LEAPS & MISSTEPS TO A
PROMISING NEW SUPERHERO ERA
The DCEU was a cinematic universe built around the shared stories of DC Comics superheroes, establishing origin tales, interconnected character arcs, crossover events, and a consistent ensemble of settings and cast members. It all began in 2013 with Man of Steel, directed by Zack Snyder, which laid the foundation for what would become the Snyderverse (Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Zack Snyder’s Justice League), a darker, more mythic vision within the broader DCEU framework. However, following the polarizing reception of the 2017 theatrical cut of Justice League, the DCEU began to lose its footing. While films like Wonder Woman and Aquaman generated excitement and expanded the universe with confidence, later installments, including Shazam!, Black Adam, Wonder Woman 1984, Blue Beetle, and Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom, felt increasingly directionless. Many struggled to recapture the early momentum, instead leaning into a tone and style that mimicked Marvel’s MCU without the same level of cohesion. With diminishing critical and commercial returns, Warner Bros. made the decision to close the chapter on the DCEU. Its final installment, Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom (2023), brought the franchise to a quiet and underwhelming end. Now, two years later, Warner Bros. and director James Gunn aim to launch a bold new era: the DCU, a rebranded cinematic universe for a fresh generation of heroes. Its first chapter? Superman. Does this latest take on the Last Son of Krypton reignite a beloved legacy with newfound purpose, or is it already weighed down by superhero fatigue and too much narrative déjà vu to soar?
THE STORY
Earth has grown used to the presence of metahumans, among them, Superman (David Corenswet), who continues to perform heroic acts in hopes of honoring the message of purpose left by his Kryptonian parents. A beacon of hope and protector of the innocent, Superman also finds himself hopelessly in love with Daily Planet reporter Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan), all while trying to manage the unpredictable behavior of his super-powered rescue dog, Krypto. But a new threat looms. Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult), hellbent on destroying Superman’s legacy, joins forces with the mysterious Ultraman and the lethal assassin known as The Engineer (Maria Gabriela de Faría). Together, they orchestrate a campaign to discredit the Man of Steel, imprison him, and plunge the world into chaos through an international incident. Though Superman receives aid from fellow metahumans like Mister Terrific (Edi Gathegi), Green Lantern (Nathan Fillion), and Hawkgirl (Isabela Merced), he ultimately faces Lex’s twisted endgame alone, one involving a dangerous “pocket universe” designed to banish Earth’s greatest hero for good…..and something most foul afoot.
THE GOOD / THE BAD
I’ll admit, I found several of the earlier entries in the DCEU, particularly those within the Snyderverse, to be genuinely good and filled with potential. I understood the creative direction: the idea of building a shared cinematic universe that leaned into a more serious, mythic tone as a stark contrast to the lighthearted, comedic sensibilities of the MCU. Personally, I loved Man of Steel. It laid the groundwork beautifully, offering epic action and blockbuster spectacle while also delivering a layered narrative, thanks in large part to David S. Goyer and Christopher Nolan’s involvement. And yes, I really liked Henry Cavill as Superman.
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, while something I can enjoy in parts, was overstuffed and tried to do too much at once, juggling competing plotlines and setups without giving them room to breathe. As for the theatrical cut of Justice League (2017), I didn’t care for it at all. It felt rushed, tonally inconsistent, and failed to deliver on the promise of the shared universe. Thankfully, Zack Snyder’s Justice League—the extended, alternate version, was eventually released and significantly improved on the original. It expanded the story, introduced new characters, and hinted at a broader cosmic threat that could’ve carried the franchise forward.
That said, it was a bittersweet victory. ZSJL was not considered canon within the DCEU, and many of its narrative seeds, like Darkseid, the Knightmare timeline, and plans for future installments, were left abandoned. As you can probably tell, I’m a fan of the Snyderverse, but I’m not a fanatic. I don’t think it’s flawless, but I do believe it had a clear vision. Would I have liked to see where Snyder’s intended Justice League sequels would’ve gone, especially with those intriguing leaks online? Absolutely. But that’s not my call, and unfortunately, those ideas now remain scattered to the cinematic annals.
Beyond the Snyderverse, the rest of the DCEU became increasingly messy and directionless. After Snyder’s vision was cast aside, the franchise seemed to lose its identity. I still thoroughly enjoyed Wonder Woman and Aquaman, both were entertaining origin stories with strong performances from Gal Gadot and Jason Momoa, who brought real charisma to their roles. But after Aquaman, the quality of the films started to waver. Titles like Shazam!, Birds of Prey, and The Flash were decent in parts, but felt like they were trying too hard to establish their own pocket of greatness without any cohesive guidance.
