As a follow-up to my incredibly
virulent defense of Ben Affleck, I thought I'd also do a post about
Man of Steel, the
recent reprequeboot of the Superman franchise. I know it's
been a while since it came out, but there was plenty of butthurt and
there still is regarding some of the plot, and I've been on a running
butthurt theme lately. Not to mention several blogs and websites this
week have featured Zack Snyder's defense of the calamitous
destruction of Metropolis in the climax of the movie.
I liked Man of Steel. At times,
I loved it. At times, I think Henry Cavill perfectly captured the
spirit of classic Superman if he was met with real-world situations.
The scene that comes to mind is when he gives himself up to the
military. Now, let me explain something about Superman, which will be
referenced several times: Superman is crazy powerful. How crazy?
Throughout all of the continuity resets DC did, he's been shown to
shrug off nuclear strikes. Before the 80's continuity reboot Crisis
on Infinite Earths (the grand-daddy of all “event” miniseries) he
was even shown moving planets around.
But in Man of Steel,
Superman not only agrees to play ball with the military, he allows
himself to be handcuffed
and confined. That is the essence of Superman: he may know better
than you, he's almost definitely more powerful than you, but he will
respect you, and he will play fair even when it would be easier to
atomize you with a single blast of heat vision or liquefy your head
with a single punch. And then, we even get a glimpse of the playful,
Super-Dickery version of Superman: after some questioning by Lois
Lane, during which he can hear and see everything the military and
scientists are doing, he's like,
“Lol handcuffs” and breaks them effortlessly. But even after
this, he assures them that he is not their enemy. A simple show of strength, enough to imply how powerful
he is, but he takes the time to tell them that he won't
use his obviously evident power on them.
That's
why I think Henry Cavill is the best and most unimpeachable part of
Man of Steel. Say
what you will about making Superman more “realistic”, or the
ending, or the pacing, but he IS
Superman. More than Brandon Routh, he is a worthy successor to
Christopher Reeves, although it remains to be seen how well he does
as Clark Kent. The way that I've always thought of Superman is that
he is really three men: Superman, Metropolis
Clark, and Smallville Clark. Superman is the presidential, statesman
version of him. He's the public figurehead, the version that winks
and flies off with a wave after saving a busload of orphans.
Metropolis Clark is the goofy caricature, the nerdy guy who you'd
never even put in the same thought as Superman. He's the part that
Christopher Reeves excelled at. But both of those versions of
Superman are masks. One is the mask a politician puts on, one is the
mask a spy puts on. One is designed for maximum public approval, one
is designed for maximum stealth, for an unremarkable presence.
 |
| Pictured: stealth. |
Smallville
Clark is who Superman really is, and the version this movie focuses
most on. Smallville Clark is most at home with himself, doing farm
work, getting milkshakes with Lana and Pete, bringing home space
aliens and superheroes for Christmas, and watching the wheat sway as
the sun sinks down. It's befitting this movie's status as an origin
story that a lot of the movie focuses on this Clark, growing up and
walking the earth and talking with his adopted parents about his
place in the world, and how he should use his powers.
I'll
come right out and say I like this aspect of the movie, of him
exploring himself. I think the way they show his powers developing is
the best representation of his powers, visceral, fascinating, and
terrifying, that I've ever seen.
Buuuut...this
movie has a serious problem with structure. The
beginning of the movie is a solid chunk of action on old Krypton,
maybe 20 minutes long. It's an odd amount of time to devote to people
who are all going to die anyway (although it does help set up General
Zod's character). Then there's a little action involving Clark as a
boy and as an adult saving people around the world, including a
fantastic scene on an exploding oil rig. But then there's basically
no action until the finale; good thing that's basically 40 SOLID
MINUTES of punching and laser eyes and ruining buildings and
explosions. Now granted,
they're quite exciting laser eyes and explosions, but there's just no
room to breathe during the last 40 minutes, and
as much as I liked the action, it was exhausting. The movie really
needed to spread it out more, particularly to sprinkle some
throughout the middle section, which I'm sure sagged for some
viewers.
Overall though, I enjoyed Man of Steel,
and thought it was a great Superman movie. Not only that, but it was
a great “realistic” take on Superman without going too grimdark
and angsty, which I was terribly afraid of considering Nolan's
involvement. The action was spectacular, the effects wonderful, and
there were great character moments sprinkled throughout, despite its
structural problems.
However,
I promised some good old butthurt defusal, and there have been two
primary sources. MASSIVE spoilers ahead. Seriously, if you don't want
the dramatic crux of Man of Steel
spoiled for you, don't read beyond the picture below.
NOW.
The first source of butthurt comes from people who hated that
Superman killed General Zod at the end. The second source of
butthurt, which has been in focus this very week, is that Superman
doesn't “save” enough people, and callously causes massive
collateral damage to Metropolis while trying to defeat Zod. I'll deal
with the second source first.
