Everyone goes on an on about how crazy Batman is to dress like a bat and fight crime, how he’s just as insane as his rogues gallery. But the moment the films portray him with an /actual/ mental illness like ptsd, they freak out and make fun of it ad nausea. Just saying.
Because for nose people, the driven, obsessive Batman is an acceptable kind of crazy. Nolan’s Batman almost seemed a little ashamed of the Bat theme, which is why the vehicles and suit were repurposed military tech and the only concession to the theme was painting them black and the cowl and cape. After Batman Begins, we only saw Bat themed weapons once with the bat darts in Rises. The suit became more like armour. The theatricality was pretty thin after Begins. Besides that, Bruce just seemed like a man with a singular mission, waiting for the moment he could retire. BvS’s Batman is seriously disturbed. Still having nightmares about his family, still having triggers, he’s unbalanced and dangerous. This is a man who is choosing to dress like a bat until somebody kills him. The bat was his coping mechanism, his comfort blanket, but now it’s just his routine, his addiction. We finally got a Batman whose mental issues make sense and explain better why he’d dress as a bat and fight people every night, and it gets so much ridicule and misunderstanding.
Maybe it makes them uncomfortable that their male fantasy role model is a man who is dealing with serious trauma and mental illness. A man who isn’t as “cool” as they’d like him to be, as if being cool is the most important thing about him. They’ve attached a sort of toxic masculinity and invincibility to batman. It also shows how mental illness is still an “avoided” topic, how they’ve minimized/trivialized its influence/effect on the character.
Batman and Superman might be the biggest victims of hyper male power fantasy roles out of all the comic book characters. Batman is dubbed cool because even though he has no powers, he is rich, has no boss and has a shitload of gadgets. A lot of those Batman fans you guys are talking about don’t see why he should have a Robin and gloss over the moments in the comics where he shows kindness and empathy towards people, especially kids. They also gloss over his paranoia and the trauma watching your parents get killed in front of you would bring. Hypermasculine men aren’t supposed have feelings or trauma! They are supposed to do whatever they want consequences be damned!
And then there’s Superman. He isn’t rich, but he does have actual superpowers and is considered one of the most powerful superheroes ever. Yeah haters deem him too powerful, but I’m not talking about haters. I’m talking about the Superman fans who scream “Not muh Superman!” when it comes to Henry Cavill’s Superman. They too buy into the hypermasculine idea that since Superman is so powerful then he must always be right. And since he’s the symbol of Hope, he must always be a perfect role model. Always smiling, always be a good example for humanity. He can never have self doubt, or his own trauma that comes from fighting powerful villains like Zod(”Do the nightmares ever stop?”) A symbol of Hope must have none of these things. Oh and he’s supposed to be able to save everyone all the time and if he doesn’t then he’s “selfish” and “apathetic”
There are many things about Batman v Superman I am grateful for, but the one thing I’m most grateful for is stripping away that toxic masculinity narrative and showing who Batman and Superman actually are. They have always been more than the hypermasculine Might makes Right tropes that people want to slap on them. They’ve been written to be more than that long before Zack Snyder came along. It’s just nice to see it finally on the big screen
A lot of what you guys are saying is true but it doesn’t justify mass murdering Batman, if you remove that from the movie we arguably have the best Batman on the big screen. And Superman should absolutely NEVER doubt whether or not he should save people. What makes him Superman is that even if the whole world tells him to stop he won’t because he knows he should save people.
I am SO TIRED of this ridiculous argument. If you want heroes with flaws that can be fixed with a band aid inside of a two-hour movie, go back to the MCU they are HAPPY to provide that service. You’re arguing against some of the GREATEST Superman stories ever told right now, probably in defense of the dcau version or the Donner version of this character. Superman NEEDS self doubt, Batman NEEDS to make bad choices, these are just the needs of good storytelling.
Are you hearing yourself?? If the whole world authentically wanted Superman to stop what he was doing, HE WOULD, because he isn’t some bullshit paternal figure, he’s not our god, he is a man who can do more than most of the people on planet, and he absolutely needs to do so with our consent. How terrifying a hero would Superman be if he didn’t consider the consequences of his actions, if he didn’t consider the fallout? If he just DID things based on his own internal sense of right and wrong and never once questioned his choices? This is EXACTLY what Superman stories deal with; what he should and shouldn’t do, what he ought to use his power for. If you aren’t interested in seeing him wrestle with that, what the heck do you come to those stories for??
If you don’t like it, that’s fine, but stop confusing a narrative that’s not to your taste with a misinterpretation of these characters.
