Review by C.J. Bunce
Probably no greater expectation permeates movie-going audiences than contemplating the next Superman movie, the next actors to take on the key roles of Clark Kent, Lois Lane, Perry White, Jimmy Olsen, and Lex Luthor. So many actors have played Superman over the years (see the first several here). What makes a great Superman? What makes a great screen superhero? What makes a great superhero movie? More space fantasy than superhero movie, James Gunn’s best movie so far is easily Guardians of the Galaxy. But even that isn’t perfect, it’s depressing beginning isn’t really for kids. And even if comic books aren’t just for kids since the 1970s and 1980s, superhero movies from DC Comics and Marvel Comics don’t make sense unless kids can enjoy them, too. Gunn’s latest, this year’s Superman, is now streaming on HBO Max. It’s definitely targeted at kids, although it has unnecessary profanity (Jesus Christ! Goddamn, shit, etc.). Despite its flaws, its simple approach is something that surpasses years of Zack Snyder trying to understand the heroes of the Justice League.
So how does the movie fare compared to past Superman movies, and past superhero movies?
Few viewers will probably find the movie topping Christopher Reeve’s first movie. If you loved Brandon Routh’s sequel to that movie, Superman Returns, you may or may not find this comparable. For my money I’d say this Superman and Superman Returns is an even heat. Routh’s sincerity and similarity to Reeve was the perfect return of what made Superman great at the movies. In the same vein David Corenswet’s take on the character is a thoroughly thoughtful guy, too. He just looks more like Superman if Brendan Fraser played him in his thirties, a bit goofy, not quite as chiseled as Superman of the comics pages in any decade. Rachel Brosnahan is much better than Kate Bosworth–Brosnahan is fun in a way the best modern Lois was (that’s Lois and Clark’s Teri Hatcher). The Lex Luthors are equal, too, although the Lex of the comics always looks closer to Vincent D’Onofrio’s Kingpin than anyone who has ever played Lex in the movies. Flip D’Onofrio over from Marvel and I think we’d see a perfect Lex Luthor. Usually a standout, Nicholas Hoult’s Luthor is rather one-note and forgettable. Psych’s Skyler Gisondo is a surprisingly good Jimmy Olson, delivering a smart kid who actually gets something real to do. But The Daily Planet’s famous editor is barely in this one (that’s Wendell Pierce). As for heart, Superman Returns nudges the new one out, too.
I’d put both this Superman and Superman Returns above Reeve’s Superman II. If you haven’t watched it in a while, give Superman II a try. Despite all the critics frequently seeing this one as a sacred cow, I don’t think it holds up like the first. Gunn’s is more fun with less cringe and less darkness. Routh’s is a better sequel, too.
Each of the actor’s performances in Superman work because of Gunn’s script. Yes, he found a way to give fans those key elements that make them beloved by fans worldwide for more than 80 years. Gunn made Nathan Fillion turn Guy Gardner into something almost cool. And that’s a feat. Where did he dig up the obscure Mr. Terrific? Who cares? Edi Gathegi makes it work and makes this D-level superhero something interesting. Long-time Justice League member Hawkgirl makes more sense here, and Isabela Merced gives us an updated interpretation (I would just have liked to see more of her).
Unfortunately what keeps Superman from being a big win is that Gunn is his own worst enemy. Although this is the rare outing that outpaces all of Zack Snyder’s DC movies (by a long shot), Gunn is like Snyder in that his movies are always experiments that border on (if not sink as) director self-indulgence, all at the expense of source material. Suddenly Superman’s alien parents are bad guys. Why? Because it was convenient. Suddenly Superman’s human parents are hillbillies. Why? No idea. Kansas is not backwoods Tennessee or Kentucky. The entire through-line of the movie involving a Near East war is indecipherable. At times it’s a bit cringey. Are we supposed to be getting some political message or analogies here? It’s why I prefer the Stan Lee brand of a goofy-named invader country, one so wacky we don’t need to dissect whether he’s also overlaying some political message. Unfortunately Superman gets swept up in the comics and in film in that big harangue that plagues Marvel Comics, too, reflected in endless stories about X-Men and Mutants vs. the rest of us, the struggle between super-powered humans and regular folk. Are we tired of that trope yet?
Where did the robots come from in Antarctica? I’ll let this go because it’s the kind of goofy thing little kids like (it’s also an excuse for Gunn to let friends from his other movies voice the roles, aka more self-indulgence). But big aliens getting blown up is cliché and boring. It’s an easy story device because they are “monsters” or “ugly villains,” something that glosses over the politics of Starship Troopers (Ender’s Game addressed this in a more interesting way). I also didn’t know who the green “squiggle” alien was supposed to be. Turns out it is Metamorpho. I had to look it up. How are viewers supposed to know that?
But then there are those fun bits. Like showing the animated Super Friends’ Hall of Justice inspired by Cincinnati’s Union Terminal. Like incorporating an interesting new Mrs. Teschmacher, played by Sara Sampaio. And like having a Krypto-centered plot. But how hard would it be to use a real dog, or have it look like the traditional Krypto? It’s that kind of picking and choosing that makes adaptations annoying, and it’s going to draw some of the audience away from the plot.
The best sequence is probably Mr. Terrific taking out all the bad guys in front of Lois near the black hole portal. But why is it backed by such a bizarre song? Who is that song for? And concerning the music, can you hum this new Superman theme? Of course it’s going to be difficult to ever match the goosebumps induced by John Williams. But the goofy pop songs throughout don’t fit with Superman at all, instead screaming, “I’m James Gunn and I like this song.”
Ultimately every new James Gunn movie is like every new Wes Anderson movie. It’s not targeted at general audiences, it’s for the director’s own fan base. If profanity belongs in your superhero movies and you like the irreverent superhero stuff of The Suicide Squad and Peacemaker, this Superman probably will work for you. For the adult crowd, there’s enough of David Corenswet’s sincerity and Rachel Brosnahan’s modern Lois to ride it out. The B-story with Mr. Terrific, Guy Gardner, and Hawkgirl help. And although Corenswet looks like he never had a pet dog and doesn’t have much rapport with Krypto, I like the idea of a story where Krypto saves Superman (at least three times?). But animals in jeopardy? Another lazy cliché story device. Where is the heart? Why does Superman show more concern for robots than his dog? No idea. DC Comics adaptations have proven to be better on the small screen, from The Adventures of Superman to Arrow, and in animated movies like Batman Ninja vs. Yakuza League and The Lego Batman Movie–DC’s brand of superhero is usually more compelling in a personal story without the need for giant monsters, buildings toppling, and international wars.
As for the obligatory post-credits scenes, this has two–an image of Supes and Krypto and another with Supes and Mr. Terrific talking about a cracked building. So nothing hinting at coming attractions.
It’s a mixed bag with something fun for everyone, younger kids excepted because of language. It’s not all that rewatchable, and I’m not sure we’ll remember this one in a few years. What I’d like to see is the return of Corenswet, Brosnahan, and Gisondo in a sequel from a different writer and director. It’s not the year’s best superhero movie, not horrible, just middle of the road compared to the 300 live-action superhero adaptations that came before it. James Gunn’s Superman is now streaming on HBO Max.
