Archive for Blake Lively

SAVAGES (2012)

Posted in 2012, Chainsaws!, Cinema Knife Fights, Crime Films, Gangsters!, Just Plain Fun, Torture, Vengeance!, VIOLENCE! with tags , , , , , , , , , on July 10, 2012 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT: SAVAGES (2012)
By Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

(The Scene: A California beach. MICHAEL ARRUDA & L.L. SOARES sit on the back steps of a luxurious beach house, facing the ocean. A beautiful blonde bikini babe approaches them.)

WOMAN: I love both you guys. (to MA) I love your sensitivity and your intelligence.

MA (holding a book and some flowers): Gee, thanks. (blushes)

WOMAN (to LS): And I love your boldness and your strength.

LS (puffing on a stogie and holding a chainsaw in his lap): You better believe it, baby!

WOMAN: It’s the perfect relationship.

MA (points to LS): Except he doesn’t like to share.

LS: Share? What, are you in pre-school? It’s only natural that she should like me more than you

MA: Well, I disagree. As usual, you’re missing the point, which is—.

LS: Which is I’m the better critic than you. (revs up chain saw) Hell, I’m better at everything than you!

MA: Them’s fighting words!

(MA squeezes the flowers and they squirt a thick green goo onto LS’s face.)

LS (drops chainsaw and covers his eyes): I’ve been slimed! Someone grab Slimer before he gets away!

WOMAN: Stop it! Stop it! You’re ruining the moment. Why can’t things be like in the movies? (She stomps away).

MA: Because movies aren’t real.

(Sad violin music fills the soundtrack)

MA: But the best movies are the ones that make you believe they’re real. Speaking of which, we have a movie to review, SAVAGES (2012), the new movie from director Oliver Stone. Shall I start this one?

LS: Be my guest while I wipe this slime off my face.

MA: SAVAGES is Oliver Stone’s latest movie, and if I may say so, it’s the best Stone film I’ve seen in a while. It’s an intense crime thriller about two young men who run a profitable marijuana business, and live with their shared girlfriend. Life is great until they run afoul of a Mexican drug cartel.

Ben (Aaron Johnson) is the brains behind the business, while Chon (Taylor Kitsch) provides the muscle, and O (Blake Lively)—named after Ophelia from “Hamlet” —is their shared girlfriend—the glue that holds them together.

LS: They actually have a believable relationship. And it’s nice to see a ménage a trois actually work in the movies!

MA: O also serves as the story’s narrator. Supposedly, they grow some of the best marijuana in the world, which makes their business both extremely profitable and noticeable, which is one of the reasons why a Mexican drug cartel is interested in moving in on their operation. The cartel offers them a deal, in which they promise to distribute Ben’s and Chon’s product and provide them with protection, in return for learning the men’s growing secrets and 20 % of the profits.

When Ben and Chon refuse the deal, the cartel’s leader, Elena (Salma Hayek, in a movie-stealing performance) orders her henchman, Lado (Benicio Del Toro), to kidnap O so that she can teach the men a lesson in “manners.” With O in her clutches, Lado is now able to dictate terms, but Ben and Chon decide to fight back, and fight back with a vengeance. To do so, they need to cash in all their chips and involve everyone in their organization, including a crooked Federal Drug Enforcement agent named Dennis (John Travolta), who plays so many sides it’s difficult to know who he’s aligned with and who he’s against.

In effect, Dennis is a lot like the entire movie. Everyone seems to be in it for themselves, and you don’t know who to trust; everyone, that is, except for Ben and Chon. You know exactly where they stand. They are completely loyal to each other and to O, and this solid bond is one of the many strengths of the movie.

LS: Yeah, they’re order, and everyone else around them is pure chaos.

MA: I loved SAVAGES. Other than THE AVENGERS (2012), it’s the best movie I’ve seen this year. It has a rich, literate story— you can tell it’s based on a novel, by screenwriter Don Winslow—fully developed characters, very strong acting performances, and superb direction by Oliver Stone. This one’s a winner from beginning to end.

LS: Yeah, since the book is almost always better than the movie, this movie made me wanted to seek out Winslow’s book right afterwards. If the book is better in this case, then it’s gotta be killer!

MA: The cast was excellent. At long last, I finally enjoyed a performance by Taylor Kitsch. While you liked him in JOHN CARTER (2012) and BATTLESHIP (2012) and I didn’t, I can’t say that here.

