This is a port over from the tavern:
Newest post at the top, as usual.
QuoteNinja D!
I only have two problems with this. First, I liked Alan Scott's children. We probably won't see an appearance from Jade or Obsidian now. Second, people seem to have a hard time wrapping their head around there being multiple Green Lanterns and I'm afraid this could hurt the Green Lantern movie franchise.
Ninja D!
He isn't the first gay DC character. Off the top of my head, there's Batwoman, two of the guys in Stormwatch are a couple, and that new flamboyant Mexican kid in Teen Titans. I don't think it's a big deal at all and DC doing these press releases is ridiculous.
Elemental_Elf
There are very, very few LGBT Super Hero characters. Marvel is making a gay wedding story arc, which was big news. DC realized they were behind the times and so quickly made one of their established characters gay. It is noteworthy because DC teased it a week ago, then announced it yesterday.
sparkletwist
It was more of a general "so what?" I'm probably a bit idealistic or whatever but it's weird to me that it's 2012 and someone being gay is still worth any hype at all. Unless they're some ardently anti-gay politician or whatever, but then it's more about the hypocrisy.
Elemental_Elf
"Rebooted". It was more of a consolidation of the continuity than anything else. Alan did have a lantern but it wasn't as cool as Hal's. I hate that the first gay DC character is in an alternate universe (very much a cop out).
Ninja D!
Also, they rebooted DC almost a year ago now. And I have no idea why that last one posted twice.
Ninja D!
Alan Scott had a lantern, originally. Also, this is Alan Scott of Earth-2. It's an alternate reality.
Superfluous Crow
@sparkletwist: if it was aimed at me, I was merely questioning E_E.
And as I understand it they are rebooting the whole thing, so they are probably going with a more up-to-date approach to his role.
Elemental_Elf
When people say Green Lantern, they think of the GL Corps. as well as Hal Jordan and John Stewart. Alan Scott is not apart of the GL Corps. mythos. He predates it. He doesn't even use a Lantern. He's more like a magician with a magic ring.
sparkletwist
So what?
Superfluous Crow
Isn't the Green Lantern sorta mainstream?
Elemental_Elf
DC made Alan Scott, the original Green Lantern, Gay. With all the hype, I was hoping for some one a bit more main stream.
Ooops, I meant first big time gay DC character that attracted a lot of attention in the mainstream community. I heard a rumor that the creators decided to de-age Scott and so, to compensate for the loss of his children, they made him gay. If true, that is a HUGE disappointment.
I really feel like they rushed this change out the door so DC could a) get free publicity and b) say "we have gay characters too!!!"
I'm shocked as to the reaction about this move. I can understand the fanboys not liking it (retcons like this suck) but the mainstream world, like NinjaD said, is having a hard time understanding that there are multiple Green Lanterns. Maybe the confusion is due to Allan Scott not being like the other Green Lanterns but still possessing their powers and name, more than coming to terms with multiple Green Lanterns... Then again, I suppose people don't know who John Stewart or Guy Gardner are... I do think this outing will definitely hurt the Green Lantern movie franchise, especially after all of the news outlets are showing pictures of Hal Jordan instead of Alan Scott.
Well, rewriting someone to be gay is still better than simply declaring their character to be gay by author fiat, like J.K. Rowling did with Dumbledore after the fact. I'm not terribly familiar with comics but my impression is that there have been a lot of massive revisions of superheroes and their backstories over the years; turning one character out of a stable of hundreds (thousands?) gay is, to me, not a very big deal.
What does bother me slightly is the use of gay people for shock value.
I guess I need to get a better handle on everyone's reaction here.
Retcons have always made me crazy. Actually drove me away from comics, to be honest. I agree with the Elf that it was a rush job to seem relevant. I also don't consider Alan Scott a major character, nor do I find a retconning that gets rid of his children to be a good one. Hundreds of characters to choose from, and they had to pick on who already had a deep backstory with family members. I'd rather they had made him poly or bi and kept the kids.
For a much more interesting LGBT character from DC, have a look at John Constantine (from Hellblazer, in their Vertigo imprint). Most people assumed he was heterosexual for the first fifty issues, but casual revelations throughout the comic and a few later storylines reveal him to be bisexual in a fairly subtle, nuanced way - his sexuality is highly ambiguous, and it's on a spectrum instead of conforming to the gay/straight binary. It's never a huge deal for the character: he doesn't conform to major LGBT stereotypes, he isn't defined by his sexuality, and it's never played for shock value (the first time we learn Constantine has had same-sex relationships is in a throwaway bit of self-narration in a caption where he mentions he's had "Girlfriends, the odd boyfriend," in a story that isn't about his sexuality at all).
EDIT: I also agree with Vreeg that retconning is silly and annoying. Either don't care about continuity and ignore any continuity bumps or stick to it. Of course, that's not how superhero comics work - retcons are a necessary evil for them - but that's one of the reasons they annoy the crap out of me.
I thought Jade and Obsidian we're really important characters in the Blackest NIght and Brighest Day storylines? Or am I delusional?
At least Jade was. She was also a huge part of Kyle Rayner's (Green Lantern) background, which is supposed to be mostly intact after the relaunch. An important thing to keep in mind, however, is that this is the Earth-2 Alan Scott. So the Earth-1 or Prime or whatever Alan Scott could still be fully intact with his children and all that.
I had only seen a couple of stories about this. Are some places seriously using pictures of Hal? I hope DC gets on damage control for that soon or it could REALLY hurt the movie franchise.
I'm sure I'll have more to say about this at some point but I've got to go get stuff done right now.
I think it's laudable to put more LGBT role models in the media-- especially in superheroic roles-- but having this reveal turn out to be an alternate-universe version of an obscure B- or C-lister strikes me as just dull tokenism. "Gay superhero? That's cool. ...Oh, it's a backup version of someone nobody cares about anyway?"
It being in an alternate world sort of makes it a joke. Really, I don't get why anyone is making a big deal of it, anyway. With Batwoman it was kind of a big thing. Now with this same sex marriage in X-Men, that's kind of a big thing. Otherwise, it's not a huge deal.
I don't consider this to be a retcon or changing of the character because it's an alternate world that was not previously established.
Quote from: Ninja D!I had only seen a couple of stories about this. Are some places seriously using pictures of Hal? I hope DC gets on damage control for that soon or it could REALLY hurt the movie franchise.
Nothing could possibly hurt the movie franchise more than the first movie did.
It wasn't that bad. The extended version should have been the theatrical release.
Marketing! :D
M.
Quote from: Ninja D!
I had only seen a couple of stories about this. Are some places seriously using pictures of Hal? I hope DC gets on damage control for that soon or it could REALLY hurt the movie franchise.
I was flipping through TV channels and no one was really posting images of Alan Scott on the day of. Many sites have switched their pictures since then but not all.
Quote from: Elven Doritos
Nothing could possibly hurt the movie franchise more than the first movie did.
Rewatch the movie on your TV. It actually is not that bad, enjoyable even. It is no Avengers or Batman but it is definitely not X-Men Wolvering bad.
Quote from: Ninja D!
It being in an alternate world sort of makes it a joke. Really, I don't get why anyone is making a big deal of it, anyway. With Batwoman it was kind of a big thing. Now with this same sex marriage in X-Men, that's kind of a big thing. Otherwise, it's not a huge deal.
I don't consider this to be a retcon or changing of the character because it's an alternate world that was not previously established.
People are making a big deal out of it because DC is making a big deal out of it. They came out last week and basically said "One of your principle characters will be revealed to be gay next week." This lead to a week long discussion, and tons of hype, as to which character would be retconned as gay. DC built it up as big event. I honestly feel a retconned, alternate universe version of a B-list hero was very disappointing. They could have actually done something meaningful with this little gimmick. Instead they just turned it into an attention grabbing headline... Kinda like the New 52 really.
I stayed away from the theatrical release of Green Lantern, because the trailers made it look like a terrible movie. When it came around on the television, and I decided "I can turn just turn it off if it sucks, and I won't be wasting money!" I watched it, and it wasn't nearly as terrible as I feared. Still not a great movie, but it was watchable. Can't say I'd be interested in watching it again, though.
And while the bit after the credits set it up for a sequel, but I have doubts that it will actually happen.
I meant I don't understand why DC is making a big deal of it.
I also wish the new 52 has been a total reboot just so I could see Harvey Dent fall from grace to become Twoface again.
