I can't believe it's not Superman

With the release of the movie Chronicle I am pleased that a cliché was avoided. Not that the movie is free from them, let’s face it, it is a found footage movie, but there is one I am glad it avoided. (At least I think they did, I haven’t had a chance to go see it yet. I know “Bad Fanboy”)

It’s a movie riffing on superpowers and superheroes where the characters powers are not based on Superman.

Think about it for a minute, name a superhero movie not based on a pre-existing superhero property where the hero’s powers were not basically Superman’s. Seriously the only one that I can name off the top of my head is the Toxic Avenger and I’m not sure he counts.

When I say Superman based I am talking about the following specific powers:

Super strength

Flight

Invulnerability

Other powers will often be present as well, but those three seem to be universal.

I’ll admit that there are a lot of superheroes in comics have these powers and are not considered rip offs of Superman. Rogue of the X-men, the Martian Manhunter, and Thor spring immediately to mind.

But most of the characters I am talking about are clearly taking their cues from Superman.

Now to be fair Superman is a cultural icon and the first image to enter people’s minds when the term superhero is used.  But all that tells me is that a lot of screenwriters are lazy. (Let’s all pretend to be shocked). So I guess form most people not immersed in geek culture Superman is synonymous with superhero.

And in most cases these portrayals are exploring ideas that you couldn’t with Superman himself. Superman is the paragon of superheroes. He is confident, noble, and humble. Often these pastiches are exploring ideas that would not fit with those qualities.

Most often you find the story to be about an ordinary person leading an ordinary life suddenly finding themselves with superpowers.

In the sixties you had to competing TV comedies, Mr. Terrific and Captain Nice, which had heroes who gained temporary powers based on a secret formula.  While similar ideas both had different execution. Mr. Terrific worked for the government who supplied the super pills that only seemed to work on him. Most episodes had his powers run out at the worst possible time. Captain Nice was a police scientist (no one said forensics back then) who invented a formula that gave him powers. Most episodes were about him needing to get to his formula in order to save the day. The other big difference in these shows was that Mr. Terrific was awkward with his powers, where Captain Nice could handle them, but was stuck with a ridiculous costume his mother made.

Moving on to the eighties and you had the Greatest American Hero, about a school teacher given a superhero costume by aliens that gave him superpowers. Like Mr. Terrific he had poor control over his abilities. The appeal of this show was the buddy cop aspect provided by his FBI friend/partner.

All these shows while having some fun with the everyman superhero idea suffered from the same problem, a problem that all TV shows featuring a super powered hero, be they from a previous license of not, suffered from. Almost none of the antagonists had superpowers. So really none of them ever really had a comic book feel to them, but more of a superhero in the real world vibe.

Movies didn’t always fare much better. You had parodies, like The Return of Captain Invincible. This was a movie where a hero from the 50’s is disgraced and becomes an alcoholic bum. He is found and has to clean up his act in order to save the world from his arch enemy. It was low budget fluff, even if it had Christopher Lee as the bad guy.

There was a terrible Italian movie called Puma Man. Yes, Puma man.  His powers were Puma based yet somehow they still made him a Superman Pastiche. His powers were even of extraterrestrial origin. If you heard of this one at all it was because Mystery Science Theater 3000 got their hands on it.

In 1993 there was Meteor Man, which sadly really wasn’t more than Greatest American Hero with an all-black cast.

More recently there was Hancock with Will Smith. To the writer’s credit instead of having a movie about an everyman with powers, it went with “What if Superman was a drunken asshole.” What was nice was they did dig a bit into the characters psychology to given him a reason for being that way and made it a redemption tale.

And there are certainly exceptions. The Incredibles for example was more of a riff on the Fantastic Four.

Sometimes Warner Brothers, who owns DC comics, thinks that these shows get a little too close to their copyright for comfort. For example WB sued over the Greatest American Hero. Ultimately lost as the court felt the character wasn’t close enough to Superman to warrant a violation, even with nearly the same powers.

Of course there are the non-powered heroes, but that could be a whole article on Batman pastiches. (And probably will be)

Will we see more Superman pastiches in the future? I don’t see why not.  Until then I think I will get out there and see Chronicle.

Of man, and Superman, and lawsuits.

Previously I touched on the Siegel family lawsuit to regain rights to the Superman copyright. This got me thinking about how I feel about the whole subject.

In 1932 Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster created the character of Superman. In 1938 they sold the character to what would become DC comics for $130 and a contract to create material for the publisher. By 1947 they decided that they were tired of getting paid a fraction of the income their creation was bringing in and sued DC to regain ownership. The courts favored DC, and in response DC fired the creators.

Siegel and Shuster made another attempt to regain the rights in 1974. Again the courts sided with DC. However a year later DC's parent company Warner Bros opted to give both men a yearly pension of $20,000 and health benefits. In addition it was decided that any comic book, novel, film, or TV series featuring Superman would include a credit to Siegel and Shuster as his creators.

