Yeah, this is my problem with overexaggerated reviews. It wouldn't be as bad if Bob gave himself some time to cool down and maybe did something less sensational, and who knows, maybe he would still feel the same, but something as blowhard-y as this review is just bound to scare of skittish on-the-fence viewers who might otherwise enjoy it, like you said.LordOfTheDance said:
It's fine to not like a movie, but you owe it to your fans to try to be as level headed as possible. Not necessarily objective, as who CAN be objective, but at least level headed.
That said, why is it such a problem that this Green Lantern is not entirely faithful to the original Hal Jordan, or the storylines that have come before? A lot of Bob's review (and some fan reviews) seem upset that this movie took Hal in a direction that the comic books didn't take him, alongside Parralax and possibly other minor characters. Well, isn't that part of the fun of COMICS ARE WEEEEIRD? That they can spring up new continuities, allowing for reinterpretations of the characters and preventing creative stagnation? The characters is decades old, for pete's sake. Saying that the reinterpretation of the character sucks is fine, but saying that the new continuity sucks simply because it is different, just seems petty. I mean look at The Dark Knight. The Joker is always being reinvented and reimagined, and he succeeded in this interpretation as in his many, many alternate selves as seen in other mediums and by other writers.
Things I think the movie did well:
Fun action sequences with inventive green energy constructs and a lot of kinetic intensity. The CGI was good, the costumes looked awesome, and I just flat out enjoyed the effects. I have no idea what has the critics up in a ruff.
Strong character development on Hal Jordan's part, as he grows from a defensive thrillseeker to a man who wants to be the best he can, for his sake, and to protect others.
An interesting villain in Hector, a self-conscious and nervous man who gains the ability to hear the thoughts and feelings of everyone around him, mocking him and disbelieving in him, turning him slowly mad.
Parralax was also interesting. He was a legitimately threatening, force-of-nature type beast who utilizes the one tool that can utterly destroy will: fear, and despair. He strikes unexpectedly, he strikes relentlessly, and if Hal fails, everyone on earth will die. This is one of the most threatening villains I have seen in a superhero movie thus far. Yes, even with his utterly ridiculous giant head. Which they shouldn't have had. (but even the head is slightly less suspension-of-disbeliefy when you hear his origin). The weakest point of many superhero movies (I loved Ironman, but his villain in the first movie was so cliche and dull) is their villains, and these two villains were superb. Even if they had ridiculous heads.
A powerful undercurrent in the narrative about what it means to be afraid, to be willful, and to be courageous. To choose to be the best of yourself, and not hold on to past failures or old fears. I felt this undercurrent many, many times in the movie, and thought it well handled and compelling.
And lastly, I consider myself slightly hardwired into reality. Suspension of disbelief is often the breaking point for me in movies I watch. And yet, even with fishmen and wasp space police and giant headed immortal beings and giant headed embodiments of fear and giant headed Howard-The-Duck-esque mad scientists (seriously, Hector just OOZED that one scientist from the Howard the Duck movie in appearance) and other such ridiculousness, I just fully got immersed in the world and accepted it on its own logic. This movie was shallow at times and illogical at others, but it was fun, good hearted, and had a strong if underexplored central theme. I loved it, and would recommend it to anyone who likes to see fun action or hear a good story.
Nowhere near perfect or even great, but very good. I just hope more people see it
I liked it too! If that wasn't obvious lolCrispee said:
