Cinema Verdict Review: Green Lantern

Green Lantern
OPENING: 06/17/2011
STUDIO: Warner Bros.
RUN TIME: 105 min
ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
In brightest day. In blackest night.

Opening Statement
While DC Comics has a large stable of iconic superheroes that ranks as a worthy rival to the lineup Marvel has to offer, considerably more of Marvel’s characters have been given the swanky big-screen treatment. While Marvel has provided us with films about The Fantastic Four, The X-Men, The Incredible Hulk, Spider-Man, Iron Man, Daredevil, Captain America, Thor and others, DC has primarily focused on the one-two punch of Batman and Superman (with occasional flops about characters from those two universes, such as Supergirl, Catwoman and Steel). At long last, we’re breaking away from the old routine with Green Lantern. Unfortunately, this new franchise is off to an awfully rough start.

Facts of the Case
Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds, The Proposal) is a hotshot pilot whose remarkable talent is only matched by his penchant for irresponsible behavior. He’s had a hot-and-cold relationship with employer/fellow pilot Carol Ferris (Blake Lively, The Town) for years, and lately things have been on the cold side of that spectrum. A recent disaster at work, an increasingly strained relationship with his siblings and haunting memories of his father’s tragic death have only amplified Hal’s personal problems in recent days.

Hal receives a welcome distraction when he’s suddenly transported to the site of a spaceship crash. Inside the ship is a dying alien, who presents Hal with a mysterious green ring. Before Hal has time to process this, he’s whisked away to the planet Oa and trained as a member of the Green Lantern Corps, a universal police force devoted to keeping life forms of all sorts safe from a wide variety of threats. Soon, the hotshot pilot finds himself faced with the task of battling foes both foreign (and I mean really, really, really foreign) and domestic.

The Evidence
Martin Campbell’s Green Lantern suffers from a variety of problems, but perhaps most prominent among them is a severe case of origin-itis. Here’s the thing: we’ve seen a seemingly endless supply of comic book origin stories at this point, and they’ve generally grown less intriguing as time has passed. I’m fairly certain that audiences are willing to accept on faith the idea that a character has been given a set of superpowers. Is there really a need for would-be franchises to provide us with feature-length explanations of how these miraculous things happen rather than simply dealing with such business in a prologue and focusing on delivering a compelling story? Green Lantern feels like a warm-up for an actual movie, which is something which can be said about entirely too many cinematic origin stories of late (the recent X-Men: First Class comes to mind, though that film delivers more entertainment than this one).

The premise of the Green Lantern Corps is one which contains a tremendous amount of potential for thrilling space opera, yet there is nothing operatic about Green Lantern. The film is a curiously mundane experience; one which spends entirely too much time wallowing in Hal Jordan’s uninteresting personal problems on Earth and precious little time exploring the vast, detailed, well-constructed wonders of Oa. Indeed, Hal’s one extended trip to Oa seems to fly by at an alarming speed, as if the filmmakers are counting the special effects cost of every second of screen time (despite the film’s vast budget of $300 million). The Oa material is interesting, but Campbell gives us little time to soak it in; the film rushes through some nifty visuals and exposition and then shuttles Hal back to Earth for the rest of the film.

I don’t have a problem with the fact that Green Lantern spends a good bit of time setting up the details of how Hal was recruited as a member of the Green Lantern Corps, but I do have a problem with the fact that the film then proceeds to force Hal to have some sort of half-baked personal crisis in which he debates whether or not he wants the job. This material feels strikingly similar to the sort of thing Peter Parker went through in Spider-Man 2, but the key difference is that Spider-Man actually had a legitimate reason for his “maybe I should just quit” period. That Hal Jordan would quit over the smallest of problems seems a blatant contradiction to the notion that he’s an adventure-loving rogue. After a while one begins to feel that the whole enterprise ought to be titled Green Lantern: Whiny Space Cadet.

The film is lacking in wonder, yes, but it’s also lacking in energy. The lackluster romance between Hal and Carol tends to sap the film of its momentum; a problem exacerbated by the fact that Reynolds and Lively really don’t have much chemistry together. The writers also struggle in their attempts to inject some humor into the proceedings, giving Hal a series of Spider-Man-style quips which probably read better than they actually sound (Jerk: “Watch your back.” Hal: “That’s impossible.”). There’s very little that doesn’t feel like filler; even the massive battle with the evil space demon Parallax (voiced by Clancy Brown, Carnivale) feels like a half-hearted attempt at giving Hal something important to do while the groundwork is being laid for a sequel.

