  • March 14, 2012, 12:28 p.m. CST

    sad about original

    by taff

    Not sad about the lack of a sequel. I'm sad about the poor quality of the original movie. I even watched it on DVD just to make sure it was as bad as I thought when I saw it in a theater. Yep, no question, it was a bad movie. I enjoy good sequels, like Iron Man II or the Die Hard movies or Empire Strikes Back, so I have no problem with sequels. I have no problem with remakes, like the most recent Star Trek. I hate poor remakes, like the last Superman movie. Good quality movies will always make money.

  • March 14, 2012, 12:29 p.m. CST

    Hollywood needs to step up...

    by Andrew Coleman

    I'm sorry I know it's "cool" to hate on John Carter but I was really hoping that movie would explode and get a sequel. First off because it was great and secondly because a big studio took a chance. Studio's are really scared of taking chances with something good, they will spend big $$$ on stupid shit though. Battleship got made because in the pitch meeting they said it would be the next "Transformers" and it essentially looks like a TF sequel. Why Green Hornet got the money it did is because with Rogen they thought they could pitch it as a comedy to retards. Studio's want comedians and to make every movie "trendy". That's why possible action classics like Halo will never get off the ground. It's because they can't put a "flavor of the month" in it. I promise you though if Justin Bieber came in and pitched the Halo movie... They'd give it $400 million dollars to be produced.

  • March 14, 2012, 12:29 p.m. CST

    No loss here.

    by Cletus Van Damme

  • March 14, 2012, 12:30 p.m. CST

    @Rupee88 - Truer words were never spoken.

    by Cletus Van Damme

  • March 14, 2012, 12:31 p.m. CST

    Holy shit Kevin Sorbo was the voice of Hercules in God of War 3.

    by UltraTron

    That's fuckin hilarious. Kevin Sorbo is hilarious. It's time for someone to use him to good effect in a mainstream comedy. He's got perfect cheese straight man down. He's all fuckin aye

  • March 14, 2012, 12:41 p.m. CST

    How about now? Is it safe now? No? Okay, how about now?

    by kabong

    Don't try anything different, though.

  • I'm suuuuuuuuure it hasn't. Meanwhile, back on Not-Doing-Coke-World...

  • March 14, 2012, 12:46 p.m. CST

    i liked the green hornet movie

    by JaredP

    kato WAS the best thing in the movie. and christoph waltz made an interesting villain

  • March 14, 2012, 12:48 p.m. CST

    I do whatever is interesting to me

    by alienindisguise

    This guy must be interested in pure shit. Fuck face.

  • March 14, 2012, 12:58 p.m. CST

    The Kidd uncovers the horrible truths of Hollywood!

    by Mattman

    That everyone has known for decades.

  • March 14, 2012, 1:03 p.m. CST

    I have an idea.

    by Bubba Gillman

    Why not decide to make a sequel based on whether or not there is a good story to be told?

  • March 14, 2012, 1:04 p.m. CST


    by Robert Evans

    Whadda scoop!

  • March 14, 2012, 1:04 p.m. CST

    Forget it, Kidd. It's Gingertown.

    by Robert Evans

  • March 14, 2012, 1:05 p.m. CST

    I enjoyed GH well enough.

    by Juggernaut125

    I didn't feel like I was ripped off for the money I spent at the theatre. But I had no interest in picking up the DVD/Blu-ray. And I'm not too sad that there isn't a sequel.

  • March 14, 2012, 1:06 p.m. CST

    Seth Rogen could've become anorexic

    by seasider

    and he still would've been wrong for the part in in that movie. I know this is beating a dead horse but I would've liked to have seen the movie with Stephen Chow left in charge.

  • March 14, 2012, 1:07 p.m. CST

    Dear Hollywood, NO MORE CG, PLEASE!!!

    by Ricky Cooper

  • And I doubt they'll be able resist saying "closer to the source material". And you will all see it.

  • March 14, 2012, 1:09 p.m. CST

    Established Franchises

    by wrath 4771

    As someone who was in high school/college when 21 Jump Street was on FOX, you're skewing more to peopole older than 35 - not 25. I like Jonas Hill, but you're not going to get teenagers or college kids to go watch this because they have fond memories of baby Johnny Depp. Those of us over 35 can already tell by the trailer the movie has nothing in common with the TV show outside of the basic premise. As for Green Hornet, now you're looking at people in their late 40's and early 50's to say, "Oh yeah, I remember Green Hornet, what a great TV show." That's not to say younger people haven't found these shows and enjoy them, but there isn't enough of them to make some insane profit that Hollywood is expecting.

  • March 14, 2012, 1:12 p.m. CST


    by Joe Plumber


  • March 14, 2012, 1:15 p.m. CST

    rac2012, brilliant plan, Einstein

    by Mattman

    Let's go back to stop motion!

  • Seriously, what are you talking about? You're worried about small art films not getting made because they won't make a sequel to a $120 Million dollar piece of garbage. Elsewhere, Beaks is lamenting the end of Big Budget, "Original" Fantasy, because a movie about a 100 year old book did poorly at the Box Office. You people need to get your heads out of Harry's fatass.

