Free will is a paradoxic double-edged sword. It's either you take away free will and be a villain and then get blamed, or you let them have free will and see people fuck things up and then blame you.

 

You're taking what I'd said out of context and you're very much crossing a line when I didn't say anything even remotely like you're suggesting here. Yes, you do have to see things from the Guardians perspective to understand their reasoning to see their side of the story. That's how Johns tends to write villains, they don't see their actions as being evil. Remember, they've rejected emotion, so they are seeing things from a purely cold and logical perspective. Their goal with the Third Army really wasn't any different than it had been with the Manhunters or the Green Lanterns. That's the part I'm saying isn't inherently evil, not that it makes their methods with the Third Army right. So don't go attacking me personally just because I'm pointing out where these characters are coming from in the story. It doesn't mean I agree with it.

 

It doesn't matter what you agree or disagree about. Some things are objectively evil. I don't have to see things from a serial killer's perspective or the guy who steals the pension money from elderly people. If you attempt to enslave all life in the universe, that's evil no matter what perspective you look at it from. The end. And all your attempted epistemological gymnastics around that just look silly.

Here's a comic for you to read: "Must There Be a Superman?" It features the Guardians as they used to be, in a story where they subtly warn Superman about the dangers of overstepping. Superman #247. Or you can find it in multiple versions of 'The Greatest Superman Stories Ever Told' HC or TPB.

 

A cover of Nightwing #53, with all of the Nightwings shown in the light

 

Nope, pretty sure that is you who looks silly by insulting people for a different opinion about a goddamn comic book.

Not once did Sparky ever say their actions weren't evil or tried to justify those actions. Saying he's down with slavery is just fucked up, so step back from behind the comic book counter and chill.

 

Im guessing by how disjointed the thread seems a certain jackass that overextends his opinions as facts is on a nerd induced rampage....glad I put him on ignore....

Lol....down with slavery huh? That's low

 

Yeah, you're still clearly not understanding what I'm saying if you think I'm saying their trying to enslave the universe wasn't evil. As smkspy said, I never once said that wasn't evil or tried to justify it. Again, my point is that their goals is the same as it's always been even with the Manhunters and Green Lanterns. Trying to establish order in the universe. Their tactics with the Third Army just changed to a cold, logical conclusion. That doesn't mean I'm saying that method is right, just that it's a method that would accomplish the ends they're trying to accomplish from a purely cold and logical perspective. Attacking me personally for pointing that out is crossing the line.

 

Jeff Lemire on Quitting Work-For-Hire Like The Terrifics - Aside from a Certain Black Label Project
The Terrifics #14 and a DC Comics Black Label project are his last jobs for the company, as a non-creator owned project.

 

Man that thing looks like it came straight out of the 90s!

 

Whether they see their actions as evil is irrelevant. They were evil. It's not really a debate. Hitler probably didn't see himself as evil either.

 

And what some others are saying is that they were never so evil in their actions in trying to accomplish this in the past. The Manhunters went way beyond what they were supposed to do. The Green Lanterns are basically a cosmic police force, and members that went too far were reigned in. The Third Army and many of the actions the Guardians took around that time went way beyond what they had done before.
Personally I can't remember any time in the pre-John's GL past when I would have called them evil. But they definitely crossed that line under him. And it was one of the few problems I had with his run.

 

Godwin's Law level reached, congrats.
 

 

Yeah, I tried to avoid taking it there, but really, I don't blame him because I don't know how else to make the point understood.

All I said originally is that I did not enjoy how Johns turned the Guardians evil with a series of short-sighted evil schemes a child could have predicted wouldn't work, and that I was glad Morrison was pulling back from that. That's all. My opinion.

Then it turned into a whole thing of not necessarily being evil, seeing things from the Guardians' perspective, and it being a logical extension of how they used to be, which I would argue against. More like a ridiculously exaggerated parody of what they were, but whatever.

Taking away all people's right to self determination is evil. The mass murder they committed in their attempt to cover up what they were doing is evil. You don't have to qualify it, you don't have to see it from their perspective. But I'm the unreasonable one.

As far as your earlier point about Johns' run being the most important in the character's history after the Silver Age, eh. I'd put the Englehart era ahead of it for creating and/or implementing most of the elements Johns later used. I credit Johns with creating the Sinestro Corps, but after that, it was mostly hitting the same note over and over again. And "turning the franchise into a cultural phenomenon" seems a bit generous. I'd credit the Justice League cartoon for bringing GL to mainstream attention much more than any run of comics. Unless you're talking about the wonderful Ryan Reynolds movie, which does spin directly from Johns' run and influence.