Still, Green Lantern isn’t quite a Catwoman or Jonah Hex-level disaster. In fact, the film is perfectly watchable, as Campbell and co. have done solid work on a technical level and there are a handful of smaller elements which add much-needed spice to the mix. Most valuable is Peter Sarsgaard’s (Orphan) offbeat turn as Hector Hammond; a nerdy scientist fueled by a compelling mix of buried rage, insecurity and nervous intelligence. Tim Robbins (The Shawshank Redemption) also seems to be enjoying himself as Hector’s fatuous U.S. Senator daddy. As I mentioned, the visit to Oa is entirely too brief, but the world itself is compelling and the characters there even moreso: the charming Tomar Re (voiced quite well by Geoffrey Rush, The King’s Speech), the gruff Kilowag (a thunderous Michael Clarke Duncan, The Green Mile) and the crisp, polished Sinestro (a nearly unrecognizable Mark Strong, Kick-Ass). There’s also a grin-inducing moment which pokes fun at the absurdity of supposedly identity-disguising superhero masks.

Closing Statement
There are promising ideas in Green Lantern, but this is a film which promises far more than it actually delivers. The idea of a sequel is kind of appealing, mostly because it feels like the writers were saving their best cards for later installments. However, I doubt most viewers are going to feel much enthusiasm for the franchise after sitting through this underwhelming origin story. Sadly, Green Lantern is one of this summer’s most disposable blockbusters.

The Verdict
5/10

4 comments ↓

#1 Manilaman on 06.23.11 at 7:22 am

I watched this last night (in 2D). Clark, I found your review depressingly similar to several other reviews that I have read recently. Its almost as if you were simply jumping on that bandwagon rather than expressing your own opinions.

Critics seem to have picked on Green Lantern as their kicking-boy of the summer season. Whether this is the start of some kind of back-lash against the plethora of comic book, graphic novel and video game adaptations being churned out by Hollywood, I don’t know. But I do think that the sort of criticism being meted out to Martin Campbell’s film is unfair and not justified.

Green Lantern is not a masterpiece. How many films are? But neither is it the disaster of the year that many are claiming. As with most films these days, the reality is somewhere in the middle. Does it hit the ball out of the park, like the first Spiderman or Iron Man? No. Could it have been better in some respects? Yes. But lets try to maintain some kind of perspective here.

Ok, so its an origin story. Name me a superhero movie of the past ten years and that is not a sequel, which is not predominantly an origin story. The fact is that outside of its fan base, a 2nd tier character like Green Lantern does not have the wide international audience recognition of Superman, Batman or Spiderman. And if you are spending $100 million plus on a movie, a studio is not likely going to risk the wider audience not understanding the background to a character they are not familiar with.

So it becomes a matter of how well the origin story is integrated into the larger narrative. On that score I really did not have a big problem with the way that the film makers handled it. I too would have liked the film to have spent rather more time on Oa and less on Earth. And the film does try to wrap everything up rather too quickly and neatly in its conclusion. But then again, Thor and X-Men: First Class are guilty of the exact same error. And the post-credits coda will come as a surprise to no-one.

What did I like? I think Ryan Reynolds nails the part of Hal Jordan in the same way that Chris Hemsworth did Thor. I also enjoyed Peter Sarsgaard’s performance. Martin Campbell handles the action well and the picture looks great, with rich and artful colour cinematography from Dion Beebe. I was disappointed in James Newton
Howard’s score though, which is at best anonymous and not what one would normally expect from this composer. It fails to soar when it needs to.

Overall, I enjoyed this movie. It is a respectable adaptation of the comic book without being particularly remarkable or memorable in any respect. But is it a turd? No. Want to see a real turd? Try the latest Pirates of the Caribbean instalment. But then on second thoughts, I suggest that you don’t waste your time. Life is too short.

#2 Clark Douglas on 06.23.11 at 9:28 am

Manilaman – First off, thanks for the feedback. I always appreciate hearing from readers, regardless of whether the feedback is positive or negative.

