---
title: 'Why "Evil Superman" Never Works'
source: 'https://youtube.com/watch?v=B3URyjpIO0o'
video_id: 'B3URyjpIO0o'
date: 2026-06-28
duration_sec: 750
---

# Why "Evil Superman" Never Works

> Source: [Why "Evil Superman" Never Works](https://youtube.com/watch?v=B3URyjpIO0o)

## Summary

The video (hosted by ScreenCrush's Ryan Arey) argues that the popular trend of imagining an evil Superman fundamentally misunderstands the character. It claims that these stories (like Injustice, Homelander, and Omni-Man) are less about Superman and more about our own societal cynicism and inability to believe in pure, selfless goodness.

### Key Points

- **The Central Thesis** [0:15] — The idea of an evil Superman always falls apart in the long run and has started to change the perception of Superman himself.
- **Popular Examples** [0:21] — Countless iterations like Injustice, Homelander (The Boys), and Omni-Man (Invincible) show a Superman who snaps, goes too far, or was never good to begin with.
- **A Misunderstanding of the Character** [0:39] — The trend says less about Superman and more about our own failure to believe that someone with that much power would choose to be good. These stories are about our cynicism, not about Clark Kent.
- **Power vs. Restraint** [1:15] — People mistake the 'super' part of Superman as his power rather than his restraint. His biggest power is his emotional strength, not his physical strength. He treats people with dignity despite his god-like abilities.
- **The Difficulty of True Heroism** [1:54] — Writing a Superman who kills is easy (he just lets go). It’s much harder to write a Superman who wields his power responsibly and doesn't make his alien nature the most important aspect of his life.
- **The 'Injustice' Flaw: Shock Value Over Substance** [2:20] — While 'Injustice' started as a fresh take, it quickly declined into shock value. Because the concept was for a video game, it constantly needed new reasons for conflict, making Superman's cruelty feel numb and repetitive rather than dramatic.
- **Homelander vs. Superman** [3:19] — Homelander works as a villain because he was never Clark Kent. He is all 'super' without the 'man,' and the audience never believed otherwise. However, the constant need to one-up kills in later seasons loses its impact once the character's morality is known.
- **Omni-Man's Redemption: The Human Connection** [4:22] — Omni-Man (Nolan) works as a villain, but he is not the Clark Kent of his world (Mark is). The story's main theme is that the human experience is what makes Mark good. Nolan eventually returns to classic Superman values by saving Earth.
- **The Snyder Trap: Alienating Superman** [6:17] — Zack Snyder's Superman falls into a similar trap. 'Man of Steel' tried to ground Superman in a dark, gritty tone, emphasizing his alien side over his humanity. This leads to a character questioning if humanity deserves help, which fundamentally misunderstands the character.
- **The 'No Other Choice' Fallacy** [8:19] — The climax of 'Man of Steel' (killing Zod) violates the core of the character. If a story gives Superman no other choice than to kill, it has forgotten a key aspect: hope. Superman always finds another way.
- **The Tension of the 'Snap'** [8:54] — Getting Superman to the breaking point is dramatic, but the moment he crosses that line, the tension is gone. He can do it again and again, leading to dictatorship and murder, which loses the very thing that makes Superman interesting.
- **The Core Distinction: Clark Kent is Essential** [9:32] — Evil Superman only works when he stops being Clark Kent. The moment he loses his compassion, empathy, and humanity, he stops being Superman and becomes a different character entirely.
- **A Reflection of Our Cynicism** [10:07] — The evil Superman trend rose from our own cynicism and belief that corruption is inevitable with great power. The fantasy isn't about Superman turning evil; it's about proving our cynicism right.
- **A Return to Hope** [10:39] — Newer adaptations like 'My Adventures with Superman' and James Gunn's 'Superman' are returning to the core idea that Superman's strength comes from his humanity, not just his power. He represents hope and the choice to do good.

### Conclusion

The evil Superman trend reflects our own societal cynicism and misses the point of the character. True Superman stories are about a man who defies all odds and chooses to do good, and we are finally returning to that core idea of hope.

## Transcript

For more than a decade, superhero fans
keep circling back to the same tired
idea. What if Superman were evil?
Welcome back ScreenCrush. I'm Ryan Arey,
and today we're going to dissect the big
problem with an evil Superman. We're
going to look at the most famous evil
Superman in recent years and explain why
this idea always falls apart in the long
run and how over time it's even started
to change Superman himself. From
Injustice to Homelander or even
Invincible's Omni-Man, we have seen
countless iterations of a Superman who
just snaps, who goes too far, or who was
never even good to begin with. Somewhere
along the way, we started to believe
that Superman is only interesting when
he breaks bad. But that says less about
Superman and more about how we
fundamentally misunderstood this
character. What do you mean? Well, these
evil Superman stories aren't actually
about Clark Kent. They're about our
inability to believe that someone with
that much power would choose to be good.
Let me explain. We all know the story of
the classic Clark Kent Superman. He was
created as the champion of the
oppressed. Superman's creators, Jerry
Siegel and Joe Shuster, are even cited
as saying that they created him as a way
to tell stories of hope during times
when things looked hopeless. For years,
we have read stories of a Superman who
helps those in need, loves his ma, and
says stuff like,
>> Golly.
>> So then, what happened? How did we go
from the Superman who saves cats stuck
in trees to one playing judge, jury, and
executioner? Well, people started to
mistake the super part of Superman as
the power that he has rather than his
restraint. I mean, think about it.
Superman spends his entire life
surrounded by people who, by comparison,
have the power of an ant. But rather
than look down on them, he treats them
with dignity, respect, and most
importantly, he loves humanity.
Superman's biggest power has never been
his physical strength. It's his
emotional strength. Writing a Superman
that kills people is easy. He can just
let go, unleash all of his pent-up
aggression, and rule the world. We have
seen that become the end goal in every
single evil Superman story so far. It is
much harder to write a Superman who
wields that power accordingly and
doesn't make the alien god the most
important aspect of Clark's life. The
idea of an evil version of Superman or
an anti-Superman has been around,
basically forever. Bizarro, although not
necessarily one of the evil Superman
we're talking about, was invented just
20 years after Superman. So, a
villainous Superman is not a new
concept. However, it did gain widespread
popularity through the Injustice
universe. In 2013, DC released
Injustice: Gods Among Us, the prequel
comic to the fighting game of the same
name. In that comic, the Joker drives
Superman insane when he kills a pregnant
Lois Lane. Driven angry with grief,
Clark kills the Joker and one thing
leads to another, leading to Superman
declaring to save the world by doing,
quote, "Whatever it takes." Injustice
was pretty much Superman's one bad day.
At first, Injustice worked as a fresh
new take on Superman and the DC
universe. The comic also validated the
audience's growing suspicion of an
entirely peaceful Superman. We see the
amount of grief that Clark goes through
and understand his anger. It makes sense
that he would snap like that. However,
because the concept itself was for a
video game, every comic issue in each
game needed to create new reasons for
the conflict. When he begins to continue
killing after the Joker, we become
almost numb to the cruelty of the
character or it becomes shock value. So,
not only does this snap go against
everything we've known from Superman,
but it also
well, it just gets old. More recently,
take Homelander for example. While he
obviously doesn't have the same alien
history or even human upbringing as
Superman, he was created as a satirical
parody of Superman. He is a version of
Superman that shares the same immense
power, but lacks all the morality and
compassion. The thing with Homelander,
though, is that he wasn't ever a
character that we viewed as the paragon
of good. Homelander is all the super
without the man, and there was never a
belief otherwise.
>> You're nothing at all.
>> Throughout every season of The Boys, we
watched as Homelander became more and
