I'm still waiting to find out when this throwdown between HB and Sir Miles is happening (I know who I'm rooting for :v). But in the meantime, seeing as we're now only a week away from the big event, WB has released Green Lantern: Emerald Knights, a straight to video anthology featuring handful of loosely connected stories about the Green Lantern Corps based on a limited comics series of the same name.
Krona, an ancient and powerful adversary of the Corps is stirring and as the Green Lanterns prepare for the coming conflict, Hal Jordan fills new recruit Arisia in on some Green Lantern lore before the obligatory and planet shattering conflict. As is the case with anthologies, some stories are stronger than others; the standouts here are The First Lantern (a kind of origin story about the first beings to wield the power rings), Mogo Doesn't Socialize (fans of the comic will see the surprise ending coming a mile away but noobs may be surprised), and a poignant reminiscence involving Sinestro and Abin Sur, which serves as an ominous harbinger of things to come.
Emerald Knights is a pretty good primer for anyone curious about Green Lantern but unfamiliar with the mythos as it does a good job of introducing us to some classic characters, laying out the ground rules for the mythology and even explaining what a "poozer" is. The animation is your standard direct-to-video effort, which is to say good but not particularly special in any way. Certain scenes are also augmented by CG extensions of characters, spaceships and so forth.
Given the nature of the presentation, Hal Jordan is the character that actually has the least to do here, serving primarily as the narrator and that is, for me, the show's greatest shortcoming. A Hal-centric story would have been a welcome addition. In spite of that, I still enjoyed Emerald Knights and would recommend it to any Green Lantern fans out there or people curious about the mythology but uncertain of where to begin.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,443Chief of Staff
I'm still waiting to find out when this throwdown between HB and Sir Miles is happening (I know who I'm rooting for :v).
Thanks TonyDP....but how are you going to break the news to HB ?
Seen the tv ads for this 'film' now...it still looks very ropey...I'll be interested in what you all make of it...can't see me watching it at the cinema though.
YNWA 97
Mr MartiniThat nice house in the sky.Posts: 2,703MI6 Agent
'Green Lantern' Cost $300 Million, and You Know What That Means...
by: Tim Grierson
Warner Bros. Pictures Big summer movies cost a lot to make and market. That's not news. In fact, the only time you hear much about a movie's price tag is if it flops. Last summer's "Robin Hood" raised eyebrows because of its $237 million budget, especially after the film was perceived as a box office underperformer with a domestic haul of $105 million. By comparison, "Avatar's" huge cost -- placed anywhere between $230 million and $500 million -- made folks at Fox nervous, but then James Cameron's movie became the biggest hit of all time, which took care of those worries. ("It is the most expensive film we've made," Fox Filmed Entertainment co-chairman and C.E.O. of James Gianopulos later admitted to CNN, "but now, having the luxury of hindsight, it is money well spent, so I'm not concerned about it.") So if you're Warner Bros, you have to be worried that the world now knows that, reportedly, "Green Lantern" cost $300 million. That's not meant to be impressive; the pre-release discussion of a number that big is meant to signal that your movie is probably in trouble.
The New York Times (via The Playlist) recently did a profile piece on "Green Lantern" star Ryan Reynolds, and the angle of the piece was pretty much, "Boy, the studio is taking a huge risk on an action movie starring a guy you probably know from 'The Proposal.'" In the piece, producers and studio executives assured the reader that the movie's gonna be awesome and it won't be your typical comic book movie. (Trying to be enticing, producer and co-writer Greg Berlanti called "Green Lantern" "a space opera in the vein of 'Star Wars' with an Earthbound 'Top Gun' vibe." Uh, thanks?)
But the piece also mentioned that the studio spent around $300 million to produce and promote the film. And while the article says that sum is in line with other major films' budgets, what's not said is that nobody cares if, say, "The Dark Knight" (reported production budget of $185 million) or 2013's "Iron Man 3" cost that much. People want to see those films from established franchises. Nobody knows if anybody will go see "Green Lantern," no matter how much it cost.
That seems to have been an anxiety for Warners for a while. They radically shifted from a jokey initial trailer to a more conventional action-and-more-action follow-up trailer. And there were also the stories about the studio hiring a bunch of extra effects companies to make sure the movie got done in time. Pre-release strategies are about instilling confidence in the product about ready to be sold to the public. By comparison, Warners seems to be rushing frantically with "Green Lantern" to clog up all the holes so that the ship doesn't sink. Even Warner Bros. Pictures president Jeff Robinov sounded somewhat worried when he talked to the Times. "We're trying very hard to deliver," he said. "Yes, there is a lot at stake. But I try and frame these things in terms of my own expectations. If you look at 'Batman Begins,' it did about $370 million worldwide and got us to a sequel."
Yes, it's all about expectations. If the Reynolds experiment pays off and "Green Lantern" is huge, nobody will remember how much it cost to make. But if it tanks, we'll be hearing that $300 million figure over and over again the rest of the summer. The studio is offering the film in both 2D and 3D. They're probably praying everybody picks the latter option
Some people would complain even if you hang them with a new rope
Well, early reviews are coming in, and they're at best lukewarm. The "tomatometer" on RottenTomatoes currently stands at 21%. You can keep track here. . .
The good news is that a movie doesn't have to be superior to make money...but I have to agree with some of the sentiments expressed in Mr. Martini's article. If you really think about it, Green Lantern is unexplored territory. Even non-comic fans are familiar with Batman and Superman and you can expect some resonance there, but with GL? Who can say. Got to give it to Warner Bros, though...their definitely giving their marketing the kitchen sink treatment. I anticipate better BO numbers than Thor got (which got a pretty lackluster marketing push in my opinion, but yet has still done reasonably well).
My biggest concern with a Green Lantern movie has always been the fact the the comic is so "out there". You have weird aliens, villains with huge heads, stories that jump from one planet to another and the central conceit that you create green constructs from a magical ring. What works in a comic doesn't necessarily work in live action; it's one thing to see a panel of a giant green fist smashing a bunch of thugs but quite another to see it rendered for real.
The fear with something like Green Lantern is always that the general public simply won't get it or think the whole thing is silly and the early negative reviews would seem to bear that out to some extent as critics typically don't go for that kind of story. Most of the negative reviews I've seen so far seem to fall back to the usual complaints: an over-abundance of CG (pretty much unavoidable with a movie like this), the amount of exposition (again, pretty much required to fill the audience in on the mythology) and the focus on action (it's a summer popcorn movie, not a Merchant & Ivory production). One critic even cracked that the power battery looked like a bong, which of course led to the obligatory drug jokes; when you get comments like that you know that they're just not even interested in the material.
Luckily, critical response very rarely lines up with box office performance and a film like Green Lantern will survive or perish more because of word of mouth from the early screenings than the musings of jaded critics who usually have an axe to grind with this kind of film before they see a single frame.
