Morality in the Media: The Antihero in Popular Culture

They can be known as badasses or rebels. They can be grizzled detectives or subjects of secret military experiments. They can be on both sides of the law, while dancing along the line of morality. They are conflicted and can be somewhat apathetic. These are the antiheroes and they are more prevalent today than they ever have been. So let’s explore the beginning of the antihero and its rise to prominence specifically in the United States, as well as look at prime examples and specific genres.

It used to be that in film and television the plot was “constructed around a series of fixed oppositions which allow for a limited number of changes and interactions” (Buxton 8). Therefore the plot and its characters within it were restricted to binary roles: good or evil, loyal or disloyal, killer or victim. This led to cookie cutter plots and characters and these same types of binary plots are still seen today. Nicholas Sparks for example has a very clear formula. Two characters, usually white and unbelievably beautiful, fall in love. Something then happens that separates the two or causes a melodramatic conflict that is then resolved due to the overwhelming power of love.

Even though cookie cutter plots and characters are still used today, the industries of both television and film have fractured and splintered, leading to many projects that create layered worlds exploring many different themes and different blended archetypes.

The beginning of the complex character in American popular culture can be traced as far back as the late 1800’s when pulp magazines started to arrive in American marketplaces. Pulp magazines were collections of fiction often associated with a certain genre. More specifically the detective pulps showcased the antihero. The antihero fights for “good” but not in any traditional way. They sometimes have to be pushed to do the right thing because they may inherently want to do evil. The detective pulp stories often dealt with murder and betrayal and a central mystery that tied it all together. The main characters of these pieces were the detectives or private eyes. These were not the typical heroes, they drank and/or smoked, and their actions were usually propelled through monetary gain or sex rather than some moral obligation to justice. Pulps became incredibly popular during the 1920’s and 1930’s but when World War II occurred the market saw a steep decline due to resource redistribution (mainly paper).

These types of characters and stories would make their big screen debut as well as return to the national spotlight when film noir took off in the 1940’s and 1950’s. Film noir is a “moody, pessimistic style of filming with downbeat plots, unscrupulous protagonists, and dark, atmospheric cinematography that reflected the social malaise and unease of postwar American society” (Dixon 104). The American cinematic marketplace would become flooded with noir films partly because “they were cheap to make, requiring little in way of sets and costumes” (Dixon 174). The style of film noir spans many different kinds of films; “this is why… critics see film noir as a movement rather than a genre” (Hayward 149). One example of film noir is The Big Sleep, full of “intricate twists and double crosses” (Dixon 100).

The film was directed by well-known director Howard Hawks, and starred accomplished actor Humphrey Bogart as private detective Philip Marlowe. Marlowe’s character is morally upright but he is highly cold and logical, a hard drinker, and makes wisecracks. He seems to be somewhat lethargic; the events around him propel the story, not his actions.

Around this same time Alfred Hitchcock was crafting many thrillers and films of suspense that fit the criteria of film noir including the classic antihero archetype. He “continued his string of suspense classics in England… before accepting an offer to come to Hollywood and direct” (Dixon 102), When Hitchcock came to Hollywood the antihero became even more prominent. “The world of noir is a continual pattern of betrayal, deception and violence in which no one can be trusted and everything is for sale at a price” (Dixon 174). Towards the end of film noir’s heyday in Hollywood, Orson Welles directed his “last American film… [and] also one of his best” (Dixon 112) the incredibly dark Touch of Evil.

The main character Vargas portrayed by prominent actor Charlton Heston has a moral obligation to justice but he is a violent man who kills his enemies. These are just some examples of film noir and its characters. Film noir offered “a cynical view of humankind” (Dixon, 119)Film noir created worlds in which no person was totally good; these films also prided themselves on being shot on location and using bystanders and people right off the streets in their shots using “the raw reality of the streets” (Dixon, 196). This need to be seen as real also affected characterization and plot, as not everything was so cut and dry reflecting real life. Film noir was the “counterforce that existed during wartime patriotism and wholesomeness” (Ellis 191).

Complex characters were fairly prominent in many of the westerns being produced by Hollywood. Such films included High Plains Drifter starring Clint Eastwood.

Clint Eastwood plays the titular character, who is reluctantly relied upon to protect a town. The town is morally backwards and to a lesser extent so is Eastwood. He is viscous and a bit sadistic. A scene early on in the film portrays Eastwood’s character raping a woman. But he is the character the audience inevitably roots for when he goes up against the outlaws. The association of heroic acts with vile ones created a complicated view of the protagonist and in doing so created an antivillain. These are characters whose actions, motives, and views lie more on the fringe. They can be seen as a bit sociopathic and to a greater extent psychopathic but they do have qualities that can get the viewer to relate with the character.

Complex characters’ popularity only increased in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s and unsurprisingly when the Vietnam War was taking place. The war in Vietnam had been going on for five plus years and the American public had become dissatisfied with the government and its actions at home and abroad. Characters that challenged the status quo and played by their own rules could be identified with more easily than those who did everything by the book.

One example of a film during this period with a complicated protagonist was Cool Hand Luke. The film starred Paul Newman as a prisoner who refuses to abide by the rules enforced within the prison walls. The ending of the film also reflects a turning point in characterization and storytelling in major motion pictures. Where at first audiences expected everything to end on a wonderful note with the hero triumphing over evil, now endings had the ability to be more ambiguous and challenging. It is heavily implied if not completely shown that the titular Luke dies from the gunshot wound in his neck. The protagonist died, he did not triumph over the central conflict and yet the ending is considered to be satisfying. The tagline for the film was “The man and the motion picture that simply do not conform”. To not conform became a selling point in America. Where at first complex characters were being created to expand the possibilities within any given story, now they were being created to say something, to send a message.

Clint Eastwood had already portrayed complex characters during his time working on spaghetti westerns (westerns produced and made in Italy), but perhaps his most popular character is the one who worked on the streets of San Francisco rather than in the deserts of the old west. Dirty Harry was released in 1971 and is about Inspector Harry Callahan as he works to track down a psychopath.

It contains one of the of the most well known lines in cinema but a line that is somewhat sadistic when put into context. Callahan with his gun drawn is standing over a criminal who just tried robbing a bank; the criminal is at the complete mercy of Callahan. Callahan then states, “I know what you’re thinking: ‘Did he fire six shots or only five?’ Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement, I’ve kind of lost track myself. But being this is a .44 magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you’ve got to ask yourself one question: ‘Do I feel lucky?’ Well, do you, punk?” Any villain could have uttered the line, while the good guy sits at his feet. But in creating the blatant dichotomy of cop and criminal, the sadism of the line is gone.

In 1976 Martin Scorsese released the neo-noir film Taxi Driver. Neo-noir shares almost the exact same standards of regular film noir but with the benefit of using modern technology to enhance the noir’s effect. Taxi Driver not unlike High Plains Drifter shows a more villainous main character. The main difference though between the two in regards to characterization is that in High Plains Drifter we only identify with Eastwood’s character due to the common enemy of the outlaws and immoral townspeople but in Taxi Driver the film created sympathy and depending on the viewer even empathy. Taxi Driver is about Travis Bickle, a Vietnam vet who, as the title suggests, works as a taxi driver.

From the narration, which is taken from Bickle’s diary, the viewer sees that Bickle is a bit sociopathic in nature. As the film progresses Bickle’s views and actions become more and more extreme. He “stalks” a woman he doesn’t even know and cannot carry a regular conversation. He befriends a child prostitute and tries to help her get a “normal” life but these scenes are coupled with Travis going on a first date to a porn den and so on. As the viewer sees Travis Bickle’s life on a very intimate scale, a relation is formed between the viewer and Travis, which give all of his action some credence. This all boils down to some intense scenes towards the end of the film where Bickle almost assassinates a would-be presidential candidate but runs at the last minute. Instead to vent his frustration at the world, he kills the pimps of a brothel. The world celebrates him as a hero vigilante who rescued a child from prostitution. The entire movie plays on who society sees as heroic and villainous, and that maybe some people are one and the same. Martin Scorsese has a track record for exploring morally ambiguous main characters. If Taxi Driver is known for its subtlety then 2013’s The Wolf of Wall Street is known for everything but. Unsurprisingly the film is based upon real world events. As discussed above having a real life influence in the film greatly increases the audience ability to relate to the story. The Wolf of Wall Street however does a great job of getting the audience to relate to the main character’s quest for wealth while simultaneously having them be incredibly critical of the actions he takes to get there and what he does with the wealth he attains.

