- Martha Kent's parenting style
- Lois gets the story on the bullet
- Protests and news coverage at the Capitol
- Lex and Finch outside the Senate hearing
- The oldest lie in America
Man of Steel Answers, Suicide Squadcast, DCU_Club
<Transcript of the episode>
In the last episode, we just covered the scene where Senator
Finch put out a call for Superman to appear at a hearing with the Committee on
Superman. We, the audience, know that it might not be a good idea for him to
come because Lex has pulled strings and used Wallace Keefe as a pawn to spur on
the hearing, and we just saw that Lex now has possession of a substantial
sample of Kryptonite. We also have a strong suspicion that Lex was behind the
African incident, and in the Extended Cut, it’s pretty obvious already that he
was, and that African incident led to the heightened governmental scrutiny in the
first place.
But Superman does not yet know about these manipulations, so
from his perspective, he has been troubled by the debate and negative reaction
that has recently grown around Superman. He has said aloud that he doesn’t care
what they’re saying, but we’ve seen it very clearly in his body language and
quiet reactions that he does care. Superman has also been pained by the
negative repercussions that have followed many of his actions. He is just
trying to help when he’s needed and protect those he cares about, but often
there are unintended consequences that follow.
Superman would prefer to be a stoic, humble hero rather than
someone who seeks the limelight or who wants to have big photo ops or press
coverage of his efforts. It was established in Man of Steel and continued here in BvS that he is a quiet person who has a strong instinct to help,
but after he helps, he wants to just slip away and avoid the aftermath
attention. This is basically Superman as an introvert, which does not make him
any less courageous or heroic, and I think it actually offers a nice contrast
to many of the other extroverted superheroes that are out there in popular
culture right now.
So within this context, Superman has now seen Senator
Finch’s invitation for him to appear before the Senate committee. He has
avoided the spotlight and has preferred to help out without big speeches or
press conferences. But he is now reflecting on whether that has been the best
course of action. Maybe the population, which is inherently divisive and
cynical, needs to have things more explicitly laid out to combat all the
prejudgment and misunderstanding.
So Superman is considering whether he should go against his
preference and appear before the Senate committee as a way to explain himself and
answer their questions, hopefully to assuage their concerns. And it makes sense
that as he is thinking about this big decision, he would go confer with one of
the two people he could really talk with about this stuff. Lois is one person
he could talk with, but she’s busy with her investigation in Washington, DC,
and Clark also probably knows the advice Lois would give. Lois has already said
that it’s very important for the world to have Superman and for Superman’s name
to be cleared so that he can be a trusted and inspirational figure. This might
not be exactly what Clark wants to hear, even though that is what he ultimately
decides. At this moment before he’s made his final decision, he probably wants
to be reassured about what he’s been doing up to this point and to get some
validation as both Clark and Superman, not just the potential of Superman.
So Superman goes to talk to his adoptive mother. And
overall, Scene 39 is a scene of a mother giving advice to her son. It’s not a
conversation, it’s a chance for Superman to listen and to simply be with his
mother. With his mother, he can be himself, which is a quiet person who thinks
deeply and cares deeply.
Talking about mother and son, Henry Cavill said the
following in the Art of the Film book: “The relationship between Martha and
Clark is the one constant, it’s the one thing which hasn’t changed. She will
always see him as every mother does… as a boy growing up. He may be a lot
bigger and stronger, but he’s still her little boy. And I think he will always
see her as the mother figure, as the one to go to, the one to ask, ‘Why doesn’t
it make sense?’”
In Scene 39, Martha starts out with the common line about
people hating what they don’t understand. This line is in danger of being
overused across TV and movies, but it really does make sense here because
Superman is still largely a mysterious and unknown figure even though he’s been
operating for about two years. Because people don’t know his full story or his
total motivations, it allows them to stoke fears and descend into divisiveness,
xenophobia, and prejudice.
Martha continues: “But they see what you do and they know
who you are.”
This line is funny to me because it’s like a preemptive slam
on the haters who have criticized BvS for
the limited number of spoken lines that Superman had. Martha is trying to have
some faith in humanity that they see actions more than words and that they
don’t just jump to conclusions or don’t just need someone loud, like a blowhard
who says things that sound strong on the surface but are actually hollow or
contradicted by how that person has lived his life. Unfortunately, in the movie
universe and in our real world, Martha is not entirely right. People are prejudicial and are swayed by words
over deeds a lot of the time. And if a public figure doesn’t take control of
their own narrative and public image, the news media and social media might run
with it off in negative directions.
Back to Martha: “You’re not a killer.” Again this is
meta-textual because many people after Man
of Steel were complaining about Superman killing Zod. Martha, and
vicariously the filmmakers, are reiterating that he’s not a killer even though he was forced to kill
Zod in that situation. Now, a rebuttal here would be that Martha is not exactly
a neutral observer. She’s biased and of course is going to see the best in her
son.
And I think that’s the point of this scene. She hits several
beats, all of which are supportive of her son. She reaffirms that Superman’s
actions are just and that Clark is essentially a good person, not a threat.
Next she says that she never wanted this world to have him, which is a very
realistic feeling for a parent to have. It’s always hard to let your child
leave your protection and head out there into the hands of the world, a world
that can often be cruel and judgmental. For Clark, because he is a world figure
who is now a figure of controversy, it must be even more painful for Martha.
Martha then hits the final beat, which is to emphasize that
what Clark is facing is a choice, not
an obligation. She says that Superman can be the world’s hero, a monument, an
angel, or he can be done of it. Just like it’s his choice of whether or not to
submit himself to the Senate hearing, it’s also Clark’s constant choice of
whether or not to continue operating in the world as Superman. The first part
of Martha’s line is pointing out that some people in the world, both the movie
world and the real world, take it for granted how Superman is supposed to act. “Of
course Superman is always going to save the day and do just the right thing.” “Of
course Superman should do exactly the right thing at every single opportunity.”
People are often holding Superman to impossibly high standards, and even though
he can meet those standards a lot of the time, the question here is whether
he’s meeting those standards out of obligation or out of choice. To me, the
fact that Superman actually makes the choice
to be a hero is more meaningful than if he just did it because he has to or
because it’s been ingrained into him. This is part of why I love the Justice
League Universe thus far, because they have richly developed Superman where he
is going through a real psychological journey to become a hero, and it’s a
realistic journey that is not over-simplified by just making his courses of
action predetermined by some perfect code.
Now, don’t get me wrong --- part of the reason I have loved
Superman in the comics, on TV, and in the movies, is because he is a pinnacle
superhero. But to me it’s very interesting to watch a Superman who is choosing to be an idealistic and
altruistic hero, rather than one who is just automatically that way or who is
that way simply because his adoptive parents told him to be a good person.
Moreover, part of the tradition of Superman being the
pinnacle superhero is that he is someone that we can all look up to and model
our behavior after. People have said that BvS
doesn’t live up to this tradition because Superman is dour and has some
self-doubt. But I think scenes like this one show the kinds of behavior that we
should model ourselves after. Superman tries to do good deeds just because
they’re the right thing to do. He doesn’t seek any sort of praise or worship
for them. Then when they lead to unintended consequences and collateral damage,
he takes that very seriously and tries to hear the stories of those affected.
When there are public debates about his role in the world, he thinks deeply
about what they are saying, seeks counsel from someone he trusts, he listens
before he speaks – which is something that others in the movie and in the real
world could learn from Superman – and then he makes the decision to humble
himself and appear at the hearing.
So Superman is behaving in ways that can set an example for
the rest of us, but he’s the example we need in today’s 21st Century
age. The fact that he has some self doubt is not a problem, because if a role
model never has doubts or dilemmas, then they provide no guidance whatsoever
for people when they do face doubts
or dilemmas. What Man of Steel and Batman v Superman do is show us a
Superman who is a model of how to deal
with doubt and dilemma when they arise, and they show us someone who comes
through the other side, doing what he has to do, and knowing full well all the
implications of his actions.
To finish out this scene, Martha says, “You don’t owe this
world a thing. You never did.” On the surface, this seems crass, and I’m sure
that’s how a lot of people have taken it, just like they took Jonathan Kent’s
“Maybe” line as heartless, as if he has actually said “Yes, you should let kids
die.” He didn’t say “yes,” he said, “maybe,” because he was acknowledging that
the world is difficult and there are going to be hard choices to face. With
Martha here in Scene 39, she’s not being crass, she is actually just making a
valid point. Clark does not owe the
world. He has already saved it once, and anyway, someone who does something
heroic did not actually owe that
heroic deed to the world, they just took it upon themselves to do the heroic
deed even though they don’t owe it to
the recipient. If someone runs into a burning building and saves a child, it’s
not that they owed it to the child.
In fact, if they did owe it to the
child, it wouldn’t really be a heroic deed. It would just be a deed, a fulfillment
of an obligation.
So Martha is right that Superman doesn’t owe the world… and
it’s a good thing that she’s right. If he did owe the world, then there would
be no reason for us to look up to him or appreciate his deeds. They would just
be things that we expect him to do.
And then on top of all these abstract ideas about heroism,
we have to realize that Martha is Clark’s mother. Of course she is going to
care first and foremost about him as her child. It hurts her deeply to see the
fear and hatred that is spreading around Superman. She wants to protect her son
and if the world is not a safe place for him, just like Jonathan Kent
predicted, then she wants Clark to know that he doesn’t have to continue. She’s
showing unconditional love for her son and if it’s too much for him, she wants
him to know that he’ll always have a home to come back to. She lets him know
this, but she doesn’t tell him what to do.
As I’ve said before, I loved the Kents in Man of Steel. I thought they were very
loving parents who cared more deeply for their son than they did for the
outside world, which is a very relatable type of parental feeling, and they
also didn’t try to simplify or give black-and-white truisms about how to live
life. They were there with Clark in all the pain and complexity of life on
Earth. They helped him to navigate the complexity rather than just giving him
some artificially simple folk advice.
Martha Kent continues that loving, realistic parental
relationship here. It pains her to see her son carrying the weight of the
world. She lets him know that it’s a choice he can make, and it really is up to
him and no one else. This makes it that much more meaningful when Superman
eventually does choose to be the hero and take up the mantle for good. To me,
it resonates much more than if she had simply said, “You know what to do. Go
save everyone and do the right thing,” as if it were that simple.
What she does do is communicate very clearly that she loves
Clark and she will always love him, unconditionally, and that’s really all you
want from a parent, and it gives the child the confidence to go forth and make
difficult choices in the world. And it’s also something that Bruce never really
had, growing up without parents. When Bruce went to get comfort and guidance from
his parents, it was actually just the graves which added to his pain and
powerlessness. Alfred, of course, tries to fill in as a parental figure, but he
is repeatedly unable to get through Bruce’s fog.
Lois redeems Superman
Moving on to Scene 40, we see the next step in Lois’s
investigation of the bullet and the African incident that started all this
negativity toward Superman. She wants to clear Superman and understand the
truth of what is happening. In the Extended Cut, Lois does a bit more of this investigating
herself, but here she has used her contact and her trust in Secretary Swanwick
to make progress.
Swanwick joins her on the riverside bench and tells her what
CI, or Central Intelligence, has found out about the bullet. In the Theatrical
Cut, this is where we find out that Lex was behind the Nairomi incident. And I
think this is a nice part about the Theatrical Cut – that we get confirmation
about Lex’s hand in it at the same moment that Lois does. In the Extended Cut,
it’s great to see more of Lois’s investigating, but because the African frame
job was so much more explicit, we already knew it was Lex from the beginning
and we’re just waiting for Lois to catch up.
The fact that the bullet was created by Lex Corp implies
that Lex Corp is working on secret research and development projects,
unquestionably at Lex's whims and likely in pursuit of creating weapons which
can stop metahumans. Not only does this make sense
given Lex Corp has developed this weaponry and he need only reach into his own
company's supply of weapons, but it also ensured that Lex could not be
implicated without the US Government being implicated. The CIA was also there,
unofficially involved in the sensitive African civil war, so Lex knows he’s
protected because the government isn’t going to expose him lest they be
exposed. Indeed, this is exactly what we see as Swanwick refuses to go public with
the information, which limits Lois's ability to prove anything. The
Pentagon and the intelligence agencies at this point are willing to let
Superman take the flack to protect their own involvement in Africa, and in so
doing they also protect Lex.
We also talked about the bullet in a previous episode where,
because it’s such a specialized tech, certain channels are going to have to be
used to trace where it came from, and Lex is very likely to be monitoring those
channels to see who is investigating the African incident. So now that Lois has
gotten a definitive answer on the bullets, we should also assume that Lex knows
people are investigating it.
But there’s actually a bigger revelation here than Lois
finding out about Lex’s involvement in Africa, which she knows makes Lex
partially responsible for all the heightened scrutiny and protesting against
Superman. The bigger moment, which was emphasized beautifully by Zack Snyder’s
directing and the editing, was when Lois realizes that Lex also knows Superman’s
secret identity. This shows that Superman is in even more danger than they
realized before, and because of Lois’s close relationship with him, this is of
course very troubling for Lois. It’s also troubling for her to realize that she
played an indirect part in luring Superman into the trouble in Africa, and if
Clark didn’t have his relationship with her, she wouldn’t have been an effective
form of bait, but this is part of a nice character arc for Lois as she gets to
redeem herself later by getting in between Batman and Superman at the end of
their fight. Also, in the Extended Cut, she redeems herself with the
investigation of the Capitol bombing.
I think it’s important to note here that Lois is pretty
quick with her deductions. We should all remember this for later when she makes
a mental connection between Doomsday and the Kryptonite spear. It’s been
amazing how many people have called that a plot hole when Lois goes back to get
the spear. It’s not a plot hole, it’s just a smart character figuring out the
same thing that Batman and Superman figure out --- namely, that Doomsday came
from the scout ship and so is probably of Kryptonian origin, and therefore the
Kryptonite spear would probably be an effective weapon.
Now, although Alessandro and I both love this movie, we are
not blind to some of the inconsistencies or places that could’ve been improved.
In this scene, it seems like as soon as Lois discovers that Lex knows
Superman’s secret, she would warn everyone who is a part of that secret. So she
would try to tell Clark right away about Lex, and although she doesn’t get a
chance to talk to him until after the Capitol bombing, even then she doesn’t
tell him about Lex. Now, we might be able to overlook this omission because she
only saw him for a few moments and they were dealing with the aftermath of the
bombing. But it also seems like Lois should have called and warned Martha.
Maybe she did, but they didn’t show it on screen, and it didn’t seem like
Martha had been warned when she’s abducted, so it seems safe to assume that
Lois did not warn her, which seems a bit out of character.
So that’s a little mistake, but it’s minor and it doesn’t
have any direct bearing on the themes and character arcs of the movie. It only
affects the story.
Scene 41: Preliminaries to the Senate Hearing (1:07:45 -- )
Finally, we’re going to cover Scene 41 really quickly. This
is all the little lead-ups to the Capitol hearing. We see Soledad O’Brien
interviewing Wallace Keefe. This allows us to see that Lex has helped get
Wallace cleaned up, it reminds the audience that Wallace has the wheelchair
from Lex, which will of course be very important in the next scene. And the
interview with Wallace also allows him to reiterate his position about Superman
not being a hero, because he won’t actually get to testify later in the
hearing.
We see Bruce Wayne watching the coverage of the Senate
hearing, and he sees Wallace and asks Grace to “get Greg up here, please.” Note
that Grace, Greg, and Jack show a pattern that Bruce interacts with his
employees by first name. This was also shown when Bruce was there in Metropolis
helping Wallace and he right away learned his name and called him Wally.
Bruce had recognized Wallace as a former employee and victim
of the BZE, so he asks Greg why he hasn’t been getting the checks from Wayne
Enterprises or possibly from a Wayne foundation to help victims of the
Metropolis attack. Greg says that he has been getting checks every month and
returns them. Bruce looks through the checks and sees the disturbing messages,
including one that Pulpklatura was especially thrilled about – “I am your
ghost” – because ghosts that further flame the main character’s vengeance are a
typical part of a revenge tragedy story. Bruce asks why he hasn’t seen these
before and Greg says he’ll get to the bottom of it.
Of course, later on the helipad, we find out that Lex is at
least partially behind these returned checks and the disturbing messages. But
it’s a bit of an open question about how much Lex was involved. One possibility
is that Lex has been planning to spur on the Batman-Superman fight for at least
8 months or so, intercepting the checks way back then and returning them either
month-by-month or all at once just before this Capitol hearing. Greg had said
that Keefe had been returning them, which makes it sound like Keefe was
returning them individually each month, but I think Greg was unaware of the returned
checks until just now because now Keefe is getting media attention. So Greg
went and looked into Keefe’s file and found all the returned checks, and then
assumed that they’d been returned all along, when really they may have been
returned just recently.
Another possibility, although I admit it’s more of a
stretch, is that Lex had previously infiltrated the Wayne victim relief fund
and found out who the recipients are, and maybe Lex identified some like
Wallace Keefe who seemed to have resentment and extreme anger toward Superman.
Then Lex may have intercepted their checks to fan those flames or to make them
needy later, when Lex could come in and offer some support and use them as
pawns in whatever Lex’s plans ended up being. So maybe Lex started shaping
Keefe not knowing exactly how he would eventually use him, and then after Finch
denied the import license, Lex said, “Okay, I know how I’m going to use Keefe
in my scheme.” And then, just a couple months ago, he took the checks, scrawled
the messages and sent them back to Wayne to spur Bruce’s rage, and decided to
use Keefe to exact his revenge on Finch and bring more anger and scrutiny onto
Superman through the Capitol bombing.
To be fair, I should say that Alessandro is pretty firmly on
the side of the first interpretation -- that Lex has been manipulating the
checks and sending them back for basically two years, with a long-term plan to
spur Bruce in his hatred toward Superman. Alessandro’s view is that this is
confirmed by the final piece of mail coming in with the newspaper clipping. He
says that the checks, therefore, didn’t come in right at the end because they
weren’t with the newspaper clipping. But I’m still not so sure. All that the
newspaper clipping proves is that there were at least two deliveries – one with
the checks and a follow-up delivery with the newspaper clipping. But it’s still
possible that these were only a few days or weeks apart, rather than spread out
over months or years. And I actually think it would be riskier for Lex to return
the checks every month for two years, because what if Bruce had seen them earlier. He could have
seen them right from the beginning and gone and talked to Wallace Keefe and
changed the whole trajectory of everything after that. But this is definitely
stuff that is left implicit in the movie, and so if you have other thoughts or
questions, please let us know in the question.
This scene also has that great shot of Superman descending
in front of the Capitol. The protestors are around him, as are some people with
messages of support. Lois is able to be there because she was already in
Washington doing her investigation. But because of that story, it makes sense
that she would not be the Daily Planet reporter assigned to covering the
hearing itself inside the Capitol. A TV reporter says that we expect Superman
to make some kind of statement. This builds up the audience’s expectation for a
Superman speech, which will make it even more surprising when the bombing
happens before he has a chance to say anything.
The other important set-up for the Senate hearing scene is
of course Lex’s taunting of Senator Finch in the hallway. Lex is waiting
outside the chamber because he really wants to see Finch face-to-face. These
sorts of interactions are part of his fun and games and reveal how totally evil
this version of Lex Luthor really is. When Finch arrives, he tells Mercy Graves
to go in and save his seat. This also shows how heartless Lex is, by sending in
his closest associate to her death. In the Art of the Film book, they explain
that Mercy is a lawyer by training and that she is super efficient and
effective in doing whatever Lex’s needs to be done. But as we’ve said before,
Lex never shows Mercy any compassion or personal connection. Lex is a totally
isolated individual. It also makes sense for him to make sure Mercy dies in the
bombing because she can connect Lex to Wallace and to probably a lot of his
manipulations.
Lex tells Finch that he is eager to tell the world he was
willing to finance a Kryptonian deterrent but it was rejected by Finch. Now
that Superman is feared and trust in him has waned, it will be a black mark on
Finch’s reputation. But the fact that Lex will be carrying out the bombing
implies that he had no intentions of actually telling “his story”. This is just
his way of throwing her off his scent and it’s also his opportunity to have the
last word in their battle of wits going back to Scene 10.
Lex’s next line shows the pattern of Lex being a sleezeball
and also taunting people based on their names. He says Finch will be on the
“hotseat,” which is obviously a depraved inside joke for Lex himself. And he
calls Senator Finch “Junebug,” based on her first name of June. Later he has
similar fun playing with Lois’s name. But overall, Lex is so gleeful to be
carrying out his murderous bombing, it’s pretty sick.
