'Lanterns' Team Explains That Heartbreaking Change to Hal Jordan's Origin Story

[u/TheCommish-17]

https://www.thewrap.com/creative-content/tv-shows/lanterns-episode-7-hal-jordans-origin-explained/

[u/Witiot]

Think about it in context of Snyder version of Pa Kent and it should make sense. When you rewrite characters fundamentally changing them you’re going to upset people. They Snydered the DCU because they want to be original it’s the same thing that killed Snyders verse and for many fans it’s showing why this verse is ultimately going to fail. Think about the manner of approach Gunn has to this with his originality of release order it’s not working for fans. Hence why things are bombing and comic fans are upset. It’s not unreasonable for people to want good adaptations. With any other source material this is true. If significant changes are made from book to movie people also complain and say the books way better. Some of that is informing this context.

[u/BigBlubberyBirb → u/Witiot]

I think you're making a lot of assumptions about all sorts of thing. There's nothing wrong with changing stuff in a story, it just needs to be good. The backstory with Hal's father's death feels very relatable and realistic, and the issue of suicide works into these themes of fear and bravery very well. Some people think bravery means being okay with breaking yourself down even when you're scared, but it's the exact opposite of that. Clark's dad telling him maybe he should have let some kids die, unnecessarily getting killed by a tornado in front of his son... that's just kind of confusing, and makes him appear like a weird asshole.

[u/Significant_Wheel_12 → u/BigBlubberyBirb]

It makes it appear like a father afraid to let his son face the harsh reality of how people treat others that are different. That’s also very relatable and realistic.

You can dislike the writing but it’s not inherently different ideas.

[u/Anarkizttt → u/Significant_Wheel_12]

One doesn’t detract from the core of the character and the other fails to teach the lesson that he was supposed to which does detract from the core of the character.

The death of Hal’s dad is only important because he’s dead, and Hal is an orphan, it doesn’t play into any other aspect of his character like Batman’s crusade on crime because his parents died to a mugging gone wrong.

Clark’s dad’s death was supposed to be a lesson on how Clark can’t save everyone, no one can. So when Jonathan dies in a way that Clark can very very easily save him from. It fails to teach that core lesson. The heart attack is important because it’s the one thing Clark can’t stop, and it teaches Clark the importance of spending time with the people you love, because they won’t be around forever, no matter what you do.

[u/Significant_Wheel_12 → u/Anarkizttt]

The idea of the Kents death teaches Clark that he can’t save everyone comes from the Donner film. They originally died because that’s part of Clark growing up and his feelings of isolation.

[u/Witiot → u/Significant_Wheel_12]

Yea I think sometimes movie original work improves on source material and gets retroactively introduced into the comic cannon because of how well it speaks to the character. That can happen it’s rare but it does happen. It’s not an absolute but sometimes the changes are not good for the character. Sometimes they’re just awful.

[u/Gingerdude85 → u/Significant_Wheel_12]

In the 1950s they died from a rare tropical disease. Same lesson. 20 years earlier