When Green Lanter became a villain

[SiegePerilous02]

It's been brought up earlier and Hal has been compared to the character earlier in this thread.

And come to think of it, John wasn't the only character brought up, either.

But the other characters were brought up by a poster who brings them up at any opportunity, regardless of the thread.

Though in this specific discussion, the other GLs (especially Kyle) coming up seems inevitable, but the topic is about Emerald Twilight and how people feel about it, so naturally some of the strongest reactions are going to be about Hal because it was about him and had the biggest impact on him at the time.

[HAN9000]

Can John fans just stop moaning about racial prejudice in every Lantern thread to show their existence?

[lemonpeace]

Can John fans just stop moaning in every Lantern thread to show their existence?

LOL what? I was with you up until the end, I agree some John fans take the criticism too far, but complaining to show their existence? That's silly. It's not possible they just legitimately have grievances /s.

[HAN9000]

I'm seeing commenters here that Hal Jordan has been treated the worse of all. I hate the idea that Hal Jordan was killed off, no doubt. But he's brought back. DC and Warner Bros. invested a lot into the character since then. He's a leading Green Lantern, has a movie, TV series, appeared in video games, toy merchandise, and at times have one of the most popular black characters such as John Stewart to play black best friend. If this was John, none of that would have happened. He'll still be dead. Hal Jordan is a good example of white privilege

Hal was brought back because he is a great character, just like Luke Cage, Black Panther, and Storm. Not because of so-called "white privilege". If John was killed off and no one tried to bring him back, maybe you should think about what's the difference between him and these characters.

[Johnny]

One thing I would add about this whole debacle is that at least allowed Kyle to grow as a character from the get-go. Which is where the Peter Parker comparisons came from, an average New Yorker suddenly given a great power and having to learn how to use it for the good of humanity. And much like Peter, Kyle had to figure it all out on his own. The "clean slate" that DC editorially mandated so Kyle would be the only GL left was so they could allow him to stand out on his own. That was reflected in the story, Kyle wasn't fighting Hal's former arch enemy, wasn't partnered with Hal's former best friend, didn't even get to meet some of the other former Lanterns until later on. I think in DC's eyes, Emerald Twilight was really supposed to be a means to end, in the grand scheme of things it was meant to be less about Hal's fall and more about Kyle's rise. What I think DC really underestimated was the fan attachment to Hal at the time. This wasn't the type of "means to an end" story that One More Day was where Marvel were fully aware they would piss off their fandom for years to come by erasing the Peter/MJ marriage, while DC actually seemed to think the fans didn't care enough about Hal anymore to get mad about what was done to him, when it turned out to be the exact opposite. They probably thought after the initial "shock", it would just go away, when it never did. That's why they did the subsequent changes to Hal's character in an effort to redeem him even before Johns came on board.

[HAN9000]

LOL what? I was with you up until the end, I agree some John fans take the criticism too far, but complaining to show their existence? That's silly. It's not possible they just legitimately have grievances /s.

And they just have to whine about that in a thread that absolutely has nothing to do with John, or everyone else will forget about their existence.

[Lee]

Heroes shouldn't be turned into mass murderers, unless that was the intention of the original creators.

[Agent Z]

Heroes shouldn't be turned into mass murderers, unless that was the intention of the original creators.

Why? I'm not exactly a fan of Parallax Hal but there's a ton of things done to characters that are against the intentions of the original creators.

[lemonpeace]

And they just have to whine about that in a thread that absolutely has nothing to do with John, or everyone else will forget about their existence.

Not really, they feel their favorite character has been mistreated and feel that it relates to the topic; in this case it does. Hal Jordan's turn directly effects John, Guy, and the entirety of the Green Lantern mythos. It's not an uncommon occurrence that tangents happen on these threads. Fans complain, literally the whole premise of this thread rests on complaints about a story that happened over 20 years ago that DC has bent over backwards to correct and overcorrect. Fans, especially comic book fans, are generally a whiney lot. If you take issue with their grievances, try to understand their issues, then present a case and debate their complaints. It's pretty condescending saying they're complaining to remind people they exist because it implies an absurdity in the existence of a fan of John Stewart (intentionally or not) and doesn't really do anything for the general discourse.