One line that I’m not a huge fan of is Finch’s response
about being able to wrestle a pig. Now, I grew up on a farm and my grandparents
actually did have pigs, so I don’t mind the farm reference, but it just seemed
like it didn’t connect well to the previous line about a hotseat.
Lex’s last line, though, is huge and the filmmakers
emphasized it well by going to a straight-on shot of Lex instead of the typical
over-the-shoulder type coverage. Lex finally gets to say his line about the
oldest lie in America – that “power can be innocent.” So Lex is saying that
power is never innocent. This line spans out and applies to a lot of events and
characters in this movie. Obviously Superman has a lot of power, and Lex could
not stand the idea that people looked up to him as supremely good and
trustworthy. So Lex needed to show that Superman is not innocent, he wanted to
show the “holes in the Holy.”
The government also has power, the media has power, so they
are not innocent in the anger and cynicism of society either. Lex might also be
specifically calling out Senator Finch for trying to proceed deliberately
rather than taking immediate and violent precautions against Superman. Bruce
also has a great deal of power, both through Wayne Enterprises and as Batman, and
we’re seeing how he has definitely not remained innocent. Lex might not realize
it, or maybe he does, but he is powerful as well and so he’s admitting that
he’s not innocent. It is interesting to think of his oldest lie in relation to
his fundraiser speech because Lex tripped up precisely when he was saying that
he has knowledge and that knowledge is power. So perhaps his mini-meltdown was
because he doesn’t think of himself
as powerful and so thinks that the oldest lie doesn’t apply to him, but of
course he is powerful through his knowledge and influence and his ruthlessness.
So he isn’t innocent either. It would seem to me that he must know he’s
powerful, and so he knows that he’s not innocent, but he just embraces it and
what he can’t stand is people who think there can be an innocent power in the
world, such as god or Superman.
One small question I have about the oldest lie is why he
phrases it as the oldest lie in America,
rather than just an old lie in general. Perhaps this is to connect to the
truth, justice, and American way triad that we mentioned before. Or perhaps
it’s because the question of Superman’s innocence is allegorical for America as
the world’s super power. I think Chris Terrio at one point talked about
Superman representing America’s military might – and so BvS raises questions about how we use our military, how we make
decisions about when to use it, and how the media and general public form
opinions about military activities. If any listeners have viewed BvS with specific lenses of American
imperialism or American exceptionalism, we’d love to hear from you in the
comments.
So Mr Sam, did you watched the Justice League Teaser?
ReplyDeleteI was on family vacation so I didn't see it until the evening after it was released, but I will be posting some thoughts with Jason Book on YouTube this week. My quick reaction is that there are some very cool personality characteristics that will probably make for compelling interactions on the team (e.g., Aquaman stoic and reluctant, Flash talkative and eager -- Bruce and Diana as partners). The character designs look good, but I'd like to see some more hints at the themes they will be exploring because my fear is that it's just plot and personality rather than literary like MoS or BvS. (The BvS Comic-Con teaser gave some hints of interesting themes right from the start.)
DeleteI personally think that the reason the Teaser felt so light was because they wanted to ease any "complaints" that Justice League will be "grim" and/or "joyless" from the get-go. As ridiculous and senseless as those criticisms were, they really dented both MoS and BvS a bit, so I can understand why they showed what they showed they way they showed it to make a first impression.
DeleteI'm also not that worried about any literary themes since we are getting Terrio in the script, and he did confirmed that this film will have depth some time before the debut of BvS in theaters, maybe you remember something he said about comparing Superman to the sun god Apollo and Batman to the underworld god Hades?
The way I look it: MoS was a deconstruction of Superman as a character, BvS was a deconstruction of Superman as an icon, thus maybe JL will be a deconstruction of Superman as a legacy.
Good points. I think you're right about the marketing. They were not going to go as heavy with this teaser as they did for BvS (even though I love the heavy). I also agree with you that Snyder and Terrio will probably not disappoint on the themes, but those themes might be more judiciously mixed with standard plot/action/personality-type movie ingredients. I would love to see Justice League round this out as a Superman trilogy, as you suggested!
Delete