question of the day: Ryan Reynolds as Green Lantern: good move, or bad?
The Hollywood Reporter broke the news on Friday: Ryan Reynolds has been chosen to play the Green Lantern, winning the part over a slew of other hot names:
After an intense months-long search, Warner Bros. has settled on Ryan Reynolds as its choice to play “Green Lantern,” the studio’s live-action tentpole based on the DC Comics hero. The film is being directed by Martin Campbell and produced by Donald De Line and Greg Berlanti.Reynolds and his camp entered negotiations for the part Friday, after the studio held two rounds of screen tests, along with actors Bradley Cooper and Jared Leto. Justin Timberlake also did a screen test.
THR also notes:
If the deal is completed, it would make Reynolds the only actor to have played heroes for both Marvel and DC. He recently starred in a comic book movie, Fox's "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," where he played "the merc with a mouth" Deadpool. The character is now being developed for a spin-off to which Reynolds is attached. He also played Marvel’s vampire hunter Hannibal King in “Blade: Trinity.”“Lantern” is actually Reynold’s second stab at a DC Comics hero. A few years ago, he was attached to play the comic company’s speedster “The Flash.”
I have no opinion on the casting, because I’m not at all familiar with the Green Lantern character (though I wouldn’t have minded seeing Nathan Fillion in the role). I was impressed with Reynolds in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, where -- again -- I had no real basis to judge him as Deadpool, but I loved the little fillips of humor he threw in. As an actor with his own style, Reynolds has grown on me considerably in recent years, particularly since Definitely, Maybe.
So I leave it to the experts to weigh in. CinemaBlend calls Reynolds “the safest choice,” yet also points out:
Lantern isn’t however usually known for his sense of humor, though who knows, perhaps they’ll find a way to rework the character to suit Ryan’s talent for the perfect retort.
What do you think? Ryan Reynolds as Green Lantern: good move, or bad?
(If you have a suggestion for a QOTD, feel free to email me.)
)
)
comments
posted by Victor Plenty (Mon Jul 13 09, 10:15AM)
Box office for The Proposal probably influenced the studio executives more than any other factor in this decision. Drawing those numbers is something they surely value far above the most dedicated comic book fan's ideas of which actor would be the best match for the character.
That being said, they could have done far worse, so I'll be looking forward to opinions from the more informed Green Lantern fans.
posted by Paul (Mon Jul 13 09, 10:44AM)
Aren't there at least four or five Green Lantern characters, all with different real names, backgrounds, and personalities? Sometimes they have teacher-student relationships, or fought along side each other against particularly nasty villains. So you can't really decided which actor would do a good job until you know which Green Lantern.
posted by Ryan H (Mon Jul 13 09, 10:50AM)
I think it's a fine choice. I think the constant hyping of actors as the make or break for movies is a bigger problem. Reynolds is a solid choice. He has the ability, the looks and the attitude. But in many ways, the actor can only make a good movie great. If the story and direction is not there it doesn't matter who the actors are.
Hollywood keeps churning out these big event films with actors-of-the-moment and hyping the cast. Their accountants say so-and-so's last movie made $X and so this movie should make $Y. And no one stops to wonder if the movie is any good.
And, on a slightly different note, in the comics there are three or four versions of Green Lantern all with decades of history plus supporting cast. They've each had wildly different takes depending on the writer. So, basically, no matter what version/take/amalgamation the movie decides to go with the fanboys (and girls) are going to be up in arms.
posted by Ken (Mon Jul 13 09, 12:07PM)
Reynolds as Green Lantern Guy Gardner: maybe
Reynolds as Green Lantern Hal Jordan: no
But of course it will be Hal Jordan in the movie; he's the most recognizable GL.
If the deal is completed, it would make Reynolds the only actor to have played heroes for both Marvel and DC.
As much as we'd all like to forget Halle Berry's Catwoman, she holds that distinction. And James Marsden portrayed characters, if not heroes, in both universes.
posted by David (Mon Jul 13 09, 7:32PM)
Well, if it HAS to be a Hal Jordan movie, Reynolds could inject some much needed personality into the character.
He is a good actor and has the superhero physique. Let's not forget that fanboys nearly stroked out over the casting of Hugh Jackman, Tobey Maguire and Heath Ledger in their defining comic book movie roles.
It won't be Van Wilder: Green Lantern.
posted by Shadowen (Tue Jul 14 09, 12:06AM)
Well, Tobey Maguire was a good Peter Parker, but not a good Spider-Man.
That's beside the point, though. I honestly think that just because of it being Reynolds, it should be Guy Gardner, but since it will almost certainly have to be an origin story, it'll be Hal Jordan. Jordan isn't as...loud as Gardner, but he does have a pretty good wit, so I think Reynolds will be fine.
posted by Sarah (Tue Jul 14 09, 11:23AM)
Oh, fuck me running. No. For the following 2 reasons.
1. Ryan Reynolds has already MADE a comic book movie, and he was perfectly cast in it. I'd fork over $10 gladly to watch a full length Deadpool movie.
2. Jensen Ackles and Nathan Fillion are still around.