Maybe people will get it, like they did Star Wars, another film that critics deemed a disaster out of the gate only to change their tune once the money started rolling in, or maybe it will quickly sink into obscurity in this summer of never ending comic book movies and sequels.
For what it is worth, Roger Ebert liked the film, said he liked it better than Thor and found the character Hector Hammond interesting. He saw the 2D version and was impressed with the vivid colors. I have seen some complaints about the 3D version, especially the earth scenes. Still intend to see it.
Nah... just don't like green eggs and green lantern... don't like the look of the villains, they seem horrible and odious. Hero bland, blather exposition, too much like hard work. Makes me yearn for the old red and blue of Reeve's Superman and his handsome looks.
I feel about GL's green get-up like some football fan disenchanted with the unveiling of a new kit.
"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,443Chief of Staff
I've seen every new trailer for this film. I love the idea of these superhero films being more violent, action-packed and for more older audiences. Ryan Reynolds plays Hal Jordan and that girl from "Gossip Girl" takes the role of his girlfriend or something. Here are a few images of the movie. Enjoy!!!!!!!!!!!
While the film is averaging a 24% fresh rating from "professional" critics, it's worthwhile to note that among actual moviegoers who have posted reviews, the rating is a respectable 72% fresh with an average 3.8 out of 5 stars (and that's from over 100 pages of user reviews).
I'm planning on seeing the movie in 3D tomorrow.
RogueAgentSpeeding in the Tumbler...Posts: 3,676MI6 Agent
Well, the kid and I went to see Green Lantern in 3-D yesterday morning but I haven't gathered my thoughts enough for a decent review of what I thought.
I can say this much, the critics were overly damning of this movie. It wasn't deserved.
Mrs. Man Face: "You wouldn't hit a lady? Would you?"
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice isUNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
Well, the kid and I went to see Green Lantern in 3-D yesterday morning but I haven't gathered my thoughts enough for a decent review of what I thought.
I can say this much, the critics were overly damning of this movie. It wasn't deserved.
Nice to see you posting Rogue; I was afraid you'd been banished to the antimatter universe of Qward or something.
I saw Green Lantern today with the brother in 3D and, surprise surprise, we both enjoyed it a lot.
The film is not perfect and suffers the plight of all origin stories; namely, it takes a while for the hero to get into the suit and accept his responsibility to save the day, but overall it more than held our attention and provided a lot of great moments for this Green Lantern fan. The film splits its time between Earth and outer space and the space sequences are so good that when the action returns to terra firma I found myself wishing we could get back to Oa. We also get the obligatory romantic subplot between Hal and Carol; it seems every comic book film tries to shoehorn this element into the proceedings and all it does is slow things down.
While we don't see as much of the other Green Lanterns as I would have liked, Kilowog, Tomar Re, Abin Sur and Sinestro all have their moments and our glimpses of other Lanterns like Bzzzt and Larvax are fun, even if brief. The visualizations of Oa, the Guardians and other locations like the Lost Sector are all beautifully done. The scenes of Hal being trained to use the ring really capture the vibe of the comics and perfectly present the characteristics of the other three main Green Lanterns. Its also a treat to see the beginnings of Hal's friendship with Tomar Re and Kilowog and his more complicated relationship with Sinestro.
Ryan Reynolds is actually very good as Hal/GL and nicely straddles the line between self-deprecating and deadly serious when he needs to be. Blake Lively is perfectly serviceable as Carol and while she doesn't have a lot to do she never seems miscast or out of place. Peter Saarsgard really captures the nerdy, creepy, borderline stalker vibe of Hector Hammond from the Secret Origin comic. The various Lanterns all look and behave like they stepped right out of the comics and the Parallax entity is strikingly realized, gradually growing in size and power as the film progresses.
There has been much debate about a post-credits scene in which we see...
Sinestro put on the yellow ring
...as there seemed to be no context for it given what happens in the film. What I think most people have missed is that we don't know when this scene occurs. It is assumed to happen right after the events of the film but, like the easter eggs in the Marvel movies, it could have happened months or years later. Viewed in that light, its just a little taste of what may come if we ever get a sequel.
In terms of the 3D quality, I didn't experience any ghosting or murkiness at my screen as others have complained about. In fact, the image was consistently bright and sharp throughout with a nice sense of depth most of the time, especially in outer space and on Oa, where it really mattered the most.
I really don't care for the way professional critics (an oxymoron if ever there was one) have lambasted this movie. Most obviously didn't care for the material before seeing a single frame and I'm amazed at how many facts they get wrong in their reviews. Clearly they have an agenda and it has nothing to do with giving the movie a fair shake. If I had my way, I'd have them all dragged from their homes and hunted for sport (something tells me they wouldn't last too long).
As for me, I enjoyed Green Lantern a lot. I plan to see it again very soon and buy the 3D BluRay when it is released. Hopefully we'll get a sequel but even if we don't it was still a thrill to see GL brought to life.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I won't be overly verbose right now...but pretty much concur 100% with Tony's review; nicely stated. GL wasn't a title I read constantly, but I'm familiar enough with the mythos to know they got the important things right...in my humble opinion. Personally, I always tend to be a bit more wide-eyed and forgiving of comic book movies than many of my very astute and more knowledgeable purist friends For my own part, it delivered everything I generally look for in a film of this genre...I actually thought the CGI costume worked exceedingly well.
The boys and I found it quite enjoyable. 3.5 out of 5 stars.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
RogueAgentSpeeding in the Tumbler...Posts: 3,676MI6 Agent
Nice to see you posting Rogue; I was afraid you'd been banished to the antimatter universe of Qward or something.
Hey, Tony! No, I could never leave my AJB family voluntarily at least. Just been really busy.
Well, after some thought, I pretty much liked Green Lantern. It's not a superb comic movie achievement but at most a servicable venture for summer escapism; if you're looking for Schindler's List in a cape ( or in this case, wearing a ring) then this movie probably's not for you. It's one of those movies where you'll have to take in account all the variables & weigh the good and the bad it had to offer and judge it on its own merits. In other words, going into it with an open mind- especially after reading most of the undeserved jeering it got from critics and haters. I almost thought that there was a conspiracy afoot to sandbag this flick before the viewing public could take their seats. It's a good thing that I'm obstinate enough not to let the critics influence me on something that I want to see. No way could it have been that bad, could it? Yes and no. More emphasis on NO.
That's the problem with movies of this genre and it doesn't help that TDK has set the barometer so high. Those that know me know that I'm one of the biggest Batman fanboys around but I don't want TDK's tone in every one of these kind of films; sometimes I just want to let go and see what a movie has to offer and hopefully be entertained and not having to think too much as if I'm studying for a Trig exam which most of Nolan's films have a penchant for doing.
