Corporate Stupidity – Exhibit A: DC Comics


Comics


Note: This is not a commentary about gay characters in comic books. I have zero problem if a character is created & written as a gay character. This is a commentary about retcons, cheap publicity stunts, and corporate stupidity.

So Alan Scott, the original non-Green Lantern Corps, Green Lantern has been changed to a gay man in DC’s brainchild of the “New 52”, for no apparent reason beyond some cheap publicity and an attempt to jump on President Obama’s bandwagon with his current “evolving position”. With the DC quasi-sorta kinda-reboot & the merging of the Wildstorm characters into the DC universe, DC had plenty of characters they could have highlighted that are already established as being gay. They could also have created a brand new character, one without the “troubling baggage” of 50+ years of comic continuity – in other words, a perfect launch point for a new character, which was one of the primary reasons cited for the sorta-kinda-reboot in the first place.

But publicity stunts don’t have to be stupid – sometimes they are effective. So why is this a bonehead move on DC’s part? Because for years, decades even, they’ve been bemoaning the fact that aside from Batman & Superman, they haven’t had any media success in making their other heroes more popular & mainstream. In this area, particularly with respect to films, Marvel has been kicking the snot out of DC. After Supes & Bats, Wonder Woman rounds out the Iconic Trinity of DC but hasn’t carried a film or TV show since the 70’s. (I mean, how many years have we been hearing about a possible Wonder Woman movie…) DC kicks butt on the animated media side and has been successfully expanding brand awareness of other characters via that medium – but that road’s a much higher hill to climb to break into the popular culture the way Batman, Superman, Iron Man, Cap, Thor, or Spiderman have done via movies.

Case in point: Green Lantern – that is, Hal Jordan, Green Lantern of Earth, member of the Green Lantern corps. GL’s been getting quite the media push in recent years and is arguably the 4th most iconic DC character behind Superman, Batman, & Wonder Woman. Feelings on the movie aside, it moved GL into the popular culture. He’s also got his own animated TV show, the only DC character I can think of to have done so in years outside of Batman, Superman, or made-for kids characters like Static Shock.

And this is where the corporate stupidity comes into play. DC decides they want to “out” a character. They try and hedge their bets by selecting an “Earth 2” character rather than a “main universe” / Justice League contender. Ok, that’s pretty smart. They get to make their statement without “risking” an iconic character that is a hopeful for the media-money-maker stable. Yet they pick the one Earth 2 character that shares the same name as one of their push-to-iconic-status-characters! Not only that, the one character that has been successfully making some in-roads into the wider pop culture.

So what happens? When the character was revealed this morning, every media outlet I saw showed a picture of....., you guessed it, Hal Jordan. Whether it was a comic book representation or Ryan Reynolds in the GL suit, it wasn’t Alan Scott. Most of the articles didn’t even bother to point out that it’s a different character, in a different universe, and not associated with the Green Lantern Corps. By mid-day, a few websites had changed the art or bothered to make the distinction, but not many.

If your goal is to increase brand-awareness to make a character franchise-level popular, why would you execute this so poorly? If your corporate “problem” is that you need to make more iconic characters to achieve franchise-levels of popularity, and more characters aren’t at a franchise-level because they’re not as well known, how in the hell do overlook the fact that the media and non-comic-reading population doesn’t know or care about the distinction between “main Earth” & “Earth 2” or GL Corps vs. just “Green Lantern”?

Sadly, the fact that this change/statement/stunt has to be made shows that it’s a divisive issue to some. Sadly, there will very likely be some negative repercussions to the brand or the character. But it’s an act of sheer corporate stupidity that someone didn’t think this through enough to say, “Hey, maybe we should pick a character that can’t be associated (correctly or incorrectly) as strongly with a character/brand we’re trying to elevate to franchise-level,” or “let the character stand on their own to see how popular this decision might be." I mean, it’s not like super team rosters don’t change… If they wanted to highlight a gay character, there are a ton of other ways they could have gone about it (which is why I feel this was a publicity stunt first-and-foremost).

As a fan of Hal Jordan & the rest of the GL Corps, I really hope I’m wrong about that franchise taking a hit from this. I never really followed the JSA, Alan Scott, or the other Earth 2 heroes so I don’t have the emotional attachment to the character that other might but generally speaking (if I was, though, I'd be annoyed), I’m not a fan of retcons. However, I can appreciate them when they’re done well. (And for those keeping score at home, I'd also be annoyed if an established gay character suddenly "went straight".)

Despite some interesting stuff (like Aquaman), I think the execution of the New 52 reboot has been poor. But this? This is just epic-level-of-incompetence stupid.

If someone forced me to choose, I’d have to pick the DC characters over the Marvel ones, but it’s a very close call. I WANT more franchise-level characters in the DC stable. I want to see Green Lantern, Flash, Aquaman, and the Justice League on the big screen. But the next time I hear someone at DC or WB whining about a lack of franchise-level characters, the immediate reaction is going to be “it’s your fault”.

And if the rumormill is true about the inevitable Batman-films-reboot and “start with Justice League” rather than taking an approach like Marvel did leading up to Avengers, I’m guessing we’ll have a DC Stupidity, Take 2 post a few years from now…


I don't know what I think about this. I really hadn't heard anything about it, since I've pretty much quit reading comics because of the 52 reboot. (okay I got sucked into reading Justice League because they were bringing back Billy and the Captain, but that take on him, ugghh.)

Alan Scott gay? Really? Just doesn't seem to fit him.

It would make a lot more sense for Hal in my eyes. All the ladies man stuff was a cover... well it would make more sense.

I wonder if Alan has told his wife and kids? Does he have kids now? Wait, is the Justice Society in the mainstream DC universe now?

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

I commented over on gaypatriot.net "So they replaced an existing D-list gay character with his C-list father."

NY Daily News article wrote:

The reboot effectively wrote out of existence Scott’s openly gay adult son, the superhero Obsidian.

“I was sort of putting the team together and I realized one of the only downsides to relaunching the Justice Society as young, vibrant heroes again was that Alan Scott’s son was no longer going to exist in the reboot,” says “Earth 2” series writer James Robinson, who wrote a 1998 storyline about Obsidian that featured the first gay superhero kiss in comics.

“I thought that was a shame and then it occurred to me, why not just make Alan Scott gay.”

link

Personally, I don't think it will impact the Earth-1 Green Lanterns that much, unless the book REALLY takes off. (I don't see it).

As to the 'putting the wrong lantern up' I seem to recall that there was some questioning why Ryan Reynolds was playing 'the black guy'. People had John Stewart from Justice league in their minds (aside: DCAU John Stewart is my favourite guy with a ring.)


Wow.

Just wow.

No problem with a character being gay. Would love to see more. I just can't see Alan Scott as gay.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Freehold DM wrote:

Wow.

Just wow.

No problem with a character being gay. Would love to see more. I just can't see Alan Scott as gay.

It's easier for me. This isn't my Alan Scott, anymore than Goldfish Barbie is my Starfire, Justice League Victor isn't My Cyborg and Red Gar Logan is My Beast Boy. :-)

My Alan Scott is a family man who loves his son and daughter, no matter which one is bringing boys home.*

Is now when I make a big deal about how they should make a C-list hero left handed? (Personally I'd love PowerGirl to be left handed and Supergirl to be right handed.)

*

Spoiler:
Which struck me as a better message.
.


Matthew Morris wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:

Wow.

Just wow.

No problem with a character being gay. Would love to see more. I just can't see Alan Scott as gay.

It's easier for me. This isn't my Alan Scott, anymore than Goldfish Barbie is my Starfire, Justice League Victor isn't My Cyborg and Red Gar Logan is My Beast Boy. :-)

My Alan Scott is a family man who loves his son and daughter, no matter which one is bringing boys home.*

Is now when I make a big deal about how they should make a C-list hero left handed? (Personally I'd love PowerGirl to be left handed and Supergirl to be right handed.)

*** spoiler omitted **.

*sigh* goldfish barbie. As a good friend of mine said, people would have forgotten about her completely if not for the teen titans cartoon. He is ad surprised by the fact that everyone forgot she was running around semi naked and wondering why everyone wasn't having sex with each as I am regularly.


Matthew Morris wrote:
My Alan Scott is a family man who loves his son and daughter, no matter which one is bringing boys home.*

That's the Alan Scott I know and love. The guy who told his son that he would probably always have trouble being open about the son being gay (as in the 1940's it was far more frowned upon than today) but was grateful for his happiness despite his own problems with it. I got the message that Alan wasn't perfect, but was trying to be a better and more accepting person, and that to me was far more powerful message.

The current take to me smacks of corporate cowardice. DC wants a gay character, but isn't willing to take chances with the 'real' one.


Nothing but pandering for sales figures...

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BPorter wrote:
When the character was revealed this morning, every media outlet I saw showed a picture of....., you guessed it, Hal Jordan. Whether it was a comic book representation or Ryan Reynolds in the GL suit, it wasn’t Alan Scott. Most of the articles didn’t even bother to point out that it’s a different character, in a different universe, and not associated with the Green Lantern Corps. By mid-day, a few websites had changed the art or bothered to make the distinction, but not many.

The media probably don't know the difference, and even if they did, the choice between accuracy or having a familiar image would still result in them using Hal Jordan in many cases. Don't ding DC for what news outlets do!


Vic Wertz wrote:
The media probably don't know the difference, and even if they did, the choice between accuracy or having a familiar image would still result in them using Hal Jordan in many cases. Don't ding DC for what news outlets do!

But that's the point, Vic. Anyone with half a brain could see that is what the result would be. You would think that a company that is striving to make its other A-list characters more iconic to the public at large would have someone smart enough to realize that the non-comic-reading community wouldn't know the difference.

That's why you don't pick someone that even tangentially tied to the iconics you're trying to push to franchise-status. They could have picked a different Earth 2 character, or better yet, come up with a new character.

And they had advance warning -- when the story originally broke that a character was going to be "outed", the media ran with headlines like "Is Superman Gay?".

Now if they had picked an established gay character and said "to better reflect the times, we're trying to increase the popularity of this character", then the effort succeeds or fails on its own.

Hopefully, it will be treated as the publicity stunt that it is and soon be forgotten. However, if it has a detrimental impact on the greater GL-universe and the GL Corps characters' popularity, is that the media's fault? No, it's the boneheads that didn't think this through.


meh. If they had any C.O. Jones, they'd have Batman come out of the closet.
And profess his love to Superman.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

BPorter wrote:
You would think that a company that is striving to make its other A-list characters more iconic to the public at large would have someone smart enough to realize that the non-comic-reading community wouldn't know the difference.

I think they probably also know that the non-comic-reading community isn't likely to care.


Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:

meh. If they had any C.O. Jones, they'd have Batman come out of the closet.

And profess his love to Superman.

they already did that in wildstorm. Old hat.


All I want to know is if Alan Scott's ring is still going to work when his boyfriend is excited.


^

*Rolls around on the floor, stabbing at his eyes with a fork*

OH GODS OF THE NINE ALIGNMENTS! Why would you do that?! I did not need that mental image! AUUUUUUUGH!

Seriously though, that made me chuckle a bit.


Samnell wrote:
All I want to know is if Alan Scott's ring is still going to work when his boyfriend is excited.

Augh! It took me forever to get that!!


Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:

meh. If they had any C.O. Jones, they'd have Batman come out of the closet.

And profess his love to Superman.

No way. Frank Miller got that relationship right.

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Entertainment / Comics / Corporate Stupidity – Exhibit A: DC Comics All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Comics