Pros and Cons about Green Lantern Movie

[AvengingLeague]

I watched it, I actually liked it, and I'm not sure why people don't like the film and that it has a bad rap on the Tomatometer. With that said, here's something I would like to know from you guys so I can understand better--what was good about Green Lantern and what wasn't good? Pretty much a "Pros and Cons" list.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Pros :

Reynolds was a good hal jordan, and did the best he could with what he had.
The cgi was fantastic
I enjoyed the score
Sinestro was cool, but underused too much.
I didn't mind the look of parallax..but this leads into :
Hector was a creepy mofo, and l liked that

Cons :
Parallax wasn't something that pissed me off, but he should have looked cooler
The obvious cutting of the plot. We know that a much longer, and better movie exists, and we got a glimpse of that with the extended cut.
Hal defeating Parallax by himself. Should have been helped by the lanterns

 

[dozer2025]

Pros:Ryan Renyolds was a better Hal Jordan than I expected
Hector Hammond was a good enough villain to carry the movie.
Cool CGI


Cons:
Underused Sinestro
Ring constructs were hockey
Weird costume
Script didn't make sense at times
Wasted Paralax too early on
Girl playing Carol sucked
Weird CGI costume

 

[Quasimod0]

Hecor was weird and really a lame villain
Sinestro shouldve had a bigger part
Sinestro going evil made no sense at all
Paralax was defeated way too easily
CG was weak
Lively was weak
Mask sucked
Too much earth stuff

 

[dozer2025]

Hecor was weird and really a lame villain
Sinestro shouldve had a bigger part
Sinestro going evil made no sense at all
Paralax was defeated way too easily
CG was weak
Lively was weak
Mask sucked
Too much earth stuff

Agreed. The movie just sucked. REBOOT!

 

[shauner111]

In my opinion the CGI was absolutely awful.

 

[BH/HHH]

It's nowhere near as bad as people make out there's far worse modern comic book films than this (the Spirit, Spider-man 3). And some others I.e. Fantastic Four films that I also think are decent enough that made more money than GL. I just wish it had made enough for a sequel.

 

[Quasimod0]

I still find spider-man 3 to be more watchable than green lantern. Spidey had heart and humor and some really fantastic action. Yes it did suck, but at least it was fun. While something about green lantern was just off. Turned alot people off actually. Cant quite put my finger on what the biggest issue was

 

[DrCosmic]

Pro:
Green Lantern energy looked cool in CGI
"You don't think I would recognize you because I can't see your cheekbones? What is this?"- F-ing BRILLIANT line, pretty much saved the film for me
Mark Strong's Sinestro from top to bottom start to finish golden
Tom Kalamaku's actor did a great job in his role

Cons:
Head-on-Body CGI was weak, generally costume CGI was weird to look at
Villains were oddly developed, Hammond was overdeveloped to the point where he had more pathos than the hero and Parallax was underdeveloped to the point where it was hard to care about his actions.
Meandering plot makes for a lot of questions about why and when
Very uninspiring early silver age-y use of the ring.
Hal wasn't very likable overall

 

[flickchick85]

Pros:

-Mark Strong and Geoffrey Rush
-The DESIGN of the suit (just don't make it CGI next time)
-The score was weak, but it's grown on me. I don't hate it.
-Hector being a creepy dude in general.
-It was pretty faithful to the story beats of Hal's origin.


Cons:

-The casting of everyone who's not Mark Strong or Geoffrey Rush.
-The CGI
-85% of the movie took place on Earth.
-The random, "oh hey, all these characters knew each other as kids by the way..." half-assed, by-the-numbers writing.
-Turning Hal Jordan into a whiner.
-Turning Parallax into a giant turd.
-Unexciting action.

Truthfully, there have been plenty of worse CBM's over the years - SM3, The Spirit, the Ghost Rider movies, Fantastic Four movies. But this movie's failure is so frustrating because they had the budget and talent involved to make a much better movie. They just didn't seem to care enough about the material to make that happen.

 

[Drizzle]

-The casting of everyone who's not Mark Strong or Geoffrey Rush.

There was nothing wrong with Michael Clarke Duncan as Kilowog.

 

[shauner111]

It's nowhere near as bad as people make out there's far worse modern comic book films than this (the Spirit, Spider-man 3). And some others I.e. Fantastic Four films that I also think are decent enough that made more money than GL. I just wish it had made enough for a sequel.

I agree but it's still terrible to me.

I still find spider-man 3 to be more watchable than green lantern. Spidey had heart and humor and some really fantastic action. Yes it did suck, but at least it was fun. While something about green lantern was just off. Turned alot people off actually. Cant quite put my finger on what the biggest issue was

I agree with this too. Im not a fan of Spidey 3 (at least in taking it seriously or when comparing it to the other two) but it has scenes that i can laugh at.

 

[Human Torch]

I really enjoyed it,myself.To be honest,I think most people wanted something on the level of TDK.This clearly isn't that,but it's not a "bad" movie,IMO.


Pretty much the only cons I see are:

Poor editing
Hammond was not the most inspired choice for villain.(His shrieking in bed got old quick)
I wasn't a fan of how Carol knew it was Hal.(Do secret ID's mean so little in the 21st century?)

