Bing Search

Green Lantern

:

Critics' Reviews

Our critic says...
Metascore
®
39
Generally Unfavorable Reviews
out of 100
Dull 'Green Lantern' Fails to Shine
Glenn Kenny, Special to MSN Movies

Word on the street about this new superhero picture, yet another comic book adaptation, has been pretty lousy. And by "the street," I mean Twitter. And by "pretty lousy," I mean people are calling it "Battlefield Earth" bad." Ouch. As it happens, "Green Lantern" is not "Battlefield Earth" bad. It simply doesn't take itself quite so seriously as to reach those lows. What "Green Lantern" ought to have gone for is some level of "Flash Gordon" bad. This movie, directed by Martin Campbell with no doubt lots of input from executives of both the film studio and DC Comics (which I think are part of the same conglomerate anyway, but you get the idea), at certain points revels sufficiently in the more ridiculous aspects of both its backstory and its galaxy-spanning production design that one suspects its going for the sense of self-conscious kitsch that made the Dino De Laurentiis-produced 1980 film such a goof. Too bad Queen wasn't around to score this one, I thought more than once.

Search: See photos of Ryan Reynolds | More on the DC Universe

Watch FilmFan: "Green Lantern" vs. "Mr. Popper's Penguins"

That might have made some difference, but, man, it would have taken quite a lot more self-conscious kitschiness to knock the pompous stuffing out of the philosophical quasi-conceits that the film's script tries to sell. The Green Lantern's emerald power beam, you see, is a product of willpower, whose most ungood counterpart is fear, whose color is yellow. And said emerald beam is wielded across the universe by thousands of chosen protectors whose naked skin is covered in a green, logo-sporting protective coating, and this league of Green Lanterns is ... oh, God, do I have to rehash the whole unbelievably prolix myth, which, according to a more well-versed-in-comic-books friend who also saw the film, is taken from some iteration of the source material?

Suffice it to say that at a certain point in the picture, Green Power "chooses" callow but gifted fighter jet pilot Hal Jordan, of ultra-buff body and ready smirk, played by Ryan Reynolds, of ultra-buff body and ready smirk. I was reminded somehow of "What's Up, Tiger Lily"'s Phil Moskowitz, Lovable Rogue. That's how really stock the character is. And of course he's got dad issues, too. Hal's female counterpart is Carol, who is not only nearly his match as a fighter pilot, but is also an ace businesswoman (that's how we can tell she's more mature than Hal). She is played by Blake Lively, and some in the audience might be heard to observe, "What is she, like, 15?" And frankly she is also not too terribly convincing these days playing anything other than somebody who doesn't know how to frame a cellphone picture. What. Ever. As I think they said on that TV show she used to be on.

So anyway, Hal is the recipient of Green Power, and on the Yellow Power spot we have Hector, a weedy balding professor and "loser" (according to the thoughts of his senator father, played by a Tim Robbins who's made up to look kinda like Jeff Morrow in "This Island Earth," in one of the film's neater "knowing" touches) who's infected with the fear material when conducting a semi-autopsy on a dead alien Lantern league guy. I must say Peter Sarsgaard really walks away with the role, first approaching it in a kind of inverse Wally Cox-as-Underdog way, very determinedly milquetoasty, and then when he gets infected and starts looking like a cross between Rainer Werner Fassbinder and Rondo Hatton, laying on the despicably snide with a trowel. Sarsgaard suggests a smarter, more malevolent film than this one, while the cartoonish 3-D graphics and strainingly "awesome" special effects (particularly that of the yellow fear villain creature called Parallax) suggest a more pulpily enjoyable one.

But as many suggestions as are made over the course of the picture, they never add up to a picture that's willing to forsake its transparently insincere and unnecessary patina of earnestness in order to deliver a just plain good time. Add to that its overstuffing of the plot components -- I haven't even gotten into the relationships Hal has with his motley intergalactic Lantern compatriots, which suggest the mutant crowd of Guillermo del Toro's "Hellboy" pictures without replicating anything like their wit and charm (and doesn't that almost go without saying by this point?) -- and you've got a pretty joyless comic book movie experience. Which is still not, you know, "Battleship Earth" bad. Just saying. Sometimes these distinctions count.

Glenn Kenny is chief film critic for MSN Movies. He was the chief film critic for Premiere magazine from 1998 to 2007. He contributes to various publications and websites, and blogs at http://somecamerunning.typepad.com. He lives in Brooklyn.

Word on the street about this new superhero picture, yet another comic book adaptation, has been pretty lousy. And by "the street," I mean Twitter. And by "pretty lousy," I mean people are calling it "Battlefield Earth" bad." Ouch. As it happens, "Green Lantern" is not "Battlefield Earth" bad. It simply doesn't take itself quite so seriously as to reach those lows. What "Green Lantern" ought to have gone for is some level of "Flash Gordon" bad. This movie, directed by Martin Campbell with no doubt lots of input from executives of both the film studio and DC Comics (which I think are part of the same conglomerate anyway, but you get the idea), at certain points revels sufficiently in the more ridiculous aspects of both its backstory and its galaxy-spanning production design that one suspects its going for the sense of self-conscious kitsch that made the Dino De Laurentiis-produced 1980 film such a goof. Too bad Queen wasn't around to score this one, I thought more than once.

