SUPERMAN (2025)

What the hell was that? I grew up reading and watching Superman, and never, not post-read nor while the credits were rolling, was I left feeling disgraced instead of inspired. I had a similar feeling after watching the Barbie (2024) movie. It too abandoned all the feel good stuff associated with its intellectual property, choosing instead to harp on about gender inequality. Yes, inclusivity is good and I assumed already that both Superman and Barbie were all for it, yet the moviemakers decided one can’t go two hours without being reminded to remember you forgot about how good it is instead of simply enjoying your childhood heroes and playthings. Yes, Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel, the creators of the original Superman comics, were children of Jewish immigrants, but prior to writer/director James Gunn’s adaptation, there was no indication that the topic of his or anyone else’s immigration tilt was a supreme or underlying narrative. Superman is and always was a protector and a symbol for human kindness. He wasn’t a political mouthpiece. Clark Kent was a reporter, but not a columnist. It conveneinced him as a first responder, helping people in need. Of course I’m not opposed to creative flexing; many great ideas come from reaching into the headlines and exploring opposing worldviews. Take for example the excellent comic mini-series Superman: Red Son (2003) by Mark Millar, with its alternate reality commenced by Superman crash-landing in the Soviet Union instead of Kansas. He’s misguided by the politics, but he is still a good person who genuinely wants to help the people of earth. It’s different and interesting, but it never feels propagandizing. Yes Superman’s actions benefit the Soviet Union and could be interrupted as an endorsement of communism, but one eventually sees Superman is being used as a tool for propaganda, which is way better than him being used to reflect the ideologues in today’s mainstream media. I’m not saying the sentiments are right or wrong or that an anti-woke version would have been better, I don’t want my childhood superheroes mansplaining any simplistic mainstream talking points from either direction. Am I alone in wanting a separation of superhero and state? In Superman IV: The Quest for Peace (1987) Superman takes it upon himself to destroy ALL nuclear weapons, it’s not a one-sided play. Superman endeavours for universal peace in a complicated world. Political leanings aside, why does Superman continually get the pulp beaten out of him? And why does every frame resonant with the same snark as a lesser Guardians of the Galaxy offering, landing it tonally between the final movie and the Holiday Special (both awful), with dialogue and jokes worthier of a mid-budget tv series (looking at you Beck Bennett). I also don’t want corny slow-motion action sequences, or perfectly framed concluding shots (a Gunn film staple) that made my eyes roll instead of shedding bittersweet tears. However, I did like the inclusion of Krypto the super dog. He was cute in the roughest way and a fine reflection of Superman’s goodness. But Bradley Cooper as Superman’s dad? What kind of new hell is this?

WATCH OR NOT: NOT

Additional musings: Cut out half the cast and all of the random alien rejects thrown in for literal distraction, and fill with more Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan).