The Superhero Subgenre: "I'm Holding Out for a Hero"
By Tim Popple
4th February 2010

"Now, a staple of the superhero mythology is, there's the superhero and there's the alter ego. Batman is actually Bruce Wayne, Spider-Man is actually Peter Parker. When that character wakes up in the morning, he's Peter Parker. He has to put on a costume to become Spider-Man. And it is in that characteristic Superman stands alone. Superman didn't become Superman. Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he's Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red "S", that's the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears - the glasses, the business suit - that's the costume. That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent. He's weak... he's unsure of himself... he's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race."

So says Bill in Kill Bill (2004). It's an interesting point, although most will argue of the negativity with which Bill sees Kal-El as viewing humanity. Superman The Movie (1978) is also effectively the first superhero movie as we know it as a genre. It fulfils many of the criteria which we see the genre has having. At its root, it is a very formulaic genre. Origin story, birth of the alter ego, tentative use of powers, build up of major arch-enemy, final face-off. Most superhero films follow, to some extent, this formula. But it is the variety of ways in which this formula is translated that is fascinating, and which creates a breadth of styles that keeps the genre alive.. With Kick-Ass due to be released in eight weeks, now is the time to see just how far the genre has come, and what twists and turns it has encountered on its way.

Origin Story

Superman The Movie is the template. Big budget for its time, stellar cast (Marlon Brando, Gene Hackman) and a story that resounded with good ol' American jingoism in a decade in which America celebrated its bicentennial, but also impeached a president. America needed a hero to fight for "truth, justice, and the American way". Which doesn't stop us enjoying it here in Blighty. Superman touches base with his origins on Krypton, his early childhood in Smallville, the creation of his Fortress of Solitude, and his eventual post at the Daily Planet. That this singular hero, with the differences that Bill so adroitly points out, should be the first of the genre makes it a purer film. This is a character devoid of that human conflict: he's not human. Certainly he cares for humans, and that is his weakness (and is always explored in greater depth than his more abject weakness to Kryptonite). But Superman is fundamentally "good" in every way. In a sense that makes him a less interesting character, but a more able template onto which to project subsequent superheroes.

Sequels aside (and you will need to wait for the next thrilling installment of this column for a look at superhero sequels) there was an eleven year gap before the next major superhero film. Tim Burton's 1989 blockbuster Batman was an incredible success. And yet it was already subverting the genre. Taking the 60s TV series "Batman", renowned for its campness, and overt silliness, and returning it to a style more closely fitting the comic books from which it was taken. Unlike Superman before it which thrust Lex Luthor into the film fully-formed, Batman looks at Jack "The Joker" Napier's origins too. (Even if it does stray from the comic book origins of the Joker, to whit, his connection with the young Bruce Wayne.) With this film, like Superman, it looks at the subject matter with a knowing seriousness. That is, it realises the essential absurdity of the story, while maintaing a straight look at that story. So it is that we have a fully-realised Gothic Gotham, tempered with the Joker's antics. But for all the darkness on show, Batman maintains the formula: the action moves inexorably towards a final showdown between Batman and the Joker. The manner in which it achieves this however, makes it an indispensible film in the superhero canon.

Birth of the Alter Ego

After variable hits The Shadow (1994), The Phantom (1996), Spawn (1997), and Blade (1998), two notable diversions produced varying commentaries on the superhero genre in a much more in-depth way than Bill's speech, and in a more subtle way than Kevin Smith's Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back (2001). Mystery Men (1999) is a little-seen comedy/border-line spoof that never, ever takes itself seriously. It sends up the conceits of the superhero film gleefully. In a discussion by the titular wannabe superheroes about the only actual superhero Captain Amazing (Greg Kinnear) and his alter ego Lance, only one member suspects they are the same person. He is put down witheringly that they are clearly not the same, as one of them wears glasses. Captain Amazing himself is kept afloat by sponsorship deals emblazoned on his costume like an F1 racing driver, and is quickly going out of business because he's already put away all the criminals. Certainly the scattershot approach means some jokes may veer left of central, but its heart is in the right place, and it is endearing as well as entertaining in its own right, putting to shame many of the spoofs of today (including Superhero Movie (2008)).

M. Night Shyamalan's 2000 film Unbreakable is a straight up superhero film dressed up as a modern day drama. Samuel L Jackson plays a character with an extreme brittle bone disease who has an obsession with comic books. He believes there is a man who is the exact opposite of him. Bruce Willis is the sole survivor of a train accident, father of one, and in a failing marriage. In this multi-layered drama, we have a close examination on the conceits of the superhero genre and a surprisingly accurate following of the formula. We have the birth of the character, the realisation of Bruce Willis' powers, eventual usage of those powers, and an eventual face-off with the arch-enemy. That these happen in a very ordinary way underlines the way in which this film approaches the idea of the superhero. Our protagonist even has the double-letter name. Clark Kent. Bruce Banner. David Dunn. And he has a costume, as sketched in the newspaper article detailing his first foray into saving lives. Arguably Shyamalan's best film, Unbreakable is the superhero film that is not a superhero film.

Tentative Use of Powers

Theturn of the millennium saw two filmmakers of note turn to the superhero genre. The superhero genre both gave their idling careers a kickstart, and subsequently caused them to stall a little as well. Bryan Singer, most notable film The Usual Suspects (1995), and Sam Raimi, most notable film Evil Dead (1981), gave the superhero genre a boost with X-Men (2000) and Spider-Man (2002) respectively. (Their careers took a dip with, respectively, Superman Returns (2006) [unjustified] and Spider-Man 3 (2007) [justified].) Here we had respected directors lending their names and their expertise, and thus credibility, to a flagging genre. One only has to look at the names glossed over during the 90s to see the dip in quality. Thus it begins that the superhero film began to regain some star power. However, X-Men was always going to have difficulty paring down from the wealth of characters on offer. Rather than being about one man's story, it had to necessarily be about multiple characters. Singer neatly steps around this dilemma by... focusing on one man's story. Our emotional investment in the film comes through the character of Logan aka Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) and, to a lesser extent, Rogue (Anna Paquin). Lumbered with the necessity to introduce so many characters, however slight that introduction, leaves little time for actual plot development. Granted, the film takes a gamble - and wins - with an introductory sequence set in a concentration camp. For a superhero film to include a reference to the Nazis was a risk (one which would be repeated a few years later). Nevertheless, encumbered as it was with necessary introductory sequences, the film only ever seems to be setting up for something else. Entertaining as it is, it is as a grand preamble that it works best. Spider-Man on the other hand, is a tour de force return to the grand formula of Superman 24 years earlier. Adherence to the formula is no bad thing - after all, it works. But with Spider-Man, Raimi creates a film that runs through with a joy at being the superhero. Where Batman has Gotham City, and Superman has Metropolis, Spider-Man is specifically in New York. That grounding in reality meant that, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 (and after some hastily edited footage) the film had extra resonance. When Spider-Man battles with the Green Goblin, the Goblin is foiled by the unexpected assistance of hundreds of New Yorkers who come to Spider-Man's aid. That cameraderie was tangible at the time, and it bleeds out of this film palpably.

Build Up Of The Arch Enemy

Like a spoilt child, Ang Lee's Hulk (2003) sits apart. The Incredible Hulk was, like Superman, always a different kind of superhero. Certainly, to paraphrase Bill, when the Hulk wakes up in the morning, he is Bruce Banner. But he doesn't put on the costume of the Hulk willingly. His alter-ego is not a celebrated hero, and this entry into the canon sits uneasily. The Incredible Hulk most obviously draws inspiration from The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1886), the classic novella by Robert Louis Stevenson. As such, it is a necessarily more complex story, and one which demands a more complex treatment. And so, celebrated director Ang Lee - a less likely choice for a comic book movie there could not have been - took on this challenge. And, in this writer's humble opinion, succeeded most adroitly. Sadly, most do not agree. A mature, considered approach to the story, shot as if it were a moving comic book itself, dealing with complex issues, including flashbacks within flashbacks, Hulk creates an entirely different style of film, yet one which still manages to mostly fit the formula. But, with his relatively arthouse sensibilities, Lee brings to the story a humanity that a lesser filmmaker might struggle with. (And, as was discovered, did struggle with, in 2008's The Incredible Hulk. Box office for both films is comparable.)

The year after Hulk came another unlikely superhero. Without an alter ego, nor human form, Hellboy is a little different. In a self-contained universe, in which demons and alternative universes are real, Hellboy (2004) deals with a whole new style of superhero. Bordering on steampunk, Guillermo Del Toro brings a singular vision to a brilliant concept.. Nazis (yes, they're back again) attempt to open a portal to another dimension, and Hellboy sneaks through. Brought up by a special branch of the FBI, he helps them ward off the "things that go bump in the night". While the mythology of the film itself veers clear of superhero clichés, within the film, the character has taken on superhero status. And so we see comic books of Hellboy within the reality of the film, so self-referential is the film. And yet the film never quite matches in actuality what it achieves in concept. Developmentally it lurches, while the bad guys range from oddly two-dimensional, to superbly-realised. In the end the scale of the film tries to cover too much ground, which jars against the lighter tone of Hellboy himself.

After a number of digressions from the straight path of superhero formula films, we return to a film that - at its root - is as formulaic as Superman and Spider-Man, but which manages to transcend that formula and make it something special, just as those films did. Iron Man (2008) took a relatively little-known superhero, and made him into blockbuster material. From a director best-known as "the actor that played the boyfriend of Monica in "Friends" for a bit", and starring an actor who until recently had been best-known as being the guy with the big drug problem, the film was not necessarily destined for greatness. And yet, by inter-mingling relevance and reality with a healthy dose of Downey Jr's laconic humorous delivery, what was created was a film that manages to be hugely fun, and really, really cool. It may have been a return to bright colourful superheroes, but it came with a modicum of bitter reality: an opening act that has the hero as a prisoner of war is not obvious summer blockbuster material. And yet, against all odds, it works, and brilliantly so.

The Final Face-Off

So where next for this illustrious genre? We have had a number of successful straight-up films, some critiques, some spoofs, some alternative takes. As the pattern seems to go, after the straight, comes the twisted. And none seems quite as twisted as the forthcoming Kick Ass. Matthew Vaugn's take on the comic of the same name looks set to be violent, abrasive, and a huge amount of fun. It seems to take the idea of Mystery Men - regular folk dress up as superheroes - but makes it an all-out action with humour, rather than an all-out comedy-spoof with action. If early reports are anything to go by, it could be the first big hit of the pre-summer season. After Kick-Ass, this year we have Michel Gondry's take on The Green Hornet, starring Seth Rogen, and next year we have Thor and Captain America to look forward to. And that's not to mention the sequels coming up. The superhero genre is prevalent today, but it is not in want of creativity. The more creative forces involved in this genre (and Gondry's involvement is promising) the better its future can be.

Next time, a look at Super Sequels... Stay tuned!