Batman v Superman turned the Clark Kent I used to love into an unrecognisable cynic

Spoiler alert: Hollywood decided long ago that modern audiences wouldn't want a Boy Scout

There we were thinking Batman was the moody one (Warner Bros)

“No one stays good in this world”. A terrific line for Batman in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. It reveals the inner battleground of a superhero birthed by trauma. One who constantly struggles to hold a moral line against an increasingly corrupt world as well as his own inner demons. It demonstrates his crumbling faith in humankind, and his resignation that he may one day lose his soul along with the rest of us.

Except Batman doesn’t say this line. Superman does.

You know Superman, we all do: he is The Big Blue Boy Scout; The Man of Tomorrow; The Metropolis Marvel. Superman is the world’s first superhero. He’s the guy who saves cats from trees, talks the desperate out of jumping, and fights for truth, justice, and the American way. So why on Earth have the film makers given him such a soul crushingly dark line?

It’s not just this one line. Batman v Superman seems to go out of its way to dismantle the Superman that I and many others grew up idolising. This Superman only seems stimulated into action when someone he loves is threatened. This Superman stands in the blazing grave of hundreds of innocents and responds by disappearing (returning only when his girlfriend is again in danger). This Superman brawls, sulksunches first and asks questions…never.

Clark Kent fairs no better. The film’s director, Zack Snyder, has openly discussed his dislike of secret identities, and he quickly takes his chance to kill Kent. In the comics, the body of Superman is laid to rest while Clark Kent is listed as missing. This means that when Superman’s inevitable resurrection occurs, Clark Kent can also return, having been conveniently ‘discovered’ in wreckage. In Dawn of Justice, it is Kent’s body in the ground. Clark Kent will stay dead. Snyder gets his wish, and avoids the much maligned glasses-as-a-disguise convention for which the character is so famous. Never mind that his human alter ego is a vital part of what makes Superman special. A tether to humanity where the world’s most powerful man has a job, a boss and rent to make.

But hey, at least he’s gritty and dark now, right? Hollywood decided long ago that modern audiences wouldn’t want the Boy Scout. He needed updating. A twist. So we got Superman the absent father (Superman Returns) and Superman the killer (Man of Steel) and now – Superman the cold and distant god. But how did they arrive at this conclusion? The last time critics, fans, and cash registers were all in love with Superman was with Christopher Reeve in 1978. We often hear that the world has moved on from that time, when Reeve’s warm smile and bright red cape were more in keeping with the times. That it’s all rather old fashioned now.

Except it was old fashioned in ’78 too. When Reeve tells Lois of his earnest mission statement, she dismisses him: “You’ll end up fighting every elected official in this country”. In throwing away the character’s inherently noble yet corny nature, the film makers have betrayed not only the character, but also distanced themselves from the last time he was truly popular.

In Dawn of Justice, Amy Adams’ Lois touches the shield on Superman’s chest. She tells him that the symbol on it means something to people. That it is all some of them have. If only he didn’t need telling. If only there were scenes in the movie to prove her right. And of only he didn’t fly away in a despondent sulk.

Superman won’t stay dead. He will be resurrected in the next movie. But I fear he will be left broken for far longer than that.