MovieChat Forums > Justice League (2001) Discussion > Not a lot of John Stewart since the DCAU...

Not a lot of John Stewart since the DCAU ended...

posted 10 years ago by DarthBill
8 replies | jump to latest

He had a few cameos on Young Justice, I think he had a brief cameo in Duck Dodgers, was voiced by Michael Jai White in a video game and Ken Thomas in DC Universe On Line and that's been pretty much it for him since the DCAU Justice League ended. The DVDs have mostly featured Hal, who was the star of the doomed 2011 live action film and who also had his own short lived series on Cartoon Network (crappy channel that it is) as well as a few cameos strung out over the Brave & the Bold culminating in "Scorn of the Star Sapphire" while Guy Gardner was usually the go to guy for the GLC on that series. Meanwhile Kyle Rayner hasn't gotten much air time either.

I was just wondering what everyone else thought about the lack of John (or Kyle) in other media post-DCAU.

[–] zombiehax 10 years ago

What I find hilarious though is all other Green Lanterns flop pretty hard. That CGI show no one knows or cares to remember, then they had the movie people hated that.

Hal Jordon is really and truly a boring character, I'm not sure why they use him or why fans love him. John Stewart, Guy Gardner, Kyle Rayner. All worthy IMO. I enjoyed John Stewart a lot though because he was hot headed and stubborn, most leaguers are very cookie cutter (Yes, sir I agree sir). It doesn't create any confrontation.

Fact: 31.5% of IMDb users wanted Avatar to win Best Picture.
Fact: 31.5% of IMDb users are idiots.

[–] night_wolf873 10 years ago

Although I am not a fan of John, at least the way he's portrayed in JLU (I don't know how he is in comics) but I do agree. He's been very much absent, wouldn't mind seeing him. But come on mate, no one can out stubborn Batman :D His level of stubbornness makes me wonder how others tolerate him. I'd hardly say others are cookie cutters, and there's a balanced confrontation whenever there is one. Honestly though, I like that JL is a functional team without too much of an ego clash.

[–] PreachCaleb 10 years ago

There's a difference in how they're stubborn.

Batman is stubborn in that he'll do things his way and doesn't care what you do.

Green Lantern will usually argue until you see things his way.

Can't stop the signal.

[–] zombiehax 10 years ago

Agreed. They are stubborn but very different for it. Perfect example is in Justice League: Doom. Batman is told to wait for the team to arrive, he shuts off his com and proceeds anyway.

John Stewart I think takes a stronger role, attempting to in some way be a chain of command. Things should be done in X formation and everyone should agree. I loved all the Leaguers in this show, but in the comics and and the new Justice League movie there really isn't much confrontation within the team. I enjoyed Justice League the show because it seemed a bit more real, everyone having different personalities and their own way of doing things.

Fact: 31.5% of IMDb users wanted Avatar to win Best Picture.
Fact: 31.5% of IMDb users are idiots.

[–] manofsteel4455 10 years ago

Batman never did care about anybody else anyways.

[–] grendelkhan 10 years ago

Hal Jordan, as written in the 60s and 70s, was a far more interesting character. However, he got lost in the shuffle from the 80s onward (when Guy Guardner went from minor back up character to a major figure in the GLC). DC: The New Frontier gives a really good take on the character, making him heroic; but, not necessarily a boyscout. Essentially, it used a lot of the personality traits of the test pilots of the post-WW2 era, as seen in The Right Stuff.

Really, apart from his initial appearances, John Stewart was a rather boring character, until the Justice League animated series.

Hal hasn't been handled well in other media. Challenge of the Super Friends didn't really develop any of the characters and most of their personalities were interchangeable. Green Lantern had one of the blandest voices of all; though, quite frankly, that was true of most of the heroes, beyond the core group.

Green Lantern, in a general, was a character whose fortunes rose and fell a lot. It took a really imaginative creative team to make him work. Most people can do a competent Batman story; but it takes a lot more to do an interesting GL or Flash story. In the 60s, it revolved a lot around gimmickry. By the 70s, they had done most of the tricks, so you either had to develop more interesting characters or raise the stakes above just stopping thieves with a high power gimmick. A comic book gives you more room to do that, compared to a tv show or movie.

Fortunately, Ah keep mah feathers numbered for just such an emergency!

[–] comicman117 10 years ago

What I find hilarious though is all other Green Lanterns flop pretty hard. That CGI show no one knows or cares to remember, then they had the movie people hated that.

It's not really hilarious though, and more sad when you consider the fact that the GL movie flopped due to executive meddling and a real lack of interest from the big wigs at WB (the fact that they didn't have a real script when the movie began production, despite there being previous drafts written, says it all), and the GL animated series failed because the movie failed and because CN stopped caring about serious action cartoons.

Hal Jordon is really and truly a boring character, I'm not sure why they use him or why fans love him.

John Stewart's a less interesting character IMO (though I still like him), especially with the Xanishi stuff, which they've beaten into the ground at the point, and Hal Jordan is my favorite GL, but each to their own I guess.

Also really before anyone brings up the movie's failure in relation to Jordan, let's be honest, it would have failed regardless of which GL was in the lead role.

I wasn't waiting, I was just sitting and breathing. Got a problem with that?

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]