Superman

In 2020, Dwayne Johnson infamously said that the hierarchy of the DC Universe was about to change. He was right, but not in the way he likely intended. After so many years of Warner Bros. not knowing what to do with DC, from trying and failing to do a full-on connected DC universe to throwing anything at the wall to see what sticks with mixed results to even swapping out creative heads at DC on a dime. Suffice it to say, the DC Universe was a total mess compared to the organized (arguably to a fault) MCU. By the end of Phase 2, they had made Marvel Studios its own entity and Kevin Feige the president. This resulted in a clear vision of where the story was going, culminating in Avengers: Endgame, which both critics and audiences raved.

Now, one of David Zaslav’s very few good choices during his tenure at Warner Bros. is taking a page from the Marvel Studios playbook. He separated DC Studios from Warner Bros, letting it operate as its own entity and appointed producer Peter Safran and writer/director/producer James Gunn as co-CEOs of DC Studios. I, for one, thought this was a brilliant move. Safran has been producing films for decades and would handle the business aspect of DC Studio, while experienced writer and director Gunn would lead the creative direction. 

And to make things even more interesting, Gunn would be the one directly in charge of DC Studios’ first three projects in the DCU: Creature Commandos (showrunner), Superman (director, writer, and producer), and Peacemaker season 2 (showrunner). This lays the groundwork as to what to expect quality-wise for the future of the DCU. Creature Commandos was quite solid; even though it treads familiar territory for James Gunn, it is clearly executed well and not half-assed in the slightest. Peacemaker season 2 has not released yet, but its first season was a delight in a similar (but perhaps more earnest) vein as The Suicide Squad.

Now, we have Superman, the first film in the DCU. A lot is riding on this film, as it needs to win over audiences and sell them on the future of this franchise. While I personally really enjoyed Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel, it is to this day one of the most divisive films of the 21st century. Divisive is not a great way to start a cinematic universe, especially when what followed it were even more critically reviled films like Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Suicide Squad didn’t help. So, how does Superman stack up? 

I have to say, I quite liked Superman. In many respects, it’s almost perfect. David Corenswet as Clark Kent/Superman is excellent, always coming across as someone trying to do the right thing for the right reasons, even when he makes mistakes. We don’t get a lot of Clark Kent, but given the story, it makes complete sense and serves the film’s core themes better to focus more on Superman. Rachel Brosnahan as Lois Lane is absolutely perfect casting. She is a very pushy reporter, with her relentless pursuit of the truth contrasting with Clark’s basic view of “I need to save people no matter what” wonderfully. In fact, I noticed more chemistry between Corenswet and Brosnahan than with any other Clark and Lois. It truly feels like these are genuine people with different worldviews that try their best to make it work. They want the same thing, but they go about it in different ways. Rounding out the main cast is Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor, who plays the perfect kind of sleazy bad guy you’d expect Lex Luthor to be. He is cruel and relishes his assholery to the point where it’s actually kind of funny. 

The Justice Gang is also well-cast. We have great turns from Isabela Merced as Hawkgirl and Edi Gathegi as Mister Terrific, but the standout is Nathan Fillion as Guy Gardener/Green Lantern. This man was uproariously funny, from the running bit about his questionable haircut to his constant blank but vaguely annoyed expression. Also, unlike previous theatrical iterations of Green Lantern, Guy Gardener takes full advantage of the green constructs. A Green Lantern’s limit is their imagination, and the movie fully understands this.

The final standout from this film is actually… a dog? Superman’s sidekick Krypto is absolutely hilarious. When I first heard that Krypto was going to be in the film, I raised my eyebrow. Like, can this very goofy idea work in live-action? When the live-action Titans series introduced Krypto, he was tonally jarring and a complete mismatch for the show. But for some reason, Krypto truly suits this film’s energy. I think the juxtaposition of this tiny mutt being the most powerful animal on Earth and also being (in James Gunn’s words) “the worst dog anyone could own” makes for a really funny sight. 

The filmmaking itself is also fresh and fun! I get where people are seeing parallels to 2023's The Flash—mainly due to both sharing the same cinematographer in Henry Braham—but I think Superman reaches the potential that The Flash tried and failed to. While the lens is very wide, swivels around a lot, and goes for the long takes, Superman clearly feels more polished in its VFX. Its VFX is undeniably detailed, even if the cinematography is hit or miss for people. I, for one, love it. It feels very large in scale yet allows the close-up scenes to feel personal. Superman’s flight scenes are an absolute rush. Gunn mentioned that Top Gun: Maverick inspired the flight scenes, and you can definitely feel it. He moves fast, practically soaring like a missile! It's the kind of innovation that is going to set the bar for superhero movies going forward. But even in non-action scenes, the camera moves around in exciting ways that feel very reminiscent of Spielberg to me. 

Politically, the movie feels very relevant. The allegory is fairly clear, but just because the messaging is obvious doesn’t make it bad or unnecessary. In fact, I think it’s quite astonishing a movie this high profile has the allegory that it has and takes as strong of a stance as it does.

However, there is one element of the film that it really dropped the ball on. The characterization of Superman’s parents is so unlike who they are at their core that it feels like a betrayal. It’s as bad as messing up Uncle Ben in a Spider-Man movie. It’s truly that terrible. I understand that Gunn wanted to add conflict, but I feel like there was enough as is. This was just unneeded and did not sit well with me at all.

If this gross mischaracterization was not in the movie, this film would be up there as one of the best films DC has ever made. As is, it is still pretty great. It just does not quite reach the heights it could have, and as a result we are still left without the definitive Superman film. Superman ‘78 is solid, but the second half falters and is nowhere near as good as the first. Superman Returns is very underrated, but even I can admit it is a tad too long. Ironically, Man of Steel’s issue is moving too fast and not giving us enough time to be invested in its characters. And now, Superman ‘25 is a crowd-pleasing, risk-taking film that sadly commits a significant error with its characterization. One day, I’m sure we will finally get a perfect Superman film. But even if the film has its flaws, it is nonetheless an agreeable enough start to this new era of DC superheroes.

8/10