more depraved. From the second he was on
screen, we were aware of his morality.
So, it becomes less jarring or out of
character when his goal of world
domination is finally being pursued. It
also works for The Boys because
Homelander is not the hero. Homelander
made for an interesting villain because
we got to see this unstoppable force get
taken down by a group of rowdy
underdogs. However, like I said, it does
come to a point. Towards the later
seasons of the show, complaints began to
rise about the show's constant need to
one-up itself with kills. Homelander
worked best in the early seasons
because, like Injustice, it feels like a
new take on a famously good hero. Once
we know, though, that this character is
willing to cross that line, the shock of
them doing so entirely fades away. Take
another, even more similar, evil
Superman adaptation, Omni-Man from
Invincible. Omni-Man is directly
inspired by Superman. Invincible
co-creator Robert Kirkman even said that
Omni-Man's original name was Supra-Man.
Parody names aside, they do have a
similar power set. They both come from
alien worlds. a badass. And prior to
Nolan's turn, they are both beloved by
the public. I mean, even Viltrum is
similar to some iterations of an evil
Krypton with their manifest destiny
approach.
>> Rule it over the planet as the last son
of Krypton. Our most trusted [music]
officers were each given a planet to
weaken by themselves.
I was one of those [music] lucky few.
>> So, it's a shock to everyone, both in
universe and out, when the real Omni-Man
is revealed. This is their world's
Superman being revealed as a
world-conquering homicidal sociopath.
But, see here, it works because, despite
their immense similarities, Nolan is not
the Clark Kent allegory of that world.
Mark is the Clark Kent of this universe.
Invincible's main theme centers around
the human experience and how that is
what makes Mark good, or at least not a
conqueror like his father. While
Omni-Man has a backstory similar to
Superman's, Mark is technically the
Superman of this story. However, Nolan
does have a face turn and aids Mark in
saving Earth from being conquered.
Eventually, while he does still kill, he
does return to the classic Superman
values of being a champion for the
oppressed.
>> There's a statute where it's Superman.
>> Right, but they were still super men.
And that's important because this means
that the problem isn't just evil
Superman. It's the assumption that this
much power will make anyone evil no
matter what. Like with Injustice, it's
the belief that Clark Kent, like anyone
else, is just one bad day away from
snapping. And while Zack Snyder Superman
doesn't become a dictator or take over
the world, he does work under some of
these same assumptions. Snyder Superman
ultimately falls into the same trap that
all evil Superman storylines do. Man of
Steel is definitely both a product of
its time and its director. Coming off
the heels of Nolan's Dark Knight
trilogy, Man of Steel emulated the same
dark gritty tone of that universe.
However, you can't really ground
Superman in Smallville or Metropolis the
same way you can ground Batman in
Gotham. Now, while we often compare the
two or pit them against each other, they
are ultimately built for different kinds
of solo stories. Batman can easily take
on a gritty and dark tone all while
keeping his same motifs. Superman,
however, cannot. Unlike Batman, Superman
doesn't start his journey in darkness.
He begins as the light. To have Superman
spend an entire film grappling with
himself further alienates him as a
character and this is part of what makes
Snyder Superman feel so
un-Supermanly. The challenge with
grounding Superman is that Superman
isn't grounded by his powers. He is
grounded by his humanity. Man of Steel
places a lot more emphasis on Clark's
alien side than his human side. Instead
of a Superman that feels deeply
connected to humanity, we get a Superman
who spends a lot of the runtime
questioning whether or not the human
race deserves his help.
>> What was I supposed to do?
Just let him die?
>> And that is an important difference.
Superman has never been inspiring
because he's Kryptonian. He is inspiring
because, despite being an alien, he sees
the best in humanity and chooses to be a
part of it.
>> You trust everyone and think everyone
you've ever met is like beautiful.
>> And this is where Man of Steel starts to
brush up against the same idea that
powers so many evil Superman stories.
Not that Superman is evil, but that
eventually Superman, like anyone else,
will break. When the film reaches its
climax, Clark is presented with an
