Only Human: A Review of GREEN LANTERN

Expected grade: 5/10

Actual grade: 6/10

(For a full explanation of my grading system, check out this post.)

Unlike most of the movies I've already reviewed, I didn't get a chance to see Green Lantern opening weekend, which meant I had plenty of time to read all the reviews. On Rotten Tomatoes, Green Lantern leveled out at a 26%, which, compared to Thor's 77%, is a disaster of epic proportions. And, already having been underwhelmed by Thor, I was prepared for a total bomb. At the same time, I was expecting to enjoy myself some -- at the very least, I would get to stare at Ryan Reynolds for a couple of hours. I didn't quite believe the Rotten Tomatoes consensus anyway. I mean, 9 percentage points below The Hangover Part II? Is that even possible? So I went in hoping for the best but expecting the worst. Turns out having low expectations was the best thing that could have happened. I actually quite enjoyed Green Lantern. In fact, I found it far superior to the disappointing Thor, although not as good as X-Men: First Class.

Ever since I saw the film yesterday, I've been trying to decide why Green Lantern was so lambasted by the critics when Thor was seemingly given a free pass for being completely average. The more I thought about the two films, the more it occurred to me that they're actually quite similar. Both are about superheroes that have never been adapted to film before; a large part of their action takes place in a mystical, fantastical otherworld; both heroes start out as extraordinary but cocky men who learn a lesson in humility and subsequently become even stronger. Essentially, the two films share the same DNA, and in my opinion, most of the negative reviews this film received were due to a kind of "been-there-done-that" summer blockbuster exhaustion. Thor also had the advantage of the insta-cool connection to the Avengers universe. All of the sly inside jokes and easter egg tie-ins in Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk and now Thor (and soon Captain America) make all of those movies must-sees whether they're great or horrendous. Green Lantern, on the other hand, is forced to stand on its own two feet. When actually taken on its own merits, I think Green Lantern is much more successful than Thor in about 90% of what it tries to accomplish.

For starters, Ryan Reynolds as Hal Jordan plays a vastly more likable protagonist than Chris Hemsworth as Thor. Whereas Hemsworth got the arrogant part of his role down perfectly, he was so good at it I never believed his transition out of it. Ryan Reynolds, on the other hand, is successful at being almost supernaturally charming while portraying both overconfidence and insecurity. (To Hemsworth's credit, Thor is a far more one-dimensional character with approximately zero insecurities.) Hal Jordan has more in common with Tony Stark than Thor, with his swaggering playboy ways hiding a deeper vulnerability.

In fact, I felt that this movie attempted a similar rapport between its two romantic leads that Iron Man established between Robert Downey Jr and Gwyneth Paltrow. This attempt is unfortunately hindered by the fact that Ryan Reynolds is acting opposite Blake Lively. While undeniably beautiful and passable as a love interest, she is horrifically miscast as a tough-as-nails test pilot. Her character is one of the weakest points of the movie. The first time we see her, she is clad in fighter pilot gear, but it seems that with every scene that passed, the costume department just borrowed more and more from her Gossip Girl wardrobe. She ended up being nothing more than the typical pretty crush without having any unique character traits of her own (the same problem I had with Natalie Portman in Thor).

Peter Sarsgaard delivers the most impressive performance of the film, and joins the ranks of comic book villains with alliterative names as the possessed Hector Hammond. His performance was so unbalanced and unrestrained -- it was both disturbing and a joy to watch him let loose. Mark Strong is also striking as Sinestro, the strong-willed but ambiguously intentioned leader of the Green Lanterns.

The biggest thing going against this movie is the mere fact that Green Lantern has never been explored on screen before. As an origin story, there is a lot of necessary exposition that has to be waded through before we can get to the action. I'm excited to see what more creative, exciting stuff the sequels can come up with now all that is out of the way (assuming this film does well enough to warrant sequels). Being its first film adaptation, Green Lantern does not have the built-in familiarity that Superman, Spider-Man, Batman, and X-Men have. He is a more obscure superhero and in this age of gritty realism (a la The Dark Knight) many may find the fantastically outlandish world of Green Lantern to be off-putting. My single biggest (admittedly nitpick-y) gripe was that 100% of the alien characters with actual roles stand on two legs, with two arms, and have faces with two eyes, two ears, a nose, and a mouth. This struck me as a narrow-minded and anthropocentric view of the universe, but I chalk that fault up more to the source material than the actual film.

All of that aside, the biggest difference between Green Lantern and Thor is that, in the end, Green Lantern had a point. When I walked away from Thor, I felt like I'd watched an average summer blockbuster with some cool action and then forgot about it as soon as I'd written my review. Not that Green Lantern is Citizen Kane, or even Spider-Man; who can forget the catchphrase "With great power comes great responsibility"? But there is at least the seed of an idea I felt Green Lantern was trying to get across: to be a hero, you don't need to be fearless -- you need to accept the fact that you're afraid and have the will to overcome your fear. Cliche? Maybe. Done before? Of course. But at least the film was driving towards something. What was the message of Thor? Don't be a cocky, warmongering ass? I'm not sure, and that absence of a central idea is exactly why that film felt lacking to me.

When Hal explains to Sinestro why, despite our faults, our planet deserves to be saved, he tells him that on Earth we have a phrase: "I'm only human." That phrase lies at the heart of this film. We try to be the best we can be, but more often than not, we fall short. This film may have fallen short in some areas, but I could feel the effort, the desire to be great. That alone sets it above Thor, which felt like a run-of-the-mill, empty-at-the-heart action machine. Green Lantern may not be great, but it's good, and you've got to give Ryan Reynolds, director Martin Campbell, and the whole team credit for trying to bring this obscure superhero to shining green light.