Could it be that the public is finally getting fed up with 3D and superhero comicbook movies? It appears that in the US 3D is losing its appeal, and as the technique is mostly applied to blockbusters, which all seem to be derived from comics could this see the demise of the comic book movie. It is rather ironic that a genre firmly based in 2D should become the staple of 3D movies. Is it because superhero comics are the mythology of our time, or is it simply the paucity of original ideas in Hollywood that is the cause of this glut? To say there are no original ideas in Hollywood is unfair on the writers and directors who try pitch brilliant ideas every day; it's the studios' lack of risk-taking that is the problem.
And yet, a small indie flick is going to be less of a risk than a big 3D CG fest such as GREEN LANTERN, especially judging by the critical shredding it's had over the last couple of days. Of course, as we have seen in recent weeks, in spite of what the critics say, the power of marketing and the public's ability to watch any old tosh at the multiplex has seen films such as SUCKER PUNCH still did good opening-weekend business.
It's fair to say that a comic book like Green Lantern would not have been possible to make into a live action movie until now, even if a major part of it is actually CG animation. What has always made comics so engrossing is not so much their storytelling but their artwork. It is a simplified method of telling stories in which the visuals, rather than the words, do most of the work, which is why Hollywood has seized upon them for adaptations – most of the work has already been done. Zack Snyder is a perfect example of someone who took comics or graphic novels and adapted them panel for shot, with a heavy reliance on CG.
I've never been much of a DC comics reader (excluding Vertigo), so was not at all familiar with the Green Lantern mythology - which could explain why I kept calling it GREEN HORNET – so watching the movie unfold was intriguing from an esoteric point of view, with will being the most powerful force in the universe and fear an equally powerful, albeit destructive force. I imagined that the creators were avid fans of Carlos Castaneda, bringing the information from his books into a comic-book realm, only to discover that Green Lantern originated from the 1940s. Unfortunately, this concept was not explored in any great detail, relegating willpower to nothing more than conjuring tricks stifled by the limited imagination of Hal Jordan (or the screenwriter). If you had the power to create or alter matter, surely, in a fight, you would use subtler methods, such as changing your enemy's composition rather than create guns and swords. Basically, the Green Lantern Corp were using the Force but in a very physical manifestation.
Is the film as bad as everyone says it is? It is another origins movie so there is lots of exposition to explain the mythology to an ignoramus like me, then it is shown with lots of CGI characters and space vistas. Ryan Reynolds is charming as usual; Blake Lively, as love interest Carol Ferris, isn't particularly convincing, especially as a fighter pilot; Peter Sarsgaard is suitably over the top as Hector Hammond. What is sad is the amount of great talent that is gathered together for such a mediocre film. Comic book movies used to be dreadful, or equally bad TV series, but then they started attracting "visionary" directors and their entourage of acting talent, and suddenly everyone was trying to make comic book movies into high cinema, and some even achieved it, although they weren't necessarily from superhero comics. This is something film critics seem to be missing when they unleash their venom; these are movies based on comic books that were originally written for teenagers, and they will never be much more than that in spite of them having A-list talent attached. As we have seen in recent months, no matter what the "experts" say people will still go and see it.
Overall I found the film no worse than THOR, in fact I was less disappointed with GREEN LANTERN than I was with THOR because: a) I was expecting it to be bad, based on the trailer; and b) I wasn't familiar with the character or mythology so was unaware of anything that may have been omitted, as in the case of THOR.
Should you go to see it, opt for the 2D version. As with so many 3D films, the only parts that impresses in 3D are the opening and closing credits. If you want Green Lantern origin stories then go to the source, and if you have an iOS device then get the free Green Lantern app.
