Green Lantern discussion thread *spoilers*

How would you rate the Green Lantern movie?


  • Total voters
    18

DARKKNIGHT

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
1,719
Location
Gotham, AMERICA
Just saw it. I have to get up early so I'll keep my thoughts short, and explain more tomorrow.

Good news: it's nowhere near as bad as some of the reviews would lead you to believe. Bad news: It's still not as good as it could, or should, have been.

When it comes down to it the movie's problems are due to it's plot. It almost seems as if bits and pieces of the movie were cut out of the final product. In other words, it jumps around a bit, especially early on, and many plot points are not expanded upon as well as they needed to be. Like Thor, the film suffers from the hero turning from ******* to hero a little too quickly. The transformation doesn't seem earned. And as some have said, more time should have been spent on Oa. I also get the feeling that Campbell didn't really know what to do with a big CGI film. That said, one of the main concerns of fanboys going in, CGI, was solid throughout. There are things here and there that look off, but overall the CGI is great. The suit looks good onscreen, and doesn't have a noticable bacon look that many complained about.

The main actors in the film are solid to very good throughout. I really think Reynolds proved many of his critics wrong. Complain what you will about the movie overall, but Reynolds does a good job as Hal. Additionally, Blake Lively is solid as Carol Ferris and Mark Strong is great as Sinestro. I have read some say that Hammond was a weak villain...to a certain extent I agree. Sarsgaard does a pretty good job at playing the part, I just don't know if they should have made him as pitiful and creepy (not scary creepy...just creepy) as they did. He never comes across as a proper threat.

All in all, I would give it a B-, though that may be a bit too easy. It's a solid C+ at least. No where close to being the train wreck that it seemed like it may be. I hope enough people turn out to see it to warrant a sequel, with a proper conflict between Hal and Sinestro with much more attention paid to making the story great.
 

mike3717

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,142
Location
Across the lake from Cap Canuck.
Re: Greg Lantern the Movie

Just saw it. I have to get up early so I'll keep my thoughts short, and explain more tomorrow.

Good news: it's nowhere near as bad as some of the reviews would lead you to believe. Bad news: It's still not as good as it could, or should, have been.

When it comes down to it the movie's problems are due to it's plot. It almost seems as if bits and pieces of the movie were cut out of the final product. In other words, it jumps around a bit, especially early on, and many plot points are not expanded upon as well as they needed to be. Like Thor, the film suffers from the hero turning from ******* to hero a little too quickly. The transformation doesn't seem earned. And as some have said, more time should have been spent on Oa. I also get the feeling that Campbell didn't really know what to do with a big CGI film. That said, one of the main concerns of fanboys going in, CGI, was solid throughout. There are things here and there that look off, but overall the CGI is great. The suit looks good onscreen, and doesn't have a noticable bacon look that many complained about.

The main actors in the film are solid to very good throughout. I really think Reynolds proved many of his critics wrong. Complain what you will about the movie overall, but Reynolds does a good job as Hal. Additionally, Blake Lively is solid as Carol Ferris and Mark Strong is great as Sinestro. I have read some say that Hammond was a weak villain...to a certain extent I agree. Sarsgaard does a pretty good job at playing the part, I just don't know if they should have made him as pitiful and creepy (not scary creepy...just creepy) as they did. He never comes across as a proper threat.

All in all, I would give it a B-, though that may be a bit too easy. It's a solid C+ at least. No where close to being the train wreck that it seemed like it may be. I hope enough people turn out to see it to warrant a sequel, with a proper conflict between Hal and Sinestro with much more attention paid to making the story great.

Thanks for the review.

To be fair, Hector is pretty creepy/gross in the comics. Especially the way Johns writes him.
 

E

Moderator
Excelsior Club
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
33,346
Location
MI
Re: Greg Lantern the Movie

Good news: it's nowhere near as bad as some of the reviews would lead you to believe. Bad news: It's still not as good as it could, or should, have been.

I can live with that, for a summer action flick.
 

mike3717

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,142
Location
Across the lake from Cap Canuck.
Re: Greg Lantern the Movie

Just saw this. Thought it was really good. Nowhere near as bad as reviews made it seem. I agree with DK, it could have been better but it was still quite enjoyable. I think Reynolds did a great job playing Hal Jordan. And Blake lively is hot and did a good job also. The fanboy in me would LOVE to see her in a Sapphire costume. Would have liked to see more of the Corps have speaking roles.
And I would have liked to see more of Sinestro going bad before the credits ending.

It wasn't as good as Iron Man but it was better than Spiderman and WAAAAY better than Thor imo.
 

Planet-man

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
11,645
Location
Toronto, Ontario(by way of the Kepler Verge)
It wasn't bad, but it only barely did anything for me. I didn't enjoy watching Reynolds, none of the cast or characters really stood out except for Saarsgard, the costume looked good, the mask did not. A lot of the problem is that it's just such well-worn territory by now. But as a fun, high-budget Green Lantern effects film, it's well worth seeing and I'm certainly glad they made it.

It bugged me that Carol Ferris was unconscious during the standoff with Hector Hammond. She could easily just be immobilized the same way; why have her miss Hal's moment? I also agree that it was oddly jumpy and the pacing was non-existent. On the plus side, I liked the frequent, ample use of different machines and gadgets as ring constructs. They almost never used them on Justice League and I wanted them to.
 
Last edited:

DARKKNIGHT

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
1,719
Location
Gotham, AMERICA
I wonder if there is a longer, more fleshed out version of the film somewhere? I know that I have seen a picture of an actor with Reynolds who had a cameo as John Stewart, and on ET they had a clip of Carol giving a speech at that banquet thing. It seems to me as though a lot of film was cut, which would explain the jumpiness of the film, and possibly the problem of many of the plot points not being expanded upon enough.

As for the constructs...I don't know. While some of them worked, others seemed odd and a bit silly. The part where he springs that tanker into the air and then shoots it was almost unintentionally funny. I can't help but wonder if more simple constructs, such as in the JL cartoon, would have worked better. As for the actors, I thought Reynolds and especially Strong were really, really good. I've heard some criticism of Lively, but I thought she did fine with what she was given. She never pissed me off in contrast to Holmes in Begins or Bosworth in Superman Returns.
 
Last edited:

The Overlord

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Re: Greg Lantern the Movie

I can live with that, for a summer action flick.

Except that's what they were aiming for with the Fantastic Four movies, I think movies like Dark Knight and Spider-Man 2 raised the bar beyond that. Plus, at least Iron Man was a really well put together summer block buster Greg Lantern doesn't seem to be in the same ball part as that.
 

E

Moderator
Excelsior Club
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
33,346
Location
MI
Saw it. Liked it. It was fine. Not great, but fun. I'm glad I saw it.

It certainly wasn't perfect, and I just never bought Ryan Reynolds or Blake Lively (especially her). They didnt ruin the movie, though. Hector Hammond was good and I thought Sinestro was great. Kilowog's voice was atrocious, though.
 

thee great one

Master of TOG-fu.
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Messages
15,570
Location
Mormon Land.
Why do people hate it? I love it and it was everything I want in a Green Lantern movie. I had no problem with the pacing or characters.

The only problem was I wanted more Sinestro especially his and Hal's relationship.

I dare say I liked it better then First Class.
 

Hellsbuttmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2005
Messages
3,300
Location
South Wales, UK
Really enjoyed it, solid 3/5 stars.
The total redesign of Parallax was a little bit annoying, but didn't ruin the film for me.
Favourite scene had to go to the 'Carol takes one look at Green Lantern and works out it's Hal' scene... "Did you think I wouldn't recognize you without your cheekbones!?"

The Parallax cloud looked awesome on earth, but when Hal fought it in space it looked a tad silly.
 

Jaggyd

The member formerly known as skotti-chan
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
5,141
Location
Ohio
Why do people hate it? I love it and it was everything I want in a Green Lantern movie. I had no problem with the pacing or characters.

The only problem was I wanted more Sinestro especially his and Hal's relationship.

I dare say I liked it better then First Class.

I saw a review of it on TV, and this woman epitomizes everything I hate about professional movie reviewers. All she did was *****ed about how the mythos, the ring, the alien civilizations were, in her words "Stupid and ludicrous". Then she went on about how nobody but nerds would even remotely enjoy it, "who'd want to see a movie about a guy who could create stuff with a ring".

Then her partner in crime would not let go of the fact that "all he did was make guns, and race tracks, and springs to do stuff".

Personally, I only gave it a 3.5 because; 1) Parallax did bother me, I'd hoped for a Yellow Construct, not Movie Galactus, and 2) Not enough of the actual Corps and Sinestro (Strong hit is out of the park). I wished they'd built up Star Sapphire tho, but that's just because I'm of big fan of the character. I really had fun watching the movie, I really don't get these people who call GL a "joyless" movie.


I do have to agree with you, I enjoyed GL a bit more than I did First Class.

Of the 3 big comic movies so far this year;

1. Thor
2. Green Lantern
3. First Class

But it's definitely a close race.
 
