Latest Movie News Headlines

The UnPopular Opinion: Green Lantern

Nov. 6, 2013by: Alex Maidy

THE UNPOPULAR OPINION is an ongoing column featuring different takes on films that either the writer HATED, but that the majority of film fans LOVED, or that the writer LOVED, but that most others LOATHED. We're hoping this column will promote constructive and geek fueled discussion. Enjoy!

****SOME SPOILERS ENSUE****

Before Marvel launched their cinematic universe, there were films like SPIDER-MAN, X-MEN, DAREDEVIL, and more. They existed as standalone movies focused on the various superhero characters that had only become filmable in the 21st century. Once Disney decided to intertwine all of their properties did the superhero genre become something more than a fun popcorn flick. But, that was Marvel.  DC had no cinematic universe aside from Bryan Singer's retro homage SUPERMAN RETURNS and Christopher Nolan's DARK KNIGHT TRILOGY.  Nolan's films were not the same type of films as what was coming from Marvel and Disney and it seemed damn near impossible to launch a slew of films using that same "realistic" approach.  It wouldn't be until 2013 when MAN OF STEEL hit theaters that it seemed like DC could successfully hang with Marvel at the box office.  But, everyone forgets about GREEN LANTERN.

There is a lot of hate for the Ryan Reynolds film from both fans and critics which is somewhat unfair.  When GREEN LANTERN was announced with Reynolds in the lead and director Martin Campbell at the helm, there should have been at least some recognition that this was not going to be the next BATMAN BEGINS.  First and foremost, the entire character of GREEN LANTERN does not work in a realistic universe.  This is a guy recruited by an intergalactic police force to weild a ring that can take on the shape of whatever he thinks of.  That and the majority of his teammates are bizarre aliens straight off the comic page.  Something tells me this movie was never going to give us a grounded look at a fighter pilot being introduced to extraterrestrial life.

Good afternoon. We're gonna have a great jump today. Okay, first crank a hard cutback as you hit the wall. There's a screaming bottom curve, so watch out. Remember: rip it, roll it, and punch it.

Martin Campbell is a talented movie maker.  While I would never mistake his films for high class cinema, they are exciting thrillrides that exemplify why we go to the movies.  GOLDENEYE, CASINO ROYALE, THE MASK OF ZORRO, EDGE OF DARKNESS: all are visual rollercoasters that cater to the swashbuckling nature of their screenplays.  Campbell approached GREEN LANTERN much in the way that Sam Raimi did with SPIDER-MAN: he set out to make a comic book movie.  The visuals are quite stunning throughout the movie and really make you feel the alien nature of what the Green Lantern Corps represents.  While some felt the use of CGI was excessive, I thought electing to make Hal Jordan's suit all computer-generated was the right move as it gave the suit a much more alien feel.  If Reynolds had just been jumping around in a black leather outfit covered with lights it wouldn't have worked nearly as well.

Which brings us to Reynolds who has never quite broken through to the level of success that everyone expected of him.  With matinee idol good looks and one hell of a sense of comedic timing, Reynolds is perfectly suited for a superhero movie.  While he works to get DEADPOOL off the ground, Reynolds turns in both X-MEN ORIGINS: WOLVERINE and BLADE III gave us a test reel for what we could have expected in GREEN LANTERN.  His delivery is perfectly suited for a douchebag who must learn to be the savior of the universe and his physique is already superhuman.  Ryan Reynolds is by no means a bad actor, but he also hasn't quite proven that he is a dramatic one either.  The great thing about GREEN LANTERN is he doesn't have to be a thespian to deliver the somewhat cheesy dialogue that every movie of the genre employs.

Are you not entertained?

Even the bad guys work in this film. Peter Sarsgaard's Hector Hammond is a well conceived villain along the lines of Willem Dafoe's Norman Osborn in SPIDER-MAN.  He is a man with hidden ambition who becomes something inhuman.  Couple that with the already non-human Parallax as voiced by the great Clancy Brown and you have both sides of villanous threat: the man and the monster.  Some have criticized making Parallax a dirty floating shitcloud, but this isn't the faceless enemy from FANTASTIC FOUR: RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER.  Parallax is a conscious beast that we do see and can feel the threat of.  One of the shortcomings of using CGI to the level they do in GREEN LANTERN is that it loses some of the impact on the audience who doesn't feel the threat to the characters is tangible.

But, on the other hand, the fully CGI world of Oa, home to the Green Lantern Corps, feels very tangible.  With the voice work of Geoffrey Rush as Tomar-Re and the late Michael Clarke Duncan as Killowog, the other Lanterns don't feel like cartoons but actual alien colleagues to the newest member of their team, Hal Jordan.  The only other physical actor in these scenes is the amazingly cast Mark Strong as Sinestro.  His thin mustache and widow's peak shows no one else should have played this role.  He is a mentor and leader to the Lanterns and any fan of the comics knows he is on his way to becoming one of the biggest villains for the franchise.  Strong carries this part and is equal parts comic book homage and classic movie villain.  If and when we get GREEN LANTERN 2, if everything goes by the wayside and is recast, Strong should be exempt and remain in this role.

I am wearing nothing under this flightsuit, Hal.

Blake Lively may not be the strongest female character in a superhero film, but damn is she nice to look at. As the object of Hal Jordan's affection, you could find a lot of other actresses who could have filled the role as Carol Ferris, but would they have been as big screen worthy as Lively? The character in a future film could transform into Star Sapphire and I for one would love to see Lively in a skintight bodysuit ready to do battle alongside Ryan Reynolds. Add to Lively the great Tim Robbins and Angela Bassett in minor roles and you have a good cast for a movie like GREEN LANTERN.

As far as origin movies go, GREEN LANTERN had a much higher hill to climb than any other. The idea of an entire alien police force in a massive universe is quite a concept to cram into a two hour film. We aren't dealing with a psychopathic clown, a megalomaniac genius millionaire, or even a drugged out man-lizard. The origins of GREEN LANTERN are wholly alien which makes this movie more of a science fiction movie than a superhero one. But, with the complex origin now told, future GREEN LANTERN films can focus on the Earthbound hero using his powers to take on foes terrestrial and otherwise. Martin Campbell and Ryan Reynolds have taken the brunt of the blame for issues on GREEN LANTERN but they didn't have to. The movie may be goofy and complex, but it is fun and succeeded where many doubted it ever could. SUPERMAN has had a hard road back to the big screen but people can relate easily to him as he is both an everyman and more. GREEN LANTERN is an average man forced into a much larger role in a massive universe.

We forget easily that both THOR and the upcoming GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY have similarly complex backstories. While I think the world of Asgard has the problem of gods fighting gods and therefore takes the human element out of the equation, GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY is likely to face the same troubles that GREEN LANTERN did with critics and audiences. But, in anticipation of the Marvel fanboys throwing way too much acclaim at that film, reconsider GREEN LANTERN. It isn't trying to be the epitome of superhero films but rather tell a space opera adventure tale within the format of a comic book movie. And it does a visually impressive job to boot.

Oh, and if you have any suggestions for The UnPopular Opinion I’m always happy to hear them. You can send along an email to alexmaidy@joblo.com, spell it out below, slap it up on my wall in Movie Fan Central, or send me a private message via Movie Fan Central. Provide me with as many movie suggestions as you like, with any reasoning you'd care to share, and if I agree then you may one day see it featured in this very column!
Source: JoBlo.com

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

+13
5:24PM on 11/06/2013
Did they let The_Soloist write an article?

Green Lantern was not only a horrible comic book adaption but just a horrible movie.
Did they let The_Soloist write an article?

