Movie News

Capone says GREEN LANTERN fails, despite the clearly ethusiastic effort to get it right!!!

Published at: June 17, 2011, 7:43 a.m. CST by Capone

Hey everyone. Capone in Chicago here.

If there was even an outside chance of you caring about this movie based on your already established love of the comic book source material or even just the progressively more interesting trailers that have been released over the last few months, then you've already likely read a half-dozen or more reviews of this film that have warned you to stay far, far away from GREEN LANTERN. I have not read any reviews of this film, but I've seen the headlines, so I'm aware of somewhat-justified piling on this film has received. But let me warn you about some terminology that you may stumble upon variation of while reading any positive reaction to this film.

"It's not perfect." No shit. Here's a newsflash: no film is perfect. This is an empty statement that critics and people use to mean "This movie is equal to or less than 50 percent shit."

"It good for what it is." Wait a second. If the movie is shit, are you saying it's good shit? In certain circles, this may be considered the ultimate slam on any movie. What I think this also empty statement is that the film isn't designated High Art, so it should be given a pass for its shortcomings on elements like plot and character development. My response: Bullshit. Every movie should strive to be great, and just because a film is designated a summer blockbuster or somehow feeding into the pop culture doesn't mean it gets to skate by in areas that wouldn't have cost any extra money to get right.

"I didn't hate it." Gee, aren't you generous. Guess what folks, you aren't supposed to hate it. This statement is not a compliment. The mission of the filmmakers was not to construct a movie that you didn't hate. You either liked it or you didn't. This statement reminds me of another favorite, "My expectations were low, therefore [something positive]." Again, not really a rousing endorsement. Just because a film met or didn't meet your expectations isn't really a gauge of its quality. Ideally, you walk into every film with neutral expectations (which is not the same as no expectations); let the film guide you through its good and bad moments on its own merits. I realize we all bring a certain level of expectational baggage into every film, but at least allow a movie to be something different than what you thought. Just because a movie is different from what you thought it would be doesn't mean it's bad; it's just unexpected, which is often quite fun.

All of this is preamble to saying GREEN LANTERN falls apart on its own merits, and no amount of enthusiasm I may have had going into it changes that. But here's the thing: I was the perfect audience to see GREEN LANTERN and judge it rationally. I know next to nothing about the character and his universe. I've always believed with any superhero movie that if you can attract audiences beyond the hardcore fanbase, then you've probably got yourself a solid movie. So I was primed and ready for my crash course in test pilot Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds), the Green Lantern Corps, yellow energy, blah blah blah. Instead what I got was a skimming of the surface, paint-by-number superhero movie I've seen in ages. It falls victim to all of the problems origin-story movies tend to have, relating to too much introduction and not enough compelling plot.

And the real crime is that the elements for something so much better are all there. My favorite scenes in the film involve the Corps storyline, which involves the galactic police force bracing itself for an attack by an age-old enemy known as Parallax, a planet-swallowing force that feeds on fear (voiced by Clancy Brown, not that you can tell). When the Corps member known as Abin Sur (Temuera Morrison), who originally imprisoned Parallax, is mortally wounded, his Green Lantern ring takes him to earth where the ring is passed on to the maverick pilot Jordan, the first earthling to ever be in the Corps., led by Sinestro (Mark Strong). Side note: I'm sorry, but the dude's name is Sinestro. Are we supposed to be shocked when he becomes a turncoat in a sequence tucked away in the credits?

I was genuinely impressed with the landscape of the Corps world Oa, and the sheer number of alien creatures created for these sequences (I believe 3,600 was the number of Green Lantern Corps members). I also dug the scenes involving the Guardians, big-headed dudes who advise the Lanterns in times of trouble. But the filmmakers, led by director Martin Campbell (Casino Royale), seem to want to force us to focus on Hal Jordan on Earth, dazzling humans with his groovy powers and wooing his old girlfriend, Carol Ferris (Blake Lively).

The film also wastes our time with cartoonish performances by the likes of Peter Sarsgaard as scientist Hector Hammond, who is infected by this yellow energy that gives him telepathic powers; Tim Robbins as his disappointed senator father, who also happens to be tied in with military projects carried out by Carol's industrialist father (Jay O. Sanders); and Angela Bassett as DC Comics ever-present Dr. Amanda Waller (in a perfect DC movie world, I believe Waller would be the closest thing to the binding force Nick Fury is in the Marvelverse). But so much of what these characters bring to the table feels like distraction. I'm sorry, but when you know a massive force is about to eat Earth, the rumblings of a few semi-powerful humans pales in comparison.

And because everyone insists on spending so much time on boring old Earth, the most interesting other-worldly elements fly by so quickly, it's as if they never happened. They certain don't stay on Oa long enough for any of the great computer-design work to really register. But what's far more troubling is Reynolds' performance. I've always dug Reynolds' charm as an actor. He's a funny, smarmy performer, and while I've enjoyed watching him do work that steps outside this comfort zone, that's what he does better than most. As cocky as Hal Jordan is, he's not Reynolds' level of cocky; he never fully commits to being full-on wiseass. I'm not even saying he should be; I'm just saying, there are elements of wiseass in the performance, and they don't rise to the level Reynolds is capable of. That being said, when he is fighting with his fellow Corps members against Parallax, he takes his performance in the opposite direction, almost too seriously--laughably so. As a result, the film has troubling settling on a tone, which normally isn't an issue for me, but GREEN LANTERN needs a fixed tone.

One more thing. Having seen how the filmmakers handle the organic nature of the Green Lantern suit--how it appears and disappears from Jordan's body in the blink of an eye, how it pulsates with green energy--I get why Reynolds didn't actually wear the suit or mask while shooting. But here's the thing, I have to imagine as an actor, wearing the suit makes a difference. I've heard every actor to play Superman say as much. You put on the suit and you become the character. There is some spark missing form Reynolds' performance that I firmly believe comes from not seeing himself in the mirror, in the suit. And by the way, the mask always looks fake.

As some of my peers have indicated, GREEN LANTERN does make a valiant attempt to rally in the final act to justify a sequel. I don't think this film makes a case for another chapter, especially in all likelihood the makers would be tempted to pile even more characters onto whatever plot they came up with. And odds are, now that they have disposed of the character introductions, the sequel would be the better movie, but that prospect doesn't make me any more interested in seeing it. Even a well-intentioned disappointment is still disappointing, maybe more so.

-- Capone
capone@aintitcool.com
Follow Me On Twitter

 

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 17, 2011, 7:47 a.m. CST

    Seems unanimous...

    by monkeygiles

    ... apart from Harry

  • June 17, 2011, 7:49 a.m. CST

    Shit - sorry about the URL: bad form.

    by ClayMatthews

  • June 17, 2011, 7:54 a.m. CST

    Great review Quint

    by MC-909

    Let Harry read it and explain to him why you used commas where you did, and why you didn't use run-on sentences or sentence fragments. As far as Green Lantern, I really wanted it to be the next Flash Gordon and, from the trailers, it looked like that's where it was headed. I don't mean that as a backhanded compliment. Flash Gordon fucking rocks. It is sooooo far out there, what with the costumes, and the plot, and the characters, and the music....the blonde-hair (not hsi real hair color, BTW) blue-eyed quarterback for the Jets saves the planet from an all-powerful outer space Asian? Fuck yeah. Damn you Green Lantern. You had the chance to at least be a cult classic and it sounds like you screwed it up. Why don't you use your gay little ring and "construct" a new movie?

  • June 17, 2011, 7:57 a.m. CST

    Strong gotta eat

    by Kamran Kashmiri

    Can anyone explain why Mark Strong is doing this shit?? Oh the answers in my subject!

  • June 17, 2011, 8:01 a.m. CST

    capone still one of the better reviewers here

    by zom-bot.com

    and his breakdown of cheap critic statements is almost line for line with the terms Harry used himself.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:01 a.m. CST

    Cgi looks kinda cheesy...

    by Mr Soze

    Reynolds can't catch a break...wait a minute, maybe he's not that good of an actor

  • June 17, 2011, 8:03 a.m. CST

    oh and Quint....

    by MC-909

    ...thanks for actually saying something in your review and making a point. I wholeheartedly agree with nearly every thing you said about summer blockbusters and "turn your brain off movies" (another phrase people don't really seem to use in the correct way)

  • June 17, 2011, 8:07 a.m. CST

    Capone, how does it compare to...

    by Larry Knowles

    Where would you rank GL in terms of Fantastic Four, Spiderman3, Daredevil?

  • June 17, 2011, 8:08 a.m. CST

    Flash Gordon

    by Margot Tenenbaum

    1) It was written by Lorenzo Semple, the mastermind of Batman '66 so its apparent "badness" is 100% intentional. Everything people find entertaining about Flash Gordon were meant to be that way. The filmmakers were in on the joke. 2) Will people find dodgy CG charming 20-30 years from now like they do regarding Flash Gordon's intentionally retro special effects? Somebody send me a VHS tape of "Beyond the Mind's Eye" for scientific retro-testing.

  • Harry loving this was as predictable as ... well, as the movie itself, frankly.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:12 a.m. CST

    "It's not perfect" -- Ha! That's what Harry's review says

    by YackBacker

    Way to slay your website's boss, Capone!

  • June 17, 2011, 8:17 a.m. CST

    any respect left for Harry?

    by zom-bot.com

    guess i respect him for starting a site that was, for a while at least, the first or best of its kind. But that was a long time ago. His credibility is NIL and you have to sift through a last competent reviewers for valid opinion, or the talkbacks themselves for real news and entertainment.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:29 a.m. CST

    ..and yet Harry likes it

    by elsewhere

    Which means it's definitely shit. I'll watch Green Lantern in the off chance I flip by it when it airs on SpikeTV in a couple months.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:34 a.m. CST

    MANGOLD on Wolverine!

    by thefirerises

    Get on it, AICN...

  • June 17, 2011, 8:35 a.m. CST

    @zombot sadly no

    by menacingphantom

    I used to read his reviews routinely. Then I had to stop myself. Now it doesn't even occur to me.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:37 a.m. CST

    Respect no, need yes.

    by UltimaRex

    Harry IS AICN. When he goes the site as we know it will go with him I guarantee you that. As such I overlook the fact he can't review worth a damn and instead appreciate his arch geekiness.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:38 a.m. CST

    margot_tennenbaum, re: Flash Gordon

    by MC-909

    Exactly! I know it was meant to be a Star Wars rival (ironic since the original Flash inspired Star Wars) but halfway through production they were just like, "You know what? Fuck it. This ain't gonna be no Star Wars. Let's just make it crazy as shit. Has there ever been a movie where the bad guy is fucking STABBED BY A SPACESHIP? No? Okay then, do it!" Dino DeLaurentiis was the man. He was the one that made the calls on Flash. That early 80s-late 70s throw-caution-to-the-wind attitude is what modern filmmakers are lacking and Green Lantern seems like the perfect movie to prove that. Too bad they screwed it up. Then again I haven't seen it yet so maybe they didn't...I'd be willing to bet they did, though.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:51 a.m. CST

    oops...Capone/Quint

    by MC-909

    Sorry about that. I was just happy to read a coherent article. Besides, is there really any difference between the two? The only writers on here with a style of their own are Massawyrm, Vern, and whoever Patton Oswalt's "codename" was. Patton's not a regular, Massa's "style" is there but it's not strong enough, and Vern doesn't even write here anymore.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:52 a.m. CST

    so to correct myself: Good review, CAPONE!

    by MC-909

  • June 17, 2011, 8:58 a.m. CST

    Total flashback to 1999

    by WONKABAR

    Know what I mean?

  • June 17, 2011, 8:58 a.m. CST

    Harry & pointless contributions.

    by jack Bauer

    I come to this site for news mostly but sadly Super Hero News seems to be beating AICN every time these days. But still I come to see the news and read the odd review, for the most part fellows on here are honest and their reviews are worth the read, ok there may be a bit of corporate hand shaking going on at times but 99% of times the reviews are trustworthy... The 1% that are not are those done by Harry, he USED to deliver a good heartfelt review but then it changed, his love of films was soon overtaken by his love of being inside the industry and there have been CLEAR times when reviews are not just tainted but downright lies that mar the sites credibility. Harry clearly likes being on first name terms and speed dial with some of the big names in the film world but he's got to understand that 1. we don't care & 2. when the content of the site is nothing but an self serving ego trip then its a mess. For those that express these tainted reviews as Harry's 'opinion' then you are wrong, these back slapping essays for the people he loves most, that should be the readers but its now the actors and directors he befriends. Every film in recent times that Harry has claimed to love and every one else hated I have watched deliberately just to see what I thought and BINGO, he was wrong on every one of them. With Green Lantern it seems to be a different Harry again, here he's in comic geek mode but with huge blinkers on. I'm a life long Marvel & DC fan so I take my comic films very seriously, I detest a bad film at the best of times but a bad comic film, a thing I've loved and followed all my life is a disaster. Like many comic heads I don't just collect and praise the fact that someone has at last bothered to take their favourite character to the big screen, I want that character and the film to animate that comic in front of me, not deliver a wet squib. Just reading Harry's review is a joke, he's over geeking and just wallowing in the film being out, he's casting aside that he's a reviewer and basically being a kid at heart. Fine for Him but not so good by people who trust his word.. If you read the review you can see Harry just wanting to be Green Lantern, wearing the ring, losing some weight and the rather over done 'will' eulogy are just Harry getting a Green Lantern hard on, he neglects the film and basically only reports 'the bits he likes best'.. Such a shame...

  • June 17, 2011, 9:08 a.m. CST

    Capone hated this movie?? Sign me up then!

    by DonkeyBalls

  • June 17, 2011, 9:09 a.m. CST

    @zombot

    by koruption

    I noticed that too. I've been hearing a lot of rumours about the back end of AICN... Several of the writers/reviewers not happy with the way things are. Of course there is denial, but the actual writing seems to show more emotion. Either gone from great writing to uncaring(/coughnordlingcough), being more visceral then normal, or as in this case, putting people in their right place.

  • June 17, 2011, 9:19 a.m. CST

    Geoff Johns is mostly responsible for dumbing-down Green Lantern.

    by cookylamoo

    Green Lantern in the Silver-Age was the smartest member of the JLA. He was fearless, he was clever, he had this kind of gay thing going with Barry Allen. He did things with his ring that someone who was really smart would do; duplicate himself, animate objects, and give himself pretty much any super-power he wanted. He was a really cool guy. But now Green Lantern mostly just a bystander while Johns unrolls his universe based on a color wheel and anything he can steal from movies like the Last Starfighter and Star Wars. Hal gets into three panel fights and then mopes around listening to exposition. If the movie sucks it's because it's based on John's concept of a child who never grows up.

  • June 17, 2011, 9:21 a.m. CST

    Harry said "it's not perfect" twice

    by thatswhatshesaid

  • June 17, 2011, 9:33 a.m. CST

    Jack Bauer and koruption

    by zom-bot.com

    good, glad i'm not the only one who sees it. and i'm just a pretty casual visitor. jack: Harry clearly likes being on first name terms and speed dial with some of the big names in the film world but he's got to understand that 1. we don't care & 2. when the content of the site is nothing but an self serving ego trip then its a mess. amen man. every one of harry's articles is ME ME ME. and that's fine- it's his right. but he is like the kid everyone knows who had the cool toys and games first- or in abundance- who you thought was inviting you over to be friends but was really just wanting someone to show off his collection to. or maybe he feels he needs all that stuff to make friends? time to just be friends and watch good movies harry. i think you're redeemable. just remember it's about watching good movies you can talk about afterwards and who you are...not about the things you collect or the names you can drop or the others you have met in life..... and a good movie isn't one where you feel afterwards that 'hey, at least they made a green lantern movie- maybe it'll be good next time'

  • June 17, 2011, 9:34 a.m. CST

    No mention of the Debbie Reynolds costume auction?!

    by Ray Gamma

    Get it together, AICN: http://www.profilesinhistory.com/debbie-reynolds-auction/debbie-reynolds-the-auction

  • June 17, 2011, 9:42 a.m. CST

    Every single thing...

    by emteem

    ...that Capone lists at the start of his review are things that he himself has been guilty of when excusing shit he likes. I haven't seen Green Lantern, and I don't know that I will (well, who am I kidding I will rent it to see what everybody is talking about because I'm a sucker), but at the end of the day I think we like or dislike things at a gut level and then try to intellectually justify our feelings, but often what we criticize about one movie can also easily describe a different film that we liked or vice versa.

  • June 17, 2011, 9:43 a.m. CST

    This review is Sinestro. Harry's review is Jordan. FIGHT!

    by blacklightning

    these negative reviews don't bode well for a sequel. if singer couldn't make it happen with superman returns, then this might be our last time seeing hal on the big screen. for what it's worth, which is not much, i totally disagree with the above comment that geoff johns dumbed down green lantern. i think he made green lantern both approachable and exciting again. the past 15 years had been a rough ride for green lantern fans, but johns has put the character higher than he has ever been in terms of popularity and story scope. good fun. i can't imagine anyone reading this. if you are, we both need to get back to work.

  • June 17, 2011, 9:46 a.m. CST

    he had this kind of gay thing going with Barry Allen.

    by Autodidact

    I'm sorry... what!?

  • "In "Captives of the Cosmic Ray" That was kind of suspicious.

  • June 17, 2011, 9:51 a.m. CST

    nonsense: there are PLENTY of PERFECT films.

    by FleshMachine

    plenty

  • June 17, 2011, 9:51 a.m. CST

    Re: "capone still one of the better reviewers here"

    by Graphix67

    The man praised "MacGruber". I will never forgive Capone for selling out on that one regardless of the fact that it was during a time when the studio literally rented the AICN website to fully promote and pimp the film.

  • June 17, 2011, 9:57 a.m. CST

    here's a few:

    by FleshMachine

    2001, texas chainsaw massacre, star wars, casablanca, raiders, et, jaws, godfather 1-2, superman, annie hall, se7en, social network etc etc etc

  • June 17, 2011, 10:03 a.m. CST

    LOL Everytime Harry says its good means it really sux...

    by doom master

    I'm going to have to use reverse psychology now with his reviews...

  • June 17, 2011, 10:08 a.m. CST

    I know next to nothing about the character and his universe.

    by Se7en

    Not saying that the movie wont be a turd. But Capone may not be ready for a outer space super-hero opera.

  • My faves.

  • Natch.

  • June 17, 2011, 10:14 a.m. CST

    Harry liked it

    by drunkenmonkey73

    Then again Harry likes anything these days. Is there something he's not telling us.

  • June 17, 2011, 10:18 a.m. CST

    The only perfect film according to the studio suits.

    by cookylamoo

    Is a movie so well-tested, balless, and dumbed-down that it'll make a shitload of money. That's why they keep making that film over and over.

  • June 17, 2011, 10:24 a.m. CST

    Harry Appears Alone here.

    by PopCultureJunkie

    http://nitro5737.blogspot.com/

  • June 17, 2011, 10:28 a.m. CST

    see! plenty.

    by FleshMachine

    this movie reeked of suck from day one.

  • June 17, 2011, 10:44 a.m. CST

    To be fair, I say "I didn't hate it" in a different context

    by BlaGyver

    It's not my definitive quote on the film. I'm just so so unbelievably fucking glad I didn't hate it. After reading the shitty reviews, I was legitimately worried. GL is my favorite and the fact that I enjoyed the movie thrills me.

  • June 17, 2011, 10:44 a.m. CST

    Raiders of the Lost Ark is Perfect...

    by zinc_chameleon

    and had that film been used, Abin Sur would have been shown imprisoning Parallax, and warning the other three Lanterns not to look into the eyes of Parallax, lest they have the slightest sign of fear. One of them flinches, and then !bam! the story begins. Much like another Spielberg beginning, that of Jurassic Park. No need to go on and on about the dangers of Parallax after that. And we should have explored Oa with Toma-Re, while he gave us some exposition, one artifact at a time. Oh well...

  • June 17, 2011, 10:45 a.m. CST

    RE: graphix67

    by Capone

    Really, dude? MACGRUBER is the one you're holding against me? For the record, almost everyone I know who actually saw MACGRUBER, loved it. The problem is, nobody went to see it outside of critics. And for the record, I don't make a dime more in a given month if a movie advertises with us or not. Not quite sure how I "sold out" on MACGRUBER otherwise. I interviewed a couple of the actors, but that's it. Standard operating procedure. And I saw the film at a festival weeks in advance, reviewed it, but didn't post until release. I had no idea when I wrote my review that the film would advertise with us. You have a very warped view on how things run around here. We're not nearly organized enough around here to accept bribes.

  • June 17, 2011, 10:48 a.m. CST

    @Korruption & Zombot..

    by jack Bauer

    The site could be changed but sadly I doubt Harry wants to, its clear to me that AICN / Harry's input is as he wants it and it matters not what we think as visitors. Fine, it's his site but its also what made him as famous as he is now and can also go in reverse if he keeps up his dire input. I feel sorry for his illness, issue that need weight being resolved are always open for snipes and obviously will have little sympathy from most but I still feel sorry for him as no one deserves such pain and the fear of never walking again is horrendous BUT being ill does not mean his ability to write proper reviews is impaired so no sympathy for the dire reviews Harry! Its hard to see what's driving him with these reviews, is it simply some behind the back handshakes going on, is it him being too involved with the stars, is it him basically believing his own hype far too much? I'm tempted to believe its a mix of all 3, its a shame, he's got a great knowledge of films and a passion for them but lately his reviews are completely unexplainable and what's worth he's too damn lazy to even bother putting his beliefs across afterwards. We have a UK saying about 'being up your own arse (ass)' and it may be fun for him to be up there but it must be hell to work with him.

