If you grew up before the Crisis on Infinite Earths, the Hal Jordan Green Lantern you knew was a one note conservative hero whose only flaw might have been that he was too noble, too good, too heroic.
That changed in the 80s with the publication of a miniseries called Emerald Dawn, which saw changes made to Hal Jordan. In the original Green Lantern origin Hal Jordan was chosen because he was the most deserving man in the area; post-Emerald Dawn Hal Jordan was chosen because he was closest. Among the most controversial changes to Hal Jordan was the fact that the miniseries turned him into a drunk driver who served time in the brig for getting behind the wheel while sloshed.
Expect to see that Hal Jordan in the Green Lantern movie. Today director Martin Campbell told me that what people will like best about Hal Jordan is that he is ‘[t]he hotshot military guy who is slightly fucked up. He screws up a bit. He may be a hotshot as a pilot, but he also has chinks in his armor, which is what makes him interesting. In fact if anybody should not be chosen as Green Lantern, it would have been Hal Jordan. That’s the journey that film takes, about somebody who on the surface of it is the least likely candidate to become one of the greatest Green Lanterns.’
In fact, Campbell specifically called Emerald Dawn ‘the origin,’ so any hope of that stoic, right winger Hal Jordan is probably dashed right now.
27 comments
Was there hope of that stoic right winger Hal Jordan? We do want the movie to be interesting right?
Yeah, I think it would be interesting to have a right winger as a superhero. Who the hell wants to see this crap they have in mind? You're telling me it's interesting to have the most cliche story in the world told yet again? "This is the last guy who should be a superhero, but you know what, eventually he learns his path and becomes a great superhero!!" Wow, so complicated, so dramatic, what a character arc! The fact they're going with this origin makes my interest in the film go WAY down. Could they really be any LESS interesting? Campbell is a hack, talks like a studio exec with this bullshit.
Martin Campell has done nothing but solid action adventure movies in his career. I like the way they are going after this material.
Hacks like AnimalStructure are one of the many reasons why I hate the internet 'comments' section. I can ignore them but there are too much hacks out there.
Interesting. I prefer the current Johns stuff myself, and think that the very "locked down" "good cop" from stories like Hard Traveling Heroes is some solid Green Lantern.
Either way, I'll wait till the finished product. Just hope they don't try to make him Hancock.
I'm pretty certain that AnimalStructure hasn't followed Green Lantern at all. If he knew anything more about the character than what's there in those few sentences above, he'd know just how full of shit he sounds. Old Hal was in fact boring, and it would have been even MORE cliched for hm to remain the way he was, as the DCU was already full of Boy Scout-types, and they weren't about to make Supes or Shazam into drunken fuck-ups. Hal's poor judgment would rear it's ugly head again and he'd even become a villain for a while, leading to more interesting stories that wouldn't have been possible if he would have stuck to his Silver Age values the whole time.
Jess Mitchell, why don't you go fuck yourself? It's about the only thing you can do to help humanity, cause you obviously like hackneyed, cliche ridden bullshit about "flawed" heroes who find their heroism over the course of two hours. I think the fact that Jordan gets a fucking power ring and needs to learn how to use it is enough of a conflict for me. I don't need some tired bullshit about how flawed he is. "Wow, you know, at first I didn't think this character would have what it takes to be a Green Lantern, but look at that, he did it! I am so happy now!" Fuck off you twat. I love Green Lantern, the real Green Lantern, not some revisionist, bullshit modern take of a hero with angst. That is NOT Green Lantern, or at least it didn't used to be. But what the fuck do you children know, I bet you think Donner's Superman stunk cause Clark didn't have to get over a drug problem to become Supes. You children love tired shit, so go on loving it, but don't expect those of us with taste to go along with your idiocy.
'Noble', 'Good', 'Heroic' = RIGHT-WINGER ?!?
Pffft. Hal Jordan didn't become interesting until Geoff Johns took control of the character. Emerald Dawn is terrible and Green Lantern: Secret Origin is FAAAAR better. Pretty sure Campbell has no idea most people only think that Johns' Green Lantern is the only relevant Lantern(yeah even more than O'Neill/Adams), probably doesn't even know there is a Geoff Johns run
Animalstructure, have you ever actually watched a movie? Seriously, you sound like you know less than shit. To prove you are not a complete idiot, perhaps you'd care to furnish us with an example of a decent film – any decent film – in which the protagonist did not have a flaw that required him/her to go through a transformative arc.
12 Steps to Super
Sounds like Iron Man, I'm sure it's no accident.
I don't know what's worse, turning Hal Jordan into a Tony Stark clone, or Devin's iobsession to see everything through a political lens. Developmentally Arrested Devin.
So, this AnimalStructure person has once again failed to show that they know anything more about the character than what's said in the article. "I love Green Lantern, the real Green Lantern, not some revisionist, bullshit modern take of a hero with angst" he says. Does a story written in the mid-80s still count as a revisionist, bullshit modern take? Also, the Donner Superman movie was fine. The newer Singer flick where they added ridiculous things just for the sake of trying to be different, instead of following the established source material? THAT was some bullshit. Also, while we're on the subject of AnimalStructure being a complete tool, feel free to check out this Cracked article from the other day, "11 Most Common (and Sad) Internet Argument Techniques". It's pretty dead-on. http://www.cracked.com/funny-3809-internet-argument-techniques/ .
I'm thinking he might be a #10…
I prefer Emerald Dawn II and The Road Back (the first "regular series" Green Lantern acr from Gerard Jones) to Emerald Dawn. I'm glad they're seeking inspiration from the Jones run, though. There's something down-to-Earth about Jones' run on the book that I liked.
Sounds to me like they are going with a superhero version of Jeremy renner's character in the hurt locker. Which is a ok with me. I trust cambpell to deliver the goods.
The script doesn't go TOO far with that.
Hal is mostly going to be compared to Downey's Tony Stark. But with more family issues than money. Less so with the alcohol.
Cool.
PlanB, how old are you? How long have you been reading comics? The 80's was the heyday for revisionist takes on well established characters. Batman and Green Lantern are just two superheroes who had their image retconned in the 80's. And yes, it still counts as modern considering how long the characters existed before said revisionism. And the fact you read Cracked kind of proves to me you're probably still in high school.
Oh and PlanB, you've still yet to show you know anything about Green Lantern, at all. You keep demonstrating your ignorance of Green Lantern with your asinine rants. You know nothing about the character, and your posts prove it.
Hateful, spiteful, arrogant, and angry equals Rightwinger. Oh, and a show on Fox.
@reduced20,
yea, way to show those arrogant, spiteful rightwingers who's boss, insulting them for no apparent reason in a movie site's comments section. You've really highlighted all the spite and hatefulness those evil rightwingers have!
Hey, AnimalStructure, I'm still waiting for YOU to show that you know anything about GL other than what's been said about him here. You mention the 80's revisionist stuff, but even that was discussed in the article. I started reading the book in late '93 when Hal was going crazy after the events of the "Reign of the Supermen", when Kyle Rayner was on his way in. It was a good jumping on point, because Kyle was a brand new character, and they did a good job of explaining the GL mythos to new readers, which made me interested in checking out the old stuff, so I went back and read a lot of it (DC had pretty extensive reprint collections even before the big trade paperback boom of the last decade). However, I haven't really followed the character all that much in the last few years since Jordan has become a full-fledged Lantern once again, aside from when he plays a part in other books or crossovers that I DO follow more closely. For over a decade though, I was pretty steady GL supporter, past and present. Also, I STILL don't think you can refer to the 80's revamp as "some revisionist, bullshit modern take of a hero with angst", because at this point, the 80's revamp has been around about as long as the Hal Jordan version of GL was BEFORE the revamp. It's hardly "modern" at this point. Getting upset about it is about as topical as venting about New Coke. In closing, yes, I read a humor website, but all of us read a certain movie news website that has had it's fair share of less-than-intelligent writing, so to bash people that read one while using the other as a platform to launch your off-the-wall tirades is just a wee bit hypocritical.
Oh, and speaking of "And the fact you read ________ kind of proves to me you're probably still in high school"-type comments, it seems that AnimalStructure may be an authority on something green, but it probably has nothing to do with lanterns…
http://legalmarijuanadispensary.com/index.php?option=com_community&view=profile&userid=13777&Itemid=152 . Might not be the same guy, but just sayin'. Also, there was an AnimalStructure that was seemingly banned for life from a site called hollywood-elsewhere.com. Even if these aren't the very same AnimalStructure's, they're still calling THIS ONE a retard on the forum. Not ME, but y'know, "they". You don't seem to be very well liked on AICN either.
Ha, ha! Drivin' drunk. Classic!
sigh. why does hollywood always change things? why can't they make things that have worked – work?
@Anonymous:
Because audiences change. What works for 10-year-old male comic readers in 1959 isn't going to work for adult movie goers of both genders in 2011.
You're so against change…why aren't you upset that Hollywood isn't doing a film version of the Alan Scott Green Lantern?
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.