My friend and fellow comics nerd Ross recently caught Superman. He liked it but he raised a point I didn’t consider in my review (nor Corrina in hers). Spoilers below, should anyone still be avoiding them.
At the end of the movie, Supergirl stumbles in, clearly having a morning after the night before; Superman explains she likes visiting red sun worlds where she’s vulnerable, specifically to the effects of alcohol. Which is, of course, the premise of Tom King’s excellent Woman of Tomorrow (one of the few King stories I thoroughly liked) — though without seeing the heroism of that story, Supergirl comes off looking less a hero and more a hot mess. Hopefully that’s not how they’ll play it going forward, but we’ll see.
The thing is — well, by now you’ve probably heard the big twist of the film, that Jor-El and Lara sent Superman to Earth not as a refugee but as a colonizer: with his power they expected him to rebuild Kryptonian civilization on Terra, fertilizing as many women as possible to create a new half-Kryptonian master race. James Gunn has been quite clear the message is not a dream, a hoax, an imaginary story, nor did Luthor tamper with the video — Superman is an apple that fortunately for us, fell very far from the tree. His parents are rotten.
The thing Ross pointed out is, what about Supergirl? Did she come to Earth with some variation of the same mission (“Watch over your little cousin, make sure he grows up into the mighty ruler his parents hope for.”)? Why isn’t she shocked that Superman isn’t conquering Earth? Haven’t they ever talked about this? What’s the story, morning glory?
One possibility is that this didn’t occur to anyone working on the film. Another is that Jor-El and Lara aren’t typical Kryptonians but some sort of extremist minority. Another is that Argo City consisted of dissidents and Supergirl came to Earth to stop Kal becoming a tyrant; when she saw he had no knowledge of his mission, she didn’t have the heart to bring it up.
Any of those are possible at this point. Or it could be something I haven’t even imagined — it’s not like I anticipated “I am your father!” in The Empire Strikes Back.
Thoughts?
As far as I’m concerned this is just another reason not to bother with the movies, regardless Whether it’s DC or Marvel.
They just can’t leave anything alone without adding what they think is some ‘kewl’ twist
Yeah, it’s a good point. Especially if the Supergirl movie going to incorporate the idea from the Tom King series that the main reason she drinks, etc., is her grief over Krypton. Based on what we know at this point, the movie version of Krypton hardly seems *worth* grieving over. Fingers crossed that the filmmakers address this, rather than just ignore it or gloss it over.
Agreed. At this point there’s a lot of ways it could go, if they go with it at all.