The Official Green Lantern Review Thread - Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Millar is accurate. GL did seem like a crappy 90s movie.

It did look cheap.

Where did the budget go? I'm starting to think execs pocketed most of that money.

You're blind, insane or just a flat out troll if you think GL looked like a 90s movie or if you think it's the worst super hero movie of all time.
 
Call me whatever you wish to cover up your insecurities about this film, typical apologist move.

But it DID look like a 90s movie or TV Syfy movie. Even the production values, scripting, music etc

It's getting trashed for all these reasons and much, much more.
 
It in no way looked like a syfy movie. Nobody's calling you out for not liking the movie, but saying it looked like a 90's movie with terrible production values is just objectively wrong.
 
Oa looked great. But the scenes on Earth looked incredibly tacky. And the CGI outside of space and Oa looked crap. Apart from the suit.
 
I've been a green lantern fan all my life i was actually green lantern for Halloween when i was six so i went into this movie with some pretty big expectations and i have to say the movie lived up to them all. The effects were amazing the story was good and the action was very well done i never thought they would be able to pull of the constructs on the big screen but there they were in all there glory the cast was great Reynolds is hal jordan imo blake lively who i was worried about after the first preview was good and what can you say about mark strong the man is sinestro the only one i thought was a little out of place was peter sarsgard but even he was okay. I give the movie a 9/10 it lived up to my expectations ,and i dont understand all the hate the movie's getting i actually found myself saying when the movie started i cant believe i'm watching a green lantern movie in the theater i cant honestly it was a good day to be a comic fan on friday.
 
3. It's not deep

This one is pretty simple. I don't think its apologetic to say that the fact that Green Lantern may not have had the depth of some of the other great superhero films is largely an issue of the source material its based on and the issues that has inherent to it...not the film itself. Be honest about the stuff you love. The filmmakers were.

cool write up Guard.

I recently watched emrald knights and I think they found a great depth to the cinematic incarnation of the concept.
 
Call me whatever you wish to cover up your insecurities about this film, typical apologist move.

But it DID look like a 90s movie or TV Syfy movie. Even the production values, scripting, music etc

It's getting trashed for all these reasons and much, much more.

exibit A
[YT]oY7R0lHSw3U[/YT]

I'd say no, but there is a certain other film this summer that kinda have a bit of this going on just saying.
 
The script for GREEN LANTERN isn't, as some people have been complaining, weak or remotely horrible. It's actually very solid, structurally, character developmentwise, and even plotwise, certainly as compared to many other superhero films. It's just rather "safe". And one wonders why a several hundred million dollar film about a character most people barely know of would play it safe? IRON MAN played it a bit safe. So did SPIDER-MAN. So have a lot of films, in various ways.

Sorry man but... :funny:

The script was horrible. Even people who like the movie admit this. There was no character development... for ANYONE. Including Hal Jordan.

And the dialogue was laughable.

The scene where Carol spoon feeds what Hal needs to do to be a Green Lantern is cringe worthy. It's just terrible, not only in dialogue "you have the ability to overcome fear" but the fact that it's cheating. It takes away the opportunity for Hal to learn by himself. To develop by himself.

No, he has his cute girlfriend do it all for him.

His journey was A-C. The B was missing. To put it in simple terms.
 
Here's the thing about getting a 'second chance/makeup' sequel. This movie was expensive to make, and yet it had very little on Oa. It's pretty safe to assume that most of the money went into the effects, so....


...would it not stand to reason that the sequel would have a lot more with multiple GL's, and more Oa, and more big space battles? And if so...if this movie cost this much...man, how much will the next one cost? So if a first movie that's getting mostly panned by critics, and tracking to maybe barely make enough to get a sequel is already well into the 9-digit budget mark ...you'd think that WB would want to keep the budget more reasonable in the next chapter. But if it's certainly going to cost WAY more....that's really asking a lot from WB. Sure, for some it may be their fault that GL is in its current predicament...but it's still their money. They may want to spend it on something else that has less negative baggage coming in, and something that you won't have to make so many CG characters and worlds with.
 
