Green Lantern: The Motion Picture

[Josette]

I saw this last weekend and thought it could have been much better than what it was and found most critical reviews of it to be accurate.

Outside of Hal (I even found his development to be rushed), the characters were extremely underused or just plain weak - the relationships weren't there at all. What childhood friendship? There was a lot of 'telling' and not 'showing' going on through out. The end battle was extremely anti-climatic.

The only character that truly interested me was Sinestro, who was in it for about ten minutes.

 

[Ash Housewares]

Wolverine was so much better than this movie.

 

[plasmid303]

Comparing this flick with Wolverine is like weighing the comparative awfulness of a bad case of diarrhea versus a series of papercuts. One could be worse than the other, but you don't want either.

 

[Darklord Dave]

I'm a bigger DC fan than Marvel and GL is, after Supes & Bats, my favorite DC character. I like Ryan Reynolds and think he's very talented as a comedian and even actor.

I'm not a fan of Blake Lively but I think she did a tolerable job although not being anything how I'd picture Carol.

But the movie was so horribly flawed that I can't fool myself into liking it.

Parralax looked like poopy. Literally - big brown and yellow strands of...well, you get the idea. The headline could have read - "Coast City goes down the toilet!" and it would have been accurate. The big face and the tendrils and everything was very, very weak. I did like what they did with his backstory - being a former Guardian makes sense. But there was too much exposition - Parralax could have been saved for the sequel and let it all be about Hal finding his Will and battling Hector and perhaps at the end we discover it was Parralax infecting Hector.

In fact the end with Sinestro is totally and completely unmotivated and seems like a gratuitous nod to fanboys more than anything else. If in the second movie parralax had done something that hit Sinestro personally and it was his own failure of will that caused it - he would have a reason to turn to the easier power of fear. But to have him just appear in the suit - bah. Contrast that with the more logical and better handled Magneto in a classic suit at the end of X-Men:FC.

Sinestro had just welcomed Hal to the Corp and praised him - he's a long way from the ____ retentive Sinestro that needs the fear ring. But Strong did a good job with what he was given. Hal's character was also believable -and not really ******-y as some reviews have complained. I couldn't get over how unattractive Blake Lively is (to me), so I really couldn't care less about her character and there really wasn't anything in her performance that changed my mind. Although I couldn't point to anything she did particularly wrong.

Saarsagard was great, but I'd agree with the above review that said he finished in the same place he started - no character arc at all.

The art direction was okay - I'm still not a huge fan of Hal's suit, but I think it worked on Sinestro and even Abin Sur. OA looked great, as did the Guardians - too bad about Crapalax.

As a DC fan it's a bit disheartening that Thor and especially X-Men:FC were so far superior films than GL. Despite Nolan's Batman I think this is a huge setback for DC films in general and used up a lot of good will the movie going public might have for DC characters. If they even make the distinction at all.

 

[krec9]

saw the movie today it was alright it wasnt bad or good but i can it was better than wolverine origins !!!!

 

[Nintenjoe]

I really wanted this to be good, but there are just certain comic books that can't cross over to film. Sadly the character of Green Lantern to me is one of those that can't cross over. I did not love this, but I did not loathe it either. the Animated movie was so good

nah, green lantern can translate to film. GL deserves to have a huge epic movie with great storytelling. you just have to have the right people making the movie. unfortunately, this movie didn't have the right people. the character has a lot of potential and deserves better than this POS.

 

[The Mike]

I think it's funny that people are willing to write off Green Lantern as not being able to translate on film. Whether you like the film or not this movie showed it absolutely can be done on film impressively. The story wasn't right, wasn't well flushed out or pieced together maybe, the actors maybe weren't the best for some roles maybe but the effects, the feel, the tone were perfect. Oa was fantastically done. The constructs were great! Maybe of the aliens were impressive! Even the Lantern suit looked hundreds of times better on screen than in print or what I know I imagined. Maybe someone else can do the storytelling better but saying this can't be done on film is simply being shortsighted

 

[Ash Housewares]

The Guardians looked like they were sitting on massive cocks. Thinking back to this film makes me laugh. And to think they weren't aiming for a comedy.

