Superhero fatigue has become almost unavoidable for moviegoers. In the past five years alone, Marvel Studios and DC Studios have rolled out a combined 26 films. While the superhero action brought in the consistent box office success of every Hollywood studio’s dreams at its peak, its inescapable shortcomings began to shine through the cracks for some. With an average of more than five films released per year, it was inevitable that many audience members would grow tired of the sometimes formulaic genre.
However, this past summer, on July 11, the release of James Gunn’s “Superman” awakened dormant fans everywhere. Movie theaters saw a rush of ticket sales and sold countless Superman t-shirts for the return of the summer action blockbuster, and DC’s biggest success since 2022’s “The Batman.”
After Zack Snyder’s gritty and tragic take on the iconic Kryptonian in “Man of Steel” (2013) and “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice” (2016), people appeared ready for a brighter, more cheerful take on the adored hero. And Gunn, known for his slaphappy directorial touch on Marvel’s “Guardians of the Galaxy” trilogy, seemed to be the perfect man for the job.
Superman, played in the film by David Corenswet, is, of course, a superhuman figure who is sent to Earth when his home planet of Krypton is destroyed. After being raised by the Kent couple in Smallville, Kansas, he moves to the city of Metropolis, where he, as Clark Kent, reports for the “Daily Planet” newspaper, simultaneously attempting to balance his heroic and secretive responsibilities as Superman.
Gunn’s film begins with the titular hero’s first lost fight, as he stumbles from the sky, battered and bruised. He calls for his trusty superpowered dog, Krypto, who drags him to the Fortress of Solitude, where he is healed, and thus returns to battle the villainous “Hammer of Boravia.” This introduces Superman’s feature-long opposition of the nation of Boravia, a powerful U.S. ally that attempts to overtake its neighboring, defenseless country of Jarhanpur. Meanwhile, the tech billionaire Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult) actively works to turn the public against Superman and defeat him with his advanced technological creations.
In addition to the foreign conflicts and prevalence of “fake news” in the film, Superman also struggles with feeling like an “alien” in a way that reflects current reality. Despite these heavy subjects the film, overall, somehow remains lighthearted.
Gunn handles the superhero comedy formula in a way no other director routinely has; he meshes driving, complex headaches with light-heartedness. The film, opposed to many critiques of Snyder’s earlier work, does not take itself too seriously. It has something to say while remaining an enjoyable blockbuster.
The cast certainly earns much of this credit, too; it is almost as if Gunn created Corenswet with Luthor technology to play his Superman. He is a combination of the many greats to previously portray the character, maintaining some of the confidence of George Reeves and the charm of Christopher Reeve (not to mention, he has the face for the role). Beside him, Hoult’s depiction of Luthor’s arrogance made for one of the best superhero villains in recent years. Additionally, Edi Gathegi’s witty portrayal of Mister Terrific, a member of Superman’s Justice Gang, made a large mark on the film’s great amusement.
Speaking of the inclusion of the Justice Gang (which also constitutes Hawkgirl and Green Lantern), the multitude of characters explored throughout the runtime often took away from what matters most (this can also be seen in Kent’s group of Daily Planet colleagues). While it is understandable that Gunn wanted to create a foundational universe for his new set of films, the sprawling cast of characters led to a lack of depth in the most important ones. Superman experiences a lingering identity crisis when he loses his first fight; his star-reporter girlfriend, Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan), struggles to express her requited love in what can be deemed the key relationship in Superman’s story. It all, of course, formulaically works out in the end, but there is not enough focus on the shifts that occur throughout the film to justify this closure.
“Superman” certainly offers a good time; it has that whimsy so many have missed in the world of DC, but it may lack some sought-after substance. There is so much Gunn attempts to touch on — from the parallels to reality to Superman’s “complex” love life. Parts of the film can work to fuel the superhero fatigue (there are at least one too many anticipated sequences in which a building is seen falling, about to crush a pedestrian, before Superman heroically appears with it above his head), but an arguably more important note is this: the movie is fun. That fine line of just enough enjoyment and thought-provoking depth is as hard to balance on as a tightrope. Nonetheless, Gunn seems to have taken the first step, and it is a joy to watch.
