The Official Green Lantern Review Thread - Part 1

[jmc]

There's enough people doing that already.

 

[Episode29]

The first hour has some effective stuff, but the second feels really rushed and often incoherent. I'm guessing there was some serious scissor-wielding in the editing room. None of the character dynamics make any sense. The movie just rushes from underwhelming scene to undertwhelming scene willy nilly.

Also, Hector Hammond, who is the only interesting/energetic character in the film - and most entertainingly acted by a longshot - is badly, badly wasted.

And while I believe a man fighting a giant CG cloud can probably be made cool on-screen, Green Lantern, like FF2, does not accomplish the task.

It's not a trainwreck ala Wolverine or Jonah Hex, but it's not very good either.

 

[The Morningstar]

haha yea, i'm not criticising it. I'm just reading reviews, where pretty much every else is criticising it.

And things like terrible dialogue, uninteresting lead character and it being too cheesy are doubts i've talked about before. The critics are just confirming these doubts.

I said a couple of weeks ago that the writers weren't impressive. They're TV show writers who did stuff like Dawson's Creek.

 

[webhead921]

I'd confirm the cheese and dialogue, but I was pleasantly surprised by Reynolds as Hal. Hector Hammond was very entertaining, and Mark Strong nailed Sinestro. They did a great job with the constructs as well (that was one big worry I had going in). The romance subplot wasn't good, but it wasn't any worse than the one in Thor

 

[Episode29]

Yeah, Strong is fine as Sinestro, but doesn't have anything interesting to do. The post-credit teaser would be much more exciting if there at least an iotta of attention paid to giving him a firm personality that the audience could sympathize with. But at least he's given more than the other Corps members. They just show up for a scene, deliver some exposition, and then leave.

Reynolds isn't offensive, but he's just way too laid back. No fire or intensity. His Hal Jordan is Tony Stark on downers. Most of his character development scenes consist of him somberly staring out at the horizon.

 

[RoughNTumble]

damn

I can't believe they pushed the corps to the sidelines

the corps are by far the most interesting part of green lantern

it should've been 15-20% of the movie spent on earth, the rest in deep space, exploring strange things, and developing all the characters we really care about

hammond wasn't even necessary.

and for christ's sake! 2 and a half hours! that's the runtime of a space opera! 1hr45min is the run time of an 'iron man'! (which is what it seems they wanted to make)

 

[obin_gam]

damn

I can't believe they pushed the corps to the sidelines

the corps are by far the most interesting part of green lantern

it should've been 15-20% of the movie spent on earth, the rest in deep space, exploring strange things, and developing all the characters we really care about

hammond wasn't even necessary.

and for christ's sake! 2 and a half hours! that's the runtime of a space opera! 1hr45min is the run time of an 'iron man'! (which is what it seems they wanted to make)

I agree.

BUT.

Imagine how much having the entire film in space with the corps would have cost. No studio in their right mind would have done that, not for a origin-story and a first film in a franchise anyways.

With practical effects, yes, they could have done that, but not like this movie have been made.

Also: I just read the reviews on RT. Damn I was hoping for atleast a 7/10 average

 

[Ipodman]

I just watched it... oh man, it sucks!

 

[SatEL]

I just watched it... oh man, it sucks!

Elaborate my good man.

 

[Ipodman]

Elaborate my good man.

The origin story is too rushed, the villain is not interesting at all, the story is too generic, the action scenes have bad editing, you can't see anything that's going on, ryan reynolds is totally miscast, gossip girl is not a good actress here, Oa scenes are minimal, kilowog and tomar re are non-existent, climax is convoluted confusing and cheesy

 

[Silver Surfer]

The origin story is too rushed, the villain is not interesting at all, the story is too generic, the action scenes have bad editing, you can't see anything that's going on, ryan reynolds is totally miscast, gossip girl is not a good actress here, Oa scenes are minimal, kilowog and tomar re are non-existent, climax is convoluted confusing and cheesy

Yeesh.... Over/Under would you say it was better than something like Ghost Rider or worse?

 

[Ipodman]

Yeesh.... Over/Under would you say it was better than something like Ghost Rider or worse?

To me, it's worst than Ghost Rider and Jonah Hex and the Fantastic Fours. It's better than Superman Returns, I didn't like Superman Returns at all, at least I wasn't bored in Green Lantern.

 

[flickchick85]

Well this is kinda depressing. I really wanted to be wrong about this movie, but honestly, who didn't, at least on some level, see this coming the moment they started casting this thing with Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively (with Justin Timberlake a runner-up for Hal)? I certainly don't remember the general fanbase being particularly thrilled about that when it happened, yet it seems like we all talked ourselves into giving them the benefit of the doubt because hope springs eternal for the fanboy/fangirl community. Well, we can keep making excuses all day about how critics just don't get the Green Lantern mythology or are going through "superhero fatigue" but the truth is, imo, the evidence was there from the very early stages: that this was a lazy, "safe" effort, which would therefore produce a subpar film.

That said, I'm still gonna see the movie first chance I get next week before dismissing it completely. Who knows, maybe these low expectations will help me to enjoy it. I just hope this doesn't kill the chances for other non-Bats/Supes DC properties to make their debut.

 

[Ultimatehero]

This is why I'm not that worried. The trailers, scenes, etc. have entertained me. Superman Returns is higher up on my list.

What seemed to be the crowd reaction of others in the audience?

 

[Ponyboy]

the origin story is too rushed, the villain is not interesting at all, the story is too generic, the action scenes have bad editing, you can't see anything that's going on, ryan reynolds is totally miscast, gossip girl is not a good actress here, oa scenes are minimal, kilowog and tomar re are non-existent, climax is convoluted confusing and cheesy

ouch.

 

[Ipodman]

I don't know if it's a spoiler, but when [blackout]the guardians[/blackout] appeared, people were laughing for the wrong reasons... I felt bad for the filmmakers, I knew this was going to be a problem.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Another fan review:

I saw the movie tonight, and am somewhat surprised by the almost universally negative reviews on IGN & Rotten Tomatoes. Comparisons to Daredevil & X-Men: The Last Stand are ludicrous. GL is far better than those two films......That said, I haven't liked any of the X-Men films, and haven't seen the new one.

I thought Thor was an OK movie. Not bad, but not great. Regardless, Green Lantern was better. IMO, the best comic bookmovies are Spider-Man 1, the two Batman films by Nolan, Hulk (Edward Norton), and Iron Man 1. GL isn't as good as those films, but is above & beyond duds like Daredevil, Superman Returns, the X-Men films, etc....I'd say it's an upper mid-level quality film.

I was apprehensive about watching GL, as I thought all the trailers/commercials for the GL movie were lame......I was pleasantly surprised to find the film wasn't bad.

The opening action sequence with Abin Sur was impressive......Overall, I didn't find a problem with the cgi in this movie. I thought it was well done.

My main problem was the castings of Reynolds & Lively. At first I couldn't get past it, to the point that I found it hard to get through some of the beginning Hal/Carol scenes, but by the middle of the movie I was fine with it and they didn't bother me anymore. Not sure if I got used to them, or if they started to gel more into their roles as the film went on.

Mark Strong was excellent as Sinestro. Sarsgaard wasn't bad as Hector Hammond. Morrison was good as Abin Sur, for whatever little screen-time he had.......Angela Bassett was interesting as Amanda Waller. At first I forgot it was Bassett playing the role, until they showed flashback scenes from when she was younger.....I found Tim Robbins to be a little campy in the film. I couldn't take him too seriously.

From what I noticed, everyone in the crowd seemed to like the movie. I didn't notice anyone looking or sounding disappointed. That said, there were a large number of people with GL t-shirts. I have to wonder whether people unaware of the GL mythos will be receptive to the film. It might seem too hokey for them, with the look of some of the aliens and such.

Only one I could find on Comic Book Resources

Some say the audience liked it, others say their audience didn't. Only heard one response from someone who didn't like it concerning the audience though. Some rank it higher. Some rank it lower. Unsure of any other comic sites other than that one.

 

[The Sage]

I just don't understand the fanboy mindset.

Why? Hard to believe that maybe he liked it despite the majority's opinion? People do have different opinions.

 

[Metropolis_Man]

This is why I'm not that worried. The trailers, scenes, etc. have entertained me. Superman Returns is higher up on my list.

What seemed to be the crowd reaction of others in the audience?

As I was walking out there were nothing but positive things being said from the general audience. Overheard a lot people saying they really enjoyed it and that it was a good movie. There is a lot of negativity so far but I did a pretty upbeat review that you can find in the link in my signature. You can find another positive review from an unbiased opinion here as well http://bit.ly/lAoZ9g

 

[jmc]

I just listened to a movie review where all three hosts disliked the film for completely different reasons. They even said some kid asked his dad 'does it finish soon'.

 

[J.Howlett]

Has anyone read David Poland's review of Lantern? On rottentomatoes.com, it's listed as fresh but the site, I guess, is down.

Can anyone post the review if they can get it? I quite curious about his review.

 

[Ultimatehero]

I just listened to a movie review where all three hosts disliked the film for completely different reasons. They even said some kid asked his dad 'does it finish soon'.

And there were reports of yet another kid, think I heard this on IMDB, who absolutely loved the film and was so interested in Hector Hammond's character that he kept asking his parents curious questions as to if what he was seeing was really real or possible.

The different reasons part? That's the aspect that confuses me and seems to be in every negative review. For example: some say Ryan Reynolds is the saving grace of the film, others say his performance was horrible. Some say Saarsgard is phenomenal and steals the show, others say his performance is cringe worthy. Some say the effects were bland, others say they were the heart of the film. And for the sake of simplifying things, just look at it as - those rival statements come from negative reviews... all these reports really have me , I've never heard this many conflicting reports. It's like every theater was given an entirely different film. What exactly is going on? There's no detailed general consensus in any review. Even the negative reviews list pros that other reviews have as negative, then vice-versa. How can Saarsgard be cringe worthy, yet steal the show? How can Reynolds be the saving grace, yet have a horrible performance? It's just, I'm unable to reach any detailed conclusion from any review basically.

Hangover 2, it was easy for example, every critic and audience member who didn't like it had the exact same reasons and found the exact same pros in it. Here? A negative element can be a positive element and a positive element can be a negative element in just negative reviews... in the words of Jim Stark "you're tearing me apart!"

 

[spanish39]

How was the 3D at Arclight? Seeing it there tomorrow actually, small world.

---------

Also hearing positives from fans and non-critics to me is the bigger indicator, all the reviews yesterday were saying it was a fun ride. Don't think much changed from yesterday to today.

ALSO for those who saw it, with the above in mind, what was the crowd's reaction and aura of the room upon leaving?

I feel people enjoyed it, there were only like 3 instances were you could here very minor snickering...but like I said the film doesn't take itself seriously so it was in tone with everything. I liked it, but I like GL so I am biased, lol. It's not deep in character, and it has it's flaws like most films, but there ain't no jazz dancing scene (Spidey) and GL doesn't stalk his family (Supes) and the CGI and fighting is decent. It's miles ahead of anything FOX or SONY has put out with Marvel, but it ain't The Dark Knight. You'll enjoy it as an escape.

The 3D was good. We weren't in the dome room, don't know if they have 3D in there yet or not actually. The glasses (goggles rather) they let us wear were ballz! I kept mine, screw them!

 

[spanish39]

"What did they expect from a fantasy comic book film set in space"

Why do people always troy this kinda excuse out? So, because it's a fantasy comic book film is space, it gets a free pass even if it's a steaming pile?

I'm not one to let critics decide whether i'll watch a movie. But this is pretty much universally panned. If the reviews were mixed then i'd still see it. But with reviews like this it makes me not want to waste my money.

It's why films such as Thor and Green Lantern were never made in the first place, cause they can come off as hokey (CGI was a factor too). You're never going to get a superhero film that is 100% serious when in space. That's why Nova will never get a film, cause it's hard to take it seriously. Even Star Wars was hokey at times, legendary, but it had light hokey moments. That said, the film wasn't garbage like the critics say. A lot of those morons get paid to say things in favor of studios and companies, etc...They are also critiquing it as if it was going to be Oscar worthy or something. They don't get it. We go to films to get away and have fun, this film accomplishes that.

 

[spanish39]

Basically if you are going in expecting the most Oscar worthy moments of your life ,or even if you are a diehard fan who is gonna be nit picky or say "that would never happen!", then you will be disappointed.

If you're going in expecting to be entertained and see aliens beat on each other with cool CGI and easy jokes that still make you smile and laugh, then you will be satisfied.

You won't piss your cash away as you did with Daredevil, Ghost Rider, ANY X-Men/Wolverine films, Fantastic Four 1 & 2, Ang Lee's Hulk, Blade 3, or Spiderman 3...cause IMHO those are all worse.