Where's The Hate?

email this story
read comments (20)
post a comment

I talked last night to a geeky guy at the Regal as we waited for Drive to begin, and he said he "loved" The Green Lantern. I also met a 30something mom and her daughter who really liked Lantern and had no trouble following the plot threads. "But all the critics hate it!," I said to the mom. "I mean, really hated it." She shrugged her shoulders.

What is this? Tell me there's not a big wave of genuine hoi polloi support for this thing. Box-office numbers for CG megaflicks don't mean a thing on the first weekend; it's only about marketing.

Crazy Apes<< previous | next >>"Subversion of Democracy"

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on June 18, 2011 at 3:47 PM

comment #1

Jeff and/or Danny Is Always Wrong says ...

Because 99.999-little-bar-over-the-top% of humanity goes to the movies to be passably entertained for two hours, not to find a metaphor with which to ridicule those they dislike.

Posted by Jeff and/or Danny Is Always Wrong at June 18, 2011 5:11 PM

comment #2

Deathtongue_Groupie says ...

With the rest of the DtG clan off to some sort of bead and Jewerly show, I decided to channel my inner 14 year old for a Saturday matinee with GREEN LANTERN.

Sorry, but it's just not the terrible film critics want to tar & feather it as.

Doesn't come close to sucking as much as the likes of Karina Longworth want it to. It ain't great and the second you start to question some basic logic gaps it falls apart, but it's far from unwatchable. I suspect for many critics it became a safe film to beat up so they don't seem like they're obviously giving another film a pass this summer to keep their negative reviews down.

Posted by Deathtongue_Groupie at June 18, 2011 5:47 PM

comment #3

Deathtongue_Groupie says ...

As to the box office numbers, the $60M or so it takes in this weekend is very soft. There's a big 3D bump obviously and it's going to tank next week in the 60% range.

Warner's only hope at this point is foreign. They had a big break with no direct competition next Friday (CARS 2 and BAD TEACHER), but without a $80-100M opening they'll be lucky to flicker over $120-140M at this point.

This does bring up an interesting issue: how bad is the drop off from 1st weekend to 2nd for the 3D numbers only for certain genre movies? If the "fanboy effect" is a factor, one has to assume that they push the 3D numbers up significantly.

Posted by Deathtongue_Groupie at June 18, 2011 5:59 PM

comment #4

George Prager says ...

DTG gets a Saturday afternoon off and the best thing he can think of to do is to go see GREEN LANTERN? What a swinger.

Posted by George Prager at June 18, 2011 6:10 PM

comment #5

Mr. Palmer says ...

RIP, BIg Man.

Posted by Mr. Palmer at June 18, 2011 6:25 PM

comment #6

THE MovieBob says ...

The more "invested" you are in it - either in a cinephile film theory way or a fanboy mythology-respect way - the worse it is. I can plausibly imagine people enjoying it as a distraction, but the "action" is really sparse. Its not gonna break 60 by sunday, which is DISASTEROUS for something this expensive. Its over - dud, DOA, no sequel, punchline by August.

Posted by THE MovieBob at June 18, 2011 7:02 PM

comment #7

actionlover says ...

(again)

It pretty much goes to figure that anybody who would run out and see "The Green Lantern" on opening weekend is fairly predisposed to like it.

Posted by actionlover at June 18, 2011 7:51 PM

comment #8

BobbyLupo says ...

"They had a big break with no direct competition next Friday (CARS 2 and BAD TEACHER)"

I disagree that 'Cars 2' isn't competition. Any comic book movie that's going to make serious money needs that kid audience. Marvel knows this, that's why they pitched 'Thor' so heavily to children.

Posted by BobbyLupo at June 18, 2011 8:17 PM

comment #9

BobbyLupo says ...

"It pretty much goes to figure that anybody who would run out and see "The Green Lantern" on opening weekend is fairly predisposed to like it."

Do you think there's something unique about 'Green Lantern'? What you wrote kind of seems true of every movie ever.

Posted by BobbyLupo at June 18, 2011 8:18 PM

comment #10

Buk94 says ...

"It pretty much goes to figure that anybody who would run out and see "The Green Lantern" on opening weekend is fairly predisposed to like it."

This is true. But it's the same for all types of movies and tastes. The people that were wetting their pants for over a year in anticipation of Tree of Life were going to like it no matter what.

Posted by Buk94 at June 18, 2011 11:32 PM

comment #11

LexG says ...

