Movie Buzz 6-24

24 Jun

Green Lantern dominated the box office last weekend despite it’s bad reviews by critics and consumers. So how will it do this weekend? Also, opening last weekend in wide release was Mr. Popper’s Penguins we will see how film critic reviews measure up against consumer reviews on this film, then let you know if it’s worth the money.

Note: We only review films in wide release.  

Green Lantern-PG-13- What’s the Buzz? This is the first superhero film to receive bad reviews this summer.  Film critics felt it lacked direction, assaults audiences intelligence with special effects and horrible dialogue.  Peter Travers from Rolling Stone said “Green Lantern is a new primer on how not to make a comicbook movie unless you want to screw shit up.”[1] The majority of consumers felt DC tried to pack way too much information into one film and the story was horrible.[2] Is it worth the money? No!

  • Box office rank: #1
  • Film Critics Say: Metacritic:39 Negative, rottentomatoes: 26% rotten
  • Consumers Say: Metacritic:6.6 Positive, rottentomatoes: 59%

Mr. Popper’s Penguins: PG – What’s the Buzz? Film critics were mixed about this film. What were some of the complaints? Some felt the story was formulaic at times while others said it had enough originality to make it stand out. Here is what film critic Rick Groen stated from The Globe and MailBy happy coincidence, their names – Bitey, Loudy, Stinky, Lovey and Nimrod – pretty much double as a plot summary.” What are consumers saying? Many gave the film positive reviews due to Jim Carrey’s performance. On Metacritic the majority of consumers who saw this film said the movie was enjoyable. Is it worth the money? Yes (if you like Jim Carrey).

  • Box office rank: #3
  • Film Critics Say: Metacritic- 53 Mixed, rottentomatoes: 47% (rotten)
  • Consumers Say: Metacritic- 7.0 Positive, rottentomatoes: 67%

Opening in wide release this weekend 

Cars 2 (please see trailer)

 Bad Teacher

Please join us tomorrow @ 3pE for New Movie Hot Seat Discussion.

15 Responses to “Movie Buzz 6-24”

  1. Littlebells June 24, 2011 at 10:04 AM #


    I’m probably not going to get a chance to see GL before the discussion, but I really, REALLY am hoping you do!!!! I”m anticipating your review.

    OB thanks for the 411. That GL review was just awful and embarrassing. Good grief!!!


    • comic relief June 24, 2011 at 12:23 PM #

      Hi Littlebells,

      I’m still trying to figure out what was so wrong about Green Lantern.

      Though bumpy in some stretches the acting was O.K. Despite the protests of a lot conservative reviewers many think the CGI was fine. Was the character bad; no Green Lantern is still one the biggest and most popular comic book characters on the market?

      I would say somewhere between the director and the screen play; things went really wrong. Green lantern wasn’t a bad movie; it just wasn’t particularly good. This was the character’s first feature film outing maybe he’ll get another opportunity in the future.

      Wish it had been better, but I’ll agree with the article’s assessment above.

      • Littlebells June 24, 2011 at 6:00 PM #

        Do you think there was a difference between what the director visualized with the script and what the writer had in mind? Which character stood out to you? I heard Lively’s role was kinda “bleh”. What did you think? If you could have changed it to make it more agreeable to yourself as well as the masses, what might you have done?

        • comic relief June 25, 2011 at 2:01 PM #

          LB (you crack me up) “Bleh”

          I thought Lively was fine. I’ve heard others say she and Reynolds had contrasting acting styles that clashed. I thought the problems were elsewhere.

          I really don’t have any confidence about my ability to make this clear…. But I’ll try.

          Technically there’s nothing wrong with Green Lantern or his alter ego Hal Jordan. His comic is doing really great business at DC right now; helping the company occasionally beat Marvel on the stands. There couldn’t be a better time to feature him in a feature film. He’s really hot as a character and fans are eating it up.

          On the other hand “how to tell that story,” seems to have eluded Martin Campbell. The classic stuff regarding the character origin, back story, and the oath were all there. Finally the CGI was advanced enough to handle the light effects and build all the ring powered constructs etc., etc., etc…

          I don’t know why but sometimes one has to know why, what, and how to tell a story and somehow this time all those things did not align.

          • Littlebells June 25, 2011 at 2:16 PM #

            That makes perfect sense. One has to really be able to tell a story and make it clear. I hate using SM AGAIN, but Mario Puzzo (Had NO IDEA he wrote it!!!!) really did a great job of giving SM’s history and background in a quick but informative and non-confusing way. All details were accounted.

