Lanterns — The Light That Never Arrives
A superhero series that smells like a corporate facelift, featuring cardboard dialogue and a budget that looks like a €9.50-per-episode scam.
Lanterns: full review
The first time I heard that Damon Lindelof, Tom King, and Chris Mundy had joined forces to launch a Lanterns series, I thought the DC universe had found its life raft. Instead, what I received was industrial garbage wrapped in €9.50-per-episode marketing. The room’s air conditioning was so glacial that it seemed the set had been filmed in Antarctica, and the teenager in row 3 was chewing popcorn as if he were feeding a horde of zombies. We paid the entry fee so you don’t have to make the same mistake. The industrial context is the typical one of Warner giants trying to squeeze juice out of any license.
Lindelof, known for 'Lost' and 'The Leftovers', arrives with the pretension of adding existential depth, but his vision is diluted by the pressure of DC executives who demand “more action, less reflection.” Tom King, creator of 'The Good Doctor', brings his touch of television drama, while Chris Mundy, a veteran of 'The Walking Dead', seems to have been dragged into the project like a pawn. The result is a facelift for a franchise that was already dying. The audience pays €9.50 per episode and spends 45 minutes of their life that no one will return. The lobotomy of the script is evident in every scene.
The camera gets stuck in a static shot of a cafeteria where Hal Jordan (Kyle Chandler) tries to explain the origin of a green lantern. The shot is so rigid that it looks like a passport photo. An abrupt cut to a car chase, with the green screen so poorly disguised that the background sky is visible, breaks any attempt at immersion. The sound, at 120 dB, bursts eardrums to cover the lack of narrative tension. Every time the series tries to be epic, the epileptic 0.8-second editing leaves us dizzy and out of breath.
Direction and staging
Lindelof tries to imprint his seal of melancholy, but the pressure from Warner executives forces every scene to have an “explosion moment” that ends up being a burst of cheap CGI. In episode 3, the laboratory explosion sequence is filmed with a green screen that looks like it came from a low-budget 90s set. The lighting is flat, without nuances, as if the production had decided to save on lights to invest in more merchandising. The production design, however, tries to compensate with sets that recall 80s comics, but the lack of visual coherence makes each set look like a plastic abomination. The sheriff’s office (Kelly Macdonald) is full of fake papers that move with the camera wind, and the color palette is so saturated that it looks like a digital version of a children’s painting.
Performances and script
Kyle Chandler, with his deep voice and tired gaze, tries to give dignity to Hal Jordan, but the script leaves him little room to breathe. Every line of his sounds like a sales pitch: “We are the guardians of the light.” Aaron Pierre, as the rookie John Stewart, seems to have been hired for his physical appearance and not for his acting talent. His accent sounds forced, and he delivers such a ridiculous line that I asked myself if the screenwriter had written it on a greasy bar napkin. Chris Mundy, showrunner and co-writer with Damon Lindelof and Tom King, seems to have taken notes from a manual on “How to write superheroes for the mass audience.” The script fits on a napkin, and there was still space left. The dialogues are recycled clichés from the 2000s, with phrases like “the light always wins” that sound like a marketing mantra.
Technique and sound
The cinematography is non-existent; the series has no credited director of photography, which explains the lack of visual style. The soundtrack, composed by Stephanie Economou, tries to be epic, but the constant use of synthesized strings and industrial percussion sounds like a sound scam. The sound design, with eardrum-bursting explosions, seems like a tactic to hide the absence of real tension.
The best
Kyle Chandler: An attempt at dignity that drowns in the script. Stephanie Economou: Some notes of tension that manage to stand out amidst the noise. * Desert crime scene: A wide shot that, for an instant, shows what the series could have been.
The worst
Mundy, Lindelof and King’s script: Recycled clichés and cardboard dialogue. Lindelof/King/Mundy’s direction: Lack of coherent vision, evident corporate pressure. Visual effects: Poorly disguised green screen and cheap CGI. Sound design: Deafening volume that hides the lack of tension.
The Verdict of Claqueta Ácida
Lanterns is a scam wrapped in green lights and broken promises. I paid €9.50 for a series that looks like a shareholder report projected at 24 fps, and the only light I found was the glacial air conditioning that left my nose frozen. There is no redemption, only a corporate corpse dragging itself across the screen. 💀
🎬 Tráiler Oficial
Abrir en YouTube
Lanterns: frequently asked questions
- What is the rating of "Lanterns" on Claqueta Ácida?
- "Lanterns" scored 3.2/10 on Claqueta Ácida in the review by Dante Sangre.
- Is "Lanterns" worth watching?
- No. We gave it 3.2/10 (Sulfuric Acid), our rating for films we don't recommend.
- Who directed "Lanterns"?
- "Lanterns" was directed by Damon Lindelof, Tom King, Chris Mundy.
Theater Collateral Damage Report
Psychophysical impact certificate issued by Dante Sangre
5 bostezos sonoros, 2 con quejido audible para toda la fila 4.
Más miradas al reloj que giros de guion por episodio.
2 espressos triples o un sedante hospitalario.
"En cuanto el director creyó que su ocurrencia merecía pantalla grande."
The rebuttal from Valeria Von Doom (Cinematic Haute Couture)
In stark disagreement with the review given by Dante Sangre.
“Duelo editorial natural entre las visiones antagónicas de Dante Sangre y el consejo de redacción. "Una producción carísima que huele a perfume barato para tapar la falta de ideas."
💬 Community Verdict
What did you think of the film? Rate it from 0 to 10 to compare it with the editorial review.
You haven't voted yet
📢 ¿Te ha gustado el ácido?
Comparte esta crítica con tus amigos cinéfilos o desata la polémica en redes.
⚡ THE CINEMATIC VENOM YOUR INBOX CRAVES
No sugarcoated ratings, no corporate fluff. Subscribe for our uncensored weekly analysis or join the private Telegram for press previews, poll clashes, and instant alerts.
Alertas de estrenos en 1 segundo, encuestas en caliente y audios al salir de pases de prensa.
Recibe la dosis semanal en tu mail + regalo inmediato del PDF con 50 joyas ocultas de culto.
Related Reviews
Recommended autopsies for demanding film buffs.
⚠️ Ácido Sulfúrico 3.2 Breaking Bad
⚡ Afinidad temática directa en atmósfera, estilo y fijaciones visuales.
A televised autopsy that distills moral metastasis while the audience pays for every drop of synthetic blood.
⚠️ Ácido Sulfúrico 3.2 Kamen Rider: The Legacy of the Cheap Mask
⚡ Afinidad temática directa en atmósfera, estilo y fijaciones visuales.
A marathon of toxic nostalgia where scant imagination disguises itself as a superhero with an insect helmet.
⚠️ Ácido Sulfúrico 2.3 Special Operations: Lioness – Autopsy of a series without anesthesia
⚡ Afinidad temática directa en atmósfera, estilo y fijaciones visuales.
A corrosive review that dissects Taylor Sheridan's series like a corpse of television malpractice.
Editorial Ecosystem
Cinephile connections, archive interviews and related analyses.
💬 Debate Cinéfilo & Autopsia de Lectores
0 veredictos¿Discrepas con nuestra nota? ¿Es una obra maestra o veneno puro? Deja tu veredicto abajo sin necesidad de registro.
Aún nadie ha dejado su veredicto para esta película.
Sé el primero en clavarle el colmillo rellenando el formulario de arriba.