Without a strong overseer leader, someone like Marvel’s Kevin Feige, the DCEU lacked direction. Later entries such as Shazam! Fury of the Gods, Black Adam, Wonder Woman 1984, Blue Beetle, and Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom felt disjointed, misplaced within the universe, or simply underdeveloped. Many of the sequels, in particular, lost the spark that made the originals work and fell flat either narratively or tonally.
It’s a shame that the DCEU had to end on such a sour note. I didn’t care for Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom at all, it was a muddled, meandering conclusion to a cinematic universe that once held so much promise. For me, the DCEU (and within the Snyderverse) had potential, especially in its early years, but its conclusion left behind a lingering sense of disappointment.
This brings me back to Superman, the 2025 superhero film that marks both the beginning of a new cinematic universe and the latest iteration of the iconic Man of Steel. Like many others, I was initially shocked when news broke that James Gunn would be taking creative control over DC’s cinematic future. Not only was the DCEU coming to a close, but a completely new continuity, rebranded as the DCU, was being built from the ground up. The announcement came on the heels of another surprise: actor Henry Cavill, who had recently teased a return to the role of Superman, was no longer involved. It was a tough blow, especially considering how many of the core actors from the DCEU were released from their contracts. It felt abrupt and, in some ways, disrespectful to the fans who had invested years into that version of the franchise.
Soon after, casting announcements started rolling in. David Corenswet was tapped to play the new Superman, with Rachel Brosnahan cast as Lois Lane and Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor. I was familiar with Hoult and Brosnahan and felt confident in their talent, but Corenswet was more of a wildcard. Aside from his role in Twisters, I didn’t know much about him, which naturally raised some skepticism, especially given that he would be stepping into the cape once worn by Cavill, an actor I genuinely admired in the role. That’s when my doubts began to settle in.
As time went on, the marketing campaign kicked into gear. Posters, promo materials, and trailers started to surface, both online and in theaters. Visually, it looked promising, colorful, energetic, and faithful to the character’s comic book roots. Yet I still couldn’t shake the concern that the film might be overcrowded, stuffed with too many characters and plot threads, something that many superhero blockbusters have struggled with in recent years. Still, I saw potential in the footage and was cautiously optimistic. Gunn clearly had a vision, and I was curious to see how it would unfold.
So, when Superman officially released on June 11th, 2025, I made sure to catch it on opening day. However, I waited a little over a week before sitting down to write this review. Part of that was due to backlog, I had other reviews I needed to finish, but part of it was also intentional. I needed time to process what I had watched, to sit with my thoughts and figure out how I truly felt.
And now that I’ve done that, I can say this: Superman is… just somewhat good, and just somewhat okay.I know that sounds vague, but it’s the most honest summary I can give. James Gunn’s Superman is a fun, lighthearted reimagining of the character, intended as a tonal shift and a “game changer” for the DC brand, but it’s also messy, overstuffed, and occasionally unfocused in its attempt to launch a brand-new universe.
To be clear, the movie isn’t bad. In fact, it’s enjoyable in many ways. But for me, it didn’t quite reach the level of excellence I was hoping for. It has moments of charm, heart, and excitement, but it never fully soars. It’s not the Superman presentation I found to be extraordinary, it’s the Superman that’s fine for now, with hope that greater heights are yet to come.
Before I dive fully into my thoughts on Superman, a brief disclaimer: despite the criticisms I have toward this film, I want to make it clear that I do not subscribe to the idea, held by some, that this movie is “woke” or driven by any overt political agenda. Across decades of comics, films, shows, and other adaptations, Superman has always been depicted as an outsider, an immigrant, an alien raised on Earth striving to do good. He represents peace, justice, and hope for all of humanity, values that transcend political affiliation. So, while certain viewers may interpret this iteration as making a political statement, that’s not the film I saw, and it plays no role in my assessment of its merits or faults.
Superman is directed by James Gunn, whose previous work includes The Suicide Squad, Super, and the Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy. Given his successful run with comic book adaptations—particularly how he turned obscure Marvel characters into fan favorites, Gunn feels like a fitting choice not just to direct a new Superman film, but also to shepherd a brand-new cinematic universe for DC’s characters. This film is, in many ways, his proving ground… and for the most part, he passes. Despite my critiques, Gunn clearly understands the weight of this responsibility. He lays a solid foundation for a reimagined DCU that has the potential to rival the MCU, as long as he’s given the creative freedom to bring his full vision to life, without studio interference or compromise. Let’s hope he stays the course.
But back to Superman itself. One of the most notable strengths of the film is the sense of fun that permeates its entire runtime. Gunn ensures that the story is accessible to a wide audience, from kids to longtime fans. Yes, there are a few darker or more intense moments, but nothing too grim or heavy-handed. Many viewers have noted that the tone feels reminiscent of Superman: The Animated Series or classic comic book runs, and I’d agree.
In contrast to the heavy gravitas of the Snyderverse, Superman leans into a more lighthearted, comic book, inspired approach. There are bursts of silliness, bits of well-timed comedic relief, and action scenes that unfold with that distinct “comic panel come to life” energy. At times, this risks undercutting emotional weight, but Gunn manages to capture a kind of “lightning in a bottle” charm, an energy that feels reminiscent of superhero films from the early-to-mid 2000s, before the MCU reshaped the genre. There’s a refreshing throwback feel here: bold colors, exaggerated villains, stylized action, and a focus on heroism that’s not bogged down by cynicism. It may not work for everyone, but it certainly gives the DCU a tone and identity of its own.
Another wise choice Gunn makes is skipping the standard Superman origin story. Much like Tom Holland’s Spider-Man in the MCU, this version of Clark Kent comes into the narrative fully formed—already beloved by the public, already established as a global symbol, already sparring with Lex Luthor, and already operating in a world populated by other metahumans. While this “in-progress” storytelling technique comes with its own issues (which I’ll touch on later), it smartly avoids retreading overly familiar ground. Most audiences already know the basics of Kal-El’s origins, from Krypton to Kansas, so there’s no need to rehash it. By skipping ahead, Gunn lets the film dive right into the action and character dynamics, which keeps things brisk and engaging.
Stylistically, Gunn brings plenty of the same visual energy and irreverent humor that defined his work on Guardians of the Galaxy. For those hoping for that kind of action-meets-heart sensibility, you’ll likely enjoy what he’s done here. Superman is packed with vibrant visuals, playful moments, and larger-than-life superhero spectacle. It never takes itself too seriously, yet it doesn’t completely abandon its emotional core either.
Beneath the spectacle, the film’s most consistent narrative throughline is the theme of identity—a concept that has long been central to superhero storytelling. Here, Superman struggles not with his powers, but with his place in the world. What does it mean to be a protector, an outsider, a symbol? How do you carry the weight of hope while remaining grounded in personal values? These questions quietly underpin the film, adding emotional resonance to Clark’s journey. While Gunn could’ve dug a bit deeper into this theme in certain scenes, what’s presented still works well, especially for a first entry in a new cinematic universe. It gives Superman a thematic foundation that feels both timeless and timely, setting the stage for future character and world-building developments.
As a sidenote, because I don’t know where to put this in my review, I did find the inclusion of Krypto, a dog that shares many of the super powers of that of Kryptonian, was fun and amusing to see throughout the film. It was nice to see his involvement in the feature and getting the live-action treatment.
In terms of presentation, Superman certainly looks and feels like a big-budget summer blockbuster, boasting impressive visual appeal and large-scale set pieces that help bring its world to life. Compared to the Snyderverse, where Superman was portrayed with a darker, more mythic tone, James Gunn opts for a brighter, more vibrant visual palette. This intentional contrast adds a fresh energy to the film’s aesthetic and makes it visually distinct from its predecessors.
That same tonal shift extends to the film’s production design. Gunn and his creative team embrace a comic book-inspired look, crafting a world that feels dazzling and colorful while still grounded in enough realism to feel tangible. The result is a film that stands with one foot in the realm of superhero fantasy and the other in a more modern, pragmatic visual sensibility. Credit goes to the film’s behind-the-scenes crew: Beth Mickle (production design), Rosemary Brandenburg (set decoration), Judianna Makovsky (costume design), and the entire art direction team, who work together to bring Gunn’s vision to life with flair, texture, and style. Their efforts help establish a visual identity that feels at once fantastical and lived-in.
