The AntiHero

The other day I was reading an article about an upcoming movie, a remake of a classic monster movie. The monster was considered by the director to be an 'antihero," I thought that was an odd choice, but for the director the monster represented Mother Nature and the consequences of the way humans have damaged Earth. The monster was an antihero because it's actions while destructive and atrocious bring a sort of balance to the Earth. Still for me that idea was a stretch...

I grew up enjoying the X-Men comics and seeing one of the great comic book story-lines come to the silver screen has recently got me thinking about antiheroes and why they are so popular. Magneto, The Wolverine, DCI John Luther, Raymond "Red" Reddington, Malcolm Reynolds, all three of the current incarnations of Sherlock Holmes. All of these characters are antiheroes, and rightly so, none of them have the qualities that you would associate with a classic hero. Interestingly each of them rather have major character flaws that both endear us to them and quite honestly can repel us.

Magneto, Wolverine, and Reynolds all have been or continue to reside in the grey area of doing good when it suits them or having good come about as an unexpected side effect of some action they have taken, on the other hand Luther and the "Sherlocks" exhibit nearly psychopathic behavior that brings down those on the wrong side of them or the law, whichever is convenient. In either case, the good that comes as a result of the bad in them outweighs the bad that they cannot or will not distance themselves from.

"Red" Reddington is one of the most recent additions to the list of antihero, in his case Red falls into the "grey area" antihero, his actions, giving the FBI information leading to the arrests of the worst criminals they don't know about, at first seems to be for the greater good. We slowly begin to see that his motivation appears to be first, to protect himself and second to protect FBI agent Elizabeth Keen. The connection between Keen and Red has not been made clear however that connection is what makes Red an antihero! Whether he likes it or not, and whether Keen likes it or not, Red has done good, he has protected Keen, and so far as we can tell he has never lied to her. What makes Red an antihero is the fact that he is a bad guy that you can't help but love. He has his moments, all I have to say is Swan Lake...

But knowing all these characters are antiheroes still begs the question, "Why?" Why are we drawn to each of these characters? In my own experience I think each of us has an antihero, someone that despite their imperfections, their flaws, sometimes even harsh attitudes has done something heroic for us. In the face of the bad that is a part of them, the good they have done has outweighed that.

For a long time I have known that my dad is my antihero. There was no question that he did good in spite of the bad that was a part of him. He knew he had his demons and he worked hard to fight them off. He knew that he needed to put on a good face to help bring us up, he did that for years, and then after years he couldn't keep up the hero act. He went off and indulged in the drugs and alcohol that threatened to overwhelm him. Then because someone told him he couldn't do it, he kicked the drugs and the alcohol and even the cigarettes.

I sometimes think he knew he was my hero, I know that he knew he was my hero. But kicking the crack and booze and smokes wasn't why, it was because he made the decision to try even when the odds were against him... He knew that it wasn't going to be easy, but the fact that he thought someone said it was impossible for him made it worth trying to do. That was part of what made him my hero in the first place. His grandmother told him his black friends had to come in the house through the side door, rather than the front door, my dad's response, "They are my friends and they will come in whatever door I damn well choose!" There was never a word about it spoken again. My dad taught me to believe that I was no more or less than any other person, and because I could see he lived his life that way it made an impression on me.

I knew the scar on his face came from an Afro-pick that was jabbed into his face while on a bus after hearing about the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. His best friend at the time Bodey Tilley, (the same one that Grandma got upset about coming through the front door), pushed him out of the window of a moving bus so my dad's attackers couldn't finish the job. Bodey knew what kind of man my dad was, and Bodey stuck his neck out to save him. Those two incidents in my dad's life cemented the kind of man he would always strive to be. And those incidents have been for me the touchstone by which I have measured my life. Would I be able to stand up for people around me? Would I be able to take the punishment handed out by the ignorant and the foolish? Would I be undeterred by the fact that I was told it was impossible?

