An "anti-hero" is, by definition (from Merriam-Webster): a main character in a book, play, movie, etc., who does not have the usual good qualities that are expected in a hero. Well isn't that just hunky-dory. By that definition, almost any hero nowadays can be attributed as an anti-hero, as most heroes have to have some morally grey background about them. Anti-Heroes used to have a gruff edge to them, they used to blur the line between good and bad. More often than not, they can take things to a pretty far extreme in the name of a good cause, forcing the viewer to question whether they're really right or wrong and create tension.
But, things have changed. Several heroes who used to have pure, righteous hearts are being pushed to the edge more and more. When Superman, the biggest boy scout ever, gets turned into a bit of a brooder, it really stretches what we think of as a hero.
Well, then, what's a hero? By definition, again: a person who is admired for great or brave acts or fine qualities. Okay, that one's sort of fair, until you call into question some heroes where you're completely unsure of it. I mean, tons of people admire Wolverine. But, he's killed people. And what about someone like Green Arrow? There was a time where Oliver swore off killing, then for several years was all about it, then died, and now it's complicated.
I think there are actually two different types of anti-heroes that we can see. Take your Deadpools, Jason Todd's, and Ninjak's. They're all killers in their own right, but it's not like it makes them feel any better, and they've proven time and time again that they want to be heroes and are willing to work with other heroes so they can get a little better. Okay, maybe Deadpool isn't quite such a good example...
Alright, we'll focus on Ninjak. For all of you who are unaware (so, probably all of you), Ninjak is an agent, er, former agent, of MI-6 and current member of Valiant's super team, Unity. Ninjak, prior to the creation of Unity, was tasked with killing one of their chief members. Bloodshot, who would later join the team for a brief time, has also expressed little care for our characters. So, what makes them the good guys? Obviously, they're anti-heroes. Ninjak spares no second thought when he has to swing his swords, but, he fights close to his allies against enemies that even powerful space beings are afraid of.
It's because, while he does fight in a morally grey area, there is honor within Ninjak where even thinks there is none. That's what makes a good anti-hero, and that's where, I think, many people get this wrong. Ninjak, to continue our little examination of him, does fight for his higher-ups, but knows what it takes to save the world as well as his teammates. In the recent "Book of Death" storyline, when Unity is tasked with tracking down their member Gilad, Ninjak manages to contain him but expresses some regret in doing so, as he wants to keep Gilad level-headed. Or, recently, he fought a powerful superhuman named Fitzy and the two spoke at length about their relationship and how dumb their fight is. Ninjak respects all of his enemies as he understands that he could just as easily have become them.
Even someone like Jason Todd has some honor within him. Earlier on, this seemed to be a little more difficult to discern, but, really, Jason Todd is still a Robin. As much as he makes fun of everyone else, it's obvious that he couldn't live without the Bat-Family. His objectives are never to impress Batman or Nightwing or anything like that, but he does it so that they can respect him.
Moon Knight is another great example of an anti-hero, and is actually a modern one done proper. Most anti-heroes nowadays are, of course, killers and have some tortured backstory that they're trying to rectify and walk a morally grey line. Moon Knight has to beat down the God of Vengeance constantly, as well as juggle multiple personalities. The dude walks a faint line between good and absolutely insane, yet he admits on multiple occasions that he can handle it. Does he always? Of course now. "The Death of Marc Spector" and "Shadowland: Moon Knight" are evidence of this, and the most recent run shows him slip fully into his madness. But, still, it's made very clear early on that he fights for the nighttime wanderers, like himself, so that he may keep them safe.
It seems that recently, anti-heroes are losing their sense of honor and purpose and instead being used just for the writer to create an edgy character. Well, when everyone is doing it, then it doesn't seem quite so edgy, does it? Plus, it gets grating. Hal Jordan as an anti-hero again, really? Ugh. Boring. It really speaks volumes that when we get a hero that is doing what we're supposed to be doing, it gets praised like mad as breaking through the norm. That should be the norm. It's entirely possible to write darker stories without the hero having to go rogue. "Nova," "The Amazing Spider-Man," "Spider-Gwen," and "X-O Manowar" are evidence of this.
Not to mention that there is a trend of more heroes becoming these anti-heroes coming about. On his web series "Atop the Fourth Wall," when he reviewed "Green Lantern 23.1," host Linkara pointed out the odd obsession we have with villains now, and I have to admit that I agree that it is sort of our there. In film, we have Suicide Squad coming up next year, and there were plans by Sony to create a "Sinister Six" and Venom film. Plus, DC had "Forever Evil" just a few years ago, and "Injustice: Gods Among Us," sees many heroes becoming villains, or at the very least going off on their own for their own personal gain. Oh, and, you know, two of next year's biggest films are heroes fighting each other. I mean, I get that Batman in "The Dark Knight Returns," is sort of an anti-hero, but you don't have to make it so obvious...
I'm not so sure where this movement toward making heroes evil began, and when it plans on ending. Several people enjoy the stories of righteous heroes over the morally grey ones nowadays, with films like The Dark Knight Rises, and Man of Steal being sort of hated on lately. The tortured soul has become a bit of a tired plot point.
This isn't to say that an anti-hero still can't work in a story, but, the thing is that they have to be a good character in a story that fits them. Look at the most recent season of Arrow: it was probably the lesser of the three because Oliver was torturing himself over he was really a hero or not. Of course he is! Twice he's saved Starling City from global destruction, and of course there are all the moments in the flashbacks we've seen so far! Sure, he's killed people, but he did swear it off at the start of Season 2 and did a good job of keeping by it. It added to his character and he has shown little remorse on that movement so far this season. Oliver as an anti-hero worked as he was finding himself in Season 1 but would not have worked in Season 2 as that would have ruined it's central conflict of Slade pushing him to break his "one rule," so to speak, as Oliver tried to cement himself as a genuine hero. Not to mention the poor example he would set for Roy and the contrast that would have been lost between him and Nyssa.
It's probably best for us to pump the breaks on anti-heroes for now, at least in creation. The ones we have now, that originated as anti-heroes? They're quite fine. The real issue is when we force anti-heroes upon us all. If they're written well like Netflix's Daredevil, fine, but that's a clear exception. Otherwise, let's make our heroes, you know, heroic.
Social media:
Twitter: @seanovan13
Instagram: @seanovan10
No comments:
Post a Comment