Now to be fair, I went into this movie on the defensive as I did PUNISHER: War Zone a few years back that also got owned by these arty critics. My son went in with higher expectations than I did; after the mired in mediocrity of Thor (his boy), he felt GL had to be better. We both liked it but left the theatre thinking that alot was left on the table. How did Berlanti and Geoff Johns- freakin' GEOFF JOHNS!!!!! not take full opportunity of the GL Corps rich history from the comics? The source material's all laid out on a platter, just build a story from that.
Firstly, with all of the screenwriters employed to do this, IMO, there's too many chefs in the kitchen right there. It felt like every writer involved took what they could contribute to the story and just tacked it onto one another's like post-it notes because the development was all over the place. It was hard to get vested in any of these characters with such shoddy writing....and EDITING. It also is apparent that Campbell was out of his element here; he should just stick to Bond and leave the sci-fi to someone more palatable. Duncan Jones comes to mind if we're lucky enough to get a sequel.
The actors all did a fine job, the action was good and the 3-D was great but not enough of it. I was really impressed with the visuals of Oa and the constructs during the training sequence. Not a huge fan of 3-D to begin with, I feel it's a played out fad but there is no way to fully enjoy a GL movie without paying to experience it in that format so for my money, it was warranted.
Not enough Sinestro for me. Mark Strong was born to play the guy but he just wasn't dubious enough. Should've been more like Garber's in First Flight where you know eventually it was a matter of time before he shows his "horns".
And where was Boodika? And C'hp for that matter? WB, please consider a sequel and keep Hal in space! More GLs and I want John Stewart and Guy Gardner! No, Rayner, please. lol
All in all, I gave the movie a B- to C+. With the right people in charge, this arguably could've been one of the great ones even 30 years from now because I sensed something just under the surface. They just didn't have the aptitude to bring it out.
Will someone at WB PLEASE get a clue? I don't want Batman and Supes movies only for the rest of my life so they shouldn't give up on GL and other properties. Just take the same strategy that was used with Star Trek: TMP. They shook the tree and came up with TROK. It's now considered a masterpiece by many sci-fi fans.
Mrs. Man Face: "You wouldn't hit a lady? Would you?"
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice isUNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
Hey, Tony! No, I could never leave my AJB family voluntarily at least. Just been really busy.
No worries Rogue; as long as you and the family are all doing OK, its all good.
GL made about $53 million over the weekend and that number is disappointing compared to other comic book adaptations, especially when factoring inflation into the mix
Obviously the critical drubbing didn't help it but at the end of the day I think the typical moviegoing audience simply isn't imaginative enough to "get" something like this - a fear I had from the minute the movie was greenlighted. It also didn't help that the film clearly struggled with figuring out what it wanted to be, vacillating as it did between earthbound drama and outer-space heroics. I'm inclined to think that WB meddled in the scriptwriting process as they were probably afraid of committing to a 100% spacebound adventure. After all, something like Star Wars clicks only once in a very great while. The fact that the film meandered for so long in pre-production and had to go thru a change of shooting locations from Australia to New Orleans and the relatively late start of filming were probably all signs that WB just didn't have its act together in getting this going out of the gate properly.
Frankly I doubt we'll be seeing a sequel. Movie studios are only interested in the bottom line and unless this thing has strong legs (which I doubt) the final domestic boxoffice take will probably be in the $100 million range; early reports are that the foreign box office is equally indifferent. Maybe the inevitable home video release will make up for the boxoffice disappointment but I really doubt that WB has the constitution to give GL another go and I have to believe they're probably starting to have second thoughts about greenlighting the Flash at this point as well.
The idea that some film critics had an agenda against GL isn't all that far-fetched to me. After all, they typically despise comic book adaptations, summer popcorn flicks and 3D and GL had a checkmark next to all three of those categories. I also found it interesting how some of the positive reviews such as the one on CNN made a point to mention that the film wasn't nearly as bad as most critics made it out to be. Too bad. Green Lantern deserved better.
RogueAgentSpeeding in the Tumbler...Posts: 3,676MI6 Agent
Tony, the idea of an agenda is what the Oliver Stone in me wants to believe and then I read this article:
FALLING STARS REYNOLDS AND CARREY: #1 'Green Lantern' Opens To Just $52.6M; 'Popper's Penguins' Falls To #3 With $18.2M
By NIKKI FINKE | Saturday June 18, 2011 @ 10:31pm PDT
Comments 240 SUNDAY AM, 6TH UPDATE: Warner Bros' 3D Green Lantern ($21.6M Friday, dropping -21% for $17.1M Saturday, and only a $52.6M weekend) underperforms, unable to meet even the studio's lowered expectation for North America despite the higher 3D ticket prices. And Fox's Mr. Popper's Penguins ($6.4M Friday, up only +2% for $6.5M Saturday meaning it failed to get any significant kiddie matinee bump, and only an $18.2M weekend) falls to No. 3 behind Paramount's holdover Super 8 which cast no stars moves up to No. 2. But these numbers also signal falling stars in Hollywood. Green Lantern had well-known actor Ryan Reynolds playing the superhero, yet won't come near that other non-sequel Thor's recent $65.7M opening weekend for Marvel yet starring a complete unknown. Even though for weeks now, Green Lantern had been tracking better than Thor, which also was tasked with introducing a superhero to moviegoers. Warner Bros and DC Entertainment began freaking out Friday about the continuing negative buzz around Green Lantern especially the bad reviews.
This was fanned by rival studios looking at U.S. box office. Competitors also told me that the foreign day-and-date opening grosses were off to a "very soft start" in the UK, Russia, New Zealand, Asia, and some Middle East markets with an estimated $17M from 3,253 screens. They were right: though UK opened #1 with £2.6M (US$4.9M) from 907 situations. That's less than this summer's openings of X-Men: First Class, Fast Five, and Thor. And the Russia and South Korea debuts weren't strong even though these territories usually love action movies, but Green Lantern couldnt even beat Super 8 in Russia.
In the end, it would benefit WB to just admit that they dropped the ball...AGAIN. Last summer's Jonah Hex should've taught them something about tampering with what works and paying for it in the wallet. But I know that they're too thick-headed to admit mistakes and learning from them to move ahead with an improved insight preferring instead to take their ball and go home. And what I mean by that is punish us, the comic fans, by axing any future superhero projects on their prospective lists.
I mean I love DC characters but movie-wise, we're a joke.
I still believe that other forces were at work to see that this film crashed and burned. Until then, WB should just own up to not putting their best foot forward on non-Batman movies.
Mrs. Man Face: "You wouldn't hit a lady? Would you?"
