Justice League Unlimited "Patriot Act" Talkback (Spoilers)

[James]

I see what you're saying, but I don't see the episode as being better from this perspective - in fact, I think it's weaker from this focal point. First of all, the issue of the heroes and the people struggling with the question that Eiling (and thusly, Cadmus) brings up was really resolved last season. Eiling's not spreading any doubt amongst any other characters; the further he goes on in Patriot Act, the more he just proves himself a jerk. The heroes obviously don't see things his way. And while the crowd may not be fond of the Seven from a popularity perspective ("I wanna see Superman!"), they clearly don't have any doubt that they're the goodguys - as we can see by the instant support they have for the Seven once Eiling shows up and starts smashing. That's why I see the focus on the people at the end as being shallow and silly. They were never in doubt of the Seven's commitment to the good fight; there's just more kids pretending to be Shining Knight and Vigilante when they play instead of Superman and Batman. Cute, yes, but not especially satisfying.

I guess what it boils down to is how successful - whether you like the intent or not - is this underlined theme of social perception of the masses. You could in a way, see this as a scaled down summary of the Cadmus arc; the perception of the ordinary guy to the League.

Point is, maybe the issue we have here is whether that intent came across. From the parade onwards I was "hooked". Not "edge of your seat" context, but so far as the writing had made clear it's intent; what makes a true patriot? What is a real hero? The crowd are there to imply it's grandeur and power, the story is there to question that.

So for me, the bystanders played their part adequetely. The "hook" worked, I followed the story, always aware of the how the events reflected on the onlooker. In a way, this did indeed lead to what had been done before. Similar techniques were used in "Spider-Man" as some have already mentioned.

So to me, the only answer to this setup can come from the crowd as it's the crowd who "pose" the question to start with. "Are these minor League characters as true heroes as the major ones?" The answer to this question is punctuated by the crowd representatives.

I'm not arguing that it was a perfectly handled moment. As I said, some subtlety is bound to be lost in the slight dumb down for children. However, while I see where you are coming from with Wallace, really doesn't "answer" the question posed, it answers a different question from the story.

Now, this leads me back to what I wanted to say initally but got side tracked into explaining. It seems - and I'm winging this on the basis of our conversation - that it depends on whether that hook grabbed you. It grabbed me easily. I saw what they wanted to do. But that's the nature of stories. Sometimes the writing technique works on some, on other it doesn't with no disrespect to the intelligence of either party. Same as some people from get go know where "The Sixth Sense" was going. I've met people who worked it out the resolution in the first act. They didn't take the "hook", and moved on their own tangent that took them to the final act too early!

So really, on the basis of construction and to whether you see the bystander POV as working or not (regardless of it's final execution), may depend on whether you are caught by that hook. If you are not, that final moment really will seem out of the blue, jarring and unsatisfying. If you ARE caught by the hook, you are aware of the question and the need for an answer all the way through the acts. Probably makes a big difference to how you assess the final moments.

All very interesting. In debate, this has certainly been the most intriguing, and that's without delving into "Is It Politics?"

 

[Bird Boy]

Guys, please keep the political discussion out of the thread. The episode had very low amounts of it, please don't gum up this thread with politics.

-BB

 

[Yojimbo]

To me, the term patriot from the title was not meant to have a political connection. I interpreted the episode closer to Matt Wayne's concept of the hero and villain. Straight from the beginning with the flashback to World War II, we have this concept. Spy Smasher is the hero and the patriot. He volunteered to serve for the US government and fight the Nazi's. The Nazi's, at the time, were considered all evil, the villains (Nowadays, political commentary circles view most of the low level Nazi's as along for the ride. And the elitists of the Nazi Party were the evil scum). This clear cut distinction of good and evil, hero and villain is presented with the use of only black and white color.

