Superman

James Gunn’s DCU is properly launched on the shoulders of the Man of Steel. Can he get it right?

For the last 12 years I have struggle to wrap my head around my conflicted feelings after watching Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel. I found myself generally pleased with the movie. Though I will be the first to admit, I tend to like most things I when I walk out of the theater. The one notable exception being Morbius…But something felt off about Man of Steel and I wasn’t sure what it was.

Henry Cavill was the obvious (even if not particularly inspired) choice for Clark Kent. The quintessential debate about hero casting slips to the forefront. How does the actor fit the dual identities? Decades of debate are drummed up. Michael Keaton was a great Bruce and an pretty good Batman. Val Kilmer, great Batman, ok Bruce Wayne. George Clooney, excellent Bruce, questionable Batman. Christian Bale, phenomenal Bruce, very good Batman. Affleck, meh Bruce, very accurate Batman at times. And finally Pattinson, excellent Batman, but his Bruce Wayne is a different Bruce Wayne. As far as The Batman goes, Bruce Wayne is bad at being Bruce Wayne still, so how do you measure it?

For Superman the debate is no different, save only for the fact we have far fewer examples to draw from. Christopher Reeve is the reference point. Like Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark. All inference points draw back to him. Brandon Routh was ok, though the film was poorly received. There are several TV adaptations of Superman, but as I have never really been a huge Supes fan, I have only dabbled in those forays. Though I acknowledge their cultural cache. Henry Cavill was an anomaly though. He obviously looked the part. Though now, years later, I find myself wondering if the physique is truly the defining feature of Kal-El. Cavill was built like Mr. Incredible, an inverted dorito, narrow base, wide peak. If Superman is a muscular inverted pyramid, then you have your guy. Charismatically, Cavill is a joy to watch in interviews and talk shows, but did the same charisma really ever find the screen? I would argue, largely, no. There are moments. His relationship with Amy Adams’ Lois Lane is pretty good, even if a little too rote. How could it not be though, this is Superman and Lois Lane.

With more than a decade of internal and external debate I have found myself with a better definition of my displeasure. Snyder just doesn’t understand Superman. It’s hard to see at first, largely because I believe most viewers don't fully understand Superman. For so many he is the hammer for every nail, a large reason why I personally couldn’t get into him. It was only after coming across a writer who had written Superman comics, whose name eludes me at this moment, I had my narrow view of the Kryptonian smashed open. The writer said, “If you think Superman is overpowered then you believe you can solve every problem by punching it.” There it was, Superman’s appeal made accessible, for me at the very least. The implication of this statement is one of deft storytelling. How do you make an interesting story about a man who could literally punch everything to death? We know such stories can be fun to watch. I love Reacher and John Wick. Two properties content with answering the question of, “how do we solve this” buy simply replying “violence.” But violence as the answer simply isn’t in Superman’s lexicon.

What’s more, Snyder was fixated on the parallel of Kal-El as the second coming of Christ. There is an abundance of material here. I personally, love the idea of people seeing this metahuman this way. Humans are flawed, we hunger for heroes larger than ourselves who can solve every problem. But Snyder fumbled in one way, unfortunately it was the most profoundly damaging way: his Superman humored the comparison. As a recent but dedicated convert to Superman’s greatness, I know without a single doubt, Clark Kent would fucking HATE the comparison. And this is where James Gunn, the director and writer of the new Superman film, does not miss.

Gunn’s film opens with a series of text blocks establishing the world as it is. Metahumans are known to Earth, Superman is known to the world. Superman has imposed his will on an escalating geopolitical crisis. Superman has just lost his first fight. It’s evocative, informative, and lets the film hit the ground running. We are far beyond the need for origin stories, culturally. Especially when it comes to the more well known superheroes. Please don't tell me how Superman came to Earth. Similarly, don't tell me how Batman’s parents died. We all get it.

What this slight preamble does, however, is give us all we need to be full sprint alongside the events of the film. And James Gunn’s Superman uses this to dive right into the action.

While I would love to dive into the events of the movie, really give a full synopsis of the events, I find those things to be far less important to this review than what I am going to tell you next. David Corenswet is the Superman the creators intended, much like Reeve’s rendition in the past. He is kind, dorky, respectful, and an unwavering Boy Scout. He is the epitome of healthy masculinity. He is protective of the innocent, driven to do good, and unimpeachably moral. In the opening thirty minutes of the movie he allows himself to be interviewed by Lois Lane in her apartment. The interrogation perfectly lays out the conflict of the film by making two of its leads actually dig into the ramifications of a world where a super powered individual can do things like impose their will on geopolitical events. Lois stands in as the Devil’s Advocate, in a way. Asking the tough questions. In response, Superman struggles to explain himself outside of repeating “people were going to die!” It’s excellent. Because for a being like Superman, little else has to matter. He simply refuses to accept a reality where death is the only outcome.

Alternatively, this film’s antagonist, Lex Luthor, constantly uses violence as a means to an end, and he uses his hatred of Superman, “an alien,” to fuel his jealousy. Nicholas Hoult nails his performance as Lex, creating an unhinged, angry, xenophobic billionaire with global aspirations and an extremely local (if superpowered) roadblock. Lex is terrifyingly ruthless. As a foil to Kal-El’s goodness, the two weave a compelling spiral of events.

But this is the crux of the entire movie. The rich billionaire is jealous. Jealous of the love Superman gets from everyone, despite Lex’s genius. Jealous that this non-human, alien, be afforded love and affection, where he is not. He tries to cast doubts about Superman’s motivations. Is he here to rule over us? How can we trust someone who isn’t even one of us? All of it ringing familiar to the world we live in today. Superman is a refugee. An immigrant. And a billionaire is seeking to leverage the government to deal with him as the threat he is. But the threat Superman poses isn’t to the people of Metropolis or Earth, it’s a threat to those in power or clawing for that power. Because Superman is something those in power fundamentally misunderstand. He is a force for good with no expectation of reward or recognition. He does good because it’s right. Not because he is going to get something for it.

This motivation throws him up against nearly everyone in his world. The founding framework of the Justice League, comprising of Guy Gardner’s Green Lantern, Hawkgirl, and Mr. Terrific, struggle to understand him. Lex Luthor struggles to understand him. Lois struggles to understand him. Because at his core, Superman is the antithesis of what we as Americans have been taught to expect from all-powerful beings. He must crave dominion over us, right? And when he doesn’t, it simply doesn’t compute.

I have always adored James Gunn’s ability to cast a slew of unknown characters in front of us, give them humanity, and then force us to feel strongly for those characters. Nobody knew who the Guardians of the Galaxy were. No one knew who Bloodsport, Ratcatcher 2, Polkadot Man, or Kingshark were. Yet, by the end of the first Guardians, by the end of Suicide Squad, we had a new collection of cast-offs we had grown to love. Superman, despite his legacy, fit in this mold for me. He is the Man of Steel, a character I had found little reason to care about because I assumed he was just this unstoppable force who inserted himself into events willy-nilly. Gunn illustrates in this movie, very well, that Superman is the best of us. Someone doing good because it’s the right thing to do. He sees every life as valuable, worth protecting. Something our government has made very clear they do not believe.

So if you are asking yourself if Superman is “woke” my heart hurts for you. Woke used to mean having an awareness of social and political injustice. Those things, in the stained history of America, frequently meant being woke drew your focus to racial and social inequality. While I struggle to find a reason to be upset with anyone aware of those injustices, I am aware of the more recent injustice that has been done to the word woke itself. Now it is used to demonize people who just want to acknowledge the existence of…well…everyone else. People who care for the poor and the oppressed, the under-represented and the left-out. It’s used as a bludgeon to disqualify the beliefs of people deemed over-sensitive or politically correct. Already the outcry has begun. “Superwoke” they call Superman. The alien refugee, sent in an escape pod from his people’s dying planet, tasked with becoming a protector. It’s not the story of Jesus, it’s the story of Moses. written originally by two Jewish Americans whose parents were refugees of the holocaust. He goes on to lead the Justice League.

So I guess if you’re offended Superman is woke, you’re not wrong technically, you’re just a dumbass. Anymore, the designation of a hero as being woke stands as a tremendous litmus test. Because the people saying this are people that realize they see themselves in the villains of these stories more than in the heroes. And that must be really hard to deal with. But, as I have come to notice, rather than turn the looking glass inward and investigate the feelings these folks hold inside themselves, they instead seek to use the looking glass to scorch ants, like bullies. I’m not sorry Superman wouldn’t like you, I’m sorry you are unwilling to ask yourself why.

The Punisher would and does hate cops using his logo to make themselves look tough. Spider-Man hates the way you treat the unhoused. Captain America hates the way you swapped your identity for blind party loyalty. Xavier hates the way you diminish the humanity of those different from you. And Superman hates the way you weaponize words like illegal and alien to allow yourself to oppress and criminalize humans just trying to get by. Our heroes are examples for us to try and live our lives by (minus Punisher, who is literally an example of how NOT to live your life).

This movie, and truly Superman as a concept, is about doing the right thing. It’s about being kind when so much of the world won't because it doesn’t get them anything. And if you have a problem with that. Well you need to solve that yourself. Expecting your heroes to be as ignorant and hateful as you allow yourself to be, in the name of self preservation, is embarrassing. Superman calls us to be better than we are, because anything less is a dereliction of duty. Anything else is a failure to be truly human. James Gunn’s Superman gets this, and is all the better for it. A triumph of a movie. A brilliant start to a new DC universe.