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

I think it's funny that people are willing to write off Green Lantern as not being able to translate on film. Whether you like the film or not this movie showed it absolutely can be done on film impressively. The story wasn't right, wasn't well flushed out or pieced together maybe, the actors maybe weren't the best for some roles maybe but the effects, the feel, the tone were perfect. Oa was fantastically done. The constructs were great! Maybe of the aliens were impressive! Even the Lantern suit looked hundreds of times better on screen than in print or what I know I imagined. Maybe someone else can do the storytelling better but saying this can't be done on film is simply being shortsighted

people want all movies to be the dark knight

 

[intothevoid]

Look clearly I am a huge TDK/BB/Nolan fan but I did not ever expect this movie to have anywhere near that kind of serious tone.

I wanted this movie to be fun and for it to do justice to the great character that is GL and the rich mythology that comes with him.

While I found the movie to be very fun and entertaining and found it to be an absolute joy to see these characters on the big screen - I don't feel it did justice to the GLC mythos, essentially too much telling and not enough 'showing', Parallax should have been saved for a sequel and this movie should have focused a lot more on GL and the GLC, and Hector Hammond should just have been the main villain, perhaps infected by paralax, but paralax not being the main threat in this film.

That would have setup a sequel with Paralax as the main threat and then more space to explore why the GLC are unable to defeat it (not understanding that they need to have the ability to overcome fear), and within that sequel, Sinestro's motivations and downfall could have been nicely developed.

All of that would setup a 3rd film where Sinestro/Sinestro Corps were the main threat, that's how I would have tackled the whole thing - but hey ho. Happy with got a film, hopeful of a sequel that is better.

 

[Darklord Dave]

I think it's funny that people are willing to write off Green Lantern as not being able to translate on film. Whether you like the film or not this movie showed it absolutely can be done on film impressively. The story wasn't right, wasn't well flushed out or pieced together maybe, the actors maybe weren't the best for some roles maybe but the effects, the feel, the tone were perfect. Oa was fantastically done. The constructs were great! Maybe of the aliens were impressive! Even the Lantern suit looked hundreds of times better on screen than in print or what I know I imagined. Maybe someone else can do the storytelling better but saying this can't be done on film is simply being shortsighted

Yea, I'd agree that the film looked excellent (with the exception of Parallax). Comic books are just a 2D, poor man's attempt to do what movies do so much better.

 

[Kabukiman]

Comic books are just a 2D, poor man's attempt to do what movies do so much better.

Dems fightin' words. I'd argue that many comic book movies fail because the stories are so grand in scope that no movie could ever hope to tell that story. The #1 complaint you hear about comic book movies is that they stray from the source material and need to be "dumbed down" for a movie.

 

[jye4ever]

Dems fightin' words. I'd argue that many comic book movies fail because the stories are so grand in scope that no movie could ever hope to tell that story. The #1 complaint you hear about comic book movies is that they stray from the source material and need to be "dumbed down" for a movie.

From now on, all comic book movies need to be 3 part extended editions, 12 hours in length just like the LOTR trilogy

I want a 12 hour Daredevil movie dammit!

Only TDK is allowed to be 2 hours long and win an oscar

 

[Kabukiman]

From now on, all comic book movies need to be 3 part extended editions, 12 hours in length just like the LOTR trilogy

I want a 12 hour Daredevil movie dammit!

Only TDK is allowed to be 2 hours long and win an oscar

I'm just pointing out that the stories are going to be different depending on the medium. To say comics are a "poor man's movie" is like saying an apple is a poor man's orange.

 

[jye4ever]

I'm just pointing out that the stories are going to be different depending on the medium. To say comics are a "poor man's movie" is like saying an apple is a poor man's orange.

it's all good, I wasn't trying to attack you

My point was that a genre movie can be just as good as the LOTR trilogy w/o having to be 12 hours in length or have to be dark like TDK to be taken seriously.