Remember
when I said Superman used to be powerful enough to move planets? Even
in modern comics he's still powerful enough to take a nuke and keep
on ticking. Now imagine two of him, one of whom is filled with
murderous, genocidal rage. And
the other is trying to stop him. You don't think there'd be
collateral damage on an unimaginable scale? Even if Superman did
nothing, Zod would have ensured that the entire world
burned, let alone Metropolis. From a character standpoint, Superman
can't worry about saving kittens from trees if there are no trees or
kittens left, and that is what would have happened if he hadn't
focused on neutralizing Zod. The
massive casualties are horrific, but Superman and Zod are almost
literally physical gods. And Zod shows no restraint. Even if Superman
showed some, the casualties would have been maddening to contemplate.
This
leads into the second source of butthurt. FINAL SPOILER ALERT.
 |
| THIS IS A REAL SUPERMAN COVER. |
At the
end of Man of Steel,
Superman has Zod in a headlock. Zod basically says that he will
never, ever stop trying to kill every human on Earth, and will never
stop fighting Superman. It is, after all, what he was engineered to
do. I feel like a lot of people focus on the fact that Zod is
threatening a family with his heat vision while he says this. Because
right after, Superman breaks Zod's neck, killing him. But he didn't
do it because Nondescript Nuclear Family was about to turn extra
crispy.
Let me
tell you about a little trope called the Godzilla Threshold, named
after the original movie featuring the eponymous lizard. The trope
basically goes like this: there are some threats so bad, so
dangerous, that almost ANYTHING that ends the threat is an acceptable
course of action. Take nuclear war. The entire planet Earth would be
an irradiated ball of fire; human culture, human existence, would
cease to be. Our present, our future, even all record of our past
would be sacrificed in atomic fire. Therefore, almost anything that
could be done to prevent it would be justified.
Now,
in the comics Superman has a code against killing. He almost never does it.
In the seminal Alan Moore story Whatever Happened To The
Man of Tomorrow?, Superman does
kill, and he basically tries to commit suicide afterwards. But
let's be honest: while it's an incredibly noble character trait, and
one that I love about Superman, it's a terribly unrealistic
restriction for a superhero. Would he REALLY not kill even if it was
the only way to save Lois? What about if the lives of the entire
Justice League depended on him just offing a dude who totally
deserved it?
In Man
of Steel, Superman is new to
being a hero. And he's faced with an experienced tactical leader who
has now been driven mad with rage and bloodlust after all hope of
reviving his world has been dashed. After
everything he IS is rendered meaningless. He was engineered to fight
and protect Krypton, and now there are no Kryptonians and will BE no
Kryptonians to fight for, except Superman, who passed judgment and
decided to destroy all chance of reviving their society. And
let's not forget, Superman is similarly anguished at the prospect of
Krypton's aborted revival, as well as the exile or death of every
remaining Kryptonian from Earth save himself and Zod. Even as he's
got Zod in a headlock, after fighting Zod across the city and seeing
the destruction they both can wreak, Zod basically comes right out
and says that he's got nothing left but genocide, and that he will
never stop fighting ever
as long as he lives. For me, this threat passes the Godzilla
Threshold, and Superman knew it. What the hell was he gonna do, slap
some handcuffs on him? There's not a damn thing on Earth that could
hold Zod. And let's say Superman DID find a way to restrain him.
Every day that passed would be another day when Zod could get free
and slaughter millions.
 |
| This is not the face of a man who might yet pack it in. |
Honestly,
it boggles my mind that people are pissed that Superman decided to
kill Zod even when taking into account all of those circumstances.
But more than that, Superman CLEARLY shows remorse. You can see it in
his eyes that he's looking for another way. But sometimes, the
ugliest course of action can't be helped. Even as I left the theater,
I surmised that the trauma of killing Zod, the last remaining member
of Superman's species and his last link to his long-dead homeworld,
would lead to Superman developing
his code against killing. Although
TV Tropes claims that the filmmakers have confirmed this, I couldn't
find corroborating evidence. But it fits the facts, and if they're
smart they'll cement it in the next movie. Moreover,
it feels organic...Superman wasn't born not wanting to kill. No one
is. Hell, even in the comics Superman kills...in the original The
Man of Steel miniseries by John
Byrne, in Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?...and
in this, his first adventure, he learns the terrible price of
crossing that line.
Like I
said, Man of Steel has
its flaws. But they're mostly technical and structural. I can't find
flaw with Superman's final, torturous decision, and I can't find flaw
with the destruction on display, because it's what would happen if
two physical gods went at it in a populated city. I
can, however, find flaws with the ruthlessly condensed blocks of
action, and with minor stuff like Pa Kent seeming kind of weird in
how coldly he makes Clark hide his powers. In any case, at least Man
of Steel got me excited,
thrilled me, and left me wanting more of that Superman. If not
necessarily more of that kind of movie. Now here's hoping they bring
Gary Sinise in as Lex Luthor and do Man of Steel 2: Batdeer
Games.
No comments:
Post a Comment