The Green Lantern info keeps coming, and none of it has made me too excited.
Recently, the Hollywood Reporter has revealed that the villain in the Green Lantern movie will be Hector Hammond. Peter Sarsgaard is in negotiations to play:
â€œ . . . the pathologist son of a senator who is seen as a disappointment in his father’s eyes. He becomes infused with psychic powers when he discovers a meteor.â€
Now thatâ€™s a little bit different than I remember it, and Wikipedia agrees with me. No biggie. Things get changed for movies all the time. The biggie comes in that unless this is going to be one of those movies with multiple villains (please, no!), thereâ€™s not going to be too much â€œcosmicâ€ about this Green Lantern movie.
Itâ€™s too early to tell, but this being the internet, Iâ€™m going make assumptions, and then move forward as though those assumptions were facts.
While the main villain need not be Sinestroâ€”and I think introducing Sinestro as a Green Lantern, and Hal Jordanâ€™s mentor, only to bring him back as the villain in the second or third movieâ€”any costumed hero . . . actually, any hero could fight Hector Hammond. Hammond merely stands in for any telepathic foe. Why waste a character that may be derived or otherwise inspired by the Lensmen with an Earth-bound adventure?
I hope Iâ€™m wrong. I suppose there are ways to take a Hammond story and put it in space, but then why use Hammond?
Iâ€™ll be interested to see what grows out of this, but so far, nothing is lighting that fire of enthusiasm.
Iâ€™m saving that for Deadpool.