 

Again, I never said their actions weren't evil. That was never the argument here, that's just what SouthtownKid turned it into by taking something I'd said out of context. The point I was making is that the Guardians had lost perspective on what it meant to truly live over the eons, and instead began to see things from a purely cold, logical point of view.

And I'm not disputing that the Guardians were ever so evil with their previous actions. I completely agree Johns was the one that had them cross that line to become villains. All I'm saying is that I can see where Johns developed that from, since we have seen elements of cold logic from the Guardians over the decades, long before Johns run on the title.

 

And my point initially was that for beings that had lived millions of years, the span of time that they made this shift from logical, benevolent protectors who were always careful not to overstep in the affairs of individual planets into what Johns turned them into was like turning on a dime. Always in the past, when they erred, it was on the side of letting something bad happen in the name of allowing civilizations to retain their autonomy. That's pretty much the reason they shut down the Manhunters in the first place. Then, suddenly, it's the complete opposite.

 

And I just don't agree that turn was "on a dime" like you do. Part of the build up to the Third Army explained that the Guardians were frustrated with the ever increasing insubordination from the Green Lanterns. Hal killing Krona made that all come to a head, making them realize they could potentially rebel against them like the Manhunters had 3 billion years ago. And this is also why I pointed out the Guardians sense of cold logic. The Guardians may have been portrayed as logical benevolent protectors, but even other writers long before Johns didn't always portray them as nice guys because of their sense of logic. Something Johns built on that eventually led him to making them into villains.

 

If you live to be 80 years old, a shift made over 5-10 years could be seen as pretty gradual. If you live more than a million years, the same span of time is equivalent to less time than it takes us as humans to blink our eyes once. That's a ridiculously short time to decide that everything you've ever done in your life was wrong and start doing the exact opposite. I didn't buy it then, I don't buy it now.

That's why I say they're not supposed to be us. The Guardians aren't 80 year-old men who have been fed up with something over the past decade. Maybe Johns doesn't have the imagination to write characters who have lived that long and are that evolved with essentially what is infinitely more experience than any human could ever have. Which is why the concept of the Guardians worked in the first place.

You're overstating this and using the overly vague term "nice guys" to suggest more than was there. Hal may have had differences at times with the Guardians, like when he walked off the job in the '80s. But Hal was the one who was wrong, not the Guardians. And it was Hal who was wrong in the '90s. Even when O'Neil was writing them as kind of clueless in the 1970s, they still refrained from overstepping in the affairs of individual worlds and did listen to Hal's concerns. I don't think Johns built on any of that. He created his own exaggerated parody version out of air.

 

Joker's Daughter Coming to Nightwing?
A leaked cover for Nightwing in February:


James Robinson Working on Mystery DC Comic - Could it Be Stargirl?
Geoff Johns knows what it is, but nothing will be revealed at the moment...

 

Again, I'm not seeing that this was a change that took place over just 5-10 years, which is why I keep pointing to the cold logic of the Guardians that we have seen from other writers displayed long before Johns. They've pretty much always had this attitude of "we know better than you mere mortals" attitude, when they have more than proven that they are not infallible either. And I don't see that it matters if they've lived for 80 years or 8 billion years. I can't agree that'd mean they're going to be slow to make radical changes if they decide what they've been doing isn't working.

I don't think that I'm over stating anything. You want something more specific? Let's look at O'Neil's run back in the 70's for an example. The Guardians scorn Hal for his behavior, accusing him of an emotional attack on a 'brother Earthling' who happened to be a crime boss that he and Green Arrow are trying to take down. Despite this, Hal and Ollie eventually get a confession from the crime boss so they can put him in jail but the Guardians still aren't happy with Hal's actions. Green Arrow defends their actions accusing them of having lost touch with the mortals they claim to protect, so they assign Appa Ali Apsa to experience life with them. And what happens as a result? They exile Appa after he saves Hal because of the emotional attachment they'd formed in their travels together rather than protect a boat full of people, even though everything still turned out alright in the end. The Guardians suppression of emotions and focus on logic was not at all something Johns created or exaggerated.

 

This is all SUPER awesome and fun, you guys...