Green Lantern was not only a horrible comic book adaption but just a horrible movie.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:17PM on 11/06/2013
Come on, Soloist! Say it. Get it out, buddy.....
Come on, Soloist! Say it. Get it out, buddy.....
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:59AM on 11/06/2013
This is a movie that could have been incredible if Campbell had just trimmed out a bunch of stuff and made some script changes. First off, Peter Sarsgaard's Hector Hammond was absolutely pointless in the film as his character made little to no impact on the plot. The focus should have remained on Paralax and his influence/destruction throughout the story as Hal tried to grasp his new abilities.

Secondly there's so many stupid parts and cliches that just kill the flick in its tracks such as
This is a movie that could have been incredible if Campbell had just trimmed out a bunch of stuff and made some script changes. First off, Peter Sarsgaard's Hector Hammond was absolutely pointless in the film as his character made little to no impact on the plot. The focus should have remained on Paralax and his influence/destruction throughout the story as Hal tried to grasp his new abilities.

Secondly there's so many stupid parts and cliches that just kill the flick in its tracks such as Paralax being the most dangerous force in the universe so lets send only 12 Lantern's out of thousands to try and stop him?!? And that's just for starter's.

The CGI was too ridiculous at times like his mask, why did that have to be pure CGI? It looked fake as hell and Reynolds didn't sell it that well either. Blake Lively also gave a very cliched performance although it's not really her fault given the script was crap from the start, she's proven herself as an actress. Mark Strong as Sinestro was the real standout character wise as were the voices of Michael Clarke Duncan and Geoffrey Rush.

The only thing this movie did extremely well in my opinion is when we were on Oa and amongst the lead Lantern characters. Whenever we came back to Earth, the movie grinded to a halt and was pure boredom by comparison. I honestly think the movie should be remade but with very little Earth throughout the story.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:21AM on 11/06/2013
A well constructed arguement. I disagree with all of it.
A well constructed arguement. I disagree with all of it.
4:19PM on 11/06/2013
Good for you.
Good for you.
+8
10:01AM on 11/06/2013

NO

NO. Just No. I had no problems at all with the Ryan Reynolds casting as I thought he played a decent, not great Hal Jordan. Rush and Clarke Duncan were great as Corps members and I think Mark Strong was an inspired choice for Sinestro. I didn't even mind the CGI suit. Give them credit for taking a creative route to feature a suit on screen. But the script was all over the place and just god awful. The Dr. Hammond arc was so stupid. One of the worst villain developments ever done for a comic
NO. Just No. I had no problems at all with the Ryan Reynolds casting as I thought he played a decent, not great Hal Jordan. Rush and Clarke Duncan were great as Corps members and I think Mark Strong was an inspired choice for Sinestro. I didn't even mind the CGI suit. Give them credit for taking a creative route to feature a suit on screen. But the script was all over the place and just god awful. The Dr. Hammond arc was so stupid. One of the worst villain developments ever done for a comic book film. Even worse than John Travolta's character in The Punisher. We had to see Hal fight Parallax which was nothing more than a floating fart cloud. And the script writers were not creative enough with the tools and powers Hal "willed". A hot wheels track? Really? Even seeing Sinestro don the fear ring at the end wasn't exciting and it wasn't really developed. Stupid movie overall!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+8
9:16AM on 11/06/2013
Green Lantern is still my fav comic character since childhood and I was soo pumped about this film when it first came out. Granted I thought that Ryan wasnt that great of a casting but I was willing to see how he does (He wasnt bad, just decent) When I first watched it opening day I left kind of dissapointed. The film should have been longer to better flush out character development, there should have been more screen time on OA and the final battle should have had the Green Lantern Corps take
Green Lantern is still my fav comic character since childhood and I was soo pumped about this film when it first came out. Granted I thought that Ryan wasnt that great of a casting but I was willing to see how he does (He wasnt bad, just decent) When I first watched it opening day I left kind of dissapointed. The film should have been longer to better flush out character development, there should have been more screen time on OA and the final battle should have had the Green Lantern Corps take part. The film fett rushed. I did still pick up the Blue-ray extended version which I think makes a big differnce with the extra scenes. I do understand that the concept is a hard sell for audiences. Mark strong as Sinestro was amazing, please bring him back for the Justice Leauge film or if they do a GL2 or even if they reboot it just keep Strong. Peter Sarsgaard was pretty good at Hector as well.

Over all I think it missed its mark but its still a decent film that I still do watch every now and then, I enjoy the character too much to not too. The fact that Green Lantern even got made to a blockbuster film still makes me smile. If you havent checked it out then I highly suggest you do.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:58AM on 11/06/2013
It was just an average superhero film, I didn't hate it but I didn't love it either. The extended cut was better though, gave more back story.
It was just an average superhero film, I didn't hate it but I didn't love it either. The extended cut was better though, gave more back story.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+6
12:19PM on 11/06/2013
I didn't think Green Lantern is half bad either . It isn't without it's problems, but I thought it was "pretty good".
I didn't think Green Lantern is half bad either . It isn't without it's problems, but I thought it was "pretty good".
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+6
11:12AM on 11/06/2013
It was a garbage script from the get go and you simply can't make a good movie from a shitty script, no matter talented your cast or crew might be.....
It was a garbage script from the get go and you simply can't make a good movie from a shitty script, no matter talented your cast or crew might be.....
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:17PM on 11/06/2013

Wasted opportunity

The first problem this film had was Reynolds. He plays the SAME person in 95% of the movies he does. His performance here and his performance as Deadpool, or whatever that was, or the sidekick in Blade 3 are all the same! He is the wise ass guy who learns his lesson at the end. He is a atheltic super hero version of Vince Vaughn.

The first problem this film had was Reynolds. He plays the SAME person in 95% of the movies he does. His performance here and his performance as Deadpool, or whatever that was, or the sidekick in Blade 3 are all the same! He is the wise ass guy who learns his lesson at the end. He is a atheltic super hero version of Vince Vaughn.

Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:31PM on 11/06/2013
People try to give him some sort of weird pass when it comes to his movies. He's like Will Smith.
People try to give him some sort of weird pass when it comes to his movies. He's like Will Smith.
8:15AM on 11/07/2013
Go see BURIED. He gives a really good performance in that one. But yeah, GREEN LANTERN was a serious disappointment.
Go see BURIED. He gives a really good performance in that one. But yeah, GREEN LANTERN was a serious disappointment.
9:16AM on 11/06/2013

As Jedd said, it's not a terrible film.

The problem lies with the script. It comes back to Michael Goldenberg, who has never written a great movie. Movies like Contact and Peter Pan were co-written by really good screenwriters that Goldenberg assisted on. Berlanti and Guggenheim obviously know how to write Green Arrow, but I have to blame them partially, as well. Parallax really is also not a compelling villain to watch, because it's difficult to convey that kind of threat as intelligent and give it a personality. The weak
The problem lies with the script. It comes back to Michael Goldenberg, who has never written a great movie. Movies like Contact and Peter Pan were co-written by really good screenwriters that Goldenberg assisted on. Berlanti and Guggenheim obviously know how to write Green Arrow, but I have to blame them partially, as well. Parallax really is also not a compelling villain to watch, because it's difficult to convey that kind of threat as intelligent and give it a personality. The weak script for Green Lantern is where the film derailed. Campbell did the best he could with what he was working with.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:06AM on 11/06/2013
I think it's not a bad film, it's just very much an also-rans effort when stacked against the competition at Marvel. I don't think Ryan Reynolds was the right choice for Hal and the "CGI uniforms" aesthetic didn't work. Also, Blake Lively was all kinds of stiff. However, I did very much like Mark Strong as Sinestro, that's the main thing this film got right. The late Michael Clarke Duncan also make for a great Kilowog, same with Geoffrey Rush and Tomar-Re. Green Lantern: First Flight really was
I think it's not a bad film, it's just very much an also-rans effort when stacked against the competition at Marvel. I don't think Ryan Reynolds was the right choice for Hal and the "CGI uniforms" aesthetic didn't work. Also, Blake Lively was all kinds of stiff. However, I did very much like Mark Strong as Sinestro, that's the main thing this film got right. The late Michael Clarke Duncan also make for a great Kilowog, same with Geoffrey Rush and Tomar-Re. Green Lantern: First Flight really was the film we should have gotten. I still like it a mite more than others do though.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:50PM on 11/06/2013
Okay, I typically watch the movies you guys throw on here that I haven't seen. I give them a totally open shot and then come back to read the argument. I'm basically convinced you watched the movie on some of the best weed known to man. The movie isn't bad, it just isn't good. It has little rewatch factor
Okay, I typically watch the movies you guys throw on here that I haven't seen. I give them a totally open shot and then come back to read the argument. I'm basically convinced you watched the movie on some of the best weed known to man. The movie isn't bad, it just isn't good. It has little rewatch factor
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
6:41PM on 11/06/2013
No quality or amount of weed can make the green lantern good.
No quality or amount of weed can make the green lantern good.
+4
2:08PM on 11/06/2013

Mr. Maidy, you seem like a nice guy and I have enjoyed many of your other articles

I honestly, sincerely mean that, but holy smokes, I swear if I ever were to teach a high school debate class I would use these columns as a textbook for how to not structure your arguments. Lots and lots of broad statements and generalizations backed up by your opinion, which you are definitely entitled to, and not much else.
I honestly, sincerely mean that, but holy smokes, I swear if I ever were to teach a high school debate class I would use these columns as a textbook for how to not structure your arguments. Lots and lots of broad statements and generalizations backed up by your opinion, which you are definitely entitled to, and not much else.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:47PM on 11/06/2013
I will be stealing this post verbatim at some point...

PERFECTLY STATED!!!
I will be stealing this post verbatim at some point...

PERFECTLY STATED!!!
1:57AM on 11/07/2013
Why thank you, PsycoPat.
Why thank you, PsycoPat.
9:58AM on 11/06/2013

It's interesting seeing people defend even the ugliest of the bunch

Green Lantern was a poor effort by a group of talented individuals. It wasn't Ryan who's to blame for this mess, it's the lack luster villains, half-developed plot lines (did anyone care about Sinestro?)
Green Lantern was a poor effort by a group of talented individuals. It wasn't Ryan who's to blame for this mess, it's the lack luster villains, half-developed plot lines (did anyone care about Sinestro?)
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
5:25AM on 11/07/2013

You know...

I think the problem here is you're way too forgiving of this movie. There's plenty wrong with this film, and for you to gush over everything is just unbelievable. Even this movies biggest fans can see there are serious issues with this (I will never, in my life, forget that stupid ass helicopter on wheels part). Come on, at least if you're going to try to defend this thing, point out its flaws beyond nonsense like "you could find a lot of other actresses who could have filled the role as
I think the problem here is you're way too forgiving of this movie. There's plenty wrong with this film, and for you to gush over everything is just unbelievable. Even this movies biggest fans can see there are serious issues with this (I will never, in my life, forget that stupid ass helicopter on wheels part). Come on, at least if you're going to try to defend this thing, point out its flaws beyond nonsense like "you could find a lot of other actresses who could have filled the role as Carol Ferris, but would they have been as big screen worthy as Lively". Yes, literally anyone would have been better.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:53PM on 11/06/2013

The old college try

I agree the movie was not near the disaster it was made out to be. Watch RIPD if you want to see Reynolds suck in a roll.
I agree the movie was not near the disaster it was made out to be. Watch RIPD if you want to see Reynolds suck in a roll.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:27PM on 11/07/2013
*role Unless he was eating bread in the movie in which case I apologize.
*role Unless he was eating bread in the movie in which case I apologize.
3:58PM on 11/06/2013

i usually love love love comicbook movies

But this movie was a massive disappointment it was slow,boring,the fx was cheesy and terrible and the story just wasn't interesting. All in all this movie really blew.
But this movie was a massive disappointment it was slow,boring,the fx was cheesy and terrible and the story just wasn't interesting. All in all this movie really blew.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+3
11:22AM on 11/06/2013
I will say that I don't think anyone, or most ppl, didn't like the film bc it wasn't realistic. I remember ppl throwing out hopes for Star Wars, and that it would be more intergalactic than Thor. It wasn't that it was unrealistic, it's that it's a pretty dumb movie. The plot and character progression, and then nobody helps at the end? And kinda stupid things he imagines up - tho there are crazy shit like that in the comics - but as a person who liked it, ppl didn't like it mainly bc it was
I will say that I don't think anyone, or most ppl, didn't like the film bc it wasn't realistic. I remember ppl throwing out hopes for Star Wars, and that it would be more intergalactic than Thor. It wasn't that it was unrealistic, it's that it's a pretty dumb movie. The plot and character progression, and then nobody helps at the end? And kinda stupid things he imagines up - tho there are crazy shit like that in the comics - but as a person who liked it, ppl didn't like it mainly bc it was really stupid. Very bad script. Wish they would have used Geoff more (all around in DC films)
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+3
11:14AM on 11/06/2013
I will say that I enjoyed green lantern just enough to have a sequel to the film. Well, I want a sequel or a reboot or anything. But I enjoyed it when I saw it in the theatre. Then realized how stupid it was when I watched it again. But I like the character so much I hope a mediocre film doesn't kill the franchise. I'm fine with or without Reynolds
I will say that I enjoyed green lantern just enough to have a sequel to the film. Well, I want a sequel or a reboot or anything. But I enjoyed it when I saw it in the theatre. Then realized how stupid it was when I watched it again. But I like the character so much I hope a mediocre film doesn't kill the franchise. I'm fine with or without Reynolds
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:24AM on 11/06/2013
I'll echo many sentiments here and say that the script was mostly to blame. Reynolds wasn't perfect, but he did ok with what he was given. Strong was the perfect choice as Sinestro. Sadly, all they had to do was adapt the Secret Origin story and it would have been much better and set up future stories (Sinestro Corps, Red Lanterns, etc)
I'll echo many sentiments here and say that the script was mostly to blame. Reynolds wasn't perfect, but he did ok with what he was given. Strong was the perfect choice as Sinestro. Sadly, all they had to do was adapt the Secret Origin story and it would have been much better and set up future stories (Sinestro Corps, Red Lanterns, etc)
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+3
9:37AM on 11/06/2013

I liked....

...everything about this movie that did not involve humans and Earth. And there lies my problem....
...everything about this movie that did not involve humans and Earth. And there lies my problem....
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:02AM on 11/06/2013

Reynolds

Reynolds is a third rate actor that will never wow anyone on screen, he is a fad for teenagers because he can be funny, but trust me when you hit about 24/25 you realise that he is awful!

If they do introduce the character again, I hope they go down the John Stewart path, maybe Elba or Michael jai white playing him, just not fucking Reynolds!!!
Reynolds is a third rate actor that will never wow anyone on screen, he is a fad for teenagers because he can be funny, but trust me when you hit about 24/25 you realise that he is awful!

