Super Hereos in Culture: Why We Need Superman

As most everyone knows, the new Iron Man film has been released. And it seems to be doing well from the reviews I've read and those people who have made mention of it. Honestly, I'm not surprised. I have seen the film, and I must say that the first thing that captured my attention was the Stark corporate logo. Many years ago, I worked for Lockheed Martin (once simply known as Lockheed), and their logo was pretty much one-half of the Stark logo (visit the www.lockheedmartin.com site to compare). That has nothing to do with this post, unless we can make something of it. I bring this up because of a real world connection between Stark Enterprises and defense contractors. Someone is being mirrored.

Regardless of that sidebar, what has captured my fancy for the past few years - maybe nearly a decade - is the resurgence of super hero films. They've certainly appeared on television, but it seems they've done far better at the box office and perhaps DVDs. Why I'm interested is because I wonder about the attraction. Something attracts people to super hero films. I could say nostalgia from comic book days is the cause, but many of the audience members know little of the comic books or even the history of some characters (such as the X-Men or Iron Man). Perhaps there is something appealing in these films, or in their formula, that keeps people returning to the theater - and keeps the studios trying their best to make a pleasing version of The Hulk (why hasn't this one worked yet?).

There are many commonalities in super hero films, but perhaps the most striking one is that super heroes usually work outside the "system" or the law. Quite often, they are mistaken for villains before recognized as heroes (this means they act like villains in some fashion). Or at least F22 fighter pilots attempt to shoot them down believing their are threats before being told otherwise.

It would seem this quality places such films in opposition of what holds society together, making the films a touch rebellious in nature. In fact, sometimes these films must go beyond all institutional means available to society. When the police and military fail, when politics crumble, something must be done: super villains need super heroes to defeat them. Is it an overstatement to say that buried in this concept is a fear or feeling of inadequacy in government (on any level) to protect? Mind you, the return of this genre has spanned at least two presidencies, so I don't think it is purely political.

Other elements of super heroes and their tales are the aspects of being outsiders. They always stand out from the crowd, whether it be Clark Kent with his clever glasses disguise, or Superman with his bright outfit (did anyone notice in the last Superman film, he said that he defended "Truth, justice..." - what happened to the "American way" part of that line - seems like politics did jump in there). Yet, while these grand figures are usually outcasts, lonely, prowling on the edge of society, brooding and misunderstood, they are the only ones who can save the day. They seem to be counter-culture. Most importantly, when they do, the audience cheers. Is this a symptom of everyone wanting to be a super hero, or everyone wanting a super hero - or just a hero?

From outside the entertainment business there is often a confusion about cause and effect. That is to say, it is argued that people watch super hero films because film companies make them. In most business models, manufacturers produce what the market wants. I would think that if people did not attend such films, the number produced would decrease or vanish. This means that argument is inverted: film companies are making films the public wants to see. The question it begs is why does the public want to see them?