Superman

Superman (2025) aims high but ultimately falls flat. While it offers a few flashes of visual spectacle, the story feels disjointed and the pacing drags. Characters lack depth, and the emotional beats never quite land. It’s a disappointing entry that struggles to capture the magic fans expect. Sadly, it’s more forgettable than fantastic. 4/10.

Considerable chatter has been devoted in recent years to the question of whether the movie industry is producing too many superhero/action-adventure films. Much of that talk has specifically focused on whether certain franchises/mythologies have been overdone. That’s particularly true where the “Superman” mythos is concerned, a body of work that has assumed multiple forms on TV and the big screen since the 1970s. And, after viewing this latest iteration involving this storied and much beloved character, I can’t help but concur with the opinion that the man from the planet Krypton needs to be given a serious rest for a while. In my opinion, what has been called the biggest disappointment of this summer’s blockbuster season is an assessment that’s, unfortunately, right on target. In short, writer-director James Gunn’s latest is a hot mess that strains viewer interest not long into its overlong 2:09:00 runtime (a duration that honestly feels even longer than the official tally) and never manages to get it back. The biggest problem here rests with an overstuffed narrative that at times becomes challenging to follow, thanks to a screenplay that’s loaded with incongruities, rampant assumptions and a noticeable lack of back story; film editing tediously in need of much-needed snipping; overreliance on comic relief that grows progressively tiresome (especially with Superman’s annoyingly overzealous canine pal, Krypto); and an overall production whose vision is both tedious and not particularly original (especially in the rather ho-hum action sequences that we’ve seen so many, many times before in better films, most notably those from the Marvel Universe). In addition, the picture’s attempts at updating the nature of the Superman mythology for the present day are uneven at best, including some elements that are sufficiently contemporary with others that are woefully anachronistic (e.g., why are elements involving The Daily Planet newspaper portrayed in much the same way as they were in the past, given that today’s journalism business is a very different animal from what it was years ago?). To its credit, the film’s attempts at evolving the protagonist’s character into a paragon of “wokeness” (a source of much criticism in some circles) provides an intriguing spin on the nature of the Man of Steel – one very much in line with Superman’s traditional embodiment as a champion of “truth, justice and the American way” – even if it is somewhat excessive on occasion. That’s especially true where matters involving “aliens” (like Kal El himself) are symbolically demonized as threats to society, a less-than-subtle allusion to how many perceive today’s immigrants. However, the attempt at making the film’s hero more socially relevant is at times undermined by inconsistent character development, a problem that plagues many of this release’s other players, too. And that’s unfortunate in light of the performances on display, including a capable Christopher Reeve-esque portrayal by the film’s lead (David Corenswet), as well as fine supporting characterizations of mythology staples Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan) and Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult). In essence, though, “Superman” regrettably feels like an offering created by committee, a production that desperately should have gone through several more rounds of revisions before being committed to a final print. What’s more, if this picture was meant to lead off a new franchise involving this character, it comes up short all around, a prospect that doesn’t bode particularly well for the artistic future of this series. Superman deserves better than this, but that’s noticeably lacking in this release, one that, over time, is likely to become forgettable, particularly when measured against its superior predecessors, films that commendably and authentically depict its protagonist as a genuinely super-man.

Just a fun time watching this iteration of Superman. David Corenswet and Rachel Brosnahan were absolutely wonderful together and Nicholas Hoult played a great Lex Luthor. Not perfect by any means, but a solid start to the DCU. This was a delightful time with crowd-pleasing moments. Also my first time watching a movie in one of those D-Box seats, pretty nice but don't need to do it again. **4.0/5**

Well, I enjoyed it. The writing felt a bit all over the place but most of the jokes were on point, the action was very enjoyable, and I think giving Superman a more classic comic feel and less of the apocalyptic Snyder vibe was a good change. Everyone here does a great job with the acting. Lois and Jimmy are, in my opinion, the standouts. Nicholas Hoult wasn't a great choice for Luthor, with his more manic energy. Personally, I enjoyed Hackman or Cryer's cold, cunning version more. And, y'all, Krypto is in it. Finally we got a dog! TLDR: It's good but not great. With that said, I still think you'll have a great time watching it. Also, DEFINITELY SEE IT IN 3D. ***SPOILERS BELOW*** I have two complaints. They give us two of Superman's coolest villains: Lex Luthor and Bizarro, but lame versions of both. I was expecting something on par with Iron Man vs Ironmonger circa 2008, but Lex never dons his suit. I was pretty sure the masked villain was Bizarro, and later he's revealed to be, but it would have been so much better if the authentic version had been written in.

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://talkingfilms.net/superman-review-james-gunn-gives-the-man-of-steel-a-soul/ "Superman isn't perfect. It struggles with pacing, has too many characters, and offers some clunky narrative solutions. But as the official cinematic introduction to the new DCU, it succeeds where it matters most: establishing the central pillars of the saga, giving us a worthy protagonist, and showcasing a filmmaker with a clear vision. David Corenswet is the Superman this generation needs: a symbol of kindness, hope, and - above all - conviction-led action. Rachel Brosnahan and Nicholas Hoult round out a high-quality central trio, and even with its flaws, it's hard not to leave the theater satisfied. James Gunn delivers a clear statement of intent: DC's future is in good hands. Bring on the rest of Chapter One: Gods and Monsters. If this is the path forward, maybe - finally - DC can fly as high as its greatest hero." Rating: B+

<em>'Superman'</em> is the best Supes film that I've seen - and I highly enjoyed 2013's <em>'Man of Steel'</em>, so that is actually saying something. I was surprised at how great this 2025 edition is, like at no point was I ever doubting what I was seeing - it's a fab 2hrs. I had seen snippets from a few trailers for this and, in truth, wasn't really vibing with it back then. The lead actor seemed a bit underwhelming, the dialogue felt lousy and Lex Luthor came across over the top. I'm pleased to say, none of those things are true. David Corenswet is an ace Superman, he fits the role to perfection. Again, I did like Henry Cavill's stint as the eponymous Kryptonian, though I do reckon Corenswet does ever so slightly outdo him. It's silly of me to even compare to be honest, given my appreciation for both. For me, Nicholas Hoult is just as big a plus. This is the best of him I've seen, given I've never been fully convinced. Don't get me wrong, I've liked performances from him, but almost always with an asterisk of sorts attached in my mind. No such issues here, he is fantastic as Lex. Rachel Brosnahan and Edi Gathegi also dazzle, the latter's character is especially interesting as I never knew he existed before this - hope to see more! Anthony Carrigan, Nathan Fillion and Isabela Merced also manage to stick out, which is impressive. All those onsceen are good. The story is a surpremely entertaining one. I like how they skipped over the origins of Superman, the vast majority of viewers already know the backstory so it's not needed - and for those that don't, a simple short overview, as seen here, is more than enough to get the point across. As for everthing else? The pacing, the visuals, the special effects, the music... all excellent. I, somewhat unexpectedly, have zero issues with this one, I thoroughly had fun with it and would happily revisit it at any time.

Putting all else aside, James Gunn's "Superman" succeed's because it adopts a comfortably familiar, wholly "likeable", approach. This film borrows heavily from the 70's Superman franchise. Its look, its feel, right down to costumes, harks back to that era. As does, the very simple, down to earth main character, capably played by David Corenswet. I personally, could not but recall Christoper Reeve, in his performance. This is Superman as he was mean't to be. No cynicism, no divisive woke politics, just a good guy doing his best. Its this innately appealing character and those around him, that make this film function. Because lets be honest, whilst its an entertaining romp, the script is, in my estimation "chaotic". Its literally all over the place, doing too many things at once. That said, if you view those scenes in isolation, a good portion, are both enjoyable and amusing. For example, Lex Luthor, getting his comeuppance, from Superman's cousins, kooky Superdog. In summary, no "Superman" 2025 is not a perfect film. That said, in a world that's become cynical and divisive, the simple, honest, likeability of this film shines though in a way that's impossible to ignore. For my money, well worth a look.

I know I’m swimming against the tide here, but I just didn’t really rate this. I suppose it was only a matter of time before “Superman” got dragged (literally) into the multiverse. This time it is the DC one that’s being used by the evil “Lex Luthor” (Nicholas Hoult) who has quite a grudge against our red-caped hero. That’s because “Soop” (David Corensweet) recently intervened in a war to assist a small agrarian nation from being invaded by it’s nasty militarised neighbour. With access to his enormous resources, “Luthor” manages to penetrate the secret Antarctic fortress of our well-meaning protector to find not only his deepest secrets but also to kidnap his energetic dog “Krypto” - thus luring his quarry into the aforementioned “pocket universe” where the ultimate super-max prison contains many whom the planet doesn’t know what do do with any more, and a few ex-girlfriends. What chance he can escape through a complex sequence of portals (think “Stargate”)? Well that is largely down to his tenacious on/off girlfriend “Lois” (Rachel Brosnahan) who is entirely aware of her beau’s double identity, and to a tech whizz (Edi Gathegi) from another group of meta humans called the “Justice Gang” run by the “Green Lantern” who occasionally help out when the relentless stream of aliens descend on Metropolis. Now the scene is set for a really weak, repetitious and entirely derivative series of thwack and pow adventures that had me looking at the ceiling just once too often. Gene Hackman was always going to take some beating as “Luthor” but why use a British actor at all, and then make him use an entirely unnecessary American accent before giving him lines that make him sound like a frenzied bingo-caller? What’s with the dog? Aw, bless, but really? It just goes to show how remarkably ordinary “Superman” has become in a world so completely dominated by technology and people with far greater superpowers. Corensweet tries quite hard, is easy on the eye and he has some charm to him, but nobody else really has enough to get their teeth into and just by shaving Hoult’s head you don’t make him menacing. He isn’t in the least. There is cheesy sentiment all over this CGI-fest of a film that has a passing similarity to Ezra Miller’s “The Flash” from 2023. Sure, it moves along quickly but when you start to create cracks in what made a superhero super in the first place, you have to be able to infill with some serious attempts at action characterisation - not slushy dog-loving, baby/girlfriend-saving ones. No such development happens here and after the final denouement - there are a few goes at that - I left the cinema thinking this was an huge victory for style over substance and that this fella isn’t so much super as flawed: physically and emotionally. That wasn’t what I wanted to see. It’s a family film that can offend no-one and that looks great on a big screen, but I was distinctly disappointed, sorry.

First of all i would like to say that this isnt a bad movie by any means. In fact there's actually a lot to enjoy here and is easily the BEST live-action Superman movie since the Christopher Reeve era. Corenswet as Superman/Clark is fucking amazing and the characterization of Supes would've been perfect if it weren't for that one plot twist (more on that later). I also like that thay made a point but its more on his ACTIONS that define who you are. Hoult is also spectacular, you can just feel his hate and anger and those nasty little evil smirks everytime he wins against our boy in blue. Rachel Brosnahan is also fucking perfect as Lois Lane and her interactions with not only Clark but also the Justice Gang is pure comic Lois. And to top it all of, the action, score, and visual imagery are all very much comic book-esque and just straight up fucking beautiful to see. (Mr Terrific and Metamorpho are both so good and entertaining). BUT there is one big twist here that 90% of the general audience won't care about, but as a comic fan the twist just brings this movie down from like a 8-9/10 to a 6-7/10. That twist is just that BAD atleast for someone like me who is a big big Superman comic fan. SPOILERS FROM NOW ON: Now for the big plot twist. Making the House of El (Jor El and Lara) evil and Superman believing himself to be more human than alien was a really really bad choice. As i mentioned before, i know that the whole point is that Kal or Superman or Clark is more defined by his ACTIONS rather than his heritage. But to make them completely evil and have clark reject his heritage at the end (completely replacing his krypton parents with footage from his earth parents) just really sucks. FIRST OF ALL the decision to make them evil just ruins the immigrant allegory. If you've read the comics you would know that Clark is a deeply lonely guy. Having to grow up knowing you're an alien, is different from everyone else and would constantly need to hide his powers and true self. He is afraid of being REJECTED and is the reason why he constantly yearns for his home planet krypton, a place where he could actually feel like himself and not some outsider. So to make his whole origin planet evil?? is not really helping the immigrant allegory. Like imagine if your an immigrant to the USA and suddenly in the news everyone says that your home country and everyone from there is fucking evil. STRAIGHT UP XENOPHOBIA. And to say that Clark wouldn't care about his parents and origin planet because he didnt know them is stupid. I think that Learning your father was a man who tried but failed to save a world that wouldn't listen to him would definitely have an impact on a guy who's trying to save the world everyday. A comic issue that showcased his loneliness and fear of rejection from humans is ACTION COMICS #794 where we see Clark in his adolescence watching a film with his friends, wherein the aliens are the villains and everyone around him js cheering for the aliens to go back to their planets. Imagine the pain and loneliness you would feel knowing that everyone around you even your friends just want you to go the fuck away. Also this is exactly why his origin needs to be truly adapted because thats where his character, morality, and such really shine. It's not only where his identity crisis and loneliness are explicitly explored but also where we see that it is not only his actions that define him but also the synthesis of all his experiences juggling his alien and human side. It also adds layers to his eventual rivalry with Lex, and shows his relationship with other super powered beings like the Legion. In relation to that, this is also why SUPERBOY is important to be shown/adapated because its with his heroics as a teen that led to him meeting other heroes mainly the Legion of Superheroes. His adventures with the Legion is where he truly finds who he is, because like him they're also teens going through the same problems. With the legion he finally got a community where he doesn't have to hide anything, can share his problems that no other human can get and most importantly feel less LONELY and feel VALIDATED knowing that a future where superpowered beings are accepted actually exist. (Also quick side note, this is also why him dating and losing his virginity to mermaid Lori Lemaris is so important to me. Sex and Intimacy is often done with someone you can be vulnerable with, and a mermaid or another kryptonian Lyra Lerrol be his first time is just so fitting. ADAPT SUPERBOY AND LORI PLEASE) Him yearning for his kryptonian heritage also doesnt make him less human. Because why else would he still choose and create his secret identity/persona Clark Kent if he wants to reject it. Clark is his own guilty little pleasure of living as a human because even if he is an alien it shows that he still enjoys earth and cherishes humanity and its culture. He is supposed to be the BEST of both worlds and having him be one sided makes him a FAR LESS interesting character. Again im going to reiterate this making him more human just removes too much LAYERS. Another reason why his origin needs to be adapted is his relationship with Lex Luthor. In Smallville and other iconic comics such as Birthright, Secret Origin, and most recently Last Days of Lex. In these stories a young clark is often shown to have a brief childhood friendship with Lex. Like Clark, Lex always felt alone as a child. He was a science nut and was always interested in the larger universe of extra terrestrials and the like. People constantly saw and bullied him as a weird freak, and everytime he tried to help others people would just reject him. Clark was the only one who tolerated and protected him leading to their "friendship" But Lex's obsession with the larger universe led to his failed experiment and eventual downfall. He tried to create a machine to find and/or communicate with extra terrestrial life but it exploded and almost killed a ton of people. This led to further rejection from the people of Smallville and made him think that people would always see him as a freak just because he thought bigger and wanted to create science for a better tomorrow. This rejection then of course made him angry, resentful, and didnt care who he stepped on as long as he got his way. And Clark feels guilty, because if Clark just told him who he really was then maybe Lex wouldn't have turned out evil. If Lex just had a friend who not only matched his intellect but also understood his experiences of being outcasted and then maybe, just maybe both of them together could have used their powers to save and create a better tomorrow for everyone. With this context in mind the rivalry becomes more complex. Superman isnt trying to just stop Lex simply because he's evil. He's also just trying to save his friend. There are a lot more things that i dont like in the film but this where my main points really stop. My other complaints like Jimmy not being a weird lovable dork enough (he's just too regular) and most of the Daily Planet just being caricatures of their comic selves and Clark just having one scene are all really minor nitpicks that can be solved with future movies and adventures. But again as i said in the beginning despite all my long ass complaints there's still a lot to enjoy in this film. And i cannot deny that there is clearly heart in here and is easily still the best Supes movie since Christopher Reeve. It's just the Evil Els that really ruined it for me. LASTLY Kara having a cameo at the end kinda breaks the movie in half. Like bro, if you really think the El's are evil then why do you still like your cousin? why do you still wear the House of El logo? like bro your cousin is a living example of the footage being straight up wrong lol. Look, it may look like im a hater right now but i genuinely just wanted to love this movie. There are so much scenes here that made the comic book fan in me just smile and cheer like crazy. But the flaws were just way too big for me and it really muddled my experience. I just want Superman, my favorite comic character of all time to be adapted well. And yes while this is definitely the best Adaptation since 1978, it just didn't hit for me. If you're a comic fan or just a movie fan in general im sure you'll still find enjoyment in this because the whole movie is still very fuckin endearing and action packed. But yeah for now, im sticking to the comics. Peace.

very good movie, love it!

This is a fine vacuous way to spend your time. If you're upset that a Superman movie is just kind of trash, you are not a Superman movie fan. I don't like that James Gunn is the voice of modern comics. I do kind of like his humour. Herzog warned them about the dog. Listen to Werner. He's on instagram now. I'm on board for a Mr. Terrific feature.

I walked into Superman with cautious optimism. The cast is strong, and to be fair, not a single actor delivers a bad performance. The problem lies entirely behind the camera: James Gunn. Once again, Gunn directs as if he only knows how to make one kind of movie. What we get doesn’t feel like a bold reinvention of the Man of Steel — it feels like the same film he’s been making for years, just with different costumes. In every one of his projects, he throws in monsters that look more like oversized pets than genuine threats, stripping away any sense of menace. And instead of focusing on iconic heroes that audiences actually care about, he leans on strange, second-rate characters — names like Mr. Terrific or Guy Gardner — that nobody outside comic-book diehards is interested in. This has been his trademark since Guardians of the Galaxy, when he first turned a group of unknowns into his personal playground. Let’s be clear: there’s a difference between a director leaving his personal stamp on a film and a director simply repeating himself. Gunn does the latter. Guardians of the Galaxy, The Suicide Squad, Peacemaker — it’s always the same movie with a different label. If that formula were brilliant, maybe repetition would be welcome. But the “Gunn formula” is shallow, clumsy, and exhausting. I had hoped that after so many missteps DC has taken with its recent films, this reboot would finally be different. Unfortunately, it isn’t.

The version of Superman in James Gunn’s film differs from past film iterations of the character. In other films, Superman is a one-man powerhouse. He is the only one who can save the day, and there is no plan B if he happens to lose. Maybe other heroes exist in that cinematic universe, but a major team doesn’t come together until a later film, and those other heroes are busy keeping people safe in their neck of the woods. In the 2025 version of Superman, the film begins with Superman losing for the first time. The story Gunn wants to tell is how Kal-El faces the challenge of not only losing, but continuing to lose nearly everything that he holds dear. Superman gets his ass kicked throughout the film and barely scrapes by in fights. Superman reintroduces color to superhero films after what felt like an eternity of a more serious comic book movie era, where everything tried to be serious and washed out in color. Superman feels like opening an old issue of Action Comics or a Superman comic from the 90s. Colors are bright and radiant to an extent that feels almost cartoonish, like a comic book. Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult) has a plan that results in the entire world turning on Superman and Luthor being in control of the United States when it comes to interacting with metahumans (humans with superpowers) and whether they pose a threat or not. Superman disappears after being taken captive, and it’s up to Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan) and Mister Terrific (Edi Gathegi) to save him. I’ve never been a huge fan of Superman. The original 1978 film, Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel, and Superman: The Animated Series from the late 90s are the highlights of the character for me. In Gunn’s film, David Corenswet doesn’t specifically add anything new to the character that we haven’t seen before. That’s not ragging on Corenswet’s performance, but it seems to be how the Superman character is. He is a god among men, and the thing that makes him special is that he not only cares about the human race, but also views himself as human, because despite being an alien, he also makes mistakes. Corenswet delivers that bold sense of hope Superman is known for and is the embodiment of the modern version of the character. It feels like Gunn knew that Superman’s straightforward demeanor couldn’t carry the film, and that’s one of the reasons why he surrounded him with so many supporting characters. Gunn has made a career of giving the spotlight to losers, outcasts, and characters who never should work together but are either forced to or feel like the family they’ve never been able to have once they’re all together. Lex Luthor has a short fuse in this film, but that fuse turned to ash eons ago. He is seething with his hatred for Superman. He is envious of Superman’s popularity, but also hates the fact that he isn’t from this planet. Nicholas Hoult goes completely unhinged in his performance, but the scary aspect is that the average person can either see red and let themselves give in to rage or think logically and sensibly while thinking about what comes next. Lex not only does both of those things in Superman, but he is almost always two or three steps ahead of everyone else in the film. Ultraman and The Engineer (Maria Gabriela de Faria) work for Lex Luthor and do all of the heavy lifting and fighting for Lex. The Engineer has a suit made from nanotechnology, while drones operated by drones control Ultraman to do Lex’s bidding. The Justice Gang – consisting of Guy Gardner (Nathan Fillion), Mister Terrific, and Hawkgirl (Isabela Merced) – handles heroic matters when Superman has his hands full. Guy is this universe’s version of Green Lantern, Mister Terrific is an inventor who uses his high-tech gadgets to fight crime, and Hawkgirl can fly and swing heavy weapons or something. The film devotes a huge portion of its story to Ultraman, while The Engineer and Hawkgirl are strong female characters without much to do. The inclusion of The Engineer is said to be building towards a film centered around The Authority, but Hawkgirl is kind of forgettable as a character. She has a memorable scene near the end of the film, but the character as a whole isn’t developed at all. For a James Gunn film, the humor is toned way down in comparison to his other films. Nathan Fillion’s Guy Gardner embodies Gunn’s typical comedy with a charming sense of juvenile obnoxiousness that you can’t help but love. Gunn’s other films, specifically the Guardians of the Galaxy films and the Suicide Squad, were fueled by constant bickering. There’s a sequence where Lois interviews Clark as Superman that feels like it’s attempting to add weight to Gunn’s fascination with comedic arguing and succeeds for the most part. Metamorpho (Anthony Carrigan) is one of the more unique characters with some of the most visually impressive sequences in the film, and Krypto is a national treasure. It’s wild that Jimmy Olsen (Skyler Gisondo) is the biggest player of Metropolis, as every woman wants a piece of that. James Gunn’s Superman rips the hope away from Superman and focuses on the real possibility of him not being able to save the day or even be the hero that people want to save them. Superman can eventually overcome impossible odds, but it’s earned, and nearly every supporting character is given the chance to contribute. Superman is goofy, hopeless, and rewarding in all of the best ways. Some characters aren’t given as much time as others, but it feels like James Gunn is attempting to build a DC Universe full of interesting characters that are not only worthy of being on screen but deserve to be there.

75/100 Classic Superman vs. Lex Luthor vehicle where Lex wants Superman dead. James Gunn comes through with a fun, ofttimes humorous and exciting version of Superman which is sorely needed after the string of far-too-serious entries in the previous DC lexicon. Dispensing with the origin story and already having Kent and Lois as an item and getting right to the story was gratefully appreciated ..we've been through it so many times before. The story is intriguing, the casting is brilliant, the characters are a riot and the action is top notch. We loved it! -- DrNostromo.com

This is the Superman I've been wanting for a long time. If this is how the DC Universe is going to be, sign me up. All the castings were great, and the score was amazing.

Loved the movie. Seeing a DC movie after a long time. it was worth it.

James Gunn`s Superman is Supergirl's bitch. ChatGPT wrote the story and dialogue of this movie. MCU inspired humor that is overused and overdone in modern movies. Bad acting from all the actors in this movie. Especially David Corenswet and Rachel Brosnahan. Clark & Lois have no chemistry with one another. This movie is so BAD, it feels and looks more like a cheap rip-off of the real superman we know and love. No plot and zero-character development! This movie just has 2 hours of CGI dog named Krypto. This dog annoying & gives a bad rep to all the other amazing & intelligent dogs that have been many great movies. James Gunn is this movie`s Kryptonite and his limited talent for writing edgy/lazy & frankly his self-indulgent style comedic ensemble stories and his SuperEgo for casting his friends & family members in his movies, so they can keep getting paychecks. Things just happen in this movie, whether they make sense or not. it lacks a cohesive narrative or meaningful character arcs. Superman is having a cup of hot chocolate instead of saving the city. WTF!!!! Zack Snyder`s Lex wanted Superman & Batman to fight each other but Gunn`s Superman movie's plot centers on Lex Luthor’s "Evil" scheme to tarnish Superman’s public image, instead of killing him. Why are villains in modern movies so weak & pathetic that they themselves can`t fight the heroes on their own! Instead of giving us great Justice League cameos, we got gratuitous Justice Gang cameos. The cinematography is terrible and distracting. The score & music/songs were awful and uninspiring. I hated what they did with the superman theme. James Gunn seems to be much more interested in making a MCU Superman film. Future of DC is in more danger than ever before. If James Gunn actually wanted to comment on Israel-Palestine conflict, then he would have used the real names instated of made-up fake country's name. After watching James Gunn's Superman, I have a newfound appreciation for Zack Snyder's Man of Steel.

[This review contains spoilers!] The movie, like its trailer, started off with interesting thoughts: How does the existence of superheros influence politics? Can and should they be neutral? Do they represent countries? An interesting topic one usually sees in darker superhero media. Sadly, in the end this wasn't used very much anymore once it was used to imprison Superman. That aside, most of the movie was average superhero stuff for me, but sadly with few of the "cool" things other superhero movies go for. The movie wasn't "bad". The fighting was actually quite cool, and so were some of the side-characters, or, more specifically, Mister Terrific and Green Lantern Guy Gardner. The movie had two main problems for me: First off, it wasn't funny. Now, listen, a movie doesn't HAVE to be funny. Thor certainly overdid it. But every time this movie tried, it...didn't work for me. And Krypto as, as much as I like dogs, a silly gimmick just there for "haha, silly animal does silly animal things!". But more importantly: Every superhero movie requires some "suspension of disbelief". A ton of movies have situations that end up "situation x wouldn't have happened if y had just done z!" And usually that's fine, because action and emotion distract you from this until you can think about it later. But this movie had SO MANY moments where I was in disbelieve if they were really serious. The Engineer explicitly cuts in half EVERY other enemy, but leaves Krypto alive for no reason, because otherwise no one could progress the story further later? There is NO defense in the Fortress of Solitude but melee robots? Superman just calling for Krypto in his fight against Ultraman JUST at the last moment, because Krypto, until then, was just hanging around. Like...maybe it would've been useful to have him around in that fight from the beginning? And, Luthor needs plainly visible camera drones to command Ultraman, and Superman didn't realize it until the end?! And the worst: The whole "countries at war" invasion plan of Lex Luthor was smashed because...Superman asked other superheros to help? So...Lex Luthor's plan was "I just need to distract/kill Superman, then no one can stop me"...in a world with hundreds of superheroes, three to four in that one city alone?! Did he just BET on ALL of them "being politically neutral" except Superman?! Damn, no, sorry, those were too many things that seemed illogical even while watching the movie, and not just in hindsight. I recently read the DC x Sonic the Hedgehog comic. That comic had a better story. So, yeah. Some cool superhero fights, but the rest of the story didn't catch me. I did like Mister Terrific and Guy Gardner, though. I'd watch a "Justice Gang" movie!