I didn't think it was that bad. At least I didn't have to sit through Sam Jackson and Clark Gregg yammering about fucking SHIELD for a third of the run time, and even the bad DC movies seem to have a little more character and a lot less etched-in-granite ponderousness than their Marvel peers.

Sarsgaard was annoying. Blake was SMOKING HOT. I enjoyed the human scenes, like with Robbins and Bassett and the TOP GUN stuff at the beginning and Jay O. Sanders, which is to say probably all the human-scale stuff that Martin Campbell does best.

But I forgot almost everything about it by the time I even left the parking garage. But if nothing else it makes for a fun game of "What the FUCK city is this taking place in?", an ever-increasing problem with so many movies shooting tax-break cheap in Louisiana, Georgia, PA, New Mexico, etc. Really adds to a generic, anonymous feel.

And more than anything, it is the best example EVER of a movie where this TOTALLY INSANE SUPERNATURAL OTHERWORLDLY SHIT is going down, and there's no followup where anyone-- ANYONE-- is blown away or even remotely caught off guard or in disbelief or checks into an asylum at the sight of purple aliens and flying green superheroes.

If that shit went down for real, it would lead to mass suicides and basically the end of the world as we know it. In movies it usually just gets a big shrug, like, eh, there's a GUY WITH A GIANT SKULL READING MINDS AND AN OCTOPUS SPACE ALIEN LEVELING THE CITY. People react like it's a mildly inconvenient freeway tie-up.

Posted by LexG at June 19, 2011 12:53 AM

comment #12

THE MovieBob says ...

Cars 2 is in 3D, right? I'm pretty sure it is, and if so that's all she wrote: They'll lose TONS of 3D screens (so long, artificially-inflated ticket bump) and the whole kid audience.

It's not even going to beat "Thor's" opening, and it'll sink like a stone next weekend. Transformers and Potter both come next, ALSO big with kids, ALSO 3D - it's DONE.

Posted by THE MovieBob at June 19, 2011 1:11 AM

comment #13

Jeffmc2000 says ...

This is the sort of blockbuster Warners seems to do best---the kind with every other scene edited out because the test screenings went poorly and they want to squeeze as many showings as they can into the first couple weeks of release before people wise up. See also, Jonah Hex, the Avengers, Superman IV, etc.

The movie is followable, but it's a mess. It spends a third of it's running time with Peter Saarsgaard's character, who's a creepy little weirdo that no one wants to watch, and another third with nutty aliens spouting exposition. It is the best remake of Howard The Duck I've seen recently though, so it's got that going for it.

Oh, also Blake Lively is super-sexy. That's not nothing either.

Posted by Jeffmc2000 at June 19, 2011 1:28 AM

comment #14

great scott says ...

All the critics don't really hate it. Owen Gleiberman gives it a C+, Ebert gave it two and a half stars, David Poland said the first hour was pretty good, and Leonard Maltin liked it. It may not be a "good" film but if you actually read the reviews, they don't make it sound like the Howard the Duck level disaster you seem to want it to be.

Posted by great scott at June 19, 2011 8:33 AM

comment #15

Alboone says ...

The hate is reflected at the box office. Did anyone see the numbers? This is gonna flop big time, maybe bank at best 130. Those are the kind of numbers people lose their jobs over considering the cost.

Posted by Alboone at June 19, 2011 8:39 AM

comment #16

lovethefuture says ...

Jeff I think you think too highly of the "power" of a movie critic. Most people will see a movie regardless of how fresh or rotten it is on Rotten Tomatoes. This especially rings true for teenagers and soccer moms.

The only way I would refrain from seeing a movie based on reviews is if it truly gets universally panned by critics. Otherwise I'll watch something even with mixed reviews. Can't tell you how many times I've disliked or hated something Jeff liked. (Greenberg anyone?) In fact I pretty much never read reviews anymore. Especially because reviewers drive me crazy by revealing too many plot points within the review. These days I just look at the tomato meter on my Flixster app and decide accordingly.

Posted by lovethefuture at June 19, 2011 10:19 AM

comment #17

Gabe@ThePlaylist says ...

The critics will be this movie's best friend, because they're liable to discuss what ALMOST works in this movie. But the audiences will be able to tell - absolutely NOTHING full-on works in this. The Saturday drop was huge, Sunday's will also be rough, and this thing will be in full-on tank mode by Wednesday.

Posted by Gabe@ThePlaylist at June 19, 2011 10:47 AM

comment #18