I honestly liked the movie the idea of innocence being misguided to repeat evil always stuck to me because it shows that as powerful as superman is, he isnt perfect
I like this movie because you can clearly see that he's superman, he holds the same values but with a slight tweek, it demonstrates how his upbringing didn't necessarily define his beliefs but it did define his morals. Honestly this version feels like injustice superman but better, because he doesn't step on the gas and go full evil right away or even that quickly really.
@@Nyghtking I prefer comic book walking the grey line Superman because he is misguided but by his own perspective on how to make humans less of a harm to each other which is what makes a lot of the interactions he has more impactful because it's not as easy to take sides with any faction.
@@wokenwillis2826 Indeed, thinking about what this version of superman did made me think of an alternative version of Injustice where when superman snaps instead of killing the joker he does something arguably worse, he kidnaps him to his fortress, lobotomizes him so he can't think for himself or feel, and installs a computer into whats left of his brain, leaving him as little more then an automaton, maybe throw a little bit of magic in there since superman would know of magic, making it impossible to restore Joker to even being a basic human anymore. So he starts doing that instead, he still doesn't want to cross the line into killing people, but this isn't killing them now is it?
I love how in any elseworlds Superman story (where he's actually a good human being) he's still good to the core no matter what country he lands on, the problem starts with who is the one raising him though...even then, he still has his own ideals his parents teached him on krypton (since the escape pod reminds and teaches Superman everything he needs to know in his life).
Even tho I prefer the comic, the movie was not as bad as I thought, I even liked it ! (primarly because of the more human treatment of Superman and Lex)
The big problem with that moovie is the realisator never oppened Marx nor searched what communist ideology was even once lmao Typical american propaganda and missingormation on what communism, socialism and stalinism is. Superman here isnt doing communism, he is doing fcking stalinism which is a extremly faschist system. At 0 fcking point we see actual worker syndicate trying to run the country, and argue in parlementary what would be good to the country with massive vote and political discussion from the citizen. You see, communism is technically a direct democratic system which doesnt reconize private property. Instead its the role of the State to give you housing, car, food, education ect ect, and you as citizen you join your worker syndicate. Staline hijacked that system with rigged election, total control over syndicate and secret police force to kill political dissident. Which is EXACTLY WHAT SUPERMAN IS DOING IN THIS MOOVIE, and extremly far away from what Marx and Engeld theorized. It would have been extremly more interesting to show the real problem of those regime : people corrupting it from within and abusing the system, and direct democraty falling because people are moronic. One prime exemple is Sweden. Sweden is a real socialist-democratist country. (Socialism is still about having syndicate made for worker that control the country, but contrary to communism you still have private property) Sweden is always near top 1/2 in every human law and treatment mesurment. Its nearly like the paradise : you have insane education, healthcare, the best prison, low criminality....... But nearly everyone became rascist against foreigner so they all COLLECTIVELY and DEMOCRATIVELY voted to became faschist/nazi LMAO It would have been an insane exemple to see a Superman, which individuality is a symbol, forced to become humanity worst horror because of humanity flaws and communist system that doesnt value talented individual Let people become anti vaxx and kill thousands of people, destroying the communist state with perdonnal greed, voting extremly homophobic law (cause its russia) and force to genocide gay people.... You have tons of way to show that even with the best, irreprochable communist mindset communist Superman will fail Instead we got Stalinist superman
One of the issue is pyotr he was a cunt but still an individual and the closest thing to a friend superman had asside from wonderwoman and him being lobotomized was creep because dear lord that's the closes man to him we know. And the letter f Bruce Tim for removing the letter and having brainiac dumb it down. He lost his touch since he made his ship with Barbara
This story really demonstrates Nature vs Nuture. Clark Kent is Superman because of his upbringing and the values his adopted parents instilled in him. His Kryptonian heritage only provided Clark his abilities, but the Kents made him a hero. While Jor-El and Lara were the best of Krypton, they didn’t have the chance to raise their son. All they could hope for was some other good people could give Kal a good life
@karaqakkzlnope. It’s nature of the person themselves. Are they a good person or bad person? Nurture is how those people are raised. Like, if Superman is raised by bad parents so should he be a bad person?
When you're not from the U.S., but you've grown idolizing superheroes, then you see how everyone accuse them, and specially Superman, of being "imperialist propaganda". And you have to tell them "this isn't written to brainwash kids in Latin America, it's written to express the ideals U.S. people have, it's the vision they have of who they want to be." This movie shows, better than the comic, how a "perfect man" wouldn't see the sins of his country. I suppose many watchers from the U.S. would see it and ask "how Superman couldn't realize what Stalin was doing" but had never before questioned what position would the classic Superman would have taken during the cold war. Would he had supported the Vietnam war? The Coup in Chile?
yeah I get the point you're trying to make, but that's like asking "how can people think climbing mount everest is impressive yet they don't find it impressive when they walk up a small hill? They're both just climbing terrain!". What's especially odd is that a lot of the thnigs you mentioned aren't even remotely as black and white as, y'know, bloody gulags being common government infrastructure. I mean christ the Cold War was literally 1:1 Capitalist and Communist driven, technically not even the former since most of the Cold War was being done by the government and not private enterprise, buuut this is mostly a discussion of culture not implementation so that's arguably a different topic. But, ignoring that, the Cold War wasn't an attrocity, it was a conflict (one that, famously, involved very few actual attrocities) and a conflict that was being 50% driven by Communism. And that 50% isn't necessarily blame either, someone who punches someone in the face to defend themselves after they were already attacked was 50% driving the fight, but not responsible for it, meaning you can't even necessarily assign blame eitherway. Not only that, but it could be strongly argued that as a conflict it was actually a boon for society, I mean it's not exactly a secret that the Cold War massively leapfrogged technological progress. Again, I get the premise that people are blind to the issues in their backyard but love to whine about their neighbors eye-sore of a fence, but the comparisons made definitely seem rather motivated in their reasoning. Hell, let's compare complete apples to apples, the Snowden Leaks vs China's Surveilance... yeah it's really not comparable. For as atrocious as the surveilance was (and, let's face it, still almost certainly is) in America, China is just a whole other beast entirely. Like it's really impossible to compare just how obscenely far the surveilance and digital interference goes.
Superman would have to be pretty evil to support the coup in Chile considering how horrible of a person Augusto Pinochet was. I mean we, our government and our intelligence agencies, funded a dictatorship that destroyed a democratic government because the people voted in a socialist. We did that a lot in Central and South America.
This is literally my favorite Superman movie, it's what got me interested in Superman as a character, being so pure and so good natured, that even at his worst he is still acting for what he believes to be the greater good. He just wants to help.
I think that people often forget/don't know that Superman was written by two jewish men who fled to America. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster created Superman to show was the true "American Dream" was; the ideal American way. His character wasn’t some malicious capitalist or government propaganda, he was created by love and hope. I think that's why I like Superman so much, his character and creation is so beautiful and sweet.
To add onto that- the prototype of Superman was kind of a Luther origin (a knock against the "ubermench" idea). It was shot down because Americans (influenced by Christianity) operated under the assumption that anyone with God-like powers would use those powers to help people.
@@Matt-dp7ze He could’ve justified it, just as he has other things for many years, and either kept him in line for a while longer. Even if he’d have taken Stalin out of power, it wouldn’t have been melting his head off, if Lana hadn’t died in his arms. Why else have Lana happen to be in the first gulag he finds? It’s written to be a trigger that opens his eyes, which allows him to finally see that Stalin’s society is a lie; as well as being personal, on multiple levels.
as someone who ONLY has (obsesive) culture osmosous of superman, something's that's intresting to me is that Kal-El (SEEMS) 100% nurture over nature. Again the only direct Superman material i've sought after is Smallville(i havent even browsed his tv tropes page (but i have for Ma & Pa Kent if that's any consederstion)).
This is a fair assessment. Usually, it's associated with his creation as the work of two immigrants. I'm only aware of a few instances where anyone's taken the concept and flipped it to nature over nurture; the result is generally an evil superman. Brightburn is one example, Hyperion from Squadron Supreme is the other that comes to mind.
@@Glowinghole An actual example of Clark going Nature over Nurture would be in some versions of Earth-10 Superman where he's raised by the Nazis, but betrays them in the end - even then, that's the exception, since in most earth-10 stories, Nazi Superman is just evil from start to end.
This is how you write an authoritarian Superman. The entire "What if Superman....but EVIL!!??" to me is not only overplayed and boring....but just so uninspired. Evil Superman looks at the character at such a surface level that nothing about it has any real meaning. To me, versions of Superman from Red Son and Monsters & Madness show how Superman's morality is affected by his upbringing and surroundings, and how those deeply affect one's perception of right and wrong.
THANK YOU. Yes I love your explanation of that, my thoughts exactly. It’s similarly why I hate pretty much ANY kind of “what if this character BUT EVIL” because it’s always so shallow and never actually says anything. It’s why I find Omni-Man so much more interesting than Homelander. Heck I even got into an argument with a friend about “go go loser ranger” because he kept saying that it was gonna be some mind bending masterpiece of nuance. But all I saw in the trailer was “power rangers but evil and get off on extreme violence”
I swear I remember a picture of a green-suited, Middle-Eastern Superman being proclaimed as the Mahdi, and I just thought: "Understandable, awesome, but likely terrifying depending on who he meets"
@@symbionte7987 I feel like Homelander is more complex than people give him credit for, at least in the show. Other than the powers and the other surface level comparisons, Homelander pretty much has nothing in common with Superman as a character, and once you realize that, it's a lot easier to appreciate him as a villain in his own right instead of a superman knockoff. He's the human embodiment of the worst aspects of American conservatism, celebrity worship, and corporations all rolled up into one terrifying and narcissistic test tube baby. Granted, a big reason why lots of people like Homelander is Anthony Starr's acting so maybe it's not as interesting as I think on a pure plot level.
Interesting this storyline was the reason Henry Cavil wanted to play Superman. He was a great pick but given crap material. This was a interesting story and i enjoyed it until that ending. Why that ending?
Honestly, I like the ending. Supes spent his whole life thinking he was anything but an everyman, but the ending shows that he actually *was* the ultimate everyman the Soviet state upheld as an ideal- you just couldn't get there through communism.
The movie maybe condensed but it superior in the personal touch that will be more relatable to ordinary people. The comic is showing us the usual harsh realities of those who are in the positions of power. The tendency for them to be narcissists and sociopathic and even if they are not on the extreme of such traits, the temptations that power weilds on even if you make the idealization of the comic characters, will still be susceptible victims to the "poisons" power can bring. As for politics, I know my bias, but at least both sides allow people to see some of the aspects both ideologies bring in a surface level.
NGL, I really liked the idea of soviet Superman and what that would mean for global geopolitics. But to me, what Soviet Superman lacked as a human connection, if he had remained under his parents care like normal Superman, if he had remained close with Svetlana, maybe even marrying her like he would Lois in the main timeline, then he would have remained that same boy, and never fallen to the same flaws as Stalin, he would have embodied the Soviet ideal and done all he could to achieve it through inspiring people, being fair and just, and just...being Superman. It would be interesting, at least to me, if there was another comic that explored this, and how he reformed the USSR, while Lux keeps the US in the race, even if he's still an egoistical asshole who can't stand Superman's existence and pushes those away from him, losing his connections to others and his humanity in his pursuit of finally besting Superman.
lol he didn't kill his son, he refused to change high nazi officer to his son who was in captivity and was just a usual soilder. I don't like Stalin and his the cult of personality and authorian policy but it's funny when murricans try to make him into maneater forgetting their own leaders who were on the same terms of cruelty as Stalin@@jackripley3906
Back in 1995 John Varley published a story called, “Truth, Justice, and the Politically Correct Socialist Path.” This was all about baby superman landing in the Ukraine instead of Kansas, and growing up as a tool of the Soviets. The similarities are pretty obvious. To the best of my knowledge, Varley never sued DC or anybody about it, but the question of whether or not, he got ripped off, remains an open one. To put another way: he wrote a story, and then nine years later, someone else wrote a story with an almost identical premise. This may have been a direct rip off, or it may have simply been two people independently coming up with the same silly idea. I don’t know, and I’m not going to hazard a guess. Verily, has not read comic books since he was a child, and was apparently unaware when the red sun story came out. In fact, I don’t think he knew about it until this movie came out, fine, as I said, I don’t believe you ever actually sued anybody about it. I’m not sure if he could, since superman is not his intellectual property to begin with, and he wrote it as a parity, which is protected free-speech. Just the same, interesting, right? Varley’s story ia a comedy about how superman’s fortunes change with each new Soviet regime. First, he is a hero, then he’s sent to a Gulag, then he’s a hero again, and he is forcibly married off to a woman chosen by the state, so as to improve the breed, it’s all back-and-forth. It’s pretty funny and worth a read if you can find it. It’s also rather uncharacteristic of his work, which tends to be deliberately transgressive. So, you know, be wary of that, if you decide to explore any more of his work.
I’m sure the idea of Superman being raised somewhere else has been thought of a lot. I know I have. I think most fans of his have at one point wondered what if he landed in a dictatorship.
@@NotALiberalSoSkipTheScript yeah that’s why I didn’t say it was a rip off. It could easily have been just a coincidence. The Ukraine part sounds as though it is way too coincidental to be a coincidence, but Ukraine, what is the breadbasket of the Soviet union much the same way that Kansas was the breadbasket of the United States, so really, logically, where else would you have him land? It’s got to be Ukraine. But it’s also possible that his idea was stolen. like I said, honestly don’t know which it is. I just thought it was worth noting.
@@mahatmarandy5977 You’re right. Sometimes it’s hard to tell between two people having similar ideas and one taking the others work. I know I hear comedians talk about people saying someone stole a joke of theirs and usually it’s parallel thinking or part of an older joke someone has added to or changed. I know I thought of a superhero that would take the characteristics or strengths of whatever animal it ate. Turn out it had been done!
Shit, I could never put my finger on what the differences of focus were for the two pieces of media. I just saw them as general changes, and failed to notice the major thematic differences.
I think it would be great to see another take on soviet superman where his Clark Kent identity is more prominent, working in sharing the sins of the soviet union to it's people and trying to make change within the system while still believing in communism. Kinda like a Sablin figure. While as superman he is seen with distrust by the politburo because he can't be controlled.
Ever since I found this guy's channel, I've been hooked ever since. I love his analysis the most. Another reason I love these videos, it's because they dabble into how psychology and philosophy are portrayed through different forms of media. Keep it up, mate!
It's interesting. Lex Luther's Philosophy was always "if it wasn't for you, I could've saved the world" and in the film I feel like that's truly the case. Without superman being brought in his pond lex really did become a hero for humanity, in his own twisted way. I think because he had something so alien to fight against, something to prove against. He's a force for good when he's truly challenging himself. Which is funny to say because that includes his main universe self when he teams up with the league
It's not the only time Luthor saves the world, but even when he does he gets to be very smug about it - because in doing so, he proves himself capable of doing something that Superman couldn't.
While I prefer good Superman over any evil version of Superman, I do think that red son Superman is an interesting take on Superman in general. This version of Superman is still a good person, but has a misguided ideology due to how he grew up in the soviet union.
The big problem with that moovie is the realisator never oppened Marx nor searched what communist ideology was even once lmao Typical american propaganda and missingormation on what communism, socialism and stalinism is. Superman here isnt doing communism, he is doing fcking stalinism which is a extremly faschist system. At 0 fcking point we see actual worker syndicate trying to run the country, and argue in parlementary what would be good to the country with massive vote and political discussion from the citizen. You see, communism is technically a direct democratic system which doesnt reconize private property. Instead its the role of the State to give you housing, car, food, education ect ect, and you as citizen you join your worker syndicate. Staline hijacked that system with rigged election, total control over syndicate and secret police force to kill political dissident. Which is EXACTLY WHAT SUPERMAN IS DOING IN THIS MOOVIE, and extremly far away from what Marx and Engeld theorized. It would have been extremly more interesting to show the real problem of those regime : people corrupting it from within and abusing the system, and direct democraty falling because people are moronic. One prime exemple is Sweden. Sweden is a real socialist-democratist country. (Socialism is still about having syndicate made for worker that control the country, but contrary to communism you still have private property) Sweden is always near top 1/2 in every human law and treatment mesurment. Its nearly like the paradise : you have insane education, healthcare, the best prison, low criminality....... But nearly everyone became rascist against foreigner so they all COLLECTIVELY and DEMOCRATIVELY voted to became faschist/nazi LMAO It would have been an insane exemple to see a Superman, which individuality is a symbol, forced to become humanity worst horror because of humanity flaws and communist system that doesnt value talented individual Let people become anti vaxx and kill thousands of people, destroying the communist state with perdonnal greed, voting extremly homophobic law (cause its russia) and force to genocide gay people.... You have tons of way to show that even with the best, irreprochable communist mindset communist Superman will fail Instead we got Stalinist superman
@@anonyme4881Here is the problem. All Communist systems will fall to Stalinist leaders because it fails to account for one true factor in its ideology. Man is born with greed and society isn't the primary cause of greed. From the time we are on the boob we are selfish. A necessary self-preservation. A communist system will always break down to these flaws because it's a contradictory set of ideals. Someone has to dole out the grain and this Someone will become the elite. Stalinism is the inevitable conclusion. Stalin wasn't a fascist, he was a pragmatic corrupt socialist gangster that did the dirty work the party didn't want to do.
@@jerm70 Superman has nothing to do with being like Staline. Greed and selfishness arent Superman trait at all. Superman as representation of ideals (american dream but here we are in soviet union so communism dream) should have been instead a VICTIM of mankind and communism inner flow. Btw you didnt do your search, as in Spain 1936 there also was a communism revolution that actually kinda worked, but Franco took arm and bested the communist that couldnt agree on how to wage war Communist regime will either fall because its impossible to all citizen to have a perfect consensus leading to administrative collapse, or because someone will become a Staline. Which isnt what we saw in this moovie at all. Btw the whole "someone has to dole the grain out" could be controled by....... a true democratie which limit the whole Stalinism part a LOT. Separation of power works wonder. Its just that URSS system was stupid to the get go and anti-democratic as a whole, which isnt a necessity in communism at all. (Take any middle east country its a full blown capitaliste dictate)
He was too close to the government. If superman was in the cia the same thing would happen, seeing what atrocities the ruling power justifies for their idea of peace and prosperity.
@@witchBoi_Connor Thats not what Superman is. Superman is the "basic idealistic" guy that want to do good If he was with the CIA he would quit as soon as possible. Exept quiting the gouvernement in communist regime is admiting communism sucks so Red Son would still loose the ideologic battle
The only thing I would've appreciated is if they worked with sovietologists to accurately represent the personal and political nuances of the USSR in a character like Superman. This could go for the majority of comics with a political or scientific message, but as somebody who (per my profile picture, lol) has done a few dives into the USSR and its history, it would have a beautiful number of moving parts and characters to parallel onto Superman. Stalin was known by his personal record to be a man who was both religiously dedicated to bolshevism snd always changing the standing ideological orthodoxy on a whim. He saw himself as a "force of history" more than anything else, with the warmth and care of his person being eroded and consumed by politics all over the course of his life. This could reflect or contrast with Superman, depending on the direction the writer theoretically would want to take. Instead of the "we need to kill some because its necessary" line coming from Stalin, it could've come from Beria (one of the big monsters of the regime) and had Superman bouncing off of different members of the internal circle BEFORE the death of Stalin and his own usurpation of the office. Alongside this, some scenes involving the malaised presidium bureaucracy and how Superman sees it would've been cool.
So, haven't seen the whole movie, but wouldn't pharma execs make the same statement? They could, for instance, bring the price of the epi pen back down to affordable, where it was before the patent was bought out, but they are more than willing to sacrifice the lives of others so they can maintain their money and power. Right?
If they weren't sufficiently ruthless, the board would replace them. The purpose of the company is to make money for their shareholders - any lives saved along the way are just a side effect.
Soviet Superman (movie version) and Superman Gods and Monsters, are my favorite evil Superman. For the simple fact that they still have something of the original Superman emotionally, with some changes in their stories they would be almost the same Superman and what I find curious from my point of view is the life of Clark Kent that they were missing.
Man I just love your videos. Just watched your Injustice Hal video, which was great and the into to this video with the music distorting when "Red Sons" showed up, you've got some killer editing skills. Keep up the good work!
I really want a Freedom Fighters / Earth X animated movie. Yeah I know the CW Ray / Freedom Fighters show exists but I want something closer to the comics.
I think the biggest limitation these kind of stories have is that superhero stories, by definition, inflate the individual power of citizens. So much of the capitalism vs communism ideological dilemma rests on individual responsibility versus collectivism, and giving one individual the powers of Superman fundamentally changes that discussion and tilts the scale massively in favour of the power of individual responsibility. Of course an individualistic view of the world could work if you have people who can literally shape the world because they have superpowers. Of course a collectivist view of the world would be inferior when collective action can't overpower the strongest superpowered individual. Of course the only way to make it work is by fundamentally misrepresenting the conflict to artificially make the scale even.
@@ETPlayground How are they different? They have a leader who can mind control people and a god like matter manipulator that could easily change the world better than any individual without superpowers. The comic trying to make a different point is nothing but plot convenience. And, like, I get it, it's fun and you get good stories out of it. Superman Red Son is an example of this too. But thinking the policies in a fundamentally different world would give you fundamentally different results. The death sentence, for example, makes sense for a lot of people because you can realistically lock down anyone and their impact is limited. Can't say the same for someone who can mind control you or has the potential to be more destructive than a nuclear bomb. And don't get me started on how terrible superpowered beings are as analogies for racism. The point of fighting racism in the real world is that races aren't different. Kinda hard to make the point that one race shouldn't be treated as a threat when they can produce what are, essentially, godlike beings.
I don't know about that. Surely one could write about a super-collective if they so wished? Advanced alien species, futuristic utopian societies, cults and leagues dedicated to certain causes all allow a writer to weigh a collective strength against the individual in a way that's reasonable. This doesn't even account for the fact that superheroes rarely battle nonpowered people- Superheroes battle other Superheroes. Any story about the power of individual responsibility vs collectivism could still be portrayed between superpowered individuals and superpowered collective groups in order to "weigh" the balance appropriately. Even in the case of Superman: Red Son, the story is about a person who is so smart it might as well be a superpower's struggle against somebody who is superpowered in all physical metrics. I don't think these stories particularly tilt the scale towards individualism, because even if you say that a superpower is stronger than a group of regular people, he is not stronger than a group of superpowered people. You can retain the fundamental nature of the dilemma within the overall context of a superhero story by focusing entirely on the superheroes and how they choose to organize and make use of their powers. There are many stories about Batman's disagreements with the Justice League, and it is usually one of disgruntled and individualistic heroes disagreeing with the collective agreement and action of a superheroing organization. In Red Son, is the story of Lex Luthor not a story of how the collective resources, attributes, and labor of Mankind were successfully coordinated in service of proving humanity superior to Superman? Was that not always his goal, and something he did not accomplish without great expense, time, and energy that belonged to others beside himself? He couldn't even put the letter into Superman's hands himself.
If the DC universe was a D&D game this is an example of Stalin’s player basically rolling a one on his intelligence test and diplomacy check in one go.
I have heard some people dog this movie, a lot of people on here are most likely younger than me, I just turned 44. I'm kind of a cold war baby tensions were still pretty strong even till the mid to late 80s. But this movies about it but also not about it, it was more about ideas, there was a analogy I was going to use but I've lost it at the moment, but it speaks to me on the level of Existentialism and I think anyone who has ever dreamed has thought of it or felt it. There was a wrighter that said something along the line that Man is a furious Angel with his wings nailed to the ground. Superman is still that furious Angel, he may just not be nailed to the ground. Also likes the fact Luthor was a Brilliant badass! He had the problem solved on one day with very little thought, I mean didn't get it all but he got done what needed to be.
Something-something soviet Superman is evil, I read in the comments. No he freaking isn't, that's the whole point. Yes the regime was flawed in the sense that it was a ploy by Brainiac to take over the world, but most people were actually happy in it in the end; it saved so many from hunger, strife, and so on. It could have been improved (like Lex did eventually), but it certainly was a better direction than what they had before.