If this movie cost 200 million to make, with Oa and the other Lanterns being in it for 20 minutes tops...

A sequel, if it gets one, and if it focuses more on Oa and the Corps, will cost like, 500 million :funny:

Honestly I can't understand why this movie was so expensive. Oa and the Corps looks great, but they are in the movie for 20 minutes. The suit looks great. But when the action takes place on Earth the CGI looks horrible.
 
3. It's not deep

This one is pretty simple. I don't think its apologetic to say that the fact that Green Lantern may not have had the depth of some of the other great superhero films is largely an issue of the source material its based on and the issues that has inherent to it...not the film itself. Be honest about the stuff you love. The filmmakers were.
:O
http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=20642409&postcount=843

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=19340757&postcount=1036

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=19340881&highlight=fantastic#post19340881
 
Last edited:
i wish it was set in space and never came back to earth, have parallax attack oa and the corps have to fend him off. but this was an origin story for hal so maybe let him come up with a clutch save, instead of fighting parallax by himself.
 
i wish it was set in space and never came back to earth, have parallax attack oa and the corps have to fend him off. but this was an origin story for hal so maybe let him come up with a clutch save, instead of fighting parallax by himself.

Completely agree. If the Earth scenes were completely absent (apart from the first third, setting up Hal as a person and his relationships to the likes of Carol etc), and Hal developed as a character whilst developing as a Green Lantern through training and on practice missions, this movie would have been so much better.

But the writers took the easy way out and had Hal mooch around on Earth, waiting for someone to spoon feed him what he needed to hear.

I mean i can't believe people are accepting what was served up. Especially after the marketing campaign makes it very clear we are getting the Star Wars of the superhero genre. An epic, sprawling cosmic adventure movie.

They ****ing flat out LIED to us.
 
we saw the gathering of all the corps members then nothing. also why did hal have to beg the guardians and sinestro to save earth? its their job to protect life. he is a gl why do you need to beg for help? did i miss a scene?
 
we saw the gathering of all the corps members then nothing. also why did hal have to beg the guardians and sinestro to save earth? its their job to protect life. he is a gl why do you need to beg for help? did i miss a scene?

Nope. Again, it's just lazy writing so it conveniently sets up a scene where Hal can tell us all the things he's learned. By learned, I mean told by Carol.
 
we saw the gathering of all the corps members then nothing. also why did hal have to beg the guardians and sinestro to save earth? its their job to protect life. he is a gl why do you need to beg for help? did i miss a scene?

Sinestro said himself that he'd master the yellow ring and train others while Parallax destroyed Earth. Something along the lines of "Earth will be lost... But when he gets to Oa, we'll be ready."
 
Green Lantern B +

Once in a while me and the mainstream critics don't agree and boy this is one of those times . I thought it was an excellent origin film for Green Lantern , and was entertained quite a bit. Don't know what anyone was expecting . This was handled nearly as well as Thor but yet this film gets the backlash ....


I was skeptical but I am very glad I saw this and I will admit Blake Lively was better than I expected so I apologize for ragging on it and not keeping an open mind until I saw it.

Highly recommended
 
i liked the oa and space stuff. just didn't care for the scenes on earth.even in the comics i rather have more space and less earth. which is why i like reading glc more than gl. i was really hoping this movie would be epic and then we would get lots of cosmic stuff from marvel and dc.
 
Yea GLC is better than the main title. Well it was when i was reading the GL books.
 
gl and thor were the movies i was looking forward to the most. i really liked thor and had a couple holy**** moments. in greenlantern i really think i ruined my experience from the trailers so nothing was a surprise, even after not watching the last week of footage that was out.
 
Well that is it. The money shots of the movie were in the trailers and the clips they released.

Apart from the final fight in space of course.
 
It was fun. That's about it, just a fun, light-hearted superhero movie-- nothing that really impressed or disappointed me.
 
WOW, Guard. Just....WOW.

:up:

That was a perfect review, man! Well done!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"