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice isUNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
It's Father's Day. Not being a father, and since my own father lives a thousand miles away, and since the Hardygirl is spending the day with her own dad, I thought I'd check out Green Lantern. As a lot of others have said, the critical drubbing is not deserved. Admittedly, it's no Dark Knight or Spider-Man 2, but it's pretty much on the same level as Thor--and critics were far kinder to that movie. Ryan Reynolds was pretty solid as Hal, Blake Lively fired my jets as Carol, Peter Sarsgaard made an off-beat and fascinating Hector, and Mark Strong shows us what's to come as Sinestro--if anything is to come. The weakness is that the movie is pretty much hit-or-miss: the outer-space/special effects stuff is often great, but the earthbound story--especially the love story--sags and drags. The mythos behind the GLs comes across as a bit corny, and I could have lived without the hackneyed "conquer your fear" jazz--but you pretty much have to take this sort of material in a movie like this. So Michael Clarke Duncan won't win an Oscar for voicing Kilowog, but so what? For what the movie is, and for what it tries to do, it delivers.
WB/Cartoon Network have released a teaser for their Green Lantern animated series premiering this fall. The show seems to follow the classic Bruce Timm design but with a CGI sheen to it. Looks interesting and it seems to fit the character. Here's a like to the teaser via Superherohype.com
BTW the live action GL movie pulled in a little over $5 million on Monday; not too bad for a weekday. Here's hoping it can at least make it to $100 million US. I'm planning on seeing it again tomorrow.
Mr MartiniThat nice house in the sky.Posts: 2,703MI6 Agent
WB/Cartoon Network have released a teaser for their Green Lantern animated series premiering this fall. The show seems to follow the classic Bruce Timm design but with a CGI sheen to it. Looks interesting and it seems to fit the character. Here's a like to the teaser via Superherohype.com
BTW the live action GL movie pulled in a little over $5 million on Monday; not too bad for a weekday. Here's hoping it can at least make it to $100 million US. I'm planning on seeing it again tomorrow.
It'll get my $8.50 in a week or so. Let the hype wear off some. I'll also have some more important stuff to take care of first on my days off. Really looking forward to it though.
Some people would complain even if you hang them with a new rope
I saw GL again today and critics be damned I enjoyed it just as much on my second viewing. I caught an early matinee show and was pleasantly surprised to see quite a few people in the theater and everybody seemed to be satisfied by the time the closing credits rolled.
Also of potential interest to any budding GL fans, is Green Lantern: Rise of the Manhunters, a videogame tie-in. The game uses the visual style of the movie but tells an original adventure that features many of the hallmarks and characters of the Green Lantern comics. The Manhunters, ancient enemies of the Green Lantern Corps, have launched a new attack against the Corps as you must lead the battle to repel and defeat them. During the course of the seven hour adventure you confront a number of different foes and visit several alien planets. The game can be played solo or via local co-op with a second player playing as Sinestro.
Graphically, the game looks quite nice, with both large environments and well detailed enemies. The game also supports several 3D modes including a true, full color stereoscopic mode for the newer 3D TVs and TriOviz Anaglyph 3D which works with any TV and uses cardboard glasses (in a nice touch, two glasses are included with the game and they're shaped like the classic Green Lantern domino mask). I've played the game in 3D using both methods and the sense of depth is actually quite good without suffering a bad drop in resolution as many 3D games do. The TriOviz 3D mode while not the same quality as native 3D works surprisingly well and presents good depth and range of color.
With regard to gameplay, the hook of the Green Lantern comic is that GL can use his power ring to create any construct that he can imagine. Obviously a pre-programmed game will limit what constructs you can use but you can still create any of a dozen or so constructs at any time (many of which were also featured in the film). As you progress you earn experience points with which you can purchase new constructs or augment your abilities. The game is very much a button masher in the tradition of God of War, right down to the quicktime events where you must press buttons and perform joystick moves as they appear on the screen. While the game isn't particularly difficult, you do need to use a little strategy as some constructs are more effective against certain enemies than others. Once you beat a level, you can replay it at any time using any new constructs you've learned to approach the level with a different strategy so there is also some replay value there.
Most games based on a movie or comic are usually rushed, mediocre affairs but Rise of the Manhunters doesn't really suffer the same fate. While there isn't anything particularly original or groundbreaking here, it is a fun, accessible game with some nice visuals and a reasonable difficulty curve that never becomes frustrating, even at the highest difficulty. It's also only the second Xbox 360 game where I picked up every possible achievement (I wouldn't be much of a GL fan if I didn't). Definitely worth a look in my opinion.
I will start with a little background first, I have never read a Green Lantern comic book, I have been aware of the character since I was kid, knew his power came from the ring, but knew little else. I did watch the animated movie Green Lantern First Flight and enjoyed it.
As for this Green Lantern movie, I have something of a mixed review, so I will start with the positive. Ryan Reynolds was enjoyable as Green Lantern, he played the character with a mix of emotions, he is fearful as he doubts his capability as Green Lantern, unassuming, but amazed by the power, and at times, he doesn't seem to believe the circumstances he is in. Blake Lively, although not given a lot to do is fine as Carol Ferris, Peter Sarrgaard as Hector Hammond and Mark Strong as Sinestro are also good. I liked how the background story was told and felt the film built momentum as it moved along.
A for what I was disappointed in, I will start with the 3D, I really feel I could have watched the movie in 2D and been just as entertained. Long stretches of the film have no 3D value and when a scene with 3D value occurs, I found the 3D blurry. My best example of this is the scene at the fighter contract award party where the helicopter develops problems. A lot happens, but most of it was literally a blur. The film has two villains, one a human and one a CGI evil force. The human was excellent, but Parallax failed to move me. Perhaps because it lacked any personality other than being evil I didn't find it all that interesting.
Possible small spoiler ahead.
One thing I really liked was how Carol Ferris recognized Hal Jordan despite his Green Lantern costume. Always had a problem with superhero girlfriends not recognizing their boyfriends because they have a little piece of fabric covering part of their face.
Overall I enjoyed the film, if they make a sequel it will be strengthened by not having to tell the background story.
Barry, glad to hear you liked the film. I am surprised however that the 3D seemed blurry to you; I saw it twice and while the 3D wasn't as in your face as something like Avatar, I never found it blurry at either of my showings and was able to discern a noticeable sense of depth most of the time. Maybe the projectionist in your area hadn't dialed the focus in correctly or didn't have the brightness correctly set.
I also liked the scene of Carol figuring out Hal was GL in about 30 seconds; it was funny but also very believable because as you say, the idea that a little mask could hide your identity is pretty preposterous (I've always been amazed that a simple pair of glasses was all Superman needed to fool the world).
There was an article in the Hollywood Reporter stating that despite the disappointing box office WB was still planning on going ahead with a sequel. It may simply be a face-saving stance to wring as much box office as possible or perhaps they're confident that the movie will be profitable when factoring in all the ancillary sources of income. As the article mentions, WB is in need of franchises now that Harry Potter is coming to a close so who knows, maybe we haven't seen the last of GL after all.
