Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

The place to talk about your favorite novels, comic books and web comics.
User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 4963
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Ares »

So I came across this video by Literature Devil:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6YsDwg0HiY

It's pretty long, roughly 90 minutes, but it makes good listening if can find the time for it.

In essence, Literature Devil takes several quotes from different people and uses them to tackle the idea of heroism, and why some people seem to scoff at the idea of more idealistic heroes in favor of anti-heroes and villains.

These Quotes include:

Bill's infamous speech from Kill Bill:
Bill of Kill Bill wrote:“Superman didn't become Superman. Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he's Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red "S", that's the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears - the glasses, the business suit - that's the costume. That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent. He's weak... he's unsure of himself... he's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race.”

Zack Snyder's infamous quote about heroes in general:
Zack Snyder wrote:“Someone says to me like, ‘Oh! Batman killed a guy!’ I’m like, ‘Fuck, really?’ I’m like, ‘Wake the fuck up!’ That’s what I’m saying about once you’ve lost your virginity to this fucking movie and then you come and say to me something about like, ‘Oh, my superhero wouldn’t do that,’ I’m like, ‘Are you serious? I’m like down the fucking road on that.’ You know what I mean?”

***

“It’s a cool point of view to be like, ‘My heroes are still innocent. My heroes didn’t lie to America. My heroes didn’t embezzle money. My heroes didn’t commit any atrocities.’ I’m like, ‘That’s cool, but you’re living in a fucking dream world'."

And Sana Amanat, Vita Ayala, Tini Howard and Leah Williams comments during a Women of Marvel Podcast:
The Women of Marvel wrote:"I also love how you brought up a villain because that's something I laugh about a lot. Like, when people bring up the very valid, like, academic discourse about queer coding in villainy, but at the same time I'm like . . . I identify with villains."

***

"I feel that we identify with villains because of their struggle. Very rarely today do we have a villain that is just cookie cutter. It's like oh, you were traumatized and abused. And you are like 'I'm going to reflect that back'. -Oh I would never do that, but I feel that real deep. It would be a catharsis."

***

"We find something instantly recognizable in these characters that are queer coded and vilified, specifically and are misunderstood by everyone around them. Even if we don't consciously know why we're drawn to these characters, it's kind of an experience that is recognizable."

***

"And for a long time too with villain characters, just in general, not specific to Marvel. They also had a lot of room, not just to be queer, but just to do things that were a little more nuanced and complicated than the cookie-cutter hero characters because you get all this pressure for the hero to kind of stay in one lane . . . because that's the moral character and the moral center of the story. Whereas, with the villain, it's like -no- you can have moments of softness and moments of doubt and all of these things and then you're still the villain."

***

"I would rather see that story (i.e. a villain's story) than the one where the person is like 'hi I'm a good person,' and that's it. I'm going to punch the bad guy."
As a counter example, Literature Devil brings up the Four Cardinal Virtues:

Prudence: The ability to discern the correct course of action in each situation at just the right time.

Temperance: The practice of self-control and moderation.

Justice: Having a strong sense of fairness.

Fortitude: Having the strength to carry out the other virtues, to endure pain and hardiship, and to overcome fear, uncertainty and intimidation.

And these four virtues are ones we can find in almost any hero. Even the heroes that are assholes or jerks will have strong aspects of these four virtues. And it's through the examination of these virtues and what it means to be Superman that we can come to one conclusion:

Zack Snyder and the Women of Marvel don't have a single clue about what it means to be a hero.

Ignoring the questionable "queer coding" bit, the Women of Marvel put forth that villains are more interesting because they struggle. They don't see the villains as being "cookie cutter", having room to be nuanced and complicated, having moments of softness and doubt. Meanwhile heroes are boring, cookie cutter characters who are just good, show up to punch the bad guy and have to "stay in one lane".

And I find myself wondering if any of these women ever read a comic book before Marvel hired them. Because it sounds like they've never seen stories where a hero has to overcome adversity. Or struggle with the morality of a situation. Have moments of weakness and vulnerability. Everything they said about villains could apply to heroes, with the exception of one thing: the moral center.

Heroes have morality. They show restraint. They have the same impulses as other people, they struggle with the same things other people do, but they have the moral conviction to do the right thing, rather than the easy thing. To make sacrifices in the name of others, specifically so that others will be safe and happy, even if they have to endure pain and hardship.

Heroes hold themselves to a high standard, and they do so partially to inspire us to live by a similar standard. To understand and love heroes is to understand that, as a person, things are expected from you, and you need to demand more of yourself in order to live up to the ideals of the heroes you admire.

The reason Zack Snyder doesn't believe in genuine heroes and the reasons the Women of Marvel identify with villains, is because they don't believe in holding themselves to those ideals. In short, they're lazy, immature children. Zack Snyders heroes will gladly compromise their morality and embrace nihilism because being a moral person and holding on to optimism int he face of adversity is sometimes hard. The Women of Marvel identify with villains because they get to do whatever they want without those pesky moral restraints. They talk about empathizing with "the struggle", but if that were true they'd empathize more with the heroes, because they not only struggle with the same challenges of other people, but the moral challenges to do the right thing. At which point you realize the only struggle they care about is the "struggle to get what I want" which is at the core of a villain's struggle. So in essence, the Women of Marvel empathize with the villain's commitment to self-indulgence and selfishness in general.

There's a lot of reasons why the current comic industry is in a lot of trouble, of which the pandemic is only a relatively small part. Toxic business practices, marketing schemes and sales gimmicks that bleed shop owners of money. Flood the shelves practices and constant event comics that lose interest rather than generate them. Endless relaunches of books and the pursuit of different "phantom audiences". Questionable hiring practices, creators that spend more time on social media than working, using their time to create tension with fans rather than to promote their own books.

But a strong core of the issue is simply this: to be able to really tell a good superhero story, you have to, on some level, believe in heroic ideals. Because at the end of the day, the "hero" part of superhero is vastly more important than the "super". And if you find yourself not believing in heroes or identifying with the villains over the heroes, you've got no business having creative control over superheroes.

As for Superman? I recommend you watch the video, but for my money (as well as Literature Devil's money) there will always be a place for people like Superman, Spider-Man, Batman, Captain America, the original Captain Marvel and the countless other true heroes out there. Because those heroes inspire us to be better. They show us a level of heroism that isn't unattainable, merely difficult to live up to. But it's possible.

And for the record, Zack? My heroes include guys like Mr. Fred Rogers and my father. And they never lied to America, never embezzled money and never committed any atrocities. Just because you lack moral fortitude, don't assume everyone else does.

Which brings us to that Kill Bill quote. Bill, like Zack, is projecting his own faults, his own pessimism, his own darkness onto other characters and assuming it's something insightful, rather than their own weakness clouding their perceptions. It's why that line from Kill Bill tells you nothing about Superman and everything about Bill. They see weakness in other people because they see weakness in themselves, and they can't imagine someone having the morality to stand by their convictions.

Superman, the real Superman, is still relevant today. Because even though he's a fictional character, he can still save us from these kind of people who tell us we're weak, that we're corrupt, that we will some day commit atrocities or do terrible things. That we should embrace selfishness and hedonism.

Superman can save us from them by reminding us of our better nature.

And to end it on a good quote, as one version of Jor-El put it:
Jor-El wrote:"They can be a great people, Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you… my only son."
"My heart is as light as a child's, a feeling I'd nearly forgotten. And by helping those in need, I will be able to keep that feeling alive."
- Captain Marvel SHAZAM! : Power of Hope (2000)

Want to support me and Echoes of the Multiverse? Follow this link to subscribe or donate.
MarvelLion
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 11:42 pm

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by MarvelLion »

Well said on all points!
Neo-Paladin
Posts: 3349
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 8:48 am

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Neo-Paladin »

Totally agreed. So many cynics and nihilists seek to drag us down to their level (Zach among them) and it's heroes like Cap and Supe who hold out a hand to help us get back up.
RainOnTheSun
Posts: 1153
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 7:20 am

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by RainOnTheSun »

An illegal immigrant who saves people from natural disasters, whose most famous enemy is a corrupt billionaire?

Nah, nothing interesting about that these days.
csyphrett
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:49 pm

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by csyphrett »

Some people know what a paladin is, and how they work. Some people don't.
CES
User avatar
Ken
Posts: 3460
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:40 pm
Location: Sycalb, Madiganistan

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Ken »

And yet, there was a huge demand for the Snyder Cut of "Justice League".... *shakes head*
My Amazing Woman: a super-hero romantic comedy podcast.

When the most powerful super hero on Earth marries an ordinary man, hilarity ensues.
User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 4963
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Ares »

I wonder how much the "huge" demand was in terms of number of people, or just the same small number of people making the same requests over and over again. I mean, I suppose the idea is that the Snyder Cut has to be better than the version we got, but it's like saying getting in the face with 20 pound ball of shit filled with 50 nails is better than a 25 pound ball of shit filled with 75 nails. It's technically not as bad, but it's still a painful, shitty experience.

I mean, it's good that the studio is releasing it, they may as well. I just don't want the Snyder cut to be seen as this success story of how things should have been and causes WB to double down on the Snyder-style DC Heroes.

It's a sad day when the Marvel heroes are more fun and optimistic than the DC Heroes.
"My heart is as light as a child's, a feeling I'd nearly forgotten. And by helping those in need, I will be able to keep that feeling alive."
- Captain Marvel SHAZAM! : Power of Hope (2000)

Want to support me and Echoes of the Multiverse? Follow this link to subscribe or donate.
User avatar
Ken
Posts: 3460
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:40 pm
Location: Sycalb, Madiganistan

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Ken »

Ares wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:09 am I wonder how much the "huge" demand was in terms of number of people, or just the same small number of people making the same requests over and over again. I mean, I suppose the idea is that the Snyder Cut has to be better than the version we got, but it's like saying getting in the face with 20 pound ball of shit filled with 50 nails is better than a 25 pound ball of shit filled with 75 nails. It's technically not as bad, but it's still a painful, shitty experience.

I mean, it's good that the studio is releasing it, they may as well. I just don't want the Snyder cut to be seen as this success story of how things should have been and causes WB to double down on the Snyder-style DC Heroes.

It's a sad day when the Marvel heroes are more fun and optimistic than the DC Heroes.
I can't believe the Snyder Cut will be better than the version we got. Whedon, in my opinion, at least had the heads of the nails on the outside, and the points in the center.
My Amazing Woman: a super-hero romantic comedy podcast.

When the most powerful super hero on Earth marries an ordinary man, hilarity ensues.
User avatar
Woodclaw
Posts: 1462
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:05 pm
Location: Como, Italy

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Woodclaw »

Ken wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:04 am And yet, there was a huge demand for the Snyder Cut of "Justice League".... *shakes head*
Ares wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:09 am I wonder how much the "huge" demand was in terms of number of people, or just the same small number of people making the same requests over and over again. I mean, I suppose the idea is that the Snyder Cut has to be better than the version we got, but it's like saying getting in the face with 20 pound ball of shit filled with 50 nails is better than a 25 pound ball of shit filled with 75 nails. It's technically not as bad, but it's still a painful, shitty experience.

I mean, it's good that the studio is releasing it, they may as well. I just don't want the Snyder cut to be seen as this success story of how things should have been and causes WB to double down on the Snyder-style DC Heroes.

It's a sad day when the Marvel heroes are more fun and optimistic than the DC Heroes.
I can't honestly say how big the demand really was, but I can certainly imagine why. Cards on the table Justice League sucked and this is kind of crazy if you consider how similar it is to Avengers. Both movie feature the creation of a team to go against an alien invasion led by a stooge of the real big bad, in both movie we got a first battle with partial team that goes so-so and a big discussion about what to do next.
The big difference is the central conflict of the movie. In Avengers the conflict is between the main characters, who are wrangled into this fight, but they barely know each other and, sure as hell, aren't a team. In Justice League the main conflict should have been about the morality of bringing Superman back... and that got resolved in a 5 minutes chat where the only really voice against was Wonder Woman.
The current cut of the movie fails the Martha Test hard (which at this point I'm starting to suspect it's a trait of Snyder's style), so fans wish really hard that the original take would fix things and erase the fingerprints of Whedon.
For me that's the worst kind of wishful thinking.
"You're right. Sorry. Holy shit," I breathed, "heckhounds.”

WareHouse W (main build thread for M&M)
User avatar
Woodclaw
Posts: 1462
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:05 pm
Location: Como, Italy

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Woodclaw »

As for the main topic.
Years ago I read an article on White Dwarf where one of the game designers of 40k argued that characters like the Joker or Hannibal Lecter are more interesting because they're agents of change, whereas heroes are often static and constant, hence boring. Sure, this was a pitch for the Chaos Marines codex, but that comment made me think... is this really the case?
Until four years ago, I was really unsure. In many ways, it felt natural, villains are often the active part in the story, while heroes tend to be the reactive part. Hence, villains are creative and unpredictable, they literally build the conflict and the story that follows. Meanwhile, heroes often wait and react to the villains' actions. But is it really that simple?
No
Absolutely no.
If look at things from a different perspective, villains are much more static than heroes, because they are the initiators of these conflicts because they don't have to compromise. It's extremely rare for a villain to stop and reconsider his/her schemes. They know what they want, they take it (or at least try) without any regard for those who get in the way. Heroes on the other hand must constantly adapt, think and rethink, make hard choices, sacrifice their own happiness to keep others safe.
Every night Spider-Man is out punching the Green Goblin is a night Peter Parker can't be at home for aunt May or Mary-Jane.
Every time Superman must stop Lex Luthor's plans is a moment he must be away from his family.
It's extremely rare for a hero not to compromise and this often happens only to those characters that are either looners or don't have a life outside of the mask (which is why secret identities are a really powerful narrative tool). Change is constant, but heroes and villains approach it from the opposite sides: villains change the world to fit them, heroes change to fit into the world. This might look like a perfect match and in a way it is... until the changes created or suffered become too great and conflict ensues.
Speaking about conflict. Let's talk about the Women of Marvel podcast. My impression from this snipet is that these creators took a philosphy 101 class and utterly failed at it. There's nothing inherently wrong with identifying with the villain rather than the hero, but saying that you do so because of the struggle is horse****. Let's take a look at one of the most iconic supervillains of all time: Lex Luthor. What is the struggle of Lex Luthor? What uphill battle is he fighting? As far as modern-ish interpretations go, Luthor want to be the hero. He wants recognition. He wants a full Roman Triumph with the world hailing him as its saviour. I'm sorry but this not a struggle, this is looking for entitlement.
Now, I'm the first to admit that morality is a social construct that changes over time. Dwanye McDuffie (may the earth be light on him) explored this concept really well with Icon. On the surface Icon is "the black Superman", but I wholeheartedly disagree with this definition. Icon was created to explore the problems of struggles, the real struggles of a person judged solely by the appearence in a society that considered that the norm. The problem of the Women of Marvel seems that they equated morality to society, which makes their reasoning very transparent. The key issue isn't that they don't understand heroes, what they don't understand is why heroes don't do more to change things.
I mean, isn't Wonder Woman stated purpose to change the status quo? To create a better society? More equal? More free?
I think that these creators have grow disaffected with the idea of heroes because they think that the game is rigged. Paragon heroes, like Superman, Wonder Woman or Captain America don't appeal to them because all of them work from within bounduaries that were set in place by others, making them the sucker at the poker table.
Speaking of Captain America... let's go onto another key point: superpowers. All this talking about struggles and challenges left me open for a different critique: if all I said up to this point is true, aren't "mortal heroes" inherently better suited than Superman?
I don't think so. Mortal heroes are often easier to write, but this doesn't make them inherently better. I believe that the inherent flaw of all the quotes above (except for Bill, but we'll come to that later) is that the focus on the "super" and forget the "hero". It's an age old question and one of my favorite "acid test" for a character: are they defined from their powers?
One of my favorite moments in Endgame is Captain America's last stand. Never in all my years as a moveigoer I was so tempted to jump from my seat and scream. It's the perfect Steve Rogers moment: Thor and Iron Man are down, the rest of the Avengers are burried under tons of rubble and what does Cap do? He straps what's left of his broken shield and get ready to fight. What makes this scene great is that we already saw it once: in an alley of New York in 1940, when a skinny Steve got trashed because he stood up to a bully. He said it back then: "I could do this the whole day." and lived his life true to those words, being Captain America simply put it into bigger fights. And that's the ugly truth: superpowers just make a character bigger than he or she already is. Sometimes allows the hero to help more people (like Steve Rogers), others they gave him a second chance to be better person (like Tony Stark).
So, let's go back to Superman. Is Superman defined from his powers? I don't think so, at least not the modern Superman. Bill's quote contains at least a modicum of truth: the golden and silver age versions of Superman were very much defined by their powers. Back in those days Clark Kent was just a convenient disguise, but this changed with the work of Alan Moore and John Byrne. Defining that Superman's morality comes from his upbringing and not from some kind of weird side-effect of being Kryptonian, Moore and Byrne put the hero back in the superhero. For Bill the key features of Clark Kent are being weak, unsure and cowardly, for me they are being generous, humble and empathetic.
"You're right. Sorry. Holy shit," I breathed, "heckhounds.”