If they do introduce the character again, I hope they go down the John Stewart path, maybe Elba or Michael jai white playing him, just not fucking Reynolds!!!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:19PM on 11/06/2013
24 is still pretty much a teenager. When I was 24-25 I didn't have some kind of wisdom that made me think I knew more than teenagers (and I'm only a few years off from 24 now). I was actually prolly worse, bc I was in college and thought I was better and smarter than the teenagers, but still thought I was invincible. You kinda sound like you might be similar to that. Ryan Reynolds is absolutely not a fad. He's been around a long time with his pizza show. He's made some absolute BOMBS, and is
24 is still pretty much a teenager. When I was 24-25 I didn't have some kind of wisdom that made me think I knew more than teenagers (and I'm only a few years off from 24 now). I was actually prolly worse, bc I was in college and thought I was better and smarter than the teenagers, but still thought I was invincible. You kinda sound like you might be similar to that. Ryan Reynolds is absolutely not a fad. He's been around a long time with his pizza show. He's made some absolute BOMBS, and is still around. He's made some absolute terrible choices, and does the same thing too much, he's flawed for sure, but dude can act like a motherfucker. See Buried. I think bc he's as attractive as he is, built, and on his 2nd hot g/f (wife?) he's fucking lazy and doesn't try to reach his potential.
12:41PM on 11/06/2013
And I hope you don't think Michael Jai White is a better actor than Ryan Reynolds. No doubt that Elba is, and that'd be great casting tho he's a little old, but no way is Michael Jai White a better actor than Ryan Reynolds, nor could he carry a movie like this. Or even on the side in a JL movie
And I hope you don't think Michael Jai White is a better actor than Ryan Reynolds. No doubt that Elba is, and that'd be great casting tho he's a little old, but no way is Michael Jai White a better actor than Ryan Reynolds, nor could he carry a movie like this. Or even on the side in a JL movie
6:49PM on 11/06/2013

Highly Underrated

While its not the greatest superhero film ever made this is not the horrid disaster it was made out to be. I don't mind the CGI story-line or a whole lot else. It adequately sets up the character and the universe. I also didn't mind Paralax as the villain, interesting in a Fifth Element sort of way.
While its not the greatest superhero film ever made this is not the horrid disaster it was made out to be. I don't mind the CGI story-line or a whole lot else. It adequately sets up the character and the universe. I also didn't mind Paralax as the villain, interesting in a Fifth Element sort of way.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:01AM on 11/07/2013
What pray tell is your definition of a horrid distaster? I'm not talking like low-rent Syfy channel stuff, I mean like big budget had legtimate talent involved but still just sucked? Because really if this doesn't meet your definition, then I am curious.
What pray tell is your definition of a horrid distaster? I'm not talking like low-rent Syfy channel stuff, I mean like big budget had legtimate talent involved but still just sucked? Because really if this doesn't meet your definition, then I am curious.
3:53PM on 11/06/2013
In all honesty, it's hardly the worst superhero movie out there. There are so many things that could have been done differently and better. I do agree that Reynolds would have made a better Flash as he feels miscast here. Still hoping he can reprise as a proper Deadpool though. That aside they had a lot to covet in a short time but did it wrong. Also the film would have been better with practical effects for the main aliens. Tomar and Killawog would have looked lightyears more impressive in
In all honesty, it's hardly the worst superhero movie out there. There are so many things that could have been done differently and better. I do agree that Reynolds would have made a better Flash as he feels miscast here. Still hoping he can reprise as a proper Deadpool though. That aside they had a lot to covet in a short time but did it wrong. Also the film would have been better with practical effects for the main aliens. Tomar and Killawog would have looked lightyears more impressive in body suits with mixed cgi over full cgi. Also the final battle should have been Green Lanterns not just Hal. I get that this is Hal's story but the lack of Green Lanterns as a whole felt flat. I know, Hal learns to be a hero and takes on an enemy himself, proves he's "special" blah blah blah, but how cool would it have been with main GL core characters in that final fight?! Like in Transformers: revenger of the fallen, instead of a potentially amazing battle with Devestator, we get a giant vacuum instead. It's the easy way out of doing something potentially extraordinary just because you blew the budget on other crap.
As it stands GL was tolerable at best, imo anyway.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:32PM on 11/06/2013
It was a pretty bad movie, they honestly tried to cram too much into one movie. They had Hector Hammond as a villain while Paralax was approaching as an even bigger villain, all the while they were laying the framework for Sinestro. I didn't think this was a bad movie because it was sci-fi related opposed to the realistic nature of Nolan's Batman or the MCU. I thought it was a bad movie because the pacing was all off and they didn't take their time to craft a good story.

The movie should
It was a pretty bad movie, they honestly tried to cram too much into one movie. They had Hector Hammond as a villain while Paralax was approaching as an even bigger villain, all the while they were laying the framework for Sinestro. I didn't think this was a bad movie because it was sci-fi related opposed to the realistic nature of Nolan's Batman or the MCU. I thought it was a bad movie because the pacing was all off and they didn't take their time to craft a good story.

The movie should have been all about he origin of Green Lantern, don't even introduce the Corp. Have Hal meet Abin Sur, get the ring, he figures out how to use the ring (albeit in a limited capacity w/o training). The film builds towards a showdown with Hector Hammond and Hal saves the day. In doing so, he attracts the rest of the Corp who show up for Hal at the end of the movie.
Movie two opens up with Paralax being released from his prison. As he rushes towards Earth from the far reaches of the universe, the GL Corp investigate the damage left in his wake. They find out about Paralax and Sinestro gets the yellow ring made by the end of Act 1. Act 2 is Sinestro being tempted by the Yellow Ring and being introduced to its power against some foes. Act 3, Sinestro embraces the yellow ring and there is a show down between Sinestro and Hal Jordan.
Movie 2 leads into Movie 3. Sinestro builds his own Corp in an attempt to capture Paralax and wield his power for themselves. GL Corp tries to build a resistance/preventive measure to stop Paralax and prevent Sinestro from using Paralax. Act 2 ends with a show down between GL Corp and YL Corp. Act 3 results in both Corps having to team up to take out Paralax.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:57PM on 11/06/2013
No that's not gonna work bc the corps are gonna be notified immediately when one of them die, and especially when someone else gets the ring. And they are gonna take care of that immediately. And also, the green lantern who died - I can't remember his name - was a legend, and the corps and the little head ppl are gonna wanna know everything that happened to him.
No that's not gonna work bc the corps are gonna be notified immediately when one of them die, and especially when someone else gets the ring. And they are gonna take care of that immediately. And also, the green lantern who died - I can't remember his name - was a legend, and the corps and the little head ppl are gonna wanna know everything that happened to him.
+2
12:09PM on 11/06/2013