I agree with you on superman: self-reflection is a necessary path for his character to take because honestly, it’s a really human thing to do But Batman indiscriminately killing is not a “hero with flaws” or a different interpretation of the characters Affleck’s Batman’s mental illness as a fully realized thing was fantastic and incredibly welcome, but taking away his basic moral code of “no killing” ruins his basic character for me Yes, he’s mentally ill and probably dangerous but the fact that he respects human life and puts limits on himself despite how violent he is makes him an actual hero for me, not a trussed up murderer like the punisher For all people I follow are saying that this is the most accurate batman they’ve seen, I wanted my batman. A flawed, mentally ill, PTSD ridden vigilante yet with a vast family of orphans and outcasts, a kindness and a strict moral code that he truly believes in I got a punisher rip off because edgier = deep in today’s comic world. Go figure
I mean, I agree with you that Batman wasn’t acting like Batman and that that was hurtful and frustrating, those are definitely emotions I felt, and if I thought that that wasn’t in a very large way the point of the narrative, I would feel like it was a writing mistake.
But the movie shows to me, over and over again, that we go from a character who IS Batman, running through the streets of Metropolis caring for its people and helping those on the ground, to a character who is basically NOT Batman, the creature that Bruce has created, (with A LOT of help from Lex Luthor, because Lex is a GREAT villain) the man wasting time and effort and resources on chasing a rock in order to execute an alien, to finally being someone on the road to being the Batman we know and love again, someone who respects that 20 years in gotham fighting crime is worth the time and it means something.
I mean, we should KNOW something is wrong because for him to discount all this good work he’s done is frightening and repugnant. It’s a betrayal of those of us who love this character, those of us to whom he means something. Something is very, very, wrong that needs to be fixed. That’s the whole point.
When I say Batman “makes bad decisions” that is a HUGE understatement. In this movie, Batman is destroying everything that he stands for. If the narrative thought he was on the right path, then Alfred wouldn’t be so pissed at him in literally every single scene they share.
Totally agree with that last comment. The Batman that Bruce becomes in this film isn’t meant to be the one we all know and love. We’re meant to see how far over the line he has gone, and how Superman ultimately helps him see that and changes him. We’re not supposed to be happy with the killing, or his obsession with killing an alien on the off chance he’ll go bad. The movie’s narrative clearly shows us it’s different and not ok. This is not who Batman should be.
Alfred is the stand-in for the audience, telling Bruce things have changed and not for the better, showing censure in everything he says to Bruce in this film. That whole exchange in the plane after Batman and Superman fight, where Bruce tell Alfred he doesn’t deserve him and Alfred replies “no sir, you don’t”, and later when Bruce realizes he needs Kryptonite weapons to tackle Doomsday, and Alfred tell him that would be helpful “if he had any left”. Oh the frustration and censure in his tone! Alfred isn’t just being sassy, he’s giving the hard truth to Bruce. If he hadn’t wasted his time trying to kill an innocent man he’d be better prepared. As he is now, Bruce doesn’t really deserve Alfred’s loyalty and service, even though Alfred will continue to give it.
This film was about showing the heroes we love at their darkest and most difficult point, where they almost lose themselves and their purpose. It’s not Zack’s definitive view of these characters, it’s showing that they can still be that symbol of hope and justice even after enduring challenges that strip them to their most basic levels.
This film is about losing oneself and finding it again. It’s about hope and change even in dark times. That Batman that you want, @whatisthisoutsideyouspeakof I’m willing to bet that we will see for real in Justice League. We are continually hearing about how Bruce has been inspired by Clark’s example, that he is more hopeful, that he is more caring, even of the criminals he fights. We’re getting to that Batman, and this was the transition piece to get us there.
This approach may not work for everyone, but I loved it because seeing a hero I love truly struggle and then decide to do what’s right even in the face of loss and hardship is far more affecting to me than one who simply is that way and never deviates. It makes them far more relatable and human to me.
I keep remembering how many people freaked out when Martha Kent said:
“Be their hero, Clark. Be their angel, be their monument. Be anything they want you to be. Or be none of it. You didn’t owe this world a thing anyway.”
Don’t you think Clark having a choice in his status makes it stronger?
He’s not just Superman because he needs to be, he’s Superman because he wants to be.
He wants to save the world. He wants to be a hero. It makes everything he does much stronger because it’s his choice to be this way.
Humans are these dark, twisted beings. We’re this unsettling mix of good and bad.
Yet there is a person who looked at us, looked the darkest of us in the eye and realized that he wanted to help us. He wanted to use his powers for our benefit.