BTW Barry, I hope you stayed around for that post-credits scene in Green Lantern..
On a slight tangent, I noticed that the critics were also merciless towards Cars 2 this weekend (last time I checked it had a 44% rating on Rotten Tomatoes). I'm not sure what's going on this summer, but it seems the general movie critic population has really been gunning for mainstream, franchise and genre movies. I find it really short-sighted on their part that they are fixating on all their "important" movies and cannot fathom the notion that people might want to just relax and see a fun, lightweight movie for a couple of hours. If I were one of the studio heads, I'd be trying to arrange a concerted effort among all the studios to end critics screenings; if they're going into these films with a built in bias, then maybe they should just pay for their tickets like the rest of us.
BTW Barry, I hope you stayed around for that post-credits scene in Green Lantern..
Well Tony, I knew a post-credit was coming, but I also knew I had drank a large Coke during the film and really needed to use the restroom, at that moment, using the restroom had the greater urge than waiting for the post-credit scene. It's hell getting old. )
BTW Barry, I hope you stayed around for that post-credits scene in Green Lantern..
Well Tony, I knew a post-credit was coming, but I also knew I had drank a large Coke during the film and really needed to use the restroom, at that moment, using the restroom had the greater urge than waiting for the post-credit scene. It's hell getting old. )
Good one. But as a budding Green Lantern fan you should know that it's all about WILLPOWER. )
I never drink anything during a movie anymore for precisely the reason you mention; it's caused me to have to dash out of a screening a few times myself.
In case you want to see it, here's a youtube link (major spoiler of course and I don't know how long it will stay before it gets pulled): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTBU_Vzx_rU
Mr MartiniThat nice house in the sky.Posts: 2,703MI6 Agent
WB/Cartoon Network have released a teaser for their Green Lantern animated series premiering this fall. The show seems to follow the classic Bruce Timm design but with a CGI sheen to it. Looks interesting and it seems to fit the character. Here's a like to the teaser via Superherohype.com
BTW the live action GL movie pulled in a little over $5 million on Monday; not too bad for a weekday. Here's hoping it can at least make it to $100 million US. I'm planning on seeing it again tomorrow.
It'll get my $8.50 in a week or so. Let the hype wear off some. I'll also have some more important stuff to take care of first on my days off. Really looking forward to it though.
Ok, so it took two weeks for me to see it. I must say WOW!!! I really enjoyed this movie. I had no knowledge of the Green Lantern going into this, except for what I've read here (Thank you TonyDP and others). From the first scenes that were narrated to the final scene in Space with Parallex (sp?) I had no idea what was going to happen next. The movie seemed to move quick and had some humor at all the right moments. My favorite humorous part was in Hal's apartment when he was showing his buddy how the ring worked. The finger Hal raises to put the ring on was missed by many in the theater. Maybe most people didn't think it was funny, but I did let out a big laugh. I liked how sharp the visuals looked in this and the special effects were some of the best I've seen this year. I do hope another Green Lantern movie comes out in a couple years because I had lots of fun watching this. Why this movie had a week opening is beyond me. People should really give this movie a shot. They have no idea what they're missing. I should also mention this movie is directed by Martin Campbell. So, knowing that, all the Bond fans should run out and see this movie. I know I'll buy this on DVD when it comes out.
Some people would complain even if you hang them with a new rope
Glad to read that you enjoyed the film Mr. M. Its been my experience that most people who have given this film a chance have ended up having had a good time with it and it's pretty much batting 1000 with AJBers who've seen it. I now eagerly await Sir Miles' impressions.
BTW, right now its looking like Green Lantern will hit DVD and BluRay some time in late October.
Comments
I'm not just here for your homo-erotic pleasure....but if you are willing to oil us both down beforehand...
Krona, an ancient and powerful adversary of the Corps is stirring and as the Green Lanterns prepare for the coming conflict, Hal Jordan fills new recruit Arisia in on some Green Lantern lore before the obligatory and planet shattering conflict. As is the case with anthologies, some stories are stronger than others; the standouts here are The First Lantern (a kind of origin story about the first beings to wield the power rings), Mogo Doesn't Socialize (fans of the comic will see the surprise ending coming a mile away but noobs may be surprised), and a poignant reminiscence involving Sinestro and Abin Sur, which serves as an ominous harbinger of things to come.
Emerald Knights is a pretty good primer for anyone curious about Green Lantern but unfamiliar with the mythos as it does a good job of introducing us to some classic characters, laying out the ground rules for the mythology and even explaining what a "poozer" is. The animation is your standard direct-to-video effort, which is to say good but not particularly special in any way. Certain scenes are also augmented by CG extensions of characters, spaceships and so forth.
Given the nature of the presentation, Hal Jordan is the character that actually has the least to do here, serving primarily as the narrator and that is, for me, the show's greatest shortcoming. A Hal-centric story would have been a welcome addition. In spite of that, I still enjoyed Emerald Knights and would recommend it to any Green Lantern fans out there or people curious about the mythology but uncertain of where to begin.
Thanks TonyDP....but how are you going to break the news to HB ?
Seen the tv ads for this 'film' now...it still looks very ropey...I'll be interested in what you all make of it...can't see me watching it at the cinema though.
http://blog.movies.yahoo.com/blog/1556-green-lantern-cost-300-million-and-you-know-what-that-means
'Green Lantern' Cost $300 Million, and You Know What That Means...
by: Tim Grierson
Warner Bros. Pictures Big summer movies cost a lot to make and market. That's not news. In fact, the only time you hear much about a movie's price tag is if it flops. Last summer's "Robin Hood" raised eyebrows because of its $237 million budget, especially after the film was perceived as a box office underperformer with a domestic haul of $105 million. By comparison, "Avatar's" huge cost -- placed anywhere between $230 million and $500 million -- made folks at Fox nervous, but then James Cameron's movie became the biggest hit of all time, which took care of those worries. ("It is the most expensive film we've made," Fox Filmed Entertainment co-chairman and C.E.O. of James Gianopulos later admitted to CNN, "but now, having the luxury of hindsight, it is money well spent, so I'm not concerned about it.") So if you're Warner Bros, you have to be worried that the world now knows that, reportedly, "Green Lantern" cost $300 million. That's not meant to be impressive; the pre-release discussion of a number that big is meant to signal that your movie is probably in trouble.
The New York Times (via The Playlist) recently did a profile piece on "Green Lantern" star Ryan Reynolds, and the angle of the piece was pretty much, "Boy, the studio is taking a huge risk on an action movie starring a guy you probably know from 'The Proposal.'" In the piece, producers and studio executives assured the reader that the movie's gonna be awesome and it won't be your typical comic book movie. (Trying to be enticing, producer and co-writer Greg Berlanti called "Green Lantern" "a space opera in the vein of 'Star Wars' with an Earthbound 'Top Gun' vibe." Uh, thanks?)