impossible choice. Kill Zod or let him
laser a group of people. Superman
ultimately picks the former.
>> [screaming]
>> Now, while you can say that he had no
other choice, that only emphasizes the
misunderstanding of the character. If
your Superman story gives Superman no
other choice than killing someone, then
you have forgotten a key aspect of his
character, hope. Superman will always
find another choice. As he said, there's
always another way. That aside, this
breaking point where he does kill Zod is
exactly where this fantasy of evil
Superman hits a wall. Superman snapped.
He lasered someone. He snapped someone's
neck. So, now what? See, getting
Superman to that point is dramatic.
You're on the edge of your seat waiting
to see if he'll actually do it. And when
he does,
that's it. Now that he's crossed this
line, he can do it again and again and
again. And eventually, every evil
Superman story ends with dictatorship,
murder, intimidation, etc. This new
immoral Superman just lost all of the
tension that makes Superman interesting
because we now know that he doesn't have
a problem crossing that line. There's a
great story in the comics called
Superman Exile, where it explores just
how distraught Clark gets after killing
somebody. After being forced to execute
three Kryptonian criminals in accordance
with Kryptonian law, Superman is haunted
by his actions. He decides to exile
himself from Earth before he can hurt
anyone else. Evil Superman only works
when Superman stops being Clark Kent.
Homelander can be evil because he was
never Clark Kent. Omni-Man can be evil
because he was never Clark Kent. But,
the moment that Clark loses that
compassion, empathy, and humanity that
define him, he stops being Superman, and
he becomes a different character
entirely. For a while, we looked at an
evil Superman as the logical conclusion
of the character. But, the more popular
those stories become, the less they
became about Superman, and the more they
became about us. Superman is a hero
because he chooses to do good with the
powers that he has, something that to
most of the human race is unfathomable.
This evil Superman trend rose because of
our own cynicism and our own belief that
corruption is inevitable with that much
power. But, Superman was never
interesting because he had the capacity
to destroy the world. He is interesting
because he wouldn't. We stopped asking
whether or not Superman could ever abuse
his power, and as a society, we started
assuming that he would. The fantasy was
never about Superman turning evil, it's
about proving that our own cynicism was
right. Evil Superman is easy. Superman
is hard. And luckily, I think we're
finally coming back around to
recognizing that. Shows like My
Adventures with Superman are making
Clark Kent just as important as
Superman.
>> Well, maybe he's a nice guy who has
powers [music] and just wants to use
them to help as many people as he can.
>> Clark, if you had powers, you'd do that.
>> In the show, we meet a relatively new
man of steel. He's just discovering his
Kryptonian heritage, but instead of
isolating himself and becoming further
alien, Clark is actively seeking out
human connection. He wants friends. He
wants community. He wants to belong. We
saw something similar in James Gunn's
Superman. Despite being an alien,
Superman gets his strength from his
humanity.
>> But, that is being human, and that's my
greatest strength.
>> These newer adaptations remind us what
Superman was always supposed to
represent, not power or invincibility or
the ability to rule over everyone else,
but hope. The belief that someone with
every reason and opportunity to abuse
their power would choose not to abuse
power. When you have a character whose
entire premise is helping people who are
oppressed, you fundamentally can't have
them be evil. The question was whether
or not what happens when Superman snaps,
it's why doesn't he snap. We're not
looking to see a story about a god being
lured to the dark side. We want a story
about a man who defies all odds and
chooses to do good. After decades of
creating characters and plotlines that
validate our cynical fears about what
someone with that much power would
become, we seem to finally be
discovering why the man part of Superman
is so important. [music] Big shoutout to
Lee Mazio who wrote this video, you can
find his links down below. And let us
know what you think about the concept of
evil Superman down in the comments or in
our free to join Discord server. And if
it's your first time here, please
subscribe, smash that bell for alerts.
For ScreenCrush, I'm Ryan Arey.
>> [music]
[music]
[music]