My review of Green Lantern represents my honest personal opinion of the film. What I said about the film was not influenced by the reviews of others or any desire to jump on a critical bandwagon. I’ve been a DC Comics fans for many years and was genuinely looking forward to this film despite some of the negative early buzz.

I can’t speak for other critics, but I certainly don’t think Green Lantern is one of the worst comic book films I’ve seen (in addition to the aforementioned Catwoman and Jonah Hex, I’d also place X-Men 3, Elektra and both Fantastic Four movies below this flick – I’m sure there are others I’m forgetting) – however, it does fall far below the bar which has been set for this genre at this point, and it even falls below this summer’s two comic book flicks which preceded it. Though I feel Thor and X-Men: First Class have their share of problems, at least both of those films felt enthusiastic about their subject matter in a way that Green Lantern does not. It feels very much like a film merely going through the motions of a comic book origin story in the hopes of setting up a major franchise; not like a story the filmmakers had any genuine passion for (which is also one the problems the new Pirates film you’ve mentioned suffers from).

I don’t think giving the film 5 out of 10 (or two stars out of four, if you prefer that rating scale) really represents a complete trashing of the movie. My review is meant to convey my considerable disappointment, but I don’t feel that I beat up on the film to an excessive degree. The film had a lot of potential and wasted much of it. It didn’t work for me.

You’re right that most superhero franchises begin with origin stories. I’m saying that I feel audiences are ready to move beyond that, as we’re basically getting variations on the same thing over and over again. That studios fear to take risks isn’t a factor I feel I need to consider as a critic. Either they’ve made a good film or they haven’t; the financial risks involved only matter to those spending money on the film. More often than not, the filmmakers fail to tie the origin elements to a story that’s genuinely compelling in its own right. Part of the reason “Thor” and “Iron Man” succeeded is that both found inventive ways to go about introducing their characters rather than merely going through the worn-out origin story routine.

You didn’t have a problem with the way the origin story was woven into the larger narrative. If it worked for you, I’m glad. Some others at the screening I attended seemed to have a great time, too. But the larger narrative felt terribly half-baked to me. Parallax was poorly developed, the complicated past between Hal and Hector was poorly developed, and the final showdowns in both cases were underwhelming. Anyway, I’m glad to agree to disagree with you, but do know that the opinions expressed in the review are indeed my own.

#3 Manilaman on 06.23.11 at 11:47 am

Thanks for the quick response Clark. Much appreciated.

Don’t get me wrong as I do take your points and I agree with much of what you say. Superhero movies are becoming much too formulaic (Hollywood please take note) and I do agree with you that Green Lantern is overall something of a missed opportunity.

Maybe its partly about expections. I went into Thor with few expectations as I knew that translating the character from the page into film was not going to be exactly easy, since the whole proposition of Thor (Asgardians running around in absurd costumes and spouting cod Shakespearean dialogue) is fairly ridiculous. However, I was pleasantly surprised. Branagh and his team somehow took the whole ubsurdity of the concept and ran with it – and it worked! Thor was a fun movie. Still totally ridiculous, but fun.

X-Men:First Class on the other hand, I had high expectations of. And I was a little disappointed. Its a film of two parts. The first part, concentrating on Eric hunting nazis, the relationship between Xavier and Raven, and Moira McTaggert investigating the Hellfire Club, is great. But the second part of the movie disappoints. Maybe its because the new team of young mutants is not a terribly interesting bunch of characters and the film has no time to tell as much about them. And the whole conclusion is terribly rushed.

On the other hand, I went into Green Lantern having read a whole load of generally very negative reviews. And I sat there for the first 30-40 minutes, having smiled and even chuckled in a few places thinking, “what’s the problem here? This is not so bad”.

#4 GRATIDE on 07.04.11 at 10:26 am

I REALLY ENJOYED THE FILM , IT WAS A QUICK TWO HRS TO ME AND HAD STAR POWER . DID IT CHANGE MY LIFE ,,,,NO . DID IT GIVE ME QUALITY TIME WITH MY 12 YO …..YES . WILL I GO TO THE NEXT ONE … OH YES !
I DON’T UNDERSTAND YOUR NEGATIVE COMMENTS , BUT YOU ARE ENTITLED ………………..
WHAT YOU THINK OF THOR ……………?

Leave a Comment