Search: See photos of Ryan Reynolds | More on the DC Universe

Watch FilmFan: "Green Lantern" vs. "Mr. Popper's Penguins"

That might have made some difference, but, man, it would have taken quite a lot more self-conscious kitschiness to knock the pompous stuffing out of the philosophical quasi-conceits that the film's script tries to sell. The Green Lantern's emerald power beam, you see, is a product of willpower, whose most ungood counterpart is fear, whose color is yellow. And said emerald beam is wielded across the universe by thousands of chosen protectors whose naked skin is covered in a green, logo-sporting protective coating, and this league of Green Lanterns is ... oh, God, do I have to rehash the whole unbelievably prolix myth, which, according to a more well-versed-in-comic-books friend who also saw the film, is taken from some iteration of the source material?

Suffice it to say that at a certain point in the picture, Green Power "chooses" callow but gifted fighter jet pilot Hal Jordan, of ultra-buff body and ready smirk, played by Ryan Reynolds, of ultra-buff body and ready smirk. I was reminded somehow of "What's Up, Tiger Lily"'s Phil Moskowitz, Lovable Rogue. That's how really stock the character is. And of course he's got dad issues, too. Hal's female counterpart is Carol, who is not only nearly his match as a fighter pilot, but is also an ace businesswoman (that's how we can tell she's more mature than Hal). She is played by Blake Lively, and some in the audience might be heard to observe, "What is she, like, 15?" And frankly she is also not too terribly convincing these days playing anything other than somebody who doesn't know how to frame a cellphone picture. What. Ever. As I think they said on that TV show she used to be on.

So anyway, Hal is the recipient of Green Power, and on the Yellow Power spot we have Hector, a weedy balding professor and "loser" (according to the thoughts of his senator father, played by a Tim Robbins who's made up to look kinda like Jeff Morrow in "This Island Earth," in one of the film's neater "knowing" touches) who's infected with the fear material when conducting a semi-autopsy on a dead alien Lantern league guy. I must say Peter Sarsgaard really walks away with the role, first approaching it in a kind of inverse Wally Cox-as-Underdog way, very determinedly milquetoasty, and then when he gets infected and starts looking like a cross between Rainer Werner Fassbinder and Rondo Hatton, laying on the despicably snide with a trowel. Sarsgaard suggests a smarter, more malevolent film than this one, while the cartoonish 3-D graphics and strainingly "awesome" special effects (particularly that of the yellow fear villain creature called Parallax) suggest a more pulpily enjoyable one.

But as many suggestions as are made over the course of the picture, they never add up to a picture that's willing to forsake its transparently insincere and unnecessary patina of earnestness in order to deliver a just plain good time. Add to that its overstuffing of the plot components -- I haven't even gotten into the relationships Hal has with his motley intergalactic Lantern compatriots, which suggest the mutant crowd of Guillermo del Toro's "Hellboy" pictures without replicating anything like their wit and charm (and doesn't that almost go without saying by this point?) -- and you've got a pretty joyless comic book movie experience. Which is still not, you know, "Battleship Earth" bad. Just saying. Sometimes these distinctions count.

Glenn Kenny is chief film critic for MSN Movies. He was the chief film critic for Premiere magazine from 1998 to 2007. He contributes to various publications and websites, and blogs at http://somecamerunning.typepad.com. He lives in Brooklyn.

63
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES: Roger Ebert

Green Lantern does not intend to be plausible. It intends to be a sound-and-light show, assaulting the audience with sensational special effects. If that's what you want, that's what you get.

Read Full Review »
60
Variety: Justin Chang

An attempt to infuse an earnest piece of comicbook lore with an irreverent, tongue-in-cheek sensibility yields decidedly mixed results in Green Lantern.

Read Full Review »
60
LOS ANGELES TIMES: Kenneth Turan

More science-fiction space opera than superhero epic, it works in fits and starts as its disparate parts go in and out of effectiveness, but the professionalism of the production make it watchable in a comic book kind of way.

Read Full Review »
58
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: Owen Gleiberman

Reynolds makes Hal a perfectly functional comic-book hero, but there's a big difference between functional and super.

Read Full Review »
50
SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE: Amy Biancolli

There are pros and cons to this Green Lantern, a half-campy, half-compelling adaptation of the superheroic DC comic books.

Read Full Review »
50
Washington Post: 

It's neither amusing nor exciting enough to ensure a long-running franchise.

Read Full Review »
40
Village Voice: 

The film never rewards the viewer for even trying to keep track of what is going on. So you give up, and instead try to grab on to the small pleasures, which momentarily distract from the fact that the narrative is nonsensical, the characters so boilerplate that their every action seem preordained from the earliest frames, even as the action on-screen is often incoherent.

Read Full Review »
40
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS: Joe Neumaier

The effects are so omnipresent it's like Reynolds' perfect hair is floating in CGI limbo. Yet when they need punch, as in a "Superman"-ish display-of-powers scene involving a helicopter, there's no flair.

Read Full Review »
38
Philadelphia Inquirer: Carrie Rickey

What has Campbell wrought? An intermittently amusing, interminable affair that for sheer ugliness and a scenery-chewing performance by Peter Sarsgaard has a certain Camp appeal.

Read Full Review »
38
USA Today: Claudia Puig

For a movie that touts the importance of humanity, Green Lantern is a strangely lifeless spectacle.

Read Full Review »
See all Green Lantern reviews at metacritic.com »
showtimes & tickets
Search by location, title, or genre:
upcoming movies on
featured video