It’s been a long time since the DC Extended Universe — home to some of the most famous superheroes like Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman — has gotten any attention, either positive or negative. But that all changed when it was announced that the DCU was being rebooted this summer. The reboot is facing an uphill battle against fans of the old DCU, cautious executives all too familiar with losing money on superhero movies, and the general “superhero fatigue” many fans have developed.
To say the least, James Gunn’s Superman has a lot riding on it.
Despite its basic title and straightforward goal (to draw in enough fans to build an entire franchise) the movie itself is anything but simple. With a wide cast of characters, multiple conflicts and villains, and the introduction of a whole host of moral questions, the movie seems all over the place. Yet in many ways, it avoids the lack of focus that many similar films carry when they try to juggle so many characters and questions in between an overload of action scenes.
How did the writers pull this off?
That’s exactly what we’re exploring today. Along the way, we’ll see exactly what it takes to make an action adventure story — no matter how busy or chaotic the conflict is — that carries a purposeful cohesion.
Superman
Aside from some quick text explaining the background of the film, the audience is dropped right into the chaos of a world caught up in the conflict between Superman and the greedy billionaire Lex Luthor. Superman has lost a fight for the very first time, and somehow that isn’t even his biggest problem. He’s also facing scrutiny on all sides because of his physical involvement in a geopolitical conflict between two foreign countries. Although his actions saved lives, they also offended one of America’s valued allies and threw governments across the world into addressing the issue of super-powered individuals on the world stage. Even Superman’s girlfriend, Lois Lane, challenges his choices. Meanwhile, Lex capitalizes on the situation, seeing it as an opportunity to wreck Superman’s reputation and put him at odds with the general public.
At the same time, a group of super-powered individuals are forming a league of superheroes, hoping more organization will deter future controversy. While Superman resists joining them, the controversy around his actions only increases as more about his history as an alien is uncovered, eventually leading Superman to turn himself in, face justice, and clear his name once and for all.
But behind the scenes, Lex cut a deal with government officials so that now he’s the one holding Superman. Lois quickly realizes something is wrong and decides to investigate. The absence of Superman on the world stage has given some world leaders newfound confidence, and now the war Superman sought to prevent is brewing on the horizon once more. Meanwhile, Lex is free to impose his own will on others while cutting more deals with corrupt government officials.
All of this comes to a head in the multi-layered climax, in which every character, protagonist, and government plays a role. And yet despite the multitude of villains, wide cast of characters, and complicated moral questions involved, the movie manages to achieve a cohesion many simpler films miss.
Why It Worked
Having too many villains and conflicts seems to be a chronic problem with action movies. Since each installment in a franchise like this one is expected to have higher stakes, more complications, and a deeper meaning than the one before, many writers have fallen into the trap of assuming that a slew of villains will help solve these problems, giving their characters a multitude of conflicts to deal with. The “bloating” that results has killed more than a few superhero franchises.
The Amazing Spider-Man series is just one of these. With multiple villains, conflicts on several fronts, and in general too many problems to handle in one movie, a story with a decent premise and significant heart ended a whole series after only two installments. At this point, writers are well acquainted with the complaints that audiences have against bloated movies, and most try to stick to just one main conflict or villain, meanwhile raising the stakes and conflict through other means.
Superman, on the other hand, manages to address almost every possible conflict you can tackle in one movie: from the impact of social media on public figures to the role of superheroes in the geopolitical sphere. Although Lex was the central villain, he also has a team of allies around him, each of which Superman must face off against. And that’s not counting the multiple government figures that play a less-than-moral role in the political conflicts within the movie.
But somehow each of these conflicts avoided the problem of bloating, instead managing to enhance the story as a whole. And that’s all because they addressed one, singular question: Who is Superman?
This question is so vast that it took more than four villains, a whole slew of side characters, and half a dozen different conflicts to handle in full. We got to see Superman wrestle with the question of how his “super” persona and his secret identity as the average reporter Clark Kent interact when Lois challenged him on his actions. Should he try to keep his two identities as separate as possible, where Superman’s choices don’t affect Clark’s life, and vice versa? Or should his two identities exist in harmony, while still being separate and unique?
The accusations of Superman being an alien ultimately sent to crush humanity forced him to wrestle with his identity as a different race. Should he decide to lean into his different-ness and rely on who he is as a Kryptonian, or instead capitalize on his identity raised with and around humans, initially believing he was exactly the same as them?
The conflicts overseas caused him to question his role on the global stage. Where is the line between simply saving lives and becoming a powerful political figure, and should he even care if he crosses it?
These are just a few of the conflicts that took place in the movie, and I could go on, but I think you get the idea. Each of these questions targeted the main theme of the movie from a different angle: Who is Superman in his personal life? Who is Superman in regards to his humanity? And finally, who is Superman on the global stage? Because each of these ideas were tied together by the central theme, their respective conflicts, characters, and villains were also unified. This unified purpose gave them an element of cohesion that the movie wouldn’t have otherwise. It was because of this that the writers were able to avoid bloating their story and ultimately craft a movie that both addressed multiple high-stakes conflicts and managed to have a unifying purpose in each one of them.
Writing a book with multiple villains, conflicts, and moral questions can be tricky, but it’s far from impossible. With the right tools and a clear understanding of the purpose of each of these elements, they can enhance your story, becoming indispensable supports to the work as a whole.
Let us know:
Does your current WIP involve multiple villains and conflicts?What other stories have you seen handle them well?
Hi! My name is Mara, and I’m a Christian artist, violinist, and blogger. I remember the day that I decided that I would learn something new about what makes a good story from every book I picked up — whether it was good, bad, or a mixture of both. I use this blog as a way of sharing some of the tips and tricks I’ve learned, and highlight which books, cartoons, and movies have taught me the most about writing an awesome story.