While he garnered fan and critical acclaim through his adaptation of D-list antiheroes, James Gunn adapts the most comic book accurate version of the Big Blue Boy Scout in his latest film, “Superman.” Sent by his parents to guide humanity towards a better tomorrow, Superman, Clark Kent played by David Corenswet, fights to show the value of truth, justice and kindness in a world where people see these traits as old-fashioned. One such person is none other than the conniving Lex Luthor, played by Nicholas Hoult, who uses his vast intellect to hatch scheme after scheme to tarnish the Man of Steel’s reputation. Aided by the iron-willed Lois Lane, played by Rachel Brosnahan, as well as countless other colorful comic counterparts, Superman must inspire hope and prove that the greatest power of all is not super strength, speed or heat vision, but humanity. While “Superman” demonstrates a clear knowledge of these landmark characters through a brilliant adaptation, it is more focused on telling the audience as opposed to simply showing them.
“Superman’s” biggest strength is how well the characters are realized. Each of the three main characters, Superman, Lane and Luthor all have fleshed out world views that naturally create moments of tension. Luthor is a self-absorbed ego maniac who constantly needs to prove his superiority. So, when the embodiment of what everyone should strive to be appears from up in the sky in the form of Superman, he sees him as nothing more than a challenge. As such, Luthor will plan incredibly complex plots and invent incredibly dangerous technology all in service to prove that his mental strength is mightier than Superman’s brawn.
Onto Lane, who is a journalist down to her very core, and the film never forgets that. Despite being in a relationship with Kent, she views Superman’s action through the objective lens of a reporter. She will always ask the tough questions and put herself in the line of fire to uncover the true story. Due to her inquisitive and skeptical behaviors, she is naturally cynical, not seeing the good in people until she has evidence to support her claim – the very foundation of journalistic integrity. In light of her more jaded outlook, this causes conflict with the more hopeful world view of Superman who always chooses to see the best in people.
Whenever possible in the film, Superman always gives people a chance to choose the right path. To him, it doesn’t matter if he is fighting Luthor’s enforcer, the Engineer, played by María Gabriela de Faría, or his life is threatened at the hands of Metamorpho, played by Anthony Carrigan, he will always try to guide them to make the righteous choice in the name of good. Superman’s naive insistence on an individual’s capacity to make the moral choice is why he is the Man of Tomorrow, because in spite of everything, he will always fight to show us a better path forward.
The trademarks of these characters are given palpable moments to shine throughout the course of the movie, however, they are often undercut by an expository monologue that blatantly spells it out.
In “Superman,” almost every single character has at least one moment where they spout exactly who they are and why they do what they do in the most forced way possible. In the film’s climax, both Superman and Luthor have a monologue where they lecture each other on their belief systems. Lane and Kent get into an argument where she tells him that her skepticism conflicts with his hopeful nature. Moments similar to these plague the film and dilute powerful character moments by turning them into epistolary dialogue. Instead of letting scenes of intense action or emotion stand on their own and allow the audience to interpret them for themselves, the movie essentially stops to explain exactly what they should take away from these key instances of character development.
However, this lack of subjective interpretation in exchange for objective take-aways might not be a fault with the script, but with the audience it is intended for.
To no fault of their own, general movie goers have only been exposed to deconstructions of the title character since the release of “Superman Returns.” From 2006 to 2025, Superman has been portrayed in popular media as a vengeful murder in projects like “Injustice” or an unrelatable messiah figure as seen in “Man of Steel.” Even branching off to other superhero media for a moment, the “Evil Superman” trope has been done to death with characters like Homelander from “The Boys” and Omni-Man from “Invincible.” While these interpretations are amazing in their own right, they are just that, interpretations, not the true version of the character. Average viewers have mostly forgotten what Superman truly stands for because the last time this was shown on the silver screen was 1987’s “Superman IV: The Quest for Peace.”
Superman is a hopeful figure who saves cats from trees and smiles at the camera, but since general audiences haven’t seen this since the 80s, Gunn’s adaptation needed to do a lot of legwork to remind them who this character is supposed to be. Because Gunn essentially has to reintroduce the most popular characters in fiction, it makes sense why he would need to spell everything out. In an era where distrust in the media is everyday news, we need Lane to remind us that she will do whatever it takes to snuff out the truth. When everyone and everything exists in a murky, morally gray area, we need to hear Luthor admit that he’s an irredeemable douchebag. And most importantly, in a world that views truth, justice and kindness as old fashioned we need Superman to remind us that humanity is the greatest superpower of all.
While “Superman” is too on the nose with its messaging, it is all in service to make the audience believe a man can fly.
4/5
—
Featured Image via Warner Bros. Pictures
