EIGHTY YEARS OF THE MAN OF STEEL

Happy birthday, Superman! It may be a little early, but what the heck. At 80 years old, you deserve the cake and balloons, you big hunk of red and blue! 

Hard to believe it, but DC Comics just released Action Comics #1000 this week, 80 years after the Man of Steel debuted in June, 1938. And, as James Whitbrook notes in his post on 109.com, the writers/artists used the occasion to give Supe’s well-known origin story a few new twists.

You know the tale (and if you don’t, where have you been hiding?): the infant Kal-El is placed aboard an Earth-bound spaceship by his parents to save him from the destruction of his birth planet of Krypton. The spaceship crashes in a cornfield in Kansas, where it is found by Ma and Pa Kent, who raise the Baby Kryptonian as their own darling Clark, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound, outrace a speeding bullet, yada, yada.

Up to now, the various depictions of the destruction of Krypton have all pretty much blamed natural causes (geological instability/solar expansion), war, overweening scientific arrogance or some such. But the new prequel TV show Krypton, set in Kal-El’s grandfather’s time, offers another explanation for Krypton’s destruction. A villain familiar to Superman fans—Brainiac—turns up in a much more menacing form here, threatening to swallow the planet whole. The hero of the show, Seg-El (Cameron Cuffe)—Supe’s young grandfather—must find a way to stop the creature (while fending off a barrage of lesser threats).

The show allows Superman fans like me a chance to explore the planet and culture of Krypton in a way we’ve never been able to before. We meet the scientific caste, which at one time included the El family (and will again) and the military caste, which includes the Zod family, villains of the future. We even get an eyeful of the original Fortress of Solitude. And we’re introduced to DC Comics’ time-traveling Adam Strange, who comes to warn Seg of what he must do to protect the future.

By contrast, the comic writers and artists in charge of Action’s Man of Steel have chosen to take the destruction of Krypton in another direction, Their approach gives them leeway to follow dramatic pathways in Supe’s present here on Earth—not a bad thing, really. I won’t spoil it for you in case you want to run out to your nearest comic book store and see for yourself. But Whitbrook is not so constrained in his post, if you just can’t wait to find out.

In the meantime, lift a glass for the original superhero today and Look! Up in the Sky! It’s Superman!

Cheers, Donna

Information for today’s post taken from “Action Comics #1000 Honors 80 Years of Superman with Another Wrinkle in His Origin Story,” by James Whitbrook, io9.com, April 18, 2018. https://io9.gizmodo.com/action-comics-1000-honors-80-years-of-superman-with-an-1825366834

 
 

BAT V. SUPE: A BOGUS BATTLE

What can I say about the comic book clash of Titans mash-up that is BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE? The movie, currently playing at your neighborhood multiplex, is nothing if not ambitious, wanting to say IMPORTANT STUFF about how society sets up idols, then tears them down, about the nature of power, even, golly gee, about man vs. God.

But this film’s reach far exceeds its grasp. The plot makes little sense; the characters don’t fit the molds we’ve come to know over many years of familiarity with them; scenes are added that don’t seem to fit the story line simply because the director (Zach Snyder, of THE 300 and MAN OF STEEL fame) is trying to make a thematic point; humor is conspicuously absent; and the action drags.

Most of this is Snyder’s fault. If you’ve seen MAN OF STEEL, you will recognize the revisionist view of Superman here and Snyder’s Superman-as-Christ-figure symbolism. It gets worse in this film. Much worse. As for Batman, it's difficult to imagine a darker and more bitter Dark Knight than Christian Bale’s, but this would be it. This Batman seems to have no redeeming social value at all.

Which, of course, is supposedly what sparks the whole Bat vs. Supe tiff in the first place. Batman (Ben Affleck, not up to the task) seems to have gone off the deep end, beefing up to an inhuman level, torturing and branding his captured criminals. Straight-arrow Clark Kent (Henry Cavill, square-jawed and wooden as always) thinks this is not in the best interests of the citizens of Gotham. On the other side, Bruce Wayne is appalled at the destruction of Metropolis in the fight between Superman and his pals from Krypton, General Zod and crew. The man behind the Bat feels it’s only a matter of time before this supposedly benign being with the superpowers turns evil and uses them to destroy humanity. Thus Superman must be destroyed in a preemptive strike.

Enter the obviously nutty Lex Luthor (an interesting interpretation from Jesse Eisenberg), who has found a way not only to weaponize a hunk of Kryptonite found at the bottom of the sea, but to reactivate Zod’s crashed ship. He ups the ante between these two ostensible enemies, and we’re off to the races. Of course, that’s not all the crazy-bad stuff Luthor gets up to, but why spoil what little fun there is in this film for you?

I went to this movie because I wanted to know how anyone could plausibly pit two of the biggest heroes of the DC universe against each other and sustain it for a whole film. The answer is they couldn’t. You know how you’re told in Lesson One of Romance Writing that the conflict between lovers can’t be the kind of thing that could be resolved by a mere conversation? And if it is so fundamental that it can’t be resolved that way in the beginning, it shouldn’t be resolved that way in the end? Uh, yeah.

The initial premise of BATMAN V. SUPERMAN is weak. Then we’re told over and over that these guys have so much in common (which, of course, they do). Then the resolution is too easy. And don’t even get me started on Zach Snyder’s version of Lois Lane (Amy Adams), who continues to do stupid things only to be rescued by Superman. At least Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), who for reasons of establishing the new Justice League franchise, shows up in the final ass-kicking scenes, is capable of taking care of herself.

There was yet another reason I left the theater shaking my head at the end of this film, which I won’t reveal for fear of spoiling it for anyone still willing to pay good money to see it. I’ve left some hints in this review already. Let’s just say it’s another example of audience manipulation in hopes of generating a push for the next film. I’ll be skipping that one, thank you. I’ve had enough.

Cheers,

Donna