Farinsstones

(2012-05-01 16:52:13)

The worst superhero movie ever made?

I wanted to like this movie, but the simple fact is this movie is notgood. I love Ryan Reynolds, i like Blake lively. Tim Robbins. Hated thescript. I could have written a better script in my sleep. The script isclunky the bad guys are one dimensional. The simple fact that they makechoices and we have no idea why. Plus the fact the suit and mask lookunrealistic, the story is dumb. This movie is like a bad episode ofbarney and friends, its just not good. they could have hired a 5 yearold to write the script and I'm sure we would have had more funwatching it. There is also a scene at the end of the movie when thecredits roll, that makes no sense, there's no sign in the movie at allthat this person would do what he does in the scene. its the dumbestmovie ever made.

mcgriff1290

(2012-05-01 07:14:33)

Green Lantern doesn't have enough greatness to pull in the green

This movie has placed itself among the bottom ranking comic book moviesthat have plagued our society. The movie is better than marvels worstmovie (FF,FF2,GR,DD,etc) but Green Lantern has put WB studios and DCmovies further behind Marvel recent films and next years The DarkKnight Rises and the new Superman have to tread softly to save thedying DC brand. Both DC brand films Green Lantern and Jonah Hex fellway below the audiences and critics liking and put WB studios in a badposition for establishing future comic book films. The thing that savesthis movie from being the worst comic book movie is Ryan Reynolds. Hegrasps the viewer's attention when the plot and CGI is failing allaround him. He also has a sort of flare when he is on screen and makesthe character he is representing feel life like. I for one thought thathe would be the down fall of this franchise, but he seems to takehandle of this iconic role. He is not your typical superhero choosesuch as Robert Downy Jr. was with Iron-man, but owns that role andmakes Hal Jordan/Green Lantern story interesting. Other than RyanReynolds strong performance there is Mark Strong who is amazing andnails the role of Sinestro. He does a decent job of giving the audienceanother character to enjoy, but he was not explored enough to get afeel of who he really is and becomes. Some of the other cast membersare passable to watch at times, but roles serve no purpose to the plotand are there just to advance the movie along. These members includeBlake Lively who gives a wooden performance and brings nothing notableto the film as the same with Peter Sarsgaard who looks like a newversion of the elephant man. You never really got to know theircharacter better to really care for their role. Reynolds and Strongkeep the film afloat any time they are on screen, but the movie takes adownward turn when they are not present. I just wasn't blown away bythe whole Green Lantern universe that was set up and never exposed muchthroughout the film. There were spare cool Green Lantern tricks hereand there, but nothing captivating. The film lacks togetherness andfalls flat during the course of the film. The Paralax evil creature ofsmoke looked very unbelievable and fake at times. He seemed too big ofa villain to be placed in the first movie and look really silly andtook away a lot of interest from the movie. In addition to that theaction never seems to fit in quite right with the fight scenes. Thedirector seems to just throw them together at times just to look cool,but never quite accomplished its task. The CGI was poorly done in myopinion and looked like something that was created back when CGItechnology was first introduced to cinema. Had a strong cartoonish lookat times and felt like I was watching an animation and real life moviemash up. To sum it all up I just didn't feel the whole cosmic universethat the movie was trying to present. The film maker never explored Oaand the lantern core enough to get us really attached to the film. Theearth scenes could have been cut from the movie to shed more light onthe cosmic elements that should have been understood. Thor had the samecosmic establishment like this film, but sold it far beyond this moviesapproach. This movie feels like an hour and 30 minutes of foreplay and15 minutes of action. I really can see what the director was going for,but he was overshadowed by a horrible script that poisoned any attemptof this film actually being good. The movie felt down played by aterminal case of origin fever, telling too much and showing to enough.You can go ahead and add this to list of this summer failures and alltime box office flops.

(2012-04-30 18:43:18)

Decent, but nothing new

This review is from: Green Lantern (+ UltraViolet Digital Copy) [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) Much buzz preceded the release of this movie. A fan of most superhero films, but not of the Lantern in particular, I skipped it in theatres and waited for the home release. I was hoping for a better experience on my own screen with the extras and multiple viewings. Alas, while the movie was well crafted in terms of effects, it fell short on plot and emotional engagement. Nieither the villian nor the heros particularly frightened or inspired. The extras were indeed interesting, but not enough to keep the disc around. I suggest buying used or renting unless you're a true Green Lantern fan.

moviedoors

(2012-04-30 08:08:34)

Le Sigh

The Good:Ryan Reynolds- he really did give it his all and sold it as best hecould. His sincerity was undeniable and he deserves most of the creditfor what works in the movie. He succeeded were plenty of otherswould've fallen flat on their faces.Peter Sarsgaard- not a great performance, but he was chewing the hellout of the scenery and having a blast doing it. I love that piercingscream he does.The creature and Corp design work- The suits look great. They don'tlook phony at all on Reynolds. I love the bright colors. I wassurprised how much I liked the look and presence of Parallax.Especially good sound work on him. There were some neat looking alienstucked away in the corners.The Bad:The script- lazy, lazy, lazy. It's boiling over with clunky exposition.Who these characters were was shoehorned in in a very shoddy manner.Hal's flashback at the beginning to his father's death was the heightof plot convenience. Hal and Hector having a past is pretty much nonexistent. They don't share any scenes together until what seemed likean hour in and their interaction basically amounts to them bumping intoeach other and going "Oh, hey. What's up?" And speaking of Hector, Ihave no idea who this guy was. He's infected pretty much immediatelyafter we meet. Am I supposed to like him? see his flaws? see how hecould be susceptible to fear? I don't know! Near the end, Sinestrodescribes Hal as brash and opinionated "just like Abin-Sur." Would havebeen nice to have actually see that quality in Abin instead of justbeing told at the end.Actors in nothing roles- Tim Robbins and Angela Bassett do nothing ofnote playing cardboard characters with nothing to do but further theplot and add some cred to the cast. I'm not overly familiar with BlakeLively and I left with basically no impression of her. I won't blameher as she had essentially nothing to work with. The Corp- Speaking of doing nothing, the Corp and the Guardians donothing either. This is all tell and no show. Tomar-Re is BasilExposition, Kilowag trains Hal for what seemed like 2 minutes and thenmore or less vanished, the Guardians sit on their thrones makingbizarre, head scratching decisions and they have a serious case of theCG rubber lips. I started to perk up when Sinestro led a small regimentof Lanterns to fight Parallax, but it's a 30 second non- fight with oneprojection, 5 seconds of zipping around, and then Sinestro lookingshocked after characters we "met" in 2 second cut-aways are dispatchedwith ridiculous ease by Parallax. Oa- one of the biggest let downs for me. If you've seen the trailers,you've pretty much seen all this movie has to offer with this world.Some rocks, a purple sky, and Lanterns standing around doing, youguessed it, nothing. Asgard was a far more visually interesting placeand forget about it even coming near Pandora. The rest of the people on Earth- After Green Lantern makes his firstappearance, there's a shocking lack of attention. There's a news reportin the background of one scene "going who was this hero who saved theday?" as if that's the big story, and not a mention of, gee, I don'tknow, all the crazy energy constructs he created! The credit cookie- Not earned in the slightest. The reason Sinestroputs on that yellow ring had zero to do with what was establishedthroughout the entire rest of the movie (and for what it's worth,Sinestro works well with his small amount of screen time and MarkStrong brings as much gravity as his humanely possible to the role).This was nothing but cheap fan service and teeth grating plotcontrivance. Thor was a much more entertaining ride, and I thought Thor was merelygood. Forget about it even coming close to Iron Man, Superman,Watchmen, or Nolan's Batmans. But, is it terrible? No. I'll watch thisagain before I go near Wolverine, Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, orKick-Ass again. By a long shot. It didn't suck, but I just can't say Iliked it either and I wanted to so bad. Big disappointment.

schf

(2012-04-30 07:30:17)

Good, but drags in the middle and peter sarsgaard is awful

Overall i would recommend this film to others as good .A healthy doseof comedy ,action and bravery .Alot of sci-fi ,aliens ,spectacular CGIgoodness. Alas the pacing of the film is flawed not enough to make it abad film but enough to stop it being a great film.There are plenty ofgreat moments ,good characters ,story and and inspiring ending. Thevillain of the piece or at least the human face of it is just terribleweird uninteresting and unsympathetic for a poor possessed being.godknow what he was thinking with his "acting" style but the film needed alarger than life character we get a bumpy little freak with nopersonality at all perhaps next time they can have sinestro as thevillain he was greatSo watch enjoy and ignore peter sarsgaard and his forehead of destiny

(2012-04-29 16:05:55)

The most underrated movie of the year award goes to.....

This movie was unfairly trashed by critics. Well, I never saw the original version of the film but I just saw the extended version and I don't see what the big problem was. I have heard that the extended cut explains more about the green lanterns at the beginning, which will probably make it easier for people not familiar with the Green Lantern to understand the movie. But to anybody who is familiar with the Green Lantern, this is a fairly good adaptation of the comic book. Don't get me wrong, it is no masterpiece. Certain parts of if come off a little cheesy. But if you are a Green Lantern fan already, I think you will probably at least like most of this movie. And the sequel that it sets up for looks to be cooler than this one. If you are familiar with the Sinestro comic book storyline, you know the series gets darker.

markdroulston

(2012-04-29 06:08:59)

Interesting misfire

Let me begin this review by mentioning where I stand on comic books. Irarely read many anymore, but in the past I have dipped my toe into afew series and enjoyed them, even forming limited attachments tocertain characters, and as such I have feelings and opinions concerninghow they are portrayed on screen. Green Lantern was not one of thesecharacters. I was aware of the basic story, had some sense of what hispowers were, and I even had a Green Lantern action figure as a kid. ButI never read the books, and so, approaching Martin Campbell's GreenLantern, I really had no idea what to expect. What I saw in thetrailers looked cool enough that I was excited by what this film couldbe, but my usual gut-feeling about how a movie will turn out wasabsent. After seeing Green Lantern this morning, I'm still at a loss todescribe how I feel about it. The film features some of the mostinteresting and stunning visuals I've seen in a while, certainlystreaks ahead of this years previous comic book offerings X-Men: FirstClass and Thor, but, regrettably, the quality of the visuals can't makeup for the muddled plot and dreadful pacing issues, particularly in thefilm's conclusion.There is a lot that Campbell gets right with Green Lantern. Firstly thecasting, always of utmost importance in a superhero film, is solid. Allparticipants make the most of their roles, with Ryan Reynolds as HalJordan a particularly inspired choice. This is the type of roleReynolds was born to play, and he clearly understands the journeyJordan takes over the course of the film. Bringing his natural charm toelevate the character above the by-the-numbers troubled hero Jordancould have been, he's the best thing about the whole film. Supports aregood too, with Peter Sarsgaard wickedly creepy as Hector Hammond, andMark Strong as Lantern Corps leader Sinestro making the best of smallerparts. It's also nice to see Campbell keeping it Kiwi with roles forTemuera Morrison and Taika Waititi, although both are underused.Campbell also nails the look of Green Lantern, and the delicate butmasterful use of colour (perhaps unsurprising in a film with a colourin the title) shows his visual expertise as a filmmaker. Freed from therestraints of a realistic setting, Campbell really lets loose with hisgreat visual style in scenes that take him away from Earth. Too oftensuperhero films are hampered by the perceived need to keep proceedingsgrounded in reality to give mass audiences something to better relateto, and much like Marvel's Thor, the sci-fi heavy sequences set infar-off fantastical locations offer refreshing variety. It is howeverspectacularly geeky, and as much as certain core fans will undoubtedlybe crying for more of this style in future comic adaptations,conservative studio thinking is likely the reason we'll never see aGreen Lantern movie set entirely off-Earth.Green Lantern, despite all it has going for it visually, falls down atthe story level, perhaps an effect of having four writers working onthe script at various times. Adding originality to an origin story isalways going to be a challenging task, and the story spends too muchtime on build-up before rushing to a conclusion, which ultimately seemsa touch too easy. Obviously Warner Bros. are counting on the success ofthe film to launch a new franchise, so therefore Jordan's triumph was aforegone conclusion, but Campbell doesn't spend enough time developingthe threat presented by the film's villain, and as such when theconfrontation comes it never feels like anything is really at stake.It's an exciting sequence while it lasts, despite its overly obviousterrorism parallels, but it's just over much too quickly, and thecolossal visual scale of the villain which Campbell reaches for isunmatched by the battle itself. There's an uneasy balance between thesmall-scale human story and the epic overarching plot, andunfortunately Green Lantern comes off as unsure of what exactly itwants to be.So, here I sit, unsure of what to make of Green Lantern. There'spotential in it, elements we'll hopefully see explored in theinevitable sequel. As an introduction to a lesser known character (atleast for mainstream audiences) it's passable, and for the wow-factorof the visuals alone it may be worth seeing in the cinema. Personallythough, I think Green Lantern will be filed under 'interestingfailure'.

(2012-04-28 09:28:59)

I like the 3D effects!

This review is from: Green Lantern (Three-Disc Combo: Blu-ray 3D / Blu-ray / DVD / UltraViolet Digital Copy) (Blu-ray) I got it the same day it came out! The 3d effects are worth watching. I have a Samsung PN63C7000 63" 3D Plasma HDTV, and the special effects of Green Lantern pops out well to reach your eyes. The 3d depth and is as great as Thor 3d blu ray. The 3d combo pack comes with a 3d blu ray, an extended cut blu ray, a dvd disc, and an ultraviolet digital copy (you have to create an account to stream to your computer, or other devices).If you are a "down-to-earth optimist", you will like it.Enjoy!

nottoman

(2012-04-27 21:42:07)

Better than I expected - some unique differences from other superhero movies

It's rare that a movie surpasses my expectations, but this one did. Asperhaps one of the less-known, less-popular superheroes, GreenLantern's origins added a lot to the story, and the noble theme to hismission endears the audience, and perhaps strikes a chord when thebattle between "fear" and "will" is articulated throughout the movie.Blake Lively, of "Traveling Pants" fame does an outstanding job ofbeing the beauty and brains, while still being the vulnerable maiden indistress. The personal struggles of the novice superhero strike a chordwith most every viewer, and keep you rooting for him until the end. Thegraphics are a bit cartoonish at times, but this is a superhero actionmovie, so anything goes. The almost unlimited powers possessed by theGreen Lantern keep you guessing during the intense conflicts with thebad guys, both of which are reaaal bad. Very enjoyable, and my 23 yrold son who watched it with me was very impressed also - he's usuallyvery particular about the movies he watches. Fun and entertaining.

(2012-04-27 07:26:36)

Good movie...but "digital copy" is a waste of good money

I enjoyed the movie...it wasn't the best, but it was enjoyable.However, this review is really about the scam that is "UltraViolet" digital copy.While the ability to stream a movie to multiple devices is great, it does NOT allow you to watch the movie when you do not have internet access - like on a plane. The benefit of the iTunes digital copy is that you can transfer the file to a portable device and watch it anywhere - at any time. Not so with the UltraViolet version. In order to watch that version, you must have internet access because it is merely streaming it to your portable device.I typically pay extra money for a "combo pack" (blu ray/dvd/digital copy) because it allows me to watch the movie anywhere - even if that place does NOT have a blu ray player - such as in a car. While this version contains a DVD which is playable in my car, the digital copy is not as beneficial as the typical iTunes version.Had I known this, I would have purchased a different version of the movie...or maybe not at all.Very disappointing.

