Fighting the big bad in superhero stories

I think it's fair to say that most superheroes fight a big battle at the end of nearly every story. This isn't a bad thing, and definitely fits well into the Three Act structure. I do have a question about the final battle. What form does the fight take, and should it only be against the villain personally? For instance, in the classic "Sleeping Beauty" (which has my favorite villain of all time, Maleficent), it is completely possible for the hero to fight his way to the heroine and close it out without even slaying the villain. However, what this ending doesn't do is provide closure and leaves the villain to skulk about and do more evil, which is why the movie chose otherwise..

In the new DC movie, "Wonder Woman," the final villain (Ares) is only a metaphor for the entire movie, then suddenly manifests to be slain in the big fight. I think the ending would have been much better if Wonder Woman had beaten the general and his scientist, yet failed to stop war (the figurative Ares). This highlights that war/Ares is a much greater battle and a single victory won't finish it. Character growth like that can put a tidy capstone on a story, and leaves a whole lifetime of stories as possibilities. To win everything in one story pretty much completed the Wonder Woman arc and there's nothing left, at least not until there's a new super-villain to battle. This is why Batman has never completely defeated The Joker and never will.

Maybe as audiences we've become too accustomed to the idea of problems being resolved within single stories. This has been true in television for ages, though we do have season-long stories sometimes. But, as nice as it is to see the conclusion, is it what we really desire? Sure, a mystery needs a solution, and a battle needs an ending. However, I want a hero who doesn't just pop in, fix an issue, and leave. I want someone who sticks around and works hard and leads by example. Sometimes, that means losing the battle to win the war.

- M