Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 18

Preface

Note that this is a first quick draft, after only two views. I used a specific methodology of analysis: this is not a criticof appreciation, but an analysis of the movie. The true method of analysis is longer and more complete, and requires an analysis of the structures that affect more than just the four points analyzed here, and more comprehensively. This text contains critical movie information (i.e. spoilers). Also, this was rapidly translated from the French.

1. Introduction

While the movie Batman vs Superman (2016) has only been released for a few days as this analysis is written, critics already believe that the film is inferior to Marvel's universe, that it is incoherent for a "lack of structure", that the events taking place before us are confused and without links. In other words, the "critics" feel that the film has no internal substance that allows it to be a coherent whole, a film. The reality is, in my opinion, quite different.

This film is actually structured at a different level than what critics seek to analyze; that is to say that for them the film must be analyzed in the first degree, in the literal degree, in its fullness. If this literalness of the film, that is to say the simple sequences and the images that take place according to the canonical formats on the screen, is not respected, then the film is considered "incoherent". However, this film deals with a different structure, that of the symbolic structure. The fact this is conscious or not on the part of the screenwriter is of no concern to us for reasons we will not disclose.

Is its literal or cinematic Hollywoodian structure a good "entertainment"? I will not pass judgment on this here; I leave this field open to each person sensibility towards movies and their style. What interests me here is the symbolic and semiotic development of Zack Snyder's work.

From the outset, let us say that we take Greimas's position that symbolic systems allow for the overlapping of "layers" of signifiers, that is, one thing can mean many other things at different levels of semiotic analysis. Also, I take the bias that the symbol is, as with Lacan, a "knot of meanings" that must be undone, little by little, in a deep enterprise. This in-depth analysis, I do it under the cover of hermeneutics, thanks to the hermeneutic circle that says that the part helps to analyze the whole, and the whole to analyze the part. My method will be that of the religiological analysis of Jacques Pierre made for the interpretation of film.

To do this, I will use a three-step analysis before going for a summary conclusion. The first analysis will be that of materials, that is to say the "material" borrowed from other works or other films directly inserted in the film by the director and the writers as building blocks. The second will be the level of symbolic structures, including a look at time, space, objects and characters. Finally, an analysis of the function (morphology) of the film in its relation to reality.

2. Analysis Material

In terms of materials, it is important to note that the concept of Batman vs. Superman (BvS) itself is taken from a series of comicbooks. Not reading comicbooks, I will not be able to judge or interpret them in relation to the film:

in other words, they will be left totally beside my analysis and could potentially reveal additional interesting elements, especially in the choice of the director/writer elements that have been modified or added as to the original material

The most important material is, of course, Snyder's film Man of Steel (2013, MoS) that introduced us to Superman's figure in his present constitution. I will use it in a few places here to specify symbolic elements: the present film being made with direct references (some scene even taken from MoS), it seems fair to me to integrate it in the material to the study as obviously the director wanted to build on the first movie.

The film also uses mythological or religious references. For example, Prometheus is often referred to positively as the main antagonist of the film, Lex Luthor. Moreover, the name of God is mentioned on different occasions. Even more interestingly, I do not remember any mention of Jesus Christ, whereas as we will see, he is the major symbol of the work; again, we must not see on the surface of the narrative and borrowed materials but dig deeper.

The film occurs in a universe parallel to ours. I say parallel in the sense that certain facts are modified (for example the existence of superheroes and fictitious cities like Metropolis or Gotham), but which has the same constitution and the same history as our world (on the surface).

Superman himself is a material (just like Batman), in the sense that he is borrowed. This fact is not insignificant, as Snyder himself mentions this:

I think the relationship between Jesus and Superman is not a thing we invented in this film, it is a thing that has been talked about since the creation of Superman. And in a weird way, probably was talked about more when Superman was created than it is now. It’s one of those things mythologically you take for granted, a little bit.

Already on the internet, several analyzes abound on the links between Christ and Superman, for example at the level of their original name (Kal-El meaning "Voice of God"), their "operative" age (around 30 years), etc. The purpose of this talk is to focus on the film itself and its internal symbolic structures first and foremost.

Structure

Time

The film is set mainly in autumn in its imagery, as we can see on the one hand by the ambient temperature and the festivities that take place there (the Mexican feast of the dead). This timing seems to me not at first sight very important, except that autumn is the "dead" season, the darkest, which leads to the birth of the "unconquered sun" at the winter solstice; as to say, the return

of light to men. But also, it is the season of the "fall" of leaves, of the death of nature.

The film makes use of a classic cinematic effect: slow motion. When the time slows down in the film, it is usually for ceremonial purposes (funerals) or uses related to a form of sacredness, a mysterium or a numen that gives rise to a "whole other", a elsewhere (see Mircea Eliade on the sacred or Rudolf Otto on the numinous). For example, the introduction plays on this theme for the death of Batman's parents; the same effect is used when Superman realizes the uselessness of maintaining relations with men after the bombing; the same effect is used in the fight between Batman and Superman; etc. Even if time does not stop, it is conceivable that "what does not change" (i.e. in time) is closer to a form of sacred; a personal revelation of reality as it is, not as the character would like it to be.

What is interesting is also the choice of the release of the film: Easter Thursday in the West. This is the beginning of the Roman Catholic triduum that marks death as much as the resurrection of Christ. This data is far from innocuous as we will see later.

Space

The macrocosmic space opposes Gotham, the dark, corrupt and decaying city, to Metropolis, the city under the leadership of the Superman. The characters themselves refer to this dichotomy when they meet while Superman criticizes how Gotham handles his crime. Gotham is never seen in broad daylight, while Metropolis is more often (but not exclusively) shown in broad daylight. Also, in the tomb of his parents, where we see an icon in glass of St. Michael, behind it represents a city: as if Saint Michael was the savior of the city against the devil; this element will later be important to make sense of the symbolic links of Superman.

Each of the two protagonists also have on one side its secular space and its sacred space (again, for the use of this terminology, see Mircea Eliade). For Batman, secular space is his batcave, where he discusses with Alfred, and spends most of his time preparing materially. This is where he sleeps, eats and

has sex; in other words, it is the "normal" profane space of everyday human life. His sacred space is represented by the grave of his parents whom he visits in great reverence, depositing flowers there and which is also integrated with his subconscious in his prophetic / premonitory dreams. For Superman, his secular space is his apartment where he eats and spends most of his time with Lois Lane. Its sacred space is the mountain and the snowy areas; they are places far removed from all traces of man, it is his divine "kingdom" that even allows him to have conversations with deceased figures and symbolically loaded like his father. In both cases, the link with the parents is a link (through space) to a form of sacredness.

The mountain is a symbol of sacredness in the Christian tradition, especially with Horeb, or Mount Sinai, where Moses, prefiguring Christ on the mountain in the Gospel of St. Matthew (it is a recurring theme at home), is the character talking with his father. In BvS, the mountain is also the landmark where Superman discusses with his father the way forward. What is even more interesting is that his father even makes a comment distinguishing people from the mountains (i.e., the Father's symbol, the dead ancestor and the Superman) from the people of the plain. (humans"). This distinction between the high and the low, between the father and the son, between the son and the men is characteristic of the rest of the film. It is a fact that is repeated while the virtue of Superman is questioned: is the distance that separates man from Superman not a guarantee of a submission that would cause an imbalance in the order of things? Is this not a problem that must be regulated by the regulation of its "divine" character? The problem here is that on the plain, the rules only apply to men; Superman and the forces of evil who oppose it are not subject to these same rules.

