Was the JLU "redeemed" after the Cadmus Arc?

[Wolf Boy2]

I'll admit this post is partially in response to Disney Boy's posts, which I kind of agree with.

The Cadmus arc ended with the JLU saving the world, and that was supposed to be their "redeeming" moment, and yet they've saved the world before (and from bigger, more global threats). Just because Luthor manipuated Cadmus doesn't mean Cadmus was wrong about the League.

I suppose the redeeming moment came when the 6 turned themselves in? Or was it when they dismantled the space gun and built the Metro Tower?

Even without the space gun the League still a threat. And how does building another base, this one on US soil, aleviate the threat?

I know Waller came around and all, but I kind of agree with General Eiling. They ARE still dangerous. And how can the earth be assured that they will never "go rogue"? To me, the Cadmus arc still seems unresolved.

Maybe there is an inherent problem with the writing of the arc. Is there even a way to solve the trust issue? Certainly Batman never trusted Superman, since even on Batman Beyond he stores Kryptonite.

 

[Trevor Balena]

I don't think the intention was ever for the League to need "redeeming" in our eyes, since few very of us seem to think the League did anything wrong. Nor do I believe it was the producers' intent to make the audience distrust the League, but rather to show why it would make sense for other characters on the show (like Waller) to do so.

I will grant you that it doesn't seem likely that defeating Brainthor would cause the general public to go from "They're evil" to "They're great, and now with less filling", but did we ever really see much evidence that the public distrusted the League? I mean, besides the people who had their homes blown up in "Flashpoint", who would probably be impossible to convince?

I took the ending of "Divided We Fall" to mean that, despite the League's own doubts about their purpose, and Waller's doubts about their trustworthiness, the vast majority of people never stopped believing in the League's inherent good -- that, much like Green Arrow, they may whine a bit about how powerful the League is, but when it comes right down to it, they realize how necessary it is.

 

[Jazzie]

I thought the Cadmus arc ended too neat and tidy.

 

[Zabuza]

Certainly Batman never trusted Superman, since even on Batman Beyond he stores Kryptonite.

I don't think its really a matter of trust. Supes knows Batman has kryptonite and is fine with it because if he [Superman] ever went out of control, Batman would have the means to stop him. Just look at Batman: Hush or The Call (Batman Beyond episode). i'm not sure if it was in the comics or in a tv episode, but i remember Superman stating that he couldn't have given the kryptonite to a better person. so, if there is any trust in this, i believe its Supes trusting Bats.

 

[S.C.B]

We don't really know the conditions of Batman having that chunk of kryptonite. In 'Tabula Rasa', Superman didn't seem at all surprised at Batman having it. It could be by Superman's request that Batman has it, especially after the events of 'Legacy'.

Also, the issue of Batman's trust of Superman was resolved when he stopped Wonder Woman from interfering (with Superman and Luthor's showdown), and his knowing nod to Superman at the end of 'Divided We Fall'.

But to be honest, I would have been fine with a few more episodes in the third season being devoted to the themes raised by the Cadmus arc. 'Patriot Act' just wasn't enough.

 

[Wolf Boy2]

But to be honest, I would have been fine with a few more episodes in the third season being devoted to the themes raised by the Cadmus arc. 'Patriot Act' just wasn't enough.

On that, we agree.

But the public did distrust the League. Remember the news guy in "Clash"?

LUTHOR: "Now, take Hawgirl, for instance--"
NEWS GUY: "You take her."

After the events of "Starcrossed", the public hated Hawkgirl. When the League accepted her back, their reputation took another nosedive.

 

[Aldrius]

The league doesn't need to be redeemed. Ever since the first episode of Batman: The Animated Series there have been people who don't trust the heroes. (Harvey Bullock, Arthur Reeves, etc.) Cadmus is just the ultimate personification of that. The league's 'acts of evil' were just reactionary to their run-in with the Justice Lords, and the persecution of the public. The thing is, the League doesn't have anyone to tell it 'no'. If they ever went out of control, then there's no one to stop them. Which is the point to Cadmus. They see themselves as the police.

It was all Luthor's planning, and subsequently Braniac. They were trying to build mis-trust in regards to the league, creating self-doubt. Make them think that they were as evil as the Justice Lords were. As soon as Superman dropped Luthor and said "I'm not the man who killed President Luthor" he was redeemed, he proved that these heroes we've been watching AREN'T the Justice Lords.

The point is, no one is ever fully going to trust the Justice League... they just have too much power. And there's no way to keep them policed without just creating another Justice League or crossing a line.

Well, atleast that's my view-point.

 

[Trevor Balena]

But the public did distrust the League. Remember the news guy in "Clash"?

Ah, but you're making what I call the "Republican Error", which is to say that you're assuming that the views of overweight, southern blowhards -- like the commentator in "Clash" -- are shared by the general public.

