Green Lantern: Grading, Review, Discuss, Tracking, Sequel?

[Captain Craig]

WOM=Word Of Mouth

**jink**

[Agent Richard07]

I enjoyed it as your typical special effects-laden summer superhero movie. I'll give it a B.

Ryan Reynolds
Reynolds was entertaining in the part, but he wasn't Hal Jordan, he was Ryan Reynolds, complete with his mannerisms and sense of humor.

Blake Lively
I don't know a lot about Carol Ferris, but I knew that Blake Lively didn't embody the character. It wasn't quite Jessica Alba all over again, but that's what I'm reminded of. Not a complaint really, just an observation. Blake was still easy on the eyes and put some sophistication into her character.

Sinestro
Mark Strong was serviceable as Sinestro. He seemed to play the part quite well, but for some reason I felt that he lacked presence or charisma.

The Story
I liked the setup and introduction to the characters as well as the origin story and Ryan's training. Yeah, they did manage to get a lot in there without too much trouble, I thought. The training was especially good with its mix of action, fx use, and dialog. And as for Ryan and Blake working well toghether, I agree. They had chemistry. What didn't impress me in the movie were the handling of Hector Hammond and Parallax, the two villains. Both seemed to have potential, but that was never realized and they fizzled out. Also, a lot of superhero movies tend to have uninspired showdowns and this movie was no different.

The Costume
I absolutely loved the CGI costume. I thought it was a good idea when I first heard about it and the end result really worked. I don't think I've seen a "living" fluid-like costume like this before, so the novelty was also a part of my liking it. I wasn't distracted by the energy filaments either. And it did look like latex in a number of shots. They've come a long way since Automan.

The FX
Loved the special effects. Kilowog looked a bit fake, but the other characters and the environment of Oa looked good. None of it, or at least very little of it came off as in-your-face CGI to the point of distraction. They avoided sweeping camera shots you usually get with CGI cityscapes and that helped. The ring constructs looked great too. Loved seeing all the stuff that was created with the rings, especially the life-sized hotwheels racetrack and the water. The only things that were really distracting were Sinestro's ears. You could tell they were rubber.

Other Stuff

- Saw it in 2D.

- The woman in Ryan's bed looked like Scarlett Johansson.

- I thought it was a nice touch to have "Sapphire" as Carol's call sign. They even had the Violet Lantern symbol on her helmet.

- People in the theatre were laughing every time the disfigured Hammond showed up on screen and I don't think he was meant to be funny like that.

- I'm looking at the IMDb and it shows Nick Jones as John Stewart. Didn't notice him in the film. Were his scenes cut or was he just a blip?

- I was waiting to see Sinestro put on the yellow ring, and disappointment started to set in when the movie was coming to an end and it looked like he wasn't going to. Still, I figured that a post-credits scene would show him do this, and sure enough, they came through, mid-credits though. Guess this is where they'll go if a sequel is made. And that's a big "if" it seems. Looks like he'll be corrupted by the ring as opposed to wielding it because he was corrupt. Don't know if I like that angle since it would look like he wouldn't be responsible for his actions, but it could be interesting to see play out.

[Dream]

Here is an awesome GL pic that I found online.

[Agent Richard07]

Captain Craig wrote:

---

Another thing I left out due to being tired I guess last night was:

When Hal, as Green Lantern, first approaches Carol in her office he begins speaking in this deeper, gravely voice and the audience burst out laughing...not in a good way. There is no way that was meant to be funny, him going all Bale as Batman vocally.

I thought that was supposed to be funny. I saw it as them making fun of all those times the hero confronts his girl while in disguise and she doesn't recognize him.

[Obiwanshinobi]

mmmmmm I'll pass. I'll wait until the DVD release.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

FRIDAY 7 AM: Warner Bros is very pleased with DC Entertainment's Green Lantern 3D opening of $3.35M midnight showings from 1,810 venues, which bettered Marvel/Paramount's Thor midnights ($3.2M from 1,800 locations) and were on a par with Marvel/Fox's X-Men: First Class prequel midnights ($3.3M from 1,783 theaters). "It's an excellent result setting up for a strong Father's Day weekend at the box office," a Warner Bros exec emailed me this morning. Today, Green Lantern starring Ryan Reynolds opens in a wide but by no means record-setting release into 3,816 theaters, of which 2,711 will be 3D. There'll be a total of over 7,100 prints working. Hollywood is estimating North American box office for Green Lantern's weekend opening in the mid-$50M range with the upside as much as $65M-$70M. Sunday's Father's Day should be a strong day for the comic book movie judging from historic numbers with strong results from past superhero films.

Link

[Dream]

GL did about 3.35 million midnight at the boxoffice, which is about the same that Thor did. Off to an OK start.

http://www.deadline.com/2011/06/gree...35m-midnights/

[Admiral Buzzkill]

My minimal research before posting in the other Green Lantern topic led me to think that First Class opened slightly stronger than GL. According to Nikki this is not the case.

[Dream]

Dennis wrote:

---

My minimal research before posting in the other Green Lantern topic led me to think that First Class opened slightly stronger than GL. According to Nikki this is not the case.

You can't really compare GL to FC. GL has 3D, which costs more, and FC didn't.

The best comparison to GL is Thor. Both have 3D and will probably make around the same amount during its first weekend.

[Obiwanshinobi]

Yikes! 21% on Rotten Tomatoes, so far. That's like Ghost Rider numbers. Ouch.

[Captain Craig]

Agent Richard07 wrote:

---

I thought that was supposed to be funny. I saw it as them making fun of all those times the hero confronts his girl while in disguise and she doesn't recognize him.

I agree the close of the moment was suppose to be funny, the whole "I've seen you in your underwear..." not the voice change moment, she doesn't even comment on that.

[Dream]

ObiWanShinobi wrote:

---

Yikes! 21% on Rotten Tomatoes, so far. That's like Ghost Rider numbers. Ouch.

Transformers 2 has a 20% score at RT, but it still made 400 million!

[Obiwanshinobi]

Yeah what a travesty. I'm hoping Tranny 3 will be fantastic.

[davejames]

Dream wrote:

---

Transformers 2 has a 20% score at RT, but it still made 400 million!

True, but (much like the Pirates sequels) that was all based on the enormous good will created by the first movie.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The first two Transformers movies were self-evidently crap, why should a third be worth a shit?

In fact, Revenge Of The Fallen outperformed the first movie both domestically and worldwide. That militates against crediting good WOM from the first movie all that much, as you'd expect pretty massive falloff if the movie had really disappointed TF fans nearly as much as the squeaky wheels maintain.

And the notion that good will from one Pirates movie has carried the franchise through three more is a nonstarter. You explain an initial sales bump that way, not continued good business.