Yes, of course I know that Snyder is the director and Goyer is the writer. But Nolan (being the producer) will undoubtedly get alot of attention because of his success with the Batman movies, and he was appointed as the overseer of this project during the start. I do agree that Snyder is made for a movie like Superman, but his specialty is the kinetic action scenes (with plenty of slow mo added), and if he doesn't pay attention to the heart & emotional part of the movie this Superman reboot might turn out to be as hollow as his movie Sucker Punch. This is where Nolan and Goyer must try to keep an eye out for.
outside of parts of TDK, I find it Nolans films to be not emotional.
However the scripting in his dream movie did have me concerned about the well being of his characters but came from the use one line. If you die you die.
For some reason Snyders script thought it didn't matter that the dreams had not consequence on that level.
I do think Snyder finally has a chance to uses his camera speeds in a way that can serve the plot.
I don't think Snyder was born for anything except doing costumes & set design. He's about as shallow a filmmaker as I have seen, this side of Michael Bay. But then I'm 100% with Mark Kermode when it comes to Zach Snyder.
I was just genuinely baffled. Your review of GL was borderline trashing it. It's just one of those cases where the review itself doesn't seem to match the overall score.
But I'm trashing Thor too? Does that mini review match up with it's score?
There are a s**tload of problems with GL but I just didn't hate it as much as the critics did or at all. Again I could easily change my mind like I did with Iron Man 2 and Superman Returns. I even told my sister that I wouldn't be surprised if I disliked it more on my second viewing.
I gave both Iron Man 2 and Superman Returns a 7.5 and a 7 respectively and was struggling with my overall thoughts about the films. Days to weeks later after I thought them over my scores were...
Iron Man 2: 5 or 5.5 out of 10
Superman Returns: 4.5 or 5 out of 10
I change my score and mind all of the time after consideration.
I don't understand this sudden backlash for Thor . Everthing about it worked . Action drama /tomance etccc . They really needed someone better for the Leads in GL . Blake Livey ? b. Marvel gets an academy award winning actress for Thow and GL is stick with a cw star....
If all of theae comparions to Thor are true I am going to love GL
I don't think Snyder was born for anything except doing costumes & set design. He's about as shallow a filmmaker as I have seen, this side of Michael Bay. But then I'm 100% with Mark Kermode when it comes to Zach Snyder.
I don't think Snyder was born for anything except doing costumes & set design. He's about as shallow a filmmaker as I have seen, this side of Michael Bay. But then I'm 100% with Mark Kermode when it comes to Zach Snyder.
The Snyder born for Superman comment made me laugh out loud.
Some of the reputable insider sites said he was only hired by WB due to the time constraint of working under the conditions of rushing this out.
Hence why more talented filmmakers in the running for this (ex: Darren Aronofsky etc) who would easily be in better alignment with Nolan-level quality were dismissed.
I don't understand this sudden backlash for Thor . Everthing about it worked . Action drama /tomance etccc . They really needed someone better for the Leads in GL . Blake Livey ? b. Marvel gets an academy award winning actress for Thow and GL is stick with a cw star....
If all of theae comparions to Thor are true I am going to love GL
Katie Holmes as Rachel wasn't so present or important in the storyline. You could take her out, and the film would still feel pretty complete.
Blake.... is just so present in everything. She makes Tom's purpose in this movie utterly pointless, because she's essentially playing Ryan's sidekick, love interest, confidant and sometimes mentor.
You can tell WB REALLY wanted to try and make a star out of her with this, like she's their new golden girl they want to market.
There's no emotional depth to her character either. But to be fair, there isn't for all of the characters in this.
I'd put Blake below Bosworth as Lois Lane. Kate was miscast for the traditional LL, but she still managed to be in a few memorable and somewhat emotional scenes. Blake... wasted so much screentime in this film and was completely forgettable. None of it felt like it really mattered, just felt like filler.
I never f**king liked Thor, check my score on the Thor review thread and see how much I liked or loved it. I'd hardly call never digging a film a backlash. I always thought that it was overrated by alot of critics and my fellow fanboys.
It's always only been a slightly above average fluff piece to me.
Just got done seeing this movie my gosh what a disappointment, that part of me hoping the critics where just being “snobbish” was rudely slapped away within 15 minutes of getting in the movie. This movie is beyond flawed and I would easily put it in league with Daredevil, Ghost Rider and Fantastic Four. Its not quiet Batman and Robin or Catwoman bad but my God is it close.
I am ashamed to have ever had blinding faith in this movie to the point of making several bets (which I now consider foolish) on many of the various other sites I frequent that this would be the highest earning Superhero movie of the year.