But the piece also mentioned that the studio spent around $300 million to produce and promote the film. And while the article says that sum is in line with other major films' budgets, what's not said is that nobody cares if, say, "The Dark Knight" (reported production budget of $185 million) or 2013's "Iron Man 3" cost that much. People want to see those films from established franchises. Nobody knows if anybody will go see "Green Lantern," no matter how much it cost.
That seems to have been an anxiety for Warners for a while. They radically shifted from a jokey initial trailer to a more conventional action-and-more-action follow-up trailer. And there were also the stories about the studio hiring a bunch of extra effects companies to make sure the movie got done in time. Pre-release strategies are about instilling confidence in the product about ready to be sold to the public. By comparison, Warners seems to be rushing frantically with "Green Lantern" to clog up all the holes so that the ship doesn't sink. Even Warner Bros. Pictures president Jeff Robinov sounded somewhat worried when he talked to the Times. "We're trying very hard to deliver," he said. "Yes, there is a lot at stake. But I try and frame these things in terms of my own expectations. If you look at 'Batman Begins,' it did about $370 million worldwide and got us to a sequel."
Yes, it's all about expectations. If the Reynolds experiment pays off and "Green Lantern" is huge, nobody will remember how much it cost to make. But if it tanks, we'll be hearing that $300 million figure over and over again the rest of the summer. The studio is offering the film in both 2D and 3D. They're probably praying everybody picks the latter option
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/green_lantern/
The fear with something like Green Lantern is always that the general public simply won't get it or think the whole thing is silly and the early negative reviews would seem to bear that out to some extent as critics typically don't go for that kind of story. Most of the negative reviews I've seen so far seem to fall back to the usual complaints: an over-abundance of CG (pretty much unavoidable with a movie like this), the amount of exposition (again, pretty much required to fill the audience in on the mythology) and the focus on action (it's a summer popcorn movie, not a Merchant & Ivory production). One critic even cracked that the power battery looked like a bong, which of course led to the obligatory drug jokes; when you get comments like that you know that they're just not even interested in the material.
Luckily, critical response very rarely lines up with box office performance and a film like Green Lantern will survive or perish more because of word of mouth from the early screenings than the musings of jaded critics who usually have an axe to grind with this kind of film before they see a single frame.
Maybe people will get it, like they did Star Wars, another film that critics deemed a disaster out of the gate only to change their tune once the money started rolling in, or maybe it will quickly sink into obscurity in this summer of never ending comic book movies and sequels.
I feel about GL's green get-up like some football fan disenchanted with the unveiling of a new kit.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Lukewarm ?
Then you must be getting the better reviews that side of the pond !
I'm sure it will do well enough, but probably nowhere near what they wanted....
I think you're missing the operative phrase, Sir M--at best. That's as faint as my praise can possibly get!
I'm planning on seeing the movie in 3D tomorrow.
I can say this much, the critics were overly damning of this movie. It wasn't deserved.
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
Nice to see you posting Rogue; I was afraid you'd been banished to the antimatter universe of Qward or something.
I saw Green Lantern today with the brother in 3D and, surprise surprise, we both enjoyed it a lot.
The film is not perfect and suffers the plight of all origin stories; namely, it takes a while for the hero to get into the suit and accept his responsibility to save the day, but overall it more than held our attention and provided a lot of great moments for this Green Lantern fan. The film splits its time between Earth and outer space and the space sequences are so good that when the action returns to terra firma I found myself wishing we could get back to Oa. We also get the obligatory romantic subplot between Hal and Carol; it seems every comic book film tries to shoehorn this element into the proceedings and all it does is slow things down.
While we don't see as much of the other Green Lanterns as I would have liked, Kilowog, Tomar Re, Abin Sur and Sinestro all have their moments and our glimpses of other Lanterns like Bzzzt and Larvax are fun, even if brief. The visualizations of Oa, the Guardians and other locations like the Lost Sector are all beautifully done. The scenes of Hal being trained to use the ring really capture the vibe of the comics and perfectly present the characteristics of the other three main Green Lanterns. Its also a treat to see the beginnings of Hal's friendship with Tomar Re and Kilowog and his more complicated relationship with Sinestro.
Ryan Reynolds is actually very good as Hal/GL and nicely straddles the line between self-deprecating and deadly serious when he needs to be. Blake Lively is perfectly serviceable as Carol and while she doesn't have a lot to do she never seems miscast or out of place. Peter Saarsgard really captures the nerdy, creepy, borderline stalker vibe of Hector Hammond from the Secret Origin comic. The various Lanterns all look and behave like they stepped right out of the comics and the Parallax entity is strikingly realized, gradually growing in size and power as the film progresses.
There has been much debate about a post-credits scene in which we see...
In terms of the 3D quality, I didn't experience any ghosting or murkiness at my screen as others have complained about. In fact, the image was consistently bright and sharp throughout with a nice sense of depth most of the time, especially in outer space and on Oa, where it really mattered the most.
I really don't care for the way professional critics (an oxymoron if ever there was one) have lambasted this movie. Most obviously didn't care for the material before seeing a single frame and I'm amazed at how many facts they get wrong in their reviews. Clearly they have an agenda and it has nothing to do with giving the movie a fair shake. If I had my way, I'd have them all dragged from their homes and hunted for sport (something tells me they wouldn't last too long).
As for me, I enjoyed Green Lantern a lot. I plan to see it again very soon and buy the 3D BluRay when it is released. Hopefully we'll get a sequel but even if we don't it was still a thrill to see GL brought to life.
I won't be overly verbose right now...but pretty much concur 100% with Tony's review; nicely stated. GL wasn't a title I read constantly, but I'm familiar enough with the mythos to know they got the important things right...in my humble opinion. Personally, I always tend to be a bit more wide-eyed and forgiving of comic book movies than many of my very astute and more knowledgeable purist friends
The boys and I found it quite enjoyable. 3.5 out of 5 stars.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Hey, Tony! No, I could never leave my AJB family voluntarily at least. Just been really busy.
Well, after some thought, I pretty much liked Green Lantern. It's not a superb comic movie achievement but at most a servicable venture for summer escapism; if you're looking for Schindler's List in a cape ( or in this case, wearing a ring) then this movie probably's not for you. It's one of those movies where you'll have to take in account all the variables & weigh the good and the bad it had to offer and judge it on its own merits. In other words, going into it with an open mind- especially after reading most of the undeserved jeering it got from critics and haters. I almost thought that there was a conspiracy afoot to sandbag this flick before the viewing public could take their seats. It's a good thing that I'm obstinate enough not to let the critics influence me on something that I want to see. No way could it have been that bad, could it? Yes and no. More emphasis on NO.