In 1970’s Hollywood this mass adoption of conflicted central characters worked. But this is not always the case. Recently gritty redesigns of popular characters have occurred in the hopes of getting audiences to relate more. There are some cases where this truly works such as Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy but one of the main reasons it works there is because the character of Batman was already predominantly stark. Other tries at redesigns don’t always work so well such as The Amazing Spider-Man, Transformers: Age of Extinction, and Man of Steel.

In The Amazing Spider-Man the added layer of conspiracy and familial secrets hurt more than it helped. The plot became too convoluted and somewhat campy which is the opposite of the gritty and dark tone they were striving for. The critical reception was somewhat negative on this new take on a popular hero compared to the earlier more light hearted approached taken by Sam Raimi in 2002 and 2004.

In Transformers: Age of Extinction, they redesigned the character of Optimus Prime, making him more violent and aggressive rather than his regular peaceful and honorable attitude.

The reasoning wasn’t strong enough for the obviously dramatic character change and the film made less money than its predecessor.

In Man of Steel, the filmmakers tried to make Superman more edgy and unprincipled, but in doing so they betrayed the very basis of Superman. Superman was created to be anti-corruptible; there was no moral ambiguity.

He would always do good no matter what because he was Superman. The drastic character change hurt the film both critically and commercially.

Now just because complex characters lived life up on the big screen that in no way means that they were absent from the small one. Television has a long history with complex characters. Television and its shows needed to appeal to the majority of the masses. With the rapid rate of adoption of the television set throughout the 60’s and 70’s and in turn rise of multiple channels, their shows needed to do more to win viewers from the competition. This led to the rise of complex characters rather than the cookie cutter roles. The creation of these complicated characters on television was so that the audience could relate more and thus widen said audience. The more relatable the show the more appealing it was. “We are not clearly and thoroughly this or that. We are not completely permeated by one role” (Sumser 35). Therefore characters who have established characteristics spanning multiple planes of morality can be more easily relatable. The rise of complex characters inherently made the shows on which they appeared more complex. On crime dramas “detection, for both the audience and detective… [meant] the ability to correctly identify social types” (Sumser 42). Before all the audience had to do was look for the suspicious character in the background but now that the protagonist can be seen as equally suspicious, the mystery is raised to a whole new level.

Certain shows have explored complex characters more successfully than others such as The Sopranos, The Shield, The Wire and Breaking Bad.

The Sopranos, revolving mainly around Tony Soprano and his relationship to his criminal family and his duties as a father and husband created a fully dynamic character. For example scenes of him helping his daughter get in college coupled with the savage brutality of Tony Soprano killing a man with his bare hands showed both a man and a monster. These thematic shifts between scenes in the show created a character the viewer can both root for and against. The Shield not unlike The Sopranos shows the savage brutality of its main character but the redeeming quality in this instance is the pursuit of justice.

The Wire’s characters consisted mainly of criminals but these criminals weren’t all inherently evil, in fact; the viewer could often find logical and relatable reasons for the criminal’s acts. Creating a world full of criminals can give way to a world rich with fully realized characters that seem more human than their cop counterparts who are seen in the minority. That disparity between criminals and cops led to more complex characters.

In Breaking Bad a descent into villainy and a rise to somewhat heroic standards in its two main leads is explored throughout the series. In the very beginning of the series Walter White fit the standard criteria of an antihero. He does bad things but for good reasons. He creates and peddles crystal meth, but it’s to provide for his family. But as the series progresses Walter begins to lose sight of his original intentions and succumbs to the criminal world he inevitably found himself in. He successfully transitions from antihero to antivillain. Jesse Pinkman, the main supporting character, on the other hand has somewhat of the opposite journey. He was a petty criminal who would do mostly anything for a buck in the beginning of the series but as the plot progressed realizations are made and he recognizes what lines to cross and just as important what lines to stay away from. He went from antivillain to antihero.

Spider-Man and Superman are both mentioned above in regards to their films but their start was in the pages of comic books. It makes sense that complex characters are found within the panels of comic books because comic books are seen as somewhat the descendant of the pulp magazines of the 1920’s and 1930’s. Some great examples of complex comic book characters are Wolverine, The Punisher, Deadpool, Kyle Rayner, Two-Face, Magneto, Lex Luthor, Daredevil and more recently speaking Captain America.

