You can follow our posts on Superman at this link, and our posts on the new movie, Superman (2025) at this link.
Watched: 07/12/2025
Format: Drafthouse
Viewing: Second
Director: still James Gunn
We've already posted on seeing Superman (2025) as an initial, kinda spoiler-light/ spoiler-free take that was really about how gobsmacked I was to see a Superman movie that actually cared about four-color comics and what Superman actually stands for.
While celebrating that the movie felt like a DC comicbook in that first post, I didn't get into the issues I had with the movie, because I wanted to make sure I didn't just miss something. I also didn't discuss the characters beyond our primary trio of Superman, Lois and Lex - plus Krypto. Or a few other things I figured I'd cover in a subsequent posts.
In this post, I really don't want to get too much into the social media stuff happening around this film, and, believe me... it is tempting. There is some incredibly disappointing stuff happening out there.
SUPER SPOILERS AHEAD
What did and did not work
So what didn't work (for me)
Clunky opening: By design, we're skipping origins. Instead, we're picking up as if this is another chapter for Superman, and we're seeing the aftermath of our hero's first-ever loss in battle. Before this even has a chance to settle in, we're introducing Krypto, the Fortress, robots... We return to take on The Hammer of Barovia, a figure never before seen, but he sure has all of Superman's powers, plus a nifty suit. But we've actually missed that first fight with the Hammer. And then we're tossed into the Daily Planet with minimal prep. Then the Pentagon. It's a lot.
Functionally, it's a set-up and an exposition dump, truly feeling like we're picking up after a cliffhanger - and maybe we don't remember what happened last time and need to catch up. It felt like the pacing was off, and the need to get so much information in via show-don't-tell meant we had to be shown a *lot* of things very quickly. But inside of a few minutes we catch up, and all is well. By the time Clark is making Lois dinner, I felt like we'd hit our pace.
I can't say exactly where or how I would have preferred a start, but this just felt like a bit of a jumble.
Didn't love the Breeder plan by Jor-El and Lara: Whether this bit gets debunked in a subsequent installment or not (probably not, but also - maybe?), I'm not a huge fan of Krypton in its last days as anything else than a weirdo isolationist world of decaying super science. And I really am not a fan of Jor-El and Lara as anything other than two loving parents sending their kid in a basket down the river in a rocket to Earth. But... I admit that it does drive home the idea that Clark is a product of the love of Jonathan and Martha, rather than his biology or heritage.
Look, Krypton is interesting, but I don't want to spend 5 movies worrying about what happened on a dead planet when we have a perfectly good planet in Earth. So if this is the last we hear about Krypton - minus a Brainiac appearance - I'm good.
But. And this is the weird thing. The troll argument seems to be "Ah ha! You want to make this movie about immigrants being good, BUT his parents sent him to conquer! You've proven immigrants are bad!"
My dude. No. The movie shows that free will and nurture are powerful forces. He is, in fact, more human than he ever knew.
We should have had more debate over the reveal of Jor-El and Lara's message: I get that in a 2-hour movie we don't have time to have the general populace sit around and try to sort out what Lex is doing - but that's what the Planet staff is for. They can air the viewpoints, even as hypotheticals. I also don't really get why Superman doesn't just say "huh. I never heard that before. Absolutely not my plan. Free will and all that. Sorry my parents were dicks, but I don't have a harem."
Clark is a journalist with a major newspaper to print what he needs to say. Feels like we left an obvious bit on the table and the drama of a divide in the populace of people choosing to believe Superman or not.
No mention again of the guy Lex shot: Superman needed to be seen attending the funeral of the foodcart guy. I don't know what else to say about it. A man was murdered in front of Superman because of Superman. And I am guessing that they cut this movie down from probably 3 hours, but 10 seconds of funeral or memorializing him at the foodcart would have been nice.
If that's Bizarro, a stronger hint would have been welcome: so, the clone is clearly going to be Bizarro. We've kind of guessed that since the trailers. But a "me am sad to see you" or a hearty "hello" as he disappeared into the abyss would have been nice. But maybe that's a can of worms for a sequel.
