Review of the film Superman — a new path for the DC universe with a drinking Supergirl, an antisocial Green Lantern, and monkey hater-critics

Superman from James Gunn was very important for Warner Bros. Pictures. It’s the first movie in the new direction, and it’s about one of the flagship characters. No more misfits like those in The Suicide Squad — just grand, high-stakes heroism. Gunn promised many things, like bringing back Superman’s red trunks worn over the suit. But seriously, the film was meant to present not just another Kryptonian adventure, but a new face for the entire DC universe. We watched it, and our impressions are extremely mixed. Read on below.

In a recent interview, Gunn said he sees no point in rehashing origin stories for popular characters. Everyone already knows how Peter Parker, Bruce Wayne, or Tony Stark became who they are. Retelling the origin is a waste of runtime and tires the audience. So with Clark Kent, we meet him after he’s become a hero.

He’s already Superman, working at the Daily Planet, annoying Lex Luthor, and he’s already revealed his identity to Lois Lane — which is surprising, since the film states their relationship is only three months old. Clark has been heroic for three years, so he has plenty of enemies, but that doesn’t stop him. He seems willing to share his life story with anyone — a plot point even mentioned in the film. Alongside him: his dog Crypto; his cousin Supergirl (who drinks); personal robots in the Fortress; and a squad of allies including Green Lantern, Mister Terrific, and Hawkgirl. If that sounds like a mash-up of elements that could each carry their own film — you’re absolutely right.

The film’s overarching chaos is its driving force. Everything rushes, trying to cram in as much as possible, which is strange considering this Superman is intended to have a long future ahead in the studio’s and Gunn’s dreams. The late-meeting concept is overstated — many plot threads play out as if Superman is still unknown, with no reputation as Earth’s most powerful and dangerous man. Public opinion is undecided, Green Lantern, Terrific, and Hawkgirl treat him like an acquaintance, and Clark goes through an arc where the man in the S has to stop being reckless and become something more. Not very original — Man of Steel tackled similar themes, though in much darker tones.

The film begins with Superman intervening in a conflict between two neighboring Eastern European countries (supposedly). The fictional nations of Boravia and Jarhanpur speak for themselves. Boravia declares war on Jarhanpur over imagined terrorism. Superman deals with Boravia’s president — and their military hardware — then leaves. In retaliation, the Jarhanpuri government sends a metahuman to Metropolis, who confronts Clark with a fight that Superman loses — his first defeat.

Already, it’s clear: Gunn’s Superman isn’t the invulnerable godlike figure Henry Cavill portrayed. This new hero falls far too often. Sometimes this makes sense, but in others, it seems like a writer’s whim — Superman doesn’t even use heat vision or freeze breath until halfway through. It’s a controversial decision, but it humanizes him. Snyder set the bar so high that Clark’s invincibility in Justice League made all opponents feel trivial. Gunn lowers the stakes: his Superman is vulnerable, knows pain, and knows defeat. It makes him relatable.

The new costume works in much the same way. No matter how much they try to convince us, the outfit turned out to be quite controversial. The return of the classic red trunks is pure cringe — and it’s not even explained in any meaningful way. Though oddly enough, there is room in the script for a joke about hypnotic glasses that supposedly change Clark’s face. Compared to the Man of Steel version, the style here is looser and made of thick material that hides the Kryptonian’s muscular physique. This makes Clark appear more modest and natural. People don’t freeze up at the sight of bulging biceps and chiseled pecs. Here, he’s more man than steel.

There’s also a new variable that Snyder never used — the light of our native yellow Sun. In the previous version, Superman didn’t rely on it in any specific way, but now it’s the primary catalyst for his accelerated regeneration. If the alien is weakened by kryptonite and left in total darkness, then even after the effect wears off, he remains weak and sick. It’s an interesting twist that gives villains more options.

We also want to give credit to the lead actor. David Corenswet actually did well. His Superman is different from Henry Cavill’s version, but not better or worse — just different. Simpler, more alive — occasionally annoying, sometimes funny. If the Man of Steel Superman was a full-on demigod, fully aware of his alien nature, the 2025 version is first and foremost a man raised by ordinary farmers in Smallville. Perhaps the film’s biggest strength is how Gunn skillfully presents this contrast without spelling it out explicitly.

The main antagonist is Lex Luthor, portrayed by Nicholas Hoult. By the time the movie begins, he’s already the bald head of a powerful tech corporation — and he already hates the Kryptonian. Unfortunately, the character turns out rather weak. If you know anything about Lex Luthor, you know he’s supposed to be a highly complex villain, whose genius intellect and cunning help level the playing field against a god.

Over the years, Lex has had many motivations for hating Supes, but Gunn went with one of the most trivial. Hoult’s Luthor profits from war and fear, selling weapons and tech to whichever side pays more. Superman’s interventions disrupt the business. Toward the end of the film, Lex adds that Superman is too powerful for humanity and shouldn’t exist — but that’s practically at the finale. Immediately after that, he even cries — which completely breaks the image. For most of the runtime, the supposedly "great and terrible" Lex Luthor acts like an angry teenage brat and a cartoon villain whose only goal is to do something evil.

As per tradition, he’s backed by a team of highly skilled tech experts — none of whom ever question his leadership. Two intimidating henchmen — a female engineer made entirely of nanobots, and the silent Ultraman — exist solely to serve Lex unquestioningly. It’s all so basic and oversimplified that it’s surprising this movie with such villains is pulling box office numbers in 2025. They’re literal early-2000s superhero enemies.

Still, reviews say otherwise. Many viewers actually love the ‘90s cartoon vibe — where things were also straightforward and naive. We’re not in that camp, but we recognize that ours is just one opinion.

The irony is, Nicholas Hoult does a fantastic job. The young actor has had terrible luck landing huge, money-making roles that could ensure a wealthy retirement and eternal fandom love. You might remember him as Beast in the X-Men reboot that began with X-Men: First Class — and not much else. Hoult has auditioned for countless major parts, but always misses the mark.

Lex Luthor is his chance to go down in history as a phenomenal villain. The character has enormous potential, and Hoult tries to bring out every ounce of it — but sadly, the script holds him back. If Gunn plans to drop Lex and treