“Superman” was written and directed by comic book movie veteran James Gunn, intended as the kick-off to his new DC Universe of film and television. David Corenswet stars as Clark Kent/Superman, the most powerful metahuman in a world of many — too many — metahumans. He faces off against tech billionaire Lex Luthor, who plots to destroy Superman’s reputation and eliminate him with the government’s approval. The movie features an enormous cast of side characters, including shapeshifter Metamorpho and the Justice Gang, a superhero team comprised of Mr. Terrific, Hawkgirl, and the Green Lantern Guy Gardner. Not to mention Superman’s super-powered dog Krypto.
If there’s anyone who desperately wanted to love this movie, it’s yours truly. I grew up on the DC animated shows like “Batman: The Animated Series” and “Justice League: Unlimited,” which spurred my love for storytelling and cinema. Reel Opinion would not exist if it weren’t for those wonderful DC characters and their exciting stories. Plenty of critics and fans have compared Gunn’s Superman film to those shows, and that comparison is completely inappropriate. Those shows were far more mature and character-focused than “Superman,” which I’m saddened to say is a mess. A mixed bag, one that has so much potential and reverence for the characters, but indulges in spectacle and accelerated pacing that ultimately makes for an overall enjoyable yet deeply flawed piece.
Starting with what works, David Corenswet as Superman and Rachel Brosnahan as Lois Lane are perfect casting. Ultimately, the main element this film had to get right was those two characters, and thankfully it succeeded with flying colors. Corenswet is easily the best Superman we’ve had since Christopher Reeve, one who takes us back to the hopeful, fun-loving, animal-saving hero with genuine decency. Corenswet’s Superman lives to protect people, always prioritizing the civilians in harm’s way over battling the foes. Plus, he looks and sounds exactly how one would expect from reading the comics; he’s also helped by having the best cinematic Superman suit yet. Likewise, I adored Brosnahan as Lois Lane. She nails the feistiness and boundless energy, and has great chemistry with Corenswet.
I also appreciated the genuine heart and soul of the film. This never felt like another one of the formulaic, corporate superhero flicks which plague movie theaters. The film emanates love for the source material, with a warmth and tone matching the titular character. There is an exception with the film’s horrific take on Superman’s parents, but I won’t delve into spoiler territory. Even with that asinine decision, you can feel Gunn’s encyclopedic comic book knowledge come through. There’s an excitement to the movie, as if made by someone who’s dreamt of making the film for decades. “Superman” explodes with energy, playing out as a series of wild adventures that make for a supremely entertaining experience. The action sequences are incredibly inventive and over-the-top. This is a roller coaster ride of a film sure to keep general audiences engaged.
Unfortunately, that fun time is accompanied by a sloppy screenplay which accomplishes the entertainment value through plot holes, rushed pacing, and an overwhelming number of characters, twists, and action sequences. I cannot emphasize this enough: the pacing is schizophrenic. Not a single moment is allowed to breathe. The film has an “and then, and then” structure that leaves no room for depth or meaningful emotion. We barely have any deliberate scenes of Clark and Lois in the Daily Planet office. Without sufficient downtime, we don’t get enough knowledge of Superman, and the narrative ultimately becomes shallow. This isn’t helped by the excessive number of characters, a result of Gunn’s indulgent love for ensembles. Superman is often pushed aside in favor of other heroes or creatures, namely the overused Mr. Terrific. This film should have been a straightforward, standalone Superman story smoothly introducing audiences into the new DC universe, but Gunn couldn’t resist his worst tendencies. He’s also too lazy to explain the backstories of many characters, assuming the audience doesn’t care. For instance, Metamorpho and his child pop up in the middle of the film and we never learn their origin. We never learn the backstory of Mr. Terrific, Guy Gardner, or Hawkgirl either.
Gunn also skips over massively important elements of Superman’s life. For instance, the film immediately starts with Lois knowing Superman’s secret identity and dating him. Why should we care about their relationship if we don’t know what inspired it? It’s less satisfying if we never see the build-up of Lois gradually discovering his identity. Likewise, why should we care about the Justice Gang or Metamorpho if we know so little about them? Gunn would likely say something along the lines of “We’ve seen enough origin stories” — a growing sentiment I despise — but knowledge of heroes’ origins and motivations are integral to superhero film storytelling. In large ensemble shows like “Justice League: Unlimited” with 50 characters, sure, you don’t require everyone’s origin, but live-action film is a different medium with different needs. Gunn’s indulgence and inability to leave behind his reliance on ensembles and chaos proves that, despite his clear love for the character, he was likely the wrong choice to direct a Superman movie.
The film’s problems don’t end with Gunn’s script. Firstly, Lex Luthor is a mediocre at best villain. Nicholas Hoult underwhelms in the role despite being a great actor. He has a screechy voice and immature demeanor; Lex should be the calm, quiet type, not the loud manchild. I also took issue with the technical team Gunn surrounded himself with. To put it bluntly, cinematographer Henry Braham is truly amateurish. The film has a gross greenish hue and frenetic, irritating camerawork. I actually found the CGI to look quite good, but it wasn’t helped by Braham’s incompetence. Likewise, John Murphy and David Fleming’s score was completely unremarkable, and this film would’ve massively benefited from superior music.
The majority of this review has focused on the negatives, but I want to emphasize that there was more to like than dislike in this film. I’m harsh because there’s so much potential and these characters are so precious to me. I expect the very best, and when I see flaws I have to point them out in extensive, critical detail. “Superman” doesn’t quite soar, but it does leap in a single bound.
C+