|
|
|---|
I was sure that someone was going to die during the War of the Green Lanterns story arc. I just didn't expect that Lantern to die. This is your last warning for spoilers, by the way.
So they went ahead and killed Mogo. Now, once upon a time Mogo was just another interesting character in the GL universe. But in recent years Mogo has been built up to be something important and integral. Mogo was the keeper of the rings and decided who would get them.
Where does that leave the Corps? Without Mogo, who decides where the rings go? Who picks the worthies to wield them?
I feel like this story is shaping up to be one of those tales that really does change things. After War of the Green Lanterns there is going to be a change to the status quo. There has to be. Too much has happened in this story to have no repercussions.
I'm excited to see what happens next.
It has been about a week since I last posted here. That's mostly because, well, I needed a week off from everything after school came to an end for the semester. Now that I've had a chance to breathe I can get back to doing the things I normally do.
I would like to first direct you to the latest trailer for Green Lantern. Does anyone remember when the first trailer came out? Remember how the Internet howled at the apparent comedic aspects of it? How far we have come.
I think this movie has the potential to change the landscape when it comes to DC movies. If a film based around a clearly second tier character that stays close to the source material can make money (and Lord I hope it makes money) then any DC character can do it.
Keep in mind as well that Green Lantern is coming to the theaters a few years after Geoff Johns stepped in and revitalized the GL franchise. The case could be made that he's on his way to doing that again, only with the Flash.
Will we ever see the Flash on screen? Or Wonder Woman? Or any number of other minor characters? I really can't say. But I never thought I'd see the day where I'd see Ryan Reynolds as Hal Jordan as a cardboard standup at the grocery store.
Another quick one. Here's the new trailer for Green Lantern. What do you think? It looks pretty snazzy to me...
And yet... By all accounts somewhere around seventy-five percent of Earth's Green Lanterns will survive this so-called "war." Consider this "striking" cover for the war's aftermath:
Now I am no particular fan of Rayner. He and I have tussled on more than one occasion and that art school dropout never once gave me the respect that my multiple degrees in higher scientific disciplines deserve.
But if you lined up the Green Lanterns and allowed me to choose one to kill... Well, Kyle wouldn't be my first choice. Probably not my second either. He's a stupid kid, but at least he seems to know he's stupid. Unlike Jordan.
I'm sure there will be many who weep and gnash their teeth about Kyle Rayner's impending demise. But I am less concerned with the ones they kill than I am with the ones they leave alive.
Back before they brought back Hal Jordan I didn't want him back. I had no real connection to the character. In some sense I still don't. In fact, I was pretty pissed off in the beginning. Now, I'll admit that a lot of that was the snide smugness of a great many Hal Jordan fans.
Time passed and I mostly got over it. The Green Lanterns I liked didn't go away even with Hal headlining the Green Lantern solo book. And admittedly Geoff Johns was doing some interesting -- if weird -- stuff with the character and the book.
Then they talked about bringing Barry Allen back and I wondered again if it was really necessary. After all, Wally West had a great run as the Flash. I haven't counted, but it wouldn't surprise me to find out he's gotten more page time the the "Patron Saint of the DC Universe" ever did.
But they brought Barry back and I learned what a lot of people had said was true: Barry is incredibly boring. But setting that aside I've also grown comfortable with having him as the Flash again.
I may have gotten used to it, but I sometimes wonder if was really necessary. And I've come to realize that it was absolutely necessary.
How many of you have seen this footage for the Green Lantern movie? There's some pretty impressive stuff in there and I'm quite hopeful that it will make an entertaining film. But it could never have happened if they hadn't brought back Hal Jordan.
Could a film have been created featuring Kyle Rayner? How about Wally West? As much as I love those two characters they are defined by the heroes that came before them. Whether you like it or not, Hal Jordan and Barry Allen are iconic as Green Lantern and the Flash. They even have the dubious honor of having replaced their Golden Age counterparts as the quintessential versions of those characters.