WareHouse W (main build thread for M&M)
User avatar
Jack of Spades
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:20 pm
Location: Top of the deck
Contact:

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Jack of Spades »

Woodclaw wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 5:56 pm[T]he key features of Clark Kent are [...] are being generous, humble and empathetic.
This, along with bravely and unfailingly committed to his values: Truth, Justice, and the American Way. He works for them always, whether or not he's wearing his glasses.
Jack's Deck build threadFantasy Geographic Society campaign web site
User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 4963
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Ares »

That scene with Captain America in Endgame is my favorite moment in the entire film. Even more than the "Captain America wields Mjolnir" scene that is a close second.

Thanos is monologuing, calling in his entire army, while a battered and exhausted Steve lies on the ground. Every time he movies you can just see and hear the pain he's in. He gets up anyway. He sees that both his shield and his arm are broken. He tightens the strap on his shield and walks towards the looming army.

It's one man against the most powerful force of evil in the entire universe. All he's got is a broken shield and a broken body. But you know, you KNOW, that he is prepared to fight every single one of them. Because Steve's superpowers aren't the fact that he's stronger or faster than a normal man. His superpower is that he knows what the right thing to do is, he has the conviction to do it, and he won't give up, no matter what.

It's a beautiful moment made better by what follows. After a life time of standing up for what is right, of placing himself in harms way to protect those who can't protect themselves . . . an entire universes worth of heroes show up, take their place next to him and stand alongside him. And just like that, a lifetime of faith in the better aspects of humanity and fighting to give people the dignity to make their own decisions, is rewarded.

I. LOVE. This moment.
"My heart is as light as a child's, a feeling I'd nearly forgotten. And by helping those in need, I will be able to keep that feeling alive."
- Captain Marvel SHAZAM! : Power of Hope (2000)

Want to support me and Echoes of the Multiverse? Follow this link to subscribe or donate.
User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 4963
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Ares »

Jack of Spades wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 6:14 pm
Woodclaw wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 5:56 pm[T]he key features of Clark Kent are [...] are being generous, humble and empathetic.
This, along with bravely and unfailingly committed to his values: Truth, Justice, and the American Way. He works for them always, whether or not he's wearing his glasses.
I was thinking about the idea of Superman, of how much of who he is is due to Ma and Pa Kent and how much of it is his own nature, and then compare it to other universes where he wound up in Russia or somewhere else. And it's clear that Superman does have a lot of potential to go bad if raised by the wrong people, but there does seem to be an innate compassion to him that either blossoms under the right parents or can be twisted into something dark by the wrong ones.

What I find is really at the core of Superman's character is he someone who is active. He wants to do something, to make change in the world. One good line in Man of Steel was Jonathan Kent's "You just have to decide what kind of a man you want to grow up to be, Clark; because whoever that man is, good character or bad, he's... He's gonna change the world."

Even if Superman didn't have his powers, he was going to be someone who was going to go out and do something, to change the world. And if he's raised by someone other than the Kents, with his powers he can make real and drastic changes to the world. It's fortunate for most worlds that Clark ended up on the Kents Farm, where he was taught humility, responsibility, a solid work ethic, and his natural compassion was strengthened and reinforced. So that when he had the chance to go out into the world and make a difference, he did so in a way that helped people without infringing their freedoms.

In other worlds? Kal-El of Krypton will always make a difference, but what difference he makes depends on who finds him.
"My heart is as light as a child's, a feeling I'd nearly forgotten. And by helping those in need, I will be able to keep that feeling alive."
- Captain Marvel SHAZAM! : Power of Hope (2000)

Want to support me and Echoes of the Multiverse? Follow this link to subscribe or donate.
User avatar
Jack of Spades
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:20 pm
Location: Top of the deck
Contact:

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Jack of Spades »

Whatever values he seems to absorb, he absorbs them to his core and will fight for them. In some timelines he's the exemplar of Communism or Fascism. But he's never a lukewarm hypocrite.
Jack's Deck build threadFantasy Geographic Society campaign web site
Ian Turner
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:54 pm

Re: Is Superman Still Relevant Today: Analysis Video by Literature Devil

Post by Ian Turner »

Ares wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:30 am Which brings us to that Kill Bill quote. Bill, like Zack, is protecting his own faults, his own pessimism, his own darkness onto other characters and assuming it's something insightful, rather than their own weakness clouding their perceptions. It's why that line from Kill Bill tells you nothing about Superman and everything about Bill. They see weakness in other people because they see weakness in themselves, and they can't imagine someone having the morality to stand by their convictions.
The Batman movie with Heath Ledger's Joker had a bunch of scenes that revolved around the Joker's *desperate* need to prove that everyone was just 'one bad day' away from being as bad as he was, that he wasn't 'weak' or 'damaged' or 'broken,' but that *anybody* would make the sorts of horrible choices he made if put under the right pressure.

And on the ferryboat of prisoners, holding a detonator that would kill a bunch of random other people, and save their own lives, the big bad prisoner dude takes it away from the guard holding it and says, "I'm gonna do what you should have done five minutes ago." and flings the detonator overboard, since the Joker is dead wrong.

Not everybody would make that terrible choice. There is indeed something wrong with him, specifically.

I'm not the biggest fan (at all) of those Nolan Batfilms, but that was a powerful scene, and I like that it showed a kind of sad desperate take on the Joker, wanting to 'prove' that he wasn't crazy, that all of humanity was crazy and selfish and villanous at heart, that *he* wasn't the bad-guy. And he was wrong. Sure, there are some bad people, but not *everyone* is bad at heart, and so the free pass he's attempting to give himself is a load of rationalization hogwash.

Unfortunately, Zack Snyder sounds like he's got the same problem. He thinks everybody is pretty scummy, so it's okay for the heroes to be violent thugs, too, indeed, that might be the kind of 'heroes' that those nasty brutish people deserve!

I think that, in his case, at least, he's got the 'super' part down in making superhero movies. There are indeed several scenes (when Superman takes flight, when Faora is ripping through Smallville, etc.) when I see the 'super.'

But he needs to figure out the 'hero' part, now. It's not a 'superhero' movie if you can't grok the second part.
Post Reply