Jump to the present age. We have General Eiling. He is a villain (traditionally in the comics, he is one). However, he is not a mere villain. He addresses himself as the hero of his story, the patriot as well. Instead of the heroes of this age, the Justice League, who he considers the villain. The concept of hero and villain fractures, and is conveyed through the use of the standard colors to show the many layers of good, also demonstrated by the super heroes who appear in this episode. In other words, the concept of hero and villain is met with some nihilism in the present age, only to be superceded by the focus of the episode on Shining Knight, a anachronism that stands by his own beliefs of patriotism. Ultimately, his anachronistic beliefs intellectually stand up to Eiling's nihilistic views.

Another important piece of the present age's hero and villain are the supporting characters. Their roles in the present age have changed drastically. For instance, last season, we were presented with the ability for the supporting character to become the villain. Namely, characters like Amanda Waller and Emile Hamilton. They did illegal things, for the sake of defending themselves. The supporting characters, in essence, have an important dual nature on the series.In times of struggle, the supporting character will shift to either a villain (as stated above) or as a hero(as in this episode, or for long time viewers, Dan Turpin on Superman:the Animated Series "apokolips..now!) part two In "patriot act", it is the Newsboy Legion and the other bystanders that shift themselves into heroes and drive away Eiling.

 

[Alex Weitzman]

I guess what it boils down to is how successful - whether you like the intent or not - is this underlined theme of social perception of the masses. You could in a way, see this as a scaled down summary of the Cadmus arc; the perception of the ordinary guy to the League.

An intriguing comment you've just made: is the Cadmus arc about the perception of the ordinary guy to the League? Or is it about the League's perception of itself - and how those in power (and therefore, supposedly the people who are meant to be the real Justice Leagues of out lives) feel about them? In the Cadmus arc, the public perception is something to be won or not, but few scenes really deal with the matter from that particular standpoint. Maybe even just the scene in Flashpoint where Wally talks to various folks at the blast zone. We can't say that people like Batman, Green Arrow, or Captain Marvel are "the public" when various episodes deal with their struggles within the League system, because they're League. Even Lois is too unique a character perspective to really be representative of "the people". So, mostly, I see two struggles at work with the Cadmus arc: the League's feelings about itself, and Cadmus' feelings about the League as personified by Amanda Waller. Maybe because that's how I see the Cadmus arc, it gives way to my reading of Patriot Act.

However, while I see where you are coming from with Wallace, really doesn't "answer" the question posed, it answers a different question from the story.

Oh, I have no doubt that if Wallace showed up with Gromit, they'd save the day in the classiest and sweetest way possible.

(Too brilliantly cheeky to ignore. Sorry. Also, just throwing it out there to remind everyone to tune in on Sunday to see Were-rabbit's Oscar win.)

All very interesting. In debate, this has certainly been the most intriguing, and that's without delving into "Is It Politics?"

Absolutely. I think we've reached the admirable impasse that all good arguments inevitably draw a close to, and I tip my hat to you.

 

[Revelator]

Though it gave me little pleasure, I went back and rewatched the ending. Here's a play by play.

Gray Hulk/Eiling: Superman and your Justice League are a theat to a safe and stable world (he picks up a car).
Obnoxious Granny: Drop the act.
(Cut to Granny, standing in front of the obnoxious kids gathered around Shining Knight's unconscious body. A few anonymous bystanders are standing around too [so much for crowd control!].)
Granny: You think killing Superman would make the world safe? (Some of the obnoxious kids move forward) Or killing this boy? Or us? Tell me, how many of us do you have to kill to keep us safe?
Eiling: (still holding the car) They're the ones I'm after, not you. I'm not the menace--metahumans are. (He moves forward) Superpowered beings.
Obnoxious Kid: You're the only one around here with superpowers.
(Eiling, walking forward, stops in his tracks. He slightly lowers his head. He then raises his arms. From his POV, a leftward-pan lets us see the angry faces of the crowd. Eiling pauses, then dumps the car.)
Eiling: All right, I've become what I hate. I'll give you that. (Now we get a rightward pan over the crowd's angry faces.) But in the long run you'll see I was right. You'll see you need the likes of me to protect you from them.
(He leaps away.)

I think a careful perusal of the cutting, blocking and dialogue shows that the main focus is on bothe the superpowers issues and the hearts and minds issue. What evidently makes Eiling first stop in his tracks is:
1) The realization that he's become what he hates. (Duh stupid!)
2) The hostility of the crowd, who he realizes aren't going along with his flawless logic. That's why we get those pans of the frankly antagonistic faces. And his final words to the crowd are an attempt to reiterate the justness of his point of view, which emphasizes how badly we wants their support.

I cannot help thinking that the ending would probably come off as far less of a cop-out if other aspects in the scene were given greater emphasis. Ace the Bathound writes, "I'm reminded of that guy in Tiananmen Square who stopped a column of tanks armed with nothing more than that same conviction that kept the Knight going. Maybe echoing that moment to set up the final scene would have made the ending work better."
I agree wholeheartedly. Rather than foreground the hearts and minds element, and the metahuman realization, it probably would have been far more dramatically effective for granny to step forward in front of Eiling(as it is, Eiling remains distanced from the crowd, and drops the car before he gets very close to them) and say he'd have to kill Shining Knight over her dead body, and then to have the kids and other members of the crowd step up one by one to show their solidarity. I haven't seen the Spiderman films, so I don't know if they tried something similar--if they did, what I described could easily be changed to maintain its central point. This is a far more visually arresting depiction of everyday humanity standing up to power than the dialogue-based scene that actually occurs.

I think it would also be more effective because it brings to the foreground the question of just how far Eiling is willing to go: though prepared to kill Leaguers, is he really prepared to kill the ordinary people he's sworn to protect while looking them in the eye? The actual scene doesn't heat up to the point of directly and fully placing Eiling in that dilemma. His putting down the car occurs before he can actually get close to the crowd, and visually seems more motivated by the crowd's visilbe hostility to his purpose. Had the pressure of the situation been amped up a notch, so that Eiling decided it was better to give up when he nearly had his hands around Granny's (or some other bystander's) neck (or whetever) and had to decide whether to snap it or free it, his relenting would have been much more dramatically effective.

So, a touch more of Tianemmen Square would have worked wonders. But I also should say that part of what hampers this episode is that the everyday-people saving the day theme is damaged by the fact that the people who save the day are really more like lame, conventional and irritating cliches. The kids, in their anachronistic 40s clothing with their advanced knowledge of how to operate wrecking-balls, would hardly remind anyone of the kids they might encounter at a city parade (everyday people my foot)--the fact that the kids are a tribute to a comics-derived troupe of little brats further proves the point. And ultimately the same goes for granny. The figure of the kindly, molasses-voiced old African American granny who's full of nothing but sharp wisdom is already well on its way to becoming a cliched characterization, an easily recognizable "type," and while C.C.H. Pounder can work masterpieces with Amanda Waller, her granny goes gooey thanks to the material. These characters are too pre-fabricated to really seem like everyday people. "Everyday people" of course fit into types too, when they're not being anonymous, but when the everyday people in an episode are every bit the creatures of cartoons as the superheroes, valorizing them as everyday people comes off as fake.

Since Alex took his Waller idea out for another spin, I figure I might as well again trot out Captain Nazi idea. My egotistical feeling is that the episode might have worked well if instead of sacrificing Eiling as a mover-and-shaker in high government places (to Eiling the military means everything, and I don't see him giving that life up just so he can become an ugly hulking fugitive with a Superman bloodlust), Captain Nazi had actually been created but frozen, and Eiling had revived him, hastily brainwashed and deceived him into being his lackey, decked him out in an all-patriotic, Captain America-like outfit and sicced him on the league. You could then have Eiling closely monitoring Cap Nazi as the latter beats the snot out of the league. And then you could have Eiling decide to push the kill switch on the monster when he realizes (or is made to realize) the enormity of the crime of a supposedly patriotic American general using a Nazi weapon that has begun re-manifesting Nazi tendencies as it gets more violent and rant-prone("heil!"). (Perhaps Crimson Avenger could ferret out Eiling and show him what he's doing and what the Nazi will surely do)...
I should say that if I was involved with a show, the thing I'd probably hate more than anything else is seeing fans confidently state how they'd do things better, so I'll stop with any further armchair-critic rewrites, and let my previous words rest as they are.

