Green Lantern

The green man has no trouble not taking himself seriously, so what ultimately kills him is rather the directorial and dramaturgical indecision. The whole problem of Green Lantern is contained in one scene: Hal flies in to see his chosen one in disguise to meander like Superman. What follows is a very good parody of similar "superhero" kitsch, which I laughed at with pleasure. But in the next scene, we find exactly the same, this time deadly serious kitsch, that feels like the scene before didn't even exist. And that's the way it is all the time. Campbell winking at the viewer for a while, but then serves us un-diluted dullness and naivety. The whole film has a similar structure to Thor, but while the guy at the "top" felt serious and the guy at the "bottom" light, Green Lantern appears like a stupid and genderless retouch on both levels. Yet its potential is undeniable - but the creators have turned a hero who can materialize anything from his fantasy into Tom Cruise from Top Gun. It’s no wonder that Warner insist on a second film. A missed chance like this hurts, especially at a time when comic book films are doing well. (12/08/2011)

A monumental mess that is only watchable thanks to the really effective special effects. The screenplay is the sort of utter atrocity that makes many people look down on the world of comic books. And it seemed to me that Campbell wasn’t even trying. The completely disgusting (God, that forehead!) villain, played by Peter Sarsgaard, is a superfluous character for the “story" and Reynold’s portrayal of Jordan is also lackluster. I really liked both the concept of a ring that can materialize the imagination and also an intergalactic police force, because although they are wacky, these ideas offered material for first class entertainment, not for this rehash. I don’t even know why I gave it three stars. Perhaps because of Blake Lively, maybe. (24/09/2011)

Unfortunately, it's the same thing again. Saving the world, an indestructible villain, some kind of magical energy, the right values. Not even the proven hitmaker Martin Campbell, otherwise known as a great innovator of established brands (Zorro, James Bond), can save this from boredom and mediocrity. Not that Reynolds isn't great, it's just that the insanely overblown space worlds set pieces are just a hair worse than the whole questionable mythology. So hats off to the visual effects artists, yes, but I wanted a better project, or better execution. The big advantage goes to Blake Lively, who could have easily just stood somewhere in an evening gown and everything would have been fine. But that's not enough for a cinematic experience, especially in a comic book adaptation, where the overkill is insane and destroying planets in the umpteenth way would already put off even a die-hard fan of the color green. (14/05/2016)

Nice effects are everywhere these days. And so we get an accumulation of bland films that are nice to look at but evoke almost no emotion. Apart from a bunch of gimmicks, there was nothing to get me into the plot. Blake Lively is beautiful and Ryan Reynolds is quite likable. Except that I knew that before I saw it. Where are the days when I was rooting for the main character and couldn't tear myself away from the screen? Now I'm just watching him phone it in to see what he looks like doing it. A weak 2.5 stars. (08/12/2011)

This comic book madness is guaranteed to be appreciated by the fans the original comic book. The film doesn’t pull its punches, and during its uncompromising 109 minutes it presents a story that goes against all usual comic book adaptation characteristics. It’s just science fiction about superheroes from outer space fighting for Mother Earth outside of Earth. I have to say that it had its charm, but it was off to a rather slow start. Ryan Reynolds was great, but he could hasten the transformation and not wait for it until the middle of the film. Anyhow, I can’t say that I wasn’t captivated, as this was something else than you’d expect and that also counts for something. (24/12/2012)