Superman (2025) - 8/10

I thought it was a bold move for James Gunn and crew to pick Superman as the lead-off film in their DCU rebirth project. Not only has Superman been done so many times throughout the years on both the small and big screens, but he is an iconic character that had to be nailed in order for everything else in the DCU to work. I imagine those challenges are actually why Gunn wanted to do this film himself. If his version of the DCU was going to work, they needed to face the hurdle head-on.

As far as the end product goes, this is a very strong superhero film with a clear sense of personality and charm. It certainly isn't perfect, but I love so many of the decisions they make along the way, and it feels like the creatives had a clear understanding of what they wanted to do with the character. I'm tempted to go up to a 9/10 on my score, but it feels too early to judge the film's longevity.

1. Acting

Usually, I start with the leads, but I'll reverse direction a bit on this one. I mostly enjoyed the ensemble this film develops, and it basically breaks down into three or four subsets of characters.

The least strong is probably the LexCorp team of bad guys. Most of the people in Lex's orbit are nameless, personality-less henchmen. They also get the unfortunate job of dealing with some of the film's clunkiest dialogue. And Lex's lieutenants, like María Gabriela de Faría's The Engineer and the faceless Hammer of Boravia, are largely just props for the plot and action scenes.

Then we have the Justice Gang. Nathan Fillion, Isabela Merced, and Edi Gathegi all leave lasting impressions on the film. Fillion brings a nice comedic touch, though his Guy Gardner is intentionally portrayed as a bit of a douche. Gathegi gets the most time to shine and really turns a pretty silly character into something quite cool. Merced gets mostly sidelined, but she still has a few quick moments to work with.

And lastly, we have the Daily Planet team. It's a bit of an oddball mix of side characters, but their banter with one another does a good job showing a group that is already familiar with and genuinely enjoys each other. For this group, I mostly just love seeing Wendell Pierce do his thing.

Alright, let's get down to our three leads.

First, but certainly not least, is Rachel Brosnahan as Lois Lane. Just like Supes, Lois Lane is an iconic character, and nailing her was imperative for the film. Luckily, Brosnahan is more than up for the task and absolutely crushes it as Lois. Her ability to pivot between ferocity, charm, defensiveness, and vulnerability is pitch-perfect, and she may very well have instantly become the best to ever do it. Her scene with Clark during the interview in her apartment is one of the best exchanges I have seen in this type of movie.

Second, let's jump into Nicholas Hoult's Lex Luthor. Hoult may have been an odd casting choice for some, but he's an accomplished actor with great range. I really like his take on Lex, and he seems to have a great understanding of who the character is at his core: smart, arrogant, and entitled. However, I think the best part of Hoult's performance is his ability to capture the rage, pettiness, and jealousy that are always bubbling just beneath Lex's surface.

And of course, Superman himself. David Corenswet was a mostly unknown name prior to his casting, but he certainly does well filling the red boots. I think what I ended up loving most about Corenswet's performance is how human he made Superman feel. Oftentimes, we get an overly clumsy or awkward Clark juxtaposed with an incredibly sure-footed and almost invulnerable Superman. In this version, Clark and Superman often don't even feel like different people.

And even when he dons the cape, Superman doesn't suddenly become this godlike creature. He remains a fallible human with just a touch of "aw shucks" flavor and, most importantly, remains emotionally vulnerable. I think the reason this take on Superman feels so much more optimistic and joyous is because even when he's doing something incredible, like soaring through the skies fighting a giant monster, we can still connect with him on a personal level. He's not some detached, unrelatable demigod. He's the guy that punches the giant monster in the face, then goes and saves a squirrel from getting squashed. 

2. Cinematography

This film certainly has a lot of James Gunn's typical visual flair and spectacle. Yet I noticed a different tone than some of his other movies. The brightness is turned up just a little more. The levity is a little lighter. And the fun is a little cheesier. It's very much in line with this tonal take on Superman, and I really enjoyed it. 

I think there are two things that stood out to me as reasons why this film rises above most of its peers: its willingness to lean into a comic-book aesthetic and its incredibly active camera work.

As for the comic-book aesthetic, this is a very bright, vibrantly lit, and colorful film. It immediately jumps out at you and feels very much in line with the original comic runs, which were full of bright primary yellows, reds, and blues. It also stands in stark contrast to the Snyderverse's much more muted and darker approach.

The imagery within individual shots is also very comic-book-like, with techniques such as slow motion being used to highlight splash-panel-worthy moments throughout the runtime. For those less comic-literate than me (which I barely am), a splash panel is when a comic panel takes up an entire page instead of a small portion and is typically reserved for iconic or impactful story beats.

Then we have the camera. I think this movie, along with a few of Gunn's recent features, shows that he really likes to keep the camera moving rather than relying on static shots and frequent cutting. It's a style that has become more prevalent in modern action films, and I'm certainly here for it.

