DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond

[Christopher]

That is also what Henry Cavill's Superman had seemed to me. But he also embodied an individual with his or her own set of virtues and flaws. That is what made him so relatable to me. In fact, a good number of the Superman actors had did the same. Why is that a problem?

No one is saying Superman can't have flaws. We're just saying a character can be fallible and nuanced without being dark or amoral or lethal. Elliot S! Maggin did a great job writing Superman that way in his comics and novels in the Bronze Age. All-Star Superman was also a great take on a Superman who was true to his Silver Age corny wholesomeness but still had complexity and vulnerability.

 

[Dee1891]

No one is saying Superman can't have flaws. We're just saying a character can be fallible and nuanced without being dark or amoral or lethal.

I never claimed that Superman should solely be dark, amoral or lethal. Nor do I believe he should. But I do believe he is capable of being just that if the right situation led him down that path. I believe he is capable of that path like any other individual or well written character. Nor do I see any reason to constantly project this view that he will never be capable of such negativity.

 

[Christopher]

I never claimed that Superman should solely be dark, amoral or lethal. Nor do I believe he should. But I do believe he is capable of being just that if the right situation led him down that path. I believe he is capable of that path like any other individual or well written character.

Of course he's capable of it. His struggle to avoid that path wouldn't be compelling otherwise. But he doesn't have to fail in that struggle for the story to be interesting. On the contrary, having him fail would be the obvious, predictable path. What makes Superman inspiring is that he struggles against greater temptations than any of us and succeeds in resisting them, which gives us hope that we can succeed at being better too.

Nor do I see any reason to constantly project this view that he will never be capable of such negativity.

I have seen no one project such a view. It's not about the character's capability, it's about the storyteller's choice of what to focus on. Tearing down what Superman stands for is a trite, overused trope at this point. It's not remotely as clever as its proponents assume it is.

 

[DigificWriter]

I have seen no one project such a view

James Gunn did.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

No, he didn't.

 

[The Realist]

In Geoff Johns and Gary Frank's Superman: Brainiac, after Brainiac's actions result in the death of Jonathan Kent, this happens:

Except ... it doesn't actually happen. The "Clark?" in that last panel transitions us out of the scene, to find a slumped and grieving Clark after Jonathan's funeral. It was just an angry, murderous fantasy, a vision of something he could do, and that a part of him understandably wants to do, but he doesn't. It's a telling and movingly human moment, and functions like an indictment-in-advance of bullshit Superman takes to come like Injustice.

 

[Christopher]

Except ... it doesn't actually happen. The "Clark?" in that last panel transitions us out of the scene, to find a slumped and grieving Clark after Jonathan's funeral. It was just an angry, murderous fantasy, a vision of something he could do, and that a part of him understandably wants to do, but he doesn't. It's a telling and movingly human moment, and functions like an indictment-in-advance of bullshit Superman takes to come like Injustice.

While I agree with your point about the character, I've never liked that device of making the audience think a scene is real and then doing a jump cut to reveal it was a fantasy. It feels like cheating, not playing fair with the audience, though I admit I can't think of a better way to get Superman's state of mind across visually in this case.

(Another fakeout I hate is that one where they cut between one character fearfully or eagerly watching a door and another character about to open a door, so that you think the first character is about to be captured or rescued or whatever, and then they open the door and it turns out the scene was intercutting between two separate locations.)

 

[Dee1891]

But he doesn't have to fail in that struggle for the story to be interesting. On the contrary, having him fail would be the obvious, predictable path. What makes Superman inspiring is that he struggles against greater temptations than any of us and succeeds in resisting them, which gives us hope that we can succeed at being better too.

I see nothing wrong with a story about Superman failing in that struggle - even for a brief period. Why are people so afraid of the idea of heroes turning into villains? What are they afraid of? I'm not saying that DC Films/Television has to make a story about that. But I don't see any need or reason to completely dismiss any possibility of such a story. I really don't.

 

[Christopher]

I see nothing wrong with a story about Superman failing in that struggle - even for a brief period. Why are people so afraid of the idea of heroes turning into villains?

Don't insult the other side by calling us "afraid." We're just tired of that approach being overdone already. Deconstructions of Superman are not clever or innovative. They may have been forty years ago, but that was forty years ago. Let the pendulum swing back.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

There's the ending of Joe Kelly's "Ending Battle" storyline, with art by Duncan Rouleau, where Manchester Black made Superman believe that he had killed Lois, in order to make Superman kill him and break his code. Basically like the Joker tries to make Batman kill him in "The Killing Joke" and "The Dark Knight".

Ultimately, Manchester's motivation was that he himself had once had ideals that he lost over the evils in the world, killing his opponents in the previous The Elite story from Action #775. But the existence of Superman, a Superman who would not abandon his ideals, made Manchester realize what he had become.

I can't help but think of Manchester Black when I read some of the comments in this thread.

 

[Christopher]

There's the ending of Joe Kelly's "Ending Battle" storyline, with art by Duncan Rouleau, where Manchester Black made Superman believe that he had killed Lois, in order to make Superman kill him and break his code. Basically like the Joker tries to make Batman kill him in "The Killing Joke" and "The Dark Knight".
...
Ultimately, Manchester's motivation was that he himself had once had ideals that he lost over the evils in the world, killing his opponents in the previous The Elite story from Action #775. But the existence of Superman, a Superman who would not abandon his ideals, made Manchester realize what he had become.

One of my least favorite cliches in fiction is the story where a villain kills a hero's loved one, the hero hunts them down bent on killing them in revenge, and ultimately the hero's allies confront them and say "If you do this, you'll be as bad as them," and the hero finally realizes they're right and doesn't kill the bad guy. I hate that device because it's not a moment of growth or revelation for the hero, it's just contriving an excuse to have them forget the principles they already have so that they can be reminded of them and reset to status quo. It's a tiresome and hugely overused trope. So I'm very happy to see a story where the hero never loses sight of the fact that killing is not an option, that their own pain and anger is not an excuse to throw out their morality. Because they should already know that without needing to be reminded. There are more nuanced, less cliched ways to examine that inner struggle between their pain and their ideals.

 

[Dee1891]

Don't insult the other side by calling us "afraid." We're just tired of that approach being overdone already. Deconstructions of Superman are not clever or innovative. They may have been forty years ago, but that was forty years ago. Let the pendulum swing back.

I don't read comic books and I've never seen such a story arc in a movie or television show - at least not with Superman becoming a villain or embracing evil, however briefly, on his own accord.

Sometimes I find myself suspecting that deep down, many don't want Superman to be emotionally complicated or ambiguous. And when comic book writers or movie/TV producers actually give them what they want, they'll turn around and complain about how one-dimensional he is. It's the same old story. Flip flop, flip flop.

 

[Christopher]

Sometimes I find myself suspecting that deep down, many don't want Superman to be emotionally complicated or ambiguous.

And you're just repeating the same false straw man premise, using it to impugn the character of the people who disagree with you rather than limiting yourself to discussing the ideas on the table. That kind of ad hominem attack is inappropriate and petty. And since you're clearly determined to ignore everything I've said, I'm done wasting my time here.

 

[Mage]

One of my least favorite cliches in fiction is the story where a villain kills a hero's loved one, the hero hunts them down bent on killing them in revenge, and ultimately the hero's allies confront them and say "If you do this, you'll be as bad as them," and the hero finally realizes they're right and doesn't kill the bad guy. I hate that device because it's not a moment of growth or revelation for the hero, it's just contriving an excuse to have them forget the principles they already have so that they can be reminded of them and reset to status quo. It's a tiresome and hugely overused trope. So I'm very happy to see a story where the hero never loses sight of the fact that killing is not an option, that their own pain and anger is not an excuse to throw out their morality. Because they should already know that without needing to be reminded. There are more nuanced, less cliched ways to examine that inner struggle between their pain and their ideals.

I know you and I don't always see eye to eye but I very much agree with you here.
I will say, the only thing I like about that cliche is that it's important we all have a support system that helps us and is there for us. But yes, I very much agree with your post.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

I don't read comic books and I've never seen such a story arc in a movie or television show - at least not with Superman becoming a villain or embracing evil, however briefly, on his own accord.

Homelander in The Boys, Omni-Man in Invincible, even Ikaris in Eternals are all variations of the "evil Superman" trope. Hell, even Captain Amazing in the 90s' Mystery Men movie, while not outright evil, was arrogant, self-involved, image-driven and light-headed, and got a super-villain released from prison just so he could be seen fighting him and thus rescuing the world again.

And if it really must be Superman, well, then there's the Injustice video game franchise.

And if you also don't play video games, if it really must be film, then there's the animated film adaptation:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

There's Red Son, which tells the story of a Soviet dictatorial Superman:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

And there's Justice League: Gods & Monsters, in which Superman is a more violent and fascistic son of Zod:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Not to mention all the times Superman has been brainwashed by Darkseid, ...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

(have to break this in two, because of media-per-post limitation)

 

[Kai "the spy"]

(continued from previous post)

... corrupted by versions of kryptonite, ...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

... or turned up as a corrupted variant from another timeline / parallel universe:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

(still too much video evidence, third post needed)

 

[Kai "the spy"]

(alright, this should do it)

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

So, yeah, there should be more than enough "Superman embracing evil" out there.

Sometimes I find myself suspecting that deep down, many don't want Superman to be emotionally complicated or ambiguous. And when comic book writers or movie/TV producers actually give them what they want, they'll turn around and complain about how one-dimensional he is. It's the same old story. Flip flop, flip flop.

First off, I reject your premise that Superman has to "embrace evil or become a villain" to be emotionally complicated. Second, I have NEVER complained about Superman being one-dimensional, because I never saw him as one-dimensional. It's people like you, who mistake corruption as depth, who have complained about Superman being one-dimensional. And I've argued with people with that viewpoint for decades now. At some point I started telling people that if they hated Superman so much, just stop reading/watching, it's clearly not for you. But with some, like you, that doesn't seem enough. you literally want Superman to "embrace evil".

And I'm left thinking of Manchester Black again.

 

[Christopher]

There's Red Son, which tells the story of a Soviet dictatorial Superman:

Although in that story, both the graphic novel and the film, the Soviet Superman turned out to still have Kal-El's innate decency and desire to help people despite his upbringing by a fascist system, and the story reaffirmed Superman's goodness in the end.

 

[Tosk]

 

[fireproof78]

And if it really must be Superman, well, then there's the Injustice video game franchise.

The comics are amazing.