It isn't just limited to the movies either. The characters and concepts in comics and other media need to be at their most pure. It's hard to explain who the Flash is by telling people that he's the nephew of the first Flash. But it's easy to say that a scientist was granted amazing super-speed by a bolt of lightning. Or that a pilot was chosen by a dying alien to wield the most powerful weapon in the universe.
In the same way that Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman can never really be replaced it was folly to think that the same thing could be done with Green Lantern and the Flash. Or Aquaman, for that matter. These are characters too powerful -- for good or ill -- to be overwritten. And when I go see the Green Lantern movie in June, I'll know that it was necessary -- and inevitable -- that Hal Jordan have the starring role.
Make no mistake. I will not like everything that Geoff Johns does with Aquaman. But I am confident that he will do right in setting the character back on track. Why? Because the evidence is clear that Johns understands the three steps to re-establishing an iconic character.
1. Acceptance of the Essentials
Geoff Johns respects the essence of a character's myth. What is the essence of a character's myth? Isn't that act of deciding what a character's essence is subjective? Perhaps. But on the whole "essential" means the elements mostly commonly associated and accepted by the wider public as part of the hero's mythos-- not just the parts the writer happens to like.
The main point here is that Johns does not begin with the presumption that the character is essentially... stupid. He does not think, "Whoa, this character's basic story is ridiculous, and now it's totally broken." Why? Because, regardless of exactly how he terms it, he looks at the characters as mythic. And, as a serious student of mythology knows...
myths are always ridiculous.
Myths are full of trickster spider-gods and holy castrations that birth goddesses and people turning wine in water. A billionaire who beats up muggers as a hobby? Ridiculous. The world's most powerful being contents himself with living as a bullied milksop? Ridiculous. A princess created out of clay by an ancient immortal, magical, and scientifically advanced sisterhood and imbued with superpowers by Greek gods, who, coming to America to fight our enemies foreign and domestic and teach us that male aggression can only be tamed through submission to the happy controlling bondage of women's power of love, meets a lookalike war nurse with the same name as hers whom she can immediately pay to move to South America so she can assume her identity? Really, the word "ridiculous" simply does not cover it.
Geoff Johns does not shy away from the essential ridiculousness of the characters he tackles. He embraces it He accepts that the ridiculous essence of the myth is part of what makes it powerful, part of why the characters persists, long after more "realistic" characters have been forgotten and abandoned.
2. Incorporation of the variations
Well, where I was taught this concept we didn't call it "incorporation"; when talking about myths, we called it "syncretism". Regardless of what you call it, it's a step beyond just accepting the essential myth. It's accepting the value of the essential myth-- and all the variations of the myth that have arisen, even when they seem to be in conflict. Its highest expression is the attempt to reconcile the variations of a myth, into one larger, more powerful version of the myth.
Like it or not--or like how he does it or not-- this is exactly what Johns does. Sometimes there's a quite of hand-waving, even to the point of literary legerdemain. But generally, since the outcome is "mythically desirable" to the public, they happily suspend their disbelief of whatever means Johns uses to get them where they want to be.
3. Expansion of the mythos by extension or elaboration
Timid writers fear adding any new to a mythos, sometimes out of overwhelming respect for the character. This is particularly true for writers who started as fanboys. Brash writers contradict or at times throwout the existing mythos, trying to turn the character they've been given into a different one (e.g., Peter David on Supergirl). Respectful but bold writers keep older essential elements, but do not hesitate to add appropriate new ones (which we'll call expansion by extension) or extrapolate older elements into new directions and territory (which we'll call expansion by elaboration).
A simplified way of looking at it. is that the writer asks himself or herself:
- What are the top ten things "everyone knows" about this character and how can I best make them work together?
- How can I make the" other stuff" part of that and make it cool?
- Once that's done, how can I make the story bigger or deeper in way consistent with what I've put together?
A brief look at John's treatment of three classic characters, all of whom he brought back from utter extinction, shows his application of these principals.
