The Official Green Lantern Review Thread - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a feeling that if the reviews for GL were overwhelmingly positive, some of the people who are claiming that reviews mean little would be lending a lot more credence to them.
 
KalMart said:
I have a feeling that if the reviews for GL were overwhelmingly positive, some of the people who are claiming that reviews mean little would be lending a lot more credence to them.
Click to expand...

That's more or less a certainty.
 
I don't know about that. X-men: First Class got glowing reviews and I didn't love it.
 
I just like how some are now digging into Thor to defend GL.

Thor worked because despite having a pretty shallow screenplay, Branagh brought a level of charm and grandiose tongue-in-cheek style to the proceedings that make it a very enjoyable viewing experience. I don't know about the CGI, but Branagh knows how to shoot a scene and he gives everything a certain dramatic heft and weight that probably isn't there in the screenplay. That is why people love the scenes where Odin and Loki confront each other or when Thor is visited by Loki on Earth. Just how Branagh imagines him walking into the throne room at the beginning or Paulson watching Thor try to move the hammer gives it more dramatic power than it honestly should have.

The other reason is the cast was excellent. Hemsworth brought to life the character without a trace of irony and was completely charming in the role as he completely filled the screen as Thor. While they were playing generic roles, Portman and Sakrsgard brought some fresh humanity and sharp humor to the Earth scenes (Dennings was really just the plucky sidekick) and when you have Anthony Hopkins not phoning it in, which Branagh somehow managed, it gives the film a regal sensibility. The villain while not great, but good. In short, despite being a by-the-numbers screenplay, everything else was excellent and was much better than necessary.

Sounds like GL has done the bare minimum. Everything is by-the-numbers. The story does not appear to have the light hand or charm of Thor or Campbell's own Mask of Zorro, but is like his Legend of Zorro, which was a formulaic and unimaginative formula movie. If GL is just punching in Spider-Man and Iron Man's formula for 2 hours, that is a pretty lame way for anyone to spend $20 at least on tickets.

And again, you look at the casting. They went for the "It guy" Ryan Renyolds (who was actually surprisingly strong in Buried) and the latest teen-TV star Blake Lively. Thor didn't need Natalie Portman and it didn't need to try to work that hard, but it did. GL just coasts by from the sounds of it.
 
DACrowe said:
I just like how some are now digging into Thor to defend GL.

Thor worked because despite having a pretty shallow screenplay, Branagh brought a level of charm and grandiose tongue-in-cheek style to the proceedings that it was just a very enjoyable viewing experience. I don't know about the CGI, but Branagh knows how to shoot a scene and he gives everything a certain dramatic heft and weight that probably sin't there in the screenplay. That is why people love the scenes where Odin and Loki confront each other or when Thor is visited by Loki on Earth. Just how Branagh imagines him walking into the throne room at hte beginning or Paulson watching Thor try to move the hammer gives it more dramatic power than it honestly should have.

The other reason is the cast was excellent. Hemsworth brought to life the character without a trace of irony and was completely charming in the role as he completely filled the screen as Thor. While they were playing generic roles, Portman and Sakrsgard brought some fresh humanity and sharp humor to the Earth scenes (Dennings was really just the plucky sidekick) and when you have Anthony Hopkins not phoning it in, which Branagh somehow managed, it gives the film a regal sensibility. The villain while not great, was good. In short ,despite being a by-the-numbers screenplay, everything else was excellent and was much better than necessary.

Sounds like GL has done the bare minimum. Everything is by-the-numbers. The story does not appear to have the light hand or charm of Thor or Campbell's own Mask of Zorro, but is like his Legend of Zorro, which was a formulaic and unimaginative formula movie. If GL is just punching in Spider-Man and Iron Man's formula for 2 hours, that is a pretty lame way for anyone to spend $20 at least on tickets.

And again, you look at the casting. They went for the "It guy" Ryan Renyolds (who was actually surprisingly strong in Buried) and the latest teen-TV star Blake Lively. Thor didn't need Natalie Portman and it didn't need to try to work that hard, but it did. GL just coasts by from the sounds of it.
Click to expand...
i like Hemsworth as Thor. he was fantastic. but imagine this. Hemsworth is acting for 10 years. and he acts in Thor like in 80% of hes movies. would you still have the same opinion?

GL needed an unknown to make this hes role. i like Reynolds and i think i will enjoy the humor. IM type humor.if this owould be Reynolds fist movie where he shows this type of humor i think everyone would praise him.
 
And Thor didn't coast?

That's a load of bull. If any film coasted this summer, it's that one.

And I still like the damn thing but don't for a second think it didn't coast...(granted, it didn't coast like Iron Man 2).
 
Speed Racer, Equilibrium, and Sucker Punch all got HORRIBLE reviews, but I enjoyed all three movies far more than THOR, IRON MAN 2, Spider-man 3, The Incredible Hulk, etc.

Even Ang Lee's Hulk got a lower grade than Thor I believe, but got two thumbs up so we'll see when the movie actually hits, what people think.

THis one is getting it real bad though so im skeptical and when a movie initially didnt look good, u get annoyed at the reviews living up to ur expectations as u hope at least even a 60% cause watchmen wasnt up there as far as reviews, but I enjoyed it more than the first two spidermans as well as also enjoyed 300 more too.

Its mostly all subjective. I really did not like Thor or The Incredible Hulk
 
moviedoors said:
It's not like they knew First Class was going to be a hit when they cast Green Lantern.

Edit: damn, no delete option?
Click to expand...