LS: Wait a minute! While I’ll admit I am a huge fan of JOHN CARTER—man, did that movie get a bad rapI never once said I liked BATTLESHIP. Kitsch does what he can with his role, but BATTLESHIP was pretty awful. I just want to set the record straight.

MA: I didn’t say you liked the movie BATTLESHIP. I said you liked Kitsch’s performance in the movie, or at least you said he was serviceable, while I didn’t like his performance at all.

Anyway, Kitsch is excellent here as Chon, the muscle of the partnership. But the most important part of his performance and his character, and the same holds true for Aaron Johnson as Ben and Blake Lively as O, is that he’s likeable. In effect, the guy’s a drug dealer, but that doesn’t stop you from liking the guy. One of his defining moments, in an argument with Ben, is when he’s talking about their commitment to getting O back, and he yells that he’s never left a man behind, referring to his days in the military. In that moment, you know what he’s all about. He feels personally responsible for protecting O, and he’ll stop at nothing to see that she’s safe again.

LS: Look, I’ve been singing Kitsch’s praises since he played Tim Riggins in the TV series FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS (2006 – 2011). So this just confirms what I already knew.

MA: Aaron Johnson is just as good as Ben. Johnson, who played Kick-Ass in KICK-ASS (2010) is about as far removed here from that character as one can get. He’s the sensitive one in the partnership, the brains, the man behind the incredible growing method they use for their weed.

LS: Yeah, I liked Ben Johnson a lot in KICK-ASS, and it’s nice to see him turn in another solid performance here.

MA: And while Blake Lively as O isn’t as strong as Kitsch and Johnson, she’s still very good, plus she’s beautiful to boot!

LS: Yeah, this role is a long way from THE SISTERHOOD OF THE TRAVELING PANTS (2005) and the TV show GOSSIP GIRL—and yes, I know she was also in THE TOWN (2010)—but you’re right, she’s good here. Maybe not on the same acting level as Kitsch and Johnson, but, for the most part, she’s fine.

Which brings me to a new feature. “Does It Earn Its R?

(Two scientists bring out an oversized, clunky computer from the 50s)

LS: I even had a special computer created just for this segment. Let’s see. (he pulls out a punch card and slips it into a slot). Tell us, computer, does SAVAGES earn its R-rating?

(The machine makes all kinds of noises as its lights flash. Then a card pops back out)

LS: Hmmm. Well, it’s got plenty of graphic violence and language. And there are several sex scenes. So those things alone would prove that, yes, this movie definitely earns its R-rating. But what’s this about Blake Lively keeping her clothes on during every single sex scene she’s in? Who does that in real life?

MA: I knew that would bug you. Get over it.

LS: It’s just not an “R” thing to do, that’s all. Especially when her male partners show their butts. Hey, people care about these things!

MA: Well, it’s obvious you care about it. Jeesh!

LS: Anyway, the three main characters—who are all crucial to if this movie will work—are well cast. I don’t have any complaints. Except for the fully-clothed sex thing.

MA: I liked all three of these characters and cared about what happened to them, which is a major reason why I liked SAVAGES so much.

The supporting cast is outstanding as well, perhaps, even better. Benicio Del Toro is absolutely creepy as henchman Lado. I found him scarier here than as the Wolf Man! John Travolta is excellent as Federal Agent Dennis, and Demian Bichir turns in a strong performance as Alex, the lawyer for the cartel who eventually is set up by Chon and Ben.

LS: Yeah, Travolta is really good in this one. Although, I have to admit, as he gets older, he sure is getting awfully creepy-looking. Tony Manero did not age well! But he’s really good in character roles like this. He doesn’t always have to be the star.

(VINNIE BARBARINO, Travolta’s character from the old TV show WELCOME BACK, KOTTER (1975 – 1979) walks along the beach)

VINNIE: Did I hear you say that when I get older, I’m going to be be creepy-looking?

LS: Yes, hate to break it to you Vinnie, but someday you won’t be the heartthrob you were in the 70s.

VINNIE: I can’t believe that! I’d never let myself go.

MA: But you do. You turn into a creepy-looking fat guy.

VINNIE: Who?

MA: I said…

VINNIE: What?

LS: Oh, he’s doing his Barbarino schtick.

VINNIE: Where?

MA: I think I hear the Sweathogs calling you.

LS: Yeah, I hear the waves are much better on TV Land.

