Climbing Higher Pictures

It’s no secret that DC comics has been running behind Marvel in the movies game for quite some time now. The heyday of the Richard Donner Superman and Tim Burton Batman have come and gone, replaced with a new age of darker, grittier, and altogether more cinematic comic book adaptations. Films like The Dark Knight have redefined what a superhero movie is capable of delivering, and while there are almost as many failures as there are successes, it seems like costumed heroes may still have another summer or two of life left in them. Can Green Lantern throw the gauntlet for the rest of the Justice League?

Green Lantern Review

By Ryan Hamelin

Movie Grade: C+

I really wanted to love Green Lantern. It could’ve been a great throwback popcorn blockbuster, the kind of movie that rekindles the audience’s faith in studio filmmaking. The marketing campaign reminded me of old school Hollywood, where advancements in visual effects had companies competing for the chance to create as mind-blowing an experience as possible, films that were more akin to rides than anything resembling literature. The goal had been to be the one movie everyone was still talking about when Fall rolled around, and most of that had to do with how big the budgets were and which star of the moment chose to sign on. If only Green Lantern had the depth, characters, or emotional resonance to afford it a place among the heights of the superhero genre.

I could begin by saying that the film deserves points for aiming to be different, but that just isn’t true. Tim Story’s Fantastic Four films had the same tongue-in-cheek, overly-colorful aesthetic and failed miserably because the camp overwhelmed any weight and reality the characters could have had. The tone isn’t as offensive here, with Ryan Reynolds committing so wholeheartedly to every scene that you can’t help but believe in him. It isn’t silly or wacky, but well-meaning in its lightheartedness to a fault, halting the unintentional laughter somewhere halfway up your throat. Younger audiences are going to love the film, as it gives them everything they hoped they’d to see as they bashed their action figures together in their bedroom, while adults looking for a bit more of a solid foundation will miss the heft of a well grounded narrative. Blake Lively is surprisingly solid as a leading lady, despite a strong desire to avoid showing her in any of the trailers or TV spots, and though she’s obviously only around to appeal to teenage boys, she doesn’t fall into the trap of winking at the audience. Peter Sarsgaard has a hell of a lot of fun as Hector Hammond, the scientist who inadvertently becomes infected with the villain’s power. He’s genuinely scene-stealing in his quirkiness, and keeps us interested while the more generic hero’s journey is taking place with Hal.

The real problem, is script issues. There’s a whole lot of exposition here, and it’s handled about as well as extended voice-overs (even ones delivered by an actor as brilliant as Geoffrey Rush) can ever manage. There’s no sense of audience or character self-discovery, as everything is told to you before it’s shown. Even Reynolds appears way too comfortable in his new wardrobe and abilities, showing them off to his friend like a new Xbox game he just picked up. The fact that Hal’s ring requires his lantern to charge is integrated into the dialogue during one such scene, a possible first time that a comic-book fallibility has entered into a Hollywood adaptation (Sam Raimi famously disregarded Peter Parker’s “web-shooters” in his Spiderman adaptation, giving him a seemingly infinite supply of stick stuff imbedded in his hands) but it’s NEVER USED. Seriously. He gets through the entire final battle on one charge, but flying his girlfriend all over the city somehow drained his battery. It’s probably the one oversight that really annoyed me, and considering the short runtime (An hour and forty five minutes is generous) there may have been scenes in there that dealt with this weakness in some satisfying way. Unfortunately, they didn’t make the cut.

Early on, everybody was worried that Green Lantern wasn’t going to pack the visual punch it needed to succeed. A first trailer debuted with almost nothing in the way of final effects, and the real marketing campaign only got in gear recently. The film is visually engrossing to be sure, and the post-processed 3D is probably the best I’ve seen to date (since most of the special effects are built in 3D anyway, there wasn’t much work left to do really) but it definitely feels like a rush job. I can practically see the extended versions of the set piece moments with all the shots they had to cut to deliver the movie on schedule. It’s a sad commentary on the turnaround expected of modern effects, and there’s just not enough time to really draw the audience in. In years past, filmmakers played a lot more with viewers expectations, only giving them a few “money” shots at the end to satisfy the build up. Now every shot is a “money” shot, but the scenes are just much shorter and much less exciting. It’s not a trend that starts with Green Lantern, but it’s certainly not one it ends either.

I guess you could say that I’m disappointed with the final product, but that’s only in light of how great it could have been. Early tracking has the film opening huge, and I expect everyone involved will be listening closely to the criticism for the inevitable round 2. It’s a hard thing to truly nail the line between camp and cheese, and I think the performances are really all that saves Green Lantern from being a total waste of the studio’s money. What would have been a good grade for effort, some beautiful visual effects, and an overall commitment to their chosen aesthetic gets marred by poor delivery, shallow dialogue, and uneven pacing that leaves the viewer generally unsatisfied. If you were interested in the flick, this review is probably not going to change your mind, but if you’re on the fence, you might want to save your superhero ticket dollars for Captain America, or at the very least, a second at Thor.