Green Lantern

As someone who's followed Green Lantern a little bit of a decent amount (not big but fairly decent, for DC character), I liked some things about the movie; but I definitely say that it could have been made better, both for casual fans, non-GL fans or hard core ones.

Good points... 1. It stuck fairly consistently with the mythos of the origin and Planet OA; 2. Ryan Reynolds did decently as Hal Jordan (though he fits more with the Kyle Rayner/Guy Gardner type than Jordan) -- but I wish he was more serious; though non-GL fans couldn't care less about this; 3. Blake Lively was eye candy; super hot, but not much else; 4. Green Lanterns Tomar Re, Kilowog and Abin Sur were damn good but didn't have enough screen time to be significant; 5. Mark Strong's Sinestro was excellent! 6. Hector Hammond was well portrayed by Peter Saarsgard (though it lacked a proper finish) 7. Good supporting cast from Tim Robbins (Sen. Hammond) to Angela Bassett (Amanda Waller); 8. Green Lantern's costume was wicked; 9. Visual/CGI effects were pretty good

Bad Points... > It tried to fit too much into one movie, moving back and forth from Earth and outer space/OA, thus there was no proper flow... (like when there was a build up of momentum, things go slow or boring; or from serious to funny without proper pacing); too many stories were crammed into one movie > Humor was misplaced at times (good peg is Thor which had it in the flow rather than contrived/forced) > Parallax looked comical; scary at times but only a couple of times > Like Iron Man 2, I wish the fight scenes were so much more; they spent too much on the set-up that the fights were short and could have been so much more and elaborate. > Some scenes and even some characters were not necessary (Hal's best friend, even some scenes with Blake's Carol Ferris were not needed); they should have added more action instead

Summary, visual effects, actors, GL base story good. But the way the writers and director put things together were a mixture of various plots and subplots crazy glued into one movie for pure entertainment. Kids will enjoy it, but adults likely will not. This is a summer of superheroes, with 3 down and one more to go (well, technically 5 with Transformers if you're thinking comic book stories), so it's quite impossible not to compare them to each other.

The director is known to direct good flicks like Goldeneye and Casino Royale (two good movies), but I wish he did more; studied more, had split up more stories to be more single- minded and not work on a cluttered material.

I saw Green Lantern with my son because it looked safe enough and I used to collect the comic books when I was a kid. I felt like I was the only guy over 20 at the theater, which I guess isn't surprising anymore. Did think there would be more adults, however, because the Green Lantern was something we read in my generation. Not sure if it's even around anymore. Being a fan of the comic book I had to go see it, and I was intrigued with the movie. After I got home I jumped on the computer and read the reviews. I was very disappointed with the professional reviews that cast stones at it, while at the same time, regular folk like myself thought it was a pretty good stab at the DC comic book version. I guess I look for something different when I go to the movies. I go to unwind and enjoy myself for a couple of hours, and Green Lantern worked for me.

Now let me begin by saying this film is not an amazing film. It is definitely not an awful film, like most critics are saying. I think critics might have raised their expectations due to Thor and X-Men: First Class. They should not compare the Green Lantern with those films. It is ranked now 24% on Rotten Tomatoes, which is way too low. It would probably be in the high 60s, if it was released before Thor and X-Men: First Class.

The acting in the film is good and not terrible at all. Ryan Reynolds is great as Hal Jordan and extremely likable. He definitely fits the role as Hal Jordan really well. Blake Lively is great and extremely sexy, she's not just a pretty face as most are suggesting. Peter Sarsgaard is a great actor and he plays the villainous Hector Hemmond really well and interesting. Overall everyone tries their best and at the end of the day do a really great job, certainly no Oscar worthy performances, though.

The special effects are pretty superb and extremely worthwhile to say the least. Although it sometimes feel a little CGIish, but it doesn't get too big of a distraction. I have to say I was a little disappointed how Parallax looked like, it felt a little fake at times, but it is not horrible in any sense of the way. Also the film did not take itself seriously which is kind of refreshing. Which could be the reason why critics disliked it so much. They want another sad, personal and serious story. Unlike Thor and X-Men, The Green Lantern is more kids friendly.

The main problem of the film was that they were trying to cram stuff in from the comics and the personal lives of the other characters. It seems that there could be so many sequels for the other characters. It did kind of focus on too many characters. Also the editing gets to be a little distracting at times, they certainly needed to have done a better job, but the editing is mediocre at best.

Overall the Green Lantern was a fun summer flick. Although it is nowhere near the realm of The Dark Knight, it didn't need to be. The 3D was actually really good and the special effects were memorable. No doubt, the critics were extremely tough on the Green Lantern and it is unfair. At the end of the day, don't listen to the critics. Make up your mind and see this film. At the end of the day, it should be only your opinion that matters to you. You might agree with the critics or you might not. However don't skip this movie because of the low Rotten Tomatoes score.

I like superhero movies as much as the next person, having grown up on the likes of Superman and Batman. Green Lantern is not the worst superhero movie, but far from the best either. For me it was just a mildly average and somewhat bland movie, that didn't live up to the potential it had.

Getting the good things out of the way, I did like the cinematography, settings and costumes very much, and while they weren't among the best or most detailed I've seen the effects were better than average apart from Parralex. The score/soundtrack by James Newton Howard compliments the film very nicely, Martin Campbell's direction is assured and there are classy turns from Mark Strong, Tim Robbins and Peter Sarsgaard.

On the other hand, Ryan Reynolds didn't quite work for me. Now don't get me wrong, I initially found him an ideal choice in the title role. The problem is not that Reynolds is bad, actually he is quite spirited in the role, it's just that the character himself like a lot of the characters in the movie is irritatingly bland. Blake Lively is cute and lovely, but her performance goes little beyond that. The story starts off well with an intriguing idea, being an origin story and all, but is bogged down by too many characters, tedious pacing and too thin a story for such a running time consequently some scenes seemed as though they were going on longer than they should've done. However though, these problems are pretty trivial compared to the script, which to put it kindly was an awkward, cliché-driven mess.

Overall, neither good or bad, but very average and bland. 5/10 Bethany Cox

I saw this in the theater a thought it was really good (my introduction to the character). I really wanted to see Sinestro go bad in a sequel. Oh well,,,

Was it as good as it could've been,, well,, no, but what movie can you not say that about?!? That list is not long,,,

I thought Reynolds was great, as well as the rest of the cast. While I certainly wouldn't want to have derailed the Deadpool movies,, I really wish this had been more successful. I don't know why it wasn't,,, I mean the first Fantastic Four movie had a sequel,, and while I liked that one this was way better. Anyways,,,

Go watch it!!