 

[DLM]

Actually, Id encourage EVERYONE to find any political possible in this episode. I don't see it myself but It at least gives one sonething to talk about in this frankly otherwise awful episode.

 

[Bones Justice]

Well, it's taken me a while but now that I've read through the entire fourteen pages of this thread, I thought I'd weigh in with some random thoughts on this episode.

Regarding Amanda Waller -- glad to see her back in action. I may be wrong but I thought she was the one that sent the Captain Nazi file to Eiling. I mean, we see Eiling reading the file for what appeared to me to be the first time (why would he need to review the file if he’d already seen it before? Or how did he even have the file if he was locked out?). Next scene, Eiling meets with Waller. I also think Waller was playing Eiling with her unconvincing argument about how the League really isn't so bad afterall. Somebody like Eiling, all it would take is someone telling him to stay away from the League and it's all he'll want to do. The file combined with Waller's comments practically drove Eiling into action. It was like Waller was loading and firing a gun at the League. That totally explained her obvious absence once Eiling made the scene as the General. The only thing Waller didn’t plan on was Superman’s absence.

Cool factor: Vigilante. He had some great action sequences. Never knew he rode a motorcyle instead of a horse.

Not so cool: The General's design. What's with the big, blunt lower tusks?

S.T.R.I.P.E.'s armor: I actually preferred the earlier armor, the one that looks like you "drive" it instead of the current one that looks like you wear it.

I never heard of the Seven Soldiers, Crimson Avenger, or the Newsboy Legion before. The Crimson Avenger looked very cool. I don't care what parents say, I like the good guys that carry guns. I hope we get to see this guy in action again.

I agree with TempleFugate -- I didn't see any hidden political agenda in this episode.

I'm surprised that people have posted in the Dead Reckoning thread that no one remembers the action sequences, they only remember the emotional ones. I totally disagree. Patriot Act has a lot of great action that I won't soon forget! But then, so do episodes like Twilight or Clash. I thought there were several non-action sequences that really brought Patriot Act down.

And why do we only seem to get to see guy's like Vigilante or Shining Knight when they get beat? C'mon, these guys keep showing they really know how to fight but we only get to see it when they are up against an unstoppable foe? First, Task Force X, now Patriot Act? Lame. I can only hope someday that we get to see that DTV between Starcrossed and Initiation with Vigilante taking on a bunch of Hawks. He pulls out his pistols, shoots down a dozen -- then reloads. How about, instead of Vigilante and Shining Knight discussing a movie, how about showing them taking out a gang of bank robbers early on? For that matter, why not let ‘em discuss a “Dirty Harry” movie while they’re taking out a gang of bank robbers? Otherwise, I’m beginning to think these other posters are right – these guys don’t belong in the League afterall.

I liked how Vigilante got the kids out of the battle zone, very clever. I hated the kid using the wrecking ball, though. I know, I know, it's fantasy but this was stretching things WAY beyond belief. Even if the kid managed to operate the crane, no way he could've been that accurate. Perhaps it would have been more fitting for the kid to have hit the hero by accident. But better would have been one of the heroes, like Vigilante or Green Arrow operating the crane. Or maybe a professional crane operator, at least that would have made more sense and still fit into the whole "everyday heroes" theme.

Speaking of everyday heroes, where the heck were the cops? You'd think Metropolis would still have it's special crime unit, too. Very lame to have kids willing to fight while the cops or even ordinary adults take cover.

The entire battle was awesome! Too bad it had to end so soon. I loved every minute of it except the kid with the wrecking ball.