Soviet Superman is more like an Honest Tankie than a Manipulative one, He Honestly believes that the Soviet idea of Communism can led to a better place, it just needs reform and Strong Leadership to achieve a Communist State, which ironically Parallells the Real Soviet Union's attempts at reform from Khruzchev's Destalinization to Gorbechov who attempts at Democratizing the USSR. (Hilariously the Movie having Superman Kill Stalin is ironically a more literal parallel to Stalin's Cult of Personality dying after his death.)
Side Note I find it funny that the Movie had Stalin be killed by Superman, the Idealised Image of the Soviet Ideology, because IRL after Stalin died Khruschev Denounced Stalin in his Secret Speech to the Communist Party and Began a Program of Destalinization, so its a literal Interpretation of the Soviet Ideology and State Killing Stalin and his Policies.
Your explanation of the difference between Lex and Superman in the comic vs the film weirdly reminds me of the difference between the Korean and Vietnam Wars, where the former was fought between two megalomaniacs and the latter between two sides that genuinely wanted the best for their people but had irreconcilable ideas of what the best would be.
That's a really weird and dumb way to characterize the Vietnam War. The US wasn't doing it for their people, they were doing it because of rabid anticommunism.
@@aLukepop they certainly weren't perfect but neither were the Viet Kong, and when compared to other anti communist countries in the region they were downright saintly.
This my favourite Superman book of all time. Goes to show that when you are that OP, it it did not take him that long to turn into low key Zod, with actual reason.
Mark Millar: “I’m figuring out the ending for my Superman book, but it needs a wrap up.” Grant Morrison: *Breaks the door down.* “I have just the thing.”
Both the movie and the comic are reflections of the time they were made in and how they view the same events. The original tries to view the endpoints of the two systems, albeit from a biased viewpoint with its end point being the dialectic idea of an idea and its opposite creating a better end point through their fusion. The movie instead focuses on the men that make the situation trying to remain themselves despite the circumstances they are stuck in.
The movie ending is basically just “Capitalism good, democracy is definitely real in America, don’t think about changing the status quo” 100 million deaths vs 3.5 billion
I prefer the movie, its less comic booky exaggerated and more personal. What i really like is thag we see Lex grow. He becomes the great man superman always sees in him. Using his gifts to help the world
As a leftie, and a great enjoyer of your channel, I want to thank you for bringing me dives into DC. I love the ideas they have and the experiences I get from watching the media and your analysis of it.
I still want Polish superman. Have clark land in Poland just post ww1 and have him there to halt the blitzkrieg. He was made by two jewish writers and they were very quick to put him up against hitler. I would like to see what happens when he's not raised in a town on the other side of the ocean for that war.
The way I have always seen the difference between Batman and Superman is perfectly described by a Dr Who quote, 'Good men don't need rules, now is not the time to find out why I have so many'. Superman will always be able to go further because he is limited by his own moral compass, whereas Batman is scared of what he could do so implements a set of rules on himself.
I think in this comic, I think I meant we kinda know Superman is immortal if just living like a human so by time travel logic, somehow theres 2 Superman at a time?? and while after Superman also live past the time after the timeline where the time looped?? Did they address this in the comic?
I feel like... people still don't get it. I see people commenting about how Superman was still a good person, but only brought up in a bad place, as if Stalin Communist Soviet Union was a bad place. When the point, by Mark Miller's admission, was to show that Superman is wrong when he's working for the United States (as in Dark Knight Returns) or the Soviet Union (Red Son). Because no one with that much power should be taking a side, and that is what is what people are not getting here.
@@kaantax8666 The argument of an IRL Superman goes against the idea of Superman. Because he's fictional, he can and does embody the best of people. Superman is a symbol, not a real person. That's the point of Superman. Bringing up Homelander or Brightburn is something Lex Luther does. Superman works because he's fictional, because he's supposed to be that good, to the point where any real person couldn't and wouldn't believe that such a good person like Superman could exist with all of his powers. Thanks for being a Lex Luther. Thanks for proving why Superman needs to exist. Because the world needs more of Superman than Lex Luther.
@@ArcDragoon no i never said that he himself would be evil, but IRL there is no way that the freaking government doesn't detect an alien spaceship and find kal-el before the kents even find him. Superman would be dissected, experimented on and would be brainwashed/manipulated to work for governments(or maybe he would be like how he was in flashpoint). Even if the dude is perfectly good, they could condition him with time into believing that killing humans when your governments asks you to, is great for humanity. Oh and i'm not even talking about people creating religions in the guy's name and worshipping him as space jesus. But yeah i get your point. Btw my favorite morally grey superman, is when he goes to another country to stop terrorists, but saving the people there triggers a civil war that kills thousands. It was in the "superman:earth one" comic
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I honestly liked the movie the idea of innocence being misguided to repeat evil always stuck to me because it shows that as powerful as superman is, he isnt perfect
I like this movie because you can clearly see that he's superman, he holds the same values but with a slight tweek, it demonstrates how his upbringing didn't necessarily define his beliefs but it did define his morals.
Honestly this version feels like injustice superman but better, because he doesn't step on the gas and go full evil right away or even that quickly really.
@@NyghtkingEXACTLY
@@Nyghtking I prefer comic book walking the grey line Superman because he is misguided but by his own perspective on how to make humans less of a harm to each other which is what makes a lot of the interactions he has more impactful because it's not as easy to take sides with any faction.
@@wokenwillis2826 Indeed, thinking about what this version of superman did made me think of an alternative version of Injustice where when superman snaps instead of killing the joker he does something arguably worse, he kidnaps him to his fortress, lobotomizes him so he can't think for himself or feel, and installs a computer into whats left of his brain, leaving him as little more then an automaton, maybe throw a little bit of magic in there since superman would know of magic, making it impossible to restore Joker to even being a basic human anymore.
So he starts doing that instead, he still doesn't want to cross the line into killing people, but this isn't killing them now is it?
You could even say that he is... *only human after all*
Here before he changes the title to "balls" or something
You're giving me too many ideas bro
@@ImplicitlyPretentious there you go, the 69th like on your comment
@@ImplicitlyPretentiouscan you do a video on the batman Gotham by gaslight movie?¿
@@ImplicitlyPretentious do it no balls
“What happens now?”
“Now? I saved the world.” My absolute favorite line in the movie.
I love how in any elseworlds Superman story (where he's actually a good human being) he's still good to the core no matter what country he lands on, the problem starts with who is the one raising him though...even then, he still has his own ideals his parents teached him on krypton (since the escape pod reminds and teaches Superman everything he needs to know in his life).
Not when he landed in Nazi Germany, or Apocalypse
@@NotALiberalSoSkipTheScriptProbably cause they wouldn't let him see it in either of those places
@@NotALiberalSoSkipTheScriptthey actually made nazi Superman a nuanced character with regrets in the comics.
@@frankorious3023 When he was Overman? I must be thinking the wrong story then.
@@TehElimanator Well that would mean he’s more nurture than having an innate sense of good wouldn’t it?
Even tho I prefer the comic, the movie was not as bad as I thought, I even liked it ! (primarly because of the more human treatment of Superman and Lex)
The big problem with that moovie is the realisator never oppened Marx nor searched what communist ideology was even once lmao
Typical american propaganda and missingormation on what communism, socialism and stalinism is.
Superman here isnt doing communism, he is doing fcking stalinism which is a extremly faschist system.
At 0 fcking point we see actual worker syndicate trying to run the country, and argue in parlementary what would be good to the country with massive vote and political discussion from the citizen.
You see, communism is technically a direct democratic system which doesnt reconize private property. Instead its the role of the State to give you housing, car, food, education ect ect, and you as citizen you join your worker syndicate.
Staline hijacked that system with rigged election, total control over syndicate and secret police force to kill political dissident.
Which is EXACTLY WHAT SUPERMAN IS DOING IN THIS MOOVIE, and extremly far away from what Marx and Engeld theorized.
It would have been extremly more interesting to show the real problem of those regime : people corrupting it from within and abusing the system, and direct democraty falling because people are moronic.
One prime exemple is Sweden. Sweden is a real socialist-democratist country.
(Socialism is still about having syndicate made for worker that control the country, but contrary to communism you still have private property)
Sweden is always near top 1/2 in every human law and treatment mesurment. Its nearly like the paradise : you have insane education, healthcare, the best prison, low criminality.......