I don't doubt that they're reputation took a hit -- all you have to do is look at the end of "Wake The Dead" to see what people think of Shayera -- but I doubt it had a huge effect on public opinion. An entire sports team isn't condemned if they refuse to reprimand one player to taking drugs. I think an intelligent person in the DCAU would be more likely to reconsider their position on Hawkgirl after she's let back in than they would be to condemn the entire League for her past actions.

 

[jv2k]

Yea their views of hawk girl do not represent the views of the league as a whole. Remember when they sent a team down to save the people from the city they shot, the people were grateful and talked about all the good they do. It wasn't until they knew who shot them that they got angry at the league.

In the end aside from a minority, the public believed that the league did good and there wasn't any need for to fear them.

 

[Captain Clown]

In "Divided we Fall", after Flash "dies" and Superman is fighting off the urge to barbecue a defenseless and harmless Luthor, what sticks out to me is that he's the only hero out of the group that that has to fight off the urge. It's not that reassuring.

 

[Wolf Boy2]

Refusing to kill Luthor only redeemed him to his own self.

That doesn't explain why the government would cancel Cadmus, make Eiling into a pencil pusher and Waller into a liason.

Luthor didn't make Superman go overboard in "Clash", he simply got it caught on camera. Superman trying to lobotomize Doomsday had nothing to do with Luthor. Superman was becoming violent.

Look at how he smashed the back of the chair when Question mentioned the Justice Lords. Supes was pissed. His mouth said one thing, but his actions smashed chairs, cities and small boys.

 

[Aldrius]

Luthor didn't make Superman go overboard in "Clash", he simply got it caught on camera. Superman trying to lobotomize Doomsday had nothing to do with Luthor. Superman was becoming violent.

Yeah, but he was becoming violent because of the pressure. Everyone was telling him "YOU'RE NO DIFFERENT THAN SUPERLORD. YOU'RE A JACK-ASS. YOU'RE GOING TO KILL LUTHOR." Eventually, he's going to start believing that. Added to the fact that Luthor WAS manipulating him. Acting all nice on TV. Making Superman out to be a lose cannon and a villain... (Something which I'm sure Superman is very sensitive to, due to Legacy, and a Brave New World.)

As for him lobotomizing doomsday. He was in a hopeless fight. Doomsday was pounding the shniz out of him, and he was running out of options. He couldn't let Doomsday get away, he'd kill countless people. It was an act of desperation.

That doesn't explain why the government would cancel Cadmus, make Eiling into a pencil pusher and Waller into a liason.

Well, that might have something to do with Cadmus hiring wanted criminals. Attacking the watchtower without the authority. Their illegal genetic experimentation... moreso than the Justice League being cleared of anything. "Question Authority" wouldn't have happened without Cadmus.

Refusing to kill Luthor only redeemed him to his own self.

Which was what was causing him to become violent and aggressive, his fear of becoming what he hated. His fear of killing Luthor. It was all a reaction to that.

Look at how he smashed the back of the chair when Question mentioned the Justice Lords. Supes was pissed. His mouth said one thing, but his actions smashed chairs, cities and small boys.

Again, it was his fear of becoming the Superlord. It was creating aggression and fear in him. Which he was letting out on those around him. Instead of dealing with it in a healthy and productive manour.

 

[theRedDeath]

Are we all forgeting Agent Faraday? The Cadmus issue ended once the league started cooperating with the Government. Letting Government agents, like agent Faraday, into the JL's fold was all that was necessary to make everything right with the Government and Cadmus.

And I don't think the general public ever had any real problems with the league. Look at Flash's reception in Central City for example. There's no nation-wide paranoia against the league there.

There's just the occasional group of people that distrust the league, but they in no way represent the whole country. As far as I see it, the league's reception in the world during and after Cadmus is no different than when Glorious Godfrey rampaged against the league in "Eclipsed".

Only y'know, instead of a TV show, it was a black-ops government organization. But whatever, same difference.

---

 

[Wolf Boy2]

As for him lobotomizing doomsday. He was in a hopeless fight. Doomsday was pounding the shniz out of him, and he was running out of options. He couldn't let Doomsday get away, he'd kill countless people. It was an act of desperation.

Than couldn't the same thing be said of the Justice Lords Superman? He was in the middle of a city, no less.

Again, it was his fear of becoming the Superlord. It was creating aggression and fear in him. Which he was letting out on those around him. Instead of dealing with it in a healthy and productive manour.

He exhibited that agression long before the JL Lords episode. "Twilight", for instance. I know that was his rage against Darkseid, but still. He was actually willing to die just to kill Darkseid. He hit Batman, when Bruce was only trying to save him!

One point I have to make, however. In "Destroyer", despite the fact that Superman was fighting in a harder, more powerful way than ever before, he made no mention of his grudge towards Darksied. He was only thinking of saving the earth, not of evening the score with Darkseid. This was a definite display of Superman "growing up."

 

[Ian]

I don't know; the League didn't do anything during the Cadmus arc that needed redeeming--that's not the problem.