For Hawkman, he focused on essential elements (Shayera as Hawkgirl and the relationship with her, the reincarnation and connection with ancient Egypt and history, the museum setting, the Thanagarian connection), incorporated variations and history (e.g., quickly merging the blond Golden Age Hawkman with the black-haired Silver Age Hawkman into the brown-haired modern Hawkman, putting all of Hawkman's rogues gallery back into play one by one, bringing back Golden Eagle), and expanded on the mythos (e.g., creating a new and unique fictionopolis for Hawkman to replace the vague and unessential Silver Age setting of Midway City).
For Flash, he re-established the essentials (Barry Allen the slow and methodical police scientist, his relationship with reporter Iris West, his friendships with Wally and Hal, Central City and its Rogues' Gallery, bringing Capt Boomerang back from the dead), incorporated variations (e.g., keeping the "speed force", the West-Park family, Max Mercury, and Jay Garrick, re-setting Bart Allen and making him Kid Flash), and elaborated on the mythos (e.g., making Barry the generator of the speed force rather than its recipient, creating co-worker characters for Barry, putting a new spin on the Reverse Flash's powers).
For Green Lantern, he stopped the "GL-of-the-decade" cycle by restoring the GL essentials (test pilot Hal Jordan, the importance of fearlesness/willpower, Carole Ferris, refurbishing the Lantern foes, revitalizing the Corps and the Guardians), incorporated variations (e.g. finding off-world roles for John Stewart, Guy Gardner, and Kyle Rayner) and elaborated on existing elements into new territory (e.g., taking the existence of a ring of a different color (yellow) and the association of "willpower" with the "green" lantern and extrapolating those into other color rings with their corps and own associated mental states).
Lest you think I'm just a Johns-nut, I have to confess I do not like all of the results of what Johns has done. The GL Corps bores me, the Flash's stories are still achingly slow, and Hawkman has still not found a stable place in the DCU. But there is no question that Johns has done the (apparently) impossible in getting these three characters (each of whom has been completely written off as toxic, irredeemable, and, well, dead) back on track.
Similarly, it's important to point out that Johns is not the only writer who takes this approach. Kurt Busiek and, of all people, Grant Morrison do as well. Taking this three-pronged approach to mythic revitalization doesn't mean doing it perfectly. Busiek did wonders with Superman in almost no time at all; however, his work on Aquaman was less successful because, I think, he mis-identified what the essential elements of Aquaman were. Morrison seems to take this approach (he masterfully boiled down Superman's origin and did essential characterization work on Jimmy Olsen and Lex Luthor in All Star Superman, and has steadfastly tried to incorporate outlying Silver Age and Bronze Age variations into the Batman mythos); he's just undone by his inability to weave it all into a coherent whole (or, for that matter, a coherent story, or even coherent sentences). If you take a look at other good writers working on revitalizing existing properties (such as Levitz on Legion), you'll be able to spot the approach.
How exactly will Johns apply this approach to Aquaman? He's already given us some clues, such as his revitalization of Mera (acceptance), the recasting of her homeworld as a other dimensional penal colony for former Atlanteans (incorporation) and creation of the new Aqualad (an extrapolation of the conflict between Aquaman and Black Manta). Time will tell how he will apply it further, but for now it appears that Aquaman is in good hands.
If you had cause to read the little "War of the Green Lanterns" preview in the back of this week's DC comics you might have seen the little snippet. The "Guardians" wax on and on about all the serious mental deficiencies that the various Lanterns have. They finally conclude that Hal Jordan is "emotionally unstable."
I believe it is safe to say that that is the understatement of the decade.
Hal Jordan has always been unstable. And as a deranged split personality, I know unstable. That fool Jordan can't seem to figure out what he wants out of life. He's always going this way and that, never settling on any one thing. When a man doesn't know what he wants out of life he is adrift. And potentially a danger to himself and others.
This, I believe, is what we have seen in Hal Jordan all these years. The fool can't seem to decide who he loves (if he loves at all) or where his heart is. And if he doesn't figure it out soon, he may have a complete mental and emotional breakdown.
I'm looking forward to that.
The worst thing about it is this: with all these Green Lantern comics they can't seem to find room for even a single appearance by Doctor Polaris. I don't care which one of those dullards I get to beat up on. My preference is certainly Hal Jordan. But I'm just as willing to crack Kyle Rayner's skulls. I've done it before.
But instead we continue to be fed new villains. Random cosmic figures and non-Green Lantern villains shoehorned into fighting those pathetic ring-slingers. Though my position is paramount, I wonder if the other Green Lantern villains are as annoyed as I. Where is that fool Sonar? What about Evil Star? Does anyone even remember Evil Star?
Setting this all aside, the course is clear: one of those three writers needs to get me a cover spot. Put me on the cover and his life may yet be spared. I'm willing to be patient... But for how long?
I saw Sherlock Holmes last week. It wasn't the first time; I saw the movie in the theater. After all, I'm a pretty big Sherlock Holmes fan. I've read all the original Arthur Conan Doyle stories as well as my fair share of Holmes tales written by other others.
But this isn't really about Sherlock Holmes. It's about the fact that I didn't connect the name Mark Strong (Lord Blackwood in Sherlock Holmes to Mark Strong (Sinestro in Green Lantern). That's mostly because I forgot the guy's name. I mean, "Mark Strong" isn't the most common of names.
Now, when I realized exactly who it was who was playing Sinestro my immediate thought was: He's perfect. I still think so. But what it really did was finally drive home to me that this movie is actually happening. So far it's been hard to wrap my mind around the fact that there is actually going to be a Green Lantern movie. This has driven it home for me in a very explicit way.
For some reason Green Lantern never seemed like a likely movie. I always knew it would be a good movie, but how often do actually good comics get made into movies? It's usually really bad comics (or rather, bad adaptations of comics) that get made into movies. And by that I mean the movies have nothing to do with the actual comics.
See Steel. Or Catwoman. Those are the two most egregious examples. But something seems to have happened in recent years: Hollywood is actually making comic book movies that are like the comics. Geoff Johns's new position as Chief Creative Officer is the most shining example of that philosophy.
Will Green Lantern be good? I don't really know. But I think the fact that it's being made at all is a serious win for super-hero fans...
Is this what you want to see when you pick up your weekly comics? Hector Hammond is neither attractive nor charming. He's not even a particularly effective nemesis. He just sits there whining about how he wishes he were Hal Jordan.
Know this: I have never wished I was Hal Jordan. Indeed, I would not wish the fate of being Hal Jordan on my greatest enemy. Incidentally, my greatest enemy happens to be Hal Jordan.
But I digress. My main point should be clear right now: why is Johns reusing Hammond and not Doctor Polaris? This "Brightest Day" gives ample opportunity to bring back the greatest of Hal Jordan's adversaries.
Instead, Johns gives us poor, deluded, sick in the head Hector. A travesty. Know this Geoff Johns: I have been patient with you. But even my compassion has limits. Do what you know you must do or face the consequences.
So what is going to happen? Some clues have leaked out. The Rainbow Corps will be headquartered on Earth. Nekron will certainly be defeated. Some characters will undoubtedly be reborn.
Other than that, though? There isn't a whole lot we can be sure of. Really, the doors have been left wide open. Everyone could come back to life or -- just a few. The Corps could expand with more Earth people -- or they could shrink back to just the core.
Anything could happen. While you still have the chance... Give me your predictions.
Whew! What a week!
Sorry about the lack of posting, friends. This week was the start of my Spring Break. And as you all no doubt know, I have a tendency to fail at blogging precisely when I have the most time to do it. A curious paradox, that.
Anyway, have you read any of this week's comics? They are distinctly interesting. I was most intrigued by Green Lantern, flush as it was with delightful revelations.
Mostly I'm talking about the reveal of all the emotional spectrum entities and their origins. I don't know if Geoff Johns is a relgious man, but he does seem to have poured some religious connections into the Blackest Night saga.
