The whole point is that Hal starts out as a less than stellar person and grows into a more responsible one. You're supposed to like him for his quality attributes (bravery, idealism, etc) and recognize that he has flaws.
People seem to have an issue with that in the film, but not in the comics.
It's kind of odd.
The reason is because his quality attributes were shown inconsistently (sometimes he's brave sometimes he's not... is it Tuesday?) and his flaws had pretty tragic consequences.
The point is, the drones weren't actually faulty. Hal made them do something they weren't designed to do. It was no fault of the designers/workers. He cost them their jobs just so he could show off. Who wouldn't be pissed off if some big shot *****e bag got you fired through no fault of your own?
Boom.
I think the scene is trying to portray a "cruel to be kind" scenario. The contractors put a ceiling on combat, but Hal is of the mind that there is no ceiling on combat.
He beat the drones and the reason he didn't recover from the stall was the flashback to his father. Another sufficiently capable pilot would have recovered. So in his mind, he was showing how to improve the drones.
The reason it failed is because that was clearly not the goal of the test, and they asked him to stop when he began to be cruel to be kind. Also, Hal may have improved the drones, but it didn't help anyone, company still laid off a bunch of people, and the drones didn't need any extra altitude to help him against Parallax. It was an utterly selfish bad call, the way the movie portrayed it.
The Hal in the film was NOT the Hal in the comics, though. The key difference is when Hal in the comics was faced with the question of whether or not he would accept this new power/duty, his response was, without hesitation, "absolutely." Whereas in the film, he was like, "you've got the wrong guy!" His entire arc was the age-old "reluctant hero" arc. Hal Jordan has many flaws, but a reluctant hero he is not. That's like his core attribute. As Kurt Busiek once said, Hal's the guy who jumps off a cliff and then figures out how not to die on the way down. He does not hesitate before jumping and say, "I don't know if I can do this."
Exactly! The film started in this vein with him being a pilot, even though that's his greatest fear, cool... but then it paralyzes him? Okay... then later, confronted by fear, he mopes around his apartment and needs a pep talk!? That's not just an unlikeable character, that's a badly written one.
But they have to show character growth and development, and in order to do that, you have to start somewhere and solidify the character's flaws, conflicts, etc. Structurally and dramatically.
It seems kind of silly to say "well he's this brave, courageous , generally decent guy, oh, except he has no sense of responsibility for some reason". That doesn't really compute. That makes for a fairly lame character arc, from "Already kind of a hero" to "an actual hero". That's not terribly interesting in terms of conflict.
The point of the film (and in the comics, really) is that he found something constructive to DO with his ability to overcome fear that bettered him as a person.
Hal in the comics has had self doubt. He's run away from things before. He just didn't do it in the same order. Getting a power ring shouldn't automatically make someone accept responsibility.
And I've seen Hal question the ring and his right to it several times over the years in the comics. They just had him do it early on. Which makes perfect sense.
How MovieHal expresses his self doubt is inconsistent, and the character he starts as, before he grows, is not likeable. When other superheroes start out, they are quickly likeable, even with their flaws. Their positive qualities are consistent and compelling. This was not true of Green Lantern, his positive qualities were inconsistent and not compelling. The plane scene is a great example of showing how Hal is an impetuous out of the box thinker, but in order to do so, he betrays the woman who cares about him, messes up his employer, defies orders and produces nothing of any use to anyone. Everyone's life is worse off because Hal is an out of the box thinker here, and no one's life is better off.
Yes, he was trained to win at all costs. He used an unorthodox method and it worked. If you remember, Ferris acknowledged that the drone improvements did indeed get made, proving Hal right.
But you're right in the assertion that Hal had some jerk tendencies. Each Green Lantern did, with Guy being such a jerk that even the other GL's didn't like him. Arrogance seems to come with having the willpower to get the ring.
So, when faced with air force pilot training (which apparently is win at all costs) and direct orders from his bosses (show off the product, stop flying so high), Hal is the type of guy who will do whatever he wants, regardless of what job he's been assigned, regardless of who will get hurt in the process, regardless of how important it is to everyone else, Hal was TRAINED, by the MILITARY to DEFY ORDERS and WIN no matter what? Is that what you're telling me?
No, sir. Movie Hal was a grade A *****e, of Guy-like proportions, unlike John, Kyle or Comic Hal. Hal was right that the drones had a ceiling, but that 'rightness' benefited who? The company he set up for bankruptcy? Those improvements will never see daylight. There's no upside to this flaw, on any level, so it's not appreciable.
