How ’bout some non-neurotic superheroes?

How ’bout some non-neurotic superheroes?

The recent “Superman” reboot didn’t exactly take, and I don’t believe you can blame the casting – or Supe’s newfound metrosexuality.

Have audiences become numb to the pure as the driven snow superhero?

Look who’s been invading the cineplex in recent years:

Spider-Man: Teen angst, inferiority complex, fear of commitment

The Hulk: He’s more monster than superhero, and his alter ego would do anything to banish himĀ - permanently.

Hancock: A drunk on a good day.

Batman/The Dark Knight: Rage issues only scratch the surface.

Hellboy: More identity issues that Showtime’s Tara.

Now, along come the Watchmen, the anti-heroes heading our way March 6. Alan Moore’s groundbreaking comic series debunked and demystified the superhero genre, and should the film succeed expect plenty more conflicted superheroes.

Suddenly, Superman seems a bit … ordinary in comparison.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Related posts:

  1. Take that, Spidey!
  2. Cheering for the Joker, not Batman?
  3. International Bat love
  4. Movie haiku reviews – 7/18/08
  5. Holy Bat demand!

{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }

KNo Gravatar March 2, 2009 at 8:41 pm

Mr.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._A

Alas, no movie yet.

KNo Gravatar March 3, 2009 at 12:33 am
DagnabbittNo Gravatar March 3, 2009 at 10:39 pm

Blame Marvel, and the sophistication-somewhat-of the standard comic book audience, particularly in the fact that it is one of the few young-skewing genre-specific audiences that has not aged out of fan base.

“Superheroes as Manichean archetypes” does not play as well in the post-Marvel era when, as you note, Spider-man has “real,” relatable-to-the-reader problems, like cash flow, anxiety issues, etc., as well as the newly-escaped super-powered villain (who often has his own issues).

However, this does undermine potentially good writing of the stalwart, upright, heroic archetype. Director Peter Jackson took criticism for introducing a flawed aspect to the heretofore flawless character of Aragorn in “LotR,” but his reasoning echoed this sentiment: that audiences will not believe in a pure hero, anymore.

Whether this really is Hollywood’s shortcoming, or ours, is open to question.

~ Dagnabbitt

HeidiNo Gravatar March 4, 2009 at 12:13 am

I sort of like the superhero with flaws, but of course, I grew up watching and loving the X-Men cartoons and those characters are full of flaws.

I don’t think I’d want a return to the “pure as snow” superhero – I do not think a flawless personality makes for an interesting character.

cftotoNo Gravatar March 4, 2009 at 5:14 am

I agree, Heidi … Marvel’s introduction of more complex heroes helped the genre immeasurably, but I still want to see the occasional Superman – the guy/gal who simply wants to save the day. Let the writers work around that archetype and give us a great story. They did it in the first two Superman movies (lets forget III, IV and parts of “Returns.”)

Leave a Comment