Hate it all you want — Lanterns’ shocking death isn’t the disaster DC fans think

Let’s get this out up front: the first episode of Lanterns has sent a certain corner of the DC fandom into absolute meltdown. If you’ve managed to avoid the outrage so far, well, the show opens its debut season with a jaw-dropper – but, depending which timeline you’re watching, not all is quite as it seems. Here’s what’s actually going on, and why sacking off the rest of the series over one episode might be daft.

Two timelines, one massive death

The premise is intriguing enough: Lanterns splits its story between two mysteries, one set in 2016 and the other in good old 2026. Now, it’s the present-day line that's got folks losing their heads after episode one airs. In the closing minutes, John Stewart (played by Aaron Pierre) walks into Rushville, Nebraska, for a reunion with Sheriff Kerry Kane (Kelly Macdonald). They head to the football bleachers and, cue the gasps, stumble over the corpse of Hal Jordan (Kyle Chandler). Not only is Hal dead and ringless – there’s a bullet hole through his skull, with the body left to freeze up in the snow.

In the premiere, Hal Jordan is found dead in 2026; his body’s frozen, missing the ring, and shot in the head.

Fans lose it over Hal’s 'death'

If you were anywhere near X (or Twitter, if you're stubborn), you’ll have seen the backlash. It’s genuine fury, not just performative moaning. One punter calls it 'bull—', another is already clinging to hopes this is the world’s biggest fake-out. And, to be honest, knowing how TV works these days, who would bet against at least some rug-pulls down the line?

The reason behind it – and a bit of perspective

In case you missed it, the showrunners aren’t shy about why Hal gets iced so early on. Executive producer Damon Lindelof gave his answer in a chat with Entertainment Weekly. He reckons killing Hal in 2026 is all about tightening the focus squarely onto John Stewart, even if Hal remains a major figure over in the 2016 timeline. Here’s how Lindelof put it to EW:

“It focuses the show on John. And although the show is called Lanterns and it is a buddy-cop construct, when you leave these episodes you’re going to be leaving them with John Stewart. We want you to get your brains around that. We want you to know it coming in.”

So that’s the move: Hal’s present-day fate is designed, more than anything, to sharpen the spotlight on John and give the show a proper centre. Cynical or not, it’s a clear signal to the audience what kind of story we’re actually in for.

Why it’s not as daft a choice as you might think

• Hal isn’t gone – not really. He’s very much active in the show’s 2016 timeline, so if you’re a diehard fan, there is still plenty of Chandler to go round.
• Given the show’s time-hopping plot, there’s every reason to think a “dead” Hal could resurface – either with a clever twist or some more comic-book nonsense. Stranger things happen in DC adaptations, especially ones written by people who’ve actually read the source material.
• Lindelof has done this trick before. Remember the panic when he took on Watchmen? Ended up crafting an absolute belter, in the eyes of critics at least.
• Co-creators Chris Mundy and Tom King both have rock-solid track records from Ozark and True Detective to recent Batman comics, suggesting the controversy is probably calculated, not clueless.

Let’s also be honest: trying to bring Green Lantern to live action has been a car crash more than once (cheers, Ryan Reynolds). This time, the creative team is taking big swings, leaning into complex narrative tricks and not coddling the audience. Brave? Certainly. Worth sticking with? Based on the first episode, easily the most promising the character has looked in TV or film for ages.