  • March 14, 2012, 1:22 p.m. CST

    Ummmm...Robert Rodriguez is doing a fucking CGI Heavy Metal remake!!!

    by Jaster Mareel Thought he was your bud Harry! You should be first to have an article on this!

  • March 14, 2012, 1:27 p.m. CST

    It was a load of hobo shit

    by TheGangBangTheory

    with corn and a little bit of blood in it. The kind you see in an alley all splatter up against the wall. No better than that. Piss poor in almost every fucking way. Just a fucking horrible, horrible film. Anybody who likes it is the type of fucktard they aim these underachieving films at. Really, did I mention it wasn't very good?

  • March 14, 2012, 1:30 p.m. CST


    by Joe Plumber

    The Best Review Ever that could possibly written about this total P.O.S.

  • March 14, 2012, 1:30 p.m. CST

    the only rogen movie I have...

    by Doc_Hudson

    is Zack and Miri,.... And thats only because it's a smith film...and quite funny. and granny pants,....Banks is a doll.

  • Just expect more of the same. Remake after remake, unorignal boring sequel after sequel. I really enjoyed the Green Hornet. It was a lot better than I thought. And I wouldn't mind seeing Seth Rogen and Jay Chou do some more. It's sad, especially because their 3D actually added to film unlike other pieces of SHIT like Clash of the Titans! Which as you can see despite it's utter AWFULNESS got a sequel. Just sad.

  • March 14, 2012, 1:49 p.m. CST

    wcwlkr, have you seen the 3D trailer for the new Titans

    by Joe Plumber

    The 3D looks amazing, because they actually shot it for 3D this time rather than retrofitting it. But, I agree with you about the first one.

  • March 14, 2012, 1:51 p.m. CST

    I like Rogen in small doses, but he is not a leading man

    by Joe Plumber

    In fact, at this pint if he is the main character, I'm out.

  • March 14, 2012, 1:56 p.m. CST


    by TheCAT7225

    You almost seemed disappointed that they are not making a sequal to a movie of medicore quality in the first place. You sound like you are falling in the rut of thinking a movie can only be a success if it has 2-3 sequals. You should be thrilled that instead of trying to wring another story out of an uninteresting concept, the producers are taking the money that made, which sounds like it was a profitable endeavor, and moving on. I think thats a good thing. Instead your using this as an opportunity to bitch about how "Hollywood only cares about the bottom line, blah blah blah..." New flash: We know! and you are quite correct! My point is the world doesn't need a Green Hornet 2. Whether we all agree with the reason why is inconsequential. Let just all be thankful. Maybe something better will get produced now.

  • March 14, 2012, 2:08 p.m. CST

    This is great news. Green Hornet was the worst movie i saw in 2011.

    by hallmitchell

    If they made money well i would consider that lucky. I got burned on Green Hornet i sure wasn't going to come back for seconds. What an awful movie that was.

  • March 14, 2012, 2:28 p.m. CST

    Green Hornet is one of the few movies I wish I could un-see

    by Joe Plumber

    I've tried drugs and alcohol, but it's hard to kill the exact brain cells containing the memories of this dreadful piece of crap.

  • March 14, 2012, 2:38 p.m. CST

    Instead of 'Green Hornet 2', how about...

    by buggerbugger

    ...'Cocoon: The Exhumation'?

  • March 14, 2012, 2:41 p.m. CST


    by Chadley BeBay

    It was a cool movie. The only way you could miss that fact is if you are so fucking full of yourselves you can't even enjoy a movie. Your loss idiots

  • March 14, 2012, 2:54 p.m. CST

    Worrisome? What's worrisome?

    by Matt

    I suppose "The Green Hornet" may have made its money back, or maybe turned a small profit… maybe. But I've never met anybody who liked it, and I know quite a few who hated it. A sequel would almost certainly do significantly less business and would likely cost more. This is the way with sequels, with only very, very rare exceptions. So why would they make another? And why would it be troubling that an unliked movie can't have a sequel? Oh I definitely get why the producer wouldn't be happy about it. That's a paycheck lost. But is this really worrisome to the rest of us? Curious how "Wrath of the Titans" will do. "Clash" did well, but again nobody I know liked it (including teenagers I know). Will any of them go to the sequel?

  • March 14, 2012, 2:55 p.m. CST

    Green Hornet is one of the few movies I wish I could un-see

    by TheGangBangTheory

    Right? It's like the hobo shit on the alley wall mentioned come across it and all you can think about is how you wish you hadn't seen it. The old school Green Hornet concept is pretty good superhero pulp. But still, it's 2nd teir compared to Batman and Doc Savage and such, so the odds of a decent reboot happening in the next 10 years is about as likely as Harry running the LA Marathon.

  • March 14, 2012, 2:57 p.m. CST

    chadley bebay

    by TheGangBangTheory

    Fuck you retard. You don't know a good or bad movie from your own limp dick. You're a white dude who wears his hat backwards and sez "Yo" a lot, right? Because these are the dipshits who like this movie, because it has a nominal amount of rap in it's soundtrack. You are exaclty the type of moron in America that makes them set their sites so low in Hollywood, making us intelligent folk have to shoot it down. It's fucking horrible, and so is your retarded life. Bitch. Now go eat more Jack in the Box, numbnuts.