The cinematography by Henry Braham, who previously collaborated with Gunn on two of the Guardians of the Galaxy films. is sharp and stylish throughout. Braham’s camera work provides plenty of dynamic motion, with sweeping angles and fluid movements that elevate the action. Sequences of Superman in flight or mid-battle feature creative twists and camera turns that are visually engaging and kinetic. Simply put: they’re fun to watch.
Finally, the musical score, composed by David Fleming and John Murphy (both past collaborators of Gunn), adds emotional weight and momentum to the film. Their compositions effectively heighten both the action and more intimate, emotional moments. Most notably, the film makes use of John Williams’s iconic “Superman March” from the 1978 Superman, updated here for modern audiences. Its inclusion is triumphant and nostalgic, a rousing callback that earns its place in the score.
Unfortunately, despite its many strengths, Superman has its fair share of problems, most of which stem from its overall execution and creative direction. For starters, the film feels like an overt course correction from the DCEU era, particularly from the Snyderverse, and that overcorrection comes at a cost.
As many fans know, Superman’s character was a central figure in the Snyderverse, portrayed with gravitas and thematic weight under Zack Snyder’s direction. Whether one loved or loathed that interpretation, it was undeniably distinctive. Here, James Gunn makes a deliberate effort to distance his film from that tone, stripping away the somber, mythic elements in favor of something more lighthearted and accessible. The intention is clear, but the end result can be uneven. The tonal shift leans heavily into comic book whimsy, sometimes veering into Saturday morning cartoon territory. At times, this works well, capturing the spirit of old-school Superman charm. But other times, it borders on camp. Certain characters and sequences feel overly goofy, even for a superhero film, pushing past playfulness into outright silliness.
Gunn, as seen in his Guardians of the Galaxy films, has a knack for blending humor with heart. That signature style is present here too, but Superman occasionally stumbles under the weight of its own comedy. There are moments where the jokes undercut emotional beats, disrupting scenes that would’ve been stronger if allowed to breathe. It’s as if Gunn is trying a little too hard to endear his vision of Superman to audiences, at the expense of the deeper, more resonant storytelling the character deserves. Had this film been released in the early 2000s, it might’ve thrived. But in today’s cinematic landscape, where superhero films often carry more sophistication and layered nuance, it comes off as clumsy and unsure of its footing.
Another major issue is the film’s overstuffed narrative. To be fair, Gunn is shouldering a lot here, it’s the first entry in a new shared cinematic universe, and there’s considerable world-building to establish. But in trying to do so much at once, the film ends up rushing through story elements. Plot points are introduced rapidly, characters come and go without much development, and the pacing rarely allows time to let anything settle.
The Justice Gang is a prime example. While Mister Terrific (Edi Gathegi) gets some decent screen time, both Guy Gardner’s Green Lantern (Nathan Fillion) and Hawkgirl (Isabela Merced) are woefully underutilized. Their roles feel more like cameos than fully realized characters. Similarly, several Daily Planet characters feel flat, present, but with little to do beyond advancing the plot. Because this is the launching pad for a larger universe, Superman tries to cram in far too much lore and setup. The result is a film brimming with ideas but lacking the time or focus to explore them all meaningfully.
Additionally, the plot itself is messy and oddly structured. It almost feels like the movie begins in medias res, already knee-deep in this new world without offering proper orientation. While skipping the traditional Superman origin story is a smart move (we all know it by now), this “already in progress” approach makes the film feel more like a sequel than a proper introduction.
Important questions remain unanswered: Who exactly are these supporting characters? How did the Justice Gang form? Why is Lex doing what he’s doing? What’s the history between these figures? Gunn throws viewers into the deep end, but doesn’t always provide the context or clarity to keep them afloat. It’s disorienting. This easily could’ve been the second or even third film in this new universe—it certainly feels like we’ve missed a chapter or two.
Moreover, while Gunn tries to distance his Superman from past iterations, he still borrows heavily from them, sometimes too much. Lex Luthor’s endgame evokes Superman II (and Superman Returns), the emotional core of Jonathan and Martha Kent feels pulled from Man of Steel, while political tensions echo Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Even Jor-El’s cryptic message evokes Smallville. In trying to create a fresh new take, Gunn ends up cobbling together a patchwork of old ideas, some more effectively executed in previous incarnations. In the end, the story feels disjointed and overly ambitious. Trimming just a few elements might have allowed the rest of the film to shine brighter.