Doesn’t that mean anything to anyone?
Superman could easily leave the earth and go as far away as he can, but he doesn’t, because he made the choice to stay on earth and help humanity out.
And it’s that choice to stay that truly makes Clark Kent super.
“Girls want a Superman, but they walk past a Clark Kent every day”
You fuckin CLOWNS think you’re a CLARK KENT? Not on my fuckin watch. You dumb, headass motherfuckers are barely a Guy Gardner and you think you’re a CLARK KENT? The amount of disrespect is unreal.
And here it is, a mad cunt openly recognizing she’s alone sand and angry
oh feminists, never change
But that’s the point, you moron. We aren’t alone. Clark Kent AKA fucking SUPERMAN married one of US. Clark Kent’s dream girl ::was:: a “nasty woman” *TM feminist who was angry about patriarchy and if she was real right now would be no doubt spending her days railing on Donald Trump and going to protests and he would be right there with her. The most handsome, wonderful man in fiction has been in love with kind of woman you hate for 80 years years because, unlike you, Clark Kent actually respects women and is a good person. Which is why he’s not alone. He’s happily married and has a child.
That’s why this post got 17,000 notes in 24 hours. Because men like you who literally call women “cunts” actually think you identify with Clark fucking Kent! That he’s your namesake. You honestly think that Clark Kent—the man who told Pulitzer Prize winner LOIS LANE that he would love her “until the end of time” would agree with you. You are getting laughed at by 17,000 women because you have the audacity to think you are Superman when you are actually the villain in this story. You are Lex Luthor. Meanwhile, women like us aren’t alone unless we choose to be. We are quite literally validated by SUPERMAN. Which is why he’s awesome and you are not.
There are so many hurt man feelings in the notes. 😯😂😂
Hurt male feelings bc these morons have been going through life thinking they are Clark fucking Kent while simultaneously calling women bitches and cunts proving that not only are they delusional but they don’t even understand the Superman myth. Thanks for the entertainment, guys.
I have to say while I agree with so much of these posts, I think the OP is doing a disservice to Guy Gardner.
At his very worst (and most brain damaged), Guy Gardner tried like hell to be a good man to the girl he loved. He fucked up a lot, was crude, insensitive, and a jerk, but we saw him do his damnedest to treat her well. We saw him comfort her after a hero’s death, hold in his temper when being extensively mocked because she was having fun, and other small and large gestures to show how much he cared. He tried to change for her and he worked damn hard at it.
He even learned her language, during a time when he was mocked for not being able to complete a child’s crossword puzzle. And after she died, he kept trying to be a better person and be worthy of her.
The men that the OP discuss are absolutely not Clark Kents. But they’re also not Guy Gardners. Because Guy Gardners fucking try.
I love how this is not only a feminist post but also shows that girls make better comic geeks than the misogynistic men who fail to drag them.
I have legit no problem saying that every woman I know understands Clark Kent better than most of the men.
Women make better Superman fans than most men do. When he’s written well, he belongs in our space. There. I said it.
Something that has been bothering since the first reviews of Wonder Woman came out. Critics loved the movie, they love Diana (of course, I mean) and especially they loved her character development and delivered many important messages without “forcing an agenda”.
With development, they meant – Diana’s save paradise place, actually being quite confident, leaving it to be introduced to mankind, her naivety is funny, of course, but doesn’t have the “Born Sexy Yesterday”-Trope, the more she sees how double-sided men are, the more she questions everything and gets more confident in what she wants to do instead of what others tell her to do because she is able to do that. She realizes although there is both dark and good side in each human being, love is the only to fight it (be it romantic, be it a family, friends etc.)
They loved that. It was great, that’s true.
But this is the exact same thing, that Clark has gone through. That Bruce has gone through. Surely it was a bit different here but they all had the safe space™ where they came from (Clark from his farm in Kansas, Bruce from the wealth of his parents), were forced into the double-sided coin of mankind (i.e. meeting a threat but getting to know people that would support them somehow), struggling with both believing in good in people and making a decision to do something evil or staying good (Bruce and Clark killing each other, though they fight for the same thing). We had Man Of Steel and Batman v Superman to show this from Clark’s POV and partly Bruce’s POV, most people know Bruce’s history as Batman so far (especially with the hint of Jason’s death), so there is no need for him to have an extra movie to point that out.
So what I am saying is: These critics only loved it with Diana because a) they gotta act like they are not sexist because she is a woman and women have “more” emotional feelings and can “easier” show them and b) ARE sexist at the same time because Clark and Bruce did show their feelings towards this whole development, each of one them individual because of different personalities, but then with men it’s not okay because men “can’t” have feelings.