Green Lantern 2 is already in the works. They made all their money back just on merchandising and promotional stuff before the film even hit theaters. Massive profit.
Quote from: Ninja D!
I meant I don't understand why DC is making a big deal of it.
Because they are scared to appear irrelevant in the face of Marvel's gay wedding.
Quote from: Ninja D!I also wish the new 52 has been a total reboot just so I could see Harvey Dent fall from grace to become Twoface again.
I agree! It would have been cool to see old stories shaped and molded to suit a new era, as well as the complete sloughing off of the old, haphazard continuity.
Quote from: Ninja D!Green Lantern 2 is already in the works. They made all their money back just on merchandising and promotional stuff before the film even hit theaters. Massive profit.
It was not a Box office hit (it only grossed 20 million dollars) but, yes, the merchandising made the movie successful to Warner Bros. Plus, Ryan Reynolds is a good actor to play Hal Jordan, especially with the Justice League movie on the horizon.
I thought that Ryan Reynolds was a terrible choice. I also don't think a Justice League movie should be made.
Quote from: Ninja D!
I thought that Ryan Reynolds was a terrible choice. I also don't think a Justice League movie should be made.
Ryan Reynolds has the right amount of charisma, looks and acting ability to pull it off.
The Justice League movie will become a reality because there's a huge potential market for it thanks to the Avengers.
Batman will soon begin the process of being rebooted, Superman is being rebooted, Green Lantern is getting a second film. All they need is a Wonder Woman film to have a well rounded team of four, if they really are going to follow the Marvel movie formula to the T.
I think he's lacking the look and acting ability. The Justice League movie was always going to happen but the team things are cheesey. They tried for a Wonderwoman TV movie and series and got shot down.
Why is Batman getting a reboot? I thought Rises was continuing the two filmes with Bale?
Damn it, this is why I never got into comics.
M.
Quote from: Contumelious Che
Why is Batman getting a reboot? I thought Rises was continuing the two filmes with Bale?
Damn it, this is why I never got into comics.
M.
No, Rises concludes the trilogy.
After that, it is time to reboot the series to bring it in line with the other Justice League movies. My guess is that the current stock of Batman movies are too dark and not comic book-y enough to jive with the likes Green Lantern and Superman.
Quote from: LordVreeg
I guess I need to get a better handle on everyone's reaction here.
Retcons have always made me crazy. Actually drove me away from comics, to be honest. I agree with the Elf that it was a rush job to seem relevant. I also don't consider Alan Scott a major character, nor do I find a retconning that gets rid of his children to be a good one. Hundreds of characters to choose from, and they had to pick on who already had a deep backstory with family members. I'd rather they had made him poly or bi and kept the kids.
Quote from: Luminous Crayon
I think it's laudable to put more LGBT role models in the media-- especially in superheroic roles-- but having this reveal turn out to be an alternate-universe version of an obscure B- or C-lister strikes me as just dull tokenism. "Gay superhero? That's cool. ...Oh, it's a backup version of someone nobody cares about anyway?"
Quote from: Elemental_Elf
gimmick.
Nothing to add, here...
Quote from: Elemental_Elf
Quote from: Contumelious Che
Why is Batman getting a reboot? I thought Rises was continuing the two filmes with Bale?
Damn it, this is why I never got into comics.
M.
No, Rises concludes the trilogy.
After that, it is time to reboot the series to bring it in line with the other Justice League movies. My guess is that the current stock of Batman movies are too dark and not comic book-y enough to jive with the likes Green Lantern and Superman.
This is my understanding as well. Dark Knight Rises is in fact concluding Chris Nolan's Batman franchise. Then they get to start all over again! Again...
Quote from: Seraphine_Harmonium
Quote from: Elemental_Elf
Quote from: Contumelious Che
Why is Batman getting a reboot? I thought Rises was continuing the two filmes with Bale?
Damn it, this is why I never got into comics.
M.
No, Rises concludes the trilogy.
After that, it is time to reboot the series to bring it in line with the other Justice League movies. My guess is that the current stock of Batman movies are too dark and not comic book-y enough to jive with the likes Green Lantern and Superman.
This is my understanding as well. Dark Knight Rises is in fact concluding Chris Nolan's Batman franchise. Then they get to start all over again! Again...