Never saw Clark change: I mean, we all want to know how he changed into the suit. Even a super-blur would have been nice. A shirt pop. Something. It's part of Superman's iconography to have the S under his clothes. But it's just as big of a deal to see him go from one to the other.
Not enough Daily Planet: I'll regularly complain that comics and movies since the Bronze Age have ignored the Daily Planet in favor of adding in superheroes. Here, it's maybe a necessary evil, but I would have loved to see more Perry, Cat Grant, Steve Lombard and Ron Troupe. And I think there was room for it if the movie weren't so concerned with a 2-hour runtime.
What Did Work for Me
The story wasn't about old family business: I don't mind General Zod, Ursa and Non, obviously. But if all that our Superman does in his movie is deal with issues created by his family on a planet that no longer exists, who is he really helping? Yes, he saved the world in Man of Steel, but he is also, very specifically, the problem for the world to begin with. And it's the only reason he goes public.
Superman in the new film is *part* of Lex's problem, but it's made clear that no matter what, Lex would be doing this and finding an excuse. He's just a megalomaniac, and he's also clearly obsessed. The second he's got Superman in a collector's box, Lex doesn't turn to world peace. Nor does this Superman create Lex. He happens to appear in the world at the same time as our villain, and that's enough. (Arguably, btw, Smallville's Clark absolutely creates a villainous Lex Luthor by lying to him for several years and repeatedly concussing him).
If we get a Zod or Jax-Ur or whatever, I hope it's on, like, movie #5.
I guess the Planet Staff knows he's Superman?: I take it from the little exchange at the end that Perry and Jimmy are well aware Superman is Clark, and they're playing along. No word on Ron or Cat, and I can assume Steve has no idea.
That shocked me for a second, and then I realized how funny it was. And it kinda makes sense. "Oh, let Clark do his thing..."
Punk Rock Superman (buckle up, kids): It is not a mistake that the movie closes on Iggy Pop singing Teddybears' "Punkrocker".
One of my favorite bits in the film - something I did not quite expect to be how we actually *wrap* a Superman film - is the insertion of the notion of "punk" into the movie. (As if shoving Rocket Raccoon to the forefront of the MCU didn't do it, it was a very odd moment of realizing James Gunn and I may be sympatico on many things.)
It's been a long-held, mostly silently considered opinion of my own, that - yeah, Superman's kindness and general presence in the comics is its own form of fighting norms and the negativity embraced by those who consider themselves wise in a world of Luthors and Darkseids and Batmans. I dig it, man.
When things are looking bleak, Lois and Clark are talking and she mentions she's just a former punk rock kid from Bakerline (yes, Metropolis has established neighborhoods and geography). Clark, looking for connection and wanting to prove his bona fides offers up his choice of bands - and mentions the fictional Mighty Crabjoys, which Lois - in true street cred old punk fashion - has no problem telling him "sucks". This, of course, crushes him a bit.
Lois' version of punk is the skeptical kid from the 'burbs who knows bullshit when she sees it. She's found her outlet in journalism, popping open the lock-boxes of liars and putting the truth on the front page.
And Clark, responds maybe he is punk for being who he is.
If punk rock is an anti-establishment stance where you follow an internal set of ethos rather than those prescribed to you by traditional authority figures, especially when you see how those offering up their guidance fail those they're trying to influence - what could be more punk rock than your biggest enemy on the planet is a billionaire autocrat who uses his power to manipulate the populace, governments, militaries, etc... to increase his personal power and wealth? If not asking the President to convene a committee before you dash off across the planet to save people in a war zone is an issue? Who is more punk rock?
That Superman's general take, the much ballyhoo'd boy scoutness, the "no one is that good, I don't believe it" of both Lex Luthor and skeptical people wrestling with the concept of fiction, is cinsidered naive, maybe consider that he knows exactly what he's doing, and Superman is performing the ultimate act of rebellion on the screen and in comics, defying those who know better.
