Red Lanterns #29 - "Forever"
May. 28th, 2014 10:01 am
"The Reds are trying to regroup, to determine what their purpose should be. Are they simply the Green Lanterns' attack dogs, there to save the day whenever willpower needs a little boost from rage, or can they be something more - something uniquely their own?" -- Charles Soule

no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 04:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 08:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 04:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 04:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 08:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 09:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 04:56 pm (UTC)Fights for the rights of everyone...
no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 05:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 07:46 pm (UTC)*ahem*
no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 05:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 04:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 06:16 am (UTC)I mean I just found out he's writing the new INhumans so now I have to check that out even though in general I dislike the Inhumans I have to at least give the title a look now.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 06:19 am (UTC)Seriously, if this place were Soules_Daily, I'd still be here.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 05:09 pm (UTC)I suspect he's also using the American age for drinking alcohol with is 3 to 5 years higher than most other countries I can think of.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 07:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 07:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 01:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 08:38 pm (UTC)It's a silly law, no doubt, and I say that as someone who chose not to drink until I was 32.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-30 12:43 pm (UTC)Long Answer: the national drinking age is a recent thing, though it's so ingrained now you could be forgiven for thinking otherwise. When I wore a younger man's clothes, the drinking age was determined on a state-by-state basis (since that was and effectively still is controlled at that level under a Federalist republic). Similarly, the voting age USED to be 21, not 18.
...BUT.
When Vietnam happened, a lot of students were angry that they could be drafted into a war by legal act at the age of 18 to die for their country, but didn't get the right to vote on that situation until 21. In other words, you could be sent to die against your will legally and had no say ("Old enough to fight, Old enough to vote!"). This led to the 26th Amendment to the Constitution, guaranteeing the right to vote at 18 across the country (again, age restrictions varied). To make something like this happen, it takes a LOT of will to get it passed.
So the drinking age? TRICKERY. In 1933, Congress made it a requirement of the repeal of Prohibition that there be a minimum drinking age, determined individually by each state. No big. Most states settled on 21, then later lowered it to 18 or 19. There was a lot of back and forth as the years passed and plenty of puritan debate. Then, in 1984, some Congressmen figured out a way to do an end-run around the state laws: the highways. Citing the rising accident rates due to drunk driving, a law was passed: the Drinking Age Act of 1984. That law said this: you can have whatever minimum drinking age you want, but if you want Federal Funds from the government to pay for upkeep on your highways, you'll raise it to 21 or lose 10% or your money from the Federal government for that purpose. Within 10 years, every state towed the line. The only places in the US where it is lower are Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands and some other territories who don't get those funds, anyways.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 06:31 pm (UTC)you'd think the writer would start to stretch thin with all the stuff he's been doing,
but he sure ain't showing it.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 07:02 pm (UTC)I like Superman being stern with a warning, but yet very respectable at the same time.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 07:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 10:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 09:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 09:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 01:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 10:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-30 12:50 pm (UTC)Because from what I can tell, the Reds were planning on straight-up murdering the Greens as soon as it was actionable? Because Atrocitus is a rage-monster who considered (but to to his credit changed his mind at the last second) killing his only loyal friend to steal his ring? Because he wanted to keep the Red Lanterns enraged and mindless even though he didn't have to?
no subject
Date: 2014-05-30 05:12 pm (UTC)Yeah, because they had placed a listening device in one of his Lanterns and were spying on him.
And I'm not saying he was right there, but keep in mind right before that Atrocitus had helped the Green Lanterns defeat the First Lantern and the Third Army. He also helped Kyle harness the power of the red ring when he was trying to acquire the powers of all the corps.
He's pretty much been an anti-hero and begrudging ally to the GLs before this, then Guy practically kills him, steals his ring, and takes over his people.
Because he wanted to keep the Red Lanterns enraged and mindless even though he didn't have to?
It's been a while since I read it, but didn't Milligan's run have him giving them their intelligence? They were all already intelligent when Guy showed up.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-28 11:24 pm (UTC)Edit: Also, Guy's moustache is awesome. That stache and the general writing of him here makes me want him to be the Lantern they put in the Justice League film, so long as he's depicted how he is here.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 01:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 06:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 08:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-29 04:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-30 01:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-30 02:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-30 03:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-30 03:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-30 03:03 pm (UTC)