The Green Lantern is coming out

I don't see the point in making pre-established characters gay for the sake of it, seems a bit like pandering. But saying that, if that genre can start to include a bit of diversity then I don't exactly see the bad in it either. Makes no difference to me but might do for gay people who want to identify with strong gay characters.

I think this is the best we've come up with so far.

The actual cartoon is funnier than just the theme song. Stephen Colbert (of the Colbert Report) and Steve Carrel (40 Year Old Virgin) do the voices.

Probably not, they just stick to their hypocritical guns.




BINGO! You get the TFS insight of the month award, and it's only the 1st.

i read the article below, about green lantern, who care about this? is not hal jordan, but allan scott is pretty much hasbeen in d.c.'s comicworld. my opinion of him. in 60's and 70's, when i read allan scott ( green lantern ) in d.c. comic books, i find him pretty boring character, hal is so much better allan as green lantern. so allan and his son is gay, so what? even the other d.c. superheroes are gay. i think d.c.is trying sell more comic books with this ploy, so d.c. is trying to promote somesort of role models to kids. that's great idea, d.c. should use charcters, who are better-well know to be gay, not characters that i never heard of. i think marvel should be more bold let out some of their well-known characters tell the world that they are gay. this article, if there are other articles like this one, it is a waste of time, nobody really cares. a kid is going to use a superhero as a role model, regardless, if he or she is gay. pretty sad day in comic books!

green lantern

To be honest, I couldn't really care, although it has to be said that Michelle Pfeiffer in her role as Catwoman in Batman Returns was purrrrrrrrfect and made a lot of dykie girls wish she'd miaow in their direction. Phew.....!!

But seriously.... what's it all about..? Comic book characters coming out..? Whatever next..? And who takes this stuff seriously anyway..?

I don't think this sort of thing can be called affirmative in any way. Rather, I think, it falls somewhere between patronising and boring. It certainly suggests either a lack of imagination or just plain laziness on the part of the writers.

It's doubtful that writers are producing these storylines with the intention of introducing diversity... rather, they simply can't think of anything else and so fall back on the good ol' tried and trusted "Shock horror, he's gay" angle.

Ho-hum.

Okay, what now? Actors are hypocritical if they don't accurately reflect the characteristics of a fictional role they once played?

I was responding to your, "Incidentally, do you remember when Superman renounced his US citizenship? Did you wonder then if that meant that Brandon Routh, Dean Cain had to renounce theirs as well?"

No, but there is a political line that you cross at your own professional peril. You'd probably understand what I'm saying if Superman put on a swastika. Renouncing one's citizenship is renouncing what America stands for, which is in a word, freedom. If some American group tries to undermine that freedom, you don't turn your back on the country, your denounce the group--and I can think of a couple.

I'm aware of what you were addressing a it was the only thing I said in the post you quoted. What you seem to have missed is that I was addressing what you said about Ryan Reynolds.

Those actors have nothing to do with what happens to a character after they've portrayed them in a film, but you seemed to think that they would continue to identify with that role as if it defines them forever.

I agree.