Oh, and did you notice what caused the birth of the rage entity? Vandal Savage makes history again...
Parallax is the personification of fear. Ion is the personification of willpower. The Predator is the personification of love. What about the others?
Green Lantern got me thinking about it again this week. If you've read it, you know that Atrocitus tries to snag the the Spectre as his own entity of rage. The Spectre, of course, isn't having any of that. But the Spectre does have some interesting information to impart to Atrocitus:
"I am God's rage, not yours! But I know of the crimson creature of anger, Atrocitus. I have faced him! If you seek him out, he will destroy you!"
It should come as no surprise to anyone that Geoff Johns is setting things up for the post Blackest Night universe. And with Parallax's little disappearing act and Hector Hammonds little "oh no!" I've got to wonder if the emotional entities won't play a big role in whatever Johns has coming up.
I'm thinking that the "crimson creature of anger" might have been seen before. I can't quite put my finger on it, but that description sounds strangely familiar...
What astonishing thoughts await you in this week's Thursday Night Thinking?
It's been a long week. And it's still not quite over. I'm so tired I can barely move... But I can still think! This is Thursday Night Thinking!
Idiot.
I've realized something about Geoff Johns' Green Lantern mythos that is a tad bit disturbing. Well, I guess it's no less disturbing than anything else Johns has done. But it's certainly interesting.
If you read Green Lantern #46 (and who isn't reading Green Lantern these days?) you know that the power sources at the heart of the Star Sapphires' central power battery are (or rather were) the petrified bodies of Khufu and Chay-Ara.
Don't know who those people are? They were the original incarnations of Hawkman and Hawkgirl way back in Ancient Egypt. I don't know how or when the Zamarons got their hands on the bodies of those two lovers, but their position at the heart of the central violet battery makes a twisted sort of sense. They are a classic love story, and Johns did say that Hawkman and Hawkgirl would play an important role in Blackest Night.
Needless to say, none of this is what I found slightly disturbing. As weird as it is to have a couple of dead bodies serving as a power battery, it's not the first time. That's what kind of creeps me out. Do recall that the black battery is powered by the corpse of the Anti-Monitor. And it's not just that one, either. Atrocitus made the red power battery out of the corpse of Qull (the member of the Five Inversions that told the Blackest Night prophecy to Abin Sur).
Count that up: that's three out of eight batteries powered by dead bodies. This, of course, begs the question: are there corpses in the other batteries too? It's never been clear what was in the green battery, and of course the yellow, blue, indigo, and orange batteries are all mysteries.
So do they have dead bodies inside? Is the corpse of some hopeful chap whose luck finally ran out floating in the blue battery? Is the body of the most avaricious being in history locked inside Larfleeze's little lamp? Or are these bodies we've seen laying around just coincidences? I'd imagine not; Geoff Johns doesn't do coincidence...
I'm far too tired to do a proper post tonight. Instead, I ask that all my loyal readers head on over to SallyP's blog and read her post about Blackest Night #3. I heartily endorse everything she says.
If you happen to be SallyP, here's a picture of Kyle Rayner's ass:
You'll have to forgive me. I'm not feeling particularly great tonight. I'm so tired I can barely think. But that won't stop Thursday Night Thinking!
Continuing our long tradition of using throughts from classsic Silver Age covers here's Hal Jordan from Green Lantern #7:
I don't know about you, but Green Lantern #44 scared the crap out of me.
Not in the most literal sense, of course. I didn't cower in fear at the sight of the book and run away screaming in the middle of reading it. No, it scared me in the sense that it was at its heart objectively frightening.
That's the thing about this whole Blackest Night event. Sinestro Corps War may have been about fear, but Blackest Night is the story that really has the potential to inspire fear.
The things going on here are just too terrible, too horrifying for anyone to honestly read it without admitting that it gives them that queasy fear feeling in the stomach. "Zombies" have been overdone. But the Black Lanterns aren't zombies. They are something far more sinister.