  • ..So for instance with a big movie like avengers you're looking at around 250 million production costs plus close to 50 million on advertising, promotions and merchandising etc; So 300 million costs needs to recoupe 900 million to cover everything and start producing profits. The bigger the movie the bigger the profit has to be. Movies are like any other industry, they have profit margins, forcasts and projections, acceptable losses, investment, shareholders, loan repayments. John Carter was a 200 million movie, Disney will be looking at a similar situation to Green Lantern last year; ie, a massive hole where profit was expected. Avengers has the added problem of having to make even more money than usual as Disney has invested in it and will look at The Avengers movie to bung some of the gap JC leaves. So it'll have to push past Avatar and become a 1.5 billion dollar movie to make everyone happy. If The Avengers fails like JC, which is unlikely given the rabid comic book fan base regardless of quality, but if it did fail it would seriously undermine any future marvel movies. A movie like Green Hornet is a total hit and miss and i'm surprised it got green lit with such a large budget. Marvel have already had a stinker with Ghost Rider & Disney have had a major fail with JC, in the coming weeks i think there will be a lot of nervous people waiting to see what people think of the avengers. Sequels only happen when that water line is passed.

  • March 14, 2012, 3:06 p.m. CST

    was hot?

    by gotilk

    The delusions here amaze me. Where I am, the 2d showings are like ghost towns.

  • what whistful insightful comments... from a 12yr old. If you think this fillm was the worst of 2011 then you need to learn some shit about film, putting taste aside. I'm not singling him out, but what a hyperbolic load of nihilist wank waffle passing for criticism. I loved it personally. The film I mean. Not the hack analysis it's getting from alot of folks here.

  • March 14, 2012, 3:24 p.m. CST

    Rogan is a fucking IDIOT...

    by rocketeuropa

    ..and everyone involved in making that abortion should have had their hands broken. The Williams/Lee series was spectacular and I would have paid top dollar to see Rogan shit his pants if Bruce Lee was alive and caught up with Rogan for putting out this abortion of a film.

  • March 14, 2012, 3:26 p.m. CST

    GREEN HORNET was unwatchable

    by bobjustbob

    Nuff said.

  • You give a fat somewhat funny Jew moderate success in Hollywood, then he fancies himself a super-hero action star? Stick to comedies Seth.

  • If I can save just one person from wasting an hour and a half of their life watching this abortion, my job here is done.

  • March 14, 2012, 3:41 p.m. CST

    Seth Roben and Zack Galafawhatthefuck

    by TheGangBangTheory

    Are two unfunny dudes I would be happy to never see in any movie ever again. If GH at least had Kevin James or or Ben Stiller as Hornet, it would at least have been halfway funny. And really, the guy they had in the role is supposed to fill in for Bruce Lee? FUCKING FAIL. And Blue skull fuck ho or whatever the fuck your stupid user name is, really? You like this? Then welcome to 99% of America who will actually see a fat dude take a big, chock full o nuts shit on a plate, lay sprinkles and banana slices on it, and eat it up making yummy sounds, just like the hacks of Hollywood want you to. Taste good? They give you what you are willing to eat, geektard..

  • March 14, 2012, 3:46 p.m. CST

    Never saw the first one...

    by Dude_Abides

    I was more excited about this when Smith wanted to make it. Rogen is an interesting leading man but just not an action leading man.

  • March 14, 2012, 3:47 p.m. CST

    The kidd making some huge leaps of logic

    by judge dredds fresh undies

    That's quite the sad mindset to ignore smaller films in favor of only big budget blockbusters

  • March 14, 2012, 3:48 p.m. CST


    by Dude_Abides

    Yes because when I think funny.... i think Stiller or James. Those two haven't done anything funny since... well ever.

  • March 14, 2012, 3:52 p.m. CST

    Movies cost so much to make...

    by Bruno

    Because the bigger tentpole movies employ hundreds of crew members. Then you have to pay the SFX team. The actors. The stunt men. The director. The editor. And it keeps going on and on. It's weird when I see people scream for the demise of the huge tentpole megabudget blockbuster. These movies keep many of the not so rich in Hollywood employed for months. Finally, a movie making back double it's original production budget isn't the way to be profitable in many cases. Exhibitors/Theater Chains also need to get paid. Screw Green Hornet. The Friday the 13th remake was more profitable and that isn't getting a sequel any time soon.

  • March 14, 2012, 3:55 p.m. CST

    Don't Expect A Green Hornet Sequel Anytime Soon?

    by thepentaveret

    Don't worry! I wasn't expecting one, nor did I want one. That movie was destined to suck, did in fact suck, and will continue sucking for generations to come.

  • March 14, 2012, 4:15 p.m. CST

    That's what you call "COOKIE CUTTER" filmmaking.

    by Jarrete Barnett

    Terminology that applies to various forms of so-called entertainment; predominantly over-emphasized this particular generation, more than any other.

