The idea behind the game rests on an alternate reality in which the Joker destroys Metropolis and tricks Superman into killing Lois and his unborn son. At which, point Superman kills the Joker.
No.
This is just wrong characterization. There is literally no other way to put it- the writers of the game are literally incorrect.
First: Why is the Joker interested in Metropolis? Why would he pick there? Think about the Joker as a character. Think about what he does as a villain and how he operates- he’s local. He doesn’t perform multinational heists. He’s not a businessman. He’s not a politician. He’s a specialist, and his specialty is Gotham. The first major plot event makes no sense.
Okay, so instead, maybe Lois Lane is in Gotham reporting on a piece of Wayne technology (Metropolis is a big city, and The Daily Planet is a local rag as much as the New York Times is), and the Joker and his goons, they break into the press release and demonstration. Maybe the tech has military applications, maybe it’s harmless. Whatever- the Joker takes Lois captive, bombs the press release. Makes her keep reporting on the atrocities he’s committing around them. Maybe he’s making Clark choose between saving the love of his life and millions of Gothamites. Whatever, the Joker, sure. He tricks Clark into killing Lois (and unborn baby? Although this is canonically contentious at best. Sometimes Kryptonian DNA is viable with human, sometimes it isn’t) and then what would Clark do?
This is my second and biggest beef with this whole idea- Killing isn’t Clark.
Period. The end.
Clark fucks up a people die? Clark gets tricked and people die? Clark doesn’t take it out on the trickster and he doesn’t purposefully kill. There’s this remarkable bit of amnesia people like to play with Superman’s character, and that involves decontextualizing him from his background. Clark grew up on a goddamn farm for Christ’s sake. A farm. He called his parents sir and ma’am. He’s squeaky clean. He’s a boyscout born on another world. And Superman fans? That’s what we go to Superman for. Damn near every other hero has gone through some kind of drive to become harder, edgier, darker, and while this drive did save the comic industry (this drive leads us to things like Tony Stark’s alcoholism and Decent Batman Writing), it’s not a good look for a lot of characters. Billy Batson is a nine year old boy, the Flash runs really fast and makes brilliant jokes, Superman still says things like “Shucks” and “Gee” well into his college years.
So Clark kills Lois, and he doesn’t kill the Joker. He falls apart. He literally falls apart from guilt and grief. This is the ultimate in superhero fear- they got too close, they got hurt, I couldn’t save them. That’s it- that’s the whole song. Killing Lois breaks Clark, and not in murderous rampage way. In a way that brings a god to his knees. In a way that leads to him crying and begging. In a way that leaves him vulnerable.
Clark grew up with a family and engaged in a community. He grew up well adjusted and loved. He’s painfully fucking normal except for the part where he’s was born in outer space (but other than that, he’s the pretty boy who sat behind you in church). Clark doesn’t have emotional expression issues, and he’s comfortable with putting himself out there. With having feelings. In canon, he talked a girl down from a ledge, and that requires being comfortable with yourself and your damage and your feelings in way that the emotionally constipated generally aren’t.
You know who fits the bill for none of these characteristics, though? Grew up disengaged from a community, no parents, very few positive human connections at a young age? Has a strong reputation for stoicism and not much of one for sitting down and letting people have a good cry?
Batman.
And I think this is what’s wrong with what happens to Superman in a lot of writing lately. Batman is hugely popular, and the Batman characteristics are popular too (especially with young adults holding disposable income). Batman’s hard. Batman’s tough. Batman doesn’t have time to sit down and think about how the bat makes him feel (A pretty common occurrence in Superman strips involves Clark sitting down and having a good think about what the S really means), Batman’s got a city to save. The mental equation that transposes Batman’s characteristics onto Superman doesn’t work though. That flies against a long and proud tradition of Superman being…well, Clark and not Bruce. Because the equation never quite works out right, though, Batman fans walk away from Superman thinking he’s a cutrate, OP Bat; Superman fans walk away wondering why Clark suddenly seems to have ennui.
I think that killing the Joker is also out of character for Batman (don’t worry), but I think that Superman experiencing a psychotic break that leads to violence and megalomania is bad writing, bad characterization, and ultimately bad business. It undermines an existing Superman fanbase for a Batbased fanbase that will always being slightly disappointed that Clark wasn’t, oh, I don’t know, a very rich, very angry orphan with incredible resources.
No comments:
Post a Comment