"Green Lantern" movie news... (1 Viewer)

[Brandon Conway]

There have been two types of criticisms, in general, that I've read.

The first type concerns me - uneven pacing between Oa/Earth, a bit too silly in tone, etc. give me pause.

The second type is irrelevant to me - complaints about the ring/lantern dynamic, "too many aliens", and other stuff that is either something one accepts as part of the framework of the universe or doesn't. I already do, so like I said, irrelevant.

I still plan on seeing it this weekend. I'm expecting a live action version of a fantastical comic story. GL doesn't have the gravitas of a Batman, and I'm glad they haven't tried to make it have one. For all the complaints about Snyder/Nolan maybe making Superman "too dark", GL is getting complaints about being "too light". Light is the right take on GL. I'm just hoping the "too" isn't present.

 

[Jose Martinez]

Hmmmm. With all the mediocre to good reviews (I don't think there are any reviews calling it great or above), maybe I should just wait the eventual reboot.

 

[Patrick Sun]

The space/Oa stuff was fun (in 3D), the earth-side stuff was stiff and uninvolving (flat in 3D). I think kids will enjoy the spectacle and comic-book sensibilities. Chemistry between Reynolds and Lively was so-so. The script is haphazardly plot-driven with wide jumps from scene to scene without the requisite connective tissue to tamp down the jarring jumps between the earth-side scenes and the space-faring scenes. But it was enjoyable to see the GL's on Oa and in action at times.

I give it 2.5 stars, or a grade of C+.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

Originally Posted by Patrick Sun
TChemistry between Reynolds and Lively was so-so. The script is haphazardly plot-driven with wide jumps from scene to scene without the requisite connective tissue to tamp down the jarring jumps between the earth-side scenes and the space-faring scenes. But it was enjoyable to see the GL's on Oa and in action at times.

This exactly. The best way to describe it was that it was written by a GL fan because the GL Corp parts were perfect but the story had no flow, did not have a beginning, middle, and end and seemed to be written by an amateur. Edit to be clearer- In fact I feel like the movie just ended in the middle of a much larger story because it was like "What? The movie is over? There are still some things that haven't been covered for an origin movie". Also way too much saying how powerful Parallax was without showing any of it and the final fight scene was so short the only conclusion I come to is every other GL Corp member must really suck compared to humans. There are only about 100 minutes of movie time (sans credits) so there should never be anything on screen that isn't important. Instead we are treated to scene after scene in the beginning with characters that seem like they would be pretty important to Hal Jordan and his motivations that are never to be seen or discussed again.

The movie was also scored by a one of those people who rework movies or music on YouTube. The movie constantly used the Superman riff and it was "Am I watching GL or Superman?" Soundtrack was either a direct ripoff or very derivative of other works.

I really want this movie to do well so they could actually make a really good one the next time. The movie is okay but way below what it could and should have been. It has the overall feel of Iron Man where the hero part is pretty much only at the end for a short time but it wasn't nearly as well written. I mean the one thing fans usually worry about, getting the character, powers, and feel/tone correct, the movie had in spades. However the actual writing of a simple story structure taught in basic writing 101 was a total fail.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Yeah, I'm going to pass on this comic book adaptation.







Crawdaddy

 

[Lord Dalek]

Don't spend the money period.

Don't even rent it.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Ultimately the film is OK. I think it never hits any real highs, but never delves into bad lows.

6/10.

In the end what it needed was the focus of a filmmaker with a specific vision; it just hits too many familiar beats ever so timidly, and it's got a very "produced" feel.

Mildly recommended.

 

[Jacinto]

Background: Comics fan since early childhood. Worked off and on in the comics/fantasy field for the last 18 years. Alex Ross's Hal Jordan poster hangs over my desk. DC Direct's full scale GL Power Battery sits on my bookshelf. A painting I did of Hal as GL is on my studio wall (among other art).

I should be the type to skewer the GL film for its flaws, but I can't -- I just enjoyed it too much. The scope of Green Lantern's origin is massive, with introductions to Abin Sur, Oa, the Guardians, Sinestro, the Corps as a whole, Hal, Carol, Thomas, and that's not even getting to a necessary villain yet. While I would have loved some follow-up scenes with Hal's family, I'm just happy they made it into the movie at all. Hal and Carol's chemistry was fine, no worse than Thor/Dr. Foster, Bruce Wayne/Rachel Dawes (from either film), and certainly superior to Superman/Lois (from Superman Returns), and I absolutely loved the anti-superhero-cliche scene between the two of them. I liked GL every bit as much as Thor (maybe even a little bit more), and the films are quite comparable in terms of having to juggle two completely different worlds and all of the characters from each. I will agree that the major weaknesses of the film come from clumsy handling of some scenes/flow on Earth, but there was honestly nothing so bad as yank me out of the story as a whole. One of the two battles with Parallax needed to be longer, either when the other Lantern's take him on, or else Hal's defeat of him needs to be MUCH more difficult. Overall, my biggest gripes with the movie are the score, and Hal's mask -- it just always looked a little funny on his face.

For summer super-hero films this year, I rank it below X-Men First Class, and ever-so slightly above Thor. A fun and worthwhile introduction to a great character; I'd give it a solid B.

 

[JonZ]

Too bad nthis film is getting ripped into when some are saying its not any worse than Thor. I really liked the full trailer when it was released.

Maybe superhero burnout has begun? I thought James Bs review of X-Men First Class was a bit harsh.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

Originally Posted by Jacinto
Background: Comics fan since early childhood. Worked off and on in the comics/fantasy field for the last 18 years. Alex Ross's Hal Jordan poster hangs over my desk. DC Direct's full scale GL Power Battery sits on my bookshelf. A painting I did of Hal as GL is on my studio wall (among other art).

I should be the type to skewer the GL film for its flaws, but I can't -- I just enjoyed it too much. The scope of Green Lantern's origin is massive, with introductions to Abin Sur, Oa, the Guardians, Sinestro, the Corps as a whole, Hal, Carol, Thomas, and that's not even getting to a necessary villain yet. ds to be MUCH more difficult. Overall, my biggest gripes with the movie are the score, and Hal's mask -- it just always looked a little funny on his face.

For summer super-hero films this year, I rank it below X-Men First Class, and ever-so slightly above Thor. A fun and worthwhile introduction to a great character; I'd give it a solid B.

Actually you are exactly the opposite of who would skewer the film because the one thing the film got right was the GL universe. So if you wanted to see a perfect live-action replica of the GL universe, you got exactly what you wanted on the screen. It is the casual fan or newbie to GL that is going to be disappointed because the story just didn't hold up compared to others like Thor. Thor had flaws but I thought it was the better movie. Every origin movie has to hit certain beats and they all do. What makes the movie poor, okay, good, or great is how well those beats are connected and executed in a believable fashion. Great ones seem perfectly natural so those beats don't stand out. Poor ones make those beats seem like a checklist. I thought GL was okay and Thor was good on that part.

Now I was a GL fan growing up and he was my favorite superhero so I do appreciate how well the movie got that part right and I am not down on the movie because "GL is a stupid superhero" or "I wish they had done a movie about my favorite superhero instead of this junk." This is one case where I hope the masses come through with dollars so we can get another one that has a story worthy of the effort put into creating the GL universe.

 

[Lord Dalek]

See I don't know how you people manage to find entertainment in this. It's just garbage. The plot is boring and loaded with holes (Ugh big head Hammond). The love story is terrible and badly acted. Several of those goofy moments are pretty groan inducing (The Superman to Hot Wheels ripoff for one). And even the best parts (the stuff on Oa) doesn't work because when you break it down, its just people standing around in a room and talking, and furthermore there is not enough of it because soon you're back to Hal and his daddy issue whining.

I'd love to see Plinkett to do a review of this. Its got all the cons of the Star Wars prequels and manages to be even stiffer.

 

[Don Solosan]

"It is the casual fan or newbie to GL that is going to be disappointed because the story just didn't hold up compared to others like Thor."

Except I'm a casual fan/newbie to the GL world, and I thought the movie was good as light entertainment (like you, I liked Thor a bit better). The story was fine, if a bit simple. I expect that from the PG, kid-friendly model the studios are using.

 

[Sam Favate]

Not good. So much wrong with this movie. Let's start with the script - very cliched. The dialogue was so tired, especially early in the film, that it felt lifted from other movies; the point being that we've heard the same exchanges over and over. The characters in the movie are not similar to the source material. Hal Jordan is not a wise-cracking, overgrown frat boy, but that's what he was in the movie. His character showed no humility or sense of purpose. None of Sinestro's inherent qualities are present, so at the end, when he takes the yellow ring, it's out of character. Ryan Reynolds is miscast. He's too young and, frankly, too thin to pull off GL. Someone like Nathan Fillion or Jon Hamm would have been better. The effects - wow, complete overkill. The CG costume is the worst thing I think I have ever seen. The mask never looked real, or looked right. There's so many quick movements in the effects that we often can't see what's going on. One reason the visuals in a film like Star Wars were so good is that they moved slow enough for the human eye to process and understand what was happening, and gave a level of believability that lightning-fast CG effects don't. The Guardians looked almost right, but their incredibly long robes and skyscraper thrones were ridiculous -- the arena is outside, how can the Lanterns on the floor and the Guardians up high hear one another?

I give it credit for Peter Saarsgard and Blake Lively, both of whom made me believe in the movie. Some of the visuals of the starscapes were pretty. Not much else I can say about it that was positive. Doesn't compare to X-Men First Class, which I believe will be one of the best films of the year; nor does it compare to Thor, which was genuinely entertaining.

Comic book movies could learn several things from X-Men. 1) Always respect the source material, in tone, if not in substance. 2) Period pieces are a pretty good idea. No character says "Space Age" more than Green Lantern, and yet he's set in the unidentifiable present.

Being generous, I'd give it 2 1/2 stars, out of four; mostly for looking pretty.

 

[Don Solosan]

"Hal Jordan is not a wise-cracking, overgrown frat boy, but that's what he was in the movie."

This is a common complaint with adaptations -- most recently with Green Hornet. People expect the fully-developed hero they've grown accustomed to in comics/TV shows/whatever to be there in the movie before he/she's become that character. But it's an origin story, so they can't be perfect right off the bat.

In a movie, you have to show the character grow. So he/she starts out with some mild flaws, nothing that will make the audience totally hate the character though, and through the course of the film you smooth out those flaws. The character is a better person as a result of their adventure.

The problem is if you have a series, but run out of ways for the character to grow. Most people seem to hate Spider-Man 3 because of the direction they went with Peter Parker's character. Hal Jordan seemed to be a pretty good replica of the aviators I knew when I was in the Navy.

 

[Jacinto]

Originally Posted by Sam Favate
Hal Jordan is not a wise-cracking, overgrown frat boy, but that's what he was in the movie.

Sam, you are completely wrong about that. When Silver-Age Green Lantern was launched, Hal was very much a wise-cracking hero, similar to Spider-Man. It wasn't really until the 70's when Denny O'Neal and Neil Adams got a hold of him that the overall tone of the character changed into a more serious, mature vibe. Given that, I had no issues at all with his depiction in the film. I saw the film with 3 hardcore fans and our wives, and 5 of the 6 of were well pleased with the entertainment value of the film, and even the odd wife out still enjoyed it overall.

Joel, did you miss the part where Hal's friend gives him crap over how stupid the Hot Wheels save was? That was the whole point; Hal's new at this, and whatever pops into his head is what the ring will do. I too thought that action sequence was ridiculous, but the following scene did a good job of humbling Hal over it, and showing that he still had an awful lot to learn about how to use his powers.

 

[Bryan^H]

Originally Posted by Lord Dalek
See I don't know how you people manage to find entertainment in this. It's just garbage. The plot is boring and loaded with holes (Ugh big head Hammond). The love story is terrible and badly acted. Several of those goofy moments are pretty groan inducing (The Superman to Hot Wheels ripoff for one). And even the best parts (the stuff on Oa) doesn't work because when you break it down, its just people standing around in a room and talking, and furthermore there is not enough of it because soon you're back to Hal and his daddy issue whining.

I'd love to see Plinkett to do a review of this. Its got all the cons of the Star Wars prequels and manages to be even stiffer.

Yes. I was speechless after seeing this. One of the most complex, intriguing comic book heroes ever created handled by screenwriters who obviously didn't have even a slight grasp of how to tackle this. Complete waste of time. DC/WB should be ashamed.

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

I actually had a fun time in this movie. Not the greatest screenplay but found it to be entertaining and much better than other comic book movies like Electra, Daredevil, Catwoman or Ghost Rider. More satisfying than Avatar or the Star Wars Prequels. I hope they make enough money to make another and have more time to work on the script.

 

[Chad R]

Originally Posted by Jacinto

Joel, did you miss the part where Hal's friend gives him crap over how stupid the Hot Wheels save was? That was the whole point; Hal's new at this, and whatever pops into his head is what the ring will do. I too thought that action sequence was ridiculous, but the following scene did a good job of humbling Hal over it, and showing that he still had an awful lot to learn about how to use his powers.

I actually liked that save. It just felt very Green Lantern to me.

I guess this movie affected me the same way "Superman Returns" did. There's a grown-up, intellectual side that knew there were elements not working. They really handled Hector Hammond wrong, and the romance was stiff. I've never seen Blake Lively act before and based on this I wouldn't allow her to ever again. And although I'm already aware of the difference between the colors of will, fear, etc. that makes up the different color lanterns, this movie didn't sell it very well. But maybe it's because I'm a fan I just got a smile on my face when Hal constructed the hot wheels track, much like I smiled ear to ear when Superman saved the plane in SR. So the part of me that was just looking to have fun with the Green Lantern universe enjoyed himself pretty well. I really feel it was only one draft away from being a great comic book movie. It's certainly not the train wreck all of the critics made it out to be.

 

[TravisR]

I've never seen Blake Lively act before and based on this I wouldn't allow her to ever again.

She's very good in The Town. She works with better actors and a better script there though.

It's certainly not the train wreck all of the critics made it out to be.
 

Yeah, it's hardly great but I thought it was on par with most summer blockbusters. With movies like Catwoman, Elektra, Ghost Rider, Jonah Hex or any of The Punishers, it's not even amongst the worst comic book movies.

 

[Jose Martinez]

Um, I actually liked it. Not the disaster most people are saying. Quite entertaining in fact. True, the supporting characters needed more screen time but I think there were just too many of them. Blake Lively actually looked great with darker hair. She could be my wingman anytime!