But nearly everyone became rascist against foreigner so they all COLLECTIVELY and DEMOCRATIVELY voted to became faschist/nazi LMAO
It would have been an insane exemple to see a Superman, which individuality is a symbol, forced to become humanity worst horror because of humanity flaws and communist system that doesnt value talented individual
Let people become anti vaxx and kill thousands of people, destroying the communist state with perdonnal greed, voting extremly homophobic law (cause its russia) and force to genocide gay people....
You have tons of way to show that even with the best, irreprochable communist mindset communist Superman will fail
Instead we got Stalinist superman
@@anonyme4881Stalin "hijacked" your ideology because it is fucking shit and ignores political realities!
Guy above me needs to stfu. God damn I’m so glad you don’t write for DC
@@anonyme4881agreed. That's indeed, the biggest flaw of the movie.
One of the issue is pyotr he was a cunt but still an individual and the closest thing to a friend superman had asside from wonderwoman and him being lobotomized was creep because dear lord that's the closes man to him we know.
And the letter f Bruce Tim for removing the letter and having brainiac dumb it down.
He lost his touch since he made his ship with Barbara
This story really demonstrates Nature vs Nuture. Clark Kent is Superman because of his upbringing and the values his adopted parents instilled in him. His Kryptonian heritage only provided Clark his abilities, but the Kents made him a hero. While Jor-El and Lara were the best of Krypton, they didn’t have the chance to raise their son. All they could hope for was some other good people could give Kal a good life
@karaqakkzlnope. It’s nature of the person themselves. Are they a good person or bad person? Nurture is how those people are raised. Like, if Superman is raised by bad parents so should he be a bad person?
"Babe wake up new Sad superman video came out!"
When you're not from the U.S., but you've grown idolizing superheroes, then you see how everyone accuse them, and specially Superman, of being "imperialist propaganda". And you have to tell them "this isn't written to brainwash kids in Latin America, it's written to express the ideals U.S. people have, it's the vision they have of who they want to be."
This movie shows, better than the comic, how a "perfect man" wouldn't see the sins of his country. I suppose many watchers from the U.S. would see it and ask "how Superman couldn't realize what Stalin was doing" but had never before questioned what position would the classic Superman would have taken during the cold war. Would he had supported the Vietnam war? The Coup in Chile?
Captain America does this same thing. He's absolutely not a symbol of what America is, but of what America should dream of being able to live up to.
@@Argusthecat except for those times they write him like a crazy super patriot lol but hack writers will always be hack writers.
yeah I get the point you're trying to make, but that's like asking "how can people think climbing mount everest is impressive yet they don't find it impressive when they walk up a small hill? They're both just climbing terrain!". What's especially odd is that a lot of the thnigs you mentioned aren't even remotely as black and white as, y'know, bloody gulags being common government infrastructure. I mean christ the Cold War was literally 1:1 Capitalist and Communist driven, technically not even the former since most of the Cold War was being done by the government and not private enterprise, buuut this is mostly a discussion of culture not implementation so that's arguably a different topic. But, ignoring that, the Cold War wasn't an attrocity, it was a conflict (one that, famously, involved very few actual attrocities) and a conflict that was being 50% driven by Communism. And that 50% isn't necessarily blame either, someone who punches someone in the face to defend themselves after they were already attacked was 50% driving the fight, but not responsible for it, meaning you can't even necessarily assign blame eitherway. Not only that, but it could be strongly argued that as a conflict it was actually a boon for society, I mean it's not exactly a secret that the Cold War massively leapfrogged technological progress.
Again, I get the premise that people are blind to the issues in their backyard but love to whine about their neighbors eye-sore of a fence, but the comparisons made definitely seem rather motivated in their reasoning.
Hell, let's compare complete apples to apples, the Snowden Leaks vs China's Surveilance... yeah it's really not comparable. For as atrocious as the surveilance was (and, let's face it, still almost certainly is) in America, China is just a whole other beast entirely. Like it's really impossible to compare just how obscenely far the surveilance and digital interference goes.
That's why I don't like the demonization of "The American Way" moniker he's known by
Superman would have to be pretty evil to support the coup in Chile considering how horrible of a person Augusto Pinochet was. I mean we, our government and our intelligence agencies, funded a dictatorship that destroyed a democratic government because the people voted in a socialist. We did that a lot in Central and South America.
This is literally my favorite Superman movie, it's what got me interested in Superman as a character, being so pure and so good natured, that even at his worst he is still acting for what he believes to be the greater good. He just wants to help.
I think that people often forget/don't know that Superman was written by two jewish men who fled to America. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster created Superman to show was the true "American Dream" was; the ideal American way. His character wasn’t some malicious capitalist or government propaganda, he was created by love and hope. I think that's why I like Superman so much, his character and creation is so beautiful and sweet.
To add onto that- the prototype of Superman was kind of a Luther origin (a knock against the "ubermench" idea). It was shot down because Americans (influenced by Christianity) operated under the assumption that anyone with God-like powers would use those powers to help people.
Dude, Stalin telling Supes it’s a necessary evil, and just ignores where Supes found Lana, was a poor choice.
I think Stalin killing people in the gulags and hiding it from Superman was also a bad idea
I think maybe gulags were a bad idea to start with.
@@Matt-dp7ze but it makes sense to who Stalin was.
@@Matt-dp7ze
He could’ve justified it, just as he has other things for many years, and either kept him in line for a while longer.
Even if he’d have taken Stalin out of power, it wouldn’t have been melting his head off, if Lana hadn’t died in his arms.
Why else have Lana happen to be in the first gulag he finds? It’s written to be a trigger that opens his eyes, which allows him to finally see that Stalin’s society is a lie; as well as being personal, on multiple levels.
@@Matt-dp7zenddj
as someone who ONLY has (obsesive) culture osmosous of superman, something's that's intresting to me is that Kal-El (SEEMS) 100% nurture over nature.
Again the only direct Superman material i've sought after is Smallville(i havent even browsed his tv tropes page (but i have for Ma & Pa Kent if that's any consederstion)).
This is a fair assessment. Usually, it's associated with his creation as the work of two immigrants. I'm only aware of a few instances where anyone's taken the concept and flipped it to nature over nurture; the result is generally an evil superman. Brightburn is one example, Hyperion from Squadron Supreme is the other that comes to mind.
@@Glowinghole An actual example of Clark going Nature over Nurture would be in some versions of Earth-10 Superman where he's raised by the Nazis, but betrays them in the end - even then, that's the exception, since in most earth-10 stories, Nazi Superman is just evil from start to end.
This is how you write an authoritarian Superman. The entire "What if Superman....but EVIL!!??" to me is not only overplayed and boring....but just so uninspired. Evil Superman looks at the character at such a surface level that nothing about it has any real meaning. To me, versions of Superman from Red Son and Monsters & Madness show how Superman's morality is affected by his upbringing and surroundings, and how those deeply affect one's perception of right and wrong.
THANK YOU. Yes I love your explanation of that, my thoughts exactly. It’s similarly why I hate pretty much ANY kind of “what if this character BUT EVIL” because it’s always so shallow and never actually says anything.
It’s why I find Omni-Man so much more interesting than Homelander.
Heck I even got into an argument with a friend about “go go loser ranger” because he kept saying that it was gonna be some mind bending masterpiece of nuance. But all I saw in the trailer was “power rangers but evil and get off on extreme violence”
Just watched a video on owlman being better than the batman who laughs for this exact reason. I love it.
I swear I remember a picture of a green-suited, Middle-Eastern Superman being proclaimed as the Mahdi, and I just thought: "Understandable, awesome, but likely terrifying depending on who he meets"
@@symbionte7987 I feel like Homelander is more complex than people give him credit for, at least in the show. Other than the powers and the other surface level comparisons, Homelander pretty much has nothing in common with Superman as a character, and once you realize that, it's a lot easier to appreciate him as a villain in his own right instead of a superman knockoff. He's the human embodiment of the worst aspects of American conservatism, celebrity worship, and corporations all rolled up into one terrifying and narcissistic test tube baby. Granted, a big reason why lots of people like Homelander is Anthony Starr's acting so maybe it's not as interesting as I think on a pure plot level.
