I agree, but I think part of the problem is with the genre. It's in the very nature of superheroes (at least as presented in the DC and Marvel universes)to act outside the law and in morally dubious ways. Breaking and entering, extreme violence, violations of privacy - that is what costumed vigilantes do, and they often don't do it wit the consent of their people. And Superman does it almost as much as Clark does in Smallville. And they tend not to present alternatives (with the exception of things like the Authority or Cable in Marvel). Batman, Oracle (cyber crimes), J'onn (disguising himself as government official to spy on the President), Wonder Woman (murder) - they're all criminals (or unlawful combatants, or whatever).
Superheroes are awesome, but they're neither very effective nor are they morally sound. If you suspend your disbelief to superheroes, you have to suspend part of your morals, too, I think, and that's the problem: in order for the superheroes to still seem like heroes, the villains need to be flat and menacing, natural forces rather than people. Lex so far fails to be that.
(And if I got my way, he'd continue to be that. Aside from his smartness, Lex's effectiveness against Superman lies in the fact that Superman can't fight him physically and can't prove any of his crimes. As long as Lex doesn't pick up a raygun and put on a powersuit, moral ambiguity is important for him.)
I'm almost glad now that SV introduced Ollie in this role instead of Bruce (Green Arrow is originally a Batman substitute, and I'm sure that`s how SV intended to use him), because Green Arrow *is* one of the most reckless and extremist heroes of the DC verse. SV!Ollie apparently isn't a big lefty, but aside from the lack of a political aspect, his methods are something I could see comics!Ollie using, whereas Bruce is more rigid in his morals and probably would go one-on-one with Lex rather than blowing up stuff. And I don't think we're supposed to see Ollie as the kind of infallible ideal Superman is meant to be (See "Rage" or "Reunion", as well as "Sneeze".) He's an anti-hero in my book, and probably he knows that.
My main problem with Clark at the moment is his complete lack of proactiveness. People will always die while Superman eats a sandwich, but excessive moping in barns or obsessing about Lana is less excusable. And why doesn't *he* look for Level 33.1? Why doesn't he *ever* try to gain more information? Clark must be the least curious being in the world - and that just doesn't work for someone who's going to be a reporter (although I've long resigned myself to the fact that Clark is only ever going to be a reporter because of peer pressure. Everyone he knows is either a superhero, a villain or a reporter.) It's like he relies on his gut feeling to tell him everything he needs to know about the world. He's not a Kansas farmer, no matter how much he wants to be!
Wow... I didn't know I had that urge to rant. Sorry!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
winterfish
no subject
Date: 2007-05-07 10:23 am (UTC)Superheroes are awesome, but they're neither very effective nor are they morally sound. If you suspend your disbelief to superheroes, you have to suspend part of your morals, too, I think, and that's the problem: in order for the superheroes to still seem like heroes, the villains need to be flat and menacing, natural forces rather than people. Lex so far fails to be that.
(And if I got my way, he'd continue to be that. Aside from his smartness, Lex's effectiveness against Superman lies in the fact that Superman can't fight him physically and can't prove any of his crimes. As long as Lex doesn't pick up a raygun and put on a powersuit, moral ambiguity is important for him.)
I'm almost glad now that SV introduced Ollie in this role instead of Bruce (Green Arrow is originally a Batman substitute, and I'm sure that`s how SV intended to use him), because Green Arrow *is* one of the most reckless and extremist heroes of the DC verse. SV!Ollie apparently isn't a big lefty, but aside from the lack of a political aspect, his methods are something I could see comics!Ollie using, whereas Bruce is more rigid in his morals and probably would go one-on-one with Lex rather than blowing up stuff. And I don't think we're supposed to see Ollie as the kind of infallible ideal Superman is meant to be (See "Rage" or "Reunion", as well as "Sneeze".) He's an anti-hero in my book, and probably he knows that.
My main problem with Clark at the moment is his complete lack of proactiveness. People will always die while Superman eats a sandwich, but excessive moping in barns or obsessing about Lana is less excusable. And why doesn't *he* look for Level 33.1? Why doesn't he *ever* try to gain more information? Clark must be the least curious being in the world - and that just doesn't work for someone who's going to be a reporter (although I've long resigned myself to the fact that Clark is only ever going to be a reporter because of peer pressure. Everyone he knows is either a superhero, a villain or a reporter.) It's like he relies on his gut feeling to tell him everything he needs to know about the world. He's not a Kansas farmer, no matter how much he wants to be!
Wow... I didn't know I had that urge to rant. Sorry!