That's the problem with movies of this genre and it doesn't help that TDK has set the barometer so high. Those that know me know that I'm one of the biggest Batman fanboys around but I don't want TDK's tone in every one of these kind of films; sometimes I just want to let go and see what a movie has to offer and hopefully be entertained and not having to think too much as if I'm studying for a Trig exam which most of Nolan's films have a penchant for doing.
Now to be fair, I went into this movie on the defensive as I did PUNISHER: War Zone a few years back that also got owned by these arty critics. My son went in with higher expectations than I did; after the mired in mediocrity of Thor (his boy), he felt GL had to be better. We both liked it but left the theatre thinking that alot was left on the table. How did Berlanti and Geoff Johns- freakin' GEOFF JOHNS!!!!! not take full opportunity of the GL Corps rich history from the comics? The source material's all laid out on a platter, just build a story from that.
Firstly, with all of the screenwriters employed to do this, IMO, there's too many chefs in the kitchen right there. It felt like every writer involved took what they could contribute to the story and just tacked it onto one another's like post-it notes because the development was all over the place. It was hard to get vested in any of these characters with such shoddy writing....and EDITING. It also is apparent that Campbell was out of his element here; he should just stick to Bond and leave the sci-fi to someone more palatable. Duncan Jones comes to mind if we're lucky enough to get a sequel.
The actors all did a fine job, the action was good and the 3-D was great but not enough of it. I was really impressed with the visuals of Oa and the constructs during the training sequence. Not a huge fan of 3-D to begin with, I feel it's a played out fad but there is no way to fully enjoy a GL movie without paying to experience it in that format so for my money, it was warranted.
Not enough Sinestro for me. Mark Strong was born to play the guy but he just wasn't dubious enough. Should've been more like Garber's in First Flight where you know eventually it was a matter of time before he shows his "horns".
And where was Boodika? And C'hp for that matter? WB, please consider a sequel and keep Hal in space! More GLs and I want John Stewart and Guy Gardner! No, Rayner, please. lol
All in all, I gave the movie a B- to C+. With the right people in charge, this arguably could've been one of the great ones even 30 years from now because I sensed something just under the surface. They just didn't have the aptitude to bring it out.
Will someone at WB PLEASE get a clue? I don't want Batman and Supes movies only for the rest of my life so they shouldn't give up on GL and other properties. Just take the same strategy that was used with Star Trek: TMP. They shook the tree and came up with TROK. It's now considered a masterpiece by many sci-fi fans.
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
No worries Rogue; as long as you and the family are all doing OK, its all good.
GL made about $53 million over the weekend and that number is disappointing compared to other comic book adaptations, especially when factoring inflation into the mix
Obviously the critical drubbing didn't help it but at the end of the day I think the typical moviegoing audience simply isn't imaginative enough to "get" something like this - a fear I had from the minute the movie was greenlighted. It also didn't help that the film clearly struggled with figuring out what it wanted to be, vacillating as it did between earthbound drama and outer-space heroics. I'm inclined to think that WB meddled in the scriptwriting process as they were probably afraid of committing to a 100% spacebound adventure. After all, something like Star Wars clicks only once in a very great while. The fact that the film meandered for so long in pre-production and had to go thru a change of shooting locations from Australia to New Orleans and the relatively late start of filming were probably all signs that WB just didn't have its act together in getting this going out of the gate properly.
Frankly I doubt we'll be seeing a sequel. Movie studios are only interested in the bottom line and unless this thing has strong legs (which I doubt) the final domestic boxoffice take will probably be in the $100 million range; early reports are that the foreign box office is equally indifferent. Maybe the inevitable home video release will make up for the boxoffice disappointment but I really doubt that WB has the constitution to give GL another go and I have to believe they're probably starting to have second thoughts about greenlighting the Flash at this point as well.
The idea that some film critics had an agenda against GL isn't all that far-fetched to me. After all, they typically despise comic book adaptations, summer popcorn flicks and 3D and GL had a checkmark next to all three of those categories. I also found it interesting how some of the positive reviews such as the one on CNN made a point to mention that the film wasn't nearly as bad as most critics made it out to be. Too bad. Green Lantern deserved better.
FALLING STARS REYNOLDS AND CARREY: #1 'Green Lantern' Opens To Just $52.6M; 'Popper's Penguins' Falls To #3 With $18.2M
By NIKKI FINKE | Saturday June 18, 2011 @ 10:31pm PDT
Comments 240 SUNDAY AM, 6TH UPDATE: Warner Bros' 3D Green Lantern ($21.6M Friday, dropping -21% for $17.1M Saturday, and only a $52.6M weekend) underperforms, unable to meet even the studio's lowered expectation for North America despite the higher 3D ticket prices. And Fox's Mr. Popper's Penguins ($6.4M Friday, up only +2% for $6.5M Saturday meaning it failed to get any significant kiddie matinee bump, and only an $18.2M weekend) falls to No. 3 behind Paramount's holdover Super 8 which cast no stars moves up to No. 2. But these numbers also signal falling stars in Hollywood. Green Lantern had well-known actor Ryan Reynolds playing the superhero, yet won't come near that other non-sequel Thor's recent $65.7M opening weekend for Marvel yet starring a complete unknown. Even though for weeks now, Green Lantern had been tracking better than Thor, which also was tasked with introducing a superhero to moviegoers. Warner Bros and DC Entertainment began freaking out Friday about the continuing negative buzz around Green Lantern especially the bad reviews.
This was fanned by rival studios looking at U.S. box office. Competitors also told me that the foreign day-and-date opening grosses were off to a "very soft start" in the UK, Russia, New Zealand, Asia, and some Middle East markets with an estimated $17M from 3,253 screens. They were right: though UK opened #1 with £2.6M (US$4.9M) from 907 situations. That's less than this summer's openings of X-Men: First Class, Fast Five, and Thor. And the Russia and South Korea debuts weren't strong even though these territories usually love action movies, but Green Lantern couldnt even beat Super 8 in Russia.
http://www.deadline.com/2011/06/green-lantern-makes-3-35m-midnights/#more-140808
In the end, it would benefit WB to just admit that they dropped the ball...AGAIN. Last summer's Jonah Hex should've taught them something about tampering with what works and paying for it in the wallet. But I know that they're too thick-headed to admit mistakes and learning from them to move ahead with an improved insight preferring instead to take their ball and go home. And what I mean by that is punish us, the comic fans, by axing any future superhero projects on their prospective lists.
I mean I love DC characters but movie-wise, we're a joke.
I still believe that other forces were at work to see that this film crashed and burned. Until then, WB should just own up to not putting their best foot forward on non-Batman movies.
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/167643-trailer-for-green-lantern-the-animated-series
BTW the live action GL movie pulled in a little over $5 million on Monday; not too bad for a weekday. Here's hoping it can at least make it to $100 million US. I'm planning on seeing it again tomorrow.