            Thanks CR!

            • comic relief June 25, 2011 at 2:33 PM #

              Thanks for the example, I will try to do the same…

          • comic relief June 25, 2011 at 2:32 PM #

            Sorry, Sorry, Sorry to answer your question…..

            To be honest I think it is a vision issue. Not being a director I think I can point to successful examples of comic book movies I thought were successful.

            • I thought Nolan’s Batman films were great because all they were interested in was making Batman seem plausible in the real world. Some things were fantasy like the character gliding through the air but the Kevlar, the Tank-like Batmobile, and the attempts use science to undermine criminals (like marking bills) seemed to bring the character into the real world. If I sound’s far-fetched look at an episode of Adam West’s Batman TV series from the sixties, and tell me whether batman’s costume, custom car Batmobile, or zany detective work seems like it would stop or slow down crime in any city.

            • Littlebells June 25, 2011 at 2:36 PM #

              YES!!!! Super heroes that are plausible are THE best! Batman isn’t immune, but he sure works hard through physical regime and using, like you said, science and technology to combat evil.

              I like realism in my super heros and their stories. I know fantasy is fantasy, but it’s fun to think, “hmmm…it COULD be possible…”

  2. Francesa June 25, 2011 at 2:36 PM #

    Cars 2

    I went to the 7:00 show with my sister, her husband, my 9 year old niece and 2 1/2 yr old nephew. It was his first movie in a theater, so needless to say my sister’s family and I were so excited for him.

    The movie theater was not quite 1/2 full, my nephew was one of the youngest in the theater. Most kids were i would say between 6-10 years old with their parents. I thought with all of the hype there would be more people. i suppose the early shows today there will be more.

    So for the movie. IMO it was okay. I thought for a kids movie it was a little to long, almost 2 hours. I thought it was not as funny as the first. Larry the Cable Guys one liners at times got to be a bit much. Sometimes a little of him goes a long way, kind of like Jim Carrey. I thought it was kind of scary in parts(at least for my nephew). Machine guns on cars, bombs going off etc. We did not see it in 3-D, but I did hear people say on the way out, that it was not worth it. Usually when you see kids movies there is an adult undertone to it. I did not feel it. I as an adult did not feel, do I dare say, connected to the characters or the film on a whole. Now i know it is a kid movie but shouldn’t I come away having felt vested in at least part of the movie? The movie was visually appealing. Pixar is so good at that. I just felt the story revolving around Mater took something away from it.

    I felt it was not one of Disney/Pixar best efforts. When walking into the theater there were big vinyl posters of the characters that the kids were taking their pictures next to. It made me wonder was it all done for the marketing?? It kind of seemed that way. I don’t see how they could make a sequel and to be honest I really hope not. This was probably not the best review, but it was just an okay movie and it is really hard to put into words something that was just okay. Would i go see it again, no, I don’t even think I would see it on Netflix or buy it to own.

    With all this being said, my nephew really enjoyed it. He did get a bit restless. And asked his dad to turn down the volume on the big tv, Ha!

    • Littlebells June 25, 2011 at 2:41 PM #

      Wow, thanks Francesa! THat was a great review! You just saved me $20 plus an additional $50 just for popcorn and a drink. 🙂

      2 hrs is extremely long. Yeah, my 3 year old wouldn’t be able to handle it. one hour is about her limit.

      Yes, I think adults should come away from it invested in the characters and story. Two of my favorites are The Iron Giant and Up!. I attached so quickly to the characters and stories. I cried and laughed.

      Thanks for a great review (and taking one for the team!). 🙂

      • comic relief June 25, 2011 at 3:05 PM #


        Sorry for laughing; i needed something to laugh at (as opposed to with). I promise I’ll get over the Green Lantern thing soon.

    • Open Book June 25, 2011 at 2:58 PM #

      Great review Francesa! I loved the first Cars so it’s sad to hear Cars 2 did not live up to the first. Love the comment from your nephew to turn down the volume on the big TV. LOL! That was great! I often feel the same way when seeing films in IMAX.

    • comic relief June 25, 2011 at 3:10 PM #

      Great review francesa

      …this is sad because I liked the first “Cars” also.

      • comic relief June 25, 2011 at 4:28 PM #

        Looks the discussion moved to another board, see you all there.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: