u/bradbastarache

As someone who likes most of Tom King's work, liked Superman, and defended the first few episodes, Lanterns is awful and insulting.

Initial Post Here: https://www.reddit.com/r/MauLer/s/KEF5BOWxkn

I think I still stand by most of what that post was getting at. Creators should be willing to let a show take some risks/mystery and Hal Jordan's portrayal in the first few episodes isn't unfaithful to his original character. However, I understand anyone that wants to lampoon me for defending this show in the beginning. I want to go over my biggest problems with the show in a fun way.

In Brightest Day

The show presents Hal at the beginning as old, disheveled, and dead. This wouldn't be a problem if we ever saw Hal as the hero he was. We don't see what changed in 2006 that made him forego the Halogram updates. Nobody but a bitter Carol Ferris shows up to his funeral. Friends like Oliver Queen, Barry Allen, Kilowog, and so many other heroes, civilians, and Lanterns should mourn Hal Jordan, but in this universe no one does. The one time we actually get to see Hal Jordan's story, it is used as a vehicle to show that Hal Jordan is depressed and his family has a history of suicide. I don't even hate this change to Hal's lore in concept. In the comics, his father is incredibly underdeveloped, but they don't do anything with it in this show other than make you feel more bad for Hal. I can understand Gunn wanting to adapt the Hal that was around when Gunn himself was reading comics, but that veteran version still had the entire Silver, Bronze, and Copper Ages beneath his wings. He had the Silver Age fun sci-fi adventures, the Bronze Age grounded activist stories, the Copper Age space epics. Here he is nothing other than a charming old asshole. Even if Lanterns was as good as Logan, that movie wouldn't be that satisfying if it was the only Wolverine adaptation of that universe. It is insulting that Hal Jordan dies for no reason to an OC that he loves. From the first episode my mind was filled with theories as to how his death could perfectly adapt so many stories but the writers were not interested in reading them I guess. In the 90s, after turning evil, Hal is shot by his best friend Oliver Queen (Green Arrow). In death, his spirit becomes the Spectre, the agent of God's vengeance. Somehow this show's story was more interesting than that to the writers.

In Blackest Night

I was tempted to make this section about race for the meme but I actually don't have much to say about that. This phrase is the first part of the oath that is changed for John's oath in the last scene.

Here is the full old one:

>"In brightest day, in blackest night
No evil shall escape my sight.
Let those who worship evil's might,
Beware my power... Green Lantern's light!"

Here is the full new one:

>“In brightest day, in darkest night,
I'll embrace my fear, I'll do what's right.
I choose this ring, I choose this fight,
In service to this lantern's light.”

Blackest Night is one of the most beloved DC stories. The word "blackest" even evokes something different and more thematic to the Green Lanterns. Space and death aren't exactly dark, they are black (well actually Death is a goth white girl but you get the point). The idea that Green Lanterns don't embrace fear is incredibly weird. A lot of Green Lantern stories are about them accepting and overcoming their fears. It's only when they try to ignore their fears and let themselves be consumed by them, like with Sinestro or Hal in Emerald Twilight, that they become evil. Did John choose this? He was raised to be a Green Lantern then denied it after some trauma and then got the opportunity to actually become Green Lantern a decade later. This sounds like cope from him? What's the virtue in choosing to become a Lantern anyway? It's not like Superman or Batman exactly feel like they are choosing to do good every day. It's what Uncle Benjamin said to the Man of Spider. "If you could do good things for other people then you have a moral obligation to do those things." Why is he doing these things in service to a Lantern made by Sinestro? Is John Stewart evil?

No Evil Shall Escape My Sight

Everyone gets out of this show scot-free, except for Hal Jordan for some reason. John Stewart's abusive parents are never reprehended. The girl who extorts John Stewart gets the money. Kerry is never imprisoned for murder. The genocidal robot alien is allowed to roam free. The Guardians get away with ruining this family's lives. It's just ridiculous. Guy Gardner is chewed out by John for no reason. Guy's like the most heroic Green Lantern so far (lmao) and John is bitching at him. There is a Green Lantern comic story titled after this part of the oath where Hal deals with a corrupt landlord because "no evil shall escape his sight." This show would find some way to vindicate the landlord.

Let Those Who Worship Evil's Might

The Manhunters are a fleet of robot terminators made by the Guardians to instill order throughout the universe. They are alien Ultrons with an odd hierarchal fascination. They even have a signature phrase.

>"No Man Escapes the Manhunters."

This is all tossed away. Hector Hammond is tossed away. Black Hand is tossed away. Sinestro is in two scenes. Instead the show is preoccupied with making what should be a buddy cop dynamic between John and Hal into a murderous rivalry. The villains of this show are John, Hal, John's family, the Guardians, and even the Sheriff. The Manhunters are an afterthought. Sinestro is an afterthought. Tom King has even used many parts of Lantern lore correctly in his other work. A Manhunter is a main character in Danger Street and that story is great. Do these writers think that an HBO audience can't handle any of this? Should they have cut out the dragons from Game of Thrones and had lizards instead?

Beware My Power... Green Lantern's Light!

I have seen plenty of people online turn against this show. I fully turned against it with episode four. Grace Randolph turned against it with the finale. However, there are still plenty of shills who will defend this. This show is getting a season two. It did incredibly well unfortunately. We will have an evil John and a dead Hal for the foreseeable future. I don't regret giving the show a chance, but I lament any investment I had in this universe. I am going to look forward to Mister Miracle and then this universe can burn for all I care. I used the word apophenia in my initial post to describe my feeling that Mauler and other creators were misattributing Lanterns to a pattern of beating down legacy heroes for newer ones. I still don't think it matches that pattern. Hal Jordan isn't really a hero that has beloved big works like Indiana Jones. He's big in the comics and that is about it. I think this far more matches the pervasive phenomenon of creators adapting work and then not reading the source in favor of making something more "interesting" and "innovative." Nolan's Odyssey, Spider-Man: Brand New Day, Marvel's Wolverine... all of these fit perfectly into the modern writers' aversion to reading.

Here is a short list of some actually good Green Lantern stories if you want to do something that modern writers can't do apparently:

• Hard-Traveling Heroes (Green Lantern/Green Arrow road trip while dealing with pressing issues of the 70s)
• Emerald Dawn (Hal's origin)
• Justice League International (comedic adventures starring Guy among others)
• Geoff Johns' Run (sprawling definitive epic)
• The New Frontier (Non-Canon story reinterpreting all of DC mythology with Hal as a main character)

Apophenia: The tendency to perceive meaningful patterns in unrelated data.

Going to make a bit of an effortpost here as (as you can tell from my profile picture) I am a bit of a Green Lantern fan. Both Mauler and Metal have recently commented on how Lanterns fits a tired recent trope of old legacy heroes being knocked down to support a new, often diverse, replacement. This trend does in fact exist (see The Last Jedi, Dial of Destiny, and Black Widow). However, Lanterns doesn't really fit and I think that Mauler and Metal are misattributing it to the pattern. Hal Jordan, throughout the 70s to the 90s, was actually a lot of the things Mauler mentions here. John Stewart isn't a new diverse character. John Stewart being Hal's replacement is the story, not a part of some studio agenda.

I want to first look over Mauler's tweet. This take on Hal Jordan is not modern. If you read DC comics from the 1970s to the mid 1990s you will be surprised how arrogant, old, and angsty Hal is. In the 1970s, in his own series (starting with #76), he is the ignorant asshole that Green Arrow has to knock down and show the struggles of ordinary Americans. After Crisis on Infinite Earths, where most characters are rebooted or de-aged, Hal is made older and presented as a veteran superhero. Not many years later, Hal turns evil and dies. James Gunn seems to be pulling mostly from this era, from the Bronze Age to Zero Hour. His Superman, Suicide Squad, Peacemaker, and even what we know of Man of Tomorrow, all best fit the era of the Justice League International, a human-focused Superman, Panic in the Sky, and a ragtag Suicide Squad. Even looking at these adjectives is either puzzling because I don't see how they match the show or fit Hal Jordan of that era. Drunken? I guess he drank a little in the show, but he seems to be dealing with some trauma. Not exactly ooc for him either. Disheveled? Same thing. Arrogant? That's a core trait of Hal Jordan c'mon. Selfish? I don't see how he was exactly selfish here until we see the rest of the season. Lonely? see #1 and also not exactly out of character. Idiotic? See selfish. Loser? see #1. If I was to describe him here it would be likely arrogant tired asshole. Depending on what we see happened in 2006, that could be totally warranted and in character. Executed? We didn't see him die. Why is he here? In the scene right before this we literally had an alien who could mimic someone and it was specifically remarked that it would be accurate even after death. That feels like a pretty clear hint to me that something fishy is going on. People that have seen up to episode seven have even hinted that you get plenty of Hal and that this isn't what it seems. Metal even joked that this will be just the John Stewart show. Do we really think that this entire show will be set in 2026?

