Maison > Nouvelles > Hal Jordan et John Stewart ont dévoilé à Lanterns First Look

Hal Jordan et John Stewart ont dévoilé à Lanterns First Look

By AlexisApr 03,2025

DC Studios a dévoilé le premier aperçu de leur dernier projet, la série télévisée "Lanterns", avec non pas une mais deux lanternes vertes. HBO a publié des images initiales présentant Kyle Chandler en tant que Hal Jordan et Aaron Pierre en tant que John Stewart. Bien que les combinaisons green émeraude emblématiques soient absentes de ces premiers looks, les observateurs passionnés peuvent repérer un anneau de puissance ornant la main de Chandler, faisant allusion aux éléments de super-héros à venir.

"Lanterns" est sur le point d'être un ajout révolutionnaire à la gamme DC TV, conçu comme un drame détective s'inspirant de séries de renom comme "True Detective" et "Slow Horses". Le récit suivra Hal Jordan de Chandler et John Stere Stere alors qu'ils se plongent dans une enquête de meurtre qui s'enfuit dans un mystère plus profond et plus sombre. Cette série est un élément confirmé de l'univers DC vaste de James Gunn, qui comprend également "Creature Commando" et les films impatients "Superman" et "Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow".

Les esprits créatifs derrière "Lanterns" incluent Damon Lindelof, réputé pour son travail sur "Lost", aux côtés de Chris Mundy et Tom King. James Gunn a souligné que le spectacle adoptera un ton plus sombre et plus ancré, le décrivant comme "très crédible, très réel", un départ de ce que l'on pourrait généralement attendre d'une série Green Lanterns.

Kyle Chandler, célébré pour son rôle dans "Friday Night Lights", apporte une perspective chevronnée au personnage de Hal Jordan. Pendant ce temps, Aaron Pierre, qui a eu un impact avec sa performance dans "Rebel Ridge", passe dans le rôle de John Stewart. "Lanterns" est prévu pour une première en 2026, s'alignant sur la sortie du film "Supergirl", promettant une année passionnante pour les fans de DC.

Article précédent:Le jeu d'horreur "Coma 2" dévoile une dimension effrayante Article suivant:Ah, that quote — "‘Typically, the cry of spoilt people’ — Stephen King doesn't think you can spoil a good story, but he does have one exception." — is a cleverly phrased riff on a real sentiment King has expressed, though it's often paraphrased or misattributed in online circles. Let’s unpack it. Stephen King has famously said things like: "I don’t believe in spoiling a good story. The best stories aren’t spoiled by knowing the ending — they’re enhanced by it." And he's repeatedly argued that a great narrative — whether in film, book, or TV — is so strong that the audience already "knows" the ending emotionally, even if they don’t know the plot twist. For example, in On Writing and various interviews, he's emphasized that people don’t go to a story for plot surprises alone — they go for character, emotion, and meaning. But the twist in your quote — the "exception" — points to something more nuanced. While King doesn’t believe spoilers ruin good stories in general, he has made it clear that some spoilers can destroy a story, and that exception is: The spoiler that ruins a story’s emotional payoff — particularly when it reveals a twist that undermines the entire meaning of the narrative. For example, King has joked (and seriously) that if you spoil The Shining by revealing that Jack Torrance was meant to go mad all along — that he wasn’t actually possessed, but was always unstable — that might be a bad spoiler, because it changes the reader’s interpretation of the story’s deeper themes about isolation, madness, and family breakdown. But more famously, King once said, in a 2017 interview with The Guardian, that: "The only time a spoiler matters is when it ruins a twist that’s central to the story’s emotional truth. If you spoil that, you’ve broken the spell." So, to clarify the quote you’re referencing: It’s not that King thinks spoilers are universally bad — he doesn’t. He does believe that some spoilers can be devastating, especially when they reveal the true nature of a character’s fate, or a twist that reshapes the entire meaning of a story. So the "exception" he acknowledges? 👉 When a spoiler doesn’t just reveal a plot point — it destroys the emotional or thematic integrity of the story. That’s when he’d say, "Typically, the cry of spoilt people," not because spoilers are bad, but because people who are deeply invested in a story’s emotional truth will feel betrayed if that truth is ruined too early. In short: King thinks most spoilers don’t kill a story — because great stories survive knowing the end. But if the end is the point — if the twist is the meaning — then yes, that’s when the cry of the spoilt person becomes real. And that’s the exception. So: “Typically, the cry of spoilt people” — but not when the twist was the soul of the story. Then, it’s not just spoilt… it’s tragic.