The Sartrean Struggle of Banner/Hulk in Marvel's Cinematic Universe
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Sartrean Struggle of Banner/Hulk in Marvel’s Cinematic Universe Jason Butco Sams, Arizona State University Abstract justifiable in this context. Hulk, on the other hand, represents the authentic within the Ang Lee’s 2003 Hulk is gauged as the character. These two concepts establish the least favorable showing of Bruce Banner philosophical ontology through which and the Incredible Hulk in Marvel’s Banner/Hulk can be best understood; driving Cinematic Universe (MCU). Despite its the development of Banner/Hulk through his criticisms, the film remains in the cinematic subsequent appearances in the MCU. The canon. The opportunity to retcon the content distinction between Banner and Hulk, along of Ang Lee’s Hulk has been possible in any these existential lines, begins to decay as the of the subsequent appearances of interpolations of these ontologies begin to Banner/Hulk in MCU. However, this has affect one another in their continuing never come to pass, which indicates that presence within the ever expanding MCU. Hulk makes a significant contribution to the One of the criticisms that was directed character. towards Sartre’s philosophical offering was Unlike the traditional comic book that he underestimated the strength of the representation of Banner/Hulk, Ang Lee’s world to limit the freedom of the individual, offering does not establish the emergence of particularly in the face of oppressive the Hulk as the result of the gamma political and economic regimes. As the radiation accident. Instead, an attentive MCU expands, and increasingly powerful analysis shows that the Hulk has been, from entities emerge as antagonists, it is the Banner’s birth, a part of the unity of the author’s intent to use Banner/Hulk as a character. The gamma accident in the film is response to such a criticism. The power and just a catalyst that tears away any sort of strength of the Hulk may, at first, seem the divide between the two facets of key to such an argument. However, the Banner/Hulk. This duality can be understood events of Thor: Ragnarok represent the apex through the existential philosophy of Jean- of the interpolation between Banner/ Hulk, Paul Sartre. which can be predicted through the Sartre develops two concepts within existential understanding established. A Being and Nothingness that ultimately drive possible solution to Sartre’s criticism and the ontology of Banner and Hulk, bad faith the continuing development of Banner/Hulk and authenticity. Banner is the epitome of lies not with the Hulk, but in the rise of bad faith, or the denial of one’s freedom in Banner. the face of the conditions of the world. Eric Bana’s banal performance becomes The Phoenix Papers, Vol. 4, No. 1, August 2018 59 MCU started in 2008 with the release of Significance emerges through the two films, Iron Man and The Incredible application of an existential hermeneutic Hulk, and has since transitioned to include a driven by concepts within the philosophical wide cast of characters from comics to contributions of Jean-Paul Sartre. Resulting cinema.1 Prior to the establishment of this from this hermeneutical approach are cinematic MCU continuity, Ang Lee’s Hulk parallels between Hulk and the MCU canon was released in 2003.2 This film has always that can be used to understand the occupied a peculiar position in relation to relationship between Banner and Hulk, the MCU films, even after the declaration by predict character development, and Kevin Feige, the president of Marvel potentially answer questions about the Studios, in a 2014 interview that the film is characters that are currently unanswered. excluded from Marvel cinematic canon.3 A Though the author appreciates both Sartre’s complete chronological filmography of philosophy and the MCU, there are Banner and/or the Hulk in the MCU would comments that Sartre has made to which are be ordered as such: The Incredible Hulk difficult to reconcile with some of his most (2008), Marvel’s The Avengers (2012), Iron fundamental concepts. Using Banner and Man 3 (2013), Avengers: Age of Ultron Hulk as a paradigm, the author also (2015), Thor: Ragnarok (2017), and considers one of the most severe statements Avengers: Infinity War (2018). The Sartre has made about violence, a sentiment conclusion to Infinity War releases in 2019. that seemingly applies to the Banner/Hulk The Incredible Hulk, which is both a character. sequel to and a reboot of Hulk, establishes a Jean-Paul Sartre was an author, dependence upon its prequel thereby causing philosopher, and playwright contributing to Hulk to occupy a position in relation to the the French existentialism philosophical MCU in that it is both included and tradition that arose after the Second World excluded. In part, this article is intended to War. Although his body of work is be a defense of Ang Lee’s Hulk in that its significant, only a few of his concepts are content is significant to the trajectory of necessary to create an interpretive model for Bruce Banner and Hulk in the MCU canon. the cinematic variations of Bruce Banner and Hulk. 1 Iron Man, directed by Jon Favreau (Marvel Studios, In Being and Nothingness, Sartre 2008), DVD (Paramount Pictures, 2008); The 4 Incredible Hulk, directed by Louis Leterrier (Marvel introduces bad faith and freedom. These Studios, 2008), DVD (Universal Pictures, 2008). two concepts rest upon facticity and 2 Hulk, directed by Ang Lee (Marvel Enterprises, transcendence and the relationship between 2003), DVD (Universal Pictures, 2003). 