The Official Green Lantern Review Thread - Part 5

[Cosmic]

I was in the wilderness when this movie released in theaters. I just picked it up recently on DVD. I didn't completely hate it. I see a lot of wasted potential. My overall impression is of a rushed product. It's a script that needed to be reworked at least 2 or 3 more times before being ready to shoot. I think the filmmakers were in over their heads...they tried to take on too much. This was only the first movie. They should've gone for a simpler, more straightforward approach. What they ended up with was sort of a forgettable mess.

They really needed to take a closer look at the romantic relationship, and Carol in general. Carol was just not believable at all. Hal, Carol, and Hector being past schoolmates was just too convenient. A lot of time was spent on Hector's development into a villain, but it didn't pay off. These were some of the things that took me out of the movie.

I was so looking forward to this movie, having been a fan of the comics for over 20 years, but when I heard from reliable sources of how it failed, I lowered my expectations a bit. I did enjoy the action scenes, and most of the casting worked for me. I was skeptical of the CGI costume at first, but it worked. The character of Hal Jordan translated well to the big screen. It's funny how we're always worrying about the trappings of the genre (will people laugh at the costume? Will they think his powers and origin story are silly?), but most of the time, the real problem is with the story and basic screenwriting.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

My initial response was that it was lazy, poor, by-the-numbers, and Reynolds was miscast. On further viewing I find it to be very entertaining. It's a rather simple tale compared with, say, Thor or Iron Man, with little angst, but it's not as silly as the Fantastic Four movies either. It's well-paced, well-staged and efficiently told. Not as good as X-Men: First Class, but as good as Thor and better than Captain America.

 

[Shemtov]

Watched first 15 minutes of it. Couldn't watch anymore. Maybe I'll give it another try, but until then, it's the worst comic book movie I've seen.
In those first 15 minutes I identified 3 Major Problems:
CGI is terrible.
Dialogue is TRYING to be witty, and fails miserably.
Something off about the direction I can't pt my finger on it.

 

[Juicy J]

^ Agreed, especially with the dialogue part. They were going for an Iron-man esque sort of vibe, especially with the characters repartee, and they failed miserably.

 

[Mr.T]

Picked it up on RedBox and tried to give it another shot. All the acting was horrendous. Reynolds was bad. I definitely had a more "positive" opinion of the movie after leaving the theater. After watching it again on bluray, it is an absolute stinker...

 

[Chris M]

t it's not as silly as the Fantastic Four movies either. It's well-paced, well-staged and efficiently told. Not as good as X-Men: First Class, but as good as Thor and better than Captain America.

Agreed.

I can't for the life of me understand how people rate Captain Amricas so highly and Green Lantern so poorly. Captain America didn't even have an ending!!!!

I guess if they'd set GL in WW2 with lots of Pro-American feeling people would also consider it a "romp" and overlook it's flaws.

 

[chiefchirpa]

Agreed.

I can't for the life of me understand how people rate Captain Amricas so highly and Green Lantern so poorly. Captain America didn't even have an ending!!!!

I guess if they'd set GL in WW2 with lots of Pro-American feeling people would also consider it a "romp" and overlook it's flaws.

Just read people and reviewers comments in most sites (including this one) why they rate Cap higher than GL. You having a differing opinion than the majority should instantly question yourself: do you appraise too much on sub-par movie? IMO Cap A has better characters, actors, theme, and story. Editing is better in the beginning parts. That's my opinion and apparently most people too. The only thing that makes you appraise GL over Cap, if you like space science fiction better. Or familiar with the subject matter (read: GL fans).

Of course Cap A doesn't have an ending, the continuing story is called Avengers. Although I concur Cap is not as good as Thor and Iron Man, it's certainly better than GL. Just like what most reviewers amateurs or pros said.

 

[The Morningstar]

Cap's ending was great. I loved how it cut just as Rogers realises that Peggy is dead.

 

[HighFivingMF]

I loved how it cut just as Rogers realises that Peggy is dead.

You sick bastard.

 

[chiefchirpa]

And GL ending is that crap generic sci fi theme song. Duh duh duh duh duh.... Duh duh duh duh duh....

 

[dnno1]

Just read people and reviewers comments in most sites (including this one) why they rate Cap higher than GL. You having a differing opinion than the majority should instantly question yourself: do you appraise too much on sub-par movie? IMO Cap A has better characters, actors, theme, and story. Editing is better in the beginning parts. That's my opinion and apparently most people too. The only thing that makes you appraise GL over Cap, if you like space science fiction better. Or familiar with the subject matter (read: GL fans).

Of course Cap A doesn't have an ending, the continuing story is called Avengers. Although I concur Cap is not as good as Thor and Iron Man, it's certainly better than GL. Just like what most reviewers amateurs or pros said.

I have to agree. "Captain America: the First Avenger" had a better cast for one thing (Tommy Lee Jones, Hugo Weaving, Haley Atwell, Samuel Jackson, are big names vs Ryan Reynolds, Blake Liveley, Mark Strong, and Peter Sarsgaard). The actors that really should have mattered most had smaller roles in Green Lantern, plus the fact that there was little brand recognition didn't help either.

 

[KalMart]

Agreed.

I can't for the life of me understand how people rate Captain Amricas so highly and Green Lantern so poorly. Captain America didn't even have an ending!!!!

I guess if they'd set GL in WW2 with lots of Pro-American feeling people would also consider it a "romp" and overlook it's flaws.

You forgot: also make GL at least coherent, with better acting and at least a sense of fun, without the bad editing and characterizations taking viewers out of the experience. Y'know, just little details like that.