Interesting this storyline was the reason Henry Cavil wanted to play Superman. He was a great pick but given crap material.
This was a interesting story and i enjoyed it until that ending. Why that ending?
Mark Millar and Grant Morrison are generally pretty bad at endings.
I kinda hope that James Gunn does the multiverse with his DC Universe and brings back Henry Cavill and Ben Affleck but gives them better material.
I didn’t mind the ending. It definitely would’ve fit better in a different story.
@@thefez-cat almost every good author seems to struggle with endings
Honestly, I like the ending. Supes spent his whole life thinking he was anything but an everyman, but the ending shows that he actually *was* the ultimate everyman the Soviet state upheld as an ideal- you just couldn't get there through communism.
The movie maybe condensed but it superior in the personal touch that will be more relatable to ordinary people. The comic is showing us the usual harsh realities of those who are in the positions of power. The tendency for them to be narcissists and sociopathic and even if they are not on the extreme of such traits, the temptations that power weilds on even if you make the idealization of the comic characters, will still be susceptible victims to the "poisons" power can bring.
As for politics, I know my bias, but at least both sides allow people to see some of the aspects both ideologies bring in a surface level.
NGL, I really liked the idea of soviet Superman and what that would mean for global geopolitics. But to me, what Soviet Superman lacked as a human connection, if he had remained under his parents care like normal Superman, if he had remained close with Svetlana, maybe even marrying her like he would Lois in the main timeline, then he would have remained that same boy, and never fallen to the same flaws as Stalin, he would have embodied the Soviet ideal and done all he could to achieve it through inspiring people, being fair and just, and just...being Superman.
It would be interesting, at least to me, if there was another comic that explored this, and how he reformed the USSR, while Lux keeps the US in the race, even if he's still an egoistical asshole who can't stand Superman's existence and pushes those away from him, losing his connections to others and his humanity in his pursuit of finally besting Superman.
See this I thought would've been the more realistic ending.
@@SolarFlareAmerica Given how Stalin was in real life, not really...dude killed his own son irl.
lol he didn't kill his son, he refused to change high nazi officer to his son who was in captivity and was just a usual soilder. I don't like Stalin and his the cult of personality and authorian policy but it's funny when murricans try to make him into maneater forgetting their own leaders who were on the same terms of cruelty as Stalin@@jackripley3906
@@jackripley3906 More like: Didn't bother rescueing him.
Back in 1995 John Varley published a story called, “Truth, Justice, and the Politically Correct Socialist Path.” This was all about baby superman landing in the Ukraine instead of Kansas, and growing up as a tool of the Soviets. The similarities are pretty obvious. To the best of my knowledge, Varley never sued DC or anybody about it, but the question of whether or not, he got ripped off, remains an open one. To put another way: he wrote a story, and then nine years later, someone else wrote a story with an almost identical premise. This may have been a direct rip off, or it may have simply been two people independently coming up with the same silly idea. I don’t know, and I’m not going to hazard a guess. Verily, has not read comic books since he was a child, and was apparently unaware when the red sun story came out. In fact, I don’t think he knew about it until this movie came out, fine, as I said, I don’t believe you ever actually sued anybody about it. I’m not sure if he could, since superman is not his intellectual property to begin with, and he wrote it as a parity, which is protected free-speech.
Just the same, interesting, right?
Varley’s story ia a comedy about how superman’s fortunes change with each new Soviet regime. First, he is a hero, then he’s sent to a Gulag, then he’s a hero again, and he is forcibly married off to a woman chosen by the state, so as to improve the breed, it’s all back-and-forth. It’s pretty funny and worth a read if you can find it. It’s also rather uncharacteristic of his work, which tends to be deliberately transgressive. So, you know, be wary of that, if you decide to explore any more of his work.
I’m sure the idea of Superman being raised somewhere else has been thought of a lot. I know I have. I think most fans of his have at one point wondered what if he landed in a dictatorship.
@@NotALiberalSoSkipTheScript yeah that’s why I didn’t say it was a rip off. It could easily have been just a coincidence. The Ukraine part sounds as though it is way too coincidental to be a coincidence, but Ukraine, what is the breadbasket of the Soviet union much the same way that Kansas was the breadbasket of the United States, so really, logically, where else would you have him land? It’s got to be Ukraine.
But it’s also possible that his idea was stolen. like I said, honestly don’t know which it is. I just thought it was worth noting.
@@mahatmarandy5977 You’re right. Sometimes it’s hard to tell between two people having similar ideas and one taking the others work. I know I hear comedians talk about people saying someone stole a joke of theirs and usually it’s parallel thinking or part of an older joke someone has added to or changed.
I know I thought of a superhero that would take the characteristics or strengths of whatever animal it ate. Turn out it had been done!
what exactly about that is "politically correct" tho? that comes off as the kind of buzzword word salad a fox news host would use nowadays
*in Ukraine
FIFY
Please never quit. What you do is important
Shit, I could never put my finger on what the differences of focus were for the two pieces of media. I just saw them as general changes, and failed to notice the major thematic differences.
I am more of a fan of the comics plot twist because that twist was super interesting.
I think it would be great to see another take on soviet superman where his Clark Kent identity is more prominent, working in sharing the sins of the soviet union to it's people and trying to make change within the system while still believing in communism. Kinda like a Sablin figure. While as superman he is seen with distrust by the politburo because he can't be controlled.
Yeah, that would also be good!
Just make him work with lenin instead of stalin ffs
Even better, make him work with Sablin @@kaantax8666
Ever since I found this guy's channel, I've been hooked ever since. I love his analysis the most. Another reason I love these videos, it's because they dabble into how psychology and philosophy are portrayed through different forms of media. Keep it up, mate!
You should totally do a Brave & The Bold episode!!
It's interesting. Lex Luther's Philosophy was always "if it wasn't for you, I could've saved the world" and in the film I feel like that's truly the case. Without superman being brought in his pond lex really did become a hero for humanity, in his own twisted way. I think because he had something so alien to fight against, something to prove against. He's a force for good when he's truly challenging himself.
Which is funny to say because that includes his main universe self when he teams up with the league
It's not the only time Luthor saves the world, but even when he does he gets to be very smug about it - because in doing so, he proves himself capable of doing something that Superman couldn't.
Damn it… I really didnt enjoy the movie take on the comic but you’ve made a really compelling case for the ending. I’m going to give it another watch.
While I prefer good Superman over any evil version of Superman, I do think that red son Superman is an interesting take on Superman in general. This version of Superman is still a good person, but has a misguided ideology due to how he grew up in the soviet union.
The big problem with that moovie is the realisator never oppened Marx nor searched what communist ideology was even once lmao
Typical american propaganda and missingormation on what communism, socialism and stalinism is.
Superman here isnt doing communism, he is doing fcking stalinism which is a extremly faschist system.
At 0 fcking point we see actual worker syndicate trying to run the country, and argue in parlementary what would be good to the country with massive vote and political discussion from the citizen.
You see, communism is technically a direct democratic system which doesnt reconize private property. Instead its the role of the State to give you housing, car, food, education ect ect, and you as citizen you join your worker syndicate.
Staline hijacked that system with rigged election, total control over syndicate and secret police force to kill political dissident.
Which is EXACTLY WHAT SUPERMAN IS DOING IN THIS MOOVIE, and extremly far away from what Marx and Engeld theorized.
It would have been extremly more interesting to show the real problem of those regime : people corrupting it from within and abusing the system, and direct democraty falling because people are moronic.
One prime exemple is Sweden. Sweden is a real socialist-democratist country.
(Socialism is still about having syndicate made for worker that control the country, but contrary to communism you still have private property)
Sweden is always near top 1/2 in every human law and treatment mesurment. Its nearly like the paradise : you have insane education, healthcare, the best prison, low criminality.......
But nearly everyone became rascist against foreigner so they all COLLECTIVELY and DEMOCRATIVELY voted to became faschist/nazi LMAO
It would have been an insane exemple to see a Superman, which individuality is a symbol, forced to become humanity worst horror because of humanity flaws and communist system that doesnt value talented individual
Let people become anti vaxx and kill thousands of people, destroying the communist state with perdonnal greed, voting extremly homophobic law (cause its russia) and force to genocide gay people....
You have tons of way to show that even with the best, irreprochable communist mindset communist Superman will fail
Instead we got Stalinist superman
@@anonyme4881Here is the problem. All Communist systems will fall to Stalinist leaders because it fails to account for one true factor in its ideology. Man is born with greed and society isn't the primary cause of greed. From the time we are on the boob we are selfish. A necessary self-preservation. A communist system will always break down to these flaws because it's a contradictory set of ideals. Someone has to dole out the grain and this Someone will become the elite. Stalinism is the inevitable conclusion. Stalin wasn't a fascist, he was a pragmatic corrupt socialist gangster that did the dirty work the party didn't want to do.
@@jerm70 Superman has nothing to do with being like Staline.
Greed and selfishness arent Superman trait at all. Superman as representation of ideals (american dream but here we are in soviet union so communism dream) should have been instead a VICTIM of mankind and communism inner flow.
Btw you didnt do your search, as in Spain 1936 there also was a communism revolution that actually kinda worked, but Franco took arm and bested the communist that couldnt agree on how to wage war
Communist regime will either fall because its impossible to all citizen to have a perfect consensus leading to administrative collapse, or because someone will become a Staline.
Which isnt what we saw in this moovie at all.
Btw the whole "someone has to dole the grain out" could be controled by....... a true democratie which limit the whole Stalinism part a LOT.
Separation of power works wonder. Its just that URSS system was stupid to the get go and anti-democratic as a whole, which isnt a necessity in communism at all.
(Take any middle east country its a full blown capitaliste dictate)
He was too close to the government. If superman was in the cia the same thing would happen, seeing what atrocities the ruling power justifies for their idea of peace and prosperity.
@@witchBoi_Connor Thats not what Superman is. Superman is the "basic idealistic" guy that want to do good
If he was with the CIA he would quit as soon as possible. Exept quiting the gouvernement in communist regime is admiting communism sucks so Red Son would still loose the ideologic battle
When you're about to sleep but a Implicitly Pretentious video drops
From your description the comic sounds much more philosophically interesting and involving
My favorite part of this movie is the curse of Batman. Regardless of the timeline, an orphan gotta be some form of Batman😂.
The only thing I would've appreciated is if they worked with sovietologists to accurately represent the personal and political nuances of the USSR in a character like Superman. This could go for the majority of comics with a political or scientific message, but as somebody who (per my profile picture, lol) has done a few dives into the USSR and its history, it would have a beautiful number of moving parts and characters to parallel onto Superman.
Stalin was known by his personal record to be a man who was both religiously dedicated to bolshevism snd always changing the standing ideological orthodoxy on a whim. He saw himself as a "force of history" more than anything else, with the warmth and care of his person being eroded and consumed by politics all over the course of his life. This could reflect or contrast with Superman, depending on the direction the writer theoretically would want to take. Instead of the "we need to kill some because its necessary" line coming from Stalin, it could've come from Beria (one of the big monsters of the regime) and had Superman bouncing off of different members of the internal circle BEFORE the death of Stalin and his own usurpation of the office. Alongside this, some scenes involving the malaised presidium bureaucracy and how Superman sees it would've been cool.
Wicked good analysis, thesis antithesis synthesis but for just people being people.
How do you make me tear up every time?
Man Stalin, you really walked into that one.
Nice movie but I do missed the twist ending from the comic, would love to see it animated.
Very good video. I'm happy that I stumbled across Red Son when I did and decided to give it a shot.
Looking forward to Bloodlines as well.
Superman was a lot more hardcore in this version, but he was still the same man at heart. 😍
New implicitly pretentious video? Good day
So, haven't seen the whole movie, but wouldn't pharma execs make the same statement? They could, for instance, bring the price of the epi pen back down to affordable, where it was before the patent was bought out, but they are more than willing to sacrifice the lives of others so they can maintain their money and power. Right?
If they weren't sufficiently ruthless, the board would replace them. The purpose of the company is to make money for their shareholders - any lives saved along the way are just a side effect.
your videos are so great. the narration, the editing and the background music all fit perfectly to keep me engaged till the end of the video
Soviet Superman (movie version) and Superman Gods and Monsters, are my favorite evil Superman.
For the simple fact that they still have something of the original Superman emotionally, with some changes in their stories they would be almost the same Superman and what I find curious from my point of view is the life of Clark Kent that they were missing.
Agreed.
God, I love this character, it's such a cool take on the character.
Man I just love your videos. Just watched your Injustice Hal video, which was great and the into to this video with the music distorting when "Red Sons" showed up, you've got some killer editing skills. Keep up the good work!
Man where do you get all your background music it’s always so good
I guess in writing the medium has the luxury of pausing to think.
I really want a Freedom Fighters / Earth X animated movie.
Yeah I know the CW Ray / Freedom Fighters show exists but I want something closer to the comics.
The red son animated movie I thought was a fine adaptation of the source material not the best but not the worse in my opinion.
Bruh this was my favorite video from you. Love this
I think the biggest limitation these kind of stories have is that superhero stories, by definition, inflate the individual power of citizens. So much of the capitalism vs communism ideological dilemma rests on individual responsibility versus collectivism, and giving one individual the powers of Superman fundamentally changes that discussion and tilts the scale massively in favour of the power of individual responsibility. Of course an individualistic view of the world could work if you have people who can literally shape the world because they have superpowers. Of course a collectivist view of the world would be inferior when collective action can't overpower the strongest superpowered individual. Of course the only way to make it work is by fundamentally misrepresenting the conflict to artificially make the scale even.
So you've never heard of The X-Men eh?
That's a lotta "of course".
@@ETPlayground How are they different? They have a leader who can mind control people and a god like matter manipulator that could easily change the world better than any individual without superpowers. The comic trying to make a different point is nothing but plot convenience. And, like, I get it, it's fun and you get good stories out of it. Superman Red Son is an example of this too. But thinking the policies in a fundamentally different world would give you fundamentally different results. The death sentence, for example, makes sense for a lot of people because you can realistically lock down anyone and their impact is limited. Can't say the same for someone who can mind control you or has the potential to be more destructive than a nuclear bomb.
And don't get me started on how terrible superpowered beings are as analogies for racism. The point of fighting racism in the real world is that races aren't different. Kinda hard to make the point that one race shouldn't be treated as a threat when they can produce what are, essentially, godlike beings.
@@applesandgrapesfordinner4626 yes, it was on purpose
I don't know about that. Surely one could write about a super-collective if they so wished? Advanced alien species, futuristic utopian societies, cults and leagues dedicated to certain causes all allow a writer to weigh a collective strength against the individual in a way that's reasonable. This doesn't even account for the fact that superheroes rarely battle nonpowered people- Superheroes battle other Superheroes. Any story about the power of individual responsibility vs collectivism could still be portrayed between superpowered individuals and superpowered collective groups in order to "weigh" the balance appropriately.
Even in the case of Superman: Red Son, the story is about a person who is so smart it might as well be a superpower's struggle against somebody who is superpowered in all physical metrics.
I don't think these stories particularly tilt the scale towards individualism, because even if you say that a superpower is stronger than a group of regular people, he is not stronger than a group of superpowered people. You can retain the fundamental nature of the dilemma within the overall context of a superhero story by focusing entirely on the superheroes and how they choose to organize and make use of their powers. There are many stories about Batman's disagreements with the Justice League, and it is usually one of disgruntled and individualistic heroes disagreeing with the collective agreement and action of a superheroing organization.
In Red Son, is the story of Lex Luthor not a story of how the collective resources, attributes, and labor of Mankind were successfully coordinated in service of proving humanity superior to Superman? Was that not always his goal, and something he did not accomplish without great expense, time, and energy that belonged to others beside himself? He couldn't even put the letter into Superman's hands himself.
He's very good at twist endings.
I'd like to see how Red Son in his Prime and Dark Knight Returns Superman would interact.
Awesome video ( i have not even watched the video yet)
If the DC universe was a D&D game this is an example of Stalin’s player basically rolling a one on his intelligence test and diplomacy check in one go.
I remember getting the red Son Comic from a book store at rehobeth beach. To this day, it’s stuck with me and is my favorite comic ever
I have heard some people dog this movie, a lot of people on here are most likely younger than me, I just turned 44. I'm kind of a cold war baby tensions were still pretty strong even till the mid to late 80s. But this movies about it but also not about it, it was more about ideas, there was a analogy I was going to use but I've lost it at the moment, but it speaks to me on the level of Existentialism and I think anyone who has ever dreamed has thought of it or felt it. There was a wrighter that said something along the line that Man is a furious Angel with his wings nailed to the ground. Superman is still that furious Angel, he may just not be nailed to the ground. Also likes the fact Luthor was a Brilliant badass! He had the problem solved on one day with very little thought, I mean didn't get it all but he got done what needed to be.
Yooo wasnt recommended this channel for like 2 months now i got vids to binge lessgoo
Interesting discussion
really cool. I enjoyed this a lot! :)
i didn't know the comic story was that different!
Something-something soviet Superman is evil, I read in the comments.
No he freaking isn't, that's the whole point. Yes the regime was flawed in the sense that it was a ploy by Brainiac to take over the world, but most people were actually happy in it in the end; it saved so many from hunger, strife, and so on.
It could have been improved (like Lex did eventually), but it certainly was a better direction than what they had before.
Soviet Superman is more like an Honest Tankie than a Manipulative one,
He Honestly believes that the Soviet idea of Communism can led to a better place, it just needs reform and Strong Leadership to achieve a Communist State, which ironically Parallells the Real Soviet Union's attempts at reform from Khruzchev's Destalinization to Gorbechov who attempts at Democratizing the USSR. (Hilariously the Movie having Superman Kill Stalin is ironically a more literal parallel to Stalin's Cult of Personality dying after his death.)
YEs!! Thank you so much much, @Implicitly Pretentious!!! ..HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGS...!
I really enjoyed the Red Son comic, and this video makes me want to reread it. Thank you.
Mystery song: Ebony Eye by Yves Tumor
I have missed out on like four videos. For some reason TH-cam wasn’t telling me I thought you’d gone missing lol.
I prefer the comic.
12:12 Rivalry is a very underrated part of spirituality
Side Note I find it funny that the Movie had Stalin be killed by Superman, the Idealised Image of the Soviet Ideology, because IRL after Stalin died Khruschev Denounced Stalin in his Secret Speech to the Communist Party and Began a Program of Destalinization, so its a literal Interpretation of the Soviet Ideology and State Killing Stalin and his Policies.
So basically where Superman kills him literally, Khrushchev killed him symbolically?
@@PetroBeherha yup
Your explanation of the difference between Lex and Superman in the comic vs the film weirdly reminds me of the difference between the Korean and Vietnam Wars, where the former was fought between two megalomaniacs and the latter between two sides that genuinely wanted the best for their people but had irreconcilable ideas of what the best would be.
That's a really weird and dumb way to characterize the Vietnam War. The US wasn't doing it for their people, they were doing it because of rabid anticommunism.
@@DavidRYates-tk2tq you do know that there was an actual native led government in the south before the Americans showed up right?
@@onewingedangel9189 Weren't they also kind of awful though?
@@onewingedangel9189An US puppet goverment that put it's own population in concentration camps
@@aLukepop they certainly weren't perfect but neither were the Viet Kong, and when compared to other anti communist countries in the region they were downright saintly.
Don’t want to sound like I’m a communist or anything, but the red and black goes hard
Yeah Nazi Germany loved it.
@@Elfenlied8675309i think this was a reference to the ancom flag which is red and black
Leftist flags do go quite hard, especially the ones with gears in them.
The suit, the black and red suit Superman wears
@@junimo-hexeddo you know how broad red and black flags are!? The falangist flag is red and black
This my favourite Superman book of all time. Goes to show that when you are that OP, it it did not take him that long to turn into low key Zod, with actual reason.
When you say anarchy in black and the music happens that’s some greatness right there
Mark Millar: “I’m figuring out the ending for my Superman book, but it needs a wrap up.”
Grant Morrison: *Breaks the door down.* “I have just the thing.”
Both the movie and the comic are reflections of the time they were made in and how they view the same events. The original tries to view the endpoints of the two systems, albeit from a biased viewpoint with its end point being the dialectic idea of an idea and its opposite creating a better end point through their fusion. The movie instead focuses on the men that make the situation trying to remain themselves despite the circumstances they are stuck in.
I feel so bad for this version of Superman and yet, this is the coolest version of Lex Luthor ever. He's like.... Evil Reed Richards.
The movie ending is basically just
“Capitalism good, democracy is definitely real in America, don’t think about changing the status quo”
100 million deaths vs 3.5 billion
Bad: ideological propaganda, even if unintended
Good: really well executed and heartfelt
Mark Millar and ideological propaganda, a truly inseparable pair
YES ANARCHIST BATMAN MY LOVE MY JOY
Man I love both versions of the story.
I prefer the movie, its less comic booky exaggerated and more personal. What i really like is thag we see Lex grow. He becomes the great man superman always sees in him. Using his gifts to help the world
You are not immune to propaganda.
I love this sotry and view of superman I first viewed the story from the animated superman red series and i loved the recent movie
As a leftie, and a great enjoyer of your channel, I want to thank you for bringing me dives into DC. I love the ideas they have and the experiences I get from watching the media and your analysis of it.
I for some reason really love Russian Superman's accent...
dude
that was a very good summary
Always ❤ these videos
To anyone who didn’t see the movie search beyond the lot red son it’s the animated comic I would take it over the movie anytime
I still want Polish superman. Have clark land in Poland just post ww1 and have him there to halt the blitzkrieg. He was made by two jewish writers and they were very quick to put him up against hitler. I would like to see what happens when he's not raised in a town on the other side of the ocean for that war.
The way I have always seen the difference between Batman and Superman is perfectly described by a Dr Who quote, 'Good men don't need rules, now is not the time to find out why I have so many'. Superman will always be able to go further because he is limited by his own moral compass, whereas Batman is scared of what he could do so implements a set of rules on himself.
I don't like looping timelines even one bit. Not sure why exactly. There's something extremely messed up about them which i can't properly describe.
What a damn great video.
amazing video! keep it up
I think in this comic, I think I meant we kinda know Superman is immortal if just living like a human so by time travel logic, somehow theres 2 Superman at a time?? and while after Superman also live past the time after the timeline where the time looped?? Did they address this in the comic?
the movie is good but i never knew their was a comic version different from it, both or good👍
Do you have a list of the music you used in this video? More specifically the song at 5:35, it almost sounds like kings field but its a bit too upbeat
Another great video.
I love this movie more than the other one.
Well done
That was beautiful.
Great video!
I feel like... people still don't get it. I see people commenting about how Superman was still a good person, but only brought up in a bad place, as if Stalin Communist Soviet Union was a bad place. When the point, by Mark Miller's admission, was to show that Superman is wrong when he's working for the United States (as in Dark Knight Returns) or the Soviet Union (Red Son). Because no one with that much power should be taking a side, and that is what is what people are not getting here.
he can literally destroy earth with a single punch, IRL we wouldn't have superman, we would either have homelander, or brightburn.
@@kaantax8666
The argument of an IRL Superman goes against the idea of Superman. Because he's fictional, he can and does embody the best of people. Superman is a symbol, not a real person. That's the point of Superman.
Bringing up Homelander or Brightburn is something Lex Luther does. Superman works because he's fictional, because he's supposed to be that good, to the point where any real person couldn't and wouldn't believe that such a good person like Superman could exist with all of his powers. Thanks for being a Lex Luther. Thanks for proving why Superman needs to exist. Because the world needs more of Superman than Lex Luther.
@@ArcDragoon no i never said that he himself would be evil, but IRL there is no way that the freaking government doesn't detect an alien spaceship and find kal-el before the kents even find him.
Superman would be dissected, experimented on and would be brainwashed/manipulated to work for governments(or maybe he would be like how he was in flashpoint).
Even if the dude is perfectly good, they could condition him with time into believing that killing humans when your governments asks you to, is great for humanity.
Oh and i'm not even talking about people creating religions in the guy's name and worshipping him as space jesus.
But yeah i get your point.
Btw my favorite morally grey superman, is when he goes to another country to stop terrorists, but saving the people there triggers a civil war that kills thousands.
It was in the "superman:earth one" comic
i offered them Utopia, but they fought for the right to live in hell
holy fuck what a raw line