I think the point is Vaughn and Singer didn't care that Fassbender (or McAvoy and Lawrence for that matter) weren't big names to audiences. Those three were cast because they're great actors and really contributed to XFC's overall quality. Renyolds, who isn't a bad actor, but quite good, was cast over someone like Fassbender because he is more famous and has a marquee name after The Proposal. That is also why Blake Lively was miscast as a fighter pilot/savvy businesswoman.

The point is, WB wasn't casting for who was best for the role and movie. They were casting to have a better opening weekend. Though I don't get the hate for Renyolds, he is a very solid leading man/movie star type. I hear he is one of the few redeeming points of this movie.
 
I enjoy Reynolds but I do wish they went with someone else
 
Green Lantern is simply middle of the road, IMO. The setup is fine and the conclusion is fine, but it does nothing but tread water in Act 2. It talks about fear and the burden of responsibility, but does nothing to actually show those issues. The "did he quit or didn't he" nature of the act is basically the whole problem. "I quit" has no consequences and is undone with a simple pep talk.

It's a fundamental script issue.

It's not Wolverine or Batman and Robin bad. Not by a long shot. It's not even that much worse than Thor. But, about half the film has no bearing on the ending, and that's a problem.
 
dark_b said:
i like Hemsworth as Thor. he was fantastic. but imagine this. Hemsworth is acting for 10 years. and he acts in Thor like in 80% of hes movies. would you still have the same opinion?

GL needed an unknown to make this hes role. i like Reynolds and i think i will enjoy the humor. IM type humor.if this owould be Reynolds fist movie where he shows this type of humor i think everyone would praise him.
Click to expand...

I was well aware of Tobey Maguire's, Christian Bale's, and Robert Downey Jr.'s work before I saw them play their superheroes. That didn't effect how I viewed their excellent performances. Brandon Routh was an unknown for Superman and was marginal at best. Sometimes an unknown like Hugh Jackman, Christopher Reeve and now Hemsworth make the part better. But just because I know Johnny Depp is playing Jack Sparrow using a certain bag of tricks doesn't mean I can't appreciate how brilliant that performance was in the first movie.

BTW, a lot of one-liners does not make this Iron Man. Fantastic Four had a lot of one-liners, as well.
 
J.Howlett said:
And Thor didn't coast?

That's a load of bull. If any film coasted this summer, it's that one.

And I still like the damn thing but don't for a second think it didn't coast...(granted, it didn't coast like Iron Man 2).
Click to expand...

I said it had a weak screenplay. The screenplay did coast and completely played it safe. But by getting Kenneth Branagh and an A-list cast with a few Oscar winners and nominees on hand, the film was better than it had any right to be. It could have just been as safe and by-the-numbers in its style, casting and production as its average screenplay was (see IM2 which beyond some good acting was a bore). But Branagh put together a movie that didn't just coast by when it could have given the screenplay. It seems GL does just coast.
 
Reynolds himself doesn't seem to be the problem. It's the writing that lets him down going by most of the reviews. None of them really criticises Reynolds.

People still going on about Thor? :funny: Get over it.
 
KalMart said:
I have a feeling that if the reviews for GL were overwhelmingly positive, some of the people who are claiming that reviews mean little would be lending a lot more credence to them.
Click to expand...

Such is the way. If critics were praising GL no one would be complaining.
 
DACrowe said:
I said it had a weak screenplay. The screenplay did coast and completely played it safe. But by getting Kenneth Branagh and an A-list cast with a few Oscar winners and nominees on hand, the film was better than it had any right to be. It could have just been as safe and by-the-numbers in its style, casting and production as its average screenplay was (see IM2 which beyond some good acting was a bore). But Branagh put together a movie that didn't just coast by when it could have given the screenplay. It seems GL does just coast.
Click to expand...

While Portman kind of hurt the film, I agree. The main tale of Odin, Loki and Thor comes across so well, it makes the film. That is down to the actors and Branagh. Those scenes work far better then the script deserved.

Also while the Warrior Three were kind of terrible, Alexander, Russo, Elba, Skarsgard, and Denning all added to the tale in their limited roles.
 
KalMart said:
I have a feeling that if the reviews for GL were overwhelmingly positive, some of the people who are claiming that reviews mean little would be lending a lot more credence to them.
Click to expand...

agreed
 
Godman said:
i agree as I always saw him more as The Flash
Click to expand...

Na, he's Deadpool.

Besides, if Flash got a movie it wouldn't be Wally West, the wise cracking, charismatic guy who Reynolds would be great for. It'd be Barry Allen, the dull as dishwater nice guy.

Geoff Johns would decree it.
 
I thought this was a Green Lantern thread, not a bash Marvel films thread.
 
The Morningstar said:
Na, he's Deadpool.

Besides, if Flash got a movie it wouldn't be Wally West, the wise cracking, charismatic guy who Reynolds would be great for. It'd be Barry Allen, the dull as dishwater nice guy.

Geoff Johns would decree it.
Click to expand...

Supposedly they're doing The Flash from a CSI angle, given Barry Allen's profession.

Granted who knows if that movie will even get made now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
The Official Green Lantern Review Thread - Part 5
29 30 31
Replies
757
Views
85K
Savage
Savage
T
  • Locked
The Official Green Lantern Review Thread - Part 4
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
82K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Locked
The Official Green Lantern Review Thread - Part 3
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
70K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Locked
The Official Green Lantern Review Thread - Part 1
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
82K
The Sage
The Sage
T
  • Locked
Official Green Lantern News & Discussion Thread - Part 2
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
78K
Thread Manager
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 2,212 (members: 27, guests: 2,185)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,289
Messages
22,080,794
Members
45,880
Latest member
Heartbeat

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"