  • March 14, 2012, 4:22 p.m. CST

    21 Jump Street....ugh

    by cloverock70

    Why did they turn this into a comedy?

  • March 14, 2012, 4:32 p.m. CST

    Speaking of the Total Recall remake

    by successor

    <p>Where is the trailer for it? Not that I'm looking forward to it--quite the opposite--but you have to wonder. It's only around five months from release and no teaser, no trailer, nothing. They say they're going to release a trailer this month, but it's almost half over and still nothing.</p> <p>Is the remake so bad that they're going to push it back or bury it? If so, that would be for the best. They sure aren't going to top Verhoeven. No three-breasted hookers, no deformed mutants, no Mars, no arms ripping off, no blood-splattering squibs, no quotable lines like "Get your ass to Mars!" or "Sue me, dickhead." No sale.</p> <p>Why did they do this remake again?</p>

  • March 14, 2012, 4:33 p.m. CST

    I get more laughs from the failure of this movie

    by Nerd Rage

    than from the movie itself.

  • March 14, 2012, 5:22 p.m. CST

    That has got to be the dumbest fuckin excuse

    by meta4

    So because it was successful both critically and commercially your not going to make another movie?....I don't...know if you think what you said made a god damn bit of sense but IF in some parellel universe (not youniverse) you do, Neal Mortiz, you may need to put the crack pipe down. Just let it go. If you don't believe me that crack is wack, look at Whitney, it did wonders for her career.

  • March 14, 2012, 5:42 p.m. CST

    Let's just be honest about Green Hornet & 21 Jump Street.

    by kdoc13

    First, I'll disagree with Grammaton above who says Jonah Hill can't act. Not true. He's just not funny. He's great in Moneyball. I think he has a brighter future doing those sorts of roles than he does in comedies. Green Hornet. One of the few moments I can credit Kevin Smith being a genius for, is his decision to step away from GH. It's a horrible premise to begin with. It's a batman with no skills, relying on Robin to save his ass, with less gadgets and worse villains. It's discount/generic batman. Who wants to see that? I have high hopes for the next batman movie, but the well runs dry pretty quick in that series, and it's the best of the bunch. Spiderman? Doc Ock, great bad guy, then they start to get a little weaker. Tier 2, Green goblin, and Venom. Venom, who can be defeated by a hoopdie with a boomin sound system. Then tier 3 and below. Is anyone really lining up to see the highly believeable Vulture or worse yet, the Rhino guy? Green Hornet didn't even have one marquee bad guy. You went to see it because Kato kicks ass. I'd rather see a Kato movie where he just busts guys in the nards all over LA. Plus, it was an origin story. The origin story movie is always lame and follows the same boring formula. Green Hornet wasn't comedy when it was on the radio. But was campy on TV. Yeah, it didn't last long in that formula. So why do it to the movie? Make that shit straight up action with some violence to it. And then you've got Seth Rogan, who isn't bad with other people's stuff, but not really that great of a writer. Pineapple express? Superbad? Both overrated. And both saved by a throwaway character (McLovin & the danny mcBride character in PE.) And on top of all this, half of the jokes were aleady done better in some other form. Starsky & Hutch for example. You can't save a flawed concept. That's the problem with Hollywood. Green Hornet had no chance at being good. It had all been done before, and done better. That's the problem with 21 Jump Street, it's the same thing. It's an unoriginal premise, made worse by casting and attempts to be comedy. The comedy has already been done better in this same scenario by Strangers With Candy of all things, and the premise has been done to death since the 50's. David fracking Cassidy, aka Keith Partridge was in a movie as an undercover cop in a high school. It's been done to death. When the movie was first announced, no one cared about the movie, only whether Johnny Depp would make a cameo. If that's the best excitement you've got going for your premise, you're in trouble.

  • March 14, 2012, 5:53 p.m. CST

    So the Muppets get a sequel but the Hornet doesn't?

    by FeralAngel

    Not that I care, both films sucked, but geez...the Muppets, if it made anything, made chicken feed. Damn, Disney must be desperate.

  • March 14, 2012, 6:09 p.m. CST

    Dude abides

    by TheGangBangTheory

    Yes because when I think funny.... i think Stiller or James< I said them because they are literally "halfway funn" dumbshit. Obviously irony is lost on you. What is up with this site? Did the IQ's of the nerd community suddenly drop dramatically? Christ...

  • He takes the comments on ONE producer and extrapolates it to "Hollywood". Very negative and ill-advised in a site like AICN which focuses on fanboy films (usually associated with big budget filmmaking).

  • March 14, 2012, 6:18 p.m. CST

    i liked green hornet

    by jsfithaca

    but a lot of it was meh. kinda forgettable, but still enjoyable

  • March 14, 2012, 6:34 p.m. CST

    Green Hornet was a good time at the movies

    by thot

    It was funny. Had some heart to it. Cool action and sfx. In other words, a decent popcorn flick. No way would a "serious" GH have gone over well, so taking the comedy route made sense and worked pretty well overall. I'd go see a sequel. .