So what’s good about the movie? No surprises that I am struggling to find any positives, I try and think of a positive and a negative flares up hmmmmmmmmmmmm let me think. Oh yeah how the constructs where shown on screen was good it was a good interpretation from the comics.
So what’s bad? How about the majority of the movie, say like 90%, . The pacing was terrible, we literally get thrown from one scene to the next. Also you just don’t give a dam about the characters because we are not giving a reason to care, there is no redeeming qualities to any of them. Hal Jordan wasn’t likable, Hector Hammond was obviously meant to be a sympathetic villain yet I didn’t care about him or any of the characters why? Because the audience isn’t giving a justifiable reason to care, sure their were poorly thrown scenes were I believe we were supposed to feel for the characters but nope don’t care. Everything in this movie is bland which is shocking considering the backdrop a freaking alien world for crying out loud how the **** do you make that bland, want to know? Go and watch GL. Hal Jordan is meant to have issues with fear but if you don’t care about a character you wont care about his problems, so when he does manage to overcome his fear and recites the GL oath instead of getting that oh yeah what a badass feeling in your gut you get nothing. We all know that oh yeah what a badass feeling as most of us probably got it in Thor after his Hammer returned to him and he was getting revived. Anyway better wrap things up although I could probably write an essay stating everything bad about this movie. All in all GL is one big disappointment and you wont be missing much if you saved your money for something else.
Oh and Lol at the after credit scene, I mean really why would audiences give a dam about Sinestro turning bad when in essence we don’t care about him because he was hardly on screen.
Yeah, I was just trying to stick up for her where I honestly could. At least her character isn't as horribly conceived as the Rachel Dawes character is(i.e. no redeemable attribute in sight).
What a stupid argument. Why would a superhero movie be high art when with a few exceptions superhero comic books aren't High Art. That doesn't mean they don't have a heart, or that they don't have meaning. That's what missing from GL I think. Just some stinkin' heart. Just somebody working on the movie that didn't do so for a freakin paycheck.
Even Ryan Reynolds, yes his performance was passable. But he's been involved in 3 comic book movies so far that failed and while that may be coincidence, I'm starting to think Reynolds is just the guy that does what he's told to, for a paycheck. I can't believe a smart guy like him would read the script that's been so complained about and go: "Yeah, okay, whatever you want". He MUST'VE said something, he must've reacted somehow. I can't believe nobody involved in this production realised that they were working on a faulty project.
Unless they were doing the movie just for a paycheck, or if it got really butchered in the editing room and came out a completely different movie than the actors were expecting.
I can't blame Reynolds for going for it. Cool comic, Martin Campbell, Grant Major. I'd have gone for it too. A project this big, so much is dependent on so many other people getting things right. It's gotta be tough to know if what you're doing is going to work when you're stuck in front of a green screen hoping against hope that post production makes it all come together.
This was bad, really bad. And just confirms for me that Nolan's bat films are a total fluke success for WB and what it tries to do with it's superhero properties on film. They truly have no clue.
Caught the midnight showing, this morning, and I'm left with some mixed feelings about the movie. On the one hand, I can definitely say that I enjoyed it. On the other hand, I feel like the Green Lantern deserved a lot better.
I really like Reynold's in the role of Hal Jordan. He's charming, he's funny, and he can act the part of the hero and make it believable. He just didn't have a lot to work with. I bought his version of Hal the entire way through, and even when some of the other characters were camping it up on screen, Reynold's still delivered.
I'd have to say that Blake Lively (as great as she looked in the role) and Peter Saarsgard were the weakest points in the movie. Blake just seemed REALLY out of place (maybe it's due to her age?), and the character of Hector Hammond was completely, and utterly, useless. You could have very easily removed him from the movie, and it wouldn't have suffered at all. I've always felt that the character of Hector Hammond was completely pointless, and this movie just confirmed my feelings.
The biggest disappointment for me was the lack of time spent on Oa. Yes, I know they have to bring him to Earth so he can conquer his fears, and become the hero he needs to be, but they spent so much time and effort building Oa and the corps, and left them as an afterthought. The training scene with Killowog and Sinestro is easily one of the best parts, and it's less than 60 seconds long. I just wanted more interaction with the rest of the corps. Oh, and what about that imminent threat of Parallax coming to Oa? Sinestro was in panic mode for absolutely nothing. You can't tell me that showing Parallax attack Oa and having the corps take in on wouldn't have been 10x better than what we got? Again, I realize that Hal needed to "protect his sector," but the Green Lantern isn't a lone hero amongst normal people. He's 1 of 3,600.