I don't think I picked up on this from Grant Morrison, but it's entirely possible I read this in the long-long ago and it stuck in my mind and slowly grew. In a now archived, kinda lost interview he did with Newsarama (found over on tumblr), he says:
In today’s world, in today’s media climate designed to foster the fear our leaders like us to feel because it makes us easier to push around. In a world where limp, wimpy men are forced to talk tough and act ‘badass’ even though we all know they’re shitting it inside. In a world where the measure of our moral strength has come to lie in the extremity of the images we’re able to look at and stomach. In a world, I’m reliably told, that’s going to the dogs, the real mischief, the real punk rock rebellion, is a snarling, ‘fuck you’ positivity and optimism. Violent optimism in the face of all evidence to the contrary is the Alpha form of outrage these days. It really freaks people out.
In an era where the cool thing everyone thinks they need to be is a bad-ass affecting stoic apathy and saying "crap" a lot, what does it mean to intentionally be a square? To care if the monster trampling your city lives or dies as much as you care about the squirrel the kaiju almost squished? To say "golly!" after you just got crunched by a monster?
When I started picking up Superman comics at long last at the turn of the Millennium, it was exactly this part of Superman that drew my attention. I was burnt out on 90's edginess and dark, wry takes. Batman could go on growling and karate-chopping villains forever. Wolverine could keep stabbing people. Sure. But to what end?
But Superman? He was going to do his best for others, not because of a vendetta, but because he could. And he liked doing it.
There's always a sort of general zeitgeist idea of Superman as a smiling dimbulb based on half-remembered cartoons and decades-old viewings of movies that folks coming into comics are often surprised to find out isn't really how the character works. But that doesn't mean the character doesn't remain side-eyed as the squarest of squares by many, as the guy who bows to authority figures, etc... And, fair.
Superman has been around a long time and been used for PSAs, for a generic image of banal goodness. And there's some comics history to why that impression came to be. But when Superman first showed up, he wasn't necessarily anti-cop - but he was a radical free agent of justice. He didn't start out fighting robots and mad scientists - he was inclined to mess about with an arms dealer, a crooked landlord, a gangster shaking down locals. He'd leap into the fray and serve up some ironic justice, without asking for permission of anyone.
And over the years, he's kept that streak in his DNA, whether that's been going rogue when the police or governments are wrong, when the country elects Lex Luthor to office (see Superman comics circa 2000), or he's telling the Guardians of the Universe where to stuff it.
In modern terms, much like in the film, storylines are made out of Superman deciding that he can make a difference and save lives, but he's going to have to just do it and worry about the political, personal and legal fallout later. His shoulders will have to be big enough to stand by his choices if he knows those choices are right - and right is saving lives no matter which borders, neighborhoods people live in, or their ethnicity, country of origin, religion, sexuality...
Superman is for everybody.
Lois's punk rock gatekeeping isn't a throw away line to try to give her a splash of character. The gatekeeping she's doing is what has been the prevailing take we've had about Superman since comic nerds read Dark Knight Returns and Batman showed up in black with a cool-ass car in 1989. Batman, the aristocrat beating mental patients and people doing crime without asking questions... is the post-Gary Cooper hero, the Death Wish vigilante we wish could scare those who scare us. And he has become the default, continually pushed further into the shadows (although I'll argue the last 15 minutes of The Batman made me feel pretty good about where that series could be headed).
But Superman the character is literally fueled by light. He's the one who Superman may not be your punk rock ideal, but it doesn't mean he's not punk - he may even appear a little lame if your preference is The Descendants over *waves at all punk post 1999*. But he's not the guy going to Hot Topic for his street cred. He's wearing his reds and blues and his trunks without apology.
Anyway, I found out (while drafting this post) that Gunn talked about it over at Den of Geek, where he said:
We live in an age where everything is so mean and so ugly. Everyone is screaming at one another. Right now the most punk rock thing you can do is be kind, be raw, be open, look out for the person who needs looking out for, be unapologetically earnest. I think those are the things that are most rebellious.
So, yeah. Hard agree. And maybe it's why people seem to be responding to the movie now.
I don't know how seriously you should take all this, but I kind of do take it seriously - insofar as I think it makes Superman inherently interesting in both the fictional and real world. And I find it personally a nice inspiration. Not one I live up to as often as I'd like, but nonetheless... I find it cool.
And if this is the new cool, I am very onboard with that.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Keep it friendly. Comment moderation is now on. We are not currently able to take Anonymous comments. I apologize.