John Dowbiggin

(2012-04-26 20:46:28)

Good fun had by all

I went to see this film because the 3d projector broke down on the filmwe were going to see and this was picked because a) it started at theright time b) it was 3d and c) it was a superhero film. So, I had noexpectations and didn't know about reviews so no pre-conceptions.I go to the cinema to relax and be entertained. This film did justthat. Decent performances all round (although the Green Lantern maskwas a bit much - so bijou!) good special fx and it managed to avoidthat 15 minute period where you think "this is a bit slow". As it drewto a close I found myself thinking "I really enjoyed this". It mightnot be the greatest film ever made but I thought it good fun and itkept me entertained - and surely that is the purpose of a film likethis.I don't know why folks seem to expect a film with the depth of aShakespeare or Hemmingway classic - it comes from a comic for goodnesssake and it does what its source did - entertained.

Michael Hogan

(2012-04-26 07:42:07)

Only Human

It seems every summer blockbuster season, fans and critics alike seizeupon a particular film to victimize and this year it seems GreenLantern is the chosen candidate. Warner and DC's first big effort tosuccess fully bring one of their lesser known characters to the bigscreen GL had a decent pedigree. Martin Campbell has made some verygood pictures in his time ( Goldeneye, Mask of Zorro, Casino Royale)some decent efforts (Edge of Darkness) and some downright awful ones(Vertical Limit) so he has was seen as a fairly safe pair of hands forthis. Ryan Reynolds, when he wants to be, can be a very likable andeffective leading man and again seems like ideal casting for the cockytest pilot turned inter-galactic hero. Mark Strong as Sinestro islargely perfect casting, while Peter Sarsgaard is creepily effective inhis under developed role as villain Hector Hammond and Blake Lively ispretty too look at but don't blame her too much, her role isessentially your typical love interest. Where GL does succeed is invisual effects which are largely effective, Reynolds likable hero,Strong's Sinestro (who really should have been the main villain)Sarsgaard who gets the most out of his villain and fan boy pleasingwinks to the audience (Amanda Waller, Corp member cameos). However thefilm also has many serious flaws, chiefly the lack on time spent on Oawhich largely reduces fan favorite Lanterns like Kilowog and Tomar Reto little more than cameos. The Guardians meanwhile are almost totallysidelined, popping up only to deliver exposition. Blake Lively,gorgeous though she is, is given little to do other than provide a loveinterest. The choice of Parrallax as the main villain and the moviesdepiction of him also irks, basically coming across as an evil cloud ofspace vomit. Also the film's obvious attempts to ape the Marvel formuladoesn't really work out. DC's characters have always been more mythicthan their Marvel counterparts. The best DC movies (Nolan's Batmanseries, Donner's Superman) realize this but GL tries to inject too muchhumor that doesn't connect. All in all, GL has more pros than cons andis nowhere near as bad as the reviews would have you believe. Butcompared to this year's other superhero flicks (the superb Thor and theexcellent X-Men: First Class) it falls somewhat short. A sequel maywell shore up the problems, but given the movies dismal receptioncritically and commercially don't count on it happening anytime soon.

thelittleclown

(2012-04-26 19:48:56)

Pleasantly Surprised

I was going to stay away from this movie after hearing bad reviews, buthaving a chance to go to the theater and being a comic fan, I gave it ashot. I can honestly say that I actually liked it. It didn't surpassChristopher Nolan's work on Batman, but did it need to? I'll admit thatit's not a perfect film, but it isn't nearly as bad as it's being madeout to be. The title character is handled solidly and the supportingcharacters are good too. It was a creative and entertaining adaptationof the Green Lantern universe and it surpassed my expectations. So ifyou happen to be looking for a movie with some good action and decentcharacters with some humor thrown in here and there, this movie isn't abad choice. Seriously, it's far better than many would have youbelieve.

Nathan Dawson

(2012-04-25 23:50:24)

Below Average Superhero Movie!!!!