My main problem with the Cadmus arc was that, despite having a point, the writers decided to villanize Cadmus and write them as a bad organization, instead of as a group suffering from "good idea, bad execution". In the end, we never saw them doing the good they were supposedly created to do.

On the League side, I never felt that they understood why they were feared, which made them seem aloof, not to mention dim. Cadmus had a point, that given the inmense amount of power the Justice League holds, it's a good idea to amass a comparable force, in case the League ever becomes a threat or dissapears (NOT "go rogue"). This point is obvious to anyone with two brain cells to rub together. Yet, until Divided we Fall, the League was all [Eddie Izzard in Dress to Kill] "Phsaw! Us, a threat. Like we could ever be brainwashed."[/Eddie Izzard in Dress to Kill] By the time they aknowledged the merits of Cadmus' position, Cadmus was no longer an issue, its position discredited by the fact that most of its members were complete asses. What's worse, in Season 4 they further discredit the Cadmus position by having Amanda Waller, the only person who could legitimately hold the pro-Cadmus opinion (aside from Prof. Hamilton, who simply dissapeared after Season 3), actually say Cadmus' position was wrong when there was nothing wrong with their position.

You know what I would have liked? To have seen Cadmus do something good. If, sometime during Season 4, we'd been told that Cadmus had been reorganized under a new Manager (Sarge Steel or Mr. Bones, choose your pick). Then, in Destroyer, we'd see the members of the new Cadmus joining the League to stop the Para-Demon invasion.

 

[Wolf Boy2]

You know what I would have liked? To have seen Cadmus do something good. If, sometime during Season 4, we'd been told that Cadmus had been reorganized under a new Manager (Sarge Steel or Mr. Bones, choose your pick). Then, in Destroyer, we'd see the members of the new Cadmus joining the League to stop the Para-Demon invasion.

Now that would've been awesome. I was dissapointed with Season 3 of JLU because it did ignore so much of the previous season. I liked the stories, but think it could've been executed better.

However, I know a lot of people who consider season 3 the best, because they had been wanting to see Superfriends-style hero/villian brawls. Me, I never really wanted a Legion of Doom in JLU, so I was dissapointed.

 

[Aldrius]

Than couldn't the same thing be said of the Justice Lords Superman? He was in the middle of a city, no less.

Not really. Superlord was obviously not just applying that logic to Doomsday.

All of Arkham was lobotomized.

He exhibited that agression long before the JL Lords episode. "Twilight", for instance. I know that was his rage against Darkseid, but still. He was actually willing to die just to kill Darkseid. He hit Batman, when Bruce was only trying to save him!

One point I have to make, however. In "Destroyer", despite the fact that Superman was fighting in a harder, more powerful way than ever before, he made no mention of his grudge towards Darksied. He was only thinking of saving the earth, not of evening the score with Darkseid. This was a definite display of Superman "growing up."

Okay, can't argue with Twilight. Though it's not like Darkseid doesn't deserve it... Unlike Luthor who can be dealt with handily (for the most part), Darkseid is a constant threat, who's never truly been defeated (He was still ruler of Apokalips after all, until he died).

 

[awh1978]

As for him lobotomizing doomsday. He was in a hopeless fight. Doomsday was pounding the shniz out of him, and he was running out of options. He couldn't let Doomsday get away, he'd kill countless people. It was an act of desperation.

True, but Lord Superman was in the same position and Lois was shocked that he resorted to doing that. The only potential saving grace is that Superman may have thought that if Doomsday recovered from it once, the lobotomy wouldn't be permanent. Otherwise, his act showed that, just like any person, Superman would ignore his usual morals and do the "right" thing in a desperate situation. The pessimistic line of thought (i.e. Batman throwing a hissyfit) is that once you start doing it, rationalizing increasingly worse behavior is inevitable.

As for the trust issue, I believe the world mainly trusted Superman. Of the original 7, Superman was the only true global hero, and the public probably decided that a group led by him was OK. Once they expanded the same line of thought probably applied. They trust Superman to guide the League in the right direction and set a high standard, hence the standing O at the end of the Cadmis arc.

 

[jv2k]

True, but Lord Superman was in the same position and Lois was shocked that he resorted to doing that. The only potential saving grace is that Superman may have thought that if Doomsday recovered from it once, the lobotomy wouldn't be permanent. Otherwise, his act showed that, just like any person, Superman would ignore his usual morals and do the "right" thing in a desperate situation. The pessimistic line of thought (i.e. Batman throwing a hissyfit) is that once you start doing it, rationalizing increasingly worse behavior is inevitable.

I don't understand why this is being said like superman did something wrong. It was an act of desperation, he not only getting beaten down, if he lost the rest of the world would suffer from it. Its not like he just picked up some random mortal and lobotomized them, it was an act of survival, something which makes him more human(well he's not human but close enough).

 

[JAG]

It was Doomsday, or (most likely) several hundred civilians and most of the League. Hmmm....let's think about that one for a second.