It'll get my $8.50 in a week or so. Let the hype wear off some. I'll also have some more important stuff to take care of first on my days off. Really looking forward to it though.
Also of potential interest to any budding GL fans, is Green Lantern: Rise of the Manhunters, a videogame tie-in. The game uses the visual style of the movie but tells an original adventure that features many of the hallmarks and characters of the Green Lantern comics. The Manhunters, ancient enemies of the Green Lantern Corps, have launched a new attack against the Corps as you must lead the battle to repel and defeat them. During the course of the seven hour adventure you confront a number of different foes and visit several alien planets. The game can be played solo or via local co-op with a second player playing as Sinestro.
Graphically, the game looks quite nice, with both large environments and well detailed enemies. The game also supports several 3D modes including a true, full color stereoscopic mode for the newer 3D TVs and TriOviz Anaglyph 3D which works with any TV and uses cardboard glasses (in a nice touch, two glasses are included with the game and they're shaped like the classic Green Lantern domino mask). I've played the game in 3D using both methods and the sense of depth is actually quite good without suffering a bad drop in resolution as many 3D games do. The TriOviz 3D mode while not the same quality as native 3D works surprisingly well and presents good depth and range of color.
With regard to gameplay, the hook of the Green Lantern comic is that GL can use his power ring to create any construct that he can imagine. Obviously a pre-programmed game will limit what constructs you can use but you can still create any of a dozen or so constructs at any time (many of which were also featured in the film). As you progress you earn experience points with which you can purchase new constructs or augment your abilities. The game is very much a button masher in the tradition of God of War, right down to the quicktime events where you must press buttons and perform joystick moves as they appear on the screen. While the game isn't particularly difficult, you do need to use a little strategy as some constructs are more effective against certain enemies than others. Once you beat a level, you can replay it at any time using any new constructs you've learned to approach the level with a different strategy so there is also some replay value there.
Most games based on a movie or comic are usually rushed, mediocre affairs but Rise of the Manhunters doesn't really suffer the same fate. While there isn't anything particularly original or groundbreaking here, it is a fun, accessible game with some nice visuals and a reasonable difficulty curve that never becomes frustrating, even at the highest difficulty. It's also only the second Xbox 360 game where I picked up every possible achievement (I wouldn't be much of a GL fan if I didn't). Definitely worth a look in my opinion.
It's all Green Lantern all the time here at AJB.
I will start with a little background first, I have never read a Green Lantern comic book, I have been aware of the character since I was kid, knew his power came from the ring, but knew little else. I did watch the animated movie Green Lantern First Flight and enjoyed it.
As for this Green Lantern movie, I have something of a mixed review, so I will start with the positive. Ryan Reynolds was enjoyable as Green Lantern, he played the character with a mix of emotions, he is fearful as he doubts his capability as Green Lantern, unassuming, but amazed by the power, and at times, he doesn't seem to believe the circumstances he is in. Blake Lively, although not given a lot to do is fine as Carol Ferris, Peter Sarrgaard as Hector Hammond and Mark Strong as Sinestro are also good. I liked how the background story was told and felt the film built momentum as it moved along.
A for what I was disappointed in, I will start with the 3D, I really feel I could have watched the movie in 2D and been just as entertained. Long stretches of the film have no 3D value and when a scene with 3D value occurs, I found the 3D blurry. My best example of this is the scene at the fighter contract award party where the helicopter develops problems. A lot happens, but most of it was literally a blur. The film has two villains, one a human and one a CGI evil force. The human was excellent, but Parallax failed to move me. Perhaps because it lacked any personality other than being evil I didn't find it all that interesting.
Possible small spoiler ahead.
One thing I really liked was how Carol Ferris recognized Hal Jordan despite his Green Lantern costume. Always had a problem with superhero girlfriends not recognizing their boyfriends because they have a little piece of fabric covering part of their face.
Overall I enjoyed the film, if they make a sequel it will be strengthened by not having to tell the background story.
I also liked the scene of Carol figuring out Hal was GL in about 30 seconds; it was funny but also very believable because as you say, the idea that a little mask could hide your identity is pretty preposterous (I've always been amazed that a simple pair of glasses was all Superman needed to fool the world).
There was an article in the Hollywood Reporter stating that despite the disappointing box office WB was still planning on going ahead with a sequel. It may simply be a face-saving stance to wring as much box office as possible or perhaps they're confident that the movie will be profitable when factoring in all the ancillary sources of income. As the article mentions, WB is in need of franchises now that Harry Potter is coming to a close so who knows, maybe we haven't seen the last of GL after all.
BTW Barry, I hope you stayed around for that post-credits scene in Green Lantern..
On a slight tangent, I noticed that the critics were also merciless towards Cars 2 this weekend (last time I checked it had a 44% rating on Rotten Tomatoes). I'm not sure what's going on this summer, but it seems the general movie critic population has really been gunning for mainstream, franchise and genre movies. I find it really short-sighted on their part that they are fixating on all their "important" movies and cannot fathom the notion that people might want to just relax and see a fun, lightweight movie for a couple of hours. If I were one of the studio heads, I'd be trying to arrange a concerted effort among all the studios to end critics screenings; if they're going into these films with a built in bias, then maybe they should just pay for their tickets like the rest of us.
Well Tony, I knew a post-credit was coming, but I also knew I had drank a large Coke during the film and really needed to use the restroom, at that moment, using the restroom had the greater urge than waiting for the post-credit scene. It's hell getting old.
Good one. But as a budding Green Lantern fan you should know that it's all about WILLPOWER.
I never drink anything during a movie anymore for precisely the reason you mention; it's caused me to have to dash out of a screening a few times myself.
In case you want to see it, here's a youtube link (major spoiler of course and I don't know how long it will stay before it gets pulled): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTBU_Vzx_rU
Ok, so it took two weeks for me to see it. I must say WOW!!! I really enjoyed this movie. I had no knowledge of the Green Lantern going into this, except for what I've read here (Thank you TonyDP and others). From the first scenes that were narrated to the final scene in Space with Parallex (sp?) I had no idea what was going to happen next. The movie seemed to move quick and had some humor at all the right moments. My favorite humorous part was in Hal's apartment when he was showing his buddy how the ring worked. The finger Hal raises to put the ring on was missed by many in the theater. Maybe most people didn't think it was funny, but I did let out a big laugh. I liked how sharp the visuals looked in this and the special effects were some of the best I've seen this year. I do hope another Green Lantern movie comes out in a couple years because I had lots of fun watching this. Why this movie had a week opening is beyond me. People should really give this movie a shot. They have no idea what they're missing. I should also mention this movie is directed by Martin Campbell. So, knowing that, all the Bond fans should run out and see this movie. I know I'll buy this on DVD when it comes out.
BTW, right now its looking like Green Lantern will hit DVD and BluRay some time in late October.