In retrospect... does anyone really care about the Red Lanterns?

[Star-Lantern]

I'm not privy to DC's inner workings, but I think that Geoff Johns is active in Green Lantern and many other DC properties (like Superman, where his buddy Tomasi writes one of the key titles), being president and all. Considering Green Lantern, I can't easily file it away to coincidence that during this Rebirth thing (which is certainly Geoff Johns' idea) Simon Baz and Jessica Cruz have their own comic book, and there is almost nothing but stories that rely extremely heavily on the Emotional Spectrum. I recall him also saying that he personally selected Sam Humphries to write Green Lanterns, and Johns even co-wrote the Rebirth Special issue of Green Lanterns. I believe Johns broadly set the directions for the Green Lantern titles, meaning what characters would be used and what characters would be focused on versus others, and what he wanted the stories to have, like what villains and such would be used.

[Trey Strain]

Oh, and Geoff created Jessica Cruz and Simon Baz, even though Green Lantern was already badly overpopulated with Earth Lanterns. That might be the best example of DC's overconfidence in his ideas about the franchise.

[JohnMc]

Originally Posted by Trey Strain

Oh, and Geoff created Jessica Cruz and Simon Baz, even though Green Lantern was already badly overpopulated with Earth Lanterns. That might be the best example of DC's overconfidence in his ideas about the franchise.

Creating Jessica Cruz and Simon Baz was just ego masturbation on Johns' part. He wanted his own characters and make them prominent [aka their own GL book and in the Justice League] to pretty much cement his legacy in the series.

[Trey Strain]

I don't think Geoff's ego had anything to do with it. The diversity imperative has trumped good business sense at DC and Marvel (especially the latter) and DC has had an inordinate confidence in Geoff's creative decisions where Green Lantern is concerned. Hence, the Green Lanterns comic that nobody but DC's management wanted is gracing the comics shops.

DC and Marvel need to face the fact that print comics are in the phase of their life cycle where they're managing decline. There are not any hordes of minority members who will run to stores to buy titles with members of their groups cast as the stars, and furthermore, by replacing the established characters with minority members, and by reducing the camera time of the established stars in favor of minority versions, they're chasing away their existing customers.

If anyone in DC's management reads this, I'm telling that you're doing exactly the wrong thing. You're running off your dwindling herd of horses so you can hunt bright shiny unicorns that aren't out there, and your virtue signaling isn't impressing anyone.

[Star-Lantern]

Diversity is not bad business, because those 'different' people actually exist and want entertainment. The problem lies in the direct market system. The comic companies and retailers, in their shortsighted foolishness, destroyed the entry point for new fans.

I'm willing to go out on a limb and bet a good number of the people on this very forum got into comics because they saw them at some place they would go to, which was not a comic book shop. Maybe a drug store. Maybe a supermarket. Places many people of many diverse backgrounds regularly go to. This is why probably many people here started reading comics in the '80s, '90s (granted in parts of this period, the direct market enjoyed fad success that would not last), or maybe even sometime before then.

The direct market is meant to cater to the existing comic fan, most certainly not to reach out to a new reader. Because the products adapted to become the best to sell in that environment, they further alienate new people not only with their location, but their content (confusing crossovers, reboots, and the like.

The reason minorities won't rush to comic book shops is because during the time comics were easily accessible to new people, in a variety of ways, the publishers, for the most part, only focused on white heroes. Thus, a white customer base developed, and because comics greatly struggle to reach new customers of ANY background, that's all the mainstream comics have. The same customer base that developed decades ago, many of whom got into comics because they saw them in easily accessible places.

So, the point is that appealing to people of different backgrounds isn't bad. It can be done poorly. Rather than bringing that out as the problem, it is much more beneficial, intelligent, and honest to address the root problem, which is comics' stagnate and dwindling readership. That is what is REALLY the bad business. Not the diversity stuff. If comics could reach a large enough pool of people, and not have to rely on gimmicks that come to the detriment of the new and potential new fan, the companies wouldn't resort to turning Iron Man into a black woman, the prices wouldn't be so high for a single comic, these crossovers likely wouldn't be running amok like they do now, and so on.

No decent entry point for new readers (meaning new readers SEEING them and then finding them appealing) = hardly any new fans = a plethora of problems for comics. Appealing to the dwindling group of good ol' boys who ARE used to putting money on the table as opposed to the potential new fan is only putting a band-aid on the problem, and maybe delaying the inevitable a little while longer. BUT, I will admit this. As long as the direct market system is going to be the primary way to sell comics, it is wiser to appeal to the good ol' boy, because he's already used to it and spending his money there. But the important thing is looking at this with a big lens will show this system is broken.

[Trey Strain]

They can try it forever, but identity politics will never sell comics. That just won't happen. Print comics are not a growth industry. There just aren't that many people will will go to comics shops to buy them.

