Why does the world need a superhero?

Part 1: Why does a superhero need us?

We better not need one too much....for most of our problems we're going to have to rely on our faith and ourselves, with a little help from our family and friends to get through it.  And occasionally, we get an assist from an angel....some inexplicable help that showed up at a time when there was little hope.  That's the relationship that we can also have with a superhero at the movies.  

I think it's important to ponder how movies are different from comic books, and therefore why movie adaptations of characters that began in comics ought not to try to be silver screen comic books.  Alas, the comic community is the fan base, and it seems as though the risk of offending them or losing their interest is driving a bias in the superhero movie making business toward big booms that make comic fans yell "AWESOME!!!!" instead of good story telling.  Star Wars was ruined by this exact same trend and I'll get into that in the sci-fi category.  But suffice it to say, the problem that I have with this category is that everyone involved from the creation, the writing, to the people who buy tickets to superhero movies are all trying to answer the question "what makes a great superhero movie?" without asking the question "what makes a good movie?"  You need a protagonist that you can be emotionally invested in, and a challenge for them to overcome.  

Contrary to the assertion I made in the previous post, there have not been 7,534 Avengers movies made since 2008.  There's only been 23.  Only 23.  I had to look this up.  Let me break this down for those keeping score at home.

• The 5 year span from 2008 to 2012 saw the creation of six Avengers movies, for an average of 1.2 multi-million dollar mega-productions per year.  In the Avengers universe, I've seen this referred to as Phase 1.  I've never sat through any of the phase 1 movies.
• Phase 2, a 3 year span from 2013-2015 generated 6 more of the superdeedooper spectacaramas.  I haven't seen a single one of these either.  While the phases are equal in the number of features, we've upped our production average to 2 per year.
• Phase 3, a 4 year span from 2016-2019 saw the release of 9 countem 9(!!!!!!) full-length feature films carrying the Avengers flag.  That's 2.25 per year if you're bad at math, totaling a 1.91 average over 12 years. 

Folks, if we need that much saving, I hope we're giving these good natured superfreaks of nature enough reason to care.  If not, I wouldn't blame them for becoming apathetic about their efforts on our behalf.  What I have seen of this 12 year filmgasm often doesn't portray us mortal earthlings in a very flattering light much of the time.  Somewhere deep in all of this storytelling and action, the question of why seems to only lead to one conclusion.  These heroes do their thing because they need our money.  "But why would a superhero need money?" you ask. Answer: Yep.  And that's where it all falls apart.  They keep saving us because we keep paying them to.  And that's it.  Who is the protagonist in this story, and what are they overcoming?

Part 2: "Let's just kill him"

Those words were offered in jest by DC writer/illustrator Jerry Ordway in 1991.  For years, DC had lagged behind rival Marvel (so I'm told...as I've said, I'm in this for the movies, not the comics).  Interest in DC's main character, Superman was waning compared to the enthusiasm for Marvel's heroes like the X-Men.  It seemed there was no task too great for a character like Hulk Hogan er Superman because he never lost.  In frustration and an effort to release the writer's block Superman's creative team was facing, Ordway said "Let's just kill him."  That got everyone's attention.  A storyline about the demise of the indestructible Man of Steel from Krypton?  That wouldn't just sell comic books, it would make headlines.  The team got to work writing the story, but the public would only get cryptic promos about their intentions for the long beloved hero promising that Doomsday was scheduled for November 17, 1992.

The public response to this included everything from despair, to giddy anticipation, to death threats being mailed to the writers if they carried this story through.  Superman was being discussed on The Today Show.  You'd think this had never happened before, but comics are like soap operas and professional wrestling.  Nothing is ever final, not even death.  And the killing of Superman had been hashed out previously, only to have him triumphantly return.  Why was this different?  The promotional material suggested something more permanent was going to take place.  This was intentional.  When the writer's first joked about "just killing him", it didn't just trigger some new creative wrinkle.  They had long wondered if anyone cared about Superman any more as a character.  So they decided to let the world find out what the world would be like if he died.  If we didn't care anymore, than we wouldn't miss him.  If we did, then we'll all talk about why we care.  

The story wouldn't build up toward a climactic death scene....rather, the death would only be the conclusion of the first act.  

A second act would then deal with the aftermath for the world, and how those who knew and loved Clark Kent and his alter ego responded to the loss.  It was a unique moment of story telling where people in the real world mourned with Lois Lane, Perry White and Martha Kent like one huge grieving family.

Part 3: So the world DOES need superheroes.  Why?

Maybe the characters that we call superheroes represent aspects of ourselves and what we'd like to be if we could be.  That's how I might describe one that I can get invested in.  This is what to me, the Avengers and more recently, the Justice League themed movies don't seem to understand.  The pictures that I posted of Superman's epic fight with Doomsday aren't strong because of WOW factor, they are strong because they represent something important and consequential is occurring.  When I watch Superman the Movie from 1978, I feel more tension in the scene where Lois Lane's helicopter is hanging off of the side of the Daily Planet building than I ever did in the entire countless hours I spent watching Man of Steel (2013), Superman V Batman (2016), Justice League (both edits), and any Avengers series movie.  

Each of the newer movies were to me, more about fights where nothing of consequence occurs except for a lot of destruction around the heroes.  

I don’t know who is who in this scene, what they’re fighting about, and now I also have a headache from the shaky photography work. 

Christopher Reeve's Superman squaring off with General Zod in the middle of Metropolis was tense because his Superman was trying to protect people from the harm that Zod and his two minions would do to them.  

Henry Cavil's Man of Steel interpretation of this same confrontation just saw the two super Kryptonians throw each other through buildings, turning Metropolis into an urban hellscape without either of them being harmed in the least.  

It's the kind of action that puts me to sleep.  I don't even recall how Cavil's Superman defeated Zod because there was no tension or emotion to it to maintain my interest.  All kinds of violence without anybody really getting hurt.  Entertaining?  Maybe.  But interesting?  Compelling?  In movies like Man of Steel, only brute force prevails.  And so we're just supposed to believe that the good guy's brute force was more brutishly forceful than the other guy's because the writers told us so.  So no, not interesting or compelling, but it would be a great headliner for Wrestlemania on pay-per-view. 

Notice how Reeve's Superman cares about how the results of what is taking place effect real people?  It was established early in his super-fight that this was going nowhere and would only hurt people he was trying to protect.  So he had to outsmart his opponents and use their unquenchable desire for power against them.  That's what made the difference in the outcome of that struggle. That character represented the kind of hero I wanted to be if I could be.  Cavil's is just super.....powerful? Awesome? Super special effecty?  He's the kind of superhero that will only be interesting if they "just kill him."

Now that you know the thought process of the Big Empty Movie Award Committee, we can proceed to the best of the Superhero genre.  Tune in soon!