Also, the film puts a lot of emphasis on the verticality of things. Objects fall, objects rise. Batman himself, in his speech at the very beginning of the film, speaks of the "fall", a Christian and platonic reference, where things before time, "diamond perfect", did not suffer the corruption of the world; but in our world, everything is falling. It is a concept related to the "long defeat" of Christianity. Besides the speeches, the film itself shows us these elements in a cinematic way: Batman falling in the hole, pearls falling to the ground, his parents falling to the ground, etc. while we see on the other side Superman who

always rises, who seeks the top of the mountains, etc. What falls is humanity; but there are still possibilities of elevation, like Batman's bats in his dream that leads him to a "light," or Superman who raises Lois (or at least prevents her from falling). This Batman discourse on the devolution of the times could be contrasted with the finale, where Batman conceives an opening (because the resolved antagonism) where, without denying the Fall, there is a possibility that opens for the humanity not to build a paradise, but to rebuild what is destroyed by their decay; a voluntary correction brought to the world.

This verticality is also linked, in the case of Batman, to the place of sacredness: where Superman has a mountain (high-sacred), Batman has a cave (low-profane). That being said, the cave in itself is a symbol of resurrection and being reborn; more could be said on this. The cave is inside the mountain.

Objects

The objects in the film are associated with men and not with the divine:

Superman's Kryptonian father did not leave him any weapons or significant objects (except his costume), his human father either, even as a mind on the mountain. In reality, the objects (and the science / technology behind them) are the hallmark of man: social constructs that allow for their failure, as exemplified by the use of technique by Lex Luthor to achieve his ends. With Batman we have the same paradigm at work; the difference here being that his objects also make use, at the end, of a loan to the "all other", to the "divine", kryptonite.

The role of kryptonite inside the film is ambiguous: sometimes salvific, sometimes destructive. It's easy to see why: the movie makes us interchange the human (Batman) and divine (Superman) points of view; for both, the effects are drastically different. This point of view is made clear in particular by the opening scene borrowed from MoS, where we see the divine battles from the point of view of men (Batman), those who suffer the wrath of heaven without being able to act. The same technique is used elsewhere as we observe the actions and reflections of each of the characters. Inside the film itself, the

characters (most notably Lex Luthor) recognize this dichotomy between divine and human in Superman's opposition to Batman.

Kryptonite is notably forged to make a particular weapon, a spear. This detail is not insignificant since the spear of Longinus is the spear that pierced the flanks of Christ in his passion, from which escaped water and blood. The water and the blood are both linked to the spear while it is lost in a puddle before being found on the one hand, and on the other it is tinged with Superman's blood by the cut that Batman makes.

We could also invoke two minor elements in Batman: the pearl of his mother's necklace that falls with him into the well in his dream, thus pointing to the link between his fall and his mother; and the use of the rifle against Superman who, because of the scene of the father's hubris with the clenched fist (see below), makes a metonymy between Batman and the criminal (who had also used a rifle); except that in the criminal, there was not this impetus of empathy, this recognition of the Other.

Characters and their Trajectory

For this section, I will separate in three the consideration of the characters and their trajectory in the film. First, I will address the figure of Lex Luthor who, because the antagonist, is a passive character (because mostly unchanged in the film), character inferior in the traditional symbolism. Subsequently, I will address the two active characters, that is to say Batman and Superman.

a. Lex Luthor

Lex Luthor, in addition to the obvious link between his name and that of Luther, is a character presented as subversive (as demonstrated by his inversion of the painting of demons against angels): he is opposed to the social order (senator and government ), he opposes the human aspect (Batman) and divine (Superman). In addition, he obeys his personal hubris with a "titanic" impetus (against he Olympian order of gods and man): he associates himself with the figure of Prometheus, the one who wanted to reject the divine order according to his own judgment towards men. For him, the human must prevail over the

divine from a purely Luciferian (as in: rebellion for powers, leaded by pride) and vain point of view: the human must unleash the elemental forces (the material, the grotesque, the violent like Doomsday) in order to acquire this that he wants to acquire; it is what drives him to literally criticize Superman's absolute virtue and to judge him as dangerous. Lex Luthor cannot conceive of any higher Principle in this world [1], so the material powers of Superman (his power is unparalleled on earth) is dangerous mutatis mutandis. This is because Lex Luthor refuses anything superior to the material and individual / subjective plane that he cannot conceive Superman's reality as a manifestation of a superior and virtuous Principle; he reduces Superman's figure to the material, thereby distorting his substance.

Lex Luthor, moreover, does not produce, by himself, any act: he asks others to do, he uses machines and men to create [2]. He is an agent of discourse, like the senate and the human mass. Indeed the discourse between the divine and the human is put forward many times in the film, always in a failure: the direct speech according to the human laws can only lead to a failure because to hold such a discourse between God and Man, a bridge is needed between the two, an element that allows to recognize the divine in man and the man in the divine (see below). The discourse is opposed to the essences of things as well as to acts; this is what allows Superman's mother to tell him that these people are only expressing a doxa, an impermanent element that does not change the reality of Superman. His mother tells him that he owes nothing to the world; in doing so, she makes him understand that any act of kindness towards the world is an act of will, of "grace" on the part of Superman, which echoes the classic conception of the action of Christ. The bankruptcy of the discourse besides is solved in the death of the human agents, whereas the divine one, Superman, is untouched (see the senate scene).

Lex Luthor is not alone in his representation of titanic forces: his creature, Doomsday, is also of the purely material and destructive type. It is Superman's opposition: both are equally powerful in material terms, but they are not equivalent in their virtue or substance. Moreover, the mass of people (as in incoherent force of opinion/doxa) is also associated with this force while it is influenced by Lex Luthor to position itself against Superman. The first Batman, before his redemption (see below), is also of the Promethean type,

putting his trust in his material and combative abilities (his weapons, his physical training, etc.). Lex Luthor, therefore, the man of the discourse - we could add sophistry of the style of Gorgias - is an antagonist of subversion and opposition which characterizes the imperfect relationship of democracy and the corruptible mass.

b. Batman

Batman represents the human aspect; he does so by being attracted as much by the Promethean account settlement (thus towards "the bottom") against Superman as by the relation towards the divine (thus towards "the high"). The human being is here represented as a multiple or incomplete being and torn apart. This is what the introduction to Batman's dream caution, where the human falls in the cavern, but is offered a possibility of extricating himself from the depths to join the light (besides the position of the Bruce Wayne's child at this moment is that of the cross while he is raised to heaven).

The "first" Batman is a man who tends towards the Promethean aspect, which refuses the divinity by what it could bring as destruction whereas it is conceived only from the point of view of the men, that is to say mainly material and moral. It is the Promethean spirit of Luthor that corrupts Batman by subversion and ignorance (i.e. the facts built into the checks he receives, the repeated lies, etc.). It is a question of construction by false mental representations. He does not have access to the "thing in itself" because he refuses to see beyond, to shed his individuality by a refusal to communicate with Superman (we could even ask if it is even possible without the intervention of an event as powerful as the one who will change him). On the other hand, what already differentiates him from the mass is his upright character: he does not ask others to do what he can do himself, unlike Lex Luthor. He tries to do his best and judges that the best must act (hence his action in Gotham and then against Superman). It is this same upright spirit that continues later when it implies the creation of a league of superheroes.

The character does not stay unchanged through the narrative of the cinematographic work. In the critical scene where he decides not to kill

Superman (which is the film's critical stage, the "symbolic knot" par excellence), a "second" Batman takes shape.

This one appears by the resolution of Oedipus as conceived in psychoanalysis [3]. Batman [4] has, since the beginning of the film, a tormented relationship with the girl/women/mother, [5] especially in the visions of her mother who dies to whom we give the last words to her father. Thus, the figure of the mother is deep and striking in Batman, without being seen directly by him. He cannot resolve this internal conflict by himself, and therefore plans the murder of a father by divine fatherhood, Superman, in order to resolve this conflict that marks him. But in the end, the resolution is different. While Superman is about to succumb to Longinus's spear, after revealing his humanity through fear (see Batman's speech after the smoke grenade with kryptonite) as well as blood (Batman's cut on his face in connection with Batman's earlier talk with Superman about his deity and his blood), Superman opens up to Batman asking him to save his own mother. The names of the two mothers being the same, Martha, Batman thinks that Superman asks him to save his own mother (when in fact, Superman accepts his death and asks him to at least go save his mother). This resolution of the Oedipus occurs while Batman recognizes a Same in the deity: he also has a mother, a mother he wants to see again (and we could add, his own mother, since they are, linguistically, the same). Thus, Batman recognizes his counterpart in Superman while he sees in the Other One a Same:

love and the relationship to the mother. Seeing this link, the Event allows him not to see an antagonist in the Other but on the contrary to see a part of the same: this allows for a new Christian morality fixed on the Christ imperative of the dignity of all being in essence. This change is exemplified in his treatment of Luthor, which is like the treatment Superman had given him, i.e., to spare him

By cutting him off, Batman symbolically opens the visceral dialogue that allows for an existential exchange, not just theoretical as in congress by the discourse. Superman accepts his humanity and so they can converse from human to human (or from divine to divine?), where the oedipal resolution of Batman and the substantial progression of Superman happens; he reveals his fully man aspect.

An opening was already prefigured in the father's hubris in the scene where the closed fist directed against the criminal at the beginning of the film in his youthful vision caused his death. Superman's hubris is the same as a zoom-in is made on his fist that closes to hit Batman, the criminal, which causes his loss; the same loss that leads to the redemption of Batman (because to continue the fight for Superman leads to his defeat at the hands of Batman, same for his father, it is in this scene of the fight that everything is played) then that the same unresolved incident had led to the death of his parents and his own failure. This creates a link where the human can learn from the divine, and the divine from man.

Batman thus accepts his role in the story and having solved his internal conflict, he acquires a renewed virtue that allows him to assist Superman in his fight against Prometheus / Lucifer. Moreover, it allows him to attend, as a "favorite disciple" to the death of the divine; this element echoes the death of Jesus while the first to recognize him as truly God is a Roman legionnaire, that is to say, one of those who had persecuted him before. We even witness a scene (at the death of Superman) where crosses appear in the background, in a deep darkness (echoing the Gospel where the heavens are torn apart and the world is plunged into darkness), where his disciples and women mourners (Lois Lane and Wonder Woman) remove it from the cross (the hands of Doomsday) in order to deposit it in what looks like a cave in the eyes of the spectator: it is a summary of his passion, his death and his burial. Batman appears at the funeral as a Paulian figure: passing from a party that drove Christ and his followers to a party that defends him, he promises to set up a community that can continue his memory (his speech especially echoing Romans 5: 6 "For when we were yet deprived of all strength, Christ died in his day for us who were wicked"); thus the League of Justice would become an allegory of the Church.

c. Superman

For Superman, the essence of his transformation is also the acceptance of an inner conflict. This conflict is twofold: on the one hand his role of the divine and virtue, on the other hand his Oedipal problem (in this case with the father, while Batma

The character is torn by the mass and their opinion, while he wants to please their doxa rather than the inner imperative that guides him to the virtue that his fathers have summoned him to rule over this world, to demonstrate to humans. In fact, the Oedipal conflict begins here: he refuses to fully pursue his father's dream because it could cause problems for humans, especially at the doxa level. However, this element sees its first stage of resolution in the discourse that he holds with his father on the mountain: this one tells him a history (of symbolic and / or parabolic type) as what to do with the good, of how to be the hero of someone, and of the necessity to be the anti-hero of the someone to do so. Judges are always appreciated by the person receiving the compensation, and hated or feared by the one who receives the judgment. Moreover, this discourse tells him that the Oedipal resolution of the conflict with the world and his own internal symbolic confusion has passed, for his father, by the encounter and the acceptation of the Other as being the World, that is, Martha, his wife (and Superman's mother).