The ending, regardless of how you justify or explain it, was totally unsatisfying. It wasn't entertaining at all. I did think it was obvious that despite the General's words, he wasn't really looking to kill these second-stringers. He could have killed several times but he didn't. He even was trying to convince Shining Knight to give up rather than just killing him. But I agree with Revelator – no way the General gets turned so easily by an old grandma and some meddling kids. I could have more easily believed that he just decided Superman really wasn’t coming and took off to look for him or other first-stringers from the League. “Bah! You weaklings aren’t worth my time!” But that wouldn’t have been much better.

I would rather have the "David & Goliath" ending. Actually, that's what I was expecting right up to the point that Shining Knight went down for the count. I’m no writer but here are some of my picks of how it could have ended better:

1. Shining Knight guts the General with his magic sword. Wounded, the General says he’ll be back for Superman then leaps away. I know there’s really no chance they would do this ending since it’s too violent.

2. As the General moves in to finish off Shining Knight, Green Arrow recovers long enough to pull out his last arrow. He explains to Speedy that this was a kryptonite-tipped arrow that Batman had given him “just in case”. Though he doesn’t really expect it to work on the General, he fires it anyways out of desperation. To everyone’s surprise, the arrow wounds the General (though I would prefer it kills him, I doubt the censors would allow that). Wounded, the General rips out the arrow, says he’ll be back for Superman, then leaps away. Later, aboard the Watchtower, Mr. Terrific analyzes the General’s DNA (from the recovered arrow) and determines that the DNA is very similar to kryptonian. How? Well, at some point, Vandal Savage had gathered some of Doomsday’s DNA (who was created from Superman’s DNA) and developed a mutagenic agent which he sent back to himself during World War 2 / The Savage Time. That formula was going to be used to create Captain Nazi (perhaps the introductory scene could have even shown Savage overseeing the experiment). The mutagen transforms humans into something similar to kryptonian. That’s why the General was so tough. It’s also why he looked similar to Doomsday. But it also made him vulnerable to the kryptonite that Bats gave Green Arrow. "Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes." You better believe it.

Overall, I give Patriot Act three stars. Great episode but I really disliked the kid with the wrecking ball and weak ending (minus a star). Plus, it’s yet another episode featuring Vigilante getting beaten (minus another star). C’mon, the guy’s too cool to always be used this way.

 

[Alex Weitzman]

Regarding Amanda Waller -- glad to see her back in action. I may be wrong but I thought she was the one that sent the Captain Nazi file to Eiling. I mean, we see Eiling reading the file for what appeared to me to be the first time (why would he need to review the file if he’d already seen it before? Or how did he even have the file if he was locked out?). Next scene, Eiling meets with Waller. I also think Waller was playing Eiling with her unconvincing argument about how the League really isn't so bad afterall. Somebody like Eiling, all it would take is someone telling him to stay away from the League and it's all he'll want to do. The file combined with Waller's comments practically drove Eiling into action. It was like Waller was loading and firing a gun at the League. That totally explained her obvious absence once Eiling made the scene as the General. The only thing Waller didn’t plan on was Superman’s absence.

Well, that's a different take. Can't say I agree; there's no legitimate hint that she's actually responsible for Eiling getting the file (we just see him with it; we don't know that it was sent to him or that he found it himself or anything like that). I'm glad that you see the unconvincing argument element of Waller's side of the conversation in that early scene, but I don't see it as manipulation. Just fatigue. I think a side of her still wished she was correct, but she knows she's not - therefore, somewhat stilted ability to argue against Eiling. Most of all, it seems to go completely against the way Epilogue shows she developed. As dirty as she was fighting during Cadmus, what you just proposed is even dirtier, and I can't believe that would be the case after what we saw from the fallout in the end of the Cadmus arc.

