Does anyone think that Green Lantern is going to end up getting slammed by critics?

[kedrell]

Well I'd put a film that aims lower and manages to hit it's target over a film that aims higher and misses. The end result is what I judge: Did it hit it's target? I good burger is better than lousy filet mignon.

 

[The Morningstar]

Thor hasn't gotten ratings from any top critics yet. I think they just had the U.S. Premiere just recently. Let's see what the score looks like after the top critics do their review.

It has had plenty of reviews from "top critics". 11 out of the 12 top critics gave it a positive review.

And i don't get this mentality that Thor played it safe... at all. The entire concept alone is more "out there" than pretty much any other superhero movie thus far. I mean, it's about extradimensional beings who wear weird sci fi/medievil armour that were once worshipped as Gods.

 

[Chewy]

And the leads are two up-and-coming unknowns as opposed to Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively. But I guess different people define "safe" differently.

Although I do understand what jmc is saying, but if Thor had a story more "out there" than it already does I guarantee it would have out-and-out bombed.

 

[The Riddler]

It has had plenty of reviews from "top critics". 11 out of the 12 top critics gave it a positive review.

And i don't get this mentality that Thor played it safe... at all. The entire concept alone is more "out there" than pretty much any other superhero movie thus far. I mean, it's about extradimensional beings who wear weird sci fi/medievil armour that were once worshipped as Gods.

you're simply describing the story/characters associated with the film; nothing within the film is unique.

set pieces, action sequences, and even the plot aren't "new".

 

[The Sage]

I don't think GL playing it safe in the first film is a bad thing. The goal right now is just to get him established. In the sequel, they can take some risks if they choose to.

 

[dnno1]

It has had plenty of reviews from "top critics". 11 out of the 12 top critics gave it a positive review.

And i don't get this mentality that Thor played it safe... at all. The entire concept alone is more "out there" than pretty much any other superhero movie thus far. I mean, it's about extradimensional beings who wear weird sci fi/medievil armour that were once worshipped as Gods.

If you type in "Thor" in the search engine over at RT then click on the "Top Critics" link above the 92% tomatometer you will see that it says "no score yet...". That's because there have only been 4 top critics thay have reviewed the film (David Germain, Megan Lehman, Richard Roper, and Richard Kuipers). Surprisingly, the website Metacritic gives "Thor" an overall rating of 59 out of 100 based on 5 critics.

 

[The Sage]

Alright guys, let's try to curve this discussion back to GL. If you guys want to debate the percentage of positive reviews for Thor, do it in the Thor thread.

 

[dnno1]

I just want to say that we shouldn't be basing the success or failure of a film based on critics reviews. Showtime has already stated that we shouldn't and I don't know why people keep coming back to that and comparing GL to Thor. It's almost like this thread was designed to do just that. I really think the early scores by RT are over rated and if you are going to use that as a gage, you might want to wait until some more remarkable and more credible critics give their reviews.

 

[Showtime]

Rotten Tomatoes only approaches even close to be a reliable barometer once all the critics have chimed in and a large number of RT members have had a chance. Critics could crush the film and it could still make good bank and a sequel. Critics aren't the be all and end all for any movie. I don't base my movie going experience on what critics think of a film. I am the one who is going to be viewing the movie, and only my opinion matters to me. I do find the critics insight into a movie interesting, but it should have no bearing whether you see or don't see, enjoy or don't enjoy a film.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

I just want to say that we shouldn't be basing the success or failure of a film based on critics reviews. Showtime has already stated that we shouldn't and I don't know why people keep coming back to that and comparing GL to Thor. It's almost like this thread was designed to do just that. I really think the early scores by RT are over rated and if you are going to use that as a gage, you might want to wait until some more remarkable and more credible critics give their reviews.

Dude. I didn't design this thread just to say that if the movie gets slammed by critics that it is indeed true that it sucks, if you think that I designed this thread for that reason then you are totally mistaken, the only reason that I don't want the movie to get slammed by the critics in general is so I don't have to hear foolish crap from a bunch of them left, right, and center. I have never used the critics' movie reviews to determine what movies I will see and what movies I won't see. I never have and I never will. If there is one thing that I loathe, it's being forced to defend certain movies over and over and over, and providing explanations.

 

[Metropolis_Man]

I don't think it should be judged on critic reviews either. There are some people I have noticed that seem to want this movie to fail. Mentioning that putting out all the alien Green Lanterns on the character posters and promotional material isn't helping it out with the general public. I honestly don't see what the problem with that is. If I weren't a Lantern fan and I saw all of the promotional stuff, my curiosity would be very high for what's going on. I just get the vibe that a select few want this film to flop at the box office, which is a bit pathetic.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

I don't think it should be judged on critic reviews either. There are some people I have noticed that seem to want this movie to fail. Mentioning that putting out all the alien Green Lanterns on the character posters and promotional material isn't helping it out with the general public. I honestly don't see what the problem with that is. If I weren't a Lantern fan and I saw all of the promotional stuff, my curiosity would be very high for what's going on. I just get the vibe that a select few want this film to flop at the box office, which is a bit pathetic.

I hope that you're not trying to say that I am a part of that equation.

 

[Metropolis_Man]

I hope that you're not trying to say that I am a part of that equation.

No not at all. It's not directed to anyone here at the forums actually. Just a website I frequent. Every time there is some Lantern news to be found the site always seems to have something negative to say about it.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

Oh.

 

[dnno1]

Dude. I didn't design this thread just to say that if the movie gets slammed by critics that it is indeed true that it sucks, if you think that I designed this thread for that reason then you are totally mistaken, the only reason that I don't want the movie to get slammed by the critics in general is so I don't have to hear foolish crap from a bunch of them left, right, and center. I have never used the critics' movie reviews to determine what movies I will see and what movies I won't see. I never have and I never will. If there is one thing that I loathe, it's being forced to defend certain movies over and over and over, and providing explanations.

That's why I said it is almost like that. BTW if you don't want the movie to get slammed by the critics then why did you make a thread like this in the first place? The first negative review will be posted right here.

 

[The Morningstar]

And the leads are two up-and-coming unknowns as opposed to Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively. But I guess different people define "safe" differently.

Although I do understand what jmc is saying, but if Thor had a story more "out there" than it already does I guarantee it would have out-and-out bombed.

Exactly, well said.

Reynolds and Lively have in built fanbases. Hemsworth and Hiddleston? Ehhh not really.

It's glaringly obvious why Lively got cast in the role, despite what the studio bigwigs say.

you're simply describing the story/characters associated with the film; nothing within the film is unique.

set pieces, action sequences, and even the plot aren't "new".

The entire concept and "dressing" if you will, makes it "out there" and unsafe. I mean, did you see Odin's armour? And the story? It's never been done in this genre before. Unless i'm missing the movie about sibling rivalries and arguments with dads on a godly scale?

What is gonna be unique about Green Lantern? It has formulaic origin movie written all over it. Except it has space travel and aliens.

Fact is, both concepts of Green Lantern and Thor are too far "out there" for them to be anything but forumalic origin stories. Neither film could really push the envelope, because they are big enough risks as it is.

 

[The Sage]

I just want to say that we shouldn't be basing the success or failure of a film based on critics reviews. Showtime has already stated that we shouldn't and I don't know why people keep coming back to that and comparing GL to Thor. It's almost like this thread was designed to do just that. I really think the early scores by RT are over rated and if you are going to use that as a gage, you might want to wait until some more remarkable and more credible critics give their reviews.

It's starting to feel that way to me a little bit as well. I hope it doesn't keep going in that route, or this thread might have to get closed...

 

[jmc]

And the leads are two up-and-coming unknowns as opposed to Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively. But I guess different people define "safe" differently.

Although I do understand what jmc is saying, but if Thor had a story more ''out there'' than it already does I guarantee it would have out-and-out bombed.

I don't think the story necessarily needed to be more out there, I just think they needed to be more confident with it, it needed more oomph for lack of better word. I got the feeling they were over cautious, the result for the most part is good, but a bit too vanilla in flavour.

I don't think it should be judged on critic reviews either. There are some people I have noticed that seem to want this movie to fail. Mentioning that putting out all the alien Green Lanterns on the character posters and promotional material isn't helping it out with the general public. I honestly don't see what the problem with that is. If I weren't a Lantern fan and I saw all of the promotional stuff, my curiosity would be very high for what's going on. I just get the vibe that a select few want this film to flop at the box office, which is a bit pathetic.

I have noticed an increasing amount of negative articles targeting GL specifically, I have no idea why there's a bigger agenda against this superhero film compared to any other. Maybe it's the concept, the first trailer, or that Reynolds and Lively are in it, or just shear ignorance from some who did their background research on the character in wikipedia and made up their mind that they don't like it ahead of time, who knows, some journos just don't want to see this film do well. Overall though the proof has to be in the pudding in order to make them eat their words.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

That's why I said it is almost like that. BTW if you don't want the movie to get slammed by the critics then why did you make a thread like this in the first place? The first negative review will be posted right here.

Look, I made this thread so I could--you know? I wanted to know if anyone had a bad feeling about GL's reception, I have said it once, and I will say it again. One out of the four comic book movies this year is bound to fail somehow, in the past, critics have given a pass to movies that have had the same flaws that were in a movie that they slammed. And as usual, they maintain their very 'picky' and "holier than thou" stance at times. Since when has it become wrong to ask people here what their opinion is on something?

I think that you read into what I said far too much. And no, I didn't design this 'thread' so people could come in here and compare Green Lantern to Thor, not. One. Bit. I didn't condone it and I am not about to condone it either as well. Perhaps The Sage should give people a warning in this thread, unless he wouldn't mind it eventually coming to a complete halt. I can't believe that you think that I have zero confidence in Green Lantern, heck, I also never said anything like "Oh the Green Lantern movie is definitely going to fail in every imaginable way possible". If movie critics never poo pooed on a movie for being bad, then I wouldn't have to kind of worry about the Green Lantern's reception at all.

Enough said on my behalf.

-Saad

 

[S.A.A.D.]

Anyways I think that some people are attacking the movie in articles because of the first trailer and because of their ignorance pertaining to the Green Lantern mythology, but I would have to say that I have this feeling that it has more to do with the bad taste of the first trailer that is still left in their mouths. And or maybe a number of them are only and secretly Marvel fans, it would make sense if they are.

 

[Chewy]

Well, now that Warner Brothers owns Rotten Tomatoes...

 

[S.A.A.D.]

For a while, I thought that it was old news until I found out. Oops.

 

[The Bruce]

Article that predicts, that Green lantern "is destined to flop", imo badly written:

http://www.benzinga.com/analyst-ratings/11/05/1053823/the-green-lantern-destined-to-flop-twx

I stopped at comic nobody cares about. Isn't green lantern one of the best selling comic book series of the past 6 years?

 

[Metropolis_Man]

I stopped at comic nobody cares about. Isn't green lantern one of the best selling comic book series of the past 6 years?

You are absolutely correct. It has been one of DC's top selling comic's for a while now. That article really has no credibility.

 

[I Am The Knight]

And the leads are two up-and-coming unknowns as opposed to Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively. But I guess different people define "safe" differently.

Huh? The leads are Chris Hemsworth and Natalie Portman. It also has that Hannibal guy...