Lois, three things sell papers...
One of the things that I really enjoy in general about the Bryan Singer movies I've seen is that all of them are very...for lack of a better word, thoughtful. Each one of them that I have seen sets off a sea of interesting trails for my mind to go on and different ideas to consider...which is for sure an accomplishment when making superhero movies. Actually, one of the things I've most appreciated about this decade's superhero movies is that many of them have been extremely well thought-out, rather than simple action flicks (Fantastic Four is another excellent example of this).
I've always found the Superman lore in general to be very intriguing. Superman is probably one of the most, if not the most, idolized superhero in this century's comic lore. When we talk about superheroes, the character of Superman sits at the pinnacle of our consideration, with everyone else being, at least in some respects, measured against him to form our understanding.
I don't think, however, that the myriad of abilities this character possesses is what really makes him such an icon. Rather, I think it is what his character is and how he puts his abilities to use that is really so quite possibly just unbelievable. In a world where power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, the Superman character sits as someone with near absolute power and no interest whatsoever in corruption. As every rendition of the Superman lore I've ever encountered reminds us, Superman stands as a beacon for truth and justice; he never lies; he seeks in all things the good of others, even when it means personal sacrifice. There's something about that that makes the Superman legend very attractive, even in world where "nice guys finish last" is an accepted axiom.
I also think that, for some, the fact that this story was conceived, as well as the fact that it has been, at its crux, retold rather faithfully, stands as a reminder, against all counter-evidence, that there is value in things like truth, justice, kindness, gentleness, and all that stuff. As much as I often feel like no good deed ends up being appreciated (much less rewarded), clearly there exists some innate concept somewhere that these sorts of things are of value.
Hmm. Not sure where to go with this post beyond here. Maybe some of my readers will (hint hint ;-)).
Posted by Luke at 9:14 p.m.
me either :-)
Posted by mcoker on 2007.02.07 at 5:22 p.m.
I really enjoyed the comic set in the alternative universe where Superman's ship crashed into the Soviet Union when he was a baby. Makes you realize how far off we are from the ideals that were espoused when Superman was created. Superman's a bit of a socialist. He believes everyone deserves equal saving (well except Lois). He doesn't do contract work or wear corporate logos. Of course he's the perfect socialist, but I guess that goes along with being a super man.
Posted by Tim on 2007.02.08 at 1:45 a.m.
Heeheehee....
I see a lot of the ideals of socialism as being great as ideals, but untenable pragmatically because of negative side effects that would be introduced by those who would endeavor to take out of the system without putting back into it. Still, it seems somewhat befitting that some of those ideals would be reflected in such a character.
Very intriguing thoughts. :)
By the way, it was excellent to see you on Tuesday, even if I only had the opportunity to talk to you for a couple of minutes. And Stella is a gorgeous baby (and that says something; I am not the type to fall out in adoration over babies ;-)).
Posted by Luke on 2007.02.08 at 1:50 a.m.
Yeah, it was good to see you in person too. The unfortunate downside to having a kid is that you constantly feel like you're running to go hang out with people, only to immediately have to leave to put the kid to bed.
Posted by Tim on 2007.02.08 at 3:51 a.m.
Actually, we dispersed from dinner a few minutes after you left. A few of us (seven, to be precise) went to Iron Cactus afterwards, but the large group gathering ended shortly after your departure.
Posted by Luke on 2007.02.08 at 4:50 a.m.
I know exactly what you mean. Both of mine, unfortunately, are currently sick and miserable. :(
I think one of the things about superheroes (Superman in particular) that people find so attractive is the ability to help in a way that they've always wanted but never could. I'll allow the kid in me to type for a moment. Every time I see Superman save someone, I wish I were Superman. I wish I could fly around the world and make the same sort of difference he does. I wish I could help people like he does. The vast majority of us aspire for greatness knowing that very few of us will attain that which we dream. Superman's the personification of what most of wish we could do for those who are weak and abused. That is what I find so fascinating about Superman.
Posted by Chris on 2007.02.08 at 6:22 p.m.
I'm not a big comics fan (and maybe what I'm about to say is taken for granted by people who are) but I think it's worth noting that Superman is the only superhero I can think of whose primary identity is his heroic persona, not his "average Joe" façade. Bruce Wayne came before Batman; Peter Parker was before Spiderman; Bruce Banner before the Incredible Hulk; and so forth—but Superman was Superman (well, Kal-El) before he became Clark Kent.
Posted by Alan on 2007.02.09 at 9:41 a.m.
What are the necessary and sufficient conditions for "primary identity"? I think that's certainly true in some cases (Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, etc.), but untrue in others...a primary example here is Bruce Wayne/Batman. One point I very, very often hear made in commentaries and such is that to understand that character, you must realize that he is very much Batman first and foremost, and Bruce Wayne is who he disguises himself to be during the day. The fact that there existed a time where the latter existed and the former did not is not really all that relevant.
Also, most of the X-Men were born mutants, although in some cases their mutancy was latent.
Posted by Luke on 2007.02.09 at 11:28 a.m.
I'm not sure what the conditions would be. I guess you're right about Batman; I hadn't given it a whole lot of thought. And of course the X-Men are a great counterexample.
Like I said, I'm not much of a comics fan, though I do enjoy most of the films made from them.
Posted by Alan on 2007.02.09 at 11:33 a.m.
I think that what the "conditions" are is really, "Who does the character really see himself or herself to be?" Everything else seems to domino from there. Batman clearly sees himself to be Batman, and disguises himself to be Bruce Wayne. On the flip side would probably be the Fantastic Four (exempting maybe The Human Torch), who very much identify themselves as their "normal" selves first and foremost.
Two interesting points come out of this. One of them is that Superman is no longer a polar case--he sees his identity in resting simultaneously and equally in both personas. The other is that the X-Men are no longer a polar case, either...some of them seem to identify themselves much more as their codenamed/mutant self (such as Wolverine), some are on the opposite end of the spectrum (prime example is Rogue), and most are in the middle (Cyclops, Storm, etc.).
Posted by Luke on 2007.02.09 at 11:40 a.m.
That didn't sound like something a kid would've said. ;)
A kid would've sounded a bit more like:
"Liek Supperman is teh aweSome!!11!111!!11!!!!!111!1! I wud liek 2 fly 2. That wud be sooooooooo kule! Id fly than save teh people. I wud luv 2 have heet vizshun and ice breath 2!11!!!!1!!!1!!!11! Taht wud pwned!11!!!11!1!!111!! Oh yea, and buletproof!11!11!!!"
Posted by Nathan on 2007.02.09 at 12:53 p.m.
L0Lrc0Pt3r!!!11!
Posted by mcoker on 2007.02.10 at 3:40 a.m.
Luke never sounded like that even as a kid.
Posted by loyalfriend on 2007.02.11 at 3:58 p.m.
I'd guess there are many ways Luke never acted like "average" children. ;)
Posted by Alan on 2007.02.11 at 4:40 p.m.
Post a Comment