Overall I really liked the second season, in many ways more than the first. The first season was the origin story, but mostly it was the origin of Arthur, the Tick's sidekick more than the eponymous Tick himself. We really have no idea who the Tick is or where he comes from and by the end of season 2 we still don't know. (Apparently we'll never know as Amazon canceled it.) Which begs the question: do you need an origin story for your superhero?
In this case, I don't think you do. I mean if I knew the Tick was an alien or a cyborg or a government experiment or a construction worker with a wife and two kids who got a super-suit from aliens, would it add or subtract to my enjoyment of the show? If anything it would probably detract from the show because it would bog the show down in flashbacks and a lot of drama when the story is supposed to be a comedy. The Tick isn't supposed to be the dark, brooding Zack Snyder kind of hero (that's the vigilante Overkill); he's basically like the Adam West Batman, which if you remember that show they didn't really get into Batman's origin story in that because again it wasn't supposed to be a serious show.
So, if your hero isn't serious then origin stories just kind of bring it down. But even more serious ones don't necessarily need it. After two versions of Spider-Man's origin story in Spider-Man and Amazing Spider-Man, Marvel decided the hell with the origin story for Spider-Man: Homecoming and I don't think most people really missed it.
I'm sure whenever DC gets around to the next Batman or Superman movie they'll include the origin story. Which especially with Batman it's pretty played out by now. How many times can we see his parents being gunned down in an alley by whoever? Just about everyone should know that story by now, why do we have to keep repeating it? Especially since the longer time has gone on, the more antiquated it becomes. Why the hell would rich people be WALKING in an ALLEY? They don't have a limo? I mean they have a butler but no chauffeur? WTF? They don't have bodyguards? Back in the Great Depression it could still work but in the 21st Century it doesn't make a lot of sense.
I've done superhero stories with the origin story and without. Or really with the Girl Power and Gender Swap Heroes series it was more of a split. Most of them we didn't go much into the origin of their male character, but they were origin stories for the female versions of those characters.
Could I have done the Tales of the Scarlet Knight series without the origin? I guess so, but really the whole series is Emma's journey so not having the origin probably wouldn't have made sense. But I think it depends a lot on the story you're trying to tell. Sometimes you're telling the hero's journey but other times maybe your story is something else. Like a few months ago I talked about a series called Young Protectors that was about the homosexual relationship between a young hero and an older villain. There was really no need for origin stories--at least of how they got powers and stuff, because it was more about the origin of their relationship. Or in my gender swap hero series there was no need to give the male character origin stories in depth because it wasn't about that; it was about them adapting to becoming women. In the case of The Tick, it's not really about the Tick's origin so much as Arthur's origin and overcoming his fear of The Terror to save the day.
The same is also true for villains. The Joker is probably the best example of this. Was Jack Nicholson's Joker better than Heath Ledger's because we knew where he came from and how he came to be? I don't think so. In fact the whole The Killing Joke story is kind of meh in its conceit that one bad day is all you need to become a psychotic killer. One bad day might prompt you to go on a killing spree like all those workplace and school shooters, but to become the sort of calculating psychopath of the Joker you need to have some bad things already inside of you.
Michael Myers is another example. In the original Halloween there was an origin of Michael killing his sister but there was no real explanation of why he was going on a killing spree years later. The sequels added theories as to his motivations like Laurie Strode was his sister to a curse based on Celtic mythology. The soft reboot last year tried to rewind it back to the first movie but it didn't really work--in large part because the movie was spectacularly boring.
Little to no origin for villains can make them scarier than if they have an origin. An origin tends to humanize them and in many cases that's not really what we want. You want your bad guys bad not someone to feel sorry for. The Joker is scarier if he's some evil mystery man rather than a failed comedian or mob henchman.
Anyway, something to consider is that some of the most popular heroes like Superman and Batman didn't start with origins. Those origins only came out after the characters were already popular and people began to wonder where they came from.
3 comments:
I wonder how many people would flood the internet with bullshit if they were to modify Batman's origin somewhat to be more contemporary...like his parents get gunned down in a drive-by waiting for an uber or killed in a carjacking gone wrong or something.
The Borg are a good example of villains that were scary, didn't have a definitive origin, and don't need one, although they did become a bit less scary once they were on Voyager a bunch. I liked Ledger's Joker's ambiguous origins a bit more than the Nicholson one and the Gotham TV show was completely ridiculous: this guy is the Joker, but we can't call him that for...reasons... :( (That whole show was a weird collection of :almost, but not quite" lol)
I agree. Origin stories are not really necessary, and especially for villains. Which is why I think DC's movie about Joker is not a good idea...
Some people think you have to have a well developed villain, and that means an origin story. However, I think over doing it is the biggest problem. Did we really want to know Darth Vader was a good kid/slave at one time? It really defeats the purpose.
Post a Comment