 

[kewlmatto]

Pros
- Mark Strong as Sinestro
- Geoffrey Rush as Tomar-Re

Cons
Basically everything else...

- Earth scenes feel forced with no real sense of scope beyond the small cast.
- Space scenes feel alienating from CGI overload. We are thrust into that world way too quickly.
- Ryan Reynolds.
- The really juvenile 8-year old version of the love triangle. Ech.
- Tim Robbins playing Sarsgaard's dad. They are just over ten years apart in age. It just doesn't look genuine.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Gotta disagree with those who say SM3 is worse. I think both are good, but SM3 is by far the better of the two.

 

[Human Torch]

I don't understand the hatred for SM 3,myself.But hey,it seems to be the "in" thing, to say it's the worst movie since B&R.*shrug*

 

[A Necessary Evil]

I like sm3 alot! I do! It's really not as bad as people make it out to be, much like green lantern. But, I see why people can say it's bad.

 

[Changeling]

Cons

Hector and Parallax made me uncontrollably laugh out loud in the theater

Hectors dad and Amanda Waller were so ****ing useless

The subplot with Hals family is given up on halfway thru

Not enough time on Oa

 

[flickchick85]

There was nothing wrong with Michael Clarke Duncan as Kilowog.

Oh yes, you're right. I should just say all the other GLs were well-cast.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Cons:

Parallax's comic backstory being rewritten in a stupid way
Too much time on Earth, not enough of Oa
Lanterns being killed before their names are even mentioned
Far too much attention given to Hector
No flightless simulator

Pros:

The costumes were eye-popping
Oa was awesome for it's brief stint in the movie
Reynolds and Lively gave stellar performances
Kilowog (RIP, Big Mike) was amazing
The constructs like the mini-gun and flamethrower were sweet
The dogfight was well done
Hal throwing caution to the wind to make sure Parallax was defeated
Both Oaths
Sinestro and Abin Sur

Overall a solid movie, but handling Parallax in such a way meant the movie had a lot of ground to make up.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I still find spider-man 3 to be more watchable than green lantern. Spidey had heart and humor and some really fantastic action. Yes it did suck, but at least it was fun. While something about green lantern was just off. Turned alot people off actually. Cant quite put my finger on what the biggest issue was

Easy to see a parallel between Spidey 3 and GL. Each had landmark villains with important storylines that were squeezed into bad places in the franchises.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Spidey 3 was enjoyable and entertaining, albeit a disappointment. Green Lantern... just everything seems to have gone wrong with it and no one seemed to take it that seriously (in a bad way). Then - the CGI looked really weird and stood out. Overall just the original script was torn to shreds. Spidey 3 seemed to be more the people caring about it, but things just going bad. Whereas GL it really didn't seem like they were into it and it did become a 'for paycheck' film.

 

[Changeling]

I loved Spider Man 3 when I first saw it in the theaters, only later did I realize why people think its a bad movie. I enjoyed myself the whole time and can still watch it and enjoy myself. Very entertaining as Ultimatehero said.

GL was not enjoyable at all. I HATED the action, I HATED the acting, I didnt care about any of the characters, it was just a bad movie. Spider Man 3 mostly failed as a follow up to Spider Man 2 and 1. Its not a horrible movie by itself, but when compared to those films its so disapointing

 

[The Guard]

PROS:
Yay, Green Lantern, and the story of Green Lantern and some Green Lantern stuff on film! I'll list pros later.

CONS:
It didn't contain everything in one film that many fans figured a Green Lantern franchise needed, which apparently gave license to a bunch of black and white thinking, mostly hyperbolic fanboys to pretend to be critics by just being critical, and randomly applying words like "weak" to things that were imperfect, but not actually bad (Much like X3 and SPIDER-MAN 3, actually).

Here are the movie's real cons: The score was only average, there were a few editing/transition issues, the story could have used more background and setup between Hal and his father and there could have been a tad more character work with Hal and the other Jordans, certain training/combat sequences could have been extended for more impact, and Hector Hammond/Parallax probably weren't the best choices of villain to carry the first film. Everything else was pretty solid, including the character portrayals, the acting, the effects, and the action. Its an imperfect film to be sure, but still a very solid one with lots to like about it.

Fanboys just seem to like to be ridiculous about hating this movie. There are legitimate beefs to have with this movie, but half the "cons" listed here and elsewhere are just absurd, half the complaints aren't remotely accurate and some of them don't make any sense.

 

[shauner111]

I disagree that we all were looking for a Dark Knight and got dissapointed. But at the very least i want something i can enjoy. Spider-Man 3 is a horrible movie but it's friggin hilarious. And i can enjoy that aspect of it. At least give me comedy if the writing is going to be poor. Much like the 90's Batman sequels.

Green Lantern didn't fit that for me. Nolans trilogy is very high in quality to me, and i dont expect anybody to achieve that. Unless future DC movies step up their game. But a solid, fun CBM is what i look for everytime. That year i enjoyed parts of Thor/First Class. I enjoy Raimis first 2 Spideys, Amazing Spidey as well. Batman 89'. The 2nd X-Men. The first Iron Man. Even Avengers...........that's what i expect of every superhero flick. Green Lantern failed.