Did I wish Thor was made as an epic 3 part series as LOTR, sure did...but I also understand the money and risks involved for Marvel, so they took the easy way out with a 2 hour bubble gum action spectacle and I enjoyed it just as much, it was entertaining, just not "Epic" as we know Thor can be.

Wait....this is the GL thread, isn't it

Sorry

 

[EndoSickness]

I'm a bigger DC fan than Marvel and GL is, after Supes & Bats, my favorite DC character. I like Ryan Reynolds and think he's very talented as a comedian and even actor.

I'm not a fan of Blake Lively but I think she did a tolerable job although not being anything how I'd picture Carol.

But the movie was so horribly flawed that I can't fool myself into liking it.

Parralax looked like poopy. Literally - big brown and yellow strands of...well, you get the idea. The headline could have read - "Coast City goes down the toilet!" and it would have been accurate. The big face and the tendrils and everything was very, very weak. I did like what they did with his backstory - being a former Guardian makes sense. But there was too much exposition - Parralax could have been saved for the sequel and let it all be about Hal finding his Will and battling Hector and perhaps at the end we discover it was Parralax infecting Hector.

In fact the end with Sinestro is totally and completely unmotivated and seems like a gratuitous nod to fanboys more than anything else. If in the second movie parralax had done something that hit Sinestro personally and it was his own failure of will that caused it - he would have a reason to turn to the easier power of fear. But to have him just appear in the suit - bah. Contrast that with the more logical and better handled Magneto in a classic suit at the end of X-Men:FC.

Sinestro had just welcomed Hal to the Corp and praised him - he's a long way from the ____ retentive Sinestro that needs the fear ring. But Strong did a good job with what he was given. Hal's character was also believable -and not really ******-y as some reviews have complained. I couldn't get over how unattractive Blake Lively is (to me), so I really couldn't care less about her character and there really wasn't anything in her performance that changed my mind. Although I couldn't point to anything she did particularly wrong.

Saarsagard was great, but I'd agree with the above review that said he finished in the same place he started - no character arc at all.

The art direction was okay - I'm still not a huge fan of Hal's suit, but I think it worked on Sinestro and even Abin Sur. OA looked great, as did the Guardians - too bad about Crapalax.

As a DC fan it's a bit disheartening that Thor and especially X-Men:FC were so far superior films than GL. Despite Nolan's Batman I think this is a huge setback for DC films in general and used up a lot of good will the movie going public might have for DC characters. If they even make the distinction at all.

Always astounding how much can people think the same stuff without even having that much to do with each other.

I didn´t even see the movie, but read the story complete and what I read made me think 80% of your opinion, although 100% on the Sinestro part.

How come that all actors that play on stuff like this always say We´re really trying to bring justice to the character" and then it always goes down the drain.

They could´ve used the story so well, that Parallax lives and also put Ion and Ophidian (just keep them as entities and don´t mash up Krona and Parallax) in it, keeping the comic story mainly intact, while better setting up the sequel mostly in the way you said, but that Ophidian influenced Hammond and having the battle between Sinestro and Hal after the later manages to bond to Ion and defeat Parallax, while in the end Sinestro would´ve felt betrayed by the guardians AND Jordan of course turn the guilt on them instead of him.

Finally Parallax would´ve lived and in a post credits scene offers Sinestro the ring, recoursing the path of his fear-ridden kingship on Korugar and directly establishing the Sinestro Corps.

Classic superhero stuff always works, but Hollywood doesn´t get it.

 

[EndoSickness]

Something´s not quite right, all is taking a whole lot more long then normally and now my post came twice.
Please delete this post.
Thx

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

I saw it today

 

[intothevoid]

And your thoughts?

 

[jye4ever]

And your thoughts?

I would guess that he's going to say that it's worse than TDK but better than the 1990 Captain America movie