Re: Tough Choices...

On Fri, 17 Jun 2011, Mike Findlay wrote:
> Haven't seen GL, but based on its reviews and that I have seen Thor, I'd 
> go with Thor.

Taste is taste, of course, but FWIW, I found Thor simultaneously too 
mythic and too earthbound, but not very superheroic.  Green Lantern (which 
I have not yet seen) at least has a more explicitly sci-fi-ish cosmology.

Though I certainly expect the acting in Thor will be better than its 
counterpart in Green Lantern.

> The Detroit Free Press movie of GL was subtly brutal.  Too much CGI and 
> targeted for the 10-14 boy crowd.

I don't care about age; as long as it's targeted at people who actually 
read the Green Lantern comics (as I used to do), I'm fine with that.

As for CGI... well, how else *could* you make a Green Lantern movie?

> And only 27% on Rotten Tomatoes.

It's got 40% at Metacritic, which tends to be a more reliable gauge of 
critical opinion (for one thing it doesn't try to compress every review 
into a simple thumb-up or thumb-down).  But even so, what matters is not 
the *quantity* of the reviews but the *quality* of the reviews.

> I am however going to see the X-Men movie tomorrow.

I liked it quite a bit, but then I wish more superhero movies were retro 
period pieces (and I loved all the subtitled foreign-language dialogue). 
I've always thought the James Bond movies should go back to taking place 
in the '50s and '60s, when Ian Fleming wrote the books.  :)

> And I'd even keep my cell phone in my pocket, (I do anyway, at least 
> after the previews are over).

You turn it on during the previews?  Eep.  For me, when the house lights 
go down, *all* lights go down.

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot