Tags
Related Posts
Share This
Editorial: Heroes
“There are some people who live in a dream world, and there are some who face reality; and then there are those who turn one into the other.”
—Douglas Everett
Superman. Batman. Wonder Woman. The Flash. Green Lantern.
These names are known the world over, both in the DC Universe and in our own real world, as Earth’s Greatest Heroes. Each has a distinctive identity that is more developed and more defined than many people you can name in real life. Each one has a different personal reason for being. Each one has powers or skills that make them the best of the best in any universe. With each of them comes a 70-year legacy, plus or minus, of inspiration, imagination, and the basic idea that the world can be a better place if we are simply willing to take a stand for what we believe in. They are the icons of the DC Universe. They are the progenitors of the Marvel Universe. They overshadow all other characters. They are universally admired.
Correction: they used to be universally admired.
When these characters were created, the world was a dark place. Dictators and global fascism threatened the freedoms of the world. The average person was held in the iron grip of corruption, crime, and financial ruin. Their examples lit the torch for another generation to carry on and fight the good fight.
Today, the world is a dark place. Dictators and global socialism threaten the freedoms of the world. The average person is held in the iron grip of corruption, crime, and financial ruin. See a pattern?
And the caretakers of these once-mighty heroes at Warner Bros. and DC Comics have cheapened their characters to become “newer, darker, grittier, and more realistic.†Instead of inspiring a generation to fight the good fight and to raise the standards of what we think is possible, they have helped to shape the belief that these heroes should be humanized and bent to hopelessness as if to prepare us for a post-apocalyptic mindset. These characters, forged from the same heroic cloth that is humanity’s common mythological heritage from Hercules to the Three Musketeers to Zorro, now sit side-by-side with the likes of Spongebob Squarepants and Family Guy in terms of cultural relevance.
Superman, who once championed the cause of Truth, Justice, and the American Way is little more than a stalker who is ashamed of America and doubts his place in the world at large. The lessons learned from Jonathan and Martha Kent? Out the window. Batman once held the moral high ground as the man who carried a hatred of firearms and would not kill lest he become as evil as that which he hunted. Now his vehicles are armed to the teeth with cannons and missiles of the most lethal sort, and the Dark Knight himself teeters on the very edge of sanity. And the once fearless Green Lantern, if the new movie trailer is any indication, doubts himself and his courage. Watch it again and see if you can find the kind of test pilot that’s cut from the same cloth as Chuck Yeager or the Mercury 7 astronauts. And if you don’t know who those guys are, there’s always Wikipedia.
In short, the icons that once stood head and shoulders above the rest are now reflections of the absolute worst traits humanity has to offer. So what happened? We happened to them. The public grew fickle, and we voted with our dollars at the box office. We opted for flashier, sexier, scarier, grittier, and darker. Ever wonder what that even means, “darker?†It’s a buzz word. It means nothing. We have forgotten that the World’s Greatest Heroes, no matter how “light†or “dark†they seem must ultimately face the darkest evil in order to fulfill their heroic mandate. But instead of fighting the evil in the world, the public has demanded they become the evil in the world. Our shortcomings have been projected upon them in no uncertain terms, but as long as there’s big explosions, DTS surround sound, and 3-D CG animation, nobody seems to care about the little things like honor, morality, and an heroic code.
Perhaps these ideas seem old-fashioned. Perhaps I’m finally getting old. Or perhaps…people really do want something better but are simply settling for what’s being dished out. Perhaps we’ve gotten so used to the smell that we don’t notice it anymore.
Perhaps it’s time we made our voices heard. Do you want heroes who inspire you to greatness, or do you flawed characters that help you to feel better about yourselves?
It’s time to choose, before that decision is chosen for us.
I’ve read this a couple times now, trying to gauge what my response would be. I mean, I don’t know what sort of response there really is to this. However, I think I give a point or two just to add a little more flavor to this pot.
When we talk about people these days and their love or hate of heroes, I tend to go back to horror movies. I’m a huge fan of Halloween (I can almost hear some of the shudders), and tend to follow the Michael Myers storylines whether it actually be worth the follow or not. In my case, what makes it interesting is the fact that in the first movie Michael Myers is the kid that lived up the street and up until the end of the film, I could see somehow surviving a barrage attack. That is until he’s shot 6 times. All of a sudden we’ve broken away from the psycho in the mask to the idea that this incarnation of evil is stalking the streets and won’t stop until everyone in his family line is dead.
Now let me tie this back into the subject of this Editorial. The only Halloween I’ve seen on the big screen was H20. It happens to be my favorite of the series, because they went back to try and tie up the series in a nice little bow. The hero of the story is Jamie Lee Curtis’ character Laurie. We learn what’s happened in the past 20 years, and how much of a wreck she is and what she’s got to do to overcome that when Michael turns up on the school campus she works at. I will admit this isn’t superheroic in story. What it this is, is a tale of a woman facing a monster. I was behind this all the way, but the larger audience wasn’t. In fact, they cheered Michael for every kill he made. I wish to say this was an isolated incident, but it happened on the 2nd viewing as well. That’s not to mention any other horror film that I deemed worthy enough to see on the big screen. It didn’t matter if it were Freddy, Jason, Pinhead, a Predator, a Xenomorph, whatever… The point is that people decided that they couldn’t connect with the characters in these films. We know these films are aimed at teens, and so they pack them full of teens that are supposedly relatable to the audience. Instead, most of the teens don’t relate to it and see them as being perfect fodder. Is it the acting? Well, yeah, to a degree. The biggest problem is that the characters are actually written unlikable because we know they’re gonna get killed anyway. However, even the “hero” of the film is written completely unlikable so we don’t care. So we take that lesson and put it in the context of the superhero flick.
With these, we’ve got to maintain this Lethal Weapon quality. Meaning we have to have a character that is both Riggs and Murtaugh. If you’re like me, you may enjoy the LW films because the characters are fun, but not superheroic. They’re not really even that good of heroes per se as they’ve got a bigger body count than most of the guys they’re going after. With the Nolan Batman, he’s got this complex. They’ve tattooed the WB logo onto it by giving Bruce Wayne the demeanor inbetween the Lethal Weapon characters, and to add spice to the horror of it made him the exact monster he’s fighting against. That way we like both parts of the persona. Well, let me say why the random audience likes both parts.I know I keep dancing here, bear with me…
When superhero movies are announced, the first question asked is “Who’s the Villain?” People want to know exactly what they’re in for. In a Batman flick, people wanted the Joker. I understand that, because a good Batman vs. the Joker story is some pretty intense and funny for the wrong reason stuff when done well (BB: Return of the Joker, Batman: Under the Red Hood). However, we come up with the audience expectation, what most directors call “their artistic vision”. What this means is that they know what sell with the audiences and if the characters don’t have it, they’ll cut and slice to make it fit their mold. Meaning that instead of a man who’s clear cut path to bringing down the Joker is a scientific deductions and a good right hook, we get a guy willing to roll down the streets in a tank and motorcycle with an ordinance that the Punisher would be jealous of. The audience root for Batman because he’s become the “heroic” movie monster. The villain is still cheered for because he’s upping the body count in droves. The shootout is very Western/LW as it doesn’t take into account the tons of people around the streets that could get hit by shrapnel or bullets.
With Superman, the reason people can’t relate to him isn’t because he’s got all the powers anymore. It’s not that you can’t cause someone to be able to stop him without the use of Kryptonite, it’s because they can’t turn him into a monster. They tried stalker which got buzzed out in lieu of a reboot. With this, they had a ton of talk about it trying to reason out how conflicted he was about being alien and how the people couldn’t possibly trust that. It’s a sad state of affairs that gets thought about all too often. So they give it to Zack Snyder with the Nolan’s input. I await that.
Green Lantern, I have no words for. Again, conflicted if what’s in the trailer isn’t some sort of tease.
All of this has translated into the comics as well. Identity, Infinite and Final Crisis were all of that. What’s worse is that there were stories out there trying to forgive these heroes that made such trespasses. GL goes nuts, and no one can accept it. Bam, he’s the Spectre. Not good enough? Bam, GL: Rebirth. He was bad, but it wasn’t his fault. Batman sets up a satellite in the wake of the ID Crisis. He’s a stark raving loon, and everyone’s going to let that go? Yeah, he went away for a year to let himself retrain and heal. He also should answer for the fact that his “well protected” satellite was jacked into and made a legion of OMACs bent on taking out the metahuman populace. He’s had Ra’s do that to him already, why did he allow this to happen twice? I could go on and on. The point is that people buy heroes that are monsters and that have personal demons. I know this reiterates the point made already, but it gives a scarier perspective to it whether that be right or wrong.
I understand and appreciate all of that. I guess the question I have boils down to identity, and it can be applied to any franchise or character, is this. These characters have evolved over the decades, yes, but they have also remained true to their original intent until the current generation. Given that the public is more or less told what to accept by the media, why do the studios insist on giving creative license to some hack with a “vision” instead of keeping true to what has always worked? There are ways to revitalize a mythos without killing what it stands for. And if they believe truly that the public wants a different kind of hero, why not give them different heroes that fit those demands? For example, if we want Batman to be the Punisher, why not use the Jean Paul Valley version of Batman instead of Bruce Wayne? If Green Lantern needs to be something less than Hal Jordan, use a different GL. Or create a new one. Or create a new character completely and call it something else. New characters grace the big screen all the time. The different versions of King Arthur and Robin Hood can stand as timeless heroes in spite of having their stories told a thousand different ways, but the superhero retellings have to be less than super and not heroes? I don’t buy it. These characters have served for generations. They will still make money for all the right reasons if the studios let them stand as they were meant to stand.
I believe I answered your question above. The heroes name is one thing to people in power; marketability. A rich textured history to draw on is simply looked at as too comic book-ish and won’t work because no one will believe it when put to film. For that matter, some people barely believe it in the printed page.
Now I agree that they’ve got 75 years of the greatest heroes to draw upon. Any number of stories would make 1, 2, or 3 great movies. If anything, just to show a contrast of Batman (and get a real Bane on the big screen) I’d love for them to pull off Knightfall as a trilogy as it seems to be the popular choice. Give them the Bruce Wayne Batman, have the rise of Jean Paul Valley, and then turn around and show why the original’s needed over Valley. Condemn the hero that will kill. Will it sell? I don’t know. Honestly, I think people will cling to Valley. However, in the right director and screenwriters hands it could be some real magic.
Until the point where Hollywood in relation to DC Comics is ready to listen, or even DC is ready to actually draw other than revisiting character of the Silver Age, they’re going to keep this sort of thing up. They want their happy, shiny heroes back. The problem with that is that they’ve tarnished their good name by putting out stories directly defying those good old days. Trying to erase it with 2 more Crisis storylines isn’t going to do a damn bit of good. While I hear they’re trying to put heart and soul back into the books, the monsters still creep around. 52 was supposed to be the world without the big 3 active in it. The sabbatical to recenter. That didn’t even last more than an issue or each respective book if that. People clamored for the monster within. They don’t want Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. They want Eradicator Superman, Az-Bats, and Artemis Wonder Woman. Sad part is that people have been kicked in the face so much that they think it’s some sort of treat now. They openly accept this because this is what they get. It’s not about a quality film, it’s about any film at all. Never mind the the 15 years of Animated Series continuity that they can draw from. Was it correct to the comics? No, but what they did was spectacular. They were successful because you could get behind the heroes on the screen. These days it’s passé to watch such a cartoon. It’s not modernized enough. How can you stand behind it? Simple, good story and respect to the characters involved. Bruce Timm and Paul Dini didn’t set out to make monsters of the characters. If anything else, they showed the world where that happened and the 7 refused to allow it to happen.
I agree, you want heroes that do this stuff? Find one that’s really on the books or come up with a brand new one. However, as long as brand name sells and people pour their earnings into it, they’ll keep making it. Sometimes people don’t pour money into it and they still keep making it in hopes they’ll get the DVD/Blu-Ray sales. People buy in because people want to see the inner-demons and monsters of a real world hero. I say watch Kick-Ass for that. Again, not really true to the comic story, but from what I’m to gather the intent is still all there. If you’re not into that, watch the Crow. As long as Batman’s story can be construed as him being an absolute nut in a costume, they’ll keep making movies and books that say he is.
I completely agree, if they can get the characters right in an animated series, there is no reason that they can’t get them right in a live action movie. Doctor Who proved that you can modernize a franchise and keep the character essentially the same. Doctor Who just turned 47 and is now more popular than ever before. The new Star Trek movie proved that you can modernize a franchise and still keep the characters the same, and people will go and see it in droves in the theater. The characters work, and have worked for Decades. There is a reason people keep buying the comics, books, CDs, and DVDs. Literally hundreds of books/comics have been written using these characters. It astounds me how Warner Brothers can’t seem to make a decent live action movie to save their lives.
Much like the new Battlestar Galactica, Batman:The Dark Knight was a good action movie, but it wasn’t Batman, if it had been called something other than Batman I wouldn’t have any problems with it. If Batman is willing to have guns and missles all over his vehicles, then why not just carry a gun? Oh wait, we already have that its called The Punisher or Robocop. I want a movie about a normal human that through sheer determination and cunning can stand toe to toe with other superpowered heroes against supervillans, thats what Batman is to me, a symbol that if you are determined enough and clever enough you can do amazing things.
Here is a mesage to DC and Warner Brothers: KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid)! If the character has worked for several decades there is no reason to change it, just keep comming up with good stories. Sure the characters and settings will need to evolve with the times, but the basic character traits never need to change. Batman doesn’t kill, Superman is basically a big BoyScout, Spock and Bones snipe at each other, and The Doctor is The Doctor.
Leave the characters alone, just come up with good new stories and the franchises will take care of themselves.