Last edited:

Bass

Nexus of the World
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
14,167
Location
Folkestone, UK
The more I hear about this the more convinced I am that the only people who seem to enjoy it at all are comic book fans - and while they like it their response is, "It's pretty good! But kinda silly." When you're core demographic is pretty lukewarm to it, that's a flop.

And since I hate Green Lantern I seriously think I'll find it crap.

I won't see it in the cinema (unless people ask me to go) because I won't make the effort (this would've also been true for X-MEN: FIRST CLASS which I really did enjoy btw) , but I'm sure I'll see it at some point, and hopefully I will enjoy it.

But I sincerely doubt I will. It seems that it's not a good film. It might not be a 25% film as rotten tomatoes says, but it's still probably mediocre at best.

But then, I liked HELLBOY and HULK, andd didn't think X3 or SPIDER-MAN 3 were as bad as everyone thought, so anything is possible I suppose.
 

Gothamite

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
3,260
Location
Dublin, Ireland
I'm glad that everyone is more or less on the same page about this.

The biggest problem the movie had wasn't really its plot so much as its script. The script was one of the most ruthlessly cheap and generic I've ever seen in a movie. Even the romantic scenes didn't even bother to be that interesting. All of the characters bar Hal and Sinestro (who was incredible and deserved to be in a better movie) felt like cartoons, especially Tim Robbins. The movie needed a better catchphrase than "It's my job to not to be [afraid]." The problem with the movie really just was the direction. There was just not enough life in the way the movie was shot or portrayed to us. We didn't get enough of a feel for Coast City to actually care about it for the final act.

I also thought that the costume was fine; maybe even perfect. The mask only really bothered me because it didn't even slightly disguise Ha (which they even addressed in the funniest scene in the film)l. The flying was awesome. Some of the Oa scenes seemed fake, but no moreso than stuff like Avatar.

I'm really happy that the movie was so completely ballsy and inventive with the constructs. The trailer implied that it was just going to be a load of guns and swords, but there was a great mix of other stuff.

All in all, the movie was flawed, but nowhere near as diabolically hellish as critics are making it out to be. I was glad to have read some reviews in advance because it meant that I left the theatre pleasantly surprised rather than disappointed. Nowhere near Thor or First Class but miles better than Spider-Man 3, Fantastic Four and Daredevil (all of which aren't as bad as people say).

This movie just needs a really good sequel. Don't reboot it. 6/10
 
Last edited:

Jaggyd

The member formerly known as skotti-chan
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
5,141
Location
Ohio
Looking like the bad reviews didn't hurt GL as much as people expected. WB was hoping for a $55Mill opening and got a $53.7Mill.


Granted Thor opened with like $70Mill, and First Class opened with $55Mill, I'd have to say it's not the "bomb" people are claiming it'd be.
 
Last edited:

Gothamite

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
3,260
Location
Dublin, Ireland
You know, Green Lantern's plot was basically a better version of the Smallville finale. A great big EVIL THING is coming to DESTROY THE WORLD and the hero has to fly into space and PUSH IT AWAY by BELIIEEVIIING IN HIMSELF !!!

But with Green Lantern, the story is all about willpower anyway and the plot was streamlined in a way that wasn't retarded. Still a bit silly, but nowhere near turning Apokolips into the Panic in the Sky meteor. I'd be surprised if Chris Sims didn't point that out soon.

Some other thoughts:

- Sinestro throwing Captain America's shield was the only WTF moment in the whole film for me.

- The first twenty minutes were the worst of the whole film and the only time the film even flirted with Batman & Robin levels of badness. (I'd heard the comparison be made)

- Tomar-Re and Kilowog had WAY more screentime than the reviews suggested. Another pleasant surprise.

- It was annoying that they made such a big deal about changing the design of the GL ring, only to make the Sinestro Corp ring exactly the same as the one from the comics.

- For the record, Bass, none of my friends are comic book fans (well not avid comic book readers anyway) and they all were surprised by how much better it was than the reviews said.

- I'm going to go on record and say that Martin Campbell is entirely to blame for this film. The direction was just really lazy and uninspired and the script desperately needed to be tightened.

- Once again though, I enjoyed it and I hope a sequel is made and not a reboot. This movie has all the ingredients for a fine sequel, if it manages to find a better director. This was not true for Superman Returns, X-Men Origins: Wolverine or Hulk.
 
Last edited:

DARKKNIGHT

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
1,719
Location
Gotham, AMERICA
It will be interesting to see how this ends up doing in the Box Office. Hopefully it will do well enough to warrant a sequel.
 

Latest posts

Top