  • June 17, 2011, 10:51 a.m. CST

    I'd such hopes for it

    by The StarWolf

    Oh well, on the bright side I get to keep my money in my pocket and maybe they'll get the second one right, assuming it ever gets made.

  • ,

  • June 17, 2011, 11:10 a.m. CST

    high flight

    by chiwrtr72

    I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth

  • June 17, 2011, 11:13 a.m. CST

    Capone, it shouldn't take 4 or 5 paragraphs

    by seasider

    for you to finally get to your review of the film. I don't get why you're so up in arms that there are people out there who had a positive reactions to the film. As you pointed out, everyone comes into a movie with a certain amount of baggage. I'm sorry but your statement, "let the film guide you through its good and bad moments on its own merits" has to be the cheesiest and most cliche' thing I've read so far today. Will your next review tell us how to close our eyes, breathe deep and find our center?

  • June 17, 2011, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Capone what are you trying to say with your title?

    by Fico

    That other movies don't really try to "get it right?"

  • June 17, 2011, 11:34 a.m. CST

    To Jasonicus

    by PopCultureJunkie

    Fanboys are whiny because they are so passionate about the subject material. Try to put yourselves in their shoes. Reading and becoming a huge fan of Green Lantern and dedicate yourself to years of reading and when a movie comes out representing an important character that is relevant to your life it IS a big deal.

  • June 17, 2011, 11:37 a.m. CST

    Better than THOR and X-MEN...

    by film11

    ...at least in its midnight show box-office, taking in over $3.35 million (THOR had $3.2)

  • June 17, 2011, 11:51 a.m. CST

    Capone has no credibility

    by jaylerd

    "Every movie has flaws, pointing them out doesn't matter" - Thor review Only reason to read anything by this clown is the enjoyment of watching mean things get said about something.

  • June 17, 2011, 11:53 a.m. CST

    I hope it bombs

    by double_l88

    Comic book movies do not need to be this camp.

  • June 17, 2011, 12:04 p.m. CST

    Here is what I thought

    by William Potter

    http://willsmoviearchive.blogspot.com/

  • June 17, 2011, 12:04 p.m. CST

    Best thing about this review is how he shits on harry

    by knowthyself

    In such a way that Harry will never even notice haha.

  • Hmmm I forget what I come to this site for anymore...... But I can't wait to see the Green Lantern!

  • June 17, 2011, 12:17 p.m. CST

    It is doing much better with audiences than with critics

    by Stan Gable

    Right now it has an audience rating of 72% on rotten tomatoes compared to 22% from the critics, and ultimately that is all that matters. I am going to see it tonight and I'm sure I will enjoy it, since a comic book movie really needs to sink to the level of Catwoman/Elektra where they completely throw out any resemblance to the source material before I get pissed off. I do not go into a movie looking for nits to pick or ways that I can shit all over it. If I can get entertainment out of Daredevil or X-Men 3, then the movie has done it's job and I'm sure I will like Green Lantern.

  • June 17, 2011, 12:18 p.m. CST

    nitro5737

    by elsewhere

    Lame argument. I'm a huge Transformers fan and I was totally let down by the Transformers movies. I have enough sense not to let my fanboyism cloud my better judgement. I recognize a piece of shit when I see one.

  • June 17, 2011, 12:28 p.m. CST

    why did my comment disappear

    by elsewhere

    Hm?

  • June 17, 2011, 12:29 p.m. CST

    And by the way, the mask always looks fake.

    by gk1

    ...as opposed to a real looking mask? wait wut

  • June 17, 2011, 12:36 p.m. CST

    Yes, the name Sinestro does sound suspicious to earthlings.

    by cookylamoo

    But the name "Hal Jordan" mean "turd eater" on Korogar.

  • June 17, 2011, 12:43 p.m. CST

    @Capone, how do you account for Harrys views?

    by jack Bauer

    Lets be fair, Harry has posted some pretty unexplainable reviews recently, what do you make of them? You have a colleague who seems to post 100% opposites of what all the rest of you have, it makes you wonder why that might be, there's having a differing opinion on a film and then there's what Harry is posting! I would ask Harry but he does not see fit to respond to the readers about why films that get universally panned EVERYWHERE suddenly become good to great films, some even reaching epic. And please, no one's accusing you of taking bribes but in business and an industry there are ALWAYS favours for mates. Having a background in game reviews means I have seen how touching a nice free game or junket can be on certain reviewers. Exclusives, interviews & set visits don't always come for free. I can't say or suggest that's the cause of Harrys reviews but its all very weird

  • June 17, 2011, 12:47 p.m. CST

    Good Review

    by Mercuryrules

  • June 17, 2011, 12:51 p.m. CST

    Good point about the costume!

    by Tom Fremgen

    I believe you are right Capone, nearly every actor has said how real it all is once they get into costume. As for a real mask vs a fake mask (not sure why anyone would have trouble with this)- fake mask - the actor is not really wearing one, it's a cgi effect real mask - the actor is actually wearing a mask on their face. You know Sam Worthington real actor, Navi fake actors.

  • June 17, 2011, 12:54 p.m. CST

    Not surprised, but hard to ignore expectations

    by Wcwlkr

    I do try to keep an open mind, but everything I saw from trailers just did put my expectations very low. Everyone does have a different experience when seeing a movie. Most of you guys I believe hated Pirates 4 were I thought it was pretty good. I did enjoy your reviewer lingo breakdown, I have been guilty of a couple of those lines. Though I never thought my feeling met your interpretation. The consenus however just seems that if the film focus on a Galactic level story it would've been better. But it didn't therefore we're left with the crap. And supposed to have a hope that they'll expand to the galactic in a sequel. But why should they get the chance?

  • June 17, 2011, 1 p.m. CST

    harry only likes movies with a tie to his past or childhood.

    by zom-bot.com

    what was the last totally original film that harry has liked-? and if he has then he liked some part of it that he felt referenced something else or reminded him of his youth. of COURSE he was going to like GL. whereas, INCEPTION was new and original and he could make no connection with it whatsoever. it required thought and not the comforting embrace of candied memories from the past. or maybe nolan should have sent harry a toy totem? harry is a man child. at least he's unapologetic about it. we all probably know many people like him. unlike most worshipers of entertainment past, harry is never miffed when someone totally gets wrong or destroys the property he cherishes. that's what i can't figure out. anyone else would be pissed that GL got fucked up. harry is just happy it got made. but it's not good enough to think that way. that isn't going to get movies made BETTER. we need to stop the trend of dumbing down fantasy and sci-fi for the idiocracy. maybe that's an oxymoron? but i don't think sci-fi or fantasy have to be stupid, even if they have some implausible ideas.

  • June 17, 2011, 1:03 p.m. CST

    TO Elsewhere

    by PopCultureJunkie

    You missed the point completely with what I was saying. People are pissed and/or picky about particular movies like Transformers, GL, Thor, Supes, Bats, etc. because they are passionate. If I was a Huge Fan of Transformers I'd whine too. Especially after viewing the GL movie. I know shit when I see it too! Wish Harry did though!

  • June 17, 2011, 1:05 p.m. CST

    Elsewhere

    by PopCultureJunkie

    I'm still a fan of Supes even though Superman Returns sucked. I actually viewed the film from a non fan point of view and a fan's point of view.

  • June 17, 2011, 1:13 p.m. CST

    All I really want to know: Is it Spiderman 3 bad?

    by jimmy rabbitte

    Spiderman 3 is the benchmark for completely screwing the pooch on a superhero film.

  • June 17, 2011, 1:15 p.m. CST

    My all-time favorite alien Green Lantern

    by cookylamoo

    Is this diamond that has arms, legs and a face (and pants). I always a found a diamond that carried a ring supremely ironic.

  • A movie that fits this example is Citizen Kane. Its 70 years old and has built a reputation as the greatest movie ever made. Even with that reputation there will be people that wont like it. The Godfather is another example.

  • June 17, 2011, 1:17 p.m. CST

    sunwukong86, just because some asshole doesn't like Godfather

    by Mattman

    Does not mean it isn't a perfect movie.

  • June 17, 2011, 1:20 p.m. CST

    Wow and it looked so good in the trailer,,,LOL

    by the Green Gargantua

  • June 17, 2011, 1:27 p.m. CST

    what did people expect

    by Pipple

    I always found green lantern to be a b list hero with no real captivating story (apparently I'm wrong?) akin to aquaman. I think I'll be satisfied with this movie coming from that perspective.

  • June 17, 2011, 1:27 p.m. CST

    Godfather not a perfect movie...

    by chiwrtr72

    The scene where Sonny gets gunned down at the tollbooth is pretty bad by today's standards.

  • June 17, 2011, 1:29 p.m. CST

    jimmy rabbitte, really, Spidey 3 is the benchmark?

    by Mattman

    What about Batman and Robin? Superman III/IV? X-Men 3?

  • June 17, 2011, 1:29 p.m. CST

    Honestly im sure its worse than spiderman 3

    by mattforce7

    Lantern didnt even look that great in the trailers....Sure, Wide sweeping shots of a large CG landscape, explosive action pieces cut in and out, the comic con footage ect. but even all this, i was able to dissect that in the scope of the film and its main gears, that the film would befall terrible story telling. you see, this is how i save my money so i can pay rent. I don't pay to see stupid things. Sex and the City...Green lantern...Just awful I'm sure

  • June 17, 2011, 2:19 p.m. CST

    Slow, boring, confusing and loud as hell!!

    by MovieGeekBlog

    One positive note: I did like the costume… Here's my review http://wp.me/p19wJ2-lE

  • June 17, 2011, 2:28 p.m. CST

    You're saying Ryan Reynolds WASN'T enough of a cocky wiseass in this movie?

    by Voice O. Reason

    I disagree 100%. The only time Reynolds made me close to liking him in this movie was when he WASN'T playing him that way.

  • June 17, 2011, 2:48 p.m. CST

    Sorry to add to the sniping

    by IWasInJuniorHighDickhead

    but here goes. Harry's review reads like 'it is a shite film but I was predisposed to like it and therefore I do', yet he can almost fall asleep during Inception and not really bother reviewing the film at all? Each to their own (who wants to watch films they're not interested in?) but perhaps - if you run a review site - you should give each film your full attention.

  • June 17, 2011, 2:53 p.m. CST

    Lantern

    by D Jones

    It is a good comic book movie not a bad GL movie not everything I would want in it ,but name me a comic movie that got everything right? I have read GL since the 60's so I have some high standards ,but it was not bad at all. I wonder how many will bitch because John Stewart is not GL? Basing their entire thought on the JLU cartoon not the years of history before Stewart was introduced.

  • June 17, 2011, 2:59 p.m. CST

    Dang first Scarlett now this

    by BrooklynBred

    Ryan can't win.