 

[Replikon Xum]

no, because it was stupid...

before editing, general threw sgirl at shiny, shiny didn't even try to catch her, just kept after general....seemed very un-chivalrous to us in the editing room, so we cut the scene short to eliminate the sgirl toss....lord sidious probably noticed that the UN-EDITED shot appears in the previous ep's end-credits (THERE'S your "easter egg", karkull)...

Spoiler

Along with the scene of Vixen summoning the strength of a gorilla to throw the bookcase at the Shadow Thief in "Ancient History"...

Always wondered if an electric eel was really that strong...

Oops, this is OT, isn't it?

[Double-oops on the spoiler. Thought I was in the UK at the time... sorry.]

Xum

 

[Grimlock]

Not really. When you think about it, most superheroes are variations on the same set of powers. With some powers, it's easier to have a bit of variation, but others...well there's only so many ways to have a speedster and have it different from other speedsters. In those cases, most of the differents come from personality.

Also, remember that we've had comics running for something like 60+ years. You're going to have a lot of repetition as people dredge up characters they used to like, or create their own versions as they dont like the ones that currently exist. These build up until bam, we suddenly have something like 15 speedsters spread out over the various comics and time periods.

I wouldn't say most superheroes are variations of the same powers. In fact, i'd say there are far more superheroes with way different powers than there are ones with similar powers.

And that's kind of my point...maybe they shouldn't have so many speedsters then. It floods the universe and takes away the uniqueness of the quality that made one character cool.

And that's kind of another issue i have, writers creating brand new characters when they have perfectly good ones to work with. I mean heck, even doomsday in the comics was created simply to kill superman. Would have been kind of cool to have seen one of luthor's plots FINALLY work or something.

 

[Bones Justice]

Well, that's a different take. Can't say I agree; there's no legitimate hint that she's actually responsible for Eiling getting the file (we just see him with it; we don't know that it was sent to him or that he found it himself or anything like that).

You could be right. The first time that I watched it, it seemed obvious to see him going from reviewing the file to meeting with Waller. After re-watching it, I'm not so sure. Still, I think it makes more sense that way. I doubt Eiling would be allowed to take top secret files from Cadmus. Or that Waller wouldn't show up at the end of Patriot Act to stop him.

I suppose we should have seen Waller give an "evil" look or a wry smile to make it convincing even though it's cliche. But then, we've seen Justice League throw plot twists before without relying on that sort of thing.

I'm glad that you see the unconvincing argument element of Waller's side of the conversation in that early scene, but I don't see it as manipulation. Just fatigue. I think a side of her still wished she was correct, but she knows she's not - therefore, somewhat stilted ability to argue against Eiling.

I guess I just don't see someone like Waller backing down from, well, anything.

Most of all, it seems to go completely against the way Epilogue shows she developed.

I dunno, I mean, Epilogue takes place in the far future. Who's to say how far she has developed at the time of Patriot Act? I'm not really impressed by her "good nature" in Epilogue, anyways. Likewise, I wouldn't expect a new episode with Vandal Savage to show him in a good light just because of his development in Hereafter -- a past episode that also takes place in the far future.

As dirty as she was fighting during Cadmus, what you just proposed is even dirtier, and I can't believe that would be the case after what we saw from the fallout in the end of the Cadmus arc.

Dirtier than what she did in Epilogue? Not only did she hijack an innocent couple's reproductive system, she was also going to have them killed right in front of their child! I happen to think project Batman Beyond was far more sinister than sending Eiling after the Justice League.

 

[Silly McGooses]

Was it just me, or was that old lady's head proportionally giganteriffic? That bugged me more than any cliches...

 

[Wolf Boy2]

It bothers me that people are calling "Patriot Act" anti-military propaganda.

The DCAU is not anti-military. Look at Easy Company in Savage Time, or John Stewart himself, who was a Marine. Heck, the Green Lantern Corps is military. Eiling and Hardcastle are the EXCEPTIONS in the DCAU's portrayal of the military, not the norm.

 

[Hyper Shadow X]

Was an ok one.