OK, so we are having a lot of superhero movies this year, and most ofthem have turned out to be pretty good and reach the Top 250 on IMDb.We have had Thor, X-Men First Class and now Green Lantern. Most ofthese movies have been pretty impressive as you can see, Thor 7.4/10,X-Men First Class 8.1/10 reaching the top 250. But this has been atotal failure on the DC Comics hand, it looks like Marvel has got thebetter films until DC Comics "THE DARK KNGIHT RISES". This had a badscript and a bad plot that was utterly unbelievable you could notbelieve it (and I mean this in a bad way). The acting was good though Ithink there are many other better actors than Ryan Renolds for thispart. One good part about the movie "THE EFFECTS" The effects wereawesome and gave a lot of fun in the film, but really that was aboutit, nothing else. Peter Saasguard does a good performance as a octopus(HAHA) but still turned out well. Overall I will give this movie 4.8out of 10. This movie could of been so much better given a screenplay,script and a new director like Chris topher Nolan.Cheers Nathan Dawson

John Maynes

(2012-04-24 21:40:08)

Epic Fail *Worst Picture worthy nominee*

Not even the trailers, the toys, the game, the book about the movie, oranything impressed me.And I even saw Battle:L.A. to be honest it was exactly like watchingthat movie again just put into a utterly not well thought about scriptalong with cheesy dialog,poor robotic direction, and enough laughableaction and acting to call this a *Last Airbender Repeat*3-D as far as the 3-D desperately tried to save the film it did wellnot either, yes another worthless 3-D superhero movie since the GreenHornet.*I'm not gonna spoil it for those Die Hard Fans of the Comic Book Hero*I am also a HUGE fan of the Green Lantern but this just was a disaster.Straight Up one of the worst movie of the summer worthy of competingwith Mars Needs moms and Red Riding hood for worst Picture

ryan-craven

(2012-04-24 16:13:21)

There is a good film to be made out of Green Lantern, this isn't it.

Wow. Talented, competent director. A company coming off the back of 3successful films. A well cast lead. What could go wrong? Everything,apparently. What was Martin Johnson thinking when he read the scriptfor Green Lantern? Some alarm bells must have been ringing, or maybethe paycheck was putting him off. That is the film's gaping, obviousproblem...the script. Packed with lines that wouldn't go amiss in aspoof, Green Lantern tries so hard to take itself seriously, whenreally, it's just a kid. Starting off with a big, boring monologuepacking in thousands of comic book mythology in under 5 minutes, and athoroughly pointless scene showing Hal Jordan's dad's death, then 5minutes later showing it again in the form of flashbacks, the filmnever really recovers. Hal Jordan is a cocky flight pilot, who, with aninsane amount of luck, is chosen by a dying pink guy to become a greenlantern. The film's villain is a big, messy blob (much like the filmitself) which runs on the yellow power of fear. Sound stupid to you?Then don't watch it. Ryan Reynolds gives likability and easy goingcharm to Jordan, however his character doesn't make for a convincing,noble hero. All in all,a big, dirty stinker.

RichHartford

(2012-04-23 06:49:48)

Anyone Who Love Comics Will Enjoy It

Green Lantern is a film based on the DC Comics superhero of the samename. It stars Ryan Reynolds, Blake Lively, Peter Sarsgaard, MarkStrong, Angela Bassett and Tim Robbins.The script were written by GregBerlanti and comic book writers Michael Green and Marc Guggenheim,which was subsequently rewritten by Michael Goldenberg.It tells thestory of Hal Jordan, a test pilot who is selected to become the firsthuman member of the Green Lantern Corps and given a ring that grantshim superpowers after a new enemy called Parallax threatens to destroythe balance of power in the universe.It was directed by MartinCampbell.In a universe as vast as it is mysterious, a small but powerful forcehas existed for centuries. Protectors of peace and justice, they arecalled the Green Lantern Corps. A brotherhood of warriors sworn to keepintergalactic order, each Green Lantern wears a ring that grants himsuperpowers. But when a new enemy called Parallax threatens to destroythe balance of power in the Universe, their fate and the fate of Earthlie in the hands of their newest recruit, the first human everselected: Hal Jordan. Hal is a gifted and cocky test pilot, but theGreen Lanterns have little respect for humans, who have never harnessedthe infinite powers of the ring before.The movie serves as a good entertainment on a Saturday night for itsfans and nothing more.Unfortunately,the screenplay was thinlywritten.It was also not engaging and a bit boring.But credit has to begiven to its spectacular visual and special effects despite of beingdisjointed and somewhat not-so-interesting plot.But overall,anyone wholoves comics will enjoy this film.

(2012-04-22 13:24:07)

Brightest Day and Blackest Night

The Review:Green Lantern is Warner Bros' latest attempt to climb back on top of the superhero movie genre (with a character other than Batman). Their last non-Dark Knight attempt was Superman Returns, and that effort met with mixed results and mixed reviews. Now comes Green Lantern, guardian of sector 2814. Does he fair any better than the man of Steel? Yes, but not nearly so well as Batman or Watchmen. There are now enough big budget superhero movies that they can be placed in tiers. In the first tier, we have the best of the best: Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Ironman, X-Men: First Class, Thor and Watchmen. In the second tier there are good movies that fall a little short of greatness, as well as critical acclaim: The Incredible Hulk (Ed Norton Reboot), Blade, Wolverine, and Superman Returns. Finally, we have failed efforts that are fundamentally poor movies: Ghost Rider, Daredevil, and The Fantastic Four. Green Lantern fits firmly into that second tier. It's entertaining, but it will have neither the universal audience appeal of Batman Begins nor its critical acclaim.Green Lantern brings to the silver screen one of the heavy hitters of the DC universe. Hal Jordan is part of a group of galactic peace keepers, each in charge of a sector of space the size of several galaxies. It's a very big precinct with cosmic threats. When Jimmy Olsen needs help, he calls Superman. When Superman needs help, he calls Green Lantern. The movie's introduction does a splendid job giving the background on the intricacies of the Green Lantern Corps. Notwithstanding the crash course in Green Lantern lore, much of it will be lost on those not at least a little familiar with Green Lantern comics. This is one of the potential downsides of the film. On the one hand, those with substantial familiarity with the source material will get the most from the film. On the other hand those people most familiar with Green Lantern are apt to be critical of the film makers concessions to the medium of film, e.g. there's a lot of nerd rage surrounding Green Lantern's costume.Some fans of the comic have said Green Lantern takes on too much for a single film. It is not just the origin story of Hal Jordan, played very well by the criminally underrated Ryan Reynolds. It's also about how he has to vanquish two bad guys, while struggling with his green lantern training. Trying to do so much short changes other aspects of Green Lantern's origin, such as his complex relationship with Sinestro, played by the versatile Mark Strong, who is destined to become Hal's greatest nemesis. The villains we get in this movie are poor substitutes. The first, Hector Hammond, while a well developed character, is about as much threat to a Green Lantern as a paper cut. C'mon, he doesn't even rate a cool supervillain code name. Only Lex Luthor rolls that hard. The main villain, Parallax, is certainly a galactic threat, but incredibly underdeveloped. A superhero movie is generally only as good as its supervillain. Two subpar villains don't make up for the lack of one great villain.Now I didn't think Green Lantern tried to do too much, and I didn't have any trouble following the movie. But please bare in mind that my head is swimming with such useless facts as the various differences among red, blue, green and gold kryptonite, and how fast Superman would lose his powers under a red sun. For those of you who didn't dedicate your childhood to the nerdcore equivalent of pondering how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, Green Lantern might seem a little convoluted.But fear not, Green Lantern does do many things right. Ryan Reynolds is a great Hal Jordan, despite the rantings of innumerable Internet fanboys. Hal Jordan is a very Marvel-like superhero for DC-at least in his current incarnation. He's deeply flawed. A hot headed womanizer who begins as the most irresponsible of squared jawed heroes. He is an arrogant fighter jock and he does not play well with others. Hal has a lot of potential and much of the film revolves around whether he will live up to that potential and overcome his fears and self doubt to become the hero he needs to be. Also, the movie looks fantastic. The CG aliens are in many cases as expressive as their human costars and I mean that to compliment the FX crew, not knock the actors.In the end, Green Lantern is a fun movie. It is impossible to take it too seriously and I don't think it's possible to make a Green Lantern Begins along the lines of Batman Begins. Green Lantern is fundamentally about a guy with a magic ring that can do anything so long as its wearer believes strongly enough. There's a worthwhile, and largely successful attempt to give Hal Jordan gravitas, but you won't find the social themes of Marvel's X-Men nor the epic struggle of Bruce Wayne to become more than a man. What you will find is an enjoyable romp, heavy on special FX. In short, a very watchable second tier superhero movie.FTC Advisory: We purchased our own tickets.

scott-tomasso

(2012-04-20 15:02:59)

I've read some of the other reviews...

I've read some of the other user reviews and I find a lot of themlaughable. Was this a great movie? No. Was it a bad movie? No, ofcourse not. I went into Green Lantern the same way I would go into - ohI don't know - a "Hangover" movie. You pretty much know what you'regoing to get. I suppose, however, that most of the same critic wannabesI had the displeasure of reading will probably go into the "Smurfs"movie with their quippy lines and well thought out rants already typedup and ready to send. It's easier to jump on the band wagon, than it isto be honest I guess.Personally, I thought Green Lantern was fairly good. Now, I shouldpreface that with the fact that I already knew a bit about the ringwearing superhero before going in. That doesn't mean, however, that Iwouldn't have been entertained otherwise. In fact, I thought the moviewas entertaining. Granted, it seemed rushed (and it was), but I leftthe movie theater feeling neither giddy nor disappointed. I jut wantedmore. I wish there was more. More action, more fighting, more build up.Just...more.To those of you bashing the special effects or the storyline...youobviously don't know much about Green Lantern. And that's fine. Thismovie obviously isn't for you. Have fun watching the "Smurfs".

Paul Haakonsen

(2012-04-20 00:51:03)

Yet another superhero movie...

Well, even though I am not a huge fan of superhero movies, I had togive "Green Lantern" a go. Why? Well because it looked nice in thetrailers, and because it seemed like it had potential.Now that I have seen it, I can say that it is fairly much like mostother superhero movies out there. You have a reluctant guy being putinto the role of the superhero, much against his own choice, and he hasto struggle with himself to come to terms with who he is, who he willbecome and we have seen that before in other similar movies. Plus, ofcourse, there is a damsel in distress, and of course there will be aromantic connection between the two. Nothing new or innovating here,just boiling soup on broth already used before.What puzzles me, is why they chose Ryan Reynolds. Well, I am not sayingthat he is a bad actor. I did enjoy his performance, but once you havestarred as a superhero in a movie (in a different role, mind you), youdon't go on and don the colors and garments of another superhero. It isjust wrong. Sadly Hollywood seem to enjoy doing that, re-castingpreviously seen 'superheroes' into new superhero roles. It is just sad."Green Lantern" was good entertainment from start till end, and thereis a good flow to the story. Though, personally I thought some of thescenes where he used the green energy was a bit too comical and shouldperhaps had been done in a whole different approach. But hey, I guessit worked well enough, because I watched the movie from start till end.I am not overly familiar with the universe of the "Green Lantern", sohow much (or lacking) the movie kept true to the comic book, I can onlyguess. But for a non-fan, the movie was adequate. It sure was oneamazing CGI fest. Lots of really cool effects, and lots of detailseverywhere."Green Lantern" is a movie that doesn't require much thinking, so it iswell suited for an evening when you just want to unwind and get suckedaway from everyday life and go into a universe of superheroes.One thing that I had a hard time buying into, was the villain. What wasup with that? An entity of fear, growing in mass as it consumes thefear (and lives) of random people. Well, alright, why not, guess I haveseen that as well now.Even though "Green Lantern" was good enough entertainment, it is hardlya movie that I will be making a second date out of watching. It wasn'tjust that appealing to me. And the best scene in the movie, for me atleast, was when he said "by the power of Grayskull". Hey, I am a bigfan of "He-Man and the Masters of the Universe", so that scene wasepic.Time to put out the green fluorescent light in the lantern...