It's superheroes and not their super-villain counterparts that we should really be afraid of. This idea has been explored in a number of superhero movies, including such diverse fare as The Incredibles, Watchmen, and the post-Sokovia adventures of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. In each, lawmakers shackle our protagonists in response to the collateral damage caused when they step in to save the day.
But perhaps collateral damage is not what we should be worried about. According to a new study, the "good guys" are actually significantly more violent than the antagonists they're trying to stop. These findings were presented on Monday at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics. Pennsylvania pediatrician Robert Olympia and his colleagues sat through 10 superhero movies released in 2015 and 2016, cataloging each specific act of violence and noting whether it was committed by a protagonist or villain.
As anyone who has sat through a recent summer superhero tentpole can attest, there is a lot of violence to catalogue—on the order of 23 acts per hour for the good guys, with just 18 violent acts per hour for the bad guys. And it is mostly guys—male characters were five times more likely to engage in violence than female characters.
Well, it's edgier that way.
[For the sake of discussion, here's a 3-minute clip on YouTube: Incredibles 2 Fight Scene in Full: Jack-Jack vs. Raccoon (Exclusive). How many violent acts do you count? --Ed.]
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Friday November 09 2018, @06:52PM (1 child)
I am unclear as to who Ant Man and The Wasp were.
Throughout the movie, the protagonist is on home arrest because he violated some restriction on what super heroes can do. Of course he escaped a whole bunch so his federal probation officer is always after him.
I recommend it highly. Movies have come a long ways since the last time I saw on in 2011.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @07:12PM
Ah, more perfect role models for youth to follow. Punch-up violent offenders, now running from their probation officer. Oh that Hollywood would catch fire and burn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @06:54PM (8 children)
Comic books and video games? What happened to the "Stuff that matters" from the site that must not be named?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by nitehawk214 on Friday November 09 2018, @06:58PM (2 children)
Look, it's either this occasionally or it's 24/7 politics.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @10:29PM (1 child)
So, what happened to the stuff that matters?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 10 2018, @01:50PM
Stuff that matters becomes overrated and ignored once you start allowing Sign In with Facebook
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Friday November 09 2018, @08:11PM (1 child)
I thought it was interesting as a discursive shift. Heroes have been twisted into anti-heroes. Not universally--Wonder Woman was refreshing because it hearkened back to concepts of duty and honor that used to be the meat of every superhero mythos. It used to be that even Batman was an upbeat character that believed in peace, justice, and the American way. Then he morphed into a dark character that you really couldn't root for. Everybody else followed that lead and now torture, murder, and mass destruction seem to be standard operating procedure.
I think that says a lot about the state of humanity's dreams, which have been dark of late.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Saturday November 10 2018, @04:37PM
Heroes have always been antiheroes. The ultimate outsiders.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @09:29PM (1 child)
Comic books, check!
video games, check!
superheros, check!
It appears to me that all of the above are on the standardized list of topics which could be deemed "news for nerds".
You clearly don't belong here.
Door is on your left, but the furry convention is in a different building across campus.
Please be sure to turn in your nerd card on your way out.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Friday November 09 2018, @11:00PM
It seems an odd criticism to me, as if nerd culture wasn't always inclusive of sci-fi, fantasy, and superhero topics. I vividly recall topics like this being discussed on /. from the beginning; anyone else recall the "Natalie Portman and hot grits" meme?
Disinviting this AC from SN seems a bit severe at this point, but he should go back and double-check his "news for nerds" history before repeating his assertion.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 10 2018, @07:10PM
Actually, those comics show the correct way to gain and control power. They are commentary of the US police state...
To control any force, you must be worst than that force. You must win at ANY cost.
1) America's nuclear bombing of Japan.
2) America's fire bombing action of Toyko
3) Carpet bombing for Germany
6) and on and on
US Police, the miltary force that is unanswerable to American public...
1) Civil Rights marches
2) Waco, Texas
3) Ferguson
And now corrupt court system...
The most resent... an uninvited Sexual Predator on the supreme court.
Based on a corrept legislated branch...
Who call themselves "Republicans" but are actaul "White Nationalish", stoking fears of "Alien Invastion" that they created with H2B slavery system.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @06:55PM
We Superheroes don't count violent acts. We just dish them out.
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Friday November 09 2018, @07:02PM (3 children)
You just have to accept that they exist in a world where, just like the laws of physics don't apply, the rule of law doesn't apply either.
That, somehow, vigalantes are the only way "justice" can happen, and that the Blues Brothers Rule is in full force.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Friday November 09 2018, @08:48PM
I think the issue is that in a world with superheros, you have supervillains that are way beyond the ability of mundane police to contain. Someone who can wipe out a skyscraper or remotely take over the leaders of a large country is not standard law enforcement fare.
Another reason these guys are attractive to the buying public, IMHO, is because they're exploring transhumanist themes (though usually in passing). What happens when you have someone powerful enough to completely disrupt the global status quo, for example? (one of the ongoing themes of The Watchmen) Or a world develops where most of the human population is effectively superpowered? (a later theme of Miracle Man)
I think there is a considerable unease over what the distant future will bring, and these stories help people cope with that fear.
(Score: 2) by Lester on Saturday November 10 2018, @11:20AM (1 child)
The problem is not that they are vigilantes above law, the problem is the concept of justice and morals they show. One of the points is that collateral damage is not something they accountable for. Other point is that some superheroes disdain normal-justice, they don't act where normal law enforcement forces can't, but sometimes they say judges "fuck you" or show a derogative image of courts and/or any rights of villain.
(Score: 2) by stretch611 on Saturday November 10 2018, @01:56PM
So, what you are saying is that... Donald Trump is a superhero.
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @07:03PM
Walken's Max Zorin's body count far beats any of the other characters. But then Walken is always awesome.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by RamiK on Friday November 09 2018, @07:04PM
You think super-hero films are bloody? Tarantino got nothing on Shakespeare.
compiling...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @07:05PM (1 child)
Be a superhero!
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @07:59PM
Nazi counters with Luger. Your superhero lost a life.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by AndyTheAbsurd on Friday November 09 2018, @07:07PM
The difference between "villain" and "hero" isn't how violent they are, it's their motivation.
Villains undertake their deeds for their profit, power, or aggrandizement. Heroes fight villains, and don't become without some injustice to fight against.
Please note my username before responding. You may have been trolled.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @07:09PM (2 children)
Most superhero stories focus on the heroes, so every violent act they commit is on-screen and counted. Violent acts by villains are therefore under-counted.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ikanreed on Friday November 09 2018, @07:32PM (1 child)
Also, winning involves getting less damage than you dish out.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by mhajicek on Saturday November 10 2018, @08:33AM
Or tanking better.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @07:15PM (1 child)
The movie doesn't focus on the villain so you won't see their acts.
Good villains aren't necessarily violent.
The hero has to respond in an expedient manner with force necessary to stop said villain.
I'm sure in the next blockbuster film, Batman will attempt sue the Joker into oblivion.
The Joker doesn't show for court and Batman is awarded default judgement.
Absolutely riveting!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @09:24PM
Batman is actually quite fascinating in legal dramas. Here is a documentary showing the time he sued Superman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vW5IHewoypA [youtube.com]
So yes I think Batman v Joker ala People's Court would be quite fascinating to watch.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @07:25PM (2 children)
Is now 8 years running and I've missed nothing of value. Hollywood loves them because they're universal sellers. Sell great worldwide because simple action plots have worldwide appeal. The protagonist is wearing a mask half the time so could be any nationality.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @07:52PM (1 child)
They've become boring. Avengers tries to keep things interesting but fails so hard. Infinity War was the most ridiculously stupid plot which I'm pretty certain they're gonna ex-machina their way out of.
"JUST KIDDING! Dr. Strange messed with time again and everything is fine now."
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday November 09 2018, @08:59PM
(Score: 5, Insightful) by unauthorized on Friday November 09 2018, @07:26PM (3 children)
Depicted. Important keyword here. The reason heroes inflict more violence than villains is because they get more screentime per hour since they are the protagonists of the story. If you were to take a story with a villain-protagonist, you'd get the inverse effect in spades. See Judge Dredd and Deadpool for example. Furthermore as the villains are antagonists, they happen to fail to accomplish their intended damage because there are heroes to stop them - villainous goals if realized usually would result in damage that is orders of magnitude greater than what the heroes do to stop them.
And to put the final nail of the coffin, their sample size is FUCKING 10. No, I'm not missing a zero, these "scientists" watched 10 superhero movies and wrote a "scientific" paper about it. This is the state of oppression studies academia people.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Friday November 09 2018, @07:53PM
> And to put the final nail of the coffin, their sample size is FUCKING 10. No, I'm not missing a zero, these "scientists" watched 10 superhero movies and wrote a "scientific" paper about it. This is the state of oppression studies academia people.
So, they got paid grant money to sit around for days on end, watching superhero movies? Probably had to re-watch them several times to make detailed notes and make sure they didn't miss anything.
Sounds like a pretty decent gig. Only thing missing is them being able to expense the food and drink (if they were any good, they would already have managed to expense the home theater system they had to use for the project).
Of course, the end of any project is usually some kind of paper. No matter how bad, you have to provide something in return for the grant you got.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by corey on Saturday November 10 2018, @02:43AM (1 child)
You might be right about the fact that the hero is shown more. But the average kid doesn't analyse it this way. The motivation behind the research was children's exposure to violence.
(Score: 2) by unauthorized on Saturday November 10 2018, @11:26AM
The average "kid" doesn't watch movies rated 13+, and if yours does then that's your individual responsibility as a parent. As for teenagers, they are quite capable of comprehending the nuance of justifiable violence in response to a terrible transgression.
(Score: 5, Informative) by RedBear on Friday November 09 2018, @07:52PM
It's not that I'm necessarily disagreeing that heroes tend to use a lot of violence to solve problems, and the stereotypical male will usually resort to a violence-based solution much earlier than a stereotypical heroine... but...
I am very curious exactly what these people wrote down during their research whenever the villain oh so politely (and non-violently) pushed "START" on his doomsday machine to destroy the world, or told the hero about a nuclear bomb planted somewhere in the city, and the only apparent solution to stopping the plan to do violence to millions was using some violence on some bad guys.
Was it only considered "violence" when someone was actually having a physical conflict? That's how the abstract makes it sound. The thing with movie villains is that they will typically have a goal of stealing the property of others (violence), subjugating a group of people (violence), conquering or destabilizing entire countries through manipulation (violence), or killing half or all the population of the world via some kind of doomsday plot device (violence). The hero will typically be using the violence to prevent major tragedies (aka violence).
There are many things that are far more damaging than getting punched in the face, and they all fit under the umbrella of "violence" depending on how you define it. Judging just from the abstract this seems like the "study" was done from a very limited viewpoint to address the problem of small children hurting themselves or others while imitating onscreen "heroes". The conclusion seems to be that for small children watching movies containing "good guys" performing physically violent acts, parents should take responsibility to provide some context to help their children understand not to emulate the behavior in the real world. Because it's natural for children to want to emulate "heroes".
Or in other words, "Parents should parent." I can't say I disagree. I daresay there should be very few here who would disagree with such a conclusion.
¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @08:06PM (8 children)
Yes, thank you for injecting identity politics in this! Not that the whole damned thing is meaningless bullshit to begin with. But instead of calling for more violent female superheros (more Wonder Woman, and why the fuck hasn't Supergirl or Batgirl made the big screen yet? Or for that matter where is a live action Batgirl at all?!), you're going to use to it continue with this idea that having a womb (and I'm still not clear whether regular menstruation is required or if it still counts if menstruation is irregular or mostly nonexistent, and whether patients who require the surgical removal of their wombs cease being women or at least experience a fall from grace and then become inferior beings) makes one into a superior bein--
Oh fuck it. Kill all men! The violence gap can only be eliminated by implementing the Exterminate Men Angelic Contract System immediately!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @08:32PM (1 child)
was this whole thing a lead-in to an emacs joke? wtf
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday November 09 2018, @11:02PM
Yes, let's not revive the holy war.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @09:41PM
Supergirl made the big screen a long time ago. Though surely she should be Superwoman, calling her Supergirl is somewhat sexist, unless you are going to start calling Superman, Superboy instead.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @10:00PM (1 child)
Let's have Wonder Woman whip the villain's spleen out of his body and eat it raw in front of him while he's gradually dying, screaming with agonizing pain.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 10 2018, @08:04PM
There is already a female comic book character named "Heavy Flo" whose superpower involves the use of a biological weapon. [gamespot.com]
Presumably a side effect of this character's powers is to infect her opponents with AIDs and other blood borne pathogens.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @10:34PM
To answer your questions, it's actually licensing issues that prevent SuperGirl from returning to the big screen.
Even though DC took a different approach than Marvel.
I say this because DC Characters exist explicitly in a multiverse. They took supers who were not moving comics and licensed them for exclusive use to TV, therefore these characters cannot be used in movies.
But there is no "storytelling reason" that it has to be that way, the entire Arrowverse is this way due to licensing.
Marvel TV characters on the other hand, exist in the same universe as their movie counterparts, with the exception being the XMen characters who were licensed to Fox.
Which is probably why the two XMen related TV franchises (Legion and The Gifted) have no Xmen in them, except Polaris who is Magneto's daughter and the Stepford Cuckoos none of whom are unlikely to ever make it into an XMen movie.
I'm not sure if you're aware but right now Supergirl has an active TV series starring Melissa Benoist that isn't terrible.
Going back to my previous assertion about licensing. There are a couple of notable exceptions. The Flash was in the Justice League movie and Superman was in the Supergirl TV series.
But the Flash of Justice League was already written into the movie before the Flash TV series debuted, so the Flash from the movies is a very different Flash than the one on TV.
In fact it's been rumored that the movie Flash will have a run in with TV's Flash during the Flash solo movie. So Flash might be a bit of a wildcard here.
Superman makes the occasional cameo on SuperGirl, but it's only briefly and he's there to highlight the differences in approach to crime fighting between SuperGirl and Superman, before he flies off to save the day somewhere else.
The Superman on TV is a very, very different Superman than the one in the movies.
But the multiverse is a real presence in the TV series from DC.
The seasonal crossovers between arrowverse shows usually have to bring Supergirl into the universe shared by Flash and Arrow through some scientific gimmick.
She cannot just fly there nor go there on a whim.
However beyond those 2 exceptions, for 99% of it, the TV shows are for characters that are not licensed to movies and explicitly exist in a multiverse where they are the primary hero.
Gotta roll in that dough somehow.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Magic Oddball on Friday November 09 2018, @11:27PM
It's only identity politics if you believe that being a woman or man is merely an "identity" rather than a simple fact.
If you produced a perfectly healthy biological clone of me, it would be female (two X chromosomes, breasts, vagina, etc.). The fact that I don't match gender stereotypes (or come closer to a male stereotype) is just as irrelevant to "what" I am as it is for other animals.
The term for a being whose genetics & chromosomes are of indeterminate gender or produced conflicting body parts (e.g. vagina + testes, Klinefelter's Syndrome, etc.) is "intersex." I figure they're the exception to the rule: they know how their birth defects affect them, so it's up to them to choose.
What's wrong with noticing factual differences in how males & females are depicted or what's expected of us, exactly? They are there, they do influence what people expect of men & women and how they react when people don't conform, which is just as often unfair to men as it is to women, and we can't rectify that without identifying the underlying cause.
(Score: 2) by stretch611 on Saturday November 10 2018, @02:05PM
<PoliticallyIncorrect>If we are interested in seeing an ultraviolent female superhero, maybe we can just film one during that time of the month.</PoliticallyIncorrect>
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @09:44PM
There's a difference between using force and violence.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @09:53PM
Han shot first!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @10:18PM (6 children)
Absurd. One word: Thanos.
In one fell swoop Thanos obliterates half the population, not of the Earth, but the entire Universe.
This is not violence?
Stupid researchers produce stupid research.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09 2018, @11:28PM (3 children)
Ooooh, AC found an outlier! SNAP sonnnn, them researchers are gone go piss their pants in embarrassment.
Logic +1
Critical Thinking -4
(Score: 3, Interesting) by edIII on Saturday November 10 2018, @12:37AM
Uhhh, no. Critical Thinking +5.
It's exactly what I came here to say. The movie never shows just how bad the villain really is, and just how is the prospect of all of New York perishing not more violent than Superman bringing down a whole building?
Superman doesn't bring down a few buildings fighting bad guy, bad guy fucking terraforms Earth. Did they show what Thanos had done already? He was mid-way on his genocidal killing spree before we even got to him at all, and his origin story involves him wiping out the rest of his home planet, BY HAND.
If you go by just the movie, you are missing out on quite a bit of content and context you need to the comics and books for. It's like judging Lord of the Rings based on the movie, when the books have a significant amount of content, and therefore context, never found in the movies.
Violence in general, has increased in movies since I was a child. If you want a real study, look at the original Superman movie. I don't mean the 1978 film, but the 1951 film. The first film has Superman saving the villains as well as the people, revealing a misunderstanding and everyone is saved. The 1978 film with Christoper Reeve, it shows very little violence, if any. Except for the fact Lex Luthor was going to kill maybe 100 million people sinking the West Coast into the Pacific Ocean.
The 2010 movies? Even worse.
Not just violence either, pushing the envelope for shock humor, raunchy late night fare, etc.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by unauthorized on Saturday November 10 2018, @11:21AM (1 child)
Magneto: Genocide
Dr Doom: Authoritarian dictator
Joker: Serial killer
Loki: Enabled war of aggression
Kingpin: Mafia boss
Red Skull: Literal nazi
Apocalypse: See the name
Do I need to continue?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 11 2018, @02:56AM
Yes.
It took decades for the writers to figure out that Batman and Superman playing catch-and-release might not in fact be working after the 500th breakout. It will take some other people far longer, since most people who go to movies or buy comic books probably wouldn't want to spend entire story arcs going into detail about how a city is being graphically slaughtered for the big bad's sadistic plans, so there isn't a lot of footage of that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 10 2018, @07:19PM (1 child)
Thanos was not violent to all. He merely switched realities... Universe 1 vs Universe 2. So the total population was sustainable.
Remember is The Matrix: Humanity is virus, it consumes and/or destroys its environment and moves on to do it again.
So in the end the GOOD guys will WAYS be worse than than the BAD guys. you need to take the long view look at the issue.
(Score: 2) by mr_mischief on Monday November 12 2018, @06:13PM
He had the power to change any aspect of reality at the snap of his fingers. He chooses to make half of sentient beings just not exist. Why not make everything twice as efficient?
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Saturday November 10 2018, @09:14AM
So -- first thing. There is no published paper here yet:
I wanted to find out a few things... such as:
- what movies were looked at
- what the criteria was for counting a violent act
- conditions for those acts
But could find nothing... not without published info. So far, this is just "a bunch of students" saying "we found violence *on screen*."
The on screen part is key here.
Example....
Villain steals top secret plans to destroy the world, via some super-large anti-matter bomb. The then steals anti-matter.
In the above, the villain killed hundreds of thousands of government guards and employees, and even let the anti-matter lab blow up with some remaining anti-matter failing containment after he destroyed the place.
But as someone else mentioned in this thread.. most of those wouldn't be "on screen".
Anyhow...
The real comment I have about this .. press release (without anything published yet!), is that it is keyed towards how many "violent acts" a child sees, and if those acts are linked to 'goodness'. EG, a "hero".
They want John Wayne back.
(Score: 3, Informative) by shortscreen on Saturday November 10 2018, @09:57AM
Hordes of baddies vs. one player. Villains and their henchmen outnumber heroes. So it falls to the hero to fire more rounds and bust more heads.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 11 2018, @02:23AM
It's rather jarring that it took the writers so many decades to realize that maybe, just maybe, Superman and Batman having what amounted to a fanatically-compliant catch-and-release program for genocidal and/or omnicidal maniacs, usually sentenced to the same prison they broke out of 20 times before at their convenience, just might not be working.
Besideswhich, most villains have most of their misdeeds off-screen. It would be a little difficult to have the villain's henchmen pillaging cities and slaughtering the inhabitants in graphic detail in a movie that's only a few hours long and rated PG-13. Most people would rather watch a hero kick the villain's ass rather than watch every agonizing moment it takes him to burn a city to the ground.