  • June 17, 2011, 3:02 p.m. CST

    Just saw it

    by SGodfrey

    Was it everything I wanted from a GL film? Hell no. Is it half as bad as this web site and the entire mainstream media film community has made it out to be? Fuck no. The script shifts between predictable to campy (when Hector "rages out" and Hal has his "Hot Shots" dead dad flashback, fuck, that's some shite). There are problems - the plot and pace are rushed in so many ways, but my only super geek gripe is the small relationship Hal has with Sinestro, which is the core of so much to come. B- first effort. I hope a new script and a new director (Campbell is merely serviceable) take this somewhere amazing, and that somewhere is going to be the Sinestro Corps War.

  • June 17, 2011, 3:06 p.m. CST

    re: mattman

    by jimmy rabbitte

    You make good points. The funny thing about Batman and Robin is, to me anyway, it was so bad that it has transcended it's genre; to the point where I consider it to be the worst big budget abomination ever put on celluloid. The fact that it was a superhero film is entirely beside the point.<p> Superman III was bad, no doubts there; but when it came out I was 11 or 12 and I remember not hating it instantly, I was just mildly disappointed. I skipped Supes IV altogether. I was 16 or 17 that summer and just couldn't be bothered as the trailers looked terrible.<p> As for X-Men 3... Yeah, that has to share space with Spidey 3. An all out disappointment. The only thing about X3 that somewhat separates it is Ratner directed it; so I went in to that film expecting disappointment. Spiderman 3 had the same creative team intact; so I went in expecting an experience somewhat close to Spiderman 2. I remember leaving the theater thoroughly disappointed and almost angry at having wasted my evening; it's exactly the way I felt, after viewing Terminator: Salvation. But maybe we shouldn't drag McG and his catalog of cinematic suckage into this.

  • June 17, 2011, 3:16 p.m. CST

    @mattman perfection is a form of opinion

    by sunwukong86

    therefore there is no perfect movie

  • June 17, 2011, 3:21 p.m. CST

    X3 and Spiderman 3 were dissapointments but not unwatchable.

    by knowthyself

    Um HELLO have you seen Daredevil, Elektra, Catwoman, Spawn, or Ghost Rider? Now THOSE are bad comic book hero movies. Leave Spiderman 3 and X3 alone. They weren't great but hot damn they weren't Batman and Robin level of bad.

  • June 17, 2011, 3:32 p.m. CST

    Apologetic positive reviews

    by Bass Ackwards

    I can't say those opinions are completely invalid, I've used those phrases more than a few times, in fact they would actually describe how I felt about Thor this year, a movie I didn't love, but was good for what it was, dispensable popcorn entertainment. It had me entertained while my ass was in the seat, though I have no desire to revisit it, recall it, or recommend it. Interestingly both Thor and GL looked like terrible to me from their trailers, and they both looked like the same kind of terrible (juvenile, pandering, lazy effects/action), Thor surprised me and I enjoyed it, I am hoping GL is able to do at least that, though the reviews give me little cause to think so.

  • June 17, 2011, 3:32 p.m. CST

    They got Green Lantern HORRIBLY WRONG.

    by tailhook

    Look, i'll be the first to admit I only have limited knowledge of the character. That said, the Green Lantern they needed for *this* movie, didn't show up. They didn't even come close to 'getting it right'. The fact of the matter is that its a by-the-numbers story. An evil gets released into this Universe that Nobody Can Defeat... except for one intrepid human. Said human, through the assistance of a very powerful ring.. figures out the Only Way to kill the being that Nobody Can Defeat. In order for this story to work, said human has to be confident, cocky, and willing to just let it fly. What he is *not* is some snivelling coward for a good portion of the film, to the point that his g/f bascially bitchslaps him and tells him to grow a pair. They had Hal Jordan right at the start, but the only thing the ring should have done is just amplify his confidence level to 11. In turn, this absolute confidence and cocksureness runs right across the grain of the 'intergalactic police force' and provides not only a direct rival to the current power of Sinestro, but a valid reason for him to go Yellow. If you want a film that exemplifies this type of story, look no further than Demolition Man. If you want another, he needed to be Indiana Jones and make it up as he went along until he finally figured out how to kill The Unstoppable Force. That said, if you're going to make your movie about The Unstoppable Force that Nobody Can Defeat... you'd better get that point across as Lanterns, whole worlds get shredded and everybody who tries to stop them just gets squashed. They tried, they really did. They simply failed in getting that point across. Sorry, but in an industry where we've seen spaceships that cover an entire city and lay waste to it, having a puff of smoke show up thats the size of a couple city blocks wreak a little havoc doesn't do it for me. The biggest crime of all was the climax. The climax to such a story is Hal Jordan figuring out the One Thing Nobody Could Figure Out.. and destroy Parallax. But they went another way. Instead, they have SINESTRO basically tell him how to kill Parallax midway through the movie. Fuck and you. The one time Hal Jordan is to shine.. by figuring out what no one else could... it comes directly from someone else. Fucking Rank Amateurs. The one thing Marvel gets absolutely right is they get the right directors in place for the story and the right writers to bring that story to bear. And they tend to actually get the story right. On all fronts here, DC Comics and Warner Brothers have FAILED. Just an absolutely horrid turd that is made all the more sad given there actually was a story here to put forth and deliver. Some people seriously need to get fired over this and WB itself better hope to god Harry Potter performs so over the top it can cover the absolute bloodletting that is to come with this film.

  • June 17, 2011, 3:59 p.m. CST

    And yet Capone loved Abrams Trek. Fancy that.

    by AsimovLives

  • June 17, 2011, 4:27 p.m. CST

    This 40 sec clip is better than all of "Green Lantern"

    by PopCultureJunkie

    JCVD!! http://nitro5737.blogspot.com/

  • June 17, 2011, 4:32 p.m. CST

    @tailhook, so Marvel Studios gets it right every time? Yeah ok

    by sunwukong86

  • June 17, 2011, 4:47 p.m. CST

    Why the fuck are his eyes white instead of green?

    by Nerd Rage

    Stupid shit like that are just indications of sloppy filmmaking.

  • June 17, 2011, 5:03 p.m. CST

    This film is UTTER DOGSHIT.

    by ChickenStu

    Just saw it. FUCK THIS MOVIE.

  • June 17, 2011, 5:09 p.m. CST

    So website AICN reviewers

    by jack Bauer

    Care to comment on Harry's reviews? Seems not... Doing what you are told, hell I'd protect my pay but there's a time when integrity must come out! Again..Seems not...

  • June 17, 2011, 5:21 p.m. CST

    nerd rage i hope that was a joke

    by sunwukong86

  • June 17, 2011, 5:30 p.m. CST

    Give me more

    by j2talk

    Give me another Green Lantern film...took my son to see it this afternoon he and I had an enjoyable afternoon, talked a bit, decided to check out the local book shop.....not a bad way to spend the afternoon and $25......Next up Transformers 3, Captain America and then Cowboys and Aliens.....Thank God the last 2 won't be in 3D.......

  • June 17, 2011, 6:11 p.m. CST

    "The Dark Knight Rises" Teaser on Youtube!!!

    by notcher

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-cgm4ocQUk

  • June 17, 2011, 6:35 p.m. CST

    @sunwukong: Nope, not at all.

    by tailhook

    Both movie versions of the Hulk were pretty big misfires, as was The Punisher. But i've never seen them so completely and utterly fuck up a character from inception to delivery in the way DC just did Green Lantern. Why, in gods name, would you make Hal Jordan a Test Pilot if he hadn't allready mastered his fear? The dude does shit in planes nobody else in the world can do. But suddenly he gets given a ring with Ultimate Power and suddenly starts doubting himself such that he has to overcome his fear? Really? Fuck that. You give a test pilot a ring of ultimate power and he's going to tear shit up, not get teared up. The entire concept is rotten at its core. Green Lantern needed and so wanted to be high adventure. Green Lantern should be a modern day Indiana Jones that has all the answers, even when he doesn't. You know.. a Super Hero? Exactly when did Superhero get dumbed down to just hero with the Super part being left out? If i wanted a hero, there are plenty of those to be found in the Fire Department or whatever. This is a Superhero Movie and instead we get some Emo metrosexual I wouldn't trust to win a match of Roshambo. And Reynolds showed he could play the part, its just the weak script with paint-by-idiot direction that let him down.

  • June 17, 2011, 6:39 p.m. CST

    asimovlives

    by Real Deal

    Asimovlives didn't like Star Trek and just had to chime in to tell us Capone did on a Green Lantern talkback! Fancy that!

  • My wife and I loved Werner Herzog's and Woody Allen's latest films last weekend and this afternoon we both enjoyed the hell out of Green Lantern. I honestly can't see what the complaints are for this film from anyone who enjoys a fun summer movie. It was as good as the first Ironman in my opinion. Maybe better. I'm going to go watch it again right now.

  • June 17, 2011, 7:44 p.m. CST

    My family loved it.

    by Dark Knight Lite

    Sure it had tonal shifts. So did SUPERMAN THE MOVIE, which is the film that this reminds me of most. What I want to know is WTF are all these reviewers on about? GL is entertaining, and respectful to the source.

  • Are you sure you actually watched the movie? Because this NEVER FUCKING HAPPENS! The movie fucking rocks. Don't listen to the whiner naysayer bitches. It's the PERFECT Green Lantern origin movie. I went with a friend and he completely fucking agrees. Anything else you hear is utter pussy-dripping BULLSHIT!

  • June 17, 2011, 8:09 p.m. CST

    pussy-dripping bullshit....

    by tailhook

    is what i heard during the running time. When Blake Lively has to smack him around and tell him to butch the fuck up, you got a weakass superhero.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:11 p.m. CST

    Can you describe the scene where Blake "smacks him around"?

    by Jaster

    Yeah I'm not really remembering that part.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:22 p.m. CST

    Maybe "perfect" is a little strong...

    by Jaster

    There were a couple of VEERY minor glitches. They fucked up the 3D in a couple of shots which is puzzling. The image didn't resolve correctly. 2 shots shots majorly fucked, a couple others just messy. 2 edited sequences that kind of screwed the pooch. They were both transposing Hal and Saarsgaard. I think one was of Hal's training mission simultaneous with Saarsgaard's head blowing up. Just a very weird couple of scenes to mash together. It was jarring every time they switched back and forth. I agree that it makes absolutely no sense that immediately after giving a big speech that we should never give in to fear, Sinestro puts on the fear ring. I've heard this is because a scene was excised that would explain this, but without it his actions are inexplicable. Other than that, I thought the film was pretty flawless.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:35 p.m. CST

    dirkd13"

    by Yelsaeb

    Whoa, whoa, whoa, stop everything. Life of Brian is a perfect film? Are you friggin nuts? About 1% of Monty Python is actually funny, and that 1% belongs soley to the Holy Grail. The other 99% is just stupid voices that are supposed to be funny. Life of Brian is the worst of those stupid voices compiled into a movie that is horribly boring, all the while its thinking its funny.