Three Things

First: I also liked this movie, even with it being the 'Unpopular opinion', the name of the column should keep most people from freaking out the way they seem to be, but c'est la vie.
Second: While the source material has created some of the most rabid fans around, it seems we forget all too quickly this is still a COMIC BOOK MOVIE. Same with any and all of the Transformers movies, they all come from Sci-fi/alien origins that as part of our current reality do not exist. So why do so many
First: I also liked this movie, even with it being the 'Unpopular opinion', the name of the column should keep most people from freaking out the way they seem to be, but c'est la vie.
Second: While the source material has created some of the most rabid fans around, it seems we forget all too quickly this is still a COMIC BOOK MOVIE. Same with any and all of the Transformers movies, they all come from Sci-fi/alien origins that as part of our current reality do not exist. So why do so many people appear to expect Shakespeare and timeless literature?
Thirdly and finally: The problems that Green Lantern and the first 2 Fantastic Four movies have run into are evidence that either as a community or as a society, we are just not ready for or willing to mentally accept some of these Comic Book/Alien movies just yet. Which makes me curious as to just how well a Wonder Woman and more imminently Guardians of the Galaxy will work out despite fan (fanboy/girl?) fervor. It is no secret that the fans are more vocal now, and it has yet to be determined whether that is a good or a bad thing.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:43PM on 11/06/2013
No, I don't think we are going in to see "Shakespeare or timeless literature." That would be foolish of anyone for comic book films or any summer blockbuster. These films def require a suspension of disbelief, in that we will believe that the heroes and villains have these powers, or even that Tom Cruise and Bruce Willis don't get shot by all the fully automatic weapons. However, it is reasonable for us to expect an entertaining and professionally made film, which means that the script makes
No, I don't think we are going in to see "Shakespeare or timeless literature." That would be foolish of anyone for comic book films or any summer blockbuster. These films def require a suspension of disbelief, in that we will believe that the heroes and villains have these powers, or even that Tom Cruise and Bruce Willis don't get shot by all the fully automatic weapons. However, it is reasonable for us to expect an entertaining and professionally made film, which means that the script makes sense, has a character arc for our hero. Now it's even more complicated with established characters bc fans want them not to change, but directors, actors, writers, and execs may think things need to be changed for whatever reason (bc it won't translate to screen, bc the studio wants to done it down to pg-13 or take out Tony's alcoholism, or b/c they are creatively misguided and just want to throw a huge mechanical spider bc they think their ideas are better than years and years of work already established). It makes these films even more difficult, and pleasing the fans and the general audience who doesn't know the character usually makes a lot of these origin movies mediocre. But it is reasonable for things to make sense. Now, I enjoyed all 3 of those films to a degree, but for the corpse to preach to Hal to not be selfish, and to be a part of a team for the film to end with a huge villain he tells them about and they don't listen, or come to help him, makes no sense, and is 1 flaw of the film. I'm not asking for Shakespeare, but I am asking for consistency and for non-rushed, lazy writing, which is what that is. Which is what a lot of TDKR is with "how did he get back to Gotham?" Take the time to make your story sound and make sense, which is a lot different then suspension of disbelief. I also think you are taking 3 flawed, mediocre comic-book films that have a sci-fi aspect to them and lumping them together saying we aren't willing to accept. But Thor is a flawed fairly mediocre (above average?) sci-fi film, and it was well received. The sequel, which is supposedly more sci-fi, or out of Earth, seems to be doing well. I really think you can lump all the MCU as sci-fi even if aliens aren't involved, and they've all been pretty successful. Avengers really had a nonsense plot with dimensions but look at it. Or how about Avatar? People are willing to take in these crazy other worlds, but it's only when they are professionally made is when they are accepted. I truly believe it has a lot more to do with those 3 films weaknesses and lazy writing, then it does ppl not being able to "mentally accept it," bc if you can accept a kid bitten by a spider, or the Lizard, or all of Iron Man's gadgets, or the Hulk, or Superman and the brilliant first 15-20 mins of that last movie, or ppl getting in a machine to turn into an Avatar of an alien, then you can believe and accept anything (uhm...how many ppl can't wait for Star Wars, or at least hear about Star Wars and complain?) if it's well made. I don't really think the fantastic four has that much sci-fi going on in it. Not any more than 80% of other comic book films. GL did have a lot more to explain with the character, his power, the entire galaxy, the corps, fear, the yellow ring...they had a lot more to explain, but they didn't do a lot of it very well (tho I though the parts in space were the best). So again, it's not that ppl can't mentally accept it, it's that these are more shit films that aren't entertaining. I'm looking forward to see what happens with GOTG bc as a comic book reader, I've never heard of them, and it'll just be interesting to see how accepted it is with all of its' inspired choices, like the director and just the characters on the team. I'm interested to see how ppl will react to it, but it won't matter if it sucks. So basically, I'm saying I think you are completely off base here. Ppl don't like poorly made films.
1:55PM on 11/06/2013
I'm curious about the GOTG movie as well. Of course if someone figures out how to do it amazingly, then we'll be talking about, "why can't all these movies be this good?"

I think they could have done a significantly better job with GL, but it was certainly an enjoyable escapist flick, even if it wasn't what we might hope for (considering how beloved the character is in the comics).
I'm curious about the GOTG movie as well. Of course if someone figures out how to do it amazingly, then we'll be talking about, "why can't all these movies be this good?"

I think they could have done a significantly better job with GL, but it was certainly an enjoyable escapist flick, even if it wasn't what we might hope for (considering how beloved the character is in the comics).
2:44PM on 11/06/2013
"they all come from Sci-fi/alien origins that as part of our current reality do not exist. So why do so many people appear to expect Shakespeare and timeless literature?"

Have you ever seen Blade Runner, or Alien, or heck even Empire Strikes Back? Okay, you're on JoBlo, of course you probably have. That's pretty timeless cinematic literature right there. Saying it's okay for something to be crap just because it's sci-fi or any other genre is not a valid defense. In an era where we are
"they all come from Sci-fi/alien origins that as part of our current reality do not exist. So why do so many people appear to expect Shakespeare and timeless literature?"

Have you ever seen Blade Runner, or Alien, or heck even Empire Strikes Back? Okay, you're on JoBlo, of course you probably have. That's pretty timeless cinematic literature right there. Saying it's okay for something to be crap just because it's sci-fi or any other genre is not a valid defense. In an era where we are spoiled with top-notch sci-fi films as well as top-notch superhero films its absolutely understandable why the fans complain and state their dissatisfaction when we're handed a mediocre product like this and expected to treat it eat it up just like we do the quality films.
9:20AM on 11/06/2013

I saw it alone, n a big theater in 3D around midnight...

Drunk off my ass. I still didn't like it. But it wasn't awful. It just had horrible villains, a horrible story and the relationship moments felt like brother sister and not serious affection.
Drunk off my ass. I still didn't like it. But it wasn't awful. It just had horrible villains, a horrible story and the relationship moments felt like brother sister and not serious affection.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:16PM on 11/07/2013

There was too much CGI

Guardians of the Galaxy was shot with practical effects; the new Star Wars films will be shot with practical effects. Ever since the Star Wars prequels came out there has been a backlash against CGI: if you use too much CGI then your live action movie becomes a cartoon and most people think cartoons are for kids. The CGI in the AVengers was so good that people didn't even realize that most of the third act was CGI. Likewise with the latest Thor movie. They needed to dial back the CGI. It
Guardians of the Galaxy was shot with practical effects; the new Star Wars films will be shot with practical effects. Ever since the Star Wars prequels came out there has been a backlash against CGI: if you use too much CGI then your live action movie becomes a cartoon and most people think cartoons are for kids. The CGI in the AVengers was so good that people didn't even realize that most of the third act was CGI. Likewise with the latest Thor movie. They needed to dial back the CGI. It was too much CGI that hurt John Carter too.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:58AM on 11/07/2013

If nothing else

The special effects are so distracting that they are reinforcing the fact that what you are watching cannot be related to. At no point was the awareness of watching special effects tamped down by good storytelling. For something to be so cosmic, there needed to be a lot more effort to look believable. That either required some good creative license with what the ring can do, or some spectacular special effects. Special effects don't make a movie good, but they can make a movie bad, and this one
The special effects are so distracting that they are reinforcing the fact that what you are watching cannot be related to. At no point was the awareness of watching special effects tamped down by good storytelling. For something to be so cosmic, there needed to be a lot more effort to look believable. That either required some good creative license with what the ring can do, or some spectacular special effects. Special effects don't make a movie good, but they can make a movie bad, and this one had a predicable, familiar plot, with a lot of forgettable performances.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
7:30AM on 11/07/2013
I actually appluad that they stuck to their guns with the batshit crazy Green Lantern mythos. They could've cut a lot of the character's motivations and origins out to make things "grittier" like they did with Batman and Man of Steel, but they didn't. They stuck with the surreal "space police, giant headed space dwarves", etc.

However the story, casting and rest of it was all a bit pants. And I generally like Reynolds.
I actually appluad that they stuck to their guns with the batshit crazy Green Lantern mythos. They could've cut a lot of the character's motivations and origins out to make things "grittier" like they did with Batman and Man of Steel, but they didn't. They stuck with the surreal "space police, giant headed space dwarves", etc.

However the story, casting and rest of it was all a bit pants. And I generally like Reynolds.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
2:28PM on 11/06/2013
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! Good one Maidy! Oh wait, he was serious? What the? have you not seen District 9?! That was made on literally less than a quarter of the budget that this film was.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! Good one Maidy! Oh wait, he was serious? What the? have you not seen District 9?! That was made on literally less than a quarter of the budget that this film was.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
1:48PM on 11/06/2013

Nice article.....

