There’s one thing that Supergirl gets right that Man of Steel completely whiffed, and while it’s a small thing it is, in a very real sense, the only thing that matters. In Supergirl Kara Zor-El wants to be a hero.
The one thing that makes ‘Supergirl’ better than ‘Man of Steel’
-
This is a garbage argument. How can you blame Clark Kent for not knowing how to feel about actually being Kal-El, and being forced into a virtually messianic role? This isn’t some MCU trash in which the heroes embrace celebrity status and don’t struggle with what it means to be a superhero and never ask honest, existential questions. We’re talking about a movie that introduced a very young Superman, who more than likely would NOT have wanted to be the savior of the world. Who wants that responsibility? We can say that Kara Zor-El is a better character because she’s an idealist who thinks she can change the world and is excited to do so, but why does that even matter? First of all, let’s take a look at the Superman we’ll meet in BVS and see how the character evolves in the months/years following the events of MOS. I have a feeling he won’t be the same uncertain young man he was. It took time for him to come to peace with his extremely complicated and sometimes ugly place in the world. That’s realistic. Secondly, what’s wrong with having a reluctant superhero? Josh Trank completely ripped off MOS by basing the central premise of “Fantastic Four” on the notion that superheroes might actually hate being superheroes — and he failed miserably, which shows just how difficult that can be to pull off for heroes who aren’t Batman. But imitation is a form of flattery, and it makes clear that Trank saw the genius in the more realistic approach to Superman. I believe he’ll be closer to the Superman we are familiar with in BVS — though I’m sure certain elements will be changed — but Snyder’s approach in MOS (which admittedly was inspired by existing material and wasn’t original to Snyder or Goyer or Nolan) was brilliant. If Kara Zor-El wants to run around like a foolish, idealistic, happy-go-lucky young girl and play superhero, fine. But I’m tuning in to “Gotham.” “Supergirl” is not better than MOS, and using “He’s not the Superman we know and love” as an argument is a poor excuse for logic. News flash, Devin Faraci: MOS is more heavily inspired by source material — past and present — than you acknowledge. His early iterations were often incredibly dark. Get over it. He’s not going to be fighting for truth, justice and the American way just because he feels like it and he’s an inherently good person. That’s bullshit. Nobody is inherently good. We all have to summon the power to be good, and that’s what he had to do in MOS, and he’s still learning. That’s powerful, and it’s good storytelling, and it doesn’t misunderstand the character; it makes the character more compelling. It sold me on this big, blue Boy Scout, which he isn’t anymore. But whether he wanted to be in MOS or not, he’s a hero. And he’s a hell of a more compelling hero than Kara Zor-El. But if you like one-dimensional characters with no substantial struggles or concerns, and if a dark and realistic depiction of Superman proved too troubling for a mind seeking solace in simplified, Disneyfied muck, stick to “Supergirl” and leave the DCEU to the rest of us.
-
I got infuriated when I read this ‘review’ of supergirl, I’d planned to write an entire book dismantling the reviewer’s logic lol but that’d be unnecessary now.
Thank you for your comment, it’s the perfect response to this poor review
-
-
I can’t even…
-
I get this argument and can respect where the opinion is coming from.
From my perspective however, this would be like arguing that The Lion King is ‘better’ than Hamlet because Simba actually can’t wait to be king. That argument is accurate in its own way, but would also be completely missing the point of what Hamlet is about.
-
That’s actually an amazing comparison. I was just thinking the other day about how much shit Shakespeare would receive in our time. “He’s too serious.” “He’s full of himself.” “His work is bombastic and brooding.” “His characters lack subtlety and nuance.”
-
-
I like this article because it establishes one thing, David goyer sucks. Great ideas don’t come from him. Hence why Chris terrio is now writing bvs
-
You can write as many paragraphs as you want, analyze it in as many different ways you can think of, but what it comes down to is that you either ARE or ARE NOT ready for a new version of the character.
I personally think MOS is a masterpiece. Batman is still relevant today because the character has been reinterpreted over the years. The unrealistic expectation of staying true to a 1978 version of a character is what holds the character of Superman behind. Time to move on.
-
What a load of horse shit….
-
What destroys (Man of Steel style) this argument is; The Supergirl on this TV show already has an experienced Superman as a role model. Man of Steel’s Clark Kent didn’t have that at all. He wanted to be a hero, but didn’t know how, or have the confidence to expose himself to the world. Snyder and Goyer tried to tell a Superman Begins story, where Superman wasn’t perfect, and didn’t have all the answers. But some people want a specific version of Superman, and when they don’t get it, they hate on it.
Superman’s a fictional character. It’s okay to try and do DIFFERENT things with him!
Comments