Wolverine and The Punisher are great examples of the antihero archetype. Their morals are up to heroic standards but their actions are sometimes anything but. They both kill. They only kill villains but killing is still killing. They may be saving lives but they are taking them as well. The Punisher is also Vietnam vet like Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver.

Deadpool is both an antihero and an antivillain. He plays jump rope with the line of morality usually due in part by monetary gain. He does have a moral code though such as he’ll never harm children and is somewhat of an optimist. He consistently breaks the fourth wall and addresses the reader concerning his thoughts and morally ambiguous actions. He is one of Marvel’s most popular characters. He is featured in many books and miniseries are constantly being created around the character.

Kyle Rayner was created in the early 1990’s for the same reason Man of Steel was made. As a gritty redesign of the Green Lantern, this was shown visually through a metal mask and a longer haircut. The untamed hair actually helped exemplify the somewhat animalistic ferocity of the new character. The 1990’s were actually a tumultuous time for comic books. It seemed every character was getting in on the gritty redesign trope and a lot of the stories were very bleak.

Two-Face is an interesting character because he has the capacity to do both good and evil. He doesn’t necessarily choose his actions as he leaves it to a flip of a coin. Therefore the ability to judge Two-Face’s character is made all that more difficult because the reader never really knows his reasoning or motives.

Magneto was created to be somewhat of a comic book counter part to Malcolm X. He is a mutant aka a minority in the Marvel Universe. He is a holocaust survivor, which sheds some light on some of his actions and view. He is incredibly cynical towards humans, as he has seen them at their absolute worst. He doesn’t just want to protect mutants everywhere but wants them to thrive. This character relegated back to the sympathy card that writers use to get the reader to relate to the character.

Lex Luthor on the surface may just seem like a cookie cutter villain, the eternal thorn in Superman’s side. But upon further analysis the reader can find that Lex Luthor is actually one of the more complex characters in comic books. Lex Luthor has lived in the shadow Superman. He is a genius, a man with unlimited potential. But his obsession with getting out of Superman’s shadow drives him down dark paths. If Superman didn’t exist, Lex Luthor would be the hero of Metropolis and, to greater extent, DC Comics. This isn’t to say Lex Luthor is a good guy. As within the panels of the comic book he is responsible for the loss of thousands of innocent lives.

Daredevil was created to be the darker hero of Marvel Comics. But around 2008, audiences were getting tired of the always-grim hero. He seemed to take everything too seriously. A redesign then occurred which gave the character a fresher take that had more levity. This is one of the few times when the opposite of a gritty reboot occurred. They gave the character more heroic qualities to mix up his morality a little bit more and it worked. In 2013 Daredevil was consistently well received by critics and readers alike.

Lastly Captain America suffered a lot from the same problems Superman suffered from. Both of them always did good no matter what. People would use the term “boy scout heroes”. This made them largely boring and also unrealistic. The “identification with the hero serves not only a dramatic purpose but a commercial and social one as well” (Sumser, 45) If the hero is too unreal then the audience won’t be able to identify with them thus they won’t buy the next issue. Captain America would challenge the status quo and on a larger scale the American government in the 2005 comic book event Civil War, in which Captain America leads a rebellion against the US and its new stance of supeheroes freedoms. This would be the start of Captain America’s ascent into complexity and in turn rise in popularity.

Static characters still exist but they do not get nearly the amount of attention than their more dynamic counterparts do. Complicated characters’ ability to be relatable and human makes them approachable and by doing so makes them more popular. They are seen in film, tv, books, comic books, and video games. To put it bluntly they’re everywhere.

Works Cited:

Buxton, David. From the Avengers to Miami Vice: Form and Ideology in Television Series. Manchester, UK: Manchester UP ;, 1990. Print.

Dixon, Wheeler W., and Gwendolyn Audrey Foster. A Short History of Film. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers UP, 2008. Print.

Ellis, Jack C. A History of Film. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1979. Print.

Hayward, Susan. Cinema Studies the Key Concepts. 4th ed. London: Routledge, 2013. Print.

Sumser, John. Morality and Social Order in Television Crime Drama. Jefferson: Macfarland, 1996. Print.

Works Consulted:

Daniels, Les. Batman: The Complete History. San Francisco: Chronicle Books. 1999.

Haining, Peter. The Classic Era of American Pulp Magazines. Prion Books. 2000.

Wallace, Dan. The DC Comics Encyclopedia. New York. Dorling Kindersley. 2008.