  • June 17, 2011, 8:57 p.m. CST

    @rise of fett i agree about Sinestro

    by sunwukong86

    The credit scene was forced. I really hope if there is a second movie, Sinestro isnt a bad guy "just because he is in the comics". He wasnt on screen enough to justify him becoming a villain

  • June 17, 2011, 9:08 p.m. CST

    RE: Capone RE: Graphix67

    by Graphix67

    During MacGruber's debut week, the AICN webpage was decked out with more "MacGruber" advertising than a Catholic's Christmas-tree has blinking lights. MacGruber was quickly DOA at the theaters. You gave it a positive review. I just connected the dots. Sorry if I struck a nerve.

  • June 17, 2011, 9:09 p.m. CST

    Chalk me up to pleasantly surprised

    by Bass Ackwards

    It doesn't sit aside the top tier of super hero movies, but its definitely a step above inane waste like Spidey 3, X3, Iron Man 2 (Batman & Robin is a whole separate benchmark of terrible, saying its better than that flick is meaningless). I'd put this right up there next to Thor, Thor edges it out a bit as it was paced better and had better supporting characters. But all in all, I liked it, I'd watch a sequel. Though to be fair I missed a big chunk of the middle of the flick (and when I came back to it I don't feel like I missed much at all, so that's probably not a great thing), maybe seeing some of that stuff would have soured my experience a bit more.

  • June 17, 2011, 9:35 p.m. CST

    @tailhook, i dont think you watched the movie

    by sunwukong86

    Remember that scene where he freaked out because he started thinking about his dad? Yeah I think that pretty much explained why he became unsure of himself.

  • June 17, 2011, 10:28 p.m. CST

    Just saw it -

    by DocM

    Problems: Martin Campbell - aka King Of The Intercut - as in too many which hurts continuity. Script problems - too light on Carol Ferris and too heavy on Hector Hammond's daddy issues. Also too light on the Corps - as in their absense at the end until it was over. That all said, at our 5:00 PM showing the parking lot was full, it drew a full house, and applause at the end. A guy I know at the theater said it had been that way all day. Most importantly, the kids there were wowing all over the place after the show. Personally, I'd give GL another shot id Campbell is replaced.

  • June 17, 2011, 11:20 p.m. CST

    Two responses

    by tailhook

    @rise_of_feet: Its towards the end. He's basically saying he can't do it.. he had quit and was too busy feeling sorry for himself. So she set him straight and said he could do it and she did see it in him. Basically, get the fuck out there sport and grow a pair. The "smacking around" was metaphorical. But its safe to say, when your girlfriend is more butch than you are, you got serious issues. In general, test pilots tend to have their shit together. Those that don't, die. @sunwukong86: I quite remember it. It didn't make a lick of sense then, and it doesn't now. They were clearly trying for a Top Gun reference, but it was so wholly out of place, disjointed, and poorly done the first thing that came to mind was Ted Stryker in Airplane!. But really, if you have Netflix and want to see the type of story that GL was going for and should have been if done right, lookup the Season 3 Babylon 5 episode "Messages From Earth". Its also more than likely where they cribbed the solution to the Parallax problem.

  • June 17, 2011, 11:36 p.m. CST

    It's an introduction

    by CreamCheeseAlchemist

    I didn't go in expecting the comics and I had fun. Yes, I thought the post-credits scene lacked context in the film but I did get a Sinestro/Abin feel. And there's nothing romantic between Hal and Barry. Proof: tinyurl.com/6fddzja

  • June 17, 2011, 11:54 p.m. CST

    Another stupid, lifeless, PG-13 superhero 3-D fest. What's new?

    by IronEagle74

    It's the same old garbage being pumped out of Hollywood every week of every summer. Movies that are driven by CGI and 3-D and have little to no plot, bad acting, terrible chemistry, forgettable musical scores, etc. Yet, droves of mindless youth keep loving the hell out of it. Someone wake me up if Hollywood ever starts making REAL summer action movies again. I'm thinking I'm going to need to be frozen for a few hundred years though. Either that or find a time machine and go back. I have no desire to go to theaters anymore.

  • If they ever made REAL summer action movies again, like the hardcore R-rated stuff you used to see, then people whose minds have matured beyond the age of 15 will want to go see them.

  • June 18, 2011, midnight CST

    Seriously!?!

    by Ram

    Capone, You, and all the other critics at this site, have got to be buying brand new BMWs with the money the rival studio is paying you to write bad reviews against Green Lantern. Green Lantern was Awesome!!! The movie did not drag. The pace of the action and the storytelling was excellent! The set-up for the sequel is clearly there and the movie does merit a sequel. There must be a high degree of inbreeding with respect to your taste in Super Hero Movies amongst you and your colleagues. If you think that Green Lantern sucked, then you should seriously consider driving off a cliff. The rest of your life will clearly suck from here on out. Essentially, your reviews are null and void with respect to the "Normal" fan base. What planet do you guys hide-out at? Given that your site produces so much buzz in Hollywood and is looked at by studios, I pray to God that your bearing false witness will not destroy this franchise from it's inception. Ryan Reynold's performance was not only great, he nailed it! Sinestro was played perfectly and with strength! Let me guess... your favorite movie was Spiderman? Like I said, I hope Universal Studios got you everything you wanted and in pink. Regards, Ram PS: Clear your brain and remember what it was liked to be thrilled as a young kid; maybe then you'll synch into reality. WTF!?! You guys just lost credibility with me and many like me.

  • June 18, 2011, 12:17 a.m. CST

    Unforgiven is a perfect film

    by Winston Smith

    Clockwork Orange... perfect. Perfect doesn't mean that everyone loves it. It means to you, there's not a single thing you would change (or if it's an older film, also not a single thing that is dated in a bad way). They're rare, but comeon, everyone has a FEW that, to them, are perfect or close enough.

  • June 18, 2011, 12:33 a.m. CST

    And we have our first Plant!

    by tailhook

    Created an account solely to post here eh, GREENLANTERN111? Seriously, go back to your studio job for however long that lasts after having cost the studio upwards of $400 million dollars. As per any critic really having an effect on the boxoffice, the only thing that does that is the film itself and whether the audience wanted to see it or not. People here seemed to hate both X3 and X-men:Origins Wolverine, and both were quite popular. People here tended to love X-men: First Class, and yet it underperformed. Fact is, put out a movie people want to pay good money to see, and you'll have a successful product. Don't, and no amount of praise will help your cause. It really is as simple as that. One of the big takeaways is the question of what on Earth was WB thinking by throwing so much money on an unproven franchise? Short of pulling Transformers type numbers, there was absolutely no room for underperformance. Either it went big and had a $70-100 mil opening weekend with massive buzz that could sustain like Avatar or a $100+ mil opening with bad buzz. Anything in-between would be viewed as an instant flop. Their one saving grace is they got Harry Potter as a backstop in July and a good portion of the money they rake in there is going to go towards balancing out the books for GL. Either way, whoever gave this movie that big of a budget needs to get gone. It could easily have been done with far less, while saving some of the effects heavy Oa stuff for a sequel after the franchise proved itself. The movie was him getting the ring and dealing with Parallax. Anything beyond that was fluff.

  • June 18, 2011, 1:41 a.m. CST

    Bribed Reviews

    by Tank Williams

    I've yet to hear about a film critic being bribed, in order to gain success on their movie. This is a first. Although, I have been suspicious on the review front in regards to Video Games.

  • June 18, 2011, 1:52 a.m. CST

    10 Perfect Films.. Or very near perfect..

    by Tank Williams

    -No Country for Old Men -Pulp Fiction -Blade Runner -Wall-E -Beauty and the Beast -The Shinning -Let the right one in -Rosemarys Baby -Casablanca -Alien

  • June 18, 2011, 3:18 a.m. CST

    My list of perfect movies... from off the top of my head.

    by antonphd

    Ace Ventura Pet Detective Dumb and Dumber Idiocracy Out of Sight The Goonies Whip It Raiders of the Lost Ark A Christmas Story Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon The Departed Layer Cake Kiss Kiss Bang Bang Port of Call New Orleans Good Will Hunting

  • Is Capone trying to turn a page as a reviewer? Is he shedding away the childish things of his younger years? Will he not tolerate a bad movie form encefoward? And for how long his new attitude will last? Until the next movie made by any one from Team Abrams?

  • June 18, 2011, 5:06 a.m. CST

    List of perfect movies (not exhaustive):

    by AsimovLives

    APOCALYPSE NOW BLADE RUNNER 2001 A SPACE ODDYSSEY GHOST IN THE SHELL THX-1138 (70s theatrical version) CITIZEN KANE KING KONG (1933) VALHALLA RISING John Carpenter's THE THING SECONDS FARGO CHILDREN OF MEN HEAT OLDBOY SEVEN AGUIRRE, THE WRATH OF GOD NOSFERATU (Werner Herzog's 1978 version) PATH OF GLORY DOCTOR STRANGELOVE ALIEN THE FRENCH CONNECTION PERFUME: THE STORY OF A MURDERER EMPIRE OF THE SUN CHINATOWN THE UNINVITED (Korean movie) THE MEMORIES OF MURDER A TALE OF TWO SISTERS SEVEN SAMURAI RAN SCHINDLER'S LIST LET THE RIGHT ONE IN VIDEODROME THE DUELLISTS AGORA PI BRAZIL FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS PICNIC AT HANGING ROCK MASTER AND COMMANDER DELIVERANCE GODZILLA (1953 japanese original) ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST MOON THE HIRED HAND THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL (1950) THE SAND PEBBLES THE REMAINS OF THE DAY THE ENGLISH PACIENT THE DESCENT POINT BLANK LEON (= THE PROFESSIONAL) JACOB'S LADDER ZODIAC THE DARK KNIGHT INCEPTION STAR TREK THE MOTION PICTURE (it's my list so eat it) THE HAUNTING (Robert Wise's movie) TOUCH OF EVIL INTOLERANCE EL CID KINGDOM OF HEAVEN: DIRECTOR'S CUT DAYS OF HEAVEN RAGING BULL GOODFELLAS THE AGE OF INNOCENCE THE GODFATHER PART I THE GODFATHER PART II THE CONVERSATION ROBOCOP CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE 3RD KIND THE EXORCIST THERE WILL BE BLOOD NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN THE LAST EMPEROR AMÉLIE AMERICAN BEAUTY ... and many more. The issue here is how we define what is a perfect movie. For my part, i define a movie as perfect if it accomplished what it set to be and did it in an artful and intelligent manner. There is no perfection if there is no artisty and intelligence involved. More so about movies. P.S.: JAWS is a bit of a subversion because that movie turned up mucy better then it was inicially set out to be. It became a perfect movie despiste the inicial intentions.