I'm not in complete agreement, but the author makes a number of solid points. I think the movie overall was enjoyable, but too flawed to proceed with as-is (much like the first Fantastic Four). The biggest problems I had with it were the scene he saved Lively (seriously, a hot wheels track and a hot rod to carry the helicopter???), the lack of real gravity of his situation (it definitely felt rushed where he was explaining how he felt instead of the audience discovering it), and the horribly
I'm not in complete agreement, but the author makes a number of solid points. I think the movie overall was enjoyable, but too flawed to proceed with as-is (much like the first Fantastic Four). The biggest problems I had with it were the scene he saved Lively (seriously, a hot wheels track and a hot rod to carry the helicopter???), the lack of real gravity of his situation (it definitely felt rushed where he was explaining how he felt instead of the audience discovering it), and the horribly forced ending of Sinestro trying the yellow ring for no apparent reason.

I really liked both villains, his training, the corp, and Reynolds pre-Lantern. I thought his character was well done, although it became cardboard the minute he put on the ring.

Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:36PM on 11/06/2013

Here's my take, if anybody cares...

...I didn't like this movie. I like Ryan Reynolds but he doesn't look like Green Lantern to me. Green Lantern needs to have a bigger build and shorter hair, like Bradley Cooper. DC missed an enormous opportunity by not moving forward with a Flash movie starring Reynolds as the Wally West Flash, the contemporary, wise-cracking Flash that would have been a kind of comic relief in the eventual Justice League movie. It's going to be at least 3-4 years before we get a Justice League movie but DC
...I didn't like this movie. I like Ryan Reynolds but he doesn't look like Green Lantern to me. Green Lantern needs to have a bigger build and shorter hair, like Bradley Cooper. DC missed an enormous opportunity by not moving forward with a Flash movie starring Reynolds as the Wally West Flash, the contemporary, wise-cracking Flash that would have been a kind of comic relief in the eventual Justice League movie. It's going to be at least 3-4 years before we get a Justice League movie but DC really shot themselves in the foot with Green Lantern. Sure, they've established Green Lantern and can use Reynolds in the Justice League movie but it seems like the general consensus is that Green Lantern didn't really make a splash with fans.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:51PM on 11/06/2013
They really missed a chance to use the first black superhero of the modern comic-book age. There are many talented actors who could have taken the role, and done a great job with it. I like Reynolds, but agree with you that he's just not Green Lantern (much like Affleck can't really be Batman).
They really missed a chance to use the first black superhero of the modern comic-book age. There are many talented actors who could have taken the role, and done a great job with it. I like Reynolds, but agree with you that he's just not Green Lantern (much like Affleck can't really be Batman).
2:47PM on 11/06/2013
I've always liked Ben Affleck and I'm a huge Batman fan. I don't mind seeing him as Batman but even I'll admit he really needs to knock it out of the park. I just think it's going to be difficult for him to "disappear" into the role but I'm more than happy to be proven wrong. He also has to nail the voice after dealing with Bale's voice.
I've always liked Ben Affleck and I'm a huge Batman fan. I don't mind seeing him as Batman but even I'll admit he really needs to knock it out of the park. I just think it's going to be difficult for him to "disappear" into the role but I'm more than happy to be proven wrong. He also has to nail the voice after dealing with Bale's voice.
10:32AM on 11/06/2013
I expected so much from this but it turned out to be a mediocre superhero movie. It's not a bad movie nor is it a good one. It's just Okay. It's also too long. The director could cut out 30-40 minutes of the film instead of bloating the movie.
I expected so much from this but it turned out to be a mediocre superhero movie. It's not a bad movie nor is it a good one. It's just Okay. It's also too long. The director could cut out 30-40 minutes of the film instead of bloating the movie.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
9:21AM on 11/06/2013

Agreed

A fine write-up, and a refreshing one as it is nice to hear someone defending this film in detail. I enjoy Green Lantern a good deal for many of the reasons you illustrate, chief among them being the use of Parallax as a pure entity of fear - the exact opposite of what Jordan must become (an entity of will). Also dig Hammond as Jordan's foil - a man with similar ambition who gives in rather than fights, practically becoming his own worst enemy. Good stuff, this film is.
A fine write-up, and a refreshing one as it is nice to hear someone defending this film in detail. I enjoy Green Lantern a good deal for many of the reasons you illustrate, chief among them being the use of Parallax as a pure entity of fear - the exact opposite of what Jordan must become (an entity of will). Also dig Hammond as Jordan's foil - a man with similar ambition who gives in rather than fights, practically becoming his own worst enemy. Good stuff, this film is.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:34PM on 11/07/2013

It also didn't help that they made Hal Jordan an asshole

It wasn't funny. He wasn't likeable. You ended up hoping that somebody would punch him in the face. I knew they were trying for a character arc in which he redeemed himself in the end. I realize Tony Stark is also a bit of an asshole in the Iron Man movies. But what they did with Tony Stark is they started the first Iron Man movie with him getting shot in the chest and then we went back and saw how it happened. That made Tony Stark a sympathetic character. As much as I hate the cheap "a
It wasn't funny. He wasn't likeable. You ended up hoping that somebody would punch him in the face. I knew they were trying for a character arc in which he redeemed himself in the end. I realize Tony Stark is also a bit of an asshole in the Iron Man movies. But what they did with Tony Stark is they started the first Iron Man movie with him getting shot in the chest and then we went back and saw how it happened. That made Tony Stark a sympathetic character. As much as I hate the cheap "a few hours earlier" way of storytelling it worked in Iron Man. In Green Lantern, Hal Jordan isn't sympathetic until the very end of the movie when he destroys Parallax.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:18PM on 11/07/2013
Enjoying the plot-riddled story (so they just randomly know who Sasgaard's character is?) because you're enjoying the adventure is one thing. Trying to defend the CGI is unforgivable though. This movie had a huge budget, and the CGI looking plasticy and fake is a crime. While a movie like 'Sharknado' can get away with that sort of thing due to budget constraints, which is actually part of the ridiculous fun of such films. A $100+ Million film should look better than a SyFy made for TV movie is
Enjoying the plot-riddled story (so they just randomly know who Sasgaard's character is?) because you're enjoying the adventure is one thing. Trying to defend the CGI is unforgivable though. This movie had a huge budget, and the CGI looking plasticy and fake is a crime. While a movie like 'Sharknado' can get away with that sort of thing due to budget constraints, which is actually part of the ridiculous fun of such films. A $100+ Million film should look better than a SyFy made for TV movie is what I am getting at. This movie does not. Same issue with Burton's excruciating 'Alice In Wonderland'- it looks too fake to be able to buy anything going on screen. Seriously, just the screenshots used for this article look like bad Photoshop.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:59PM on 11/06/2013

Let's see...

This movie has no tension, no fun, no pacing, nothing, absolutely nothing. Swing and a miss. Hit the showers movie
This movie has no tension, no fun, no pacing, nothing, absolutely nothing. Swing and a miss. Hit the showers movie
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:39PM on 11/06/2013

Reasons the green lantern movie was bad:

1. His power is kind of lame. I can't think of a lot of cool action scenes you can do with that power.
2. Hammond was a poorly developed villain, and again, no cool powers.
3. The studio got greedy with Sinistro, too busy setting him up as a villain for the sequel then showing him as a part of the Corps. But with his look and a name like sinistro, everyone can tell he will be a villain.
4. The movie has a weak score. No memorable theme.
5. Blake Lively is just not that good of an
1. His power is kind of lame. I can't think of a lot of cool action scenes you can do with that power.
2. Hammond was a poorly developed villain, and again, no cool powers.
3. The studio got greedy with Sinistro, too busy setting him up as a villain for the sequel then showing him as a part of the Corps. But with his look and a name like sinistro, everyone can tell he will be a villain.
4. The movie has a weak score. No memorable theme.
5. Blake Lively is just not that good of an actress.
6. Other then Hal getting his powers, the rest of the movie should have taken place in space. This story would seem to work better as sci-fi than superhero.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+0
5:25PM on 11/06/2013

4/10.