(VINNIE walks away, singing his name over and over)

Demian Bichir is really good here, too. I first noticed this guy as the crime lord Esteban Reyes in the Showtime series WEEDS, and I thought he was amazing in that. Then he got nominated for an Oscar last year for a much more sympathetic role in the movie, A BETTER LIFE. And he’s terrific here.

But I have some issues with Benecio del Toro as Lado. It’s not that I didn’t like his performance. I thought it was a force of nature. I thought he was entertaining in every single scene he’s in, and I think del Toro is a great actor. But I thought it could have been even better if he didn’t play it so over-the-top and went for something more scary. As it is, Lado is almost like a cartoon. But if he’d toned it down a little, it would have made him more intense. And since this guy is a cold-blooded sadist, more intensity would have made the scenes of violence even more uncomfortable to watch. Maybe they let him have a kind of comic relief aspect to his personality to keep things from getting too dark, but personally, I thought some of his scenes were intense, and some made him almost look like a buffoon. If he’d been intense throughout, then there could have been some real scares in SAVAGES.

So I loved his performance, I just would have done it a different way.

MA: Really? I’m not sure which scenes you’re talking about in terms of his coming across as a buffoon. I thought he was pretty disturbing throughout.

But the best of all of them is Salma Hayek as Elena. She pretty much steals the movie as the cutthroat drug lord who, as she says, would slit Chon and Ben’s throats in a heartbeat. She’s amazing. That being said, my personal favorite performance in this movie belongs to Del Toro. He creeped me out throughout the movie.

LS: Hayek is great here. It’s nice to see her get such a meaty role she can really sink her teeth into. And Elena is complex; she is ruthless but she also has vulnerabilities that come to light. I especially liked her scenes with O. There was a real chemistry between the two characters.

MA: Yeah, there’s a moment in the movie where O and Elena bond over a discussion about Elena’s estranged daughter, and there’s another moment where Elena points out to O that her relationship with Ben and Chon is flawed, that it’s obvious that the two men care more for each other than her, because otherwise they wouldn’t be able to share her. These scenes are really good.

The screenplay by Shane Salerno, Don Winslow, and Oliver Stone is first-rate. It’s one of those stories where you really don’t know what’s going to happen, and that’s a rarity in most movies these days. The characters are all fleshed out, and the relationships in the movie work.

LS: Yeah, the cast and the script are perfectly in synch. I liked every single character here.

MA: I bought the three-way relationship between Ben, Chon, and O.

LS: Totally. It’s rare to see a believable relationship between three people, but it totally works here.

MA: There’s also an intense meeting between Agent Dennis and Lado where you’re not sure if Lado’s going to blow Dennis’ brains out. There are lots of key instances like this in the movie, where there’s more going on than what you usually see in a standard crime thriller plot.

LS: Yeah, you’re not always sure how different characters are going to react in certain situations, which is great. I love unpredictability!

MA: The movie even does a good job promoting the positive effects of pot without being preachy.

LS (hides something): What? Me? I wasn’t smoking anything. (exhales smoke)

MA: Oliver Stone does a masterful job directing this movie, from the elegant California beach scenery to the claustrophobic scenes of brutality and torture.

LS: Yeah, I’ve been a fan of Stone’s for a long time, but he is a very uneven director. Sometimes he makes great movies, like PLATOON (1986), the underrated U-TURN (1997), and my all-time favorite Stone movie, NATURAL BORN KILLERS (1994), but he’s made some duds, too. And even more movies that could have been great, but were flawed. I think SAVAGES is easily his best movie since the 1990s. And it’s nice to see him make something so strong again. He really is a terrific director when he puts his mind to it.

(KEVIN COSTNER and ANTHONY HOPKINS walk past them on the beach)

COSTNER: I tell you, I have proof that JFK’s death was part of a conspiracy!

HOPKINS (talking like Richard Nixon): I am not a crook.

LS: Get a load of those two weirdos. And why are they wearing suits on the beach?

MA: You see all types out here.

Yes, SAVAGES contains some disturbing scenes, but these scenes don’t get carried away.

LS: Including some scenes with my favorite power tool, the chainsaw!

MA: I was struck by the idea expressed in the movie that these “savages” all have their moments of humanity and vice versa, that those who are humane have their moments of savagery.

At one point, O mentions that she, Ben, and Chon are like Katharine Ross, Paul Newman, and Robert Redford in BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID (1969), which sets the audience up with the feeling that Ben and Chon, like Butch and Sundance, will be killed by the end of the movie.

Which brings me to the end of the movie. The ending takes a turn that I can see many people not liking, but since I was about to dislike the ending before it took this turn, I have to admit that it worked for me.

LS: Yeah, in effect, the movie has two endings, and at first that kind of annoyed me. But the more I think about it, the more it works.

MA: All in all, SAVAGES is an exceptional movie, worth the price of admission and your time in the theater. It’s one of the best movies I’ve seen this year.

LS: You know how I was on the fence about PROMETHEUS, whether to give it three and a half knives or four (if I was reviewing it now, it would be 3 ½ )? Well, despite the fact that I thought it was visually terrific, and I liked the cast, the big problem for me was that I didn’t love it. I didn’t totally identify with all the characters and didn’t really care enough about them. In a lot of ways, it was an impressive movie, but it was just lacking something.

In comparison, SAVAGES had me from the get-go. I loved the characters, I wanted to see what they’d do next, and I genuinely cared about what happened to them. This doesn’t happen a whole helluva lot at the movies. So I have to agree with you. Easily one of the year’s best.

MA: I give it four knives.

LS: For once you and I are of the same mind about a movie. I give it four knives as well. And hell, if Benecio Del Toro had been more menacing, I might have even given it a higher rating. But, he’s very entertaining as is.

MA: So I guess we’re saying people should go out and see this movie?

LS: Absolutely! And you don’t even have to pay extra for 3D glasses. SAVAGES is one of the few movies lately that’s not in 3D.

MA: Even better!

(The blonde bikini babe is back)

WOMAN: What, you guys are still here?

MA: We had to review a movie.

WOMAN: Well, its’ time for you two to move out of the beach house. I’ve got a new boyfriend now.

LS: You sure did replace us pretty quick!

WOMAN: And he doesn’t go on and on about movies!

MA: So who is this guy?

WOMAN: Oh here he comes now.

(VINNIE BARBARINO runs up to them from the beach)

VINNIE (singing): Bar-bar-bar-bar-bar-Barino

-END-

© Copyright 2012 by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

Michael Arruda gives SAVAGES ~four knives.

L.L. Soares gives SAVAGES ~four knives.

GREEN LANTERN

Posted in 2011, 3-D, Blockbusters, Cinema Knife Fights, Comic Book Movies, Science Fiction, Superheroes with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 20, 2011 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT: GREEN LANTERN (2011)
By Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

 

(The Scene: A beach at dusk. MICHAEL ARRUDA & L.L. SOARES approach the wreckage of a crashed alien spaceship.)

MA: Wow, we’ve found a real live alien spaceship!

LS: Maybe they’ll abduct you to some distant galaxy so I can be spared your bad taste in movies.

MA: No, I think it’s your mother ship come to take you back home. L.L. phone home!

LS: How dare you compare me to that twerp, E.T.! And, for your information, I was born right here on Earth!

(They hear a groan from the spaceship. They approach to find a dying green alien with a bright pink face. The GREEN ALIEN extends his hand and shows them a green ring.)

GREEN ALIEN: The ring has chosen you.

MA: Hey, bud, you’re not seeing double. There’s actually two of us here. Which one of us did the ring choose?

LS: It obviously chose me. (Reaches out to take ring.)

MA: Not so fast! We don’t know that. Let the alien answer first. Which one of us did the ring choose?

GREEN ALIEN (Points to MA, then to LS): You.

LS: Well, that’s it. This alien is obviously retarded.

MA: This isn’t getting us anywhere. Look, there’s two of us and only one ring, and we can’t share a ring.

LS: Share? There’s no sharing at Cinema Knife Fight! I’m taking it.

(LS grabs ring, as does MA, and as they wrestle over it, they inadvertently toss the ring into the ocean.)

MA: Oops.

LS: Now see what you’ve done!

GREEN ALIEN: The ring—the ring—. (Alien dies.)

MA (Shaking his head): Well, he’s having a bad day. Anyway, with the ring gone, there’s nothing left to distract us, so why don’t we start our review of GREEN LANTERN?

LS: I bet that ring sucked anyway. It sure was ugly. Since he came all the way from another galaxy, that alien could have at least brought us some cool bling.

Yeah, start the review.

MA: GREEN LANTERN (2011) is the latest superhero movie to hit the big screen, and this one comes from the DC universe. It’s about a character not as widely known as some of the other DC superheroes, such as Batman and Superman.

