Superman: Collateral Damage – Detail Diatribe
Added 2022-09-02 15:03:59 +0000 UTC"Yes, but what about SECOND Superman Detail Diatribe???"
This was fun to make because I got to watch a lot of actually-really-good Superman media.
This video was planned to release two weeks ago, but factors outside of my complete control meant it was better for my well-being to just push this back.
It's a hard truth that people need breaks, more than we think we need them, and if we don't give ourselves a break at regular intervals the body will crash at a random time without forewarning, and it will end up being very inconvenient. Ask me how I know.
-B
Comments
I think this might be taking the points in the video the wrong way.
absoul112
2022-09-08 19:36:42 +0000 UTCFor your consideration (be it a Part 3 or your own betterment), Kingdom Come I feel might be an even better example of a "Superman Loses His Way" plot. It's set I think 25 years from "now" and it acts are a bit of a deconstruction of the Anti-Hero deconstruction that was rampant in the 1990s, which is when it was written (Injustice likely got more than a little inspiration from it). It concerns the DC Universe in general, but Supes is probably the most important characterist. The basic plot is a pastor is asked by The Spectre (a fav C-List superhero of mine) to observe the events and help him decide something, because Super-Humanity has reached a tipping point where they are likely to cause an almost literal Armageddon. It's heavy on the Book of Revelation imagery but I PROMISE it's great. 1) It has the "I Can Fix Villains Forever" when Joker is killed by an OC named Magog, "A modern, more violent Superman," who then challenges him to a 1-on-1 for the crown. Superman just flies off and retreats from the world because in his last scheme, Joker killed Lois, his wife, and with Lois and his parents being dead he has no solid anchor to humanity and he lets go of his ID as Clark Kent. (Ooh! Perhaps the next Diatribe?) 2) It shows the Good-Intentioned Totalitarianism explored by Red Son by putting all of the villains in a literal Gulag, which becomes a very bad thing when the inevitable prison riot happens, and the viewpoint character has to judge who lives or dies: Humanity, or Super-Humanity. It has probably my two favorite lines about Superman and Superheroes in general of all time, that I feel are exactly what you are talking about: "In the end, you chose Life. That is the only choice that matters" "As soon as you made the 'Super' more important than the 'Man,' you lost [your moral compass]." Oh, it's great. I love this miniseries.
K9Thefirst1
2022-09-04 07:32:48 +0000 UTCThis video was difficult for me. Mostly because it's an example of the flaw in thinking about writing from a tropes-first perspective. The reason Superman is hard to write for is because from the perspective of the creator he is limited, even though, ironically, from the perspective of the viewer he's all-powerful. From the perspective of the writer's desk, Superman can do *less* than other DC heroes. You say he's the only one who can save people from a falling building, but go on to give several examples of other heroes doing just that. In The Batman, the crescendo of the film is him saving people from a falling building. Double-damning is that when Batman saves people, it hits harder because we have an easier time relating to him than Clark (because he's just rich). This is why people like Spider-man, he's relatable. Superman is inspirational, and there are some modernist writing knots that are hard to work around there. Ask yourself, is there anything unique to Clark's perspective that couldn't be handled by any other hero? Is it just that he's powerful and incorruptible? Diana. Is it just that he can use cosmic powers in a creative way? Hal. Is it just that he's not human but has a human heart? J'onn. [TANGENT: Invincible is an interesting case-study in this, because it fulfills all the things I'm talking about here, but the problem is that the meaning breaks down if you don't already know about Superman and the baggage that comes with writing for him. Or at the very least, the lazy tropes thrown at him. So his own unique perspective requires cultural knowledge of the problems in writing for Superman, AKA: the dumb shit they always have him do in the DCU, and every edgy plot-line from the 80s and 90s. His character is fucked, writing-wise.] Second point, the reason most stories boil down to people in conflict, is because stories are always about people in conflict. Even "man vs nature" is, in a way, a person against the conflict of their own mortality and ability. In The Revenant, nobody's rooting for the bear to whoop DiCaprio's ass. It's about how DiCaprio overcame that one time a bear served him his own ass. Eventually, you'll need to write a story about Superman versus someone else. It can't all be burning buses. Your previous video is full of these great stories. I also believe there are many more cool Supes stories that no one has written yet, but collateral damage is only a piece of the puzzle. Again, Invincible is a great showcase in where and how to apply such a thing. The harrowing final episode is more about characters using collateral damage to make a point, so it's still "action figures fighting" with extra steps (and edginess). Back on track, approaching the problem from writing first rather than "what tropes will the writers use" (despite that being your whole channel, I know), there's actually a lot of rich material for Superman if he's written in a more modern way, and by that I mean by borrowing from a school of thought that goes by several different names, Metamodernism, Post-postmodernism, New Sincerity, Dogme 95. In short, cape films are stuck in post-modernist cynicism. Instead, an ideal Superman film would likely focus on humanizing elements, where Clark looks at the cold unfeeling universe and doesn't blink. Where Clark forges human connections because he needs them, and we see it. Think Invincible, Steven Universe, Parks and Rec, etc. I know the latter half is likely to get people to go "but that's what Red and Blue are saying", to which I'd say "not all arguments are in opposition", this one takes offense with how the video is laid out, which again, is from a tropes-first perspective. That writers decide to do things because it's "cool", because writers wake up, make a cup of coffee, open Celtx, then open a TVTropes window. I know your channel is all about tropes, and it's fun to think about them, argue about tropes, examine them, etc. But you always need to remember that tropes are just a tool to simplify writing, they aren't actually why certain story beats are written into a work (unless you're a hack writer, they exist, many get paid more than me). Collateral damage is only a part of a story, really you just want supes to be sad for a bit because an old lady got hit by a train or something. There's only so much screenplay space for that. Last point, more than tropes or hack writing, Superman HAS to fight bad duders. Most heroes fight bad duders because action figures. Action figures means moneys. Want to write a cape movie where they don't fight a bad duder? Bad writer, no film moneys for you.
Orphansmith
2022-09-03 20:41:00 +0000 UTC