  • March 14, 2012, 6:36 p.m. CST

    I liked the movie, the TV though...

    by Tom Fremgen

    was dud. Yes Bruce Lee was great. But the show too broad, just like Batman- except there were no jokes in the Green Hornet. So it's just kinda odd. As for the movie, I like Seth Rogen, so there. Movie wasn't great, but any means but I enjoyed it way more than Green Lantern.

  • March 14, 2012, 6:45 p.m. CST

    So there is a God.

    by Cruizer Dave

    Now if she can just kill the next Bayformers film ...

  • March 14, 2012, 6:45 p.m. CST

    Was anyone really holding their breath?

    by Executor

    Moritz, FYI: 3D cost 10 mil more but it artificial pumped your grosses by 20% too. p.s. And Moritz, when you say it was "actually very well liked," do you have any sources on that besides your assistant and your mother? Cause it wasn't the critics, and it wasn't the average movie-goer.

  • March 14, 2012, 6:52 p.m. CST

    Fuck!!! This just sucks!!!!

    by UltraTron

    Hold on let me scratch this off the ol calendar here.

  • Swear I knew a guy in school just like that. Just drew dicks. Oh well. It's too bad Hill's performance in Moneyball was non existence personified

  • March 14, 2012, 7:23 p.m. CST

    So...make the sequel in 2D in a tax rebate state.....duh!

    by cookylamoo

    Boy, I should be a mogol with these brilliant ideas.

  • March 14, 2012, 7:24 p.m. CST

    Actually...except for the last 20 minutes...Green Hornet was Ass.

    by cookylamoo

    In the last twenty minutes the sheer carnage was awe inspiring. If the first twenty minutes had been the last twenty minutes you would have had something.

  • March 14, 2012, 7:27 p.m. CST

    I wanna know who liked this and why it made money?

    by ZodNotGod

    For Fuck's sake it was not better than Green Lantern yet was a bigger success. Ugh.

  • March 14, 2012, 7:28 p.m. CST


    by ZodNotGod

    Except the movie wasn't exactly a failure. Sure, it sucks, but not what one would call a failure.

  • March 14, 2012, 7:32 p.m. CST

    thank christ

    by secracium

  • March 14, 2012, 7:38 p.m. CST

    kdoc13 nails it, preach it, brutha!

    by ZodNotGod

    David Cassidy did a television series, "Under Cover Man" in the late 70's. I feel sad for young actors coming up today. They have no staying power doing mindless junk like this....Brando made some turds in his day, but he usually delivered in some way and none really ruined his career; he let his ego do that.... Think of Hoffman, Hackman, McQueen, Bogart, Crawford and Davis...they had real movie with real meaty parts that hit and are still around today.... Who the fuck cares about 21 Jump Street in 10 years? Hell, this time next year it will be forgotten. 21 Jump Street was not a comedy then, it sucked all hell and still does, but it was not a comedy so why muck it up now? What are the actors thinking when they choose these gigs? Money? I can buy that, but is it all it is? These ideas come along and they fail either financially or creatively... Lets rape and ruin old television series.... The Mod Squad Starsky & Hutch Car 54 Where Are You? Wild Wild West Lost in Space I'm not surprised Gilligan's Island hasn't showed up...

  • March 14, 2012, 7:38 p.m. CST

    Why. Did. This. Cost. 120. Fucking. Million. Dollars

    by Al

    Does anyone actually see 100+ million dollar budget on screen in this movie, anywhere? Fuckin Eddie Furlong was in it fer crissakes.

  • March 14, 2012, 7:39 p.m. CST

    First!! and spielberg's son?

    by dznutzforu

    Haha. No, really. I never say LOL. I didn't know what it meant when people would send it to me. For The first guy's comment was on point. I was totally reading the article and it built up to say '21 Jump Street' is awesome!...and then in the last sentence he was like 'fuck you' ....spielberg's son? Damn, I'm at a loss...I honestly can't remember what you said~ but it was funny, too.

  • The climax of the film involves uploading a USB. He's fucking rich. He has to drive to his computer at the top of the tower to upload it? That's just ... argh.

  • March 14, 2012, 8:52 p.m. CST

    Oh darn!

    by Queefer Sutherland

    Gosh darn it! I'm so not pissed.

  • March 14, 2012, 9:17 p.m. CST


    by ZodNotGod

    True, but Hollywood won't see anything except the dollars.

  • March 14, 2012, 9:27 p.m. CST

    The only way to do it now...

    by ZodNotGod

    Is to make it low budget and violent as fuck. Make both dudes a mean ass-kicker. Lose the campy tone and take it serious.

  • March 14, 2012, 9:51 p.m. CST

    I worked with Moritz' brother...

    by BeatsMe

    for a few months. I left my job shortly after. Nuff said.

  • movie sucked but he fucked

  • March 14, 2012, 10:17 p.m. CST

    They actually made a movie version of The Green Hornet?

    by krazy8kat

    Who knew?