[lemonpeace]

One thing I would add about this whole debacle is that at least allowed Kyle to grow as a character from the get-go. Which is where the Peter Parker comparisons came from, an average New Yorker suddenly given a great power and having to learn how to use it for the good of humanity. And much like Peter, Kyle had to figure it all out on his own. The "clean slate" that DC editorially mandated so Kyle would be the only GL left was so they could allow him to stand out on his own. That was reflected in the story, Kyle wasn't fighting Hal's former arch enemy, wasn't partnered with Hal's former best friend, didn't even get to meet some of the other former Lanterns until later on. I think in DC's eyes, Emerald Twilight was really supposed to be a means to end, in the grand scheme of things it was meant to be less about Hal's fall and more about Kyle's rise. What I think DC really underestimated was the fan attachment to Hal at the time. This wasn't the type of "means to an end" story that One More Day was where Marvel were fully aware they would piss off their fandom for years to come by erasing the Peter/MJ marriage, while DC actually seemed to think the fans didn't care enough about Hal anymore to get mad about what was done to him, when it turned out to be the exact opposite. They probably thought after the initial "shock", it would just go away, when it never did. That's why they did the subsequent changes to Hal's character in an effort to redeem him even before Johns came on board.

This makes sense. They were too short sighted, they wanted to push this one character and underestimated the blow back of blowing up the entire franchise to reconfigure it around them. The thing is, I feel DC as a whole hasn't fully learn their lesson (or at least didn't learn the right lessons) in the fall out because even today I feel we still see shades of the same problems today. I don't think the Green Lantern mythos ever properly recovered from that initial fragmentation and it was the progenitor of the weird internal fandom warfare we see today.

[Ascended]

Heroes shouldn't be turned into mass murderers, unless that was the intention of the original creators.

I cant agree with that. I think the intention and vision of the creators should always be kept in mind but I dont think it should limit what can be done, either. I mean, just think of all the stuff that has been added to characters and their mythologies that the original creators never included (or were even alive to see).

If we limit characters to what their original creators intended we wouldn't have Dick Grayson as Nightwing, Wally would never be the Flash (and Barry would never exist if we wanna be technical about it), huge chunks of Superman's mythology wouldn't exist, etc.

The original intent should always be respected, but it should never become chains that hold a character or IP back from exploring new ground.

[Lee]

Why? I'm not exactly a fan of Parallax Hal but there's a ton of things done to characters that are against the intentions of the original creators.

I cant agree with that. I think the intention and vision of the creators should always be kept in mind but I dont think it should limit what can be done, either. I mean, just think of all the stuff that has been added to characters and their mythologies that the original creators never included (or were even alive to see).

If we limit characters to what their original creators intended we wouldn't have Dick Grayson as Nightwing, Wally would never be the Flash (and Barry would never exist if we wanna be technical about it), huge chunks of Superman's mythology wouldn't exist, etc.

The original intent should always be respected, but it should never become chains that hold a character or IP back from exploring new ground.

Note that I was specifically talking about heroes being turned into mass murderers, not heroes getting a new name or a new costume.

[Dr. Ellingham]

What was your reaction to Hal Jordan becoming a villain in the 90s??

I'd stopped reading comics in the late 1980s, and years later saw an issue of Final Night at a drugstore. I thought - why is Green Lantern so...guilty in this story? And wearing such a weird uniform? Over time I got back into the hobby a bit, and read all the lead-up - The Road Back, Emerald Twilight, etc.

I thought the whole direction was...disgusting. More importantly - small-minded.


Ditto Death of Superman, Knightfall. But I got why DC did all this; they were in 3rd place behind Marvel and Image, desperate to appeal to teenage readers of the 90s. Classic superheroes were out, and angst, "kewl" stuff was in. Less Asteroids and Pac Man, more Mortal Kombat, if you will.

Setting their core IPs on fire was the best answer they had to show the market - "We're not your dad's comics anymore...honest!!!!"

[Ascended]

Note that I was specifically talking about heroes being turned into mass murderers, not heroes getting a new name or a new costume.

Ha! Fair enough and good point.

I still think Parallax had a ton of potential though. What made it work for me was Hal's regret. That was a guy who lost his temper and did some really stupid, horrible things.....and after he calmed down realized just how much damage he had done and how lost he had become. And that made him a very interesting character to me. Zero Hour was.....whatever. But Hal trying to atone and find his way back to his old life afterwards? Those were some of my favorite Kyle stories from the early years.

[Johnny]

Heroes shouldn't be turned into mass murderers, unless that was the intention of the original creators.

I think it depends but it really didn't work with Hal specifically. For instance I've seen Darth Vader comparisons to the Parallax story more than once before and I still don't get it. There's a reason we first saw Darth Vader long before we were ever introduced to Anakin Skywalker. Vader was meant to be the bad guy from the start and his backstory was revealed at a much later time. With Hal it wasn't like that, it's not like his stint as GL was part of some previously untold backstory like it was with Anakin's past as a jedi, since Hal was the lead character of the franchise for decades. It would perhaps be more comparable had Luke been the one to suddenly become the next Darth Vader for the sake of shock value. You can't just take any lead character like that and suddenly do something with them that directly contradicts everything you've known about them for decades, which is where the backlash for Luke in "The Last Jedi" came from, SW fans weren't happy that Luke was acting out of character in that movie, the same way Hal fans were complaining about what Hal was doing in the mid-90s.