Prepared for a no-spoiler analysis of the latest Superman movie? This review isn’t for the faint-hearted. Hang on tight, as I’m gearing up to offer my thoughts in this review!
In this version, I replaced “Buckle up, up, and away because I’m taping up my fists for this one” with “Prepared for a no-spoiler analysis of the latest Superman movie? This review isn’t for the faint-hearted. Hang on tight, as I’m gearing up to offer my thoughts in this review!” which aims to convey a similar message but uses more natural and easy-to-read language.
Without a shadow of a doubt, allow me to express my ardent affection for the superhero known as Superman. Ever since I witnessed Dean Cain don the cape in the Lois & Clark pilot as a youngster, my admiration for this iconic character has been unwavering and continually evolving. Over the years, I’ve immersed myself in the comics, watched the series, delved into the lore – Superman is an integral part of who I am.
I’m expressing this not as a fanboy defending the Snyderverse, but rather as someone who dislikes it intensely. The films, such as “Man of Steel,” “Batman v Superman,” “Justice League,” and particularly “Zack Snyder’s Justice League,” hold no affection for me. In fact, my lack of fondness for them is significant. They seem to have misconstrued the characters at a very basic level.
This review of Superman is based solely on what I witnessed on the screen last night, with no influence from any other source. It’s not a reminiscence of past experiences or feelings of nostalgia for what has passed.
With anticipation, I stepped into James Gunn’s take on Superman. I stood up for the trailers, penning articles expressing a glimmer of hope – perhaps, just perhaps, this could be the rendition we’ve longed for.
Despite my strong reservations…I absolutely despised that film. It filled me with an intense, persistent annoyance because once again, a director chose to reboot Superman – and yet, for the third time, it fell short of success.
When it comes to writing reviews, this is just my personal viewpoint and opinion. If you enjoyed it, I’m thrilled for you and a little envious. It’s much more enjoyable to appreciate something than to dislike it, and I wish I could feel the same about this movie. Unfortunately, I don’t share your enthusiasm, but that doesn’t diminish your experience in any way.
This is just my personal opinion about [movie]. If you liked it, that’s great! I’m a bit jealous because I didn’t enjoy it as much as you did. But everyone has different tastes, and that’s okay.
Sure thing!
Now that we’ve covered our bases with the disclaimer, let’s get started on an unfavorable critique of Superman.
With the legalities out of the way, it’s time to dive into a less-than-positive review of everyone’s favorite superhero – Superman!
Both sentences convey the same meaning and should be easy to understand for your audience.
This Isn’t About Politics
Let’s get one thing out of the way right up front: Superman is not woke.
This content isn’t explicitly political or biased towards any particular ideology. You won’t find criticisms of progressive messaging here, as such aspects are not prominent in this piece. If they were, I would certainly highlight and critique them thoroughly. However, the material presented didn’t reach that level for me.
That’s not the problem. The problem is far simpler: it’s just not a good movie.
Not being “informed” or “aware” (woke) doesn’t exempt one from being good. You still need to craft a compelling narrative, handle characters sensitively, and respect the setting they inhabit. Unfortunately, in the case of Superman, James Gunn fails to meet these standards.
Corenswet, Brosnahan, Hoult – Great Cast, Terrible Script
David Corenswet exhibits a strong resemblance to Superman, similar to Henry Cavill. However, much like Cavill, the true Superman within him remains largely unseen. He’s encapsulated in a script that seems to undermine his performance at every turn, diminishing potentially impactful moments with ill-timed humor and poor structure.
Rachel Brosnahan delivers an outstanding performance as Lois Lane. Instead of dominating the role with a bossy demeanor, she skillfully portrays the character, and it’s worth noting that her acting is on par with Teri Hatcher, Erica Durance, and Elizabeth Tulloch – some of the finest actresses who have played Lois Lane.
Nicholas Hoult delivers an impressive portrayal of Lex Luthor, but unfortunately, even stellar acting can’t rescue this film. The challenge lies not with the cast, though.
Nicholas Hoult is fantastic as Lex Luthor, but his performance alone isn’t enough to make this movie good. It’s not about the actors.
The biggest an most insurmountable issue this movie has is James Gunn.
James Gunn is All Over This Thing – And That’s the Problem
In every scene of the movie, you can see Gunn’s artistic touch everywhere. It’s as if his creative markings have seeped into each frame. His impact isn’t merely noticeable—it’s overwhelming. Whenever the film attempts to become serious or evoke emotions, it is swiftly contrasted with a humorous touch reminiscent of Gunn.
And not a funny one.
Instead of these being on par with Marvel’s witty one-liners, which have become somewhat senseless in today’s times, they resemble the absurd humor that Taika Waititi is known for. It seems as if James Gunn is typing out another joke, inappropriately placed at the most inconvenient moments.
If you’ve come across Gunn’s past tweets that led to a temporary ban – the ones considered unfunny – it’s no surprise that his film, too, reflects a similar lack of humor. His sense of comedy is immature at best and utterly insensitive at worst, and this mindset permeates the movie as if it were contagious.
The movie shies away from genuine, heartfelt scenes; as soon as it appears a solemn, introspective moment might occur, it is swiftly undercut by an ill-timed joke. Unfortunately, the humor falls flat and feels reminiscent of Joss Whedon’s infamous “brunch” level inappropriateness.
No Origin, No Connection
Leaving out the backstory is often a mistake, although it may seem innovative given that everyone’s familiar with Superman’s origin. Omitting the origin story can be effective; we’ve seen this done successfully on multiple occasions. However, even if we could have skipped the destruction of Krypton and Clark Kent landing in a field, it would have been beneficial to portray his debut as Superman to the world, as that’s an essential part of his story.
Joining the narrative of Superman, we find ourselves right in the middle of an ongoing tale. In my upcoming spoiler-free Superman review, I’ll delve deeper into this, so stay tuned!
From my perspective, this narrative choice feels utterly confusing. It’s as if I stumbled upon the third installment of a comic series without any prior knowledge about the characters. Instead of seamlessly understanding their dynamics, I find myself overwhelmed with excessive expository dialogue that feels forced and awkward.
In our story, we encounter Lois and Clark as they’re three months deep into their romance. We don’t witness the blossoming of their love; instead, we’re informed they’re in love, but we don’t experience its growth. Similarly, Lex and Superman are introduced three years into their rivalry. The narrative doesn’t delve into why Metropolis adored Lex before Superman’s arrival or what triggers his intense dislike for the Man of Steel. These elements are explained rather than demonstrated, especially in a lengthy third-act monologue that feels reminiscent of a cartoonish speech.
In this movie, Clark’s bond with the Kents seems almost non-existent. The heartwarming moment in the trailer where Clark and Jonathan Kent chat on the porch is actually their first direct interaction in the film. This scene was meant to be emotional, but it falls flat because their relationship hasn’t been properly developed. In fact, Jonathan barely utters a word before this conversation, and he doesn’t speak another word after it.
Picture this: If “Thor: Love and Thunder” were the debut film for Thor, it would have burst onto screens with its vibrant chaos, jokes that fell flat, and a rich backstory you might not be familiar with. At some point during the movie, someone casually mentions something like, “That’s Jane Foster. She’s Thor’s ex-girlfriend who now suffers from cancer.
That’s the level we’re dealing with here.
Apologies for my oversight, fellow movie enthusiast. In my initial take on this Superman film review, I unintentionally left out the Justice Gang – it seems their presence somehow slipped my mind. Characters like Guy Gardner, Mr. Terrific, and Hawk Girl, while integral to the storyline, felt more like stock characters without a significant impact or development in the narrative.
In the narrative, Mr. Terrific serves as a character whose technology can adapt to the needs of the storyline at any given point. Essentially, he functions as a provider of plot devices, similar to a MacGuffin.
I Hate the Dog…
In all honesty, I never imagined myself disliking a canine character in a film so intensely. It’s just not something I thought was possible for me. Yet, here I am hating Krypto. Perhaps it’s because he seems devoid of any soul and feels more like a CGI monster than a real dog.
I’m gonna go with that…
Instead of being a character, he functions more as a recurring joke. He’s often loud, annoying, and repetitive, making his humor tiresome from the start. Essentially, he’s an element used in the plot rather than a fully developed character, and the animation quality, especially when it comes to him, can be quite poor at times, with the CGI appearing quite rough.
He this movie’s equivalent of the screaming goats from Thor: Love and Thunder.
A Jumbled, Aimless Mess
What really compounds the problem is the disorganized structure. This isn’t a film that focuses on well-developed characters—it’s more like a vivid, dreamlike sequence. The plot is erratic and lacks cohesion, seldom pausing for clarity or reflection. The action is chaotic, the setting feels underdeveloped, and the explanations are as blunt as a hammer. At times, it seems like the movie wants to convey a message, but those meaningful moments never truly resonate; they simply occur without being earned.
Compared to Snyder’s intense and gloomy portrayal, the new version of Superman seems like an over-the-top correction, appearing as an innocent, clumsy character rather than an invulnerable deity. In each encounter, this Superman suffers significant damage.
I’m not exaggerating. This dude gets dog walked through the entire movie.
Even though he hasn’t managed to win any confrontation independently by the third act, the citizens of Metropolis still idolize him as if he were the return of a divine figure.
Those people seem as shallow and unrealistic as characters from an old PlayStation 2 game. The city’s faith in Superman is inconsistent, changing dramatically depending on the requirements of the story at any given moment. They adore him one minute, despise him the next, and then switch back again—all due to a senseless plot development and a hasty conclusion that fails to make us feel genuinely invested.
Borrowing the Worst From the Past
It’s rather puzzling that Superman seems to adopt some of the least favorable aspects from Superman Returns, as well as some of the most frustrating decisions made in the Snyder films.
In my upcoming review, I’ll hold back on revealing specifics to preserve the surprise, but let me tell you this: if certain scenes from previous movies left you feeling cold, prepare for more of the same in this one.
Final Verdict
In this film, there are flickers of optimism hidden beneath the turmoil. The commendable acting from Corenswet, Brosnahan, and Hoult strive to emerge, but they’re up against a script that seems unwilling to acknowledge the worthiness of its audience, characters, or the gravity appropriate for Superman tales.
It’s possible that James Gunn held complete creative authority – and this could potentially be the main issue. Unlike the initial Marvel movies that maintained directors within a consistent narrative framework to contribute to a larger story, Superman appears to be entirely under Gunn’s control. This is evident in the final product.
This isn’t the Superman movie we’ve been waiting for. It’s not even close.
Score: 2.5/10
- Too much James Gunn humor
- Starts in the middle
- Krypto is terrible
- Overcorrection from Snyder movies
- Respectable performances from lead three actors
- Not woke
What did you think of this movie? Drop your Superman review in the comments!
Read More
- Report: Microsoft’s 2025 layoffs revolve around its desperate $80 billion AI infrastructure investment
- Mark Zuckerberg announces Meta Superintelligence Labs — with a battalion of AI gurus poached from OpenAI, Google, and DeepMind to try and secure an AGI win
- Microsoft has a new way to use AI in OneNote — but a “dumb” feature excites me more
- Sam Altman says his CEO ouster “wasn’t the craziest thing that would happen in OpenAl’s history” — neither will Meta’s $100 million raid on the firm’s top AI talent
- A Microsoft engineer made a Linux distro that’s like a comfort blanket to ex-Windows users — I finally tried it, and I’m surprised how good it is
- Gold Rate Forecast
- LEGO’s July 2025 Releases: Shelby Cobra, Toothless, Nike Dunk, and More!
- Why Stephen Baldwin Is “Blessed” By Justin & Hailey Bieber’s Marriage
- Tokyo Game Show 2025 exhibitors list and main visual announced
- Narcos: Mexico’s Manuel Masalva Details Being “Reborn” After Coma
2025-07-09 16:58