3 Jim Vejvoda, “Marvel Studios Boss Kevin Feige them. It is necessary to first clarify these Talks Captain America: The Winter Soldier Spoilers terms as bad faith and freedom are both And What’s in Store for the Marvel Cinematic dependent upon them. Facticity is Universe,” IGN, 7 April 2014, accessed 23April 2018, http://www.ign.com/ articles/2014/04/07/marvel-studios-boss-kevin-feige- talks-captain-america-the-winter-soldier-spoilers- 4 Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness (New and-whats-in-store-for-the-marvel-cinematic- York, NY. Washington Square Press, 1992), 86-116, universe 800, 803. The Phoenix Papers, Vol. 4, No. 1, August 2018 60 everything that one brings into their where the situation is perpetuated. To situation.5 Facticity is the unchangeable illustrate possible expressions, Sartre elements of one’s self and the world; all the provides examples, one of which is aspects of the situation that presuppose that applicable to the Banner/Hulk character. He given moment: One’s body, past, and the imagines a young woman on a first date with context of their situation. Representing the a man.7 Over the course of the date, the possibilities from that moment and situation suitor places his hand upon hers. This is is distinguished as transcendence. something that requires a response, either in Simplified, facticity is everything that one the affirmative or negative; instead, she does brings into a given moment, and nothing. Rather than make a decision that transcendence is what that same individual will drive her towards the next moment, she does with it. The relationship between is suspended in that situation with his hand facticity and transcendence is that both are touching hers, passing it by with idle synthetic of bad faith and freedom. conversation, refusing to acknowledge the Bad faith, according to Sartre, is an events that demand a choice from her. intentional self-deception that comes about Freedom, which Sartre also calls by denying one’s transcendence, or in authenticity, is the mediation in a situation another variation, the deception that one has where one maintains the possibilities that freedom over their own facticity.6 These present themselves from that moment. In examples can be taken as expressions that choosing a given action, the consequence of one situation determines the next, thus that action becomes a part of their facticity. denying one’s freedom in that antecedent The result of transcendence, due to the situation. This amounts to a deterministic temporality of moments, is building upon attitude about the given situation. The one’s facticity. For illustrative examples, response is predetermined by one’s facticity. think of freedom as skydiving where one’s The other being form of bad faith is that one actions are potentially limitless: Maneuvers, has the freedom over their situation, in that ordinary freefall, and when to release the specific situation confusing facticity for chute are all possibilities to the skydiver. freedom. Take, for example, an individual They could go as far as completely who has experienced some trauma earlier in abandoning their rig mid-air if that is the their life. This form of bad faith would be consequence they seek. Bad faith, in the equivalent of attempting to erase that contrast, is like being tied to the front of a trauma. It cannot be undone, but it need not runaway locomotive, the locomotive being define the individual or determine their one’s facticity. It pushes one ahead with no actions from the point of trauma forward. semblance of control or freedom, the tracks Bad faith can be either a self-inflicted of the train already determining the next obstruction to the transcendental project of moment. freedom, or a short circuit of this process 5 Ibid., 127-33, 802. 6 Ibid., 87. 7 Ibid., 96-97. The Phoenix Papers, Vol. 4, No. 1, August 2018 61 Conceptually, Bruce Banner is the in the third act that he cannot be cured. archetype of bad faith, in contrast to Hulk Banner is consistently referring to Hulk as who represents the expression of freedom. “the other guy,” as someone other than The first appearance of Bruce Banner himself. He also denies himself certain within the canonical MCU is presented in choices because of the possibility of the The Incredible Hulk.