10 Things GL Could Improve

[Space Cop]

^Yeah, I could see where we could be hypocritical, but as someone who thinks constructs are necessary, but Hal's day job is not, I feel I can justify it. Literally, the day job isn't fundamental because you can describe the premise without it.

Green Lanterns are space cops who use a ring powered by will that essentially do whatever they want. That's the fundamentals. What they do with their spare time can be added or taken without changing the foundation. But then again I'd admit that for the others. Clark doesn't have to be a reporter (in fact he occasionally hasn't been). However, I'd say that in the common understanding, more people would list that as a characteristic of him than would say Hal has to be a test pilot.

[Mister Ed]

I would have said that having Clark Kent as a secret identity was fundamental to Superman, even if he wasn't always a reporter.

Apparently now that's not even a thing, though. I don't read Superman comics, so I don't know how jettisoning that bit of the mythology has effected it. It seems to have minimal significance in the places I encounter the character, usually in JLA stuff or events, where he's almost always Superman the whole time.

[Space Cop]

They're still talking about it in the main Superman titles; so, I guess that's big. They haven't done yet anything like Lois being kidnapped or anything.

[Trey Strain]

Re the ring constructs, if DC ever comes to its senses and flushed that embarrassing stupidity, i'm sure a few people will wail with anguish, "I'll never read Green Lantern again!"

To which I'll respond, "Well... BYE!"

[Space Cop]

Could be. If so, it'll be a nice excuse for me to get out of comics and save some money to buy more movies.

However, DC also has a crime solving chimpanzee; a pre-teen with the powers of Solomon, Hercules, Atlas, Zeus, Achilles, and Mercury; and their flagship character owns a super-powered dog (their top seller even keeps a cow in his bat cave). I don't think they're too worried that one guy on the internet (and to this day you're the only one I know) who thinks constructs are the final straw.

[Mister Ed]

Originally Posted by Space Cop

I don't think they're too worried that one guy on the internet (and to this day you're the only one I know) who thinks constructs are the final straw.

Yeah, not that I claim to be "in the know", but I also have never heard ANYBODY who has the slightest interest in Green Lantern, besides Trey, who has a problem with the idea of ring-constructs.

I have no doubt I've heard people make joking comments about some particular construct or other, but generally they just wish something cooler had been used, not that there be none at all.

I've heard plenty of mocking of various things Batman has pulled from his utility belt over the years, or various gadgets or vehicles he has employed, but I've never heard anybody with the least interest in Batman saying he shouldn't have a utility belt or gadgets/vehicles.

[Space Cop]

^And, on the contrary, I actually have heard multiple stories of people who came to Green Lantern because they loved the idea that the ring could do whatever you want. It's wish fulfillment, just like people will often say if they could have a power they'd like to fly.

[Big Blue Lantern]

Originally Posted by Space Cop

^And, on the contrary, I actually have heard multiple stories of people who came to Green Lantern because they loved the idea that the ring could do whatever you want. It's wish fulfillment, just like people will often say if they could have a power they'd like to fly.

Actually, the ring's unlimited abilities are one of the most unique and interesting aspects of Green Lantern. Green Lanterns problem-solve in the most varied ways because they don't have a strict power set. Any given Lantern might save the day with something as simple as making a key or as massive as making an army. The reader never knows how the ring will be used, and that's the best part of it.

[Big Blue Lantern]

Originally Posted by Ωmega Man

8.) Rogues Gallery - Geoff Johns had the right idea reworking several classic enemies into more potent threats in the modern era. However there is so much more out there in terms of enemies that isn't being touched. DC could be reworking classics like the Puppet Master or Invisible Destroyer, or reintroduce a new Empire of Tears or Black Circle Syndicate. Any aliens/species that show up in Superman comics, Justice League, and the Legion of Superheroes should also come into play more often.
?

This is a topic of conversation that comes up a lot when people message me online. I get asked to explain old villains, and I get asked which villains I think will be used on the HBO Max show. The past two years have allowed me to see that there is a problem with GL's adversaries that DC needs to address in multiple phases.

The heroes who are successful in movies/TV each have villains who are easily identifiable, even to non-comic readers. Outside of Sinestro, GL doesn't have that. Maybe they remember Hector Hammond from the movie, although I haven't heard much clamoring to see a new version. Atrocitus is probably the villain whose name I hear most when people talk about new villains to be adapted in live-action, but he's had very little focus since his appearance in the Green Lanterns title.

DC should decide on a clear-cut group of villains to give focus in the upcoming comics, on the HBO Max show, and in merchandise. There needs to be some name recognition beyond Sinestro, and now should be the time to start making that a reality. We're in the 2020s, and most of GL's rivalries seem like a product of 10 years ago, if not before.