Click here for the review of Green Lantern

SPOILERS must be tagged with the "SPOILER" tag!

Well I had a good reaction to the trailer, so i'll definitely be seeing this ASAP.
Interstingly enough, Ebert liked this film more then Thor.

Isn't Sinestro evil?

Sinestro starts out as a champion of the Lantern Corps. Only later do philosophical differences reign in a divide which ultimately turns him against them. If written properly, I imagine he will remain mostly good throughout this first entry.

Please say you are lying. I admit to not having seen this yet, but how many superhero sequels can we as a nation take?
I expect:
Thor X
Iron Man X
Green Latern X
Captain America X
Eventually Avengers X

will there be any space for non superhero movies during the summer?
only slightly kidding.

I loved the Green Lantern as a kid. I devoured every one of his comic books I could find. But I haven't read a comic book since I was twelve, and that was a long time ago. At this point, I expect something more than a generic superhero origin story, but I'm not surprised that this is exactly what we get, especially with four screenwriters involved.

Perhaps part of the problem is that Hollywood has worn out the whole concept of the origin story. When you're forced to devote much of the film to the origin, it doesn't leave much time for a decent plot or character development. If it were me, I'd use a flashback technique to describe the origin, and really try to develop a good story and plotline.

Saw this last night, and...well, other things aside, the movie felt kind of silly throughout. But then I wondered if I'm not dismissing something that's part of the fabric of the character's universe. Y'know, akin to making fun of Star Trek because of all those CRAZY ALIENS, dagnabbit. So maybe it gets a few points for trying to avoid cliches - like, not all of the aliens are pretty humans, the "watchers" don't have Saving Earth on top of their list of priorities, etc.

Also, I liked the guy who played Sinestro waaaaaayyyy better than Ryan Reynolds. I think I would've liked a Sinestro movie a lot more.

Although I wasn't a big fan of Tim Burton's BATMAN, I think it handled the "origin" aspect perfectly.

Reynolds has pretty much become the king of 'bland pretty boy' actors, if you ask me. Casper Van Dien, Chris Klein, Chris Evans, Paul Walker, Channing Tatum, Bradley Cooper... they all have nothing on him (though I suppose Cooper is actually more of a 'douchebag pretty boy' actor, a la Tom Cruise in his younger days ).

I like all of those actors, i'd argue that that the term "bland pretty boy" applies FAR more to actors like Taylor Lautner, Robert Pattison, Orlando Bloom and Alexander Skarsgard, they're so bad they make all the actors you listed look like Robert De Niro by comparison.

I agree, that was a great approach. And the original Superman also had an excellent origin story, maybe the best part of that movie. It's time for a different strategy.

I couldn't agree more. I understand that superheroes are a big draw at the box office, and when told well, these types of movies can be as fun as anything out there. But every time a new one is introduced, we have to go through the same tired rhythm of an "origin story." It makes all these movies seem the same even though the heroes themselves are certainly diverse.

But nothing is going to change. Most movie-goers are still locked into a familiar comfort zone. And money talks. One of these movies would have to bomb horribly first.

Just got back from seeing Green Lantern. I'm completely convinced that most of the critics that slammed this film, LIED about actually seeing the movie. The supposed "complaints" about uneven script, bad dialogue, contrived story, and lack of chemistry between Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively are completely unfounded. Folks, this movie is the best film I've seen this summer. An absolutely terrific movie. After seeing it in 2-D, we almost went back into the theater to check it out in 3-D! I don't think I've felt that way about a film since I was a kid. The opening sequence explains the Lantern universe very well and then moves directly into the events which lead to Hal Jordon's reception of the ring. The scenes of the vast universe with the Lantern Corps are superb and certainly touched the child in me. It felt as if someone opened this huge comic book and brought it too life in a way I had never seen. The effects were impressive.

Ryan Reynolds is completely convincing as Hal Jordan and brings a refreshingly natural performance to material that most lead actors would overact and come across unrealistic. You completely BELIEVE Reynolds is Hal Jordan. And his relationship with Blake Lively is well constructed but, unlike most hero films, does not follow type and have her dashing after her hero. Blake's character is a reluctant participant that evolves with events in a natural manner that serves both character development and story responsibilities. Her chemistry with Reynolds is appealing and balances events in the story in a meaningful way that are not superficial.

As for Mark Strong, all I can say is he IS SINESTRO! I loved him. He nailed it and then some. He stole every scene he was in because he screen presence was exactly as you would envision the character. And once again, the director uses this character AGAINST type and doesn't permit him to fall into a predictable pattern of story gestures intended to lead to a probable outcome. Sinestro is arrogant, but not one dimensional. He is critical of Hal, but without the boring 'mentor' template we see in other hero franchises. His criticisms are well founded and fit within the logic of the Lantern Corps discipline. A fantastic casting choice that is well written in this film.