LS: I don’t know about that. In the comics world, Green Lantern is a pretty big deal. He was the central figure of the recent “Darkest Night” and “Brightest Day” storylines, probably the two biggest events in the DC Universe in the past few years. He just never had a movie before. Or a TV show. But comics fans know him very well.

MA: Well, for the rest of us in the real world, he’s not as well known.

GREEN LANTERN is about a carefree pilot named Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds), who is chosen by a dying alien to join the ranks of the Green Lanterns, a huge collection of super warriors who protect the universe from evil threats. They do this by showing no fear and by using their will power. They have the power to turn whatever their thinking of into reality. So, they can be as powerful as the limits of their imaginations. It’s kind of a goofy premise when you think about it. I mean, if you have the power to conjure up a ray gun, for example, to shoot your enemy, why not just conjure up a dead enemy and save yourself the trouble? I’m sure the comics did a better job of explaining all this, but it’s not covered in any satisfactory depth in the movie.

LS: I think it’s a key point here that the limits of a Green Lantern’s power is the same as the limits of his or her imagination. If there’s a flaw with this movie—it’s clearly that Hal Jordan doesn’t have much of an imagination. Neither did the writers of this movie.

MA: That’s a really good point, because, as I watched this movie, I kept thinking, where the heck is this guy’s imagination?  Why isn’t he using this new power he has to create all kinds of cool things?

Anyway, Hal becomes a GREEN LANTERN, which is a good thing, because the Earth is now threatened by a bad guy named Hector Hammond (Peter Sarsgaard), a brilliant scientist infected by another alien, the evil Parallax, which turns him into a super intelligent baddie with a big head who looks like the Elephant Man wearing a lab coat.

LS: Hector is not the villain of the movie. He’s a pawn. A sad, dejected man who has great intelligence but still feels he is a failure. He becomes infected, by the way, because he is called in to do an autopsy on the alien who gave Hal his ring. But the alien has a bad wound that still has traces of the creature that killed him in it – Parallax. When he touches the wound in depth, the traces infect him, turning him into the Elephant Man thingie. He suddenly can read people’s minds and has telekinetic powers. He also has very big daddy issues concerning his senator father (Tim Robbins). He grew up with Hal and has always envied him. And he’s in love with Carol Ferris, who loves Hal. Once he gets his “powers,” it’s clear that all Hector wants to do with them is get back at the people who slighted him – his father and Hal – and finally “get the girl.”

MA: Yeah, there’s also a love interest for Hal with the beautiful Carol (Blake Lively) but, like the rest of this movie, this story doesn’t go anywhere.

LS: I thought Lively was a big weak link here. Sure, she’s attractive. But every scene she was in, I thought her acting was atrocious. It was like watching a very pretty robot. I kept thinking—aside from being hot —what does anyone see in this woman? Why do the main characters all want her affection? She just didn’t have any depth at all as a character, and I can’t tell if it’s her fault or the writers. Probably both.

MA: There’s not much else I want to say about the plot since this movie didn’t really do much for me, and I don’t think its story warrants too much retelling. But feel free if you want to fill in the blanks.

LS: No, you just about covered it. The details actually make the story less interesting. We then have to get into the whole significance of colors. Green represents the power of will, which is the source of the Green Lanterns’ great energy. But there’s also, yellow, the color of fear, which was also harnessed by the ancient inhabitants of the planet Oa, who are blue gnome-like creatures who started all this crap. They created the green lanterns and sit on monolithic perches like a group of Yoda wannabes. One of their group turned to “the dark side” and tapped into the power of fear and it corrupted him, so he turned into the super baddie Parallax—the nebulous monster who is going around devouring whole planets (He’s an awful lot like the Marvel villain, Galactus, another bad guy who eats planets, who I like a lot better. Although he’s kind of goofy, too).

Otherwise, that’s it. The Green Lanterns try to stop Parallax as he drifts throughout the universe, devouring worlds. When he comes into the vicinity of Earth, then it’s up to Hal to save the planet. Can he do it? If you really care, go see the movie.

MA: I couldn’t get into GREEN LANTERN from the get-go. I found its opening sequences which explain the whole back story of the Green Lantern world dull, boring, and slow. It reminded me of the scenes on Thor’s planet in THOR (2011), and the scenes of the Jedi Council in the STAR WARS movies. In fact, GREEN LANTERN plays much more like a science fiction/fantasy film than a superhero movie.

LS: Well, it’s supposed to be like a science fiction film. Green Lantern is one of the most science-fiction based superheroes of all time, at least as much as the “alien come to earth” origin of Superman.