  • June 18, 2011, 5:57 a.m. CST

    The Irrelevance of Harry Knowles

    by Ernie

    It's obvious that Harry's reviews are no longer objective and are heavily influenced by his associations within the industry. A strong journalist should be able to resist such blatant attempts by film-makers but HK is neither a strong-willed individual nor is he a journalist. I think this website needs to re-shuffle it's members if it wants to maintain any sense of credibility. The first thing that needs to happen is that HK has to stop writing reviews. He can carry on writing set reports and interviews with his film-maker "friends" but keep him away from any review writing. His reviews are a joke and everyone knows that a good review from HK equals a poor film. Obviously HK would resist such a change. Even he is aware that his film-maker "friends" will quietly disappear when they realise he has no influence on reviews. And unfortunately he lacks the jounalistic skill and mobility to become an on-set reporter. So it's a simple choice for HK. Continue as a biased reviewer and watch this website become an irrelevance. Or stop writing reviews and become irrelevant to your film-maker buddies. Either way HK will realise how ficker "friendships" within the film industry can be. Don't be surprised when Sly Stallone no longers answers your phone call.

  • June 18, 2011, 9:51 a.m. CST

    Oh my fucking god I hated this movie—and in 3D!!

    by David Bolton

    I'll agree with the idea that greenlantern111 is a plant. Or a fucking idiot. How anyone could like this illogical, stupid movie is beyond me.

  • June 18, 2011, 11:26 a.m. CST

    Harry's reviews were never objective.

    by tailhook

    That said.. to understand Herr Knowles you need to understand that hes politically an extremist liberal. As such, anybody who is in that particular mold gets a pass no matter how bad their move is, while anybody else like say Fox needs to put out The Best Movie Ever to even get considered for a good review. Its not the quality that he reviews, its the politics. Why does Green Lantern get a pass? Well gosh, its about an intergalactic police force where the superhero is all sensitive and a bag of mush. All sorts of liberalistic malarchy at play. To him, going against that would be saying HE was bad, and that doesn't happen. Either way, I stand by the fact that the characterization of GL was completely wrong for the story they were trying to tell. There is apparently a reason why this dude is a B-lister, and its primarily because the people that write for him do not understand the particular archetype at play. They got The Corps absolutely right, its just GL's methods should run directly against their philosophy and Sinestro the same way they do Ferris Air on Earth with everybody just aghast at the way he gets things done.

  • June 18, 2011, 11:32 a.m. CST

    yup i could have told you

    by Bob Wire

    I could have told you this was going to suck before it was made... when they released the casting.

  • June 18, 2011, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Green Lanterns = Space Fascists

    by KilliK

    FACT

  • June 18, 2011, 3:20 p.m. CST

    @jasonicus : We'll see what the numbers say...

    by tailhook

    Whether you like it or not, they are the final arbiter when it comes to a popcorn film. Why? Because they are what determine whether you get a sequel, or more of a particular type of film in general. I would be highly surprised if Marvel wasn't watching the box office for this, Thor, Captain America, and X-men and if all underperform.. look to save money and really curtail The Avengers budget by any means necessary. Thats another product that can go wildly out of control in a heartbeat if it isn't watched close.

  • June 18, 2011, 3:24 p.m. CST

    yelsaeb is a BITCH!!

    by sanford and gun

    "The Life Of Brian" is Monty Python's CLASSIC!!<p> Stupid BITCH!!

  • June 18, 2011, 3:49 p.m. CST

    idk gravy....

    by ricky

    capone is usually dead on in his reviews but when I was reading this particular one there seemed to be a huge chip on his soldier. Maybe he has an axe to grind with harry or the studio or it may be politics....or maybe I'm just full of shit. Either way, after seeing the movie I can honestly say he is completely wrong. I thought it was a great movie, and as a marvel fanboy that actually hurts a little to say. Sure it seemed a little rushed but it did introduce your average movie goer to the GL universe. Anyone saying it was spiderman 3 bad is waaaaay off base. I think as comic book geeks and movie enthusiast people on here have become a little full of themselves and dare I say greedy? What's this bullshit I hear about "the perfect movie?" Movies are a form of art and as all art its subjective. I think some of the people griping to have a point...sort of...but no matter how on point they might be, the way they come across they cound like cynical assholes. Again I thought it was a great flick with a lot of future potential. Oh but yea blake lively sucked. Can't act her way out of a paper bag. That and she's very mediocre in the looks department.

  • June 18, 2011, 4:33 p.m. CST

    a review by definition is not objective

    by Winston Smith

    Come on people, really now. NOTHING is truly objective. All that matters is... did you reason out your opinions, and back them with as much evidence as you could? Why people always want "objective" mystifies me. What you should want is smart and well-reasoned, not objective. This is why FOX NEWS is a joke.

  • June 18, 2011, 4:37 p.m. CST

    intergalactic police force where the superhero is all sensitive

    by Winston Smith

    That's not really what the movie's about, at all. You seem to be the biggest moron of the day. You believe reviews can be "objective" and you somehow think GL has anything to do with politics, and if it did it somehow is about a "superhero that is all sensitive." If that's what GL is, then every superhero ever is sensitive. And exactly why "sensitive" and emotionally in tune is seen as a bad thing by you nuts also confuses me. Compared to, what? Hitting your kids, yelling and screaming, have compassion for no one, murdering, raping, what? I do, I do wish you guys could live in the America you want to... we should split the country up, you live in your anarchist military society, the rest of us can live in normal society. By the way, GL as a movie... about as mediocre and average as they come.

  • June 18, 2011, 4:39 p.m. CST

    asimovlives

    by Winston Smith

    Cool list. While obviously no one's going agree with everything (Jesus Dark Knight is NOT even close to perfect), I agree with your definition and yeah, there's some there I forgot about. RoboCop... PERFECT FILM. Godfather Part II, No Country, Zodiac (yes! one of the most underrated films of all time) and so forth.

  • June 18, 2011, 5:26 p.m. CST

    Some people are impossible to please

    by cylon_conspiracy

    I thought it was a lot of fun. It wasn't boring or fake and I wasn't taken out of the story. It's not Star Wars but it does have a large scope and I think a sequel is justified and likely. I want to see the next chapter. Reynolds was great.

  • June 18, 2011, 7:34 p.m. CST

    Halfbreed/Zodiac

    by MC-909

    First off, I totally agree with you on Dark Knight. It's nowhere near close to perfect. The more times you watch it the more shit doesn't make sense. It's all been discussed at length before so no need to bring it back up. And even though I enjoyed it'll only be considered a classic one day because of Ledger's performance and Eckhart's CG face. But as far as Zodiac is concerned...could someone please explain to me why you guys ride its dick so hard? It's always brought up as "one of the best movies of all time" and I just don't see it at all. How was it different from any other serial killer movie? Is it because Fincher directed it? It seemed like it could have been directed by anyone. I don't get what's so "good" about the movie at all. Sure the camerawork is pretty, but what the hell is is there to it that you can't find in a dozen other movies?

  • June 18, 2011, 7:50 p.m. CST

    @hbq2

    by tailhook

    "sensitive" and emotionally in tune is awesomesauce... but not in a Superhero film. The whole point of being a Superhero is you're larger than life and can do what everybody else can't. He's a freaking Test Pilot ffs, and he hasn't overcome his fear? Seriously? He just got given the Best Plane Ever(metaphorically speaking), and all he can do is cry in his beer over it and examine his emotions? We should be living vicariously through him as he tests the ring to its limits like he does his planes and ultimately goes up against Parallax KNOWING he's going to find his way through it and ACTING like it. Thats the fucking Green Lantern, not that piece of soggy milquetoast that got filmed. Sinestro should look like a god damn sidekick in comparison and THAT is why he takes the yellow. Out of fear that he's past his prime with this new barnburner, out of fear that he is no longer good enough to lead the Corps, OUT OF FEAR of HAL JORDAN. Why the hell else would he take the yellow? Instead, Mark Strong made Ryan Reynolds look like a fucking punk kid. Really? What the hell does HE have to fear from Hal Jordan? As protrayed in the film, not a god damn thing. Thats why his 'turn' in the credits is so out of place. It makes sense only if the GL isn't some snivelling piece of shit. Jesus Christ, this character is a middle of the road fastball that they turned into a fucking knuckleball and ultimately fouled off. Some people seriously do need to be fired and those that keep apologizing for what got made.. I pity you and your extremely low expectations.

  • June 18, 2011, 8:08 p.m. CST

    See, to me I thought it was all about not being fearless

    by cylon_conspiracy

    but having courage. The movie may have been a bit on the nose but it was about overcoming fear and not letting it get in your way. Not every super-hero is virtuous and brave. Hal Jordan was a fuck up. Yes a great pilot but reckless and careless in all other areas of his life. He doesn't want to get close to people or make commitments because he experienced the horror of seeing his dad get blowed up as a kid. I'm not a psychologist but to me it was pretty clear what the character arc was here. Hal Jordan wasn't a sniveling pussy. He was a normal young guy who hadn't become a man yet. He gets the ring, he's forced to make a choice. Grow up and be a man or stay a kid and run from the consequences of your actions. And remember, this movie is primarily targeted TO CHILDREN. In that context, it was a positive message and I related to it as well.

  • June 18, 2011, 8:10 p.m. CST

    mc-909

    by Winston Smith

    Ah Zodiac... where to start? I guess a good way to describe it is, it's sort of The Big Lebowski of thrillers. In that, it's an incredibly multi-layered, complex character driven work that is so subtle that you almost don't notice what makes it great the first time. Like, The Big Lebowski, so much of the humor is based on the characters, and the movie lets you get to know them, but the first time you see it, a lot of hilarious lines just pass right by. Like, how the Dude always ends up copying phrases of the people around him... With Zodiac, to me it's the greatest serial killer film I've ever seen, better than even Silence and Se7en, because it's not just about a killer but about WHY serial killers have such an effect on us. The film recreates the 60s and 70s in a way no other movie really has, but it's for a point. No matter how big or complex our society becomes, we always fear the people who break the bounds... who go out and hunt people like animals, who kill like savages. Serial killers represent humanity at its most base and savage, and the Zodiac killer represented this in a major way... he played the system to get attention for himself, claiming his was hunting humans. The country became obsessed with it for some time, and some people for longer, and in Zodiac you see why people become obsessed with these things. Beyond that, and the fact that it has an amazing sense of passing time, the other thing that makes Zodiac special IS the characters. When I hear people describe it as a dry police procedural or whatever, I wonder if I've seen the same movie as them. There's so many great quotes. Pretty much everything Downey Jr's Paul Avery says is great. One of my favorites... "You threw out the file?" "I threw it out, or misplaced it -- I moved onto a boat!" Or, "This can no longer be ignored, what is that you're drinking?" These are real people, even though it's the 60s it never feels like a period piece, it just feels like, yeah, these are the lives these people are living. And that's important, because in the end when you hear about those awful crimes, what really makes us interested in them is that it's a glimpse into a world without society or rules, a world that civilization keeps at bay. Dave Toschi is also one of the great movie characters. Along with the television show The Wire, Zodiac is one of the most realistic depictions of real detective work, and somehow the real depiction is MORE entertaining than all the overdone, silly bullshit of most movies and tv shows.

  • But I don't think that's how the film was, I mean every superhero (or at least the good ones) has some inner struggle they have to deal with. I'd say the problem with Green Lantern is you never get the sense that cowardice was a problem for him. Responsibility, maybe, but he clearly was brave from the start. Just because he had a flashback of his dad in the plane doesn't make him a coward. It was a very forced character "arc" and moment of growth. You could tell the screenwriters tried to make it work with the idea of "walking away" from things, but I never really bought it. But like, Spider-Man, Batman, they're all emotionally complex characters. Hell, Burton's Batman movies were pretty much about loneliness. In Batman Begins Bruce Wayne is a semi-basket case trying to come to grips with his weakened emotional state and creating Batman as a way to combat it, and the crimes that took his parents. But I don't know, I never liked Superman and partly it was because it felt like there was very little real conflict, and they always needed a forced plot point to "weaken" him and offer some conflict. Because he is Superman, afterall.

  • June 18, 2011, 8:16 p.m. CST

    Also

    by Winston Smith

    We should be living vicariously through him as he tests the ring to its limits like he does his planes and ultimately goes up against Parallax KNOWING he's going to find his way through it and ACTING like it. Thats the fucking Green Lantern, not that piece of soggy milquetoast that got filmed.

  • June 18, 2011, 8:18 p.m. CST

    Overcoming fear is great...

    by tailhook

    Thats just not The Green Lantern. He gets chosen because he's allready overcome it. And if they've been writing the funnybooks that way, they don't understand the archetype or character either. No wonder this fucker has been B-list material. When Hal fights Sinestro, its basically Neo and Morpheus in the training room. It should have started out with Sinestro getting the better, goading him, and then Hal just turning it on to the point where he levels Sinestro. Then he comes back later to challenge Sinestro's leadership and decision making. Those two things including the fact that Jordan dispatches Parallax in a way Sinestro had not even considered is what pushes him to take the yellow. If you want afterschool specials, make them. If you want a Superhero film, then ffs make one. But don't mix the two and think the public is suddenly going to show up.

  • June 18, 2011, 8:31 p.m. CST

    halfbreedqueen/Zodiac

    by MC-909

    "The Wire of Serial Killer movies"...I'm a huge Wire fan so you cleared it all up for me with that line right there. And it's not that I didn't like Zodiac, I just didn't get what was so special about it. Basically what you're saying is that it was a solid/rich film and that I can agree with. It was one of the most solid films of the 00s. I still prefer the energy of Seven over the methodical pacing of Zodiac but thanks for clearing this up for me.

  • June 18, 2011, 8:37 p.m. CST

    @hbq2

    by tailhook

    At least you're starting to understand why the characterization is a huge issue. And also understand one thing, the whole introspective horseshit is largely a Marvel Thing and a product of the 60's and its something they do quite well. When your characters are built around their problems, it works good. The problem is a lot of the characters of DC were older and have always been a more idealistic version of the Superhero. Thats Their Thing. Superman is an all-powerful force, until he isn't via Kryptonite. Green Lantern is made into Superman through a ring that chose the best of us. The DC movies often go horribly, HORRIBLY wrong when they try to mix in modern emotional issues into their movies. Probably the most obnoxious example being the turning of Superman into a Deadbeat Dad in Singer's farce. The only one to actually do it properly is Nolan's Batman and he has that series so grounded in today's world that it works when he infuses today's issues.

  • June 18, 2011, 8:54 p.m. CST

    I saw it, I enjoyed it, I think most of you expect too much

    by Smartacus

    This was a good movie. I saw it in a theater filled with people who walked out of there talking about how much they liked it. It seems like every critic I read has a problem with Green Lantern but I'm not seeing it. No, it's not a perfect movie. It's entertaining though and an outstanding attempt at doing it right. It falls short of nailing it but I'll see it again and I'll go see a sequel if it rates on. Hell, Fantastic Four stumbled and got a sequel. Daredevil stumbled and shat Elektra. Hulk fell short of the mark and Marvel went back and gave us the very, very good Incredible Hulk film. I've seen much more deeply fucked up films than this find a second chapter. If this cranks out a couple hundred million then it will get another shot I'm sure.

  • June 18, 2011, 11:11 p.m. CST

    tailhook and mc-909

    by Winston Smith

    tailhook, well said, and I see where you're coming from on that one. That is very true, the mentality of the 30s/40s creations and the 60s creations was verrryyy different, but since the 60s creations more mirror our world now, they're all adapted to that mentality whether it fits or not. And mc, I love Se7en, love it to death, but Zodiac has more rewatchability to me. It's got more little details, it's a true epic, vast in scope. But they're both great, both the very tops of their genre. Here's hoping Fincher bats 3 for 3 with Dragon Tat (which looks great even if the marketing itself is odd and misrepresentative of the story).

  • June 19, 2011, 12:36 a.m. CST

    tailhook

    by cylon_conspiracy

    Thats just not The Green Lantern. He gets chosen because he's allready overcome it.

  • June 19, 2011, 12:38 a.m. CST

    ...

    by cylon_conspiracy

    You seem to be talking about the comic. Not the movie. I'm talking about the movie. I don't know anything about the GL character so I don't have preconceived notions clouding my brain. So, for me, this IS the Green Lantern. In the MOVIE, the ring chose him because it saw a quality in him he didn't see in himself yet.

  • June 19, 2011, 12:40 a.m. CST

    the point being you think the public has these notions

    by cylon_conspiracy

    of what the movie should be like but unlike you they probably won't have read the comics. So the difference between the two is not going to be a factor on if they see it and enjoy it. They won't know the difference.

  • June 19, 2011, 1:51 a.m. CST

    hbq2

    by tailhook

    But here is the thing. If they sought to do Green Lantern right and not try to Marvel-ize him, it could have worked and worked well. Thats what pissed me off more than anything. Its a DC Character and approach, treat it like one and don't piss all over the character. Its not like the archetype for the character of GL itself hasn't worked in the past ala Neo in The Matrix, John Spartan in Demolition Man, or any number of other films. Its not exactly some unique snowflake.

  • June 19, 2011, 1:58 a.m. CST

    @cylon

    by tailhook

    "In the MOVIE, the ring chose him because it saw a quality in him he didn't see in himself yet." = Hollywood Horseshit. And i don't know shit about the Green Lantern funnybook, i'm telling you flat out how the character has to work to make a good movie and a good superhero in general. What you just said there is exactly why Green Lantern : THE MOVIE is failsauce.

  • June 19, 2011, 4:32 a.m. CST

    A much better example of the GL Archetype...

    by tailhook

    Star Trek 2009's Jim Kirk. Both adrenaline junkies, haunted by the death of their father who was a hero. Both pulled out of relative obscurity by a higher power(Pike in Trek, The Ring in GL) to serve in a galactic force for good(The Federation, The Green Lantern Corps). Both must face The Unstoppable Force That Nobody Can Defeat(except them), before it destroys Earth and all mankind. Its a by-the-numbers fastball when it comes to big budget moviemaking. ITS HARD TO GET WRONG. But it *only* works if the guy in question is arrogant, sure of himself, and figures out That Which Others Don't. Uhura said it best in that film, "I sure hope you know what you're doing.". HE REALLY DIDN'T. Hal Jordan should be a raging ball of will, absolutely fearless in his pursuit of Parallax and confident that he will find The Way and bullshit his way until he finds it. That, in turn, runs directly against the entrenched power in the form of Sinestro... leading Sinestro to take the yellow. Furthermore, whats The Way you kill Parallax? By not attacking it directly. Thats what everybody else did and failed. Use the power of the ring to get just close enough to get its attention and make it extremely mad, get inventive, while not being in a physical position to where it can kill you and taunt it with tales of its imprisonment by Abin Sur. Then once you really piss it off(shouldn't be hard given the cockiness of said hero), get it to follow you and drag it into the sun's gravity well. But playing Looney Tunes and creating cheesy constructs just to have some bottom-of-the-barrel action is just being silly and undercuts the story. And the other thing Trek nailed was The Unstoppable Force. How unstoppable? Gee, lets take out the entire planet of Vulcan while we're at it. What gets across the unstoppable part is loss and having a couple Lanterns get their fear sucked out of them doesn't cut the mustard. Nothing can slow this guy and his ship from hell down.. until our intrepid Captain figures out a way.

  • June 19, 2011, 9:36 a.m. CST

    Re: Film11

    by MakNeil

    Sure, Green Lantern took in more initially than Thor, but which one will be getting a sequel? Let me give you a hint: It isn't Green Lantern. Thor is at $400 million dollars, I and am willing to bet that Green Lantern begins to lose steam around $200 million. You have to keep in mind that Green Lantern has no real box office competition at the moment; what happens when Transformers and Captain America come out next month (never mind Bad Teacher this month)? Green Lantern will experience serious box office fall off. One problem with Green Lantern is that it opens up with some uninspired CGI, without grounding it first. Viewers have no idea what's going on in the first five minutes or so. Though the worse sin that the movie commits is that it has no heart. You don't feel much for Hal Jordan, and he doesn't in any way earn the right to have the ring. Thor earned his powers back (the redemption arch in both films was essentially the same) while not only didn't Green Lantern, but so little was invested in the character that you really didn't care–beyond a very surface level–one way or another.

  • The other GL members couldn't defeat Paralax because they never faced him or was given a chance too. He had just been released and the lanterns that was killed was fearful of him and he feeds off fear. If the Guardins had given more insight on the entity then I'm sure some could've done what Hal did but the Guardians are secretive. I liked the film.

  • The universe is vast, so vast it would appear to be limitless. I wish DC would retcon that shit to just the Galaxy. One sector is supposed to consist of something like 12 Galaxies. Something I never heard in the comics but the movie mentioned it. That shit is impossible. Hell it's impossible for one lantern to police an entire Galaxy. Even with back up lanterns it's still not possible. Poor science and stupid writing. I had hoped the movie would make it more believable but nope they mentioned the same stupid mind boggling shit.

  • June 19, 2011, 11:17 a.m. CST

    @thefounder: thats the story

    by tailhook

    The whole point is that no one else could kill him. Why do you think Sinestro caved and decided to create a Yellow Ring? Because he didn't feel Parallax could be beaten any other way. It was only Hal Jordan that stepped up and said Parallax could be defeated and then went out and did it. Its clear what they were going for, its also clear this was attemped by studio HACKS that had no idea how to deliver such a story, even though its been done even as recent as Star Trek 2009. Their entire characterization of Hal cut directly across that story and just screwed it up one end and down the other. Done properly, this would have been a fine popcorn film. Bungling it as badly as they did... some people need to find another line of work. They gave the wrong people a good amount of money for the wrong script and shitty direction. This movie will be a clinic in how *NOT* to make a superhero film.

  • June 19, 2011, 11:20 a.m. CST

    The saddest part...

    by tailhook

    Is that WB and DC *REALLY* needed this guy to anchor their lineup in the same way that Batman currently does. So not only did they piss away 300 million, but they also pissed away sequels and the ability to get other superheros off the ground. At least when Fox brought in Ratner, it was *AFTER* the series had allready been entrenched and as such he had a limited effect on the overall series. Bringing in Campbell and every other retard including Geoff Johns(who should have known better) to screw over Green Lantern, screwed the whole slate.