Thus, Superman does everything to go save his mother, this World of his father that he wants to make his own. In the end, after his existential encounter with Batman, he accepts the fact that this World is not his and even lets Batman go and defend her; thus, he shifts his mother to Lois Lane as he confesses his unconditional love (to which he was preparing a marriage, thus an alliance before God of Superman (the divine) and the Other (the human), that is, the World. This acknowledgment takes place on several levels: literally we understand that Superman's love is so great that he is willing to sacrifice himself for her (John 15:13 "There is no greater love than give your life for your friends "). In a deeper sense, however, we can use his father's speech to substitute the Other (Lois Lane) for the World [6]; thus, Superman admits his unconditional love for the World (his reality, not the one of his father) and his desire to save it. We then proceed to the sacrifice of the "living God" against the forces of darkness; the manifestation of the Principle of Virtue sacrifices itself in order to resolve the spiritual conflict that is occurring at this time between the forces of the Order who have resolved at that point their inner conflict (Wonder Woman accepting her destiny as a combatant in the service of the world rather than her own service and Batman recognizing the Same in the Other as a grounding of a spiritually superior ethic (because soteriological) that puts him at the level of the divine, and lastly Superman himself recognizing his principled destiny manifested to protect the World) against the

forces of titanic chaos unbridled by the human hubris attracted by the Promethean promises of a human who would control God rather than open a dialogue with him as Batman did. This fight of the order against chaos is exemplified in the references to Saint Michael [7] which are made: the tomb of the parents of the Batman has a work showing Saint Michael (represented according to the iconography of the rebirth, that is, i.e. in red and blue, like Superman) who defeats the Dragon (i.e. the force of chaos par excellence since long before Christianity), with a sword, piercing weapon in the same way that Superman will do at the end of the fight. Thus, in Superman, the resolution of the Oedipus is at the very end, in his death, by the crystallization of the World in the person of Lois Lane for his destiny.

Thus the conflict is also solved for the entire film while the question that persisted was "what justifies the power to act in the world?; the answer is here given: it is the disinterested love of others, of the recognition in the Other of the Same which is at the foundation of the human substance, the divinity which is capax dei and imago dei.

Capax dei because while Lois Lane, through personal devotion, is getting closer to the deity, Batman is also equal with his participation in the internal as well as the external conflict with the demonic forces (his internal conflicts unsolved in his dreams and his fight against Doomsday). Imago dei because they all share this same inner flame and divine dignity.

For Superman, Christ-like imagery abounds in the fact that it is at the center of the event of sharing between the divine and the human. His two natures were united in his death (only his divine aspect was strong enough to kill Doomsday, but at the same time he was fully human while he was dying weakened by kryptonite). His resurrection and the ceremony of his death also prefigure this double nature of Christ: there are two ceremonies that are made to him, and it is in the fully human one (in his family) that we see the subtext of his resurrection. His body being, like Christian saints, incorruptible by death, he already proclames his sacred status.

Fu nction

The function of the film is complex. On the one hand, we are talking about a Hollywood movie that, obviously, wants to serve above all as "entertainment". But on the other hand, at the structural and symbolic level, the film wants to present us a philosophical movie about Christian virtue.

Christian movie or Christ-like movie? A Christian film would have served to present a Christian story, uplifting, which seeks above all to substitute the reality of the film to ours to educate us spiritually and morally. Here, the film is Christicbecause in the end Superman appears as an allegory of Christ. If Superman had stayed dead, it would have been a Christian movie, showing us how to behave ethically like a parable. Here, it is above all a Christ allegory that seeks to explore the spiritual questions related to the passion of Christ at this time of Easter.

In the case of the two protagonists, the resolution of the Oedipal complex leads to a bond that allows the Other to become intelligible by the Same (the bond of love with the mother and the ideals of the father in both cases). This link is what allows the recognition that goes through virtue (the strong bond of the film as demonstrated in Luthor's accusations against Superman conceived as "Virtue incarnated").

Superman thus fully manifest a Principle (symbolically) in his disinterested love of the World (symbolized by Lois Lane) which actually makes him, in the evolian sense, a superman, the Superman: the primordial man who, as a new Adam , allows the redemption of the human race as exemplified by the humanist speech of Batman (speech which also shows the inhabitants of Metropolis gathered, with candles, crying Superman / divinity: this scheme is the same as the day - in the Catholic triduum or Orthodox paschal vigil - as the Easter Vigil where the baptismal paschal candles prefigure and announce the resurrection of the Light of the world). This discourse is of course colored by the ideologies of our time; the alternative would have been very surprising. Still, remembering Northrop Frye's analysis of how the Bible is the "Great Code" par excellence on which the arts of Western society are based, we see that this Great Code is still present in our society to give metaphysical and anthropological material to be discussed through the ethical and existential reality presented in this film.

This Christic film touches in particular the different levels of Christian love, which culminates in agape, brotherly love for all Others as prescribed by the figure of Christ (Superman) who here in the film exemplifies it by his sacrifice.

Thus, the function of the film is to present a soteriological and tropological reflection on the Christic figure. We are presented with a Christ related to Saint Michael who destroys death by death, thus restoring the balance that culminates in his resurrection for the fulfillment of the manifestation of the Principle of immortal virtue that resist both time and space.

3. Conclusion

In short, we saw that the film touched themes related to morality and Christology (soteriology) to bring the characters to resolve internal oedipal conflicts that prevented them from putting their internal psychic and spiritual life in order, which effectively plunges them into ignorance, causing their external struggle. Then, as they should (and will eventually) unite to defeat the forces of chaos, they are here presented as an imperative of every human being who claims to be virtuous. Thus, in the end, we are told that redemption does not lead to the abandonment of the world, but rather to its uplifting and defense.

Just as Lois Lane is human but shares the life of Superman, Batman is purely human but ends up sharing this salvific character. The difference is that in reality, man does not have to open the existential connection with God; he has only to open himself. In all cases, Batman's act against Superman could always be interpreted as echoing "taking heaven by force".

In Christianity (orthodoxy), we are saved in our weakness. That is to say, it is in our errors, our wanderings and our ignorance that we are presented face to face with our pure humanity and that we thus tend towards an internal resolution which leads to the possibility of redemption, to the union with the divine. This same kind of point of view is emitted in the film while Batman reaches his redemption while he is going to have an excess of hubris / revenge and that Superman is dying. While MoS presented to us the birth of Christ and his mission on earth, BvS wants us to meet the passion and redemption of Christ to which we are led to share as a human.

This film, because it is badly accepted, shows us that it was made for another era, and that the message it contains is not understood; critics and people are no longer sensitive to this kind of narrative, symbolism, or values.

[1] Perhaps this is due to his hatred of the Father; in his discourse against God's agency against evil, he reduces God to his political and social action, claiming that He never helped him in his relationship against his father (I say againstrather than with, because it is the impression that Luthor leaves with all traditions, all relations). We could postulate that unlike the two protagonists, what makes Luthor passive is precisely this non-resolution of the Oedipal problem (see below #3).

[2] Moreover, this role of "creator" refers to both Faust and Frankenstein. The Kryptonite computer itself warns him against the titanic and monstrous appearance of his creature; but he does not want to know anything, he thinks that he rises beyond the principles of the world because according to him, their representation manifested in the world is where they stop: krypton's advice being dead, its values die with it. In the end, it is not a true creation: he is not "God": it is a perversion, a mixture (between human and Kryptonian DNA) that creates an undifferentiation, effectively linked to the chaos of the world.

[3] The complex is clearly introduced into the narrative by the antagonist, Lex Luthor. He mentions that the true feminine figure of "every boy" is his mother; as such, this passage is presented when the complex appears obvious to the viewer for Superman. It is not insignificant that it is Luthor who speaks of it first: on the one hand he is the antagonist (i.e. the oedipal complex is the real psychic antagonist of the protagonists); on the other hand, this is a direct nod, in my opinion, to the author of this complex, that is, Freud. Freud as Luthor was above all a scientist, a materialist and an anti-religious.

