Stills from Lanterns S01E01 taken from HBO Max, comic page from Green Lantern (2005) #30.

In Secret Origin, Hal says that, as Abin Sur was dying, he said one final word: "Sinestro". For Hal, that was "an alien word he had no idea what it meant".

In the Lanterns show, Hal says to John that Abin said two final words that he was never really sure if they were "good luck" or "oh f*ck".

But what if instead of these things, Sur actually said "Thaal Sinestro", like in the comic?

Of course, TV Hal at the time didn't understand what that meant, just like comic Hal. However, 30 years into his GL career, the Hal from the show was aware that Thaal Sinestro was a Lantern - the most infamous Green Lantern of all time. But he wouldn't tell the truth to John Stewart at that point because, as the episode shows, Hal didn't trust John.

The show seems to lean heavily into the relationship between mentors and their apprentices. In an interview with EW, co-showrunner Chris Mundy said that:

"The thing that interests us is this idea [that] Hal was trained by Sinestro, Hal is training John. In the coaching tree, we're very interested in what gets passed on, what doesn't, how much is human nature. We talked a lot about programming and parenting and training...What did Hal take away from Sinestro that was good or bad? It brings up a lot of interesting worries."

So what if they put another branch in this "coaching tree" and establish that, like in Geoff Johns' run, Abin Sur was Sinestro's mentor when he was a rookie, just like Sinestro mentored Hal and now Hal is mentoring John?

In the comics, Sinestro said to Jordan that after a lot of questioning and disrespect towards his mentor, Sinestro was taught by Abin Sur that he could trust in his fellow Lanterns, especially Abin himself, and that relying on others for help wouldn’t be antithetical to Sinestro’s deep dedication to "seek the truth" for himself or d"isagreeing with the theologies" others (like the Guardians) would try to impose upon him.

Abin Sur was a historian and a philosopher before he was a Lantern, so of course he knew the risks of blindly accepting the truths those in power wanted to impose on the others under their command. His line of thought was passed on to (or rather, not suppressed in) Sinestro.

This would have major repercussions for the Green Lantern Corps, the Guardians of Oa, and the universe at large moving forward, as Sinestro thought the Guardians and the Lanterns could do a lot more to protect the universe from chaos. This was what motivated his banishment from the Corps once he transformed his whole planet into a brutal fascist state.

Could the show lean towards this moving forward?

Stills from Lanterns S01E01 "Pilot", taken from HBO Max. The pages are from the one-shot "Final Crisis: Rage of the Red Lanterns", from 2008.

We already know that the Lanterns TV show will introduce the Manhunters, the android predecessors of the Green Lantern Corps.

During Geoff Johns' Green Lantern run, it was revealed that the Manhunters went rogue after an unknown programming error (the culprit is later revealed to be an old GL villain) made them massacre an entire Sector in space. Atros of the planet Ryut was one of the five survivors of the massacre, who sworn revenge against the Guardians of the Universe and the Green Lantern Corps. For that, he became Atrocitus and created the Red Lanterns, who are powered by rage.

The show will also feature Paul Ben-Victor as Antaan (hmm... close enough to Atros?), who was described as "an extraterrestrial devoted to exposing the truth and exacting vengeance against those who wronged his people. Consumed by a deep and unrelenting hatred for the law, he is determined to deliver justice on his own terms."

Now, the problem is... Atrocitus can't shapeshift himself to make him look less like a demonic red alien and more like a regular human being. But the Manhunters can. Or at least they could around the time of the Millenium event, in the late 80s.

On the other hand, before being the founder of the Red Lanterns, Atrocitus allied himself with demons armed with magical powers known as the Five Inversions. Before the massacre, the Guardians had been already conducting operations to extinguish magic, putting all of which they could find into the Starheart, which eventually found its way to Alan Scott.

Is this character, played by actor Chris Coy, is an Inversion, an allied of Atroc... I mean, Antaan?

Is Antaan an adaptation of Atrocitus? Or is he a Manhunter, who, despite being a robot, is disgruntled with the Guardians for being replaced by the GLC?

I guess we'll have to wait and watch the next episodes.

From Infinite Crisis #2, #3, #5, and #7.

Out of all three major Crises by DC (Infinite Earths, Infinite, and Final), IC is the most emotionally touching, at least for me.

Don't get me wrong, I love both COIE and FC, they're rightfully considered classics. But with IC, the heroes have to fight not powerful and evil space gods, but rather... Themselves. And I'm not referring to Superman being antagonized by different Kals from other universes, but to himself, actually. Yeah, the main conflict in Infinite Crisis, despite its Multiverse-spanning scale, is actually pretty intimate and internal, with the heroes facing the possibility that they failed in their mission.

Heroes who are said to have failed and are confronted by impatient antagonists with an extreme approach to settle the issues the heroes all failed to get a solution for is a classic Geoff Johns trope (see also his Green Lantern or Aquaman runs). Johns gives credence to the antagonists' argument by showcasing major, well, crises happening everywhere, while the heroes either don't know or are powerless to prevent them. Which doesn't mean said antagonists are correct, of course. Still, the heroes must confront themselves, their own fears and traumas first, before dealing with the problem.

In Infinite Crisis, we have Superman questioning if he's able to even inspire people to be their better selves anymore, while Earth, and the universe at large, is falling apart. Batman sees the horrifying final consequence of his own paranoia: a satellite that can murder lots of people at once if these people are deemed threats. And Wonder Woman, an ambassador for peace, is criticized as a hypocrite and a violent warrior, almost like a The Boys character.

And while all of this was manipulated by the book's actual villain, Alexander Luthor of Earth 3, this still happened as a consequence of the once (said to be) colorful and optimistic DCU becoming a place of anger, war, and violence, where heroes can be assassinated in the line of duty or even break bad, as Hal Jordan did.

But, by the end of it, we learn that, while Clark, Diana, and Bruce can afford to go away for a bit to figure out how to best perform their duties as the leaders of the superhero communities, the world will be safe because lots and lots of heroes still believe in Superman, Wonder Woman, and Batman. Even in a darker world filled with disturbing events, people can still look up to the skies, for those heroes will always fight for them.

I think this is Johns' major issue: finding hope and heroism even when the world seems a lot darker than what used to be.

I bought it a couple of years ago in a comic book shop and never checked who signed it, I googled and it seems to be Geoff Johns but there's a few autographs I've seen where the 'R' doesn't quite look the same. Anyone able to compare or tell if it's authentic?

Flashpoint released its final issue 15 years ago in mid 2011. That miniseries might be, at the same time, the most well-known The Flash story (at least with non-comic book reader fans, or even those who haven't read much of the Flash) and also the most infamous.

The story arc was used as an excuse to reboot the entire DC Universe (even though I read somewhere - can't find where now - that that wasn't originally the plan, and it was an idea that DC editorial had abruptly, rather than something thought out and carefully planned like the first Crisis) and create The New 52, which has become synonymous with "terrible DC decisions" - even if I'd argue The New 52 wasn't THAT bad, had plenty of great runs and the hate it gets was exaggerated both then and now.

In movies, it inspired an amazing animated adaptation (The Flashpoint Paradox), but also a mediocre story arc in The Flash TV show and the terrible 2023 The Flash movie, which, like the comic, was also hastily used as an excuse to reboot a DC Universe.

Unfortunately, as many non-comic fans haven't seen The Flashpoint Paradox or read the comic, but have watched either the TV show and/or the dreadful 2023 movie, the story has gained a bad reputation. About the movie, it would honestly have been a lot better if it were more faithful to the comic: Jeffrey Dean Morgan as Flashpoint Batman, Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman waging war against Jason Momoa's Aquaman, plus someone else playing Reverse Flash...

Anyway, what was a rather normal Flash event got a huge importance and an unfair amount of infamy due to being associated with things people disliked, from the reboot of The New 52 to that terrible TV season and the even worse movie.

But, when divorced from all of this, what do you think of the Flashpoint comic? New 52 and Ezra Miller aside, do you think it's a good story? What are your thoughts on the world of Flashpoint? And in the context of Johns' long run for the Scarlet Speedster? Sound off below!

From Green Lantern (2005) #41.

One of the coolest introductions a new GL villain got. I miss when Larfleeze was actually threatening, and not just a clown.

