What happened to Superman Unchained?

[Mr. Mastermind]

No, it's not. The U.S. had a superweapon so powerful it used him to covertly deal with threats to national and world security. Because of his unknown influence on history, we have no idea how many times Wraith was deployed to cope with threats beyond our knowledge merely to maintain the historical status quo as we know it.

Consider what happened in Cuba in the early 60's. That could have easily set of a nuclear war, destroying most of the planet. The Bay of Pigs was an absolute failure on the US's part, seriously damaging Kennedy's reputation as President so early on in his administration and allowing for the USSR to put weapons so close to the actual US. Any government in their right mind would use the Wraith to secure that operation was a complete success no matter what.

And then again with the Cuban Missile crisis. Could potentially set off a nuclear war, and stopping a nuclear war be anyone's number 1 priority. The US would use the Wraith immediately and not even bother with co-operation with Khrushchev.

That's just one moment in history, but there are plenty of other examples. There's no way the US would allow Bin Laden to live for 10 years after 911, so I doubt any secret operations would take priority.

Wraith is being kept a secret so he can be used for whatever purpose the U.S. wants to use him without causing an international metahuman arms race.

How would the other countries compete? Wraith's existence is a fluke; he came from the freaking sky. You can't create another one of him no matter how hard you try. Keeping him secret is done for no reason other than the plot demanding it.

[Auguste Dupin]

You're not dealing with facts, though. While nothing you've been told points to Wraith being used in secret ops elsewhere while the historical status quo continued unchanged, it is equally true that nothing you've been told points to Wraith not being used in that way. You have no idea how the U.S. managed Wraith or made decisions on how to use him throughout history. You're drawing conclusions based on assumptions as much as I am. In both cases, we're dealing with argumentum ad ignorantiam.



Since Wraith's reveal was not necessary to prevent Darkseid from taking over Earth in the New 52, I cannot say whether or not the U.S. intended to keep him hidden even at the cost of Earth and humanity itself.

-My only assumption is that Snyder gave me the elements to apprehend the whereabouts of his antagonist. Which doesn't sound like too much considering I paid 16 dollars worth of story to read about it. At least I really don't think so.
If I have to make up secret wars nobody has ever heard of in my mind to have his own story make sense, then there's a storytelling problem. Period.
Seriously, that would have taken, what? Two sentences?

-Well, apparantly, they were willing to let what they considered to be a bunch of individualswho, as far as they knew, sere threats in their own right do the saving for them instead of sending their own supersoldier immediately to prevent an alien invasion on American soil, so that really wouldn't surprise me at this point.

[Blacksun]

Consider what happened in Cuba in the early 60's. That could have easily set of a nuclear war, destroying most of the planet. The Bay of Pigs was an absolute failure on the US's part, seriously damaging Kennedy's reputation as President so early on in his administration and allowing for the USSR to put weapons so close to the actual US. Any government in their right mind would use the Wraith to secure that operation was a complete success no matter what.

And then again with the Cuban Missile crisis. Could potentially set off a nuclear war, and stopping a nuclear war be anyone's number 1 priority. The US would use the Wraith immediately and not even bother with co-operation with Khrushchev.

That's just one moment in history, but there are plenty of other examples. There's no way the US would allow Bin Laden to live for 10 years after 911, so I doubt any secret operations would take priority.



How would the other countries compete? Wraith's existence is a fluke; he came from the freaking sky. You can't create another one of him no matter how hard you try. Keeping him secret is done for no reason other than the plot demanding it.

the story in New 52 is the same as our actual story? uSA wouldn't even need Wraith to catch Bin Laden, I'm pretty sure heroes would do this. even if wraith changed things, of course the oficial story would omit him.

[misslane]

-A message that would have remained unchanged had Wraith just celebrated his first year as a part of the US military.
Not to mention that it's not a heartfelt message, it's a commonplace.
Ho, no, war is bad, and killing for a governement without thinking is just as bad.
I have seen cartoons with a more developped message than this.

It's more powerful if he's used as a foil for Superman and symbolically is paralleled with an actual piece of machinery. Having not seen whatever cartoons you're appealing to as a way of diminishing the thoughtful message of Snyder's story, I'll have to remain unmoved by your claim.

-Could have bombed any place, any fictionnal place, and , again, the message would remain the same. He's just trying to pump up his villain as an important figure of history without actually making him an important figure of history. The fact he chose to have him replace Nagasaki,instead of Hiroshima is actually pretty revealing. He can't have replaced Atomic bombs, because that would actually change things, so he has to replace the second bomb only for the most contrived of reasons.

He replaces the second bomb to show that humanity was able to create their own "monster," and it remains a real target (i.e. Nagasaki) to add more realistic and instantly recognizable weight and applicability to the story.

-Ho, okay.
So instead, the second of the Twin Towers (not the two of them of course) was destroyed by an alien raised from birth by Ben Laden. It worked exactly as if a plane crashed into it, but it was actually an alien pretending to be a plane, because.......having two planes was too much organisation?
And he didn't destroyed both towers because......reasons.
See? that sounds stupid.

It only sounds stupid the way you say it, because you say it incorrectly. The point of having a first bomb, having Wraith be the second bomb, and having it be that he was raised to fulfill that destiny, is to set up a parallel with Superman (he's being pressured to become like Wraith) and to symbolically suggest that a man or woman who consents to such horrific violence without question is little more than a machine (i.e. the bomb) himself or herself.

No. There's plenty of commonplace treated as layers of substance by the use of monologues and historical reappropriation that he isn't even able to master in a way that makes his own story make sense. The coherence of the plot sacrified to an illusion of substance.That's what I call a show.

The story makes sense and has substance, in my opinion, regardless of your attempts to deny it.

[misslane]

-My only assumption is that Snyder gave me the elements to apprehend the whereabouts of his antagonist. Which doesn't sound like too much considering I paid 16 dollars worth of story to read about it. At least I really don't think so.
If I have to make up secret wars nobody has ever heard of in my mind to have his own story make sense, then there's a storytelling problem. Period.
Seriously, that would have taken, what? Two sentences?

Sentences were used in Unchained to point out that Wraith had been used in secret missions on a cosmic scale (i.e. he was in the background while Superman fought on several occasions). You're assuming in the absence of evidence that the U.S. deliberately chose not to use Wraith even if it would have been in its best interest to do so. You have nothing that proves this was the country's strategy.

-Well, apparantly, they were willing to let what they considered to be a bunch of individualswho, as far as they knew, sere threats in their own right do the saving for them instead of sending their own supersoldier immediately to prevent an alien invasion on American soil, so that really wouldn't surprise me at this point.

Why reveal your secret weapon when you don't have to, especially when you have the chance to test and observe the competition? Wraith admits to fighting alongside Superman in the past. It seems, in the case of the Darkseid invasion, the military was operating under the enemy of my enemy is my friend philosophy.

[misslane]

That's just one moment in history, but there are plenty of other examples. There's no way the US would allow Bin Laden to live for 10 years after 911, so I doubt any secret operations would take priority.

You're assuming a lot. Since Wraith supposedly stops a lot of threats, we have no idea if for 10 years there were other higher priorities. We also don't know if all history marched on the same in the New 52 universe as it did in ours. Based on Wraith's intervention in Japan, and the alien tech that was also developed, a new course was set which was separate from ours.

How would the other countries compete? Wraith's existence is a fluke; he came from the freaking sky. You can't create another one of him no matter how hard you try. Keeping him secret is done for no reason other than the plot demanding it.

Would you want to see other countries try to compete? Look what's happened with nuclear proliferation. First only America had mastered it, but then the USSR. Now we're all worried that Iran could gain the technology, so clearly other people having a superior weapon at one point doesn't stop people from trying and increasing tension worldwide. Ascension is a prime example of an organization that knew about Wraith and began planning a way to destroy him, America's "Machine," and the whole world using its nuclear weapons. Lex Luthor in most Superman comics is another example. Having a superior adversary in Superman doesn't stop Lex from devising his own terrible ways of defending himself and his planet as he sees fit.

[Auguste Dupin]

It's more powerful if he's used as a foil for Superman and symbolically is paralleled with an actual piece of machinery. Having not seen whatever cartoons you're appealing to as a way of diminishing the thoughtful message of Snyder's story, I'll have to remain unmoved by your claim.



He replaces the second bomb to show that humanity was able to create their own "monster," and it remains a real target (i.e. Nagasaki) to add more realistic and instantly recognizable weight and applicability to the story.



It only sounds stupid the way you say it, because you say it incorrectly. The point of having a first bomb, having Wraith be the second bomb, and having it be that he was raised to fulfill that destiny, is to set up a parallel with Superman (he's being pressured to become like Wraith) and to symbolically suggest that a man or woman who consents to such horrific violence without question is little more than a machine (i.e. the bomb) himself or herself.



The story makes sense and has substance, in my opinion, regardless of your attempts to deny it.

-So,it makes no sense in the story,but because it has some "deep meaningful subxtect" (aka, a rehashed subtext that's not nearly as thought provoking as it wished it could be),it's okay?
Yeah......that's not how storytelling works.

-So, he wants to make a point having humanity creating their own monster......in a story where one of the nukes is replaced by an alien?
That sounds......counterintuitive. Would have been simpler to have the "evil Superman counterpart" be man made/man experimented on if the point of humanity creating their own monster was so important, instead of having some half assed plot about one of the bomb being replace by an alien who can replicate the effects off a nuke, but not two because.....The US military did feel like making one bomb, but not two. Or something.

-The point still remain that what the story is telling us is that apparently the Americans could make one nuke, but not two, and that they needed some alien to fake the second one because they really wanted to impress the Russians by bluffing, when showing their unbeatable alien would have been much more effective at doing so. These parralels are based on an unbelievable premise, and therefore lose most of their evocative strengh by virtue of a lack of credibility.
You keep talking about the symbolism of the story. But the thing is, symbolism should never come at the expanse of your story. You can't justify plot holes with symbolism. That's not how writing works.
Associations with the nuclear bombs could have easily remained with the bombing of a fictionnal place. Put a nuclear mushroomsomewhere if you feel it's not "in your face enough" and that's about it.

-Of course, one could easily just say that the story makes no sense and has only the illusion of substance, regardless of your attempts to pretend otherwise.

[Auguste Dupin]

Sentences were used in Unchained to point out that Wraith had been used in secret missions on a cosmic scale (i.e. he was in the background while Superman fought on several occasions). You're assuming in the absence of evidence that the U.S. deliberately chose not to use Wraith even if it would have been in its best interest to do so. You have nothing that proves this was the country's strategy.



Why reveal your secret weapon when you don't have to, especially when you have the chance to test and observe the competition? Wraith admits to fighting alongside Superman in the past. It seems, in the case of the Darkseid invasion, the military was operating under the enemy of my enemy is my friend philosophy.

-Enough to justify not doing anything to help the country he's suposedly fighting for?
Because we're talking 70+ years of barely interrupted non intervention here. It's not like bombing Berlin would have taken more than a big afternoon on his schedule.
Plus,if he was busy fighting alien invasions, then criticisms toward Superman become all the more hypocritical. Because the guy has been doing that too.

-Because the safety of Earth is at stake, perhaps? that kinda does sound important.

[misslane]

-Enough to justify not doing anything to help the country he's suposedly fighting for?
Because we're talking 70+ years of barely interrupted non intervention here. It's not like bombing Berlin would have taken more than a big afternoon on his schedule.
Plus,if he was busy fighting alien invasions, then criticisms toward Superman become all the more hypocritical. Because the guy has been doing that too.

Do we even know how long it took the U.S. to fashion Wraith into a willing weapon? How long did it take the military to understand Wraith's capabilities or for Wraith to master his abilities? Do we know Wraith was ready to go when Berlin would have been a worthy target? It's clear Lane is claiming Wraith has intervened in both domestic, international, and cosmic threats. Lane's criticism of Superman is that he limits himself to resolving conflicts disconnected from geopolitical events. Wraith's intervening in all types of threats is what makes him superior to Superman in Lane's eyes.

-Because the safety of Earth is at stake, perhaps? that kinda does sound important.

But it wasn't at stake. Wraith's behind the scenes efforts paired with the nascent League's efforts were sufficient enough force to prevent Darkseid's dominion. Had the League proven incapable of managing the task, and Wraith still remained in the shadows, then we could discuss the military's misguided priorities.

[misslane]

-So,it makes no sense in the story,but because it has some "deep meaningful subxtect" (aka, a rehashed subtext that's not nearly as thought provoking as it wished it could be),it's okay?
Yeah......that's not how storytelling works.

