Green Lantern (2011)
- Thread starter Admiral_Young
- Start date
- Status
Mr. Beaks over at AICN, finally:
The whole thing is beginning to sound amazingly like Thor. Mediocre as that film is, it's done reasonably well...it also was better reviewed across the board, and I guess we'll see how much difference that makes this weekend.
The whole thing is beginning to sound amazingly like Thor. Mediocre as that film is, it's done reasonably well...it also was better reviewed across the board, and I guess we'll see how much difference that makes this weekend.
Hmmm, this is annoying. I'm a huge Green Lantern fan, and I was really looking forward to this, but these reviews are definitely making me nervous. I'm probably still gonna see it, but my anticipation has definitely gone down quite a bit.
But hey, even if this does suck as much as the critics say, at least we've still got First Flight.
But hey, even if this does suck as much as the critics say, at least we've still got First Flight.
I see nothing wrong with Green Lantern being a "kids" movie - that is, something that isn't dark, brooding, and bloody-minded. It's fantasy, for fuck's sake. Shouldn't fantasy be fun? This review is the first I've read of people complaining that the FF movies weren't "dark" enough. I think that's absurd. FF is never dark.
For a long time many comics' fans have longed for their favoured medium to get some respect. In the '80s (and to some extent the '70s) we saw the beginnings of gritty and edgy subject matter as well as the deconstruction of superheroes and making them more accessible to the mainstream.
But I don't think the genre has to be truly dark to be relevant and accessible.
It's funny really. I'm thinking about Green Lantern and I haven't even seen Thor yet.
But I don't think the genre has to be truly dark to be relevant and accessible.
It's funny really. I'm thinking about Green Lantern and I haven't even seen Thor yet.
I saw this movie tonight at an advanced screening.
There were some good parts, but overall the movie is not very good. I think the biggest problem is that there's too much stuff crammed into this movie. It would've benefited from having just one villain rather than two. Some of the plot points are not fully explained, leaving you scratching your head wondering what happened between point A and point B (probably more of a direction/editing issue rather than a script issue).
On a positive note, it's better than X-Men 3 and Wolverine.
There were some good parts, but overall the movie is not very good. I think the biggest problem is that there's too much stuff crammed into this movie. It would've benefited from having just one villain rather than two. Some of the plot points are not fully explained, leaving you scratching your head wondering what happened between point A and point B (probably more of a direction/editing issue rather than a script issue).
On a positive note, it's better than X-Men 3 and Wolverine.
This thread can be locked now that the grading/review one is up. Thanks all!
This movie is currently sitting at 22 per cent on the rottentomatoes tomatometer, and the reviews that I've read have confirmed the negative impression left by the trailers: that Green Lantern is a turd polished up with a lot of CGI.
Much like Thor, I never did read this comic, and have nothing invested in the character. But it was the good reviews that finally persuaded me to give the God of Thunder a chance. Looks like I'll be passing over Green Lantern.
In fact--all the movies opening tomorrow look pretty bad.
Much like Thor, I never did read this comic, and have nothing invested in the character. But it was the good reviews that finally persuaded me to give the God of Thunder a chance. Looks like I'll be passing over Green Lantern.
In fact--all the movies opening tomorrow look pretty bad.
This, pretty much. Not being a comics guy myself, G.L. is the sort of thing that it would take a lot of positive reviews and word-of-mouth to get me to see. As cool as the CGI looks, that's not enough to make me shell out $11 and two hours of my time.
If enough non-comic-nerd types feel that way, it could be bad news for any sequels.
Yeah, I'm going to pass on superhero films for another year... which may mean the first superhero movie I see in theatres since The Dark Knight might just be The Dark Knight Rises, funnily enough.
^^^^^
You should look hard at Captain America before skipping out. That's really looking good.
You should look hard at Captain America before skipping out. That's really looking good.
But isn't it like The First Avenger: Captain America, and part of the semi-serialized Marvel Comics film franchise?
Captain America is, weirdly enough, the only Marvel superhero I have any childhood affection for, but I'm less interested in him being presented as a third wheel of a superhero tag team that includes the God of Thunder.
Yes, but it's going to work as a stand alone film as well. What few bits are in there to foreshadow to other Marvel movies will be small. I wouldn't discount it just cause it's a piece in a larger puzzle, especially if he's one of a few characters you have/had any childhood affection for.
There will be some tie-ins, but this one is set 70 years or so before Iron Man etc, so it's not like dropping into the middle of an ongoing saga. I suspect any outright references to the wider Marvel Movieverse will only come after the closing credits, so just be sure to leave during them!
- Status
Similar threads