  • March 14, 2012, 10:22 p.m. CST


    by Dude_Abides

    Here's the first thing, the character was never supposed to be funny. For some reason, these days, an action star needs to be funny I have no clue why or how this happened. Two, if we're debating comic savvy, Seth Rogen is far superior to James and Stiller. 'Nuff said.

  • March 14, 2012, 10:24 p.m. CST

    The Green Hornet was horrible

    by Cobb05

    First off, Gondry kept insisting that the movie wasn't a comedy. It was a fucking comedy. That was one problem. Second, the plot was so thin. You took Christoph Waltz and made him a cartoonish fool. They created a villian and took everything about a villian out of him, which is fine if you were making a broad comedy, but for a superhero movie, it doesn't work at all. You're only as good as your villian. And lastly, seth riven is not a leading actor. No one wants to see a movie starring him. He's better in a supporting role. I always thought of him as Dan Aykroyd. He's good in a supporting role, but horrible as the lead.

  • March 14, 2012, 11:44 p.m. CST

    I didn't hate Green Hornet, but thought I would...

    by Bill Clay

    Can't stand Rogen and his stoner shtick, but my teenager dragged me to Green Hornet. I spent the entire previews time explaining Van Williams and the REAL Green Hornet to my kid, expecting the new movie to be crap. I ended up being pleasantly surprised. Not the best movie of the year, and the 3D was unnecessary, but I gave it a Thumbs Up when talking to friends.

  • March 15, 2012, 12:20 a.m. CST

    feralangel: some facts to counter your usual blah

    by mrgray

    Muppets: Production Costs - $45m Worldwide Gross - $158m Green Hornet: Production Costs - $120m Worldwide Gross - $230m Using basic math, we can see that although Green Hornet made about $70m more than The Muppets, it also cost almost 3 times as much to produce. And The Muppets made about 3 times as much money as its budget. In conjunction with common sense, it's easy to see why one of those two films got a sequel greenlight and the other didn't. That's not even factoring in the Rotten Tomatoes critic scores. Incidentally, the predominantly positive reviews and great box office pretty much destroy your months-long tirade against the film when it was first announced. Way to be wrong and out of touch with family film audiences.

  • March 15, 2012, 12:24 a.m. CST

    also, a word on Green Hornet and fanboys

    by mrgray

    Very few people on this site seem to understand how the business of filmmaking is done. I admire the passion, but there are times reading these talkbacks that I just want to shake the collective talkbacker base by their collars and make them take a college course in film producing. Talk shit all you want on Moritz, but remember this: GUYS LIKE MORITZ ARE THE ONES TAKING THE FINANCIAL RISK TO PRODUCE THESE MOVIES, YOU UNGRATEFUL FUCKS!!! Yeah. So next time you want to talk about how bad a movie is, mortgage your house and make your own fucking film.

  • March 15, 2012, 12:40 a.m. CST

    Michel Gondry please do not do that again.

    by txtone04

  • March 15, 2012, 1:25 a.m. CST

    the only thing good about the movie...

    by Joe Damiani

    the song "I hung my head" by Johnny Cash

  • Until then you remain Hollywood fodder that gobble up every source material they convert into basic action comedy as a safe bet for idiots who don't know any better!

  • March 15, 2012, 2:50 a.m. CST

    Green Hornet was well liked? On what fucking planet was that?

    by Cash907

  • March 15, 2012, 4:04 a.m. CST

    Well liked, yeah on AICN

    by CaseyMcCall

    But not many other places. Give us all a break and don't force your clouded opinions on the rest of us. I saw it because you guys where so positive. It was a first class stinker, not one funny moment and the 3D sucked. So no. And no sequel: hurray!

  • March 15, 2012, 5:46 a.m. CST

    No Green Hornet 2 is hardly 'worrisome'

    by PaulSC

    If you're going to wring your hands over Hollywood not bankrolling projects, at least pick an interesting project to worry over.

  • March 15, 2012, 6:59 a.m. CST

    kdoc13, okay I'll grant you that possibility having not seen Moneyball.

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

  • March 15, 2012, 7:06 a.m. CST

    Some of you thought 21 Jump Street was a comedy originally?

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    I mean like really thought that? Not kidding thought that? Okay, here I go dating myself. Way back in the dark ages there were only three major tv networks; ABC, CBS, and NBC. There were a few independent stations and then Fox decided it wanted to create its own network. It started out as only running a few days a week as I recall. One of the original shows was Married With Children. Another was one called Werewolf which wasn't a bad show, but only lasted a season and a half, maybe two. One crap show was The Adventures of Beans Baxter. Yeah, it's as bad as it sounds, but on the plus side it did have Kurtwood Smith. Anyway, if 21 Jump Street wasn't in the orignal lineup it was pretty close. It was about a group, not just a couple of police officers with young faces who would go undercover to fight whatever was going on at the school that week; drugs, gangs, teacher abusing students, etc. It was never a comedy. It was a cop action show for teens.

  • March 15, 2012, 7:15 a.m. CST

    Sure, I believe Seth Rogan could go ten rounds with a kung-fu master.

    by cookylamoo

    Sure I do. Why did Bruce Lee's foes never realize all they had to do was keep getting up and tackling him, or better yet, throw stuff at him?

