Superman (2025)

"Good gosh, there's gotta be a better way to do this!"

Director

James Gunn

Cast

David Corenswet - Clark Kent / Superman
Nicholas Hoult - Lex Luthor
Rachel Brosnahan - Lois Lane
Nathan Fillion - Guy Gardner / Green Lantern
Edi Gathegi - Michael Holt / Mister Terrific
Isabela Merced - Kendra Saunders / Hawkgirl
Anthony Carrigan - Rex Mason / Metamorpho

Superman movies of recent memory, starting way back in 1983 with "Superman III" and including "Supergirl" from 1984, up to today have been met with many unfavorable reviews. 

When news of another Superman movie broke, I heard the same comment from various people. "Another one?" 

With James Gunn in the director's seat after directing other comic-based movies "Guardians of the Galaxy" vols 1 through 3 and "The Suicide Squad," it definitely drew in a ton of attention. 

Some friends of mine say they like "Man of Steel" from 2013 better than this new movie. I haven't seen that since its release. All I remember thinking about it was that it started off slow. I'll have to rewatch it and refresh my memory. 

So, in this new movie, Superman (David Corenswet) once again goes up against Lex Luther (Nicholas Hault), while also facing the evil wrath of fake news and a little cancel culture along with finding himself and coming to terms with who he is.   

Like the 2022 movie, "The Batman" with Robert Pattinson, a lot of audiences seemed to gush over this new Superman movie, treating it as though "Superman" has reached the pinnacle of cinematic art. "Superman" and "The Batman" are, evidently, the greatest of comic book movies to date, so some fans believe.

But, for me, "Superman" is just... alright. I don't see it (nor "The Batman") as being so much different from previous comic book movies. I don't see it as having such depth and highly insightful insight into this well established and largely appreciated comic book character as some claim it does. There really isn't any of that in this movie. 

While I was generally entertained by James Gunn's "Superman" just as much as I enjoyed my popcorn, I wouldn't get so high on its fumes to call it a cinematic masterpiece nor even a great movie. 

But there were some things I did like, such as Lex Luthor's room of brain-controlled monkeys writing mean Tweets and TikToks about Superman. Take your criticism, Gen Z! 

However, that's not to say "Superman" is a terrible movie. Like I said, James Gunn's "Superman" is simply o.k. 

I live in a small town, and the nearest movie theater only shows one film each Friday, Saturday and Sunday. So, "Superman" arrived a bit later than everywhere else. And the theater was only showing it in 3D. I don't care about 3D at all, and my few experiences watching new releases in 3D have been very underwhelming. The theater I went to had the 3D setup perfectly. 

The flying scenes in the movie were great and best experienced in 3D. This movie nailed the shots of Superman in flight. Seeing these shots in 3D was amazing and probably the best parts of the movie for me. Shout out to the Murphy Theater in Stuart, Neb., for a great 3D experience! 

When he's not flying in this movie, it seems Superman spent a lot of time healing in some way. There are one or two moments with Superman fighting to save Metropolis. Otherwise, he's constantly being tortured and beat up, laying down to get better, or coming to terms with himself. Even Lois Lane has a scene where she's questioning Superman to the point of nearly berating him and then criticizes him for getting up to leave and not taking her verbal thrashing.  

Also, Superman's adoptive parents, Jonathan (Pruitt Taylor Vince) and Martha Kent (Neva Howell) aren't portrayed as wise as they've previously been portrayed in past depictions. 

Instead, they're much frumpier, coming across as more country bumpkins than common sense, learned and sensible people. 

In one scene after Superman discovers what his true parents from the planet Krypton really intended for him to do while on Earth (that's a big twist in the film so I won't spoil it), Jonathan Kent tells Superman that the role of parents, referring to Superman's real parents, isn't to tell their kids who they are. Personal choices determine that. That's kind of true.

Well, I think that's a bit too watered down when it comes a parent's role. Sure, we have free will and all that. 

Still, the role of parents is to tell their children who they are. Educate them. Guide them. If that isn't the case, then what's a parent's role? 

Granted, Superman doesn't have to be like his real father from Krypton. But his real father will always be a part of him and continue to have some influence. 

I think Richard Donner's 1978 movie sets the standard for what a Superman movie ought to be. Hollywood has certainly deviated from that thanks in large part of Hollywood's left-leaning political mindset. 

Superman is a figure of Americana who has been lifted up in American pop-culture as being a symbol of American strength, righteousness and morals. Superman is super! So, he fits right into the American way of life. He needs to maintain his stand for truth, justice, and the American way.

In this movie, Superman, "the man of steel" isn't as "super" as we've previously seen him. He's a little too lacking in that major detail. Oh, he's still the man of steel. Despite that, Superman gets pummeled more times than I've ever seen him get pummeled. The moment he appears on screen right at the beginning of the movie, he's knocked down for the count. It's that scene in the trailer where Superman crashes into the ice and snow, and then whistles for Krypto the Superdog to save him. 

In fact, everyone and everything with a red cape in this flick seems like a dunce. Krypto is an annoying pain in the rear. And Supergirl (Milly Alcock), who shows up at the end of the movie, is a bratty drunk girl. Oh, spoiler. Sorry!

I took a lot more interest in the rest of the "Justice Gang" - Green Lantern (Nathan Fillion) and especially Mr. Terrific (Edi Gathegi). There's also Hawkgirl (Isabela Merced). She's a part of things, too. Hawkgirl got annoying real fast, though, as she screeches like a hawk in practically every shot of her flying through the air. I get it. She's a girl hawk representing both girls and large birds within the bird community. Did she need to screech like one (a hawk, I mean) in every scene?  

Anyways, Green Lantern, Mr. Fantastic and Hawkgirl acted much more "super" and really took care of business when Metropolis was under threat. Even Green Lantern, in one scene, calls out Superman for being weak. That's not the word Green Lantern uses, but that's pretty much his point. 

I don't know, nor do I care, how many people were involved with the script, but the plot feels like many writers had their fingers in it all trying to pull it in different directions. And the whims of different writers all found their way into the story. In other words, "Superman" borders on convoluted. 

James Gunn doesn't make Superman that interesting. He doesn't dive into what makes Superman an remarkable hero. Instead, he relies on the hope that audiences already know all about Superman's story and then takes this iconic hero in his (James Gunn's) own personal direction, leaving Superman's greatness to the past. 

He also tosses in a bunch of his own style of humor on top of a lot of plot points and action. I'm not above humor and campiness, even in a Superman movie. I enjoyed that style of humor in "Guardians of the Galaxy" vols. 1 and 2. 

And Superman has to be a bit campy because a character as powerful as he is would certainly appear more frightening for audiences without any of it, more so than what the IP intends. Check out the movie "Brightburn" which shows how terrifying a character like Superman can be if he were to use his superior powers to dominate the entire world. It was produced by James and directed by his brothers, Mark and Brian. 

In this case, the humor was inserted in places where it doesn't belong, and distracted from any necessary insight into Superman's motivations and desires in this story.

In one scene where Lois Lane and Superman are making up after an argument earlier in the movie, as they talk and have a serious moment, Gunn decides to include a giant monster in the background attacking Metropolis while Green Lantern, Hawkgirl, and Mr. Fantastic fight it off. As they're in this serious moment, the audience can see this huge monster in the background destroying everything. It's also destroying a golden moment for the audience to gain any understanding into Superman and Lois. 

Gunn does delve into Lex Luthor's (Nicholas Hoult) motivations, that being jealousy (I guess) of Superman. That's about all the audience gets in regard to character exploration. 

Thankfully, the politics in this new movie is very minimal. There's some slight social commentary referencing the current political climate. But this isn't a movie about all that, especially illegal immigration. You know, because Superman is from another planet and crash lands in the American Midwest rather unexpectedly.  

At least audiences still cheer Superman on for reducing crime. That depiction certainly doesn't reflect today's reality. Reducing crime in our major cities isn't met with the same enthusiasm these days, at least not from one political side that revels in taking to wrong side of insanely dumb arguments. I digress, though. Now, here I go bringing politics into it. 

In another scene Superman and the Justice Gang attack a giant monster unleashed on Metropolis by Lex Luthor and his goons as a distraction while Lex infiltrates Superman's Fortress of Solitude. While the Justice Gang attack this thing, Superman is more interested making sure they don't kill it but rather take it to some space zoo or something to study it. Meanwhile, he's trying to make sure civilians clear the area, which they don't because they're stupid, and even swooshes down faster than a speeding bullet to rescue a random squirrel. That's were Green Lantern calls Superman out for pussyfooting around the situation. What did James Gunn do to you, Superman?     

To be fair, I enjoyed "Superman" as much as I enjoy any other Saturday night popcorn flick. I just don't see what there is to gush over. For me, the best Superman movie is "Superman II" from 1980. In fact, I prefer it over the first Superman movie. That's another discussion for another time.  

The worst is still "Superman IV: The Quest for Peace" but that's also another post for another time. 

Audiences need to know the story behind Superman when coming into this movie as it starts in media res. 

What I did like about the movie, other than the spectacular shots of Superman flying, was the acting. The casting choices are great, especially Nicholas Hoult as Lex. He did a phenomenal job and really put in a convincing performance! Rachel Brosnahan as Lois is also fantastic. And, despite my issues with Superman's portrayal, David Corenswet in the lead role did really well with what he was given to work with. 

James Gunn's "Superman" is mediocre. It did pull me in and kept me invested, albeit disappointed at times. At least it's not worse than "Superman IV," so there's that but that's not saying much. 

Otherwise, if this movie indicates the direction Superman is going, then he needs to turn around and go back the way he came. He needs to be that symbol of strength and integrity. He needs to get back to standing for not only truth and justice but the American way because compared to the rest of the world the American way is still magnificent and truly ideal. Simply put, Superman needs to be super again.