I never said it doesn't make sense in-story. The story tells us that America only had one bomb and, like real life, felt it needed another to make its point. So, they used Wraith. I'm only discussing the subtextual benefits, because that is what makes the decision to create the in-text logic also make sense.

-So, he wants to make a point having humanity creating their own monster......in a story where one of the nukes is replaced by an alien?
That sounds......counterintuitive. Would have been simpler to have the "evil Superman counterpart" be man made/man experimented on if the point of humanity creating their own monster was so important, instead of having some half assed plot about one of the bomb being replace by an alien who can replicate the effects off a nuke, but not two because.....The US military did feel like making one bomb, but not two. Or something.

The alien was raised by humans to obey humans (Wraith calls Randolph his "father"), so yes the humans literally created their own monster out of an alien that came to Earth and became a bomb. In this way, it makes us question why we as a species would do this and makes us appreciate that another alien, Superman, was raised differently and refuses to follow in Wraith's footsteps. Having both Wraith and Superman be aliens creates a more apt parallel/foil.

-The point still remain that what the story is telling us is that apparently the Americans could make one nuke, but not two, and that they needed some alien to fake the second one because they really wanted to impress the Russians by bluffing, when showing their unbeatable alien would have been much more effective at doing so. These parralels are based on an unbelievable premise, and therefore lose most of their evocative strengh by virtue of a lack of credibility.

What difference does it make if it's one or two nukes? It's not like they were super easy to make back then or that we had loads, so going from two to just one makes little qualitative difference, yet allows for an extra layer of subtext which enhances the themes and characterization in the story.

You keep talking about the symbolism of the story. But the thing is, symbolism should never come at the expanse of your story. You can't justify plot holes with symbolism. That's not how writing works. Associations with the nuclear bombs could have easily remained with the bombing of a fictionnal place. Put a nuclear mushroomsomewhere if you feel it's not "in your face enough" and that's about it.

I haven't said, nor do I agree, that the story has suffered or that it has plot holes. The symbolism explains why the writer wrote what he wrote, and what it adds to the story to have those elements included. The writer, in my view, made the symbolism and plot logic work successfully in tandem as opposed to your view which seems to be that the symbolism was the initial goal with the plot crafted poorly to match it.

-Of course, one could easily just say that the story makes no sense and has only the illusion of substance, regardless of your attempts to pretend otherwise.

One could, yes. Not me, because I think that view is wrong, but one could say that. That just leaves us at an impasse, I suppose.

[Auguste Dupin]

Do we even know how long it took the U.S. to fashion Wraith into a willing weapon? How long did it take the military to understand Wraith's capabilities or for Wraith to master his abilities? Do we know Wraith was ready to go when Berlin would have been a worthy target? It's clear Lane is claiming Wraith has intervened in both domestic, international, and cosmic threats. Lane's criticism of Superman is that he limits himself to resolving conflicts disconnected from geopolitical events. Wraith's intervening in all types of threats is what makes him superior to Superman in Lane's eyes.



But it wasn't at stake. Wraith's behind the scenes efforts paired with the nascent League's efforts were sufficient enough force to prevent Darkseid's dominion. Had the League proven incapable of managing the task, and Wraith still remained in the shadows, then we could discuss the military's misguided priorities.

-Last time I checked, Wraith could talk. I'm sure he would be all too glad to explain what he can do to the people he's serving willingly.
And we do know he was ready to go for Nagasaki, so any conflict after that was fair game.
And I know. Which is why the fact Wraith has pretty much nothing of consequence to claim for himself as the US secret enforcer is a pretty big plot hole.

-Of course it was. There was an alien invasion and the only people fighting it were completely unknown forces who were considered as evil at the time. What you're trying to sell me is that the US governement gambled the safety on the entire planet so that they could observe the capabilities of some metahumans they didn'tlike.What if the League had failed? What if Wraith was not strong enough on his own, and would have needed the League's help to win? Waiting for valuable assets to get themselves killed to get your secret weapon out when you have no idea of the ennemi's actuall offensive capacities sounds like very poor military planning.

[Auguste Dupin]

I never said it doesn't make sense in-story. The story tells us that America only had one bomb and, like real life, felt it needed another to make its point. So, they used Wraith. I'm only discussing the subtextual benefits, because that is what makes the decision to create the in-text logic also make sense.