In 1998 a new copyright law was passed that opened the door for the estates of both creators, who had by then passed away, to attempt to reclaim ownership. This has led to suits by both Estates. I have found little information on the Shuster suit other than one has been filed.

Of course the Siegel suit is the headline getter as they have had success, having recaptured their half of the original copyright. Their lawyer Marc Toberoff has vowed that they will have the entire copyright by 2013.

The whole situation leaves me feeling torn. On one hand I would like to see the family win as the creators were basically screwed by the original deal. But on the other hand as a fan I want to keep reading about the Superman I grew up with, and with as bitter as this suit has grown anything short of a complete victory by Warner Bros will not allow that.

The Superman intellectual property earns Warner Bros over a billion dollars in profit every year. Even a small percentage of that would equal millions of dollars. No corporation wants to give up any of that if they don’t have to, hence the fight on WB’s side. They have already shown a willingness to alter the story to reflect legal status.

On the heirs side there has been no indication of them caring about the copyright on any level other than financial. Superman’s status as cultural icon and his rich history have not come up in any statements I could find. This makes me question how they will treat the character if they gain complete control.

Here are some scenarios that I can foresee.

Scenario one: Warner Bros prevails.

Result: The status quo is maintained and the estates continue to battle for the rights

Scenario two: The estates gain 50% rights to the entire IP.

Results: WB has to suck it up and pay the estates their half of the profits. The heirs would have a say in how the character is handled.

Scenario three: The estates gain complete rights to part of the IP

Result: Several possibilities here. WB could come to an agreement with the estates to continue using their part of the IP for a huge chunk of change. I don’t see this as likely. More likely is that WB phases out the parts of the IP they don’t own and published an altered form of the character. We may be seeing shades of that now with the DC relaunch. This could also lead the heirs to shop around for a new home for their version of Superman which would be a watered down version of the one we all know and love.

Scenario four: The estates gain complete control of the IP

Result: Well it is possible that WB could come to an agreement to keep using Superman. However with how contentious this suit has been I could easily see the heirs shopping the character around, or even setting up their own publishing house. This would mean the end of Superman as the icon of the DC universe.

It seems crazy to consider a lot of these, but keep this in mind. The courts are not concerned with the artistic integrity of the character. All they care about is the legality of ownership, which means these scenarios or others I have thought of or bothered with could come to pass.

DC Comics Relaunch Part 3

So far we have looked at how book sales and legal issues could be playing a part in the DC Comics’ relaunch. Now let’s look at another factor.

Intellectual Property.

In 2009 DC Comics’ parent company Warner Bros announced a corporate reorganization. They formed DC Entertainment Inc. The purpose was to have a division that had oversight on all the DC comic brand properties throughout the company.  The idea was to allow for better integration of the DC properties through the rest or WB’s divisions and promote them as media franchises.  Warner executive Diane Nelson was made President of DC Entertainment and DC Comics was moved under it as a subsidiary. In 2010 Geoff Johns, one of DC Comics’ top writers was made Chief Creative Officer of DC Entertainment, which basically meant it is his job to oversee the use of DC characters in other media to maintain their integrity.

On paper this looks great, DC now had a cohesive vision for its characters in other media and the authority to back it up. But all was not well

First you have Smallville, the teen angst version of Superman’s origins, that since 2001 had been steamrolling its way through DC continuity.

On the other end of the quality spectrum in 2005 and 2008 you have Christopher Nolan’s brilliant Batman movies. Wonderful films, but the realism that he injects, while making great cinema, do not lend themselves to integration into a greater superhero universe.

Add to that the pressure being put on by Marvel Studios. Marvel Studios is in the midst of a frankly  brilliant plan. They are creating a shared universe for their characters, giving the build up to the Avengers movie the feel of an all-star cast epic, but with actors they themselves have built up. So far all DC movies have been in their own little continuities.

Oh and their one entry into the Blockbuster sweepstakes this summer, Green Lantern, is met with a lukewarm greeting, While Thor is a smash and Captain America looks to be the movie to beat this season.

So DC Entertainment, despite having some of the most recognized intellectual properties in the world, can’t seem to get them out there in a big way. They need to get people talking about them again.

So how about resetting the universe they come from in the first place.

Not only can you generate press about the reboot, but you can use it to mold the stories into ones that will translate better into other media.

To back this theory up I look to one of the 52 titles launching in September, Resurrection Man. This is a character practically begging to be adapted into another media. Mitch Shelly is a man who wakes up one day in a shallow grave and suffering from partial amnesia. He comes to find that he has superpowers. His main power is resurrection, when he dies he quickly comes back to life, and as a bonus he has a random super power to boot. He is hunted by a shadowy organization that wants to study him. And the best part, he doesn’t wear spandex. His costume is jeans, t-shirt, a duster, and a wide brimmed hat. Seriously, cast Josh Holloway and you have a hit right there.

(To be fair I have always liked this character and plan to pick up the title myself, but I still stand by what I said.)

Next post I wrap up my thoughts on the relaunch and then we can move on to other subjects.