  • March 15, 2012, 7:49 a.m. CST

    Branding: and why it's the company line now

    by Aquanaut

    i actually thought part one of redlettermedia's review of the jj abrams star trek movie had the best explanation of why established brands (adaptations, sequels, prequels, remakes, reboots, re=imaginings...etc.) are all the rage.. basically that review boiled it down to the increasing amount of entertainment options that we have today...aside from all of the home and mobile options, movies are being churned out at a much more rapid pace.. movies can't rely as much on time or word of mouth to start generating money...and they'll use every trick in the book to get you in the theater (like 3-D).. and as RLM points out- established brands are one of the big tricks...and that as we draw from properties of bygone ages, we're also utilizing titles that- because of the times in which they originated- had much less competition, and are thusly more easily remembered by the masses...that combined with the fondness of those memories and the "good ol' days" with which they are associated (nostalgia) is a powerful thing. RLM states that our abundance of media and entertainment options causes a "blurring effect"...established brands are a way around that because they're instant attention getters..and therefore a safe bet for the perpetually nervous studio exec. inception is a big example of a recent blockbuster done in the old school way- a concept picture with action and a star-lead cast...but even inception had to throw in "from the director of the dark knight"...and it was a pretty big that studios are very hesitant to make, especially when nolan refuses one of their big lures (3-D)..but he's also a director that proved himself able to pull in big on an established brand. so my advice? support the directors that will take their successes from established brands and turn around and make new properties...but we live in a world where even david fincher has to live on established take from that what you will... whatever, just follow your instincts and support good movies...established brand does not necessarily have to equal unoriginal movie.

  • March 15, 2012, 8:17 a.m. CST

    I'm putting together a superhero team.

    by UltraTron

    There's still a slot open for a fat guy who does observational humor. Who's with me?!

  • March 15, 2012, 8:22 a.m. CST


    by Lou Stools

  • I can't even remember this dogshit.

  • March 15, 2012, 8:45 a.m. CST

    The best use of a budget of all time is

    by UltraTron

    Space Battleship Tomato. Cost 15 mil and there's 130 mil of effects on the screen. It's called working teams of poor Indians to death over-seas and getting your effects for free.

  • March 15, 2012, 8:49 a.m. CST


    by BlueHawaiiSurfer

    I'm not usually that guy but glad to hear the erroneous use of 3D finally helped torpedo a film. Enough already with the 3D.

  • March 15, 2012, 9:16 a.m. CST

    I think they spent a lot on the "drive through the office building"

    by cookylamoo

    Which was the only exciting part of the movie.

  • March 15, 2012, 9:18 a.m. CST

    Uh, good?

    by MrShootist

  • Just sit there dead in the center with your head straight up. No leaning over to kiss. No lying on your side on the sofa. No no no. Just sit there with your head perfectly strait and still.

  • March 15, 2012, 9:33 a.m. CST

    Nobody has The Green Hornet in their DVD/Blu-Ray Collection

    by Joe Plumber

    NOBODY! And if they do they're to embarrassed to admit it. As they should be.

  • Also, are you saying nobody has a right to say how bad a movie is unless they produce one first? Maybe that's the problem. Producers don't want to hear feedback on their movies. Sounds like bad business sense to me. I actually commend Moritz on his realization that Green Hornet was an aborted piece of crap of a movie and therefore not worthy of a sequel. Bravo!

  • I could actually see Reynolds instead of Rogen if they still did the comedy route

  • It's got to make a shitload of money or it wasn't worth doing.

  • March 15, 2012, 11:06 a.m. CST

    Besides, we still have the Green Hornet TV show.

    by cookylamoo

    Which was played straight and not bad at all.

  • March 15, 2012, 11:57 a.m. CST

    Mathletes, huh?

    by JakeB

    If the budget is $120 million, then factoring in marketing, etc., the film needs to make at least twice that just to break even. This film didn't, hence no sequel.

  • March 15, 2012, 2:14 p.m. CST

    The GH tv series did not play it straight. It was campy.

    by ZodNotGod

  • March 15, 2012, 2:15 p.m. CST

    GH1 made $250 MILLION DOLLARS?!?!?!?!

    by Mrhazard

    (1) How the hell did that happen? Cant really blame Hollywood for making horrendously stupid movies if people flock and pay good money to see em... (B) AND $250 million isnt enough money to be considered a success?!?!?! How much freekin money did you expect THE GREEN HORNET to make?!?!? I really dont care either way but this story is hilariously hilarious to me!

  • March 15, 2012, 2:17 p.m. CST

    Disregard previous post. :)

    by ZodNotGod

  • March 15, 2012, 3:14 p.m. CST

    Lolllll okay that makes sense...

    by Mrhazard

  • March 15, 2012, 3:54 p.m. CST

    Even the Green Hornet TV show was a flop.

    by Hesiod2k7

    So, I'm not sure why anyone expected this to make any money. The only thing memorable about the TV show was Bruce Lee. And, of course, at the time what Lee was doing was fresh and exciting. Now, it's fucking old hat and cliched. So, the only selling point of the Green Hornet in the first place is now a completely warn out cliche that nobody gives a shit about. I do say this, however. If the Britt Reid part had not been written to be such an insufferable asshole, and was at least likeable, the movie would have been a bigger hit.