Thankfully, Superman’s cast helps smooth over many of the film’s rougher edges, with the ensemble clearly enjoying themselves as they breathe new life into these classic comic book characters. While some roles are underwritten or sidelined, the core cast still provides strong performances that carry Gunn’s superhero sandbox with energy and heart.
Leading the charge (quite literally) is David Corenswet as Clark Kent / Kal-El / Superman. Known for Pearl, We Own This City, and Twisters, Corenswet has a growing résumé but isn’t yet a household name, something this film is bound to change. It’s refreshing to see a relatively lesser-known actor step into such an iconic role without the baggage of preloaded expectations. While Superman is a character with immense legacy pressure, Corenswet approaches him with sincerity, portraying a more humanized and emotionally grounded version of the Man of Steel.
Yes, the powers are all there, but so are the vulnerabilities: frustration, doubt, and moral struggle. Corenswet captures these nuances beautifully, making Superman feel real and relatable. His arc is one of identity, of choosing who he wants to be and how the world sees him—which mirrors a universal truth. The only shortfall is the limited focus on Clark Kent’s everyday persona, which, given the film’s sprawling scope and world-building demands, is understandable, but still a missed opportunity. All said, Corenswet delivers a compelling, modern Superman who brings out the character’s humanity in ways that previous iterations often missed.
Opposite him is Rachel Brosnahan as Daily Planet reporter Lois Lane. A staple character in the Superman mythos, Lois has been portrayed by many actresses across generations, but Brosnahan, best known for The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, House of Cards, and Patriots Day, brings her own confident, charismatic energy to the role. She’s fierce, intelligent, and assertive, giving Lois a vibrant identity that fits well within the film’s tone. While the character isn’t deeply explored beyond her romantic and investigative roles, Brosnahan’s performance adds spark and chemistry to the screen.
Together, Corenswet and Brosnahan make a believable on-screen pair. Their dynamic feels natural, and their shared scenes help sell the emotional foundation of the film’s central relationship.
As for the film’s main antagonist, Nicholas Hoult takes on the role of Lex Luthor, CEO of LuthorCorp and Superman’s iconic nemesis. Known for Mad Max: Fury Road, Tolkien, and Nosferatu, Hoult is a versatile actor, and his portrayal here is energetic and theatrical, leaning into the comic book villain archetype with confidence. He’s clearly having fun with the role. That said, the characterization of Luthor comes across as overly petulant and immature at times, almost like a bratty genius rather than a menacing mastermind. His motivation against Superman feels vague and undercooked, which undercuts some of the character’s menace. Still, Hoult’s charisma elevates the role, and he stands as a solid fit for this universe, certainly stronger than Jesse Eisenberg or Kevin Spacey, even if he doesn’t quite reach the iconic heights of Gene Hackman or Michael Rosenbaum.
The supporting cast of metahumans—members of the Justice Gang, adds color and flair, though not all receive equal attention. Edi Gathegi’s Mister Terrific is easily the standout among them. Known for For All Mankind and X-Men: First Class, Gathegi brings charm, intelligence, and comic timing to the role, making Michael Holt a welcome presence. Nathan Fillion’s Guy Gardner (Green Lantern) is more comedic relief, brash and quippy in true Fillion fashion, but underused beyond his punchlines. Isabela Merced’s Hawkgirl unfortunately gets the shortest end of the stick, appearing only briefly and without much substance or impact. While Merced fits the role visually and gives a fine performance, the character lacks development. Hopefully future installments will expand her presence.
Outside the Justice Gang, the film introduces Metamorpho (Rex Mason), a shapeshifting metahuman played by Anthony Carrigan (Barry, Bill & Ted Face the Music). His role is brief but memorable, adding another layer of comic-book weirdness to the ensemble.
The Daily Planet staff rounds out the extended cast. Skyler Gisondo (Booksmart, Vacation) plays Jimmy Olsen, Clark and Lois’s close friend and photographer. He brings youthful energy and likability to the role, even if Jimmy’s arc is mostly functional. More disappointing, however, is the underuse of Wendell Pierce (The Wire, Suits) as Perry White. A fantastic actor in his own right, Pierce is barely given any material, and his presence feels more like a cameo than a meaningful role, which is a missed opportunity. Other Planet staffers, including Beck Bennett as Steve Lombard, Mikaela Hoover as Cat Grant, and Christopher McDonald as Ron Troupe, appear briefly and serve mostly as background color.