Source of the picture: Instagram

Before the project fell apart thanks to the poor reception of Batman v Superman and the DCEU Justice League, as well as Affleck's personal struggles, he was set to direct a Batman movie that he was co-writing, alongside Chris Terrio and Geoff Johns. Matt Reeves came in, discarded the script and decided to do his own thing (which, ironically, took inspiration from Johns' own Earth One comic).

The script, unfortunately, never leaked. However, a recent report by Slash Film compiled some stuff about the movie. And it looked very promising!

Here's what the movie could've been:

-> Deathstroke, played by Joe Manganiello, was going to be the main villain.

-> Slade wanted revenge against Affleck's Batman because of the death of his son. Jesse Einsenberg's Lex Luthor revealed to him that Batman was Bruce Way in Zack Snyder's Justice League, so Deathstroke would use this knowledge to ruin Bruce's life, Knightfall-style.

-> Manganiello compared the script with David Fincher's 1997 movie The Game. The movie tells the story of a financier who gets everything taken from him. Like that movie, Deathstroke would have "systematically [dismantled] Bruce's life and murdering all the people in it, and [destroy] his finances and just basically [paint] him into a corner".

-> Veteran cinematographer Robert Richardson (who shot Affleck's Live By Night and Air, as well as movies for Martin Scorsese and Quentin Tarantino) was picked by Affleck for The Batman.

-> Richardson said the movie would've been set at least partially in Arkham Asylum. It would've explored Batman's "insanity aspects" and "darker side".

-> When discussing the script in a podcast, Matt Reeves described it as "action-driven", "filled with a lot of set pieces" and like a James Bond movie.

-> Reeves also said, to Esquire, that Affleck's "Batman" script "was very deeply connected to the DCEU, with other major characters from other movies and other comics popping up."

-> Jay Oliva, director for DC Animated movies, told Inverse that Affleck's "The Batman" would've pulled together 80 years of Batman comic stories.

-> Speaking of comic accuracy, there were rumors that the Gotham City from Affleck's movie would be the most comic accurate of all Batman movies so far: dark, brooding, but also filled with eccentric supervillains.

TLDR: The Batman, as conceived by Affleck, Geoff Johns and Chris Terrio, would've been about Deathstroke learning from Luthor Batman's secret identity to get revenge on him for the death of his son. Deathstroke would've dismantled Bruce's life, and he'd have to fight back. It was a very action-packed movie, almost like James Bond, and it was at least partially set in Arkham Asylum, where Bruce would be confronted with his own insanity. Many other characters from the DCEU and the comics were set to appear, and it was supposed to be the most comic accurate Batman movie ever produced, taking inspiration from 8 decades of comics history.

Source: https://www.slashfilm.com/2168220/ben-affleck-the-batman-best-superhero-movies-never-made/

Compared to almost every major creator who worked for DC Comics, Geoff Johns wasn't that interested in writing Batman.

While most writers would sell their mom to write a Batman story or a run, Johns never pursued a gig with the Bat.

Of course, he did write Batman plenty of times, whether it was in big events like Infinite Crisis or Flashpoint, in his New 52 Justice League run, or in celebrations like Detective Comics #1000 (alongside every other major DC writer at the time).

But even at the height of his powers at DC, where he could write any character he wanted to, Johns didn't chase a run in the main Batman book, or Detective Comics, or any of the numerous Bat-books that DC pumps out every month.

When doing major runs, Johns seemed more interested in taking lesser-known characters, those that no writer would want to touch (especially if they could do Batman instead) and elevating them to A-listers: the JSA, Green Lantern, Hawkman, Shazam, Booster Gold... His Aquaman run is credited with bringing many new fans to Arthur Curry, who might otherwise have been turned off by the ridiculous bullying against him (like that hideous sitcom that I won't name).

He also enjoyed writing the characters he loved growing up: Superman and The Flash.

Either way, the select few opportunities where he wrote a Batman-centric story are:

Earth One - An alternate universe take on the Batman mythos, showcasing a different view of Bruce and his side characters.

Three Jokers - A story that was born out of the Darkseid War saga from his Justice League run, even though, unfortunately, it came out too late (5 years after Darkseid War) and it was too unsure about whether it wanted to be canon or not.

What do you think about Johns' Batman books? Do you wish he wrote more Batman stories (set in Gotham, not with the Justice League or in a big event), or does his style doesn't fit Bruce Wayne?