Green Lantern

Green Lantern (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews

Message

Empire Admin -> Green Lantern (15/6/2011 11:39:24 AM)
Post your comments on this article

albumental -> What the...? (15/6/2011 11:39:24 AM)
I'm sorry but that review was utterly incomprehensible. "Like the movies’ Peter Parker or Tony Stark — and unlike the comics’ straighter-arrow Hal Jordan — Reynolds does panicky comedy schtick to delay hard-to-sell oath-reciting heroism. " What?

Whistler -> RE: What the...? (15/6/2011 11:45:00 AM)
Will probably see this on Friday, hoping it'll be kinda fun. But why do the posters have 'Hal Jordan' instead of 'Ryan Reynolds'? It's really weird.

piccolo135 -> RE: What the...? (15/6/2011 11:51:33 AM)
I'm almost in agreement with the first commenter here, granted I'm not the sharpest tool in the box when in it comes to the finer points in the English language, but I don't really understand the review either...does he like the film or not?? The two star indicates the preference, but the rest does nothing to shed light on the film.

Rgirvan44 -> RE: What the...? (15/6/2011 11:51:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: albumental I'm sorry but that review was utterly incomprehensible. "Like the movies’ Peter Parker or Tony Stark — and unlike the comics’ straighter-arrow Hal Jordan — Reynolds does panicky comedy schtick to delay hard-to-sell oath-reciting heroism. " What? In the comics Jordan is a straight shooter, but in the movie Reynolds plays the character more in line with Parker and Stark - funny, goofy, with a dash of heroism at the end.

Rob -> RE: What the...? (15/6/2011 11:56:23 AM)
Yeah I'd agree about the review. I don't think it's particularly well written. I don't mind if the film is crap (I'm still excited) or if the reviewer hated it but I don't think his issues with the film are sufficiently explained.

Rgirvan44 -> RE: What the...? (15/6/2011 11:58:10 AM)
Attacking the quailty of writing in a review is the new thing, huh?

Rob -> RE: What the...? (15/6/2011 12:01:43 PM)
Not at all. And I certainly couldn't do better. Neither am I one of those people that thinks unless a film is giving the expected number of stars then the reviewer is incompetent but I just don't think it's Kim Newman's most articulate piece. Surely the point of us people able to comment on Empire's reviews is to say what we thought about the writing and the content etc.

Rgirvan44 -> RE: What the...? (15/6/2011 12:06:10 PM)
That wasn't directed at you Rob, just a general comment. Seems to be happening in every new release - not just limited to this one.

elab49 -> RE: What the...? (15/6/2011 12:13:06 PM)
I'm not sure I understand the first post - the quote is in perfect English?

red_king1 -> Stop it now!!! (15/6/2011 12:20:54 PM)
Stop letting Kim Newman write reviews!!!! FFS he can barely manage Video Dungeon!!! Never mind major film reviews!!

shtonner -> RE: What the...? (15/6/2011 12:23:20 PM)
It's not even a review - he's basically talked us through the entire film (thanks for that, no need to see it now) and then casts a really short, really poorly written opinion. Dog shit.

BatFan -> RE: Green Lantern (15/6/2011 12:29:42 PM)
In every review i've read so far they have been negative but the criticism doesn't gel with the rating, most people are giving it a 2 star rating but when it comes to criticising the film none of the reviews read like a two star review, they have disappointment and things wrong with it but nothing that would warrant a two star rating. Maybe the films so bad it can't be put into words but I just find it really weird.

J_BUltimatum -> Don't trust the criticts!! (15/6/2011 12:29:53 PM)
Just finished watching the 2D version this morning. Found it really enjoyable and the set pieces were really good (probably a lot better in 3D). The acting was strong and the casting was perfect. Really don't understand how empire reviews films now a days... as X-Men: First Class (which is porbably the worst comic book adaptation I have seen since Daredevil) has garnered a better star rating than this. Please get it sorted as your reviews are all that are letting you down!

neilhuitson -> downgraded a star? (15/6/2011 12:32:21 PM)
When I logged on this morning Green Lantern was briefly listed on the reviews section with THREE stars but the link to the full review wasnt working and then was taken down entirely before reappearing with two stars. Explanation?

elab49 -> RE: Don't trust the criticts!! (15/6/2011 12:35:45 PM)
Have some people just posted their normal Kim Newman attack without bothering to read the review? I don't read much in the way of spoilers, I don't see much in the way of talking through the detail of the narrative arc - it's a pretty standard review, but one that also gives strong nods to the context of where Green Lantern stands in the superhero world and where this particular version stands in the Green Lantern world. I dislike spoilers and I understand when people get annoyed that so many reviews have them. This doesn't. Which makes me pretty sure that the usual suspects are taking their usual pops. I'd say the review reads as a 2-3 star at most.

Aticus -> RE: downgraded a star? (15/6/2011 12:37:38 PM)
What's with all the reviewing of the review? People have too much time on their hands. Film students presumably. I liked the review and I like Kim (based on his reviews and things, I have never met him (though I would like to one day)). Not sure I will watch the movie, will probably wait for the DVD.

tallaght24 -> Agree with other posts (15/6/2011 12:37:40 PM)
Kim Newman can't review films to save his life! This is someone who, yes may have an encyclopediac knowledge of retro horror shite, but knows fuck all about films today. I just bet the editor saw that it was Green Lantern and thought "ooh who do we have that might appease to the geeks...oh Kim Newman of course!" Tit knows nothing!