Campbell played it safe. He actually repeated shots and thought it was OK because they were in different times and places. Reynolds was miscast, and the character was clearly re-written to fit him. Lively was by no means good, but she gave more energy to her performance than in 6 seasons of GOSSIP GIRL. Luckily, the chemistry between those two worked, and Sarsgaard gave a fine performance.

The FX were well crafted, but they were too obvious, and the realism was taken away. How is it that the
Campbell played it safe. He actually repeated shots and thought it was OK because they were in different times and places. Reynolds was miscast, and the character was clearly re-written to fit him. Lively was by no means good, but she gave more energy to her performance than in 6 seasons of GOSSIP GIRL. Luckily, the chemistry between those two worked, and Sarsgaard gave a fine performance.

The FX were well crafted, but they were too obvious, and the realism was taken away. How is it that the movie cost $200 million, and movies with a smaller budget looked better? Regardless, the action was only mildly thrilling. And the music score was a little forced.

Except for the lead, most characters were thinly written. Like HECTOR: When he was introduced, he became possesed right away, and then they started working on the character. It should've been the other way around so we could learned his motifs. Although, it was never explained if his actions were controlled by PARALLAX or if he had always been evil. And SINESTRO didn't seem to be as thinly-written as the others... until the post-credits scene where he turned evil out of nowhere. And something that was even more thinly-written was the characters's relationships. They never really explain why HECTOR hated his father, or why nobody else seemed to care that those two died. I could list more plot-holes, but I'll just say it had one of the most common mistakes in cinema: If a character wasn't on-screen, they didn't exist.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:12AM on 11/06/2013
Nope. Oa and the Lanterns were well conceived and the cast itself was good, but the materiel they were given was bland and generic. Hal comes off as nothing more but a slightly toned down Tony Stark. For the talent involved they needed to be more daring with the script. While we haven't seen Guardians of the Galaxy, at that film is going to be space faring. Green Lantern needed to be more space oriented.
Nope. Oa and the Lanterns were well conceived and the cast itself was good, but the materiel they were given was bland and generic. Hal comes off as nothing more but a slightly toned down Tony Stark. For the talent involved they needed to be more daring with the script. While we haven't seen Guardians of the Galaxy, at that film is going to be space faring. Green Lantern needed to be more space oriented.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:58AM on 11/06/2013

It wasn't terrible but

strictly followed the cookie cutter superhero orign story, had terrible cgi, crap action and a lackluster third act. Also i got annoyed that you felt they were trying so hard to set up a franchise that they didn't bother letting the film stand strong on its own. Besides that it was alright, Reynolds did his best to hold it up. For a better take on the story check out the DC animated flick "Green Lanter: First Flight" whoose story served the same purpose but knocked it out of the park!
strictly followed the cookie cutter superhero orign story, had terrible cgi, crap action and a lackluster third act. Also i got annoyed that you felt they were trying so hard to set up a franchise that they didn't bother letting the film stand strong on its own. Besides that it was alright, Reynolds did his best to hold it up. For a better take on the story check out the DC animated flick "Green Lanter: First Flight" whoose story served the same purpose but knocked it out of the park!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+0
9:57AM on 11/06/2013

Hmmm

Everything to do with the Corps was fantastic. Strong as Sinestro kicked ass. The CGI for space was perfect. Heck, I didn't mind Reynolds as Hal Jordan. The problems stemmed from the Earth based scenes, and the awful "villain". If DC is smart, they won't throw away what they've created here for their universe, but instead use Reynolds to launch a Jordan Stewart Green Lantern for the Justice League.
Everything to do with the Corps was fantastic. Strong as Sinestro kicked ass. The CGI for space was perfect. Heck, I didn't mind Reynolds as Hal Jordan. The problems stemmed from the Earth based scenes, and the awful "villain". If DC is smart, they won't throw away what they've created here for their universe, but instead use Reynolds to launch a Jordan Stewart Green Lantern for the Justice League.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:52AM on 11/06/2013
This movie was not good. I've tried to like it. Hard. It's just not there. I would blame the fact that Green Lantern is my favorite superhero, and maybe that had SOMETHING to do with it, but no....no, it didn't. I would, however, love to see Sinestro (Mark Strong) as the villain in a Justice League movie.
This movie was not good. I've tried to like it. Hard. It's just not there. I would blame the fact that Green Lantern is my favorite superhero, and maybe that had SOMETHING to do with it, but no....no, it didn't. I would, however, love to see Sinestro (Mark Strong) as the villain in a Justice League movie.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:41PM on 11/06/2013
One of the few movies I thought during it "I wouldnt mind if I died so I didn't have to watch the rest of this."
One of the few movies I thought during it "I wouldnt mind if I died so I didn't have to watch the rest of this."
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:58AM on 11/06/2013
Expanding, I actually did a podcast on Green Lantern a while back. Some love, lots of nit-picking. If you're interested: [link]
Expanding, I actually did a podcast on Green Lantern a while back. Some love, lots of nit-picking. If you're interested: [link]
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-1
9:01AM on 11/06/2013

Nah

Tbh Green Lantern was always going to be a tough hero to translate to film media. His powers are just a bit weird and cheesy for people to appreciate. I re-watched this film the other day, and sorry, but I still can't bring myself to like it (and I like pretty much any film!)
Tbh Green Lantern was always going to be a tough hero to translate to film media. His powers are just a bit weird and cheesy for people to appreciate. I re-watched this film the other day, and sorry, but I still can't bring myself to like it (and I like pretty much any film!)
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:03AM on 11/06/2013
And yet THOR is a much cheesier character and Marvel accomplished a terrific film adaption. It can be done.
And yet THOR is a much cheesier character and Marvel accomplished a terrific film adaption. It can be done.
9:21AM on 11/06/2013
ElderPredator - wrong.
ElderPredator - wrong.
11:29PM on 11/07/2013
That's the second time you've declared something wrong when it was actually right.
That's the second time you've declared something wrong when it was actually right.
8:54AM on 11/06/2013