On the flip side, one of the more awkward supporting characters is Eve Teschmacher, Luthor’s assistant and girlfriend, played by Sara Sampaio (Carga, Shadow). While Sampaio does a decent job with the ditzy persona she’s given, the character herself feels shallow, clunky, and more annoying than engaging. Her scenes often detract from the tension rather than enhance it.
Rounding out the cast are Jonathan and Martha Kent, Clark’s adoptive parents, played by Pruitt Taylor Vince (Identity, Constantine) and Neva Howell (Mercy Street, Run the Race). While they lack the star power of Kevin Costner and Diane Lane from Man of Steel, Vince and Howell bring an authentic, heartfelt Midwestern warmth to their roles. Their scenes, though limited, are emotionally resonant and among the film’s most touching moments.
Finally, Bradley Cooper and Angela Sarafyan make brief appearances as Jor-El and Lara Lor-Van, Superman’s Kryptonian parents, appearing via a recorded message. Though small, their inclusion adds weight and legacy to Kal-El’s journey.
The remaining players, including actress Maria Gabriela de Faria (Deadly Class and The Exorcism of God) as deadly ally to Luthor Angela Spica / The Engineer, actor Zlatko Buric (2012 and The Triangle of Sadness) as Vasil Ghurkos, the President of Boravia, actors Terence Rosemore (Outer Banks and Rebel Ridge) and Stephen Blackehart (Brightburn and The Orville) as Luthor’s henchman Otis Burg and LuthorCorp scientist Sydney Happersen, actor James Hiroyuki Liao (Barry and The Dropout) as General Mori, and actor Frank Grillo (Warrior and Captain America: The Winter Soldier) as A.R.G.U.S director Rick Flag Sr. respectfully, make up the minor supporting characters. Most of these characters help frame the feature’s new cinematic universe and only have little bit spurts on-screen here and there. That being said, some of the acting talents is good and definitely fit into the movie, while others feel a bit overacting or stretching it, feeling too goofy. Additionally, there are several cameo appearances that appear in Superman, including some that will appear in other DCU films, so I won’t spoil them….just be on the lookout for them.
Lastly, the film does have two Easter Egg scenes during the end credits sequences, with one at the mid-credit point and one at the very end. While I won’t spoil the scenes, I will say that these are more “humorous” than plotting driven. So, don’t expect anything grand.
FINAL THOUGHTS
Caught in a mastermind plot by Lex Luthor to manipulate public perception, Superman centers on the Man of Steel’s struggle to prove to the world that he truly is the protector he claims to be. Director James Gunn reimagines the iconic character with his own distinctive voice, launching a bold new cinematic universe filled with humor, heart, and a colorful array of DC heroes and villains. The result? A film that’s as divisive as the fanbase surrounding it. On one hand, it succeeds through its lighter tone, vibrant visuals, and comic book sensibilities, bringing a refreshing charm to Superman’s cinematic return. On the other hand, it stumbles through narrative clutter, tonal imbalance, and the weight of trying to reboot a universe while distancing itself, sometimes too forcefully, from what came before. Gunn’s vision is ambitious, but at times, Superman feels more chaotic than cohesive. Personally, I found the film to be good, but not great. There are entertaining moments and flashes of brilliance, but it didn’t strike the same emotional or cinematic chord for me that Man of Steel did. Maybe it’s just a matter of taste. For me, Superman is like 2022’s Barbie: I completely understand why it resonated with so many, but I walked away feeling it was just okay, not something truly transcendent. That’s not to say Superman is a bad movie, it’s not. It’s simply one of those films that will spark debate. Some will love it for its heart and humor; others will critique its messiness and tonal shifts. It all depends on what you’re looking to get out of it. As such, my recommendation for this movie would a solid “iffy choice”. Still, despite my reservations, I’m intrigued to see where the DCU goes from here. This is just the beginning, and with multiple projects already in development, the foundation is laid for a new era of heroes to take flight. In the end, Superman stands as the first leap of faith in a larger journey. It may stumble and fall in its first steps, but dares to reforge a comic book legend, not with steel, but with humanity, color, and heart.
3.7 Out of 5 (Iffy Choice)
The Official Website for Superman Link: HERE
Released On: July 11th, 2025
Reviewed On: July 21st, 2025
Superman is 129 minutes long and is rated PG-13 for violence, action, and language
Related