Correction: Dark Knight Rises is in fact concluding Chris Nolan's Batman franchise. Then Christopher Nolan gets to do it all over again!
Yup, Nolan and his wife are going to be producers for the new Batman franchise. This can be good and bad. On the one hand, he's proven himself to be quite capable. On the other, he may not be able to pull off non-gritty-realistic as well as others.
Quote from: Elemental ElfMy guess is that the current stock of Batman movies are too dark and not comic book-y enough to jive with the likes Green Lantern and Superman.
To me, this is the really big problem with the Justice League, and really with the entire idea of the DC universe. Batman tends to fight bad guys on a certain scale. Usually, their super-powers are very low-key: the Penguin, Catwoman, the Joker, Mr. Freeze, Scarecrow, Two-Face, Zsasz, the Riddler, and even characters like Bane, Poison Ivy, Clayface, and Killer Croc have modest powers or none at all. As far as I know, virtually all of Batman's central rogue's gallery have powers that can be "explained" by technological accidents, if they even have real powers. This fits with the "gritty" feel of Batman, and the idea that Batman himself isn't superhuman, just rich and resourceful. Plots tend to revolve around Gotham City and its citizens, busting up gangster and foiling terrorist-style plots.
Superman, on the other hand, deals with threats on an epic scale. With the notable exception of Lex Luther, many of his enemies are high-powered cosmic threats: the city-shrinking superhuman robot Brainiac, god-like aliens like Darkseid, Doomsday, Gog, General Zod, and Bizarro, trans-dimensional weirdos like Mr. Mxyzptlk, etc etc. Plots aren't limited to Metropolis but revolve around things like preventing the sun from blowing up or stopping some cosmic being from removing everyone's free will. Green Lantern and Wonder Woman tend to fight similarly intergalactic/dimensional/cosmic threats, like mythological gods and alien shapshifters. It all feels really colourful and over-the-top and BIG. It's the opposite world of the gloomy, mundane, Gothic universe of Batman.
IMO, it thus makes very little sense to jam characters like Batman together with Superman and Green Lantern. Inevitably, Batman seems to lose all of the things that make him Batman: his intense, brooding individuality, a feeling of visceral reality, a sense of alienation and creepiness. Incarnations of Batman that lose that stuff and put Batman on a level with other heroes and supervillians... it's like they missed the whole point of why Batman is cool.
EDIT: On the other hand, the Avengers all basically fit together. [spoiler] One of the more noticeable flaws in the recent film, I thought, was how un-menacing Hawkeye was. I feel like Hulk, Thor, Iron Man, or Captain America could have bested him pretty easily, which is why they had to put him up against Black Widow while he was mind-controlled. In the climactic set-piece battle he felt extraneous, and his absurdly powerful skills just felt kinda silly, at least to me. So Hawkeye, for me, is sorta like a little microcosmic version of why Batman doesn't work in the Justice League...[/spoiler]
The Green Lantern was one of the most boring characters. When I saw the news item with photos of potential LGBT DC characters, I figured it would be the Arrow or the Lantern. Sadly, I don't think that a gimmick like that will be enough to make the Green Lantern interesting :( But at least he should appeal more to some people! :)
It's not the first time this has happened though. Remember when Dr. Fate turned into a woman (???) to fix the gender-balance of the comics.
Steepike,
not to bust the spoiler, but it was one of my favorite issues of the avengers back in the day when all the avengers had been 'collected' by the collector, and only Hawkeye was left to face him and rescue the others. Excellent read, honestly.
I can see how that would be pretty cool! I think Batman has more problems than power level in terms of the tonal dissonance, though. I'm sure there are plenty of awesome Justice League stories, I just think the idea is a little half-baked.
The team up things have always been a bit too cheesey to me. A crossover here and there is awesome but when it's a regular thing with such different characters, I don't really like it.
Quote from: Steerpike
Quote from: Elemental ElfMy guess is that the current stock of Batman movies are too dark and not comic book-y enough to jive with the likes Green Lantern and Superman.
