The Official Green Lantern Review Thread - Part 1

[Donut]

Agreed. After being pumped for TDK, then being letdown by the film, and walking on shards in terms of anticipation for TDKR, I'd rather Nolan disappear from the Bat world.

It's only going to get worse from here if this movie fails. The WB will want Nolans input on everything after this. Especially if Superman is a hit just due to the fact that it will have Nolans name on it. Nolan will have the WB by the balls

 

[The Morningstar]

I'm not very well-versed in GL comics, or DC properties in general outside of Supes and Batman, so I've been monitoring this one from afar but not really getting into the hype. When I saw the first trailer, I almost wrote the movie off ("I know, right?!"). Then came the admissions from the studio that the trailer sucked. That was reassuring, but didn't exactly make me feel good about the movie's chances. When the trailer hit a couple months ago, I actually started to get excited. They chose better scenes to highlight and the acting seemed less goofy. These reviews, though, have totally killed any momentum the movie had going for it (with me, anyway). They're pretty much citing every problem I thought the movie might have, which was bad dialog and bad CGI. More troubling, though, is that the story doesn't appear to be any good. How does DC let that happen? With so much riding on GL's success, it boggles my mind that WB/DC would allow a thing like poor storytelling to derail their future. That should've been caught before it started.

Just a perspective of a casual DC fan. The reviews are depressing. I want all major comic movies to succeed, because we need studios to start taking chances on secondary properties like GL, WW, Cap, etc. I don't want to go back to the days of Batman and Spider-Man movies being the only comic representation.

Because they thought they'd get by on the special fx and the "awesomeness" of it. All style, no substance. It'll probably be popular with the kids.

 

[solidsnake86]

I'm remember reading all the positive reviews and I just didn't agree. There was a skeleton of a movie there, but I thought it needed a ton of work. The dialogue was just cringe worthy and structurally speaking, it was Raimi's Spiderman to a T.

well if it made the money Raimi's spider-man did I dont think they would care, lol. In all seriousness though it did need work but from what I remember it was a great start. Its interesting today with the internet and the effect it has on these films, I remember the first batman film was basically blasted by some critics back in 89 but because people didnt really have an aggregation of multiple reviews it really overcame that. Nowadays it just seems like an uphill battle for films. I remember when the first x-men film came out, I read one review in my local paper and it gave the film 2 out 5 stars, but it just wasn't that important to me. Now its tough when you see rotten tomatoes and a film you enjoy is blasted by 50 to 100 people.

 

[spider-neil]

TDK is my favorite comic book movie ever but would I want him to direct my favorite comic book character ever? no. nolan lends himself to batman but someone like spidey needs more humour (I thought raimi got the balance perfect in SM2 my second favorite CBM).
that said I think he (nolan) would do a good job with GL, Flash, WW, etc as DC heroes are more iconic than human.

 

[J.Howlett]

Well, he is the new Eastwood of the studio but I don't think he's going to get unlimited input on the DC properties as everyone thinks.

The only reason he has input on Man of Steel is because he and Goyer came up with the story and presented it to WB. If WB had done this in house, Nolan wouldn't be on Man of Steel.

And it doesn't even really matter because his wife has already confirmed that Man of Steel is all Snyder. Nolan has no input on that film whatsoever.

They're honestly just using his name to get Superman off the ground.

 

[Man of Tomorrow]

The only way Nolan gets off of DC Comic Movies is if he is assassinated at this point. The WB will turn to Nolan if this fails. Maybe not directing but Nolan will play a part in everything

I hope.


What worries me is if this fails, they won't bother with anymore DC films outside Batman.

I mean, the only reason we're getting the Superman reboot is the lawsuit forced WB's hand.

Apparently, prior to it they had no plans or intentions to do another Superman film.

 

[spider-neil]

Agreed. After being pumped for TDK, then being letdown by the film, and walking on shards in terms of anticipation for TDKR, I'd rather Nolan disappear from the Bat world.

with turning this into a nolan/batman thread, what on earth did you dislike about that movie?

 

[The Morningstar]

I can reel off a massive list if you like?

Batman being a boring and uninteresting character who was overshadowed by not only Joker, but Dent and Gordon, for one thing. Horribly unnatural exposition spoon feeding dialogue for another. Fight scenes were horrendous. Romance sub plot was poor.

 

[Steyin]

It's only going to get worse from here if this movie fails. The WB will want Nolans input on everything after this. Especially if Superman is a hit just due to the fact that it will have Nolans name on it. Nolan will have the WB by the balls

Which is my concern. I am worried about Supes too, not because of Nolan, but because of every non comic friend of mine having no interest in the character anymore; seems a foretelling tale of the GA in my mind.

In all honesty, I think comic/superhero films in general are starting to die off with the GA, but that's just my opinion from observation.

 

[Sith Scotti]

It's only going to get worse from here if this movie fails. The WB will want Nolans input on everything after this. Especially if Superman is a hit just due to the fact that it will have Nolans name on it. Nolan will have the WB by the balls

As he should . He makes great movies . One of tyhe few bright spots . There are more forgettable stuff like Green Lantern apparently than there is TDK or Inceptions

 

[Octoberist]

As a comic book fan I have to admit I'm getting somewhat tired of comic book movies. Unless they keep it fresh they can't keep on using the same formula again and again.

 

[spider-neil]

I can reel off a massive list if you like?

Batman being a boring and uninteresting character who was overshadowed by not only Joker, but Dent and Gordon, for one thing. Horribly unnatural exposition spoon feeding dialogue for another. Fight scenes were horrendous. Romance sub plot was poor.

hmm interesting...

suffice to say I thought the movie (TDK) was amazing, that said I want nolan no where NEAR spidey as I want spidey to have humour and action I can actually make out without tilting my head.

 

[Raiden]

Hit Fix Review: Awkward, uneven 'Green Lantern' packs no punch

Spoiler

I want to like "Green Lantern."

I don't want to be the guy who calls the time of death at the scene of the crime.

I walked in with several different levels of expectation for the movie, and to fully explain my reaction, I'll have to clue you in to what I was thinking as I sat down. First, my two sons are absolutely out of their mind crazy to see the movie, and I was watching it as a parent wondering if it would be appropriate for the boys based on the other things they've seen. Second, I like the idea of DC and Warner Bros. trying a big DC Universe on film, and I hoped for "Green Lantern" to be the movie to kick that off. Third, I think Ryan Reynolds is a guy who is primed for stardom, and he's just looking for the right movie. I walked in liking the last few major pieces of marketing, the stuff I saw at Wondercon and the big online trailer and the last big mythology trailer. I like Martin Campbell at times. In general, I was pumped and primed and buttered to go.

I don't like "Green Lantern."

I think the movie is pretty much inert, artificial and dead on arrival.

First, there's no way my boys are seeing it. The movie in general appears to be written for eight-year-olds, which is appropriate, and a smart move. But Parallax and Hector Hammond, the villains of the film, seem to be in a different film, a much more inappropriate film about a giant weird turd cloud with the head of the Wizard Of Oz that sucks the skeletons out of people before they explode, and his human assistant who grows a disgusting Elephant Man head in scenes where he screams in pain and writhes on the floor like it's a David Cronenberg film. Second, I don't think is the first building block of a world I want to spend more time in. Unless there are some big choices made behind the scenes on a second film, I don't have any faith in this as a franchise, much less step one in the DC Universe. Third, this is not the role for Reynolds, and it's not his fault. The marketing is more successful than the movie, and made promises the movie just can't fulfill. Martin Campbell is as wrong for this film as he was right for "Casino Royale." In general, I was deflated and depressed by the film I saw.

It feels to me like a puzzle that someone put together wrong, never checking the picture on the front of the box that they're working from, and it should work but doesn't. There are many things that it does right, individual elements that are interesting or well-executed or that have potential. Taken as a whole, though, it's so wrong that it's almost confusing. It's a state of the art superhero film if the year were 1995. If this were released in the same summer as "Judge Dredd" and "Johnny Mnemonic," this would look pretty solid by comparison. It is clumsy and ham-handed when the character and the world demand a lighter touch. Martin Campbell has several things he does well. Light and funny really isn't his thing. His set-up is labored here, and the script by Greg Berlanti & Michael Green & Marc Guggenheim and Michael Goldenberg follows a particular formula structure that bugs me. This is a movie where the main character spends most of the middle of the film angsting away about whether he should or shouldn't be a superhero. Mope, mope, mope. And then finally, he does what we've been waiting for him to do, and it feels like too little too late, frankly.

Let's back up and talk about what does work. Ryan Reynolds seems well-cast to me, and he works his butt off to make it live and breathe. Peter Sarsgaard is deranged as Hector Hammond, even before he begins his largely disgusting change. It's a nice performance. Mark Strong's Sinestro deserves a much, much better movie that is worth of the work he's doing. He is alien and badass and wise and cynical, and he suggests a pretty rich world of experience. Even with Sinestro, I have a major gripe, and I'll hide that below in a spoiler paragraph, but for the most part, he's one of the best things about the movie. I like Kilowog as well, with a voice by Michael Clarke Duncan, and I like the overall design of the world of Oa by Grant Major.

And beyond that, pretty much nothing else works. And those elements that do work are very disconnected, so it never gets a chance to add up to anything. There are major stretches of the film where the tone is just wrong and where the choices made are sort of baffling. I don't buy the chemistry between Reynolds and Blake Lively. She's not particularly bad in the film, but she's not particularly good in it, either. Much of the fault lies with what they're asked to do. Everything is broad strokes here. Everything is played in a very arch "comic book" way that feels infantile. Yet, throughout, there are elements in the narrative and in the staging of certain sequences that are just needlessly grim. If the film's tone overall was the same, it wouldn't bother me, or if it felt like they were making a film with the adult audience in mind at all.

Once Hal Jordan (Reynolds) has been given the ring, he leaves the planet and goes to Oa, a distant alien world, so that he can be trained and inducted into the Green Lantern Corps. This is the straight up solid gold money in the bank stuff if you get it right, and they both do and don't, which is why it's so frustrating. The other members of the Green Lantern Corps who we meet are suitably alien and bizarre and interesting, and the Guardians, the wizened little being in charge of the Corps, are visually very striking. But if you've watched the trailers, you've seen pretty much all there is of Kilowog and Tomar Re (Geoffrey Rush), and you've seen most of Mark Strong as Sinestro. His make-up and visual design is inspired, and you're left wanting more of him every time he exits a scene. So why is it that we hustle back to Earth to limp through a perfunctory "will-he-or-won't-he?" crisis during the gradual build-up of the bad guys until paths, as they inevitably will, cross during a big party for Senator Hammond (Tim Robbins), father to the ugly-on-the-inside-too Hector Hammond. And considering it's the first big showdown, powers against powers, it's a bust. Like almost every moment involving the ring, there's just something off about the imagination on display. It's weird… Campbell basically did make a superhero origin story with "The Mask Of Zorro," and that's a spirited, fun movie that works pretty well. How he misses the tone here so completely confuses me. Maybe the overwhelming number of greenscreen shots just crushed him, since he's a guy who has always seemed more comfortable on location, shooting real stunts. And I'm sure this is an expensive film, but it feels to me during the Oa sequences like there's a studio accountant standing just out of frame yelling, "Hurry up and end this montage, because we can only afford three and a half minutes of Kilowog!"

Now a few spoilers as we wrap this up, things that really stand out as disappointing or frustrating. If you are familiar with the comic or with the recent "Green Lantern" animated films from DC, then you know that Sinestro eventually turns and becomes a major villain in the "Green Lantern" mythology. But in this film, he's played as a hero for the entire film, established as an important and integrity-driven character, shows up to help every time he needs to, and then, after the credits have begun at the end, he just suddenly does something that changes his character completely that is so overt that he should just look directly into the camera and bellow, "SEE YOU IN THE SEQUEL WHERE I WILL BE THE BAD GUY!!!!" It is so thrown away, such a needless revelation that has zero impact in the film because of how it's handled, that it seems infuriating. It feels calculated and cynical and considering how little of the film works, having them threaten me with a sequel at the end feels like insult on top of injury. The other thing that really doesn't work is the way Parallax has been designed. An amorphous cloud with an occasional head is a deeply uninteresting bad guy, and the last fight between the cloud and the dude in front of the green screen is completely uninteresting. It an inaction scene, and it suggests that Campbell just didn't have a sense of how to stage the action here.

More importantly, is this really all Hollywood can come up with for Angela Bassett to do these days? Really?

In a summer where we've had some good superhero films already and we're seeing people really start to have fun with the genre, "Green Lantern" stands out as a pretty major misstep. Visually, it's an eyesore. It is the first genuinely ugly film shot by Dion Beebe, and between the production design by Grant Major and the New Orleans locations, it feels artificial, like the entire thing was shot on a small, dingy backlot. It feels like a pretty major missed opportunity, and I have a feeling this will be a lot more "The Shadow" than Tim Burton's "Batman" when it comes to the general public. I can't imagine word of mouth being any good for the film, especially not for people who are new to the character and the world.

The ring may not make mistakes when it chooses a new Green Lantern, but plenty of mistakes were made in bringing "Green Lantern" to the screen, and in the end, I have a feeling this is our one and only trip to Oa.

 

[Donut]

I hope.


What worries me is if this fails, they won't bother with anymore DC films outside Batman.

I mean, the only reason we're getting the Superman reboot is the lawsuit forced WB's hand.

Apparently, prior to it they had no plans or intentions to do another Superman film.

Imagine at the WB Movie Meetings

Executive #1 - So who should be flash

Executive #2 - Nolan

Executive #1 - The girlfriend ?

Executive #2 - Nolan

Executive #3 - Okay if we did a Wonder Woman movie who should be Wonder Woman

Executive #2 - Nolan

Executive - #3 - He is not a woman & has no twins & is not an actor

Executive - #2 - Clone him

Executive - #1 - Why should Nolan be everyone & in everything ?

Executive - #2 - Because our DC movies are only successful with Nolans name on it

 

[akfj]

It's only going to get worse from here if this movie fails. The WB will want Nolans input on everything after this. Especially if Superman is a hit just due to the fact that it will have Nolans name on it. Nolan will have the WB by the balls

Remember, Nolan came to WB with Goyer's Superman idea, not the other way around.

 

[spider-neil]

Which is my concern. I am worried about Supes too, not because of Nolan, but because of every non comic friend of mine having no interest in the character anymore; seems a foretelling tale of the GA in my mind.

In all honesty, I think comic/superhero films in general are starting to die off with the GA, but that's just my opinion from observation.

the attitude the GA is getting tired of superhero movies is a misconception.
TDK made a billion.
SM3 made 900
IM 800m
thor 600m
there is definately a massive audience for superhero movies but that audience will dry up if poor superhero movies becomes the norm rather than the exception.

 

[Donut]

Remember, Nolan came to WB with Goyer's Superman idea, not the other way around.

& if this bombs & Superman is a hit just with the fan boys knowing that Nolan came up with the story what do you think the studio would do after that ?

 

[Sith Scotti]

So now that it lookas Green Lasntern is going to tank , jealous gl fanboys are going after Batman & Nolan . If GL was half as good as eith Nolan Batman film we wouldb't worried about whethere there would be a sequel

 

[Willi Berg]

EW Review:

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20483133_20483463,00.html

 

[Sith Scotti]

EW Review:

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20483133_20483463,00.html

and EW is owned by Time Warner . So a C + maybe generious . Oy

 

[KalMart]

So now that it lookas Green Lasntern is going to tank , jealous gl fanboys are going after Batman & Nolan .

Batman and Nolan are quaking in terror.

 

[Octoberist]

hmm interesting...

suffice to say I thought the movie (TDK) was amazing, that said I want nolan no where NEAR spidey as I want spidey to have humour and action I can actually make out without tilting my head.

The Dark Knight is a well regarded not and like with any film, not everyone will like it. I say always think of the general consensus because if one dude doesn't like it, he could be a part of a minority. That'd why unlatch when people get too defensive about the film; dont worry many people like it.

I also think that geeks have more particular tastes in general. Not an insult though.

 

[Raiden]

As a comic book fan I have to admit I'm getting somewhat tired of comic book movies. Unless they keep it fresh they can't keep on using the same formula again and again.

I think they are still making movies fresh & interesting, at least for me. Thor is a superhero that features a god from the Norse mythology, and Kenneth Branagh did a great job keeping both the Asgard and Earth scenes interesting while focusing on the father-son-brother dynamic. X-Men First Class was a surprise to me, that after 4 X-Men movies, they still managed to give us something new and more important, an amazing movie that wiped the memories of the mediocre X3 and Wolverine movies clean. I'm now doubting if GL can become a success like these two, but even batting 2 out of 3 isn't that bad. Hopefully Capt. America will deliver the goods.

 

[Tony Stark]

I hope.


What worries me is if this fails, they won't bother with anymore DC films outside Batman.

I mean, the only reason we're getting the Superman reboot is the lawsuit forced WB's hand.

Apparently, prior to it they had no plans or intentions to do another Superman film.

And WB is so stupid with how they handled the lawsuit to begin with. They could settle this out of court in a heart beat. Siegel and Schuster were screwed when they gave up the rights, and WB/DC has made billions off Superman. Just freaking compensate the family, and all is well.

 

[Steyin]

with turning this into a nolan/batman thread, what on earth did you dislike about that movie?

Well, for me the film is great in all regards of cinematography, acting (loved Eckhart and Ledger) and other areas, but I think after watching several clips (which I thought were edited, but were not) and being so eager to see it, especially as a huge Bat fan, it just fell short for me. I loved BB, it still is my favorite comic/hero film of all time, and the aura I got from it wasn't present in TDK. I remember reading an article where Nolan compared the truck chase to the Matrix highway scene, and it didn't even compare; heck the whole sequence didn't even compare to the tumbler chase from BB to me.

The fighting choreography wasn't much better, and after listening to the soundtrack early (I knew someone who worked on it), the score was underwhelming as well (minus the ADCC track). The flow of the film also bothered me, and I even fell asleep in the theater during the swat portion. To this day, I can't really watch the film straight through; I prefer watching snippets of it, yet I can still watch BB without a problem and love it every time (and I've watched the film well near 200 times).

I remember leaving BB when I first saw it with a great sense of excitement, but I left TDK confused and unnerved, which I didn't expect at all. I might have got over-hyped for it even. I love Batman, but TDK just didn't do it for me. Apples and oranges I suppose.


Batman aside, I've had my 12:02 AM GL tickets in hand for 2 weeks now and even took off of work Friday since I'll be seeing it late Thursday. I have a feeling I'll enjoy the film and be entertained, despite these depressing reviews.