Overall, the CGI was good, but did get a little cheesy (specifically in the beginning when Parallax was freed). I absolutely love the way the costume looked on film, and I loved how the energy seemed to "peek out" from the grooves throughout the costume, the more Hal got fired up. The only problem I have with the costume is that ridiculous mask he wears. For the life of me, I don't understand why they need to add that little "tail" over his nose - it makes him look completely ridiculous. The constructs were fun to watch, but I don't understand how Hal is able to create water and natural fire. Isn't a Green Lantern unable to produce organic matter? And wouldn't anything they create also be green?
I liked the movie overall, even though I did get a little bored in the middle. Is it as good as "The Dark Knight"? Not even close. It's also not as bad as critics would lead you to believe. It's a decent start for a character that's not as well known as Superman or Batman, but it's nowhere close to being the strong foundation they were looking to build a "Justice League" movie on. Still, I'm hoping they make a sequel that allows Hal to spend less time on Earth, and shows more of the corps in action.
Stay tuned after the credits. The scene itself is very cool, but it makes absolutely NO sense in the context of the movie. I can just hear Martin Campbell saying "ah...just give the geeks what they want to see" while filming that scene.
I saw the midnight show last night, so here is my review:
First, let me start off by saying that I don't really get all the hooplah from the negative reviews. I think a lot of them really nitpicked things that didn't need to be, but some did make valid points.
To get the technical stuff out of the way, the CGI was pretty good, so it seems Sony has really stepped up their game on this one. The visuals were great, and in fact I have more complaints about the practical stunt work than the CGI (mainly the helicopter scene). The score, of which I listened to in full two days prior, was enjoyable. I liked it better along with the film than I did by itself. Its not the greatest, but it fit well with the film.
As for acting, the worst jobs here are by Angela Bassett and Tim Robbins. Ryan Reynolds was just fine; I don't really see the Van Wilder or whatnot comparisons. Blake Lively was also good and had the right emotional balance when it was called for. I remember one review pegged Abin Sur as "cocky", but in no way is that ever evident. Temuera was fine with what little scenes he had.
I'm still not comfortable with MCD as Kilowog, but Geoffrey Rush was perfect for Tomar Re. Mark Strong makes a great Sinestro, and I wish he had more scenes. Skarsgaard as Hammond was great also, and perhaps a little underutilized.
As for the tone of the film, it struck the right balance of humor, action and emotion that was quite enjoyable. The thing that hurts the film really is the editing; we jump from space to earth, scene to scene just a tad too quickly. There are a good number of plot elements going on, so I understand how it could be confusing or irritating to people and the critics. However I was able to follow just fine and felt ok with the pacing. The movie definitely should have been about 15 minutes longer (it seems a good number of scenes were cut/edited down).
Aside from this the biggest upset of the film is really the lack of focus of Oa, the corps and development of Sinestro. However, seeing as how this is Hal's film, I can perfectly understand not concentrating on other corps members at this time. The buildup with Sinestro could have been more fleshed out, but I think given the after credits scene, a sequel has plenty of room to do all of this. We don't need to be on earth for long, hell even at all for a sequel, and this is where I think GL can really shine. Should it have happened more so in this film? Sure, of course there could have been more in space, but it didn't seem necessary for the plot. From a purely marketing standpoint yes, but I digress.
For a sequel, if it happens (which I sure hope it does given how much I enjoyed the film), the after credits scene becomes null
if it is used in the middle of it. The beginning could easily build upon Sinestro and his frustrations with the Guardians and "rivalry" with Hal, then in the middle he turns. I view the after credits scene as a set up to what will happen, not what has just transpired after the first film.
It's a pretty simple set up if done in a sort of non linear fashion.
All in all, I loved the visuals, acting was good, tone was right, and there were slight things that needed elaboration, but it can be easily made up for/focused on in a sequel. I know a lot of people will argue that the sequel shouldn't be needed to do such, but to focus on so much, more so than what already was in the film, would have been absolutely terrible.
Now, if you ask me to compare this to say Iron Man, Thor and First Class, I'd say its right in the middle/second for me. Thor was great, but I enjoyed GL a bit more. FC was also good, but it suffered from a rushed second half, and to me it was because it went from originally being intended as a Magneto film to FC, and I would have much preferred a Magneto film (which I think would have been a lot stronger in the end.) Its nearly equal to IM, but with IM edging it out slightly more as film, but GL beating it as an experience and being more enjoyable.
I can't blame Reynolds for going for it. Cool comic, Martin Campbell, Grant Major. I'd have gone for it too. A project this big, so much is dependent on so many other people getting things right. It's gotta be tough to know if what you're doing is going to work when you're stuck in front of a green screen hoping against hope that post production makes it all come together.
I'm not blaming him in the least for taking the job, nor am I blaming him for doing it for a paycheck and a career boost. I'm just saying that I wish somebody, ANYBODY (cast, director, writer, PRODUCERS) involved in this production would've put a little heart into it and worried about more than just getting paid.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