To me, this is the really big problem with the Justice League, and really with the entire idea of the DC universe. Batman tends to fight bad guys on a certain scale. Usually, their super-powers are very low-key: the Penguin, Catwoman, the Joker, Mr. Freeze, Scarecrow, Two-Face, Zsasz, the Riddler, and even characters like Bane, Poison Ivy, Clayface, and Killer Croc have modest powers or none at all. As far as I know, virtually all of Batman's central rogue's gallery have powers that can be "explained" by technological accidents, if they even have real powers. This fits with the "gritty" feel of Batman, and the idea that Batman himself isn't superhuman, just rich and resourceful. Plots tend to revolve around Gotham City and its citizens, busting up gangster and foiling terrorist-style plots.
Superman, on the other hand, deals with threats on an epic scale. With the notable exception of Lex Luther, many of his enemies are high-powered cosmic threats: the city-shrinking superhuman robot Brainiac, god-like aliens like Darkseid, Doomsday, Gog, General Zod, and Bizarro, trans-dimensional weirdos like Mr. Mxyzptlk, etc etc. Plots aren't limited to Metropolis but revolve around things like preventing the sun from blowing up or stopping some cosmic being from removing everyone's free will. Green Lantern and Wonder Woman tend to fight similarly intergalactic/dimensional/cosmic threats, like mythological gods and alien shapshifters. It all feels really colourful and over-the-top and BIG. It's the opposite world of the gloomy, mundane, Gothic universe of Batman.
IMO, it thus makes very little sense to jam characters like Batman together with Superman and Green Lantern. Inevitably, Batman seems to lose all of the things that make him Batman: his intense, brooding individuality, a feeling of visceral reality, a sense of alienation and creepiness. Incarnations of Batman that lose that stuff and put Batman on a level with other heroes and supervillians... it's like they missed the whole point of why Batman is cool.
EDIT: On the other hand, the Avengers all basically fit together. [spoiler] One of the more noticeable flaws in the recent film, I thought, was how un-menacing Hawkeye was. I feel like Hulk, Thor, Iron Man, or Captain America could have bested him pretty easily, which is why they had to put him up against Black Widow while he was mind-controlled. In the climactic set-piece battle he felt extraneous, and his absurdly powerful skills just felt kinda silly, at least to me. So Hawkeye, for me, is sorta like a little microcosmic version of why Batman doesn't work in the Justice League...[/spoiler]
If you watch the Justice League TV show, they manage to combine Batman and Superman, along with the other big names. The key is to giving each a different mission while on the adventure. Sure Batman can't beat the crap out of Darkseid but he can blow Darkseid's death-ray up. Additionally, Batman is amazing at confounding and defeating mooks. Plus, let's be honest, Batman is really smart and very cunning. He can get captured and macguiver himself out of it. Superman can't do that. He relies completely on his powers. That's why Batman is always useful.
However, I fully admit that when super heroes team up, they often become caricatures of themselves. Batman becomes stealthy super tactician. Superman becomes a walking, talking beatstick. Green Lantern (John Stewart) becomes an angry guy who makes crazy stuff with his ring. Wonder Woman embodies all aspects of the female gender (also she gets to fly and has super strength). The Flash becomes super cocky and child-like. Martian Man Hunter becomes a complete background character. Hawk Girl becomes an angry berserker.
As for Hawkeye, I'd say he was very forgettable because he didn't have any real role in the lead in movies. Black Widow had a huge role in Ironman 2, we were able to see her real and her super personas in action. Hawkeye had a cameo in Thor where he basically held his bow up and stood there for 10 minutes. That doesn't tell, or more importantly show, me anything about the character. He didn't feel like he belonged because we really didn't know who he was. Like you said, that's why he was mind controlled and not anyone else.
The biggest issue with Hawkeye probably was that he felt like an afterthought in the movies leading up to Avengers. He made an appearance in Thor but we got nothing of his character. Then, when he's really there in Avengers, he gets mentally dominated almost right away and isn't himself for a large part of the movie. That was made worse by how easy it was to free him when someone actually bothered attempting to do so.
Batman wouldn't have the same failing. He'd be more like Iron Man because we all know that money is the best super power. Also, where the SUPERheroes can normally just charge into things head first and come out on top, Batman always has to plan things so he has that experience when something comes up that everyone needs to be careful with. Batman, as something more unique to him, is also the guy sometimes more able to make or get others to make the difficult choices. Really, he's just not afraid to be a prick if that's what's needed.