The idea that you can boost comics sales by casting a Latina and a Muslim as your leads and decreasing the presence of long-established characters is ludicrous. You can pat yourself on the back for being a good person when you do stuff like that, and I'm sure the folks at DC and Marvel do, but you're killing your own business when you diminish the visibility of your stars.

You can be an SJW on your own time. At work you're getting paid to sell comics.

[BLACK HAND]

I agree, totally stupid.

I wanted to like the Red Lanterns, just too many factors working against it. The writing was terrible even when the art was good; it felt like it should have been a horror title but it was so watered down and childish, not sure who the target audience was..

[Mister.Weirdo]

I always liked the concept, and the characters who were involved. The "rage thing" got old after a while though, and I found the actual series to be more miss then hit at times. The thing about the Red Lanterns though, was that in the wrong hands, it could seem really one-note.

[Andrew NDB]

Was it a mistake to make it Guy-centric? Did their treatment of Rankorr screw the pooch?

[Mister Ed]

It was a mistake to give them a title at all. They were sort of interesting as an occasional antagonist, but the concept didn't really seem like one that could warrant an ongoing title for itself, at least not to me.

[Space Cop]

^I liked the Reds overall and the Supergirl story in particular. I'd still be reading it if it existed.

[Mister Ed]

Originally Posted by Space Cop

^I liked the Reds overall and the Supergirl story in particular. I'd still be reading it if it existed.

Well, so would I, probably, but that's got more to do with my completionist tendencies than any great interest in the title.

[Space Cop]

Originally Posted by Mister Ed

Well, so would I, probably, but that's got more to do with my completionist tendencies than any great interest in the title.

Touche. But I actually still enjoyed reading RL when it ended.

[Michael Heide]

I lost all interest during the first arc of their own book. I stuck around much longer than I should have after that.

[Ωmega Man]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Was it a mistake to make it Guy-centric? Did their treatment of Rankorr screw the pooch?

I think their treatment of Red Guy screwed the pooch. Red Guy was one of the most entertaining bits from Blackest Night and WotGL's. He was insane. When TPTB wanted to make the Reds anti-heroes, ala Venom Lethal Protector, it just got stupid. Making Guy a Red again was their Hail Mary to keep the series going and they fumbled the ball. Long hair? A goatee? Are you ****ing serious?

[Big Blue Lantern]

Originally Posted by Ωmega Man

I think their treatment of Red Guy screwed the pooch. Red Guy was one of the most entertaining bits from Blackest Night and WotGL's. He was insane. When TPTB wanted to make the Reds anti-heroes, ala Venom Lethal Protector, it just got stupid. Making Guy a Red again was their Hail Mary to keep the series going and they fumbled the ball. Long hair? A goatee? Are you ****ing serious?

Atrocitus reminds me of Venom in several key aspects with the most important being at he's the kind of morally complex character who can be used in many different ways. I can envision him one day having a renaissance similar to what Venom is having now. If he starts making Arrowverse or DC movie appearances, we'll see the RLC reassert themselves into DC events.

[Michael Heide]

Current Marvel writer Leah Williams is a fan of Atrocitus. That means that there's a whole generation of professionals already who the Red Lanterns mean something to. Once that threshold is passed, characters are forever here to stay.

[Big Blue Lantern]

Originally Posted by Michael Heide

Current Marvel writer Leah Williams is a fan of Atrocitus. That means that there's a whole generation of professionals already who the Red Lanterns mean something to. Once that threshold is passed, characters are forever here to stay.

You're definitely correct. I keep forgetting that Atrocitus has been around for more than a decade, so there's no doubt that a crop of young writers have grown up with him as a prominent DC/GL character.

[Big Daddy Dave Skywalker]

In current continuity, did Atrocitus still murder Abin Sur?

[Michael Heide]

I don't even care.

[Space Cop]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Dave Skywalker

In current continuity, did Atrocitus still murder Abin Sur?

I don't recall them retconning that retcon, but that doesn't mean much.

[Big Daddy Dave Skywalker]

It just seems to me that the last version of Hal's origin uses that. So if that is the trade that DC is still peddling for Hal's origin, then it may sit there for years until they retell it again.

[Space Cop]

I sincerely hope Morrison feels no urge to revisit Hal's origin at least not for more than half a page (preferably not even that).

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Space Cop

I sincerely hope Morrison feels no urge to revisit Hal's origin at least not for more than half a page (preferably not even that).

Grant doesn't ever generally go back and revisit people's origins ever. If he does, you can be sure it was editorially mandated.

[BLACK HAND]

I think it had the potential to be cool if they took it more into the mature territory, set these guys up like cenobites that are evoked from blood ritual or sacrifice; make them more like space demons. I never had an issue with them per say, it was just that the comic sucked and the concept never really went anywhere truly interesting.