James Gunn's take on Superman's iconic secret identity has sparked debate among fans, with his attempt to address a long-standing plot hole in the film. The director's explanation involves Clark Kent using 'Hypno Glasses' to conceal his identity, but this has raised eyebrows for several reasons. Firstly, the concept of Hypno Glasses, while present in Superman comic lore, is portrayed as a tool for hypnosis, which some find ethically questionable. The idea of Superman using alien technology to manipulate those close to him, including Lois Lane, raises concerns about the moral implications of his actions. The film's portrayal of these glasses as a means to keep people from recognizing Clark Kent as Superman seems to contradict the character's status as a moral hero. This raises the question: is Superman becoming an unethical manipulator? The argument is further complicated by the fact that Lois Lane, a character with a keen eye for detail, seemingly figures out his secret identity, making the effectiveness of the Hypno Glasses questionable.
Secondly, Gunn's explanation of Lex Luthor's failure to recognize Clark Kent as Superman has been met with criticism. Luthor, known for his genius-level intellect, is portrayed as unable to piece together the obvious connection between the man and the superhero. This depiction has led some to label Luthor as an idiot, as his years of studying Superman should have provided him with the insight to uncover the secret identity. The argument here is that Luthor's genius is undermined by his inability to consider the possibility of a human identity for Superman, which seems to contradict the character's intelligence.
In my opinion, the issue lies in the portrayal of these elements. While the Hypno Glasses concept has its roots in comic lore, its implementation in the film raises ethical concerns. Superman, a symbol of truth and justice, should not be depicted as a manipulator, especially when it involves those he cares about. As for Luthor, his genius should be a strength, not a weakness. The argument that he is an idiot because he can't figure out the obvious is a disservice to his character. The film's attempt to address a plot hole has inadvertently created new ones, leaving fans with a mix of disappointment and confusion. It is a reminder that sometimes, the simplest explanations are not always the best, and sometimes, the hero's actions can be as complex as the villain's schemes.