I understand that many other Green Lantern fans here might take issue with Hal Jordan's portrayal here, especially if they are fans specifically of Geoff Johns' Green Lantern run which does portray him as a more polished superhero. That is a correct interpretation, but this one is too. Also, if you've read Johns' run, you would know that the more polished Hal comes after his descent and starts literally with his Rebirth. You could have Kyle Chandler or even a younger actor take over the role and play that and it would be insanely comic accurate.

John Stewart is not a diverse new character and race is an integral part of his character. It would simply be unfaithful to make a mature adaptation of John Stewart, and his upbringing, and not have his race as a topic for the story. Since his inception in the 1970s, his character has been like that. I'm going to find it hilarious if MAGAts online find 1970s comic books too woke. Even in those early appearances, John did have conflict about being Hal's replacement.

According to Gunn, Tom King's initial vision for the story was the conflict of John being Hal's replacement and the subsequent buddy cop potential. This wasn't Lindelof's idea or Gunn's or some woke studio mandate, it was Tom King's pitch. Tom King knows Green Lantern lore and knows that the setup and predicament don't exactly make sense with the generally understood rules of the Green Lantern Corps. The show even addresses that with the 2006 Halogram. Some people, like Metal's chat, assume that this an error, when it clearly isn't. This is the mystery. I find it frustrating that Mauler and co. correctly argue that Disney projects like Marvel or Star Wars play it too safe and are boring slop and then when something presents a mystery and takes risks, it's immediately trampled upon. What would you like the studios to do?>!If Buffy season six had released today would we critique it for it's risks? How dare you have Spike do that. How dare you have Wesley do that in Angel season three. You kill that character in season six?!<Those are the best parts.

Nerdrotic has also been tweeting about how this show is automatically bad because it's a mystery box show. I could be wrong, but how is this a mystery box show at all? I thought the idea of the mystery box, according to JJ Abrams, was that not even the writer knew the answer to the mystery and that's why it was bad. Infamously that's why Lost sucked by the end. That's also why Westworld crumbled. They had no idea to such a degree that they could change it based on reddit comments. If Lindelof was the only guy here then maybe I could see the fear. This story was only really pitched as a single season, so I still don't really see how it applies but still I get it, but this story was Tom King's idea. I assume most people here don't know his writing but he doesn't really do mystery boxes. His mysteries are usually quite simple in the end. I would compare them to Game of Thrones mysteries where the answer is interesting but doesn't actually really matter and is more a launching pad for the story. Like who killed Jon Arryn is an interesting mystery but gets answered in a throwaway line in the fourth season and really was just there to get Ned to do things.

Throughout a lot of Metal's discussion of the episode, he mentions all of these mystery things like why did the grandfather >!(who is totally not Vandal Savage)!< bail him out? Why did the grandma fuck John? He presents all of these as flaws and weird. Can we let the story play out a little first? I see this and immediately think "I wonder how this will play out" but instead he was like "weird and boring". Can we have something objective here?

Edit: I also want to add that if Lanterns continues and there are other seasons with other Lanterns, there are so many other main Lanterns. Putting aside current Lanterns Guy and John, there is Kyle (who was the main GL from 1994 to 2005), Jo, Simon, Jessica, Alan, Razer, Aya, and many others that are all beloved.

A.I. thumbnails. Making fun of Milly's appearance for no reason. This is disgusting. If this happened in real life, you would think the person doing it was disgusting. Just because someone is a "Hollywood actor" doesn't mean they are worthy of this level of harassment. If someone kept calling your family member or friend an ape or a caveman and made AI images depicting them as such and was part of a group of people doing this online, you would think that person is unhinged.