Superheroes bust out of comics
A group of us watched the first episode of Heroes and placed bets on whether it would last for three weeks or six. Surely, we all thought, such a portentous sprawling exercise in cliches couldn’t get any kind of audience, right? Well, now we know how wrong we were. And apparently this means that we’re in for dozens of copycat TV shows next season. Already, the CW has greenlit a new superhero show about two women whose powers only work when they’re together, from one of the producers of the awesome Veronica Mars. Meanwhile, Crown just paid a shitload of money for a novel about five friends who develop superpowers. (They describe it as “The Incredibles meets Kavalier and Clay,” which is literally a nonsensical statement. The Incredibles can’t meet Kavalier and Clay, because their strengths are mutually exclusive.)
I like superheroes, and superhero comics are a big guilty pleasure of mine. Occasionally, when a really gifted writer is handling them, superhero comics can even be great leeeterature. (To me, the gold standard remains Quantum and Woody.)
But I don’t really like superheroes outside of comics. I’m not sure why this is. It used to be simple to explain, because outside of comics, superheroes appeared in animated cartoons, seriously cheesy movies by people like Tim Burton, and tossed-off tie-in novels. It’s only fairly recently that people like Michael Chabon and Ang Lee are working on superhero movies, and the special effects have improved to the point where they don’t prevent you from telling a real story.
(Side note: it’s interesting how superhero TV shows have ditched some of the cheesier trappings of the comics, especially the costumes and capes. Compare Lois & Clark with Smallville, or Heroes with Birds of Prey.)
I think there are a few reasons why I dislike superhero movies, in particular. One is that even the best ones, like the first two X-men movies and Batman Begins, have a certain self-conscious stageyness about them. Also, screenwriters invariably try to make everything personal, so for example the villain of Batman Begins is the guy who trained Batman in the first place. It’s the story of their relationship, rather than the story of Batman becoming Batman and then encountering evil. Shows like Heroes and Smallville, meanwhile, take the “soap opera” thing from comics without bringing along enough of the themes of duty versus personal life which distinguish the soap opera in comics from the regular kind. (For example, Spider-Man constantly having to choose between his personal life and being heroic.)
The only TV show I can think of which really did justice to the superhero concept was Buffy. Power and responsibility? Check. In fact, Giles pretty much gave the “with great power comes great responsibility” speech in a dozen episodes. Personal life in conflict with heroism? Check. Confronting evil? Not just your former best friend who’s now gone off the rails, but evil that would have been there anyway? Check. Thinking about it, what Buffy had that a lot of these other shows and films feel as though they lack is actual heroism, and a serious examination of what heroism means. I don’t get that from Heroes, at least not so far. I get a lot of babble about evolution, and a lot of scenes where hot chicks kill guys but it’s not their fault, or the guys deserved it.
Has there been another TV show since Buffy which examined the themes it examined, particularly in its first few seasons? Has anybody even tried to?
I am very with you on the “everything is personal” aspect of comic book movies. it drives me crazy, exhibit a being hulk vs. absorbing man in the movie. It takes away from the sense of multivalent wonder in comics, where the gamma-irradiated guy is completely separate from the ex-con who runs around trashing the city with a wrecking ball. bits of the x-men movies were the only flicks that gave me that sense of an expansive, wondrous world where you might find beings which didn’t owe their existence to whatever the hero did in the first movie. exhibit b: fantastic four. anyways. great post!
In a lot of ways, cinematic treatments of “super-heroes” remain less versatile than comics, as you say, Hollywood’s weakness remains that it gets trapped in in the most personally-involving part of the story — the origin. To the Hollywood mind, everything needs to tie directly back to the hero, whereas a comic book has a lot more freedom. Not saying I approve, but that’s the mentality.
“Buffy” really remains the gold standard for iconic treatment of a hero on TV — she was new, fresh and ultimately, as you say, it wasn’t all about her.
For the most part, shows like “Heroes” and “Smallville” (although I’ve not watched the latter for some time) actually have some understanding of their own weaknesses, and opt for the “Before they were heroes” approach, which admittedly, plays to their strengths: Clark Kent ain’t Superman yet, the first thing we learn on “Heroes” is that they’re going to save the world. But FIRST …
I can understand your frustration with that, to a degree. I actually have high hopes for “Heroes” (Maybe that’s because Brian Fuller of “Wonderfalls” and “Dead Like Me” is involved) because they ARE taking the time to develop the characters a bit in isolation, to get a sense of what they want … Claire wants to not be a “freak or lab rat,” Hiro wants to be a comic book hero, Isaac’s shooting heroin to save the world (and really, who HASN’T done that? :)
It’s all still developing, but if they can make the fact they’re taking some time before bringing them together pay off, to have both the characters and the viewers understand why they ultimately become heroes, then it might actually develop into something worthwhile, definitely stronger than if they became the Justice League at the end of the first episode.
We ain’t there yet, but it’s got the potential.
I think Heroes has more of a discussion of heroism than perhaps you’re giving it credit. You only need to look at the latest episode and see that almost all the characters used their powers for evil, and how they rationalised that, or whether that was okay. Hiro used his talents for cheating and personal gain, and the cheerleader killed the guy who attempted to rape her in an act of vengeance. You can argue that, perhaps, we’re meant to think he deserved it. But I’m not sure that’s the case.
The thing that interests me most at the moment is this: Are all of these people heroes? They’re still developing their powers and working out where they sit in terms of their lives, ethics and morality – who is to say some of them won’t turn out to be evil? Since none of the characters know each other yet, that doesn’t qualify as “making it personal.”
As for other superhero shows that follow a similar path to Buffy, the first obvious candidate is Angel. He’s definitely an anti-hero, in the same sense Batman is, but the entire show – all five seasons – are a discussion of what being a hero, or champion, means. Is it fighting the good fight for the sake of the good fight, is it making a stand against evil, is it saving lives? If it’s saving lives, does that mean succeeding through compromise is okay, rather than being totalitarian? Do the ends justify the means?
Plus you’ve got the non-Angel characters, like Cordelia, Wesley, Lorne, Fred, Gunn and so on, and they frequently touch upon the personal sacrifices made in favour of acts of heroism. Especially in those first couple of seasons.
The second show that springs to mind is Jake 2.0, which was Executive Produced by David Greenwalt, who co-created Angel with Joss Whedon and was EP on the first three seasons of the show. Jake 2.0 only lasted around fourteen episodes, being cancelled midway through the first season, but it’s good TV that was getting better.
Jake is an ordinary guy – a computer technician, a bit nerdy, but with friends and a girl he likes. Then he gets infected by nanites, who give him super speed, strength, agility, and all that jazz. Suddenly he’s recruited by the CIA to fight crime, and he has to juggle his new secret job and secret abilities with his personal pursuits. It also deals with issues of morality, of heroism, and pushes Jake to see how far he’ll go to get the job done.
It’s definitely a lighter show than Angel. More akin to Buffy season 4 than Buffy season 6, if you appreciate that comparison. But it has a darkside, and it’s fun and deals with the issues you discuss above.
Thanks for writing the article. I really loved the read.