The character of Hector Hammond is more pivotal to the story than most critics apparently understood. His story responsibilities are enormous in bringing the "fight" to Hal Jordan. I'll leave that ambiguous note alone until more people have seen the movie. Suffice to say, without Hector Hammond, this story could not have thread together the other plot points in the final chapter.

There is so much I could write about the story and other characters, but I will leave it there. This film is incredible and has been done a complete disservice by critics who lambasted the movie for qualities that I never found. Whether your a fan of Green Lantern or simply looking for a classic summer film, this movie is one you should NOT miss on the big screen. Go see it. You'll be glad you ignored the critics. Oh... AND DON'T LEAVE UNTIL YOU SEE THE BONUS SCENE DURING THE CREDITS!

Am i wrong in thinking a lot of the "lack of appeal" will be because GL just looks goofy and stupid? Id have to be paid AND dragged to this film.

He didn't say it was "better" then Thor, he jsut said he liked it more, not the same thing.

I haven't read a GL comic book in 20 years so we can put that stereotype to rest. Here's an original idea ... Let the film come to you instead of going in with a formulated idea of what it "should" be. It didn't skip anywhere. The whole story covers the theme of fear and how each character deals with it. That theme is covered from Hal Jordan's insecurities with himself to the Guardians reluctance to accept their doubts against one of their own in Parallax. Where exactly did you struggle with this script?

Nah, they're about the same.

Ebert probably bought into the nonsense belief that liking Thor makes you a racist

I've seen First Flight. And while I found it enjoyable and mostly true to the Lantern origin, I also hoped the film version would be grounded in a little more character motivation - something I thought the comic interpretation lacked. I thought the movie achieved that. If Jordan just flew out into space to battle monsters like your standard, mindless Star Wars film, I would have hated this. I felt the Lantern universe was simply too big to lose Jordan's origin in the process. I felt people needed to know the hero first. I didn't find the acting stiff at all. Had Reynolds played it too serious, this concept would have collapsed into camp. It's a far fetched concept at best, so I'm not looking for meaning where it should have motivation. I felt like the director understood that and kept focus on Jordan's development. And this complaint about dialogue is a bit much for me. It's a comic book about an alien giving a ring to a earthling. Exactly what kind of reflection are you looking for in that concept? Critics like James here, consistently forgive the likes of Lucas for some of the most embarrassing dialogue and color-by-number acting ever put to film. And if Lucas is not the modern day equivalent to Ed Wood, no one is. Yet his incompetence in scripting is allowed to hide behind his genius in marketing the Star Wars label, so people excuse it as "artistic expression". So no I didn't find Green Lantern to be even remotely as bad as most films in the sci-fi genre. It fit the material adequately, just like the dialogue fit the First Flight cartoon.

I'm equally puzzled by your criticism on the relationship front. And please point out a "real" situation in X-Men First Class. I haven't met a mutant yet, so you'll need to walk me down that road. BTW, First Class was an excellent film, so we have plenty of common ground with that movie. Excellent script and excellent acting. But unlike the mutant concept, Lantern is not about interpersonal relations as it applies to appearance and the social peeking order society applies. The Lantern origin is about living with and understanding the face of fear. Had the director strictly made this an outer space adventure, he would have had a hard time selling Jordan's resolve without settling earthbound issues in the process. The space component was more an analogy to Hal's life. But Hal needed to find resolve in his world before he applied it to the next. I think the writers made the right decision here to try and find a balance between the two. That's why Hammond is such an important tool to this story. He pulls the two worlds together and allows Hal to face his fear on earth while bringing the Lantern fight to Hal's doorstep to prove his worth in that universe as well. I thought it was a good solution to a not-so-easy process of flushing out the character for anyone to watch.

I honestly think if you went back and let the film come to you as intended, you would feel better about the effort made here. It's a film that had to sell itself to generations of fans while introducing him to others who knew nothing about the concept. I think the final product had to address those considerations, while staging the makings for a tremendous sequel that would likely give you the entry in outer space your looking for.

I'm just shocked that James didn't mention The Green Hornet from earlier this year in this review. He could've said something like: "The Green Lantern joins The Green Hornet from earlier in the year in proving that while the current social climate is pushing towards 'going green', that may not necessarily be a bandwagon that Hollywood wants to jump on anytime soon." I'm sure he would've found a more eloquent way to put it but I was kind of expecting something like that. Oh the bitter sting of disappointment!