  • June 19, 2011, 11:42 a.m. CST

    Re:tailhook

    by MakNeil

    I don't necessarily think that Green Lantern's performance screws up DC's plans (in so far as long as they don't include a sequel to GL anytime soon) in that he still can appear in a Justice League movie. What the failure of Green Lantern (the jury is still out, and while anything can happen, it's not looking too good) will do is weaken the DC 'bench,' while Marvel is seemingly moving from strength to strength in using second and even third tier characters in successful films. One could argue that that hasn't always been the case, The Punisher and Daredevil being an example; but The Punisher is now back in Marvel's hands, and Daredevil is being rebooted so they don't necessarily apply.

  • June 19, 2011, 1:19 p.m. CST

    Justice League?

    by tailhook

    Starring exactly whom? The whole point of The Green Lantern was to start to build bankable stars in the DC Film Franchise That Could Then come together for a Justice League movie. Its meant to be an All-Star come-together that is greater than the sum of its parts. Without GL being bankable and an all-star, that strategy is ten shades of fucked. The only bankable franchise DC/WB currently has is Nolan's Batman, and Justice League simply would not work in that enviornment. Nolan went to great pains to ground that series in our reality and GL and/or the characters that would comprise a JL movie are anything but. But really, do tell... exactly which characters from the DC Universe are at this moment bankable and can provide the backbone for a JL film? Answer: none.

  • June 19, 2011, 4:26 p.m. CST

    I'd say beyond all else

    by Winston Smith

    What Green Lantern needed was scope. You barely see any of the corps members. It should have started on Earth, completely on Earth, and then he gets sucked out into space... and then make it mostly a space adventure. At least 50/50. They said they wanted it to be their Star Wars... well DO THAT. Also, Parallax as a giant yellow insect looks way cooler than what they did. You needed to see more of the corps, more of the scale of things, and to really put us in Hal Jordan's shoes. As someone who's not a big fan of the comic and doesn't read them very much, I think the journey should have been about a fish out of water coming to realize that what makes him special on Earth can make him special in the galaxy and in fact can help him get over his weaknesses, namely arrogance, a la Thor. Pride as the ultimate sin is a very interesting character trait to humanize and give weakness to these "always gonna win" characters. Otherwise there's no real conflict and it's like, "let me guess, the asshole lives." Star Trek 2009 I thought did a good job with it, but I would have made it even more apparent here, as Hal Jordan is not quite Kirk. Also... yes, 100% agree. It should have been a galaxy thing, or they shouldn't have mentioned those sectors. Suspension of disbelief, of course, but still, it's not like that really is important to the story, and it automatically makes you think "wow this is a fantasy with not even an iota attaching it to reality." Also, Blake Lively was awful. Both the acting and the character. And I'm not just "hating," I thought she was great in The Town. Here that entire character was a boring waste, and the flight sequences made STEALTH look groundbreaking.

  • June 19, 2011, 4:32 p.m. CST

    also, for bo grosses

    by Winston Smith

    I think especially in the last decade, domestic grosses are almost worthless to look at. You have to look at overall worldwide gross. For example, Pirates 4 (awful film btw) has somehow made 700 MIL OVERSEAS alone and will easily make over a billion, probably even beating Dead Man's Chest. I have no idea how. Inception did insanely well overseas, even making more than The Dark Knight. X-Men: First Class has the ability to become the highest grossing X-Men movie ever because of the foreign gross. And yeah, tickets sold counts too, but still, regarding whether a movie will get more or not or overall general success, the US gross isn't really that important. Many movies do okay here but are smash successes overseas. 2012 is another example, it made well over what TDK made in overseas grosses, for example. It's becoming rare when you have an Avatar that easily and simply breaks records on both fronts.

  • June 19, 2011, 5:54 p.m. CST

    hollywood horseshit

    by cylon_conspiracy

    it might be horseshit but the hero's journey is a pretty well established way to make a movie. Green Lantern followed that pretty closely. I think it would be pretty boring if the hero started out being a hero. Audiences have to identify with a character somehow. In the case of a superhero, especially an origin story, you relate to the character as they deal with their powers and deal with the psychological changes that must happen to be able to live their new lives.

  • June 19, 2011, 6:32 p.m. CST

    It wasn't as bad as I feared it was going to be.

    by fanboy71

    Pros: Sinestro looked awesome in the yellow suit! Made me think they should have used him as the villian. The Oa scenes were pretty good, including Hal VS Sinestro. But there was not enough of them. Cons: Everything else. I have been worried about this film since they announced Reynolds as Hal, and my fears were realized. That was not the Hal Jordan of the comics on screen. Carol was horribly miscast, and I felt they should have cast older on both Hal and Carol, but maybe that's just because I'm getting old. The thing that REALLY took me out of the film was when Waller said that Abin Sur's body was the first alien the Earth had ever encountered. That would have been the perfect place to put in a Superman reference by saying "except the Kryptonians". DC seems to be copying the Marvel playbook with the after credit sequence, opening titles, etc, and I thought WB had the rights to Supes, but I may be wrong. That was a missed opportunity in my book.

  • June 19, 2011, 6:55 p.m. CST

    Re: tailhook

    by MakNeil

    Care to clarify why Green Lantern couldn't be in a Justice League film? I don't anticipate Green Lantern doing well, but that doesn't mean that he cannot appear in the Justice League. Now, if Zach Snyder's Superman fails, then the idea of the Justice League is in trouble. It's safe to assume that Batman will be successful; coupled with Superman, that's probably enough. Green Lantern, and anyone else, will be second-string.

  • June 19, 2011, 7 p.m. CST

    Re: halfbredqueen2

    by MakNeil

    You're right, foreign grosses are important, but coupled with domestic grosses is where they really matter. Films like Avatar and the Pirates films are, I assume, the exceptions, not the rule.

  • June 19, 2011, 7:47 p.m. CST

    @cylon: you tell me...

    by tailhook

    Did audiences have trouble 'identifying' with James Kirk in the 2009 Trek? Its the exact same type of character, archetype, and frankly story... except done by people who at least know how to deliver it. Notice you didn't have Kirk turn into a snivelling ball of mush for a good portion of the running time as he did inane soul searching and examined his emotions and 'overcame his fears'. Why? Because thats not the character, and thats not The Green Lantern. It was completely out of place for the movie they were trying to make and it never recovered. That SINESTRO had to forcefeed Hal Jordan the way to kill Parallax midway through the movie is easily the most egreious crime of all. Complete castration of the character.

  • June 19, 2011, 8:07 p.m. CST

    @makneil: Sure i'll clarify

    by tailhook

    I in no way said that he couldn't appear in a Justice League film, i'm telling you flatout that a Justice League film does not work without bankable heroes with which to earn a significant budget. And without a budget to do it right, whats the point? And if all you got is a presumed successful Superman film (cause Nolan and Bale's Batman has 0 chance of being in JL), you might as well just make another Superman film and have GL make a cameo. A 'League' does not one character make.

  • June 19, 2011, 8:38 p.m. CST

    @tailhook tell us WHO Green Lantern is then

    by sunwukong86

    You seem to know who Hal Jordan is and yet youre not telling us who he is. Hal Jordan has always been cocky, arrogant, daring. You know, essentially Han Solo. Han never had any of the answers but was always ready to save the day. Hal Jordan = Han Solo So please tell me how Ryan Reynolds played him any different.

  • June 19, 2011, 9:58 p.m. CST

    @sunwukong: perfect analogy.. THANKS.

    by tailhook

    Yes.. I would absolutely agree.. he's Han Solo. Now, exactly when in the Star Wars movies did you see Han Solo moping around trying to overcome his fear? Thats right, you didn't. The particular part they were going for, the Han Solo/Indiana Jones/James Kirk/ANY NUMBER OF OTHER REFERENCES is what they needed for Green Lantern. Thats who he is. Instead we got some snotbag that felt a need to expend a good portion of the running time boring us to death trying to overcome something that the character should have allready mastered years previously. He's a test pilot ffs and as shown the absolute best, not some snivelling first-year learning to fly and control his emotions. All the Ring should be is metaphorically The Best Plane Ever to figure out how to push to its limits and break.

  • June 19, 2011, 10:26 p.m. CST

    @tailhook he choked up "once"

    by sunwukong86

    so by your logic because he had one crash he's a first year pilot? He became unsure of himself after he crashed the plane. If you thought you were perfect at something and then suddenly failed you would have an identity crisis too im sure.

  • June 19, 2011, 10:58 p.m. CST

    You are kidding, right?

    by tailhook

    He spent a good portion of the running time being all emo. And no, the last thing failure should do is cause an identity crisis. Han Solo doesn't fail. He simply hasn't figured out yet how to win.

  • June 20, 2011, 12:58 a.m. CST

    If a film makes $12 in the US

    by Winston Smith

    But a billion worldwide, there will still be a sequel (just not one released in the US). The combined gross matters, but if it blows it out of the water in one of those fields, it's good to go. And tailhook, I appreciate that you've reasoned out your point. However, I personally disagree. I didn't feel Hal spent much time being emo at all, and in fact part of my problem with the character is there didn't seem to be a REAL struggle or conflict that came naturally.

  • June 20, 2011, 4:16 a.m. CST

    hbq: talking money

    by tailhook

    The only thing that matters is the combined gross. Studios don't give two shits if the majority of the money came from domestic or overseas. How much money did your film make and what did it cost to put you out? For a successful film, you want to see a 200%(which is where marketing gets factored in) return on budget investment. If you cost $150 mil, you want to see a $450 mil accumulated gross. If you cost $200 mil, $600 mil is in order. $250/$750. $300/$900. Anything that goes over these thresholds is just gravy. Whether you actually get a sequel or not can be dependent on a number of factors, the most important of which once you made money is polling. How did people react to the film, are they enthusiastic for a sequel or would they rather poke their eyes out? Understanding audience reaction can be key to dodging a bullet if the enthusiasm for a franchise is exhausted. Moderatly successful is 100-200% return. At this point, check the outgoing feedback and see if its a genuine problem with the film/franchise or you just had too big of a budget. Performed Poorly is 50-100% return. Pretty much put a fork in it without good buzz for outgoing feedback that could point to a successful DVD run and building of the audience. A bomb is anything less than 50% and there are questions that need answers and heads that need rolling.

  • June 20, 2011, 7:57 a.m. CST

    You are SO wrong Capone!

    by Steve

    I saw it first show Friday and LOVED it. Ryan Reynolds owned this movie and had the personna of Hal Jordan DOWN! My only complaint... I want MORE MORE MORE!

  • June 20, 2011, 10:41 a.m. CST

    Great movie NO, good movie YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by j2talk

    I'll be picking up a copy when it hits DVD-in what @6weeks????? can't for the sequel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • June 20, 2011, 11:18 a.m. CST

    So a superhero should automatically know how to be a superhero?

    by sunwukong86

    That would be a pretty boring, and short movie.

Top Talkbacks