The alien was raised by humans to obey humans (Wraith calls Randolph his "father"), so yes the humans literally created their own monster out of an alien that came to Earth and became a bomb. In this way, it makes us question why we as a species would do this and makes us appreciate that another alien, Superman, was raised differently and refuses to follow in Wraith's footsteps. Having both Wraith and Superman be aliens creates a more apt parallel/foil.



What difference does it make if it's one or two nukes? It's not like they were super easy to make back then or that we had loads, so going from two to just one makes little qualitative difference, yet allows for an extra layer of subtext which enhances the themes and characterization in the story.



I haven't said, nor do I agree, that the story has suffered or that it has plot holes. The symbolism explains why the writer wrote what he wrote, and what it adds to the story to have those elements included. The writer, in my view, made the symbolism and plot logic work successfully in tandem as opposed to your view which seems to be that the symbolism was the initial goal with the plot crafted poorly to match it.



One could, yes. Not me, because I think that view is wrong, but one could say that. That just leaves us at an impasse, I suppose.

-I know. I just don't think you're doing a very good job at proving me it does. The whole thing feels contrived to me, artificial. Like a great pitch with not enough time spent on developping its repercutions.

-A done to death parralel/foil.
Seriously, even Snyder has already written a story about "Superman" being found in a rocket and used to create weapons by the governement. it was called "Flashpoint: Superman".

-Well, the real question is: why would anyone bother spending millions of dollars -back when the dollar was actually worth something- on a project to create nuclear bombs when you have an alien who can do just the same for free? For the story to make sense, Wraith should have been both bombs. And many events should have happened differently.

-Well, my view is that Snyder had this "super awesome idea" that sounded great when he pitched it ("What if Superman met an equivalent of himself raised as a weapon by the US?".....to his credit it does have a ring to it), but failed to develop his concept in a coherent (and interesting, but that's more subjective) fashion, which left the final project as a mess where shattering events end not being as important as they should.
In short, Snyder failed into that trap young screenwriter are warned against: putting his idea above the story.

-Pretty much yeah.
And I suppose we should stop right here before the moderators kick us both out.

[misslane]

-Last time I checked, Wraith could talk. I'm sure he would be all too glad to explain what he can do to the people he's serving willingly.

I have no idea what this is in reference to,but I'll give it a shot. At first, Wraith may not have known what he could do in a new environment like Earth. He may not have even be able to speak the same language. His abilities also changed and developed over time, and his level of obedience throughout his early years is not known.

And we do know he was ready to go for Nagasaki, so any conflict after that was fair game.

Of course, but the question was why he didn't participate in as extreme a capacity in events before Nagasaki. The comic explains Wraith's involvement afterward by saying he was used on an as needed basis, and was taking on various threats in secret. Considering Wraith's own existence is proof of alien life, one can easily assume that Wraith may have been deployed on more severe cosmic threats and was used cautiously based on a desire for secrecy. It's also not clear how every administration related to The Machine. Some may have been more comfortable than others letting a superpowered alien loose.

And I know. Which is why the fact Wraith has pretty much nothing of consequence to claim for himself as the US secret enforcer is a pretty big plot hole.

Know what? You know very little, because the story doesn't go through every single historical event you know (and don't know since Wraith could have stopped other things from happening).

-Of course it was. There was an alien invasion and the only people fighting it were completely unknown forces who were considered as evil at the time. What you're trying to sell me is that the US governement gambled the safety on the entire planet so that they could observe the capabilities of some metahumans they didn'tlike.What if the League had failed? What if Wraith was not strong enough on his own, and would have needed the League's help to win? Waiting for valuable assets to get themselves killed to get your secret weapon out when you have no idea of the ennemi's actuall offensive capacities sounds like very poor military planning.

It's not a gamble when Wraith is there to step in more if things got too bad. They didn't. Plus, Wraith is said to have helped Superman in secret before, so it's not as if he was doing nothing just waiting for the worst to happen; rather he likely assisted as secretly as he could, ready to participate more intensely as need be.

[misslane]

-Pretty much yeah.
And I suppose we should stop right here before the moderators kick us both out.

Yep, thanks for the chat but I just don't agree with your point of view despite your commendable efforts to counter my points. I'm happy to agree to disagree, but if you ever want to continue this conversation, you can send me a PM.

[Auguste Dupin]

EDIT: On the ground that we agreed to stop, I'm deleting my response.
Let's agree to disagree and all that.