No

Ryan Reynolds kills this movie. He is more of a catch phrase kind of actor. The problem with it is him, and nothing else. The story might be a bit complex, but RR doesn't sell it.
Ryan Reynolds kills this movie. He is more of a catch phrase kind of actor. The problem with it is him, and nothing else. The story might be a bit complex, but RR doesn't sell it.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:26AM on 11/06/2013
Spot on!
Spot on!
2:06PM on 11/07/2013
Wow. Generally I just ignore these nonsensical exercises, but, I must admit, when I saw that you were taking on 'Green Lantern,' I just had to see how you were going to present a case for THAT piece of shit being a good movie. I couldn't imagine. I do, kind of, grudgingly admire you for picking up what has to be the biggest challenge possible for one of these columns. Valiant effort, but... no.
Wow. Generally I just ignore these nonsensical exercises, but, I must admit, when I saw that you were taking on 'Green Lantern,' I just had to see how you were going to present a case for THAT piece of shit being a good movie. I couldn't imagine. I do, kind of, grudgingly admire you for picking up what has to be the biggest challenge possible for one of these columns. Valiant effort, but... no.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:35AM on 11/06/2013
The Green Lantern was bad only because the Green Lantern as a hero is kinda lame. The film itself wasn't that bad. They tried to put in story and character, action scenes and eye candy. Blake Lively was smoking hot. Ryan Reynolds is a good looking guy. Although at times he almost seems to not take the role seriously, like delivering his lines as a gag reel. Hector Hammond was actually full of pathos in the film. Sinestro was interesting. At times the film seemed rushed and at other times
The Green Lantern was bad only because the Green Lantern as a hero is kinda lame. The film itself wasn't that bad. They tried to put in story and character, action scenes and eye candy. Blake Lively was smoking hot. Ryan Reynolds is a good looking guy. Although at times he almost seems to not take the role seriously, like delivering his lines as a gag reel. Hector Hammond was actually full of pathos in the film. Sinestro was interesting. At times the film seemed rushed and at other times it dragged. Pacing could have been better and the script could have been better. I think the suspension of disbelief didn't quite click in because the main actor Ryan Reynolds didn't sell it as genuine, but played it like a goof. He did okay, but he'd have to sell it better, he had the look of "can't you believe I am saying these stupid lines?" I won't say I hated it. I watched it twice.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-2
10:25AM on 11/06/2013
I love Reynolds...but I'm beginning to accept he'll never reach the levels I hoped he would. That said..and despite the fact that Green Lantern is the only movie I've never had any hope for...but still went to the cinema to see it (just in case...and to do my part for comic book movies)... I still want Reynolds to play this character (would have preferred him for the Flash...but oh well) and to be included in the DC cinematic universe..purely from a continuity point of view. Then again, GL
I love Reynolds...but I'm beginning to accept he'll never reach the levels I hoped he would. That said..and despite the fact that Green Lantern is the only movie I've never had any hope for...but still went to the cinema to see it (just in case...and to do my part for comic book movies)... I still want Reynolds to play this character (would have preferred him for the Flash...but oh well) and to be included in the DC cinematic universe..purely from a continuity point of view. Then again, GL truly sucked and I'd have to go back through my posts to see if it was Pirates 4 or this movie that was my most boring cinema visit of the year…so I could accept them writing off GL, relaunching him...much like Marvel did with the Hulk complete with a new cast and allow Reynolds to become the Flash...much like Marvel did with Chris Evans. See what I'm doing here - it seems impossible for WB's to do anything that Marvel hasn't already done - but that's no bad thing since Marvel are...on the whole...getting it so right. They could of course introduce a female superhero first...particularly as they have the most well known female character of all to do that with...but I think it's clear WB's are suffering from an inferior complex at this moment in time and a lack of foresight.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:34AM on 11/06/2013
I would like to see the john Stewart version of GL brought in. They don't have to set up an origin story for him, just introduce him in a dc movie, it wouldn't take 5 minutes to explain the corpse so everyone has a basic grasp of what the character is there to do, then later do a solo film.

I don't think Reynolds would make a good flash either, I actually think Martin freeman would own that role.

I would like to see the john Stewart version of GL brought in. They don't have to set up an origin story for him, just introduce him in a dc movie, it wouldn't take 5 minutes to explain the corpse so everyone has a basic grasp of what the character is there to do, then later do a solo film.

I don't think Reynolds would make a good flash either, I actually think Martin freeman would own that role.

8:11PM on 11/06/2013

lmao@Future Green Lantern Films

This movie was horrible in every way. They messed this up in every way that you could. Starting with the terrible miscasting of Ryan Reynolds. It's too bad that Chris Evans was taken because he would have been pretty perfect for Hal Jordan. Ryan Reynolds was all wrong. He played him as a complete idiot who cracks jokes every minute. Hal Jordan should be cocky but not stupid. The only thing that they got right was the Green Lantern corps. They really should have just focused the film on that
This movie was horrible in every way. They messed this up in every way that you could. Starting with the terrible miscasting of Ryan Reynolds. It's too bad that Chris Evans was taken because he would have been pretty perfect for Hal Jordan. Ryan Reynolds was all wrong. He played him as a complete idiot who cracks jokes every minute. Hal Jordan should be cocky but not stupid. The only thing that they got right was the Green Lantern corps. They really should have just focused the film on that and made it a complete sci fi adventure film and left all the earth bound stuff alone. All of the earth bound scenes were terrible. It's a shame because I believe if done right, Green Lantern could make a great sci fi/fantasy film. As it stands we got a one and done because there will be no sequels to this complete turd.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:26PM on 11/06/2013
I think everyone on this site knows by now how much I really love Green Lantern (hence avatar) and how much I will defend the film. I enjoyed the hell out of this film and it has become one of my top five favorite favorite superhero films of all time.

It's not a perfect film...I know that. But to say it completely sucks is completely wrong. It had a really great cast and director with plenty of source material, but the biggest flaw of the film (at least I think) is the rushed ending. I
I think everyone on this site knows by now how much I really love Green Lantern (hence avatar) and how much I will defend the film. I enjoyed the hell out of this film and it has become one of my top five favorite favorite superhero films of all time.

It's not a perfect film...I know that. But to say it completely sucks is completely wrong. It had a really great cast and director with plenty of source material, but the biggest flaw of the film (at least I think) is the rushed ending. I think the film did a good job of character development and Reynolds made for the perfect Hal Jordan/Green Lantern and the effects were awesome. I just think the end of the film with Parallax attacking was a bit rushed and not fully developed as it could have been. And the extra scene with Sinestro putting on the ring didn't work, because they never really had no motivation for the character to do so. It's just like they threw that extra scene in there just for sequel purposes.

But despite all the minor flaws with the film, I still hold it close to my heart. I absolutely LOVE this film and the approach they took with it. I even enjoyed the hell out of the cgi Green Lantern suit too. I do hope that we do one day get a sequel with Reynolds and Strong returning as Hal Jordan and Sinestro. Or even reprising their roles again in a Justice League film.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:37PM on 11/06/2013
All do respect, if the ending with Sinestro putting on the ring didn't work because they never really developed the character's motivation for doing so, isn't that a point against good character development?

I mean, gotta respect your opinion because it is a movie and they're always open to interpretation. But I just can't get on board with you if your defense of the movie is they had a great cast and good effects. They need more than that to make a good movie. Your own critiques of the
All do respect, if the ending with Sinestro putting on the ring didn't work because they never really developed the character's motivation for doing so, isn't that a point against good character development?

I mean, gotta respect your opinion because it is a movie and they're always open to interpretation. But I just can't get on board with you if your defense of the movie is they had a great cast and good effects. They need more than that to make a good movie. Your own critiques of the movie are reason of enough to say the movie had horrible pacing and an ill-developed script. They tried to do too much too soon with this movie.
12:40PM on 11/06/2013
I'll give you that. So maybe poor character development with Sinestro in one way or two.
I'll give you that. So maybe poor character development with Sinestro in one way or two.
2:37PM on 11/06/2013
As I've said several times before...as with Clooney and his stint at being Batman, Reynolds was not the problem. The story just wasn't great. In most cases (perhaps all cases), the animated efforts from DC are are much better than the live action efforts...but in the case of GL, Green Lantern First Flight did an origin story far, far better. It goes without saying that the Sinestro relationship was also better done. The movie had a great cast...but as another poster said...that is not
As I've said several times before...as with Clooney and his stint at being Batman, Reynolds was not the problem. The story just wasn't great. In most cases (perhaps all cases), the animated efforts from DC are are much better than the live action efforts...but in the case of GL, Green Lantern First Flight did an origin story far, far better. It goes without saying that the Sinestro relationship was also better done. The movie had a great cast...but as another poster said...that is not enough to save a poor story.
9:18AM on 11/06/2013
"...not the same type of films as what Marvel was putting out ."

Nice English.
"...not the same type of films as what Marvel was putting out ."

Nice English.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:25PM on 11/07/2013
"the same type of films" and "what Marvel was putting out" are both noun phrases so this is a correctly stated comparison. The full sentence was "Nolan's films were not the same type of films as what Marvel was putting out " I see they changed it to "Nolan's films were not the same type of films as what was coming from Marvel" but the first way they wrote it wasn't wrong.
"the same type of films" and "what Marvel was putting out" are both noun phrases so this is a correctly stated comparison. The full sentence was "Nolan's films were not the same type of films as what Marvel was putting out " I see they changed it to "Nolan's films were not the same type of films as what was coming from Marvel" but the first way they wrote it wasn't wrong.
12:14PM on 11/08/2013
No. No you're wrong.

End of.
No. No you're wrong.

End of.
View All Comments

Latest Movie News Headlines


Top
Loading...
JoBlo's T-Shirt Shoppe | support our site... Wear Our Gear!