WORLD'S FINEST part II

We’re all friends here but in order to have a meeting of the minds sometimes things have to be said that offend others. I don’t mean any disrespect to Jinrikisha, as I know he is quite the fan of Superman, but just the other day I had a go at Batman and now I feel it is only fair to give Superman his due.

Let me establish a few things first. When I lambasted Batman that was unexpected; I’ve never had a thing against Batman before. Superman, on the other hand, I’ve despised for most of my life. I just don’t like the character. I don’t like his concept, I don’t like his execution, and I don’t understand the mentality that makes a person a Superman fan. Yet there are plenty of fans out there, so if someone can explain it to me, please do.

From a psychological perspective, our heroes are either reflections of who we wish we were or who we believe we are. In order to have a hero it must represent something to you or about you. I find that different heroes represent different archetypes and thus do their fans adhere to them for differing reasons. Superman is functionally omnipotent. Not only is he invulnerable, super strong and can fly, but he also seems to have a slew of powers and abilities that are not purely physical. A character like the Hulk is defined by his super strength. Hulk is all about strength and yet he is weaker than Superman. On his worst day, Superman can pick up an aircraft carrier and on his best day he can apparently turn a black hole into a square or some shite. He has no discernable weaknesses aside from kryptonite and magic. Thus, I put it to you that the ability to derive enjoyment from reading the adventures of such a hero, who simply cannot be challenged, is the worst type of mental masturbation/wish fulfillment fantasy.

Anything I write runs the risk of seeming as though I cribbed someone’s act, and I don’t want that, so understand that this is coming from the heart. I don’t understand the DC universe’s concept of superheroes and power levels. There are only two types: Supermen and Batmen. You are either all powerful (like Green Lantern, Martian Manhunter, Wonder Woman) or you have no powers to speak of by comparison. Thus why does any superhero team need a Batman, a Flash, an Aquaman or any other second stringers like Green Arrow when they allow Superman on the roster? Is it in case a wizard made out of kryptonite shows up and starts kicking arse?

If Batman wears a Swiss Army Belt full of gadgets for every occasion, then Superman is the Swiss Army Man of Steel. He has a power for everything; full spectrum analysis vision, super photographic memory, super computer fast reasoning skills, and the strength to impose his will upon the world. Where is the drama? Where is the challenge? Where is the compelling storytelling?

DC finally went too far when they killed him. They created a superbeing specifically to kill Superman and then had the Man of Steel sacrifice his own life to save us. Then we were treated to all the soppy “World Without a Superman” baloney and the four different Supermen. Blah, Blah. We did fine before he came to this planet, we could do fine without him. I think the guy with the magic power ring that does anything except effect the colour yellow can cover for Superman. And for those yellow emergencies we have Martian Manhunter. Then they brought him back. How touching. How crap. It ruined the heroic nature of his sacrifice.

Finally, this whole Superman, flag waving, All American Boy bullshite is unfounded. This is supposed to be the land of the free; the land where every man can become more than his birth would dictate through perseverance, hard work and connections. But what message is Superman sending? He is better than us because he was BORN better. He is an alien, and perhaps there is a message there, sure, but the fact is his powers have more in common with the old European notion of noble blood and divine right of kings than they do with America. Superman is the Ubermensch, better by breeding, better by DNA, better by everything. He has no flaws that we as humans do not also have. We can’t just grab a chunk of kryptonite either; it is highly radioactive and causes cancer. We can’t cast magic spells willy nilly, and if we could we would be superheroes and thus measured on a different scale. Thus his flaws are not so dramatic after all. A simple Achilles Heel. Funny thing about Achilles, his one weakness was no weaker than the next Greek’s heel. So I cannot abide Superman. I cannot abide the message he puts forth. I cannot understand the mentality that enjoys the exploits of Can’t Fail At Anything Man. But I’m willing to listen because I want to know.