But I agree about the opening sequence. It’s meant to bring us up to speed right away, but it’s boring. And the whole thing about green being willpower and yellow being fear seems incredibly dopey to me. Why can’t the green power of the Lanterns just be pure cosmic energy? Why does it have to be willpower? Seems silly. “I will not eat that piece of cake, thus I have wild, green power!”

Also, the whole thing about the actual LANTERN—it’s a device that’s really just a giant battery. It recharges the ring when it runs out of power. I always hated the lantern in the comics, and here it’s no better. Why does the ring need the lantern to recharge it? Doesn’t willpower come from within? And don’t even get me started on the dumb-ass oath the Green Lantern has to spout to get the recharging process to work….

(A green Energizer  Bunny holding a lantern marches by them.)

MA (pointing to Bunny):  Who knew?

LS:  And, now that I think about, why doesn’t the Green Lantern lose his powers and need to recharge himself EVER in the course of a battle in this movie? If you’re going to introduce something as lame as the lantern, then give it some dramatic relevance. As it turns out, he doesn’t even need the damn thing for the rest of the movie, and this was one chance when they could have made an improvement over the comics and just gotten rid of the damn thing entirely.

(GOLLUM from the LORD OF THE RINGS movies appears on the beach, rubbing his hands together)

GOLLUM: Did someone here mention my precious?

MA: No, not that ring! We’re talking about the Green Lantern’s ring.

GOLLUM: Oh, that makes me sad. I will continue to search for my precious….

LS: Get lost, you idiot (Kicks GOLLUM in the butt, hurrying him along the beach and out of sight)

GOLLUM: Ouch.

MA: The story didn’t grab me, the pacing wasn’t there, the characters were not likeable, and the special effects were passable, but that’s it. I also had the choice of seeing this one in 2D or 3D, and I chose 2D because, to be honest, I’m sick and tired of 3D movies coming out every other week , and then not being worth the extra cost of the ticket.  I hope movie audiences start to feel the same way and stop paying the extra money to see these movies.  Maybe they’ll go away.

LS: I saw it in 2D as well, and gladly so. Not only did I save money, but I knew the 3D aspects wouldn’t add anything to the storyline, just like most 3D movies we see. It was nice to avoid the extra tariff we’ve been getting screwed with to see bad 3D movies.

MA: While I like the Green Lantern’s power—he has the ability to turn into reality whatever he’s thinking about—and think it’s really cool, I did have some problems with it. One, it’s not used enough in the movie. I mean, we hardly see the Green Lantern use this ability. And two, when you think about it, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

LS: Yeah, like I said, for a movie about a character whose main power is his imagination, GREEN LANTERN is incredibly mundane. The character and the writers totally drop the ball on this one. The ring should have gone to someone who really would have excelled in using its power – like a fantasy writer perhaps?

MA: I came away from this movie thinking the Green Lantern’s story was rather goofy.

LS: In the comics, the Green Lantern is up there in popularity with DC heroes like Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman. Personally, I think he deserved a bigger budget and a better movie. This one seems second-rate compared to the majority of superhero movies we’ve seen lately.

MA: I also didn’t like the characters in this movie. I didn’t hate them, but none of them were that likeable.

Hal Jordan is supposed to be this likeable screw-up. He’s an amazing pilot, but in everything else, he’s a failure, although he means well. However, he doesn’t come off this way in the movie. How do I know he’s supposed to be this way? Because they tell us in the film. This is a classic example of where a story messes up by telling us things rather than showing us. We hardly get to know Hal at all. We see him briefly with his son, briefly with his girlfriend, briefly with his buddy, briefly training as a Green Lantern, basically, briefly doing everything. Hal comes off like a supporting character in a Tom Cruise TOP GUN (1986) movie. Hey, it’s Hal Jordan. He’s the guy with no fear in the cockpit with the son and the girl—yeah, but what do we really know about him? Nothing. And as a result we don’t like him.

LS: I agree. Ryan Reynolds is completely miscast here. Hal Jordan is supposed to be smart and kinda cool. As Reynolds plays him, he’s a smirking idiot who takes stupid chances and comes off as a real jerk. I have to admit, he grew on me as the movie progressed, but a better star would have made this movie a lot better. Reynolds seems like a kid trying to play a leading man. Early on, I actually hated the character. By the end, I just thought he was so-so. And you’re right about the TOP GUN comparison. Early on, I thought I was watching a sequel to TOP GUN, until the injured alien fell from the sky. Hal could have been so much better!

For some reason Hollywood loves Reynolds and thinks he is perfect for superhero movies. He also played Deadpool in the movie X-MEN ORIGINS: WOLVERINE (2009). That worked a little better, because Deadpool is supposed to be a cocky clown. But supposedly his supporting role in the WOLVERINE movie went over so well, that a DEADPOOL movie is now in the works. Reynolds can do no wrong in the world of superheroes, I guess. But for me, he was a completely awful choice for Hal Jordan.

Oh, and by the way, as far as I can tell, that kid was not his son. It was his nephew. Although early on the kid is so worried about his uncle, it seems like a father/son bond. Of course, after that scene, we never see the kid again! So I guess that bond wasn’t very important!

MA: Yeah, I found Ryan Reynold’s performance as Hal irritating as well. I couldn’t bring myself to like him, which is not a good thing for a lead character in a movie.

Blake Lively as Carol Ferris, Hal’s love interest, is beautiful, and she’s a good actress, but in this movie the Carol Ferris character doesn’t do much, nor is she interesting. Lively was in THE TOWN (2010) and she was very good in that movie, so she can really act when given a challenging role. Carol Ferris is not that role.

LS: You can say that again. If Lively is a good actress, I certainly didn’t see any evidence of that in GREEN LANTERN. A CGI cartoon would have had more depth. And, while you mention one of her movie roles, you’re missing the fact that Blake Lively is best known for the TV series GOSSIP GIRL, which is about shallow kids screwing each other over. Not exactly Oscar-worthy material.

MA: I did like Peter Sarsgaard as the villain Hector Hammond, and his was probably my favorite performance in the movie. I like Sarsgaard a lot, and we’ve seen him in ORPHAN (2009) and THE SKELETON KEY (2005). However, as much as I like Sarsgaard, the character of Hector Hammond is not much of a villain.

LS: You mentioned two of Sarsgaard’s more mainstream/genre flicks, but he’s also been a hero of the independent film scene for a long time now. He’s been in some really good stuff like the Oscar-winning film BOYS DON’T CRY (1999), Wayne Wang’s provocative THE CENTER OF THE WORLD (2001), and had an excellent turn in the biopic of KINSEY (2004). Clearly, this guy can actually act, and he’s in the wrong movie here. It was kind of a letdown to see someone this good in a movie this mediocre. And you’re right, because of his talent, he made Hector the most interesting character in the whole movie. I wanted the movie to be more about him. But, in the end, he’s not even the central villain here. He’s just a lackey of the main villain.

And there was an issue that really bugged me. Every time Hector Hammond was about to do something evil, and someone’s life was in danger, the Green Lantern would suddenly appear and fight him. This made sense in a scene where Hammond sabotages a helicopter, because both of them are at the lavish party where it happens. But later on, there is no reason why Hal Jordon would know to be at a certain place at the exact moment he is needed. Hammond is the one who can read minds, not Jordon! This just seemed like bad writing to me.

MA: Mark Strong, who was extremely nasty as the villain in KICK-ASS (2010), is completely wasted here as the Green Lantern leader, Sinestro. I found Sinestro boring and annoying.

LS: I liked Sinestro. I thought Mark Strong played him perfectly, as an arrogant, pompous ass. He goes on to become Hal’s number one nemesis in the comics. How would you know this if you don’t read the comics? Easy. The guy’s name is SINESTRO, as in “sinister.” They might as well have named him BADGUY-IO. And this movie is sort of an origin story of him as well—how he becomes a bad guy. In fact, there’s a very important scene during the end credits that follows up on this. So stick around a little after the credits start to roll, so you don’t miss it. This was clearly DC trying to imitate the whole “extra scene” thing that Marvel does in their movies (but which was missing from the recent X-MEN: FIRST CLASS, for some odd reason).

I’m hungry.  Let’s grab a snack.

MA:  Sure.

(LS & MA approach a snack shack on the beach.  A huge order of onion rings flies off the counter and lands in LS’s hands.)

MA:  The onion rings have chosen you.

LS:  I willed it to happen. For I am the Green Onion!

MA: While the acting in GREEN LANTERN is adequate, the characters the actors are playing are not, and so I blame the writing here. The screenplay was written by four writers, Greg Berlanti, Michael Green, Marc Guggenheim, and Michael Goldenberg. Four writers, and they come up with this?

