Superman vs. Batman

I have not seen the movie, "Superman vs. Batman." In fact, I'm not sure what the plot is, other than I guess an attempt to merge the lucrative "Superman" series somehow with the lucrative "Batman" film series, and perhaps leads to a sequel around the "Justice League of America" (which, if my comic book memory is correct, Superman and Batman founded although neither played particularly big roles in subsequent activities; in fact, Batman eventually leaves JLA completely).

But I have long been fascinated with the ideas of "Superman" and "Batman." Because when you think about it, there really are only two kinds of Superhero: Superman and Batman.

I say that despite the onslaught of other "superheroes:" Spiderman, Aquaman, The Green Lantern, Captain Marvel, Captain America, Iron Man, Wonder Woman, The Hulk, Flash, Silver Surfer, Thor (who is actually supposed to be a Norse god, which kind of puts him on a different level) ....

But really, it all comes down to Superman and Batman.

Superman could do everything man ever dreamed of doing but was physically unable to do: faster than a speeding locomotive, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound, X-ray vision to see through walls, bullets bounced off of him, knives were unable to penetrate his skin. He had super-hearing, super thinking, even super breath (able to create high-speed winds). He could apparently fly not just through the earth's atmosphere, but through outer space (where he often diverted on-rushing meteors and such). He was, of course, other-worldly (from the planet Krypton), and his only weakness was exposure to green Kryptonite, mineral debris from Krypton. In other words, in the beginning at least, the only thing that could harm Superman was something from his place of origin, from "home," if you will.

Superman is the fantasy, the dream. Take just about anything man has ever dreamed of doing, and Superman could do it. And to show how much man always dreamed of doing those things, just look at how many of those skills man has since adapted to: we can now fly (even to the level of solo-flight of jetpacks); we have developed bullet proof vests so that most bullets do not harm us; we have developed devices that allow us to 'see' and 'hear' from great distances and even through barriers; computers enable us to have super-thinking ... and so on.

The rest of those "superheroes' - other than Batman - are mostly perversions of Superman. They tended to focus on specific abilities, but really, what could any of them do that Superman couldn't, for all intents and purposes, do as well (if not better)?

Which begs a sidebar: how limited is Spiderman? I mean, I always enjoyed Spidey, except that I realize he's really of no use outside a major city. I mean, his spider-strength and spider-sense might work anywhere, but his webslinging is far less impressive in a small town where the tallest building is, say, three stories. Or on the plains of Kansas, where Spiderman could, I guess, swing from the tallest stalks of corn (and how stupid would that look?) Truthfully, Spiderman seems to be a strictly urban hero.

Now Batman is different. I have always been a Batman fan, and here is why: he is a truly human superhero. There is no suggestion of any special 'power' that Batman has. The implication is that any one of us, with enough money and know-how, could become Batman. He has great gadgets that make up for his lack of true superpower, and he's honed his physical skills into a cross between a world-class gymnast and 10th degree martial artist, but technically speaking there is nothing there that isn't humanly possible.

Superman, at least in the beginning, was almost naive in his strict morality, his belief in truth, justice, and something called "the American Way" (which, interestingly enough, people back in the day would have understood what that meant and basically agreed with it in principle; I doubt seriously such is the case today). In fact, at one point there was a self-imposed code that Superman could not kill a human being.

Batman was anything but naive. In fact, he is always seen as a border-line criminal, a vigilante who takes the law into his own hands. Batman has always been out to get the bad guys and seems to have little moral compunction about how that happens. He is clearly obsessive, almost singularly so (which is the only way he could have become what he became), which makes normal relationships difficult at best (unlike Superman, who as Clark Kent is able to pine after Lois Lane and as Superman is able to have a relationship of which Batman would be envious, if the Bat weren't so obsessed). If Superman lived by a moral code that forebade killing and never (at least to my memory) struggled with it; Batman seems forced to restrain his venge-filled actions, as if he'd like nothing better than to just kill the bad guys and be done with it, and it is only by his own obsessive self-control that he does not become the evil he has dedicated his life to fighting.

Anything on the Superhero scale beyond these two are simply perversions, knock-offs if you will, of the original.

Superman is perfection; Batman is the closest humanity can come to achieving that perfection.

Maybe that's why I always preferred Batman over Superman. I could identify with Bruce Wayne's (Batman's true identity) struggle with his own dark side and his obsession over achieving his own version of perfection - both physically, mentally, and socially - yet giving in to his own vices.

I haven't seen "Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice." Maybe I will at some point. One synopsis I read sounds good: "Fearing that the actions of Superman are left unchecked, Batman takes on the Man of Steel, while the world wrestles with what kind of a hero it really needs."

I did see the trailer. And there is one line from that that I did like. Batman, for whatever reason, says to Superman, "Time to learn what it means to be a man."

Without knowing context, that line represents the essence of the difference between Superman and Batman.

To create "Superman," we had to go to another planet, to another race of beings (despite their very human-looking nature), to something truly other-worldly.

To create Batman, it took one revenge-obsessed man with unlimited time, energy, and resources.

Both are cartoon characters, of course. So it's all silly nonsense.

But Batman captures the essence of what it is to be human: to struggle with who we want to be, against who we're afraid we could become.