Sometimes it takes time to realize that those are questions that you ask yourself. Sometimes it takes time to consider that who you are is shaped not just by the good that people do but also the bad, and that to embrace that good you have to forgive the bad. Doing that we don't just remember our heroes or antiheroes, we celebrate them, every time we protect someone, every time we take one on the chin, every time we look in the mirror and see them looking back at us.

Unlike the monster remake antihero I talked about earlier, my antiheroes have a purpose, my biggest antihero had a purpose, he protected me from the worst that was in others and he sheltered me from the worst that was in him.

What Makes a Hero a Hero?

Before I start this is not a movie review or a set of reviews, this is about perception.

What is your perception of a hero? What makes someone a hero? How and why can there be a fine line between hero and villain?

Last year there were a crop of what I'll call "Hero Movies", ranging from soldiers fighting international terrorists to pilots in machines fighting monsters to superheroes and anti-heroes. Not too long ago I saw Man of Steel, now that the DVD is available I don't feel bad about spoilers. And while I know that this has been written about so much already, this is my view of the subject. Man of Steel made me think, "Are you still a hero if you cross the line between good and bad? And where is that line?"

In the climactic fight between Superman and General Zod, Superman is "forced" to kill the General by snapping his neck...

To put it simply Superman became a killer! I understand that to make movies nowadays you need to be "edgy" but in my mind and heart that wasn't edgy, that was crossing a line you can never go back on. Michael Shannon in the role of General Zod was fantastic, his over the top, at times, portrayal of the villain brought an inspiring edge to Zod, his one line I will remember sums up that inspiration, "I was bred to be a warrior, Kal. Trained my entire life to master my senses. Where did you train? ON A FARM?" That line sent a chill up my spine and cemented Michael Shannon as a great villain in my eyes!
On the other side already great actors brought an edge to this film I really enjoyed, Kevin Costner's selfless farewell as Superman's adoptive father Jonathan Kent was edgy stuff. Russell Crowe as Jor-Ell did an awesome job as Superman's estranged father (so much better than Marlon Brando and his ambivalent portrayal) . Even Laurence Fishburne and his single-minded efforts to save Jenny the secretary engendered a desperation that was clearly different than anything in a Richard Donner or Christopher Reeve Superman movie.

While Zack Snyder is touted as one of "The 50 Smartest People in Hollywood" smart isn't as good as heart. In my heart and many others Superman is the hero that despite his strengths doesn't unleash them to the full on his enemies. That was what made him "Super" he knew that strength wasn't everything, and that using that strength wasn't always the only way to win. Superman has always been that hero that finds the human way out of a situation. Unfortunately in killing his nemesis it seems that he became a bit too human.

On the other hand The Wolverine despite his bestial nature showed a despair and regret that belied his "nature " while critics panned the slow pace of the movie it was calculated and precise in showing that side of Logan. While Logan struggled with what seemed to be his humanity slipping away he was reminded that it was an inherent part of his nature. The desire to do the right thing despite the personal cost is what separated the "animal" Logan from Superman.

Case in point, how many people died in the chaos stemming from the use of the world engine in Man Of Steel, or how many were killed as Zod and Superman raged accross the city in the battle that culminated in the killing of General Zod. Was it the personal cost of seeing those people dying in front of his eyes that made Kal decide in that moment to kill Zod? Was it the "humane"thing to do? Or was it the "human" thing to do?

On the other hand even as yakuza were trying to kill him, Logan struggled with the ease of dispatching his opponents by simply killing them, more than once he gave his clearly overmatched opponents a way out, sometimes only for them to try and take advantage of his mercy. Logan's fights during the film showed not a weakness but rather strength of his character, despite the fierceness of his rage, it seemed to be tempered by his desire, his long desire for inner peace. As Logan fought his way throughout the film he did his best to preserve life. 

I supposed I am jaded by the fact that in the Superman movies of my youth, Superman did his best to personify the best of us, and Logan as The Wolverine in the comics was practical, brutal, unforgiving, the epitome of human! Now it seems those lines are forever blurred. The original "anti-hero" has been softened, while the Man of Steel has found a hardness that I still cannot reconcile in my heart!