LS: Yeah, that’s sad. With all those rewrites, they still only attain a level that is a disappointment for a big superhero movie like this.
And, for the most part, the acting seemed below-average to me. I liked Peter Sarsgaard a lot. I liked Mark Strong. I even thought Ryan Reynolds, despite being miscast, had his moments. But the rest of the cast was just ugh. Blake Lively seemed like she just wandered on the set and wasn’t sure what she was doing. Tim Robbins—who can be good, when given a decent role—was boring here as yet another evil politician. BORING! And Taika Waititi as Hal’s best friend, Thomas Kalmaku, was just plain grating. The less we see of him, the better.

And there’s so much wasted talent in smaller roles. The great Angela Bassett is reduced to a one-dimensional government drone. And actors like Geoffrey Rush (Tomar-Re) and Michael Clarke Duncan (Kilowog) seem to be having the most fun here, but that’s because they’re only using their voices to bring CGI characters to life. They don’t have to actually appear in the movie, so that frees them up a bit.

A character with the stature of Green Lantern (in comics) deserved better. This movie is going to be a lot of people’s first exposure to the character, and it’s a weak one.

MA: The humor also misfired. There were so many lines of dialogue that were supposed to be funny, but I wasn’t laughing. I think this was because I didn’t really know the characters all that well. And it was hard to laugh with Hal because it was difficult to know if he was a good guy or not. If he’s truly a screw-up, a guy who’s sort of a jerk, then his jokes aren’t that funny, but the film never really delivers in terms of creating a well-rounded fleshed-out Hal Jordan, and as a result, I think a lot of the humor suffers for it.

LS: There were scenes with obvious, cliché jokes where people in the audience laughed and I was thinking “What the hell are they laughing at?” It was like they laughed because they felt they were supposed to. But I think laughs have to be earned. Not just because “Hey, this is supposed to be funny, so laugh.” Real laughter is an involuntary response. I didn’t laugh once during GREEN LANTERN. In fact, the need for such dumb humor in a movie that deserved a more serious tone made me groan a few times instead.

MA: GREEN LANTERN was directed by Martin Campbell, the same man who directed the James Bond films CASINO ROYALE (2006) and GOLDENEYE (1995), two movies that had much more energy and style than this one. GREEN LANTERN looks fine, but its action sequences—and I was surprised by this—were just average. None of the action scenes in this movie blew me away.

In short, the word that best describes GREEN LANTERN is average, and these days, with all the other superhero movie competition out there, films that are genuinely excellent, average just isn’t good enough. I liked the previous two superhero movies we’ve seen this year, X-MEN: FIRST CLASS and THOR, much better than GREEN LANTERN.

LS: I’m embarrassed to admit it, but I have to agree with you on every point. The thing is, I had heard some advance reaction to this movie, and it was almost all completely negative. So I went in to GREEN LANTERN expecting to see something that was the bottom of the bucket. The thing is, with such low expectations, I was surprised to find the movie wasn’t that bad. It’s certainly not the worst movie to come out in 2011. But it is a disappointment—because it could have been so much better.

MA: I give GREEN LANTERN two knives, and I give it two because it’s not awful. It’s just average.

LS: Average just about pegs it. And in a genre where you expect larger-than-life, flashy characters and lots of high-powered action, average is clearly a failure. I give it two knives as well. It was better than I expected. But nothing great.

(Stirring comes from the ocean waters.  MA & LS turn to see ABE SAPIAN from the HELLBOY movies emerging from the ocean.)

ABE SAPIAN:  Look at this ugly ring I just found.  I think I’ll give it to Hellboy for his birthday.

MA:  I don’t know if that’s such a good idea.  With Hellboy’s imagination, who knows what he’ll conjure up with a Green Lantern ring!

LS:  Which is exactly why Abe should give it to him. Someone like Hellboy—with that kind of power.  Now that’s a story I’d like to see!

MA:  I suppose I can’t argue with that.

LS:  You could.  But you’d be wrong as usual.

MA:  The only thing I’m wrong about on a consistent basis is my ongoing decision to team up with you each weekend!  What am I thinking???

Anyway, we’re done here.

LS:  Yep, folks, we’re done.  We’ll see you next weekend with a review of another new movie.

—END—

© Copyright 2011 by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

Michael Arruda gives GREEN LANTERN2 knives!

LL Soares also gives GREEN LANTERN - 2 knives!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 88 other followers