Rgirvan44 -> RE: Agree with other posts (15/6/2011 12:39:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tallaght24 Kim Newman can't review films to save his life! This is someone who, yes may have an encyclopediac knowledge of retro horror shite, but knows fuck all about films today. I just bet the editor saw that it was Green Lantern and thought "ooh who do we have that might appease to the geeks...oh Kim Newman of course!" Tit knows nothing! So stupid.

elab49 -> RE: Agree with other posts (15/6/2011 12:41:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tallaght24 Kim Newman can't review films to save his life! This is someone who, yes may have an encyclopediac knowledge of retro horror shite, but knows fuck all about films today. I just bet the editor saw that it was Green Lantern and thought "ooh who do we have that might appease to the geeks...oh Kim Newman of course!" Tit knows nothing! This thread is to discuss the film Green Lantern and review it. If you want to insult Empire reviewers then take it to the existing complaint about ratings thread in Empire Online please.

Rob -> RE: Agree with other posts (15/6/2011 12:48:47 PM)
Actually I've read the review about four times now and whilst I still don't think Kim goes into enough detail of what works and what doesn't the review does read like a standard 2/3 star review. Perhaps I'm tetchy because I desperately want this to be good! [:D]

elab49 -> RE: Agree with other posts (15/6/2011 12:54:13 PM)
Never been a fan of Green Lantern so wasn't expecting much anyway - the character always had the same edge of boring that Superman did, for me. And everyone else - please stop calling other users idiots. Address posts and comments, but avoid getting personal.

Rgirvan44 -> RE: Agree with other posts (15/6/2011 12:57:38 PM)
Bunch of people defined by green, patrolling a universe and imposing order. Hey! Wait a darn minute...

BelfastBoy -> RE: Agree with other posts (15/6/2011 12:57:50 PM)
What's the problem with the review? Empire can't win, no matter who writes them. Newman's review reads fine to me, and it clearly relates to a mediocre, muddled film - hence the 2* rating given. The thing that depressed me the most is that - like most other 'origin' superhero stories - Green Lantern seems to spend too much time setting up its world and characters for intended sequels or even spinoffs, and therefore fails to impress with what's actually provided in the initial film. (I still hold Wolverine as the best example of this that I've seen.)

theoriginalcynic -> RE: Don't trust the criticts!! (15/6/2011 12:58:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: J_BUltimatum Just finished watching the 2D version this morning. Found it really enjoyable and the set pieces were really good (probably a lot better in 3D). The acting was strong and the casting was perfect. Really don't understand how empire reviews films now a days... as X-Men: First Class (which is porbably the worst comic book adaptation I have seen since Daredevil) has garnered a better star rating than this. Please get it sorted as your reviews are all that are letting you down! I can't take your points seriously when you write something like that.

MonsterCat -> RE: Agree with other posts (15/6/2011 12:59:04 PM)
Right from the first trailer, this thing reeked of silliness. Think I'll wait for it to hit DVD.

tallaght24 -> RE: Agree with other posts (15/6/2011 12:59:17 PM)
Oh that hurts!

Ralancian -> RE: Green Lantern (15/6/2011 1:04:05 PM)
I agree about the review I'm not particularly bothered of the film is actually bad (I do want to watch it though) but I can't make out from the review why it's bad to say compared to Thor as they have the same elements of plot according to the review. However Thor gained 4 stars this gained 2 so there must be something about them that makes one a fair bit better than the other. It's why I actually hate ratings I read a review to garner what's good and bad about the film then formulate my own opinion if I want to watch it or not. This review tells me nothing about it I couldn't of gathered from press coverage about the film, the trailers and a fairly basic knowledge of the Green Lantern mythos. Sadly none of that tells me whether the actual film is any good or not or if I'd enjoy it!

Porter -> What a totally predictable shame.... (15/6/2011 1:08:56 PM)
...I really wanted this to be good - honest I did. I liked the Green Lantern character a lot when I was a kid, but it really didn't sell itself to a movie-adapt. It was all kinda stupid - even for a superhero flick. Casting Reynolds was a self-inflicted wound from the start (I genuinely like him, but he always seems to be taking the piss out of his own films - he wants us to know he knows it's shit too). Once I saw the trailers, it was a cert to be turkey of the year. Razzies a-plenty!

elab49 -> RE: Agree with other posts (15/6/2011 1:11:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44 Bunch of people defined by green, patrolling a universe and imposing order. Hey! Wait a darn minute... [:-] And no comments about rings [8\|] quote: I can't make out from the review why it's bad to say compared to Thor as they have the same elements of plot according to the review. However Thor gained 4 stars this gained 2 so there must be something about them that makes one a fair bit better than the other. I think there is a general problem with trying to compare it to other films - are they comparable eg just because they're superheros? It specifically mentions the type of characterisation they went for with Iron Man and Spiderman, so I'm guessing Thor wouldn't be a good example. And Newman didn't review Thor - so maybe he doesn't agree with the 4 stars anyway, so that wouldn't work. He does also compare it to Campbell's other work, suggesting an element of a similar mood, although he lost me in praising Zorro.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.03125