[4] Batman est un personnage très freudien : les théories psychanalytiques, outre le thème d’Œdipe que je reprends ailleurs dans mon, touchent beaucoup le psyché d’un point de vue descendant. Comme déjà mentionné, Batman est lié à cette descente, cette chute (rappelons-nous que tout tombe avec Batman, y compris dans sa bataille finale contre Superman où celui-ci le soulève au sommet du bâtiment et plus la séquence se développe plus ils vont vers le bas

; où sont entrainement où les poids sont consécutivement projeter vers le bas) qui se répercute dans ses rêves. Car les rêves sont un des aspects du subconscient étudié par la psychanalytique freudienne où se joue le drame interne. Il est un héro psychologique, le produit d’un traumatisme d’enfance qui prend lui-même la forme de la peur (ici les chauve-souris) pour combattre le crime, l’autre-id, qui généralement est un cas de névrose psychotique (on mentionne brièvement le Joker dans sa Batcave, mais aussi Lex Luthor qui est traité de psychotique par Lois Lane). Sa ville elle-même, Gotham, ressemble plus à un immense subconscient collectif où les forces déchainées de celui-ci ravage son paysage sombre de la nuit, beaucoup plus qu’à une ville fonctionnelle comme Metropolis (voir le commentaire du patron du Planet News sur le crime et Gotham). Tout ceci sans parler de l’aspect théâtrale et dramatique de ses costumes, de sa présence et de son impact. Les criminels de Gotham, du subconscient, sont enfermés à l’asile d’Arkham, pas dans les prisons. D’un sens, au-delà de la résolution christique exposée plus bas dans le texte, Batman représente au minimum la victoire du superego contre l’ego et l’id ; c’est ce qui le différencie d’un criminel (id) ou d’un vigilante comme le Punisher (ego). Nous pourrions même rajouter qu’en fait, sa quête pour tuer Superman vient probablement d’un débalancement interne, où l’ego reprend le dessus sur

Batman is a very Freudian character: psychoanalytic theories, in addition to the Oedipus theme that I take up elsewhere in this text, touch the psyche very much from a descending point of view. As already mentioned, Batman is linked to this descent, this fall (remember that everything falls with Batman, including in his final battle against Superman where it lifts him to the top of the building and the more the sequence develops the more they go down; as are his training weights being thrown to the ground or his descent into the cave) that reverberates in his dreams. For dreams are one of the aspects of the subconscious studied by the Freudian psychoanalytical school where internal drama is played out. He is a psychological hero, the product of a childhood trauma that takes on the form of fear (here bats) to fight crime, the other-id, which is usually a case of neurosis psychotic (we briefly mention the Joker in his Batcave, but also Lex Luthor who is characterized as a psychoticby Lois Lane). His own city, Gotham, looks more like a huge collective subconscious where the unbridled forces of it ravage its dark landscape of the night, much more than a functional city like Metropolis (see the comment of the boss of the

Planet News on crime and Gotham). All this without mentioning the theatrical and dramatic aspect of his costumes, his presence and his impact. The criminals of Gotham, of the subconscious, are locked up in the Arkham Asylum, not in the prisons. In one sense, beyond the Christic resolution in the movie, Batman represents at least the superego's victory against ego and id; this is what differentiates it from a criminal (id) or a vigilante like the Punisher (ego). We could even add that in fact, his quest to kill Superman probably comes from an internal imbalance, where the ego-id (which is why in the confrontation, as shown earlier, Batman is the criminal and Superman is Batmans Father) takes over the superego.

[5] Whether it is his relationship with Wonder Woman, or his relationship with women without faces in his bed in the morning, or with his mother's grave in his dream.

You are my world". In

the first sequence, Superman looks at the world, but also at the audience, briefly; in the second part of the sentence, he transposes his gaze to Lois, thus

completing the sliding and the recognition of the Other in the World and of the World in the Other for whom he bears his love

[6] Superman says, in the movie "This is my world

[7] Saint Michael is a complex figure: he is one of the archangels, protector of the gates of paradise, chief of the armies of heaven, the one who drove out Lucifer (i.e., the Promethean spirit in Christianity), and so on. His name, in direct transliteration in Latin, means "Quis Ut Deus", which can be taken as a rhetorical question or an affirmation: "Who is God". In the same way, the name of Superman, Kal-El (mentioned by Lex Luthor), means "voice of God" in approximate Hebrew.