 

[craigdbfan]

Green Lantern was pretty horrible in almost every way imaginable. It was basically a nightmare of what a Green Lantern movie could be. Only I didn't have to go through the nightmare part. Reality just kind of took its course.

I hope Red Letter Media reviews this. I can get some enjoyment out of that.

 

[HighFivingMF]

Green Lantern was pretty horrible in almost every way imaginable. It was basically a nightmare of what a Green Lantern movie could be. Only I didn't have to go through the nightmare part. Reality just kind of took its course.

I hope Red Letter Media reviews this. I can get some enjoyment out of that.

This meeting of overreaction addicts anonymous adjourned.

 

[craigdbfan]

Ok I'll rephrase.

It was a giant waste of money.

 

[The Sage]

I enjoyed it. It wasn't nowhere near what I was expecting and what it should have been. I didn't have a problem with the cast. My issues revolve around the story, the tone, and the editing. Feels like a lot of the ideas and original plans that were in mind were cut, which is too bad.

 

[craigdbfan]

You pretty much nailed all the problems which make it such a giant waste. Unfortunate misappropriation of money for such half baked ideas.

 

[loganom1]

So.. I just now got around to seeing this film, and it totally wasn't everything that I thought it would live up to.

 

[Chris M]

Just read people and reviewers comments in most sites (including this one) why they rate Cap higher than GL. You having a differing opinion than the majority should instantly question yourself: do you appraise too much on sub-par movie? IMO Cap A has better characters, actors, theme, and story. Editing is better in the beginning parts. That's my opinion and apparently most people too. The only thing that makes you appraise GL over Cap, if you like space science fiction better. Or familiar with the subject matter (read: GL fans).

Of course Cap A doesn't have an ending, the continuing story is called Avengers. Although I concur Cap is not as good as Thor and Iron Man, it's certainly better than GL. Just like what most reviewers amateurs or pros said.

I dont dislike Cap. America. I just think it's on par with GL. Both films have strong and weak points- and I think both films could've done much better.

I'm just puzzled by the disparity in reviews between the two. I mean the fans seem to be VERY forgiving with Cap's flaws (eg: did anyone see what happened to Steve Rogers, 'cause all I saw was Peter Parker with blonde hair...) , because they see it as a downpayment on the Avengers. Whereas professional critics seem to use the word "romp" a bit. Which is actually very patronising when you think about it as it really means they go easy on it like they would a Disney film, because the subject matter's clearly not for grown ups.

It strange that none of these concessions get applied to GL, instead people seem to apply the Nolan/TDK yardstick to measure how far it fell short. Which is harsh.

But then I seem to be in the minorty so maybe I am losing my mind...

 

[Chris M]

You forgot: also make GL at least coherent, with better acting and at least a sense of fun, without the bad editing and characterizations taking viewers out of the experience. Y'know, just little details like that.

Actually the thing that took me most out of the experience of either film was the period setting WW2 pub, in Europe, filled with soldiers - and not a single cigarette in sight.

But in GL I would've just settled for Legion. <sigh>

 

[KalMart]

Actually the thing that took me most out of the experience of either film was the period setting WW2 pub, in Europe, filled with soldiers - and not a single cigarette in sight.

That's a very good point...didn't even notice that. t:

 

[Shadowlord X]

I dont dislike Cap. America. I just think it's on par with GL. Both films have strong and weak points- and I think both films could've done much better.

I'm just puzzled by the disparity in reviews between the two. I mean the fans seem to be VERY forgiving with Cap's flaws (eg: did anyone see what happened to Steve Rogers, 'cause all I saw was Peter Parker with blonde hair...) , because they see it as a downpayment on the Avengers. Whereas professional critics seem to use the word "romp" a bit. Which is actually very patronising when you think about it as it really means they go easy on it like they would a Disney film, because the subject matter's clearly not for grown ups.

It strange that none of these concessions get applied to GL, instead people seem to apply the Nolan/TDK yardstick to measure how far it fell short. Which is harsh.

But then I seem to be in the minorty so maybe I am losing my mind...

Not to be harsh but I think you might be.

I may be a MARVEL fan but I was never a CAP fan and I loved the movie and it has made me love the character; it's CAP I'm looking forward to most in THE AVENGERS now. I saw CA:TFA 7 times in cinema and many times more since I got the blu-ray dvd.

In contrast after half an hour of GL I was ready to walk out, and in fact as soon as he punched Parallax into the sun I ran out of the cinema and never looked back.

However the style and tone of CA:TFA may be a factor in your dislike. I think the style and tone make it more appeal more to people in their 30's, 40's, and 50's. Most of my friends who are in their 20's don't like it.

 

[BH/HHH]

Finally watched the extended cut and as a fan of it anyway I thought it was alot better. The extended cut is what should have been released in the cinema just added that bit more.

On a side note my girlfriend watched it for the first time and she loved it.

I really hope WB's makes a sequel.

 

[Obi-Ron]

Finally watched GL, I picked up the Blu-ray on a lark while in Best Buy. I thought it was a lot better than word-of-mouth gave it credit for. They could have gotten someone a little more macho than RR to play Hal, but overall I quite enjoyed it.

 

[SimbaRises]

It was one of the few movies I have EVER walked out on in a theatre, and two in the same summer no less. Both Captain America and Green Lantern were utterly atrocious. At least Green Lantern had Ryan Reynolds, who can be very funny at times. Chris Evans playing one of the most boring characters around was flat out dull. Both had the most un-inspiring generic scores and theme music. Both had ridiculously cheesy villains. It was bad across the board on both films. But given Green Lantern had Reynolds, I rank it slightly higher than Captain America.