So maybe the problem people had with the Snyder’s version of Batman and Superman was that they were shown vulnerable, broken, emotional, not just a bag of masculinity and being ripped. The Trinity is so well-known for a reason. Also why they work so well together. Because of what they’re gone through and yet always find a way to keep on going.
I agree with this but I also think it’s because the critics have a gross misunderstanding of who Clark, in particular, is as a person and a character.
Too many people accuse Clark of being “perfect” and not having any real problems and therefore is an iron character because his powers makes things easy for him. Except that’s completely untrue. Snyder gave us a Clark/Superman that is extremely emotionally vulnerable and doubts himself and struggles. In other words, just as other popular media (ahem*comics/tv*cough) he gave us a human!Clark. And all of a sudden this was BLASPHEMY!
The thing is, Diana and Clark, regardless of what the “mainstream” audience thinks, are not the same. She grew up sheltered, Clark grew up bullied. She grew up royalty, he grew up poor. She did not come to man’s world hiding who she was, Clark is an undocumented immigrant refugee. Diana came to man’s world with a naive thought that all men were good; even when she learns otherwise, she first doubted and then ultimately chose love. Clark, having grown up among us, knows people can be evil, mean, and just plain awful to each other, but he still fights for us anyway and believes everyone and anyone deserves a second chance. I mean!
I maintain that the problem people had with DCEU Superman is that they wanted this coded-Other to Rise Above It ™ regarding the criticism and bullying and micro-aggressions from the media and the public (i.e. The same shit that is told to minorities) instead of allowing his character development which was that he actually did basically rise above it in the end and sacrificed himself IN BOTH MOVIES to protect humanity.
Clark: the world is very complicated and I’ve been raised to be careful with my power because I could change the course of mankind if i just start zooming around the world. I will train very carefully, learn my background, then when I’m ready I will reveal myself to –
Zod: HEY EARTH THERES A NUCLEAR POWERED ALIEN LIVING AMONG YOU. HIS NAME IS KAL. ANYONE SEEN KAL? IM HERE TO MURDER HIM PROBABLY. ALSO ALL OF YOU. LOL SEND HIM OUT.
The criticism that bugs me the most towards Zack Snyder’s Superman is that he doesn’t smile or that he spends too much time being sad. Recently in another post I talked a bit about how I interpreted this version of Superman to be a metaphor for depression so I’ll expand a bit of my thoughts on it here – but not by focusing solely on depression but rather on what it means to be human.
To get to the point, I think it’s disgusting when people make the complaint that Superman shouldn’t be sad and that he spends too much time doubting himself since he’s capable of so much more, because in a way the reactions by these critics mirror the way humanity shuns Superman in the DCEU for not being able to do everything expected of him, the way humanity in the real world disapproves of and/or alienates those struggling with depression or any mental illness in general, and the way the media attacks Zack Snyder as a person for simply making films that are different from their own tastes. It’s natural and justified for Superman to be in emotional distress, and in my opinion it would be insultingly unrealistic for him not to be.
It’s like telling someone struggling with trauma and depression “why can’t you just be happy?” or “just get over it! smile!” despite them going through or having gone through hell, despite them living in a world that prefers ignorance towards issues that need to be addressed, and despite them constantly being attacked by those who make them feel as if they’re a failure or a burden to the people around them.
Humanity in the DCEU views Superman as a devil and a god, as an enemy and a savior, and he knows that every decision he makes, even merely existing, will anger a lot of people. Humanity in real life idealizes Superman as a perfect hero who always finds the optimal solution to every problem, who smiles all the time, who isn’t allowed to show vulnerability or weakness. Zack Snyder utilizes these expectations to reveal that not even Superman is perfect, and in doing so he sheds light on the beauty of vulnerability and why it’s okay to surrender yourself to your emotions when it all becomes too overwhelming. That’s how you humanize a character like Superman.
“You look at Superman, and you wonder, what can he possibly
have to worry about? What could possibly ever hurt him? But just because
his skin is invulnerable, that doesn’t mean his heart is. And that’s
how you hurt Superman. You break his heart.”
DC stories are mainly about finding the humanity within god-like beings. Wonder Woman, for example, beautifully portrays optimism and joy in a superhero film that explores the character’s humanity in its own grounded and special way, and many people are calling the film a breath of fresh air yet many are unable to do so without attacking the “dark and brooding” character of Man of Steel and Dawn of Justice’s Superman, because that character reminds them too much of the issues they’d prefer to stay silent on.
heget's WordPress 