In this iteration, the camera movement often reminds me of animated films. Advances in technology allow for much more fluid camera work, and this film takes full advantage of that. In simpler scenes, the camera locks onto characters and follows them through spaces in a fluid way, bringing a sense of energy even to quieter moments. Then, during action sequences, the audience gets to follow as the camera swings, pivots, jumps, rotates, and flies around to capture as much action as possible without having to frequently cut around.

The end result is a collection of incredible shots, such as Mr. Terrific's beach beatdown and countless moments from the Kaiju fight. Everything feels energetic and fun, and it's honestly hard to put into words instead of just sitting there and marveling at it.

3. Production/Costume Design

Much like the cinematography, I think there was a clear desire to ground the film in a more comic-book-inspired look.

Probably the area where this stands out the most is the costumes. The consistent look across almost every character feels like modern design meeting Silver Age aesthetics. For some reason, that occasionally means the 1980s, but cooler. Regardless, I really like the costume design, and it ties everything together well tonally. As for the most important suit, I think it's a great take on Superman and probably the best execution since Reeves' original costume.

As for the settings, I think the production teams did a great job blending practical sets and CGI to craft the film's various locales. With that said, when things get turned up to eleven in terms of action or comic-book weirdness, things can fall apart a bit. The pocket dimension, for instance, is very much not grounded in reality, and those scenes are heavily CGI-driven and a bit ugly—or at least overbaked.

Contrast that with one of the most beautiful shots in the film: Lois and Clark sharing a flying kiss after the final battle. It's unsurprising to learn that it was filmed on location at the very real and gorgeous Cleveland Arcade in Ohio.

 

4. Writing

This is the maybe the biggest driver for why this film doesn't quite break into the higher levels of my rating system. 

The writing is solid. A bit clunky, as blockbusters tend to be, but solid. Yet it just can't quite find that next level. I think part of this comes down to compromise. WB is clearly worried about its DCU reboot after the Snyderverse collapse. They smartly brought in a "Kevin Feige"-type figure in James Gunn to ensure the project has a singular vision at its core. However, they aren't willing—especially in the very first outing—to completely let go of the leash just yet.

The end result is a lot of clunky exposition that I'm not used to seeing handled so lazily in a James Gunn film.

At the same time, when the script isn't busy over-explaining things with awkward dialogue, there are some genuinely great scenes. I've already mentioned it, but Lois and Clark's interview in her apartment is a smart and well-executed way to drill down into some of Clark's flaws and how his optimism and do-gooder nature will always be at odds with some of humanity's realities.

This scene and dialogue work on a few different levels. In a macro sense, the issues Lois brings up are the exact avenues Lex uses to sow doubt within the public consciousness and among government leaders. This shows how insightful and intelligent Lois is while also giving the audience a way to buy into Lex's point of view, making the Superman vs Lex conflict more compelling.

The scene also does a great job exposing the audience to Clark's complexities. Very often, Superman has been portrayed as a very "simple" character. His farm-boy roots and near invulnerability often allow him to rise above the qualities that drag normal people into conflict.

In this iteration, however, we see a more emotional Clark. One who is genuinely baffled by the notion that stopping a war could somehow be controversial. But when Lois points out that his attitude can come across as arrogant and that his actions may be misguided, he essentially storms out of the room like a child.

At first glance, this might make the character look bad, but what the film is really doing is setting up the finale. Clark is an incredibly caring person, and his hopefulness and love for humanity are what drive him and inspire others. Yes, it can make him naïve. Yes, it is an admiration that humanity probably doesn't always deserve. But it is also a necessary source of light and optimism that people need in order to overcome the selfishness, nihilism, and pettiness that cause someone like Lex Luthor to be in power.

 

As for the plot itself, it's decent.

This is a case where the script is mostly focused on its characters, which I enjoy. The unfortunate trade-off is that the actual story is a bit "whatever." Essentially, Lex Luthor launches a multipart campaign to turn public opinion against Superman. Superman is remanded to a pocket dimension while awaiting questioning. He eventually escapes and defeats/exposes Luthor.

If you're wondering how that description accounts for a two-plus-hour film, well, there are a bunch of side quests and supporting storylines built around that central premise—but that's really all that happens. It's not a bad plot; it's just that the story is primarily serving the characters, which is fairly unusual for a blockbuster. And while I would normally praise a blockbuster for maintaining that level of character focus, I think the issue is that there are simply too many characters being introduced at once.

As a result, we end up with a large collection of main and supporting characters who all need to tie into the central plot, and it doesn't always work. I think of people like Guy Gardner, Hawkgirl, and Metamorpho, who are all superhero-level characters but are basically ancillary figures shoehorned into the proceedings. 

Or I think about perhaps the craziest side story in the film: the relationship between Jimmy Olsen and Eve. Jimmy comes out of that storyline looking like a dick who treats a beautiful and seemingly innocent woman terribly the entire time, even though she ends up being one of the primary reasons the heroes are even able to expose Lex and his plot. That was not the direction I expected for Jimmy Olsen—a character who is traditionally portrayed as a sort of gee-whiz, earnest sidekick.

5. Sound Design

Music has become a key ingredient in any James Gunn project over the last several years. A significant portion of my music tastes can probably be traced back to the Guardians of the Galaxy mixtapes and projects like Peacemaker.

For this film, the soundtrack is actually a nice change of pace. It feels like a thoughtfully curated collection of songs and artists that fit the tone and themes of the movie without feeling overtly like Gunn is forcing his personal taste into the experience.

Helping in this regard are frequent Gunn collaborators John Murphy and David Fleming. Murphy, in particular, seems to have been the smartest person in the room because the creative team recognized very early on that preserving—and slightly updating—John Williams' iconic Superman theme was absolutely the right move.

Most importantly, the music always seems to hit at exactly the right moment, with the triumphant notes of the Superman theme being used expertly to elevate key moments of Superman-ness throughout the film.

6. Editing

I was actually surprised to find that the runtime clocks in at only 129 minutes.

This film feels much larger than that because so much is crammed into it. At the same time, the movie periodically slows down to allow for quieter moments, such as the aforementioned interview scene and Clark's visit to the family farm.

If you had asked me to guess the runtime before looking it up, I probably would have landed somewhere around two and a half hours. Clearly, a lot of fine-tuning occurred to keep things moving at a brisk pace. Now, was it the right move? Would the plot have been more compelling with additional time to explore some of its finer details? Maybe. But I appreciate that the film is trying to stay fun, and two-and-a-half-hour movies are rarely fun.

7. Visual Effects

The various VFX teams did wonderful work on this film. Everything looks fantastic, and any criticisms I have are extremely nitpicky.

For instance, Krypto is a fantastically photorealistic and well-animated CGI character. However, I was never able to see anything other than the CGI. He never quite felt like a real dog to me, which is a shame because he's a great character. The technical execution is immaculate, but something just didn't fully click. 

Similarly, I know some people disliked the look of Superman flying with the fisheye camera positioned directly in front of his face. I actually didn't mind it, but I understand why it bothered some viewers. Again, it's technically very well executed, but it's one of those stylistic choices that either works for you or it doesn't.

8. Originality or Strength of Adaptation

The creative team has cited a wide variety of inspirations for this film, ranging from early Silver Age comics all the way to more modern stories such as All-Star Superman.

The important thing is that this isn't a direct adaptation of any single Superman story. Instead, this "inspired by" version is about as original as we're likely to get from a modern comic-book film.

What stands out most to me is that the movie embraces a sincere sense of hopefulness and fun that many superhero films over the last twenty years have actively avoided. Where many adaptations have gone for grounded, gritty, and serious, Gunn and company chose to tell a story that is cheesy, lighthearted, and fundamentally human. Its optimism is its greatest strength and it made it cool to be a do-gooder who genuinely cares.

9. Stunt Coordination

One of the harder challenges when designing a Superman fight is figuring out how to make it compelling.

When your protagonist is the Man of Steel, it can be difficult to convince the audience that there are meaningful stakes involved. For the most part, I think this film avoids that issue. However, some of the weaker action sequences are probably the pocket-dimension dark-hole sequence and the Ultraman fight toward the end.It's not that these scenes are poorly designed—they just aren't the most interesting.

Comparatively, watching Superman save a child from an explosion, scoop a squirrel to safety, or prevent an entire building from crushing a single car is far more compelling than watching Clark and Ultraman exchange punches for several minutes.

Perhaps the best action scene in the film, though, doesn't involve Superman at all. Mr. Terrific's beach beatdown is an incredibly fun sequence that succeeds from almost every angle, especially the stunt choreography. Just watch it for yourself because a recap wouldn't do it justice.

 

10. Direction

I don't think I've made it a secret that I'm a big James Gunn fan. I was somewhat skeptical about what his take on Superman would look like, but I ended up really enjoying both his vision and his execution.

The one thing I don't want to do here is minimize the incredible work that came from every department and collaborator—not just Gunn himself. In fact, this film actually strikes me as one with a little less "Gunn" than usual, and I think it's better for it.

Legacy / Final Thoughts

Without even having a second DCU feature to compare it against, it's hard to know what this film's legacy will ultimately be. Was this a great start that eventually led nowhere? Was it simply the beginning of something great? Who knows. All I can say right now is that this feels like a very promising start to a cinematic universe that has a much better chance of competing with a now-fading MCU than I initially expected.

As for its smaller legacy, this film stands on the shoulders of nearly a century of Superman media. Even so, I think it deserves recognition as one of the strongest Superman adaptations in recent years. More importantly, it demonstrates a clear understanding of the joy, hope, and inspirational qualities that sit at the heart of this iconic character.