WHY HOLLYWOOD CANNOT MAKE A DECENT BATMAN FILM:

Crap source material. Plain and simple. The source material is not that good. To make matters worse, Hollywood, the home of left wing liberal communist thought, seems to have no grasp on the character to begin with. How can they be expected to make a decent film when they don't understand the nature of the Dark Knight Detective?
Since Tim Burton's little opus the Hollywood movie machine has tried to work the dual identity theme, the humour theme, and the "all my villians are psychos" theme and failed at every turn. Why is this, you ask. Because this is not the essence of WHO Batman is. Nay, WHAT Batman is. Batman is, to put it frankly, a Co-Dependent Faggot.
The proof: Batman could prevent future crime by putting his enemies in a facility with a proven track record for keeping them locked up. Like OZ. Rather, he makes sure they go to Arkham Asylum. If they weren't crazy before their incarceration, they certainly will be afterwards. I imagine that a typical hearing in a Gotham court of law goes something like this:
Judge: Counselor, the defendant seems rational, reasonable, and to have a full grasp of right and wrong. Prosecution has demonstrated that the defendant was motivated by greed and a callous disregard for the sanctity of the law. While this behaviour is reprehensible, it hardly qualifies as insane.
Counselor for the Defense: Ahh, your honour, you see my client was apprehended by The Batman!
Judge: I see. I rule criminal insanity. I see no other alternative but a lengthy stay at Club Arkham.
Thus Batman creates a subculture of villians that define their existence around him. They seek revenge against Batman. They blame Batman for their failures. They attempt escape in order to commit crimes, not for gain but soley to thwart (and thereby draw the attention of) Batman. To the average Gothamite there are far more important day to day issues than the Joker, the Riddler and whether or not some homo running around in tights and a swiss army belt exists. They have bills to pay. By making himself a thing of the night and the shadows, Batman needs something to justify his existence. That thing is a set of "villians" that are utterly devoted to his existence, or the ending of it, as the case may be. Thus Batman is co-dependent. QED.

He is also a fag. Batman avoids relationships with women. So does James Bond, but at least Bond exercises his misogyny by dominating the women he meets. Bond is not a homosexual. Batman avoids sexual tension like the plague. Like most self-respecting homosexuals, he will not have sex with women, and thus knows that his line ends with his death. How to avoid this problem? Like all biological organisms he seeks immortality through replication, but since he cannot, or rather will not, have sex with a woman, how does he achieve immortality of his genetic code? The answer is simple: Robins.
Batman seeks out youths that have had a tragic life of some kind, all the better when they have lost their parents as he lost his own. But rather than rehabilitate the young men and help them cope, becoming useful members of society, he fuels their childish desires for revenge and fantasy by training them, equipping them, and giving them skin-tight gay bondage fetish gear. The young men remain with him until they either grow up and realize how creepy the old queen really is, or die. Batman sets up a sick incestous father/lover figure relationship with his young wards. One can only assume that Bruce Wayne was educated classically, if you get my meaning and I think you do.

Batman's homosexual repression does not extend only to Robin. Batman wants only men around him. Commissioner Gordon and Alfred being his two closest companions. He is obviously in a number of repressed homosexual relationships with some of his oldest and most implacable foes. Reading the dialogue exchange between Batman and the Joker whenever Joker escapes from Arkham (yet again) is like seeing two old lovers who've long since stopped being intimate but still smolder with their old passions and are forced to run into one another in awkward social situations. The old queens are catty, petty, insulting, but it is obvious that their verbal and mental games are reminiscent of the passion they once shared when their love was new and full of promise. There is less of the nature of antagonism to their banter and more of the nature of foreplay. As though Batman is saying to the Clown Princess of Crime, "We've been through it all before, ducky, you know how it must end. Ah, our time together is always so brief."
Sure, on the surface Batman is saying, "Once and for all Joker, this has to stop. I will put you away again. And don't think for a minute that if you escape I won't be there to put you back."
But his subtext is saying, "I've never forgiven you. You know that. I'll never forgive you for making me love you so."
It's obvious that the Joker could kill Batman easily, but he doesn't because he only wants Batman to know that in his way, despite all they've been through, he still cares deeply and truly.

And that is why Hollywood cannot make a decent Batman picture. They have it all wrong. The Dark Knight, his boy wonder, the crazy villains; it is all just a big faggot opera about men in spandex with their packages crammed into tight fitting rubber underpants.
Next Time: Superman-What sort of crazy Nazi wet dream is he?