If there's room for intelligent debate about the script's motivations then it presumably means that the writers knew better than to mindlessly spew zieg-heiling leftist rhetoric and actually force the audience to think and debate. Unusual for Hollywood but I guess some filmmakers actually want to sell tickets.
The whole "ambivalence about power" thing has always been at the heart of the superhero genre, in my humble opinion. Spiderman is probably the most tormented example of that, but it affects all superheroes to varying degrees.
I thought about that while watching one of the “Star Wars” movies the other month. I think of the Emperor and the Dark Side as a bunch of commies. But the leftists who enjoy it apparently see Vader as Dick Cheney.
Superman is my favorite hero because no ambiguity exists in him. He is a man, yes, but as a native of Krypton he not a son of Adam, and is therefore not fallen; in a way, he is an innocent. For this reason he can be trusted to wield the powers he possesses in defense of the Natural Law (aka “Truth, Justice, and the American Way). It is his innocence and trustworthiness that make him “super”, not his powers. He is Superman because he is good.
Yes, I'm very interested with what they do with the next Batman. Poison Ivy us going to be featured this time around; and I want to see how they handle having an environmental terrorist as the villain, it could be done very well or it be all ruined by playing it PC. Or worse yet they could make it like the last time Poison Ivy was on the big screen *shudder*.
Boycott the damn thing.
"We have a really interesting international cast and I personally view the world in a very polyglot sort of way, go Barack Obama, and so we wanted the movie to really reflect a modern worldview." - Lorenzo di Bonaventura
Source:
http://www.collider.com/entertainment/interviews/article.asp/aid/7740/tcid/1/pg/2