  • March 15, 2012, 3:55 p.m. CST

    Is Mortiz counting DVD and Pay per view sales?

    by Hesiod2k7

  • The first one never should have been made. A sequel? Good riddance!

  • March 15, 2012, 7 p.m. CST

    Only good thing was the car

    by blueant

  • March 15, 2012, 7:49 p.m. CST

    Wow, more negativity from Kiddo.

    by Mike

    How shocking.

  • March 15, 2012, 8:46 p.m. CST

    filmmakers waste sooooo much money

    by BBSloth

    most films could come in at half the budget if it weren't for ridiculous spending

  • March 15, 2012, 8:47 p.m. CST

    John Carter sequel to be called...

    by BBSloth

    Get John Carter

  • March 15, 2012, 11:33 p.m. CST

    Let someone else besides Rogen take a swing at it

    by Crimson Dynamo

    Let the Sky Captain guy make a surreal noire trenchcoated pulp hero flick

  • March 15, 2012, 11:50 p.m. CST

    @darth_meh and entgncy

    by mrgray

    My point, which you seem to have missed, is not that producers should be unaccountable for their product. A bad movie is a bad movie. What you shouldn't do, and what WAAAAY too many internet movie fans do, is act as though YOU know any better. You don't. Unless YOU are a movie producer and YOU have insider knowledge of how to make a critically and commercially successful film, ESPECIALLY an adaptation of previously existing material? No? Okay then. Let's leave the tear downs of Moritz and the other money men to people who actually understand the business. And who love it enough to actually spend tons of their own time, effort, and money on it. Internet trolls bitching about how bad movies are but doing not a fucking thing about it are the worst kind of whiners. Rent or buy a prosumer videocam and get cracking, ya big babies.

  • March 16, 2012, 12:14 a.m. CST

    Oh my god this is terrible news!!!!!!

    by Jaka

    Not really.

  • Because all of those people should be fired and never allowed to work again in the movie industry. $250 million for THAT movie is just completely out of control. Terrible, wasteful amount of money. They should have been able to produce at least two 2 1/2 movies with that much money. Possibly even three 90 minute movies.

  • March 16, 2012, 12:59 a.m. CST

    No sequel = good

    by houbou

    I like Seth Rogen. And he plays a great slacker! :) On the plus side, his sidekick Kato (Jay Chou) was a great choice for the role. But, the storyline could have used a bit more.. tweaking.. The core problem is that the Green Hornet is a difficult 'hero' to port into today's world. The origin story wasn't bad, but, the only parts which were cool were the action scene with Chou. There was no chemistry between Rogen and Chou and that I think is where the problem was. Perhaps if someone else had played the role of the Green Hornet, it would have been a better movie. So that there will be no sequel is a good thing.

  • March 21, 2012, 1:03 a.m. CST

    Kidd: what we need more of is sequels!

    by obviously_youre_not_a_golfer

    Is that what you're saying? Fuck that noise.

  • April 6, 2012, 6:03 p.m. CST

    The Kidd has no idea what hes talking about

    by dave

    a basic rule of thumb is that in order for a film to just break even at the box office, it must make twice its production budget. this helps make up for not only the costs of making the film, but the extra costs of advertising and distributing it all over the world. the higher the production budget, the higher the costs of distributing and advertising it all over the world. the average advertising budget for a 120 million dollar film (which is what sony said the budget of hornet was, and studios are notorious for knocking 20-30 million off of the actual production budget when they release the numbers to the public, so it was probably more like 150 million) is 60 million dollars. so hornet needed to make 240 million just to break even at the box office and it made 227 million. You also have to remember that that the studio will only get back half of the domestic gross (the other half going to domestic theaters) and less than half of the foriegn gross (the rest going to overseas exhibitors and distributors). Neil Mortiz is sugar coating it to make the movie sound more scueessful, but this is what hes talking about when he says the movie was made for too much money. It failed, and actually lost money for Sony, and it needed to have a last minute, ticket price padding, 3d conversion just for it to do THAT well. Here's BBC film critic Mark Kermode talking about how a major studio release needs to make twice its production budget just to break even: Don't you find it odd how before this movie came out Sony was saying that a sequel had already been greenlit, and was on the way, and everyone involved talked about how much theyd love to do a sequel, then the movie came out, and all of a sudden everyone involved just had "no interest in returning for a sequel"? Don't listen to liars like Mortiz, this movie was a miserable failure, and thats the only reason a sequel isn't being done.

  • April 6, 2012, 6:11 p.m. CST

    I mean, good grief

    by dave

    Ang Lee's Hulk, Wild Wild West, Van Helsing, and freaking Batman and Robin all did similar numbers to Green Hornet, so surely they must deserve sequels too, right? Rogen will never gaain get his filthy little has-been hands o nthe Green Hornet, and Thank God. Good riddance, Rogen.