Dark Heroes

Anyone that's been paying any attention has probably noticed that Superheroes are getting darker.  This is happening across the board, though the DC cinematic universe is the most obvious, with their recent Batman v. Superman being massively criticized for going too dark.  The trend is also apparent with the MCU and the X-Men, the two other superhero franchises in the top three, with Logan and Civil War being prime examples that no one wants to just make a movie about a good guy doing good things for good reasons.
This trend has popped up every once in a while in the comic world, so there's no reason to be really shocked.  Batman wouldn't even exist if there hadn't been a push for more complex characters in the late 30's, which led to the "Golden Age" of comics.  Interestingly enough, Batman is directly responsible for this shift today as well, in what might be considered the Golden Age of Superhero Movies.  Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy was ground breaking.  It was popularly and critically acclaimed, and put DC on the top of the movie world (albeit for the last time, as of the writing of this post).  It introduced a more grounded, less fanciful, and significantly darker Batman than we got from Tim Burton a decade or so earlier, especially in the second film of the trilogy, where we were faced with some terribly troubling questions about the nature of mankind as the Joker and Two-face terrorized Gotham, apparently without motive.
I, like most everyone, loved the trilogy, and came out of The Dark Knight feeling overwhelmed, but thrilled beyond belief.  Unlike the rest of the world, though, I haven't forgotten another superhero film that was released between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight; a film that also took their hero down a darker path than we'd seen before.  I'm talking about the infamous Spider-Man 3.  I enjoyed it, and Spidey is still one of my all time favorite heroes, but no one can deny there were problems, and the main one was that Peter Parker went to a place where we didn't want him to go.  He was unpleasant as a character when the symbiote was with him, and I'm not just referring to the awkward jazz scene.  He was no more unpleasant than Batman was while he threw himself into obsession over the Joker, but for some reason it worked with Batman, but not with Spiderman.
Here's my theory.  There are heroes that should be dark, there are heroes that can be dark, and there are heroes that should not be dark (or that at least need a really careful handling of them going dark for a very limited run).  More importantly, there are fundamental characteristics that define a hero, and why we love them.  He love Batman because he fights for justice against some great villains, because he has no special powers (except money and ninja skills), and he has a tragic backstory.  We love Spiderman because he's a kid, because he's just trying to to what's right, because he considers his powers to be a responsibility and tries to take that seriously while juggling things like school and girls.  In short, at his core, Peter is a good kid.
This theory explains perfectly why Batman v Superman failed.  Superman is on of those characters that, no matter what, needs to be good at his core.  He can't be morally torn.  He needs to stick to traditional conservative values, not because of some propaganda, but because he represents the traditional America.  Truth, justice, and the American Way, am I right?  It doesn't matter that Hollywood in general is trying to move away from that, it's no longer Superman if my grandfather wouldn't agree with his choices.  In an increasingly amoral, or multi-moral, world, why shouldn't we have a hero that reminds us there was a time when right and wrong were a little clearer, and that it's okay to stand up for what we feel is right no matter what the world around us says.  That's what Superman is to the world, and any breach of that, results in him being poorly received.
So here's the question, is it possible to have the dark heroes that are popular without destroying the truly good characters that are sharing their world?  I think so, and for proof, I once again offer up Spiderman as my example.  I mentioned Civil War as being an example of a darker turn for the MCU.  Turning the heroes against each other will almost always mean making some characters a little less pure than we're used to, and yet, there was one notable exception.  Peter chose to help Tony, not because of some political ideology like the rest of the heroes, but because he admires Tony and wanted to please his idol.  His motives are naive, but pure.  He was the highlight for many viewers of the film and his solo film is one of the most anticipated films this year, an impressive feat for the second reboot and third iteration of the character in a decade.
So, the moral of the story, for any production execs that read my blog (you know you're out there?), is that we need a balance of light and dark.  We need our pure heroes to remain pure, even if it makes them feel outdated.  We need our fun heroes to remain fun, even if they come off a little goofy at times.  We need our dark anti-heroes and we need our brooding emotional vigilantes as well.  There is more than enough material out there that there's a hero to fit each mood, so we really don't need to change any of them.  More importantly, there's enough material out there to show that, in print, the lighter characters can interact with the darker ones without taking away from either.  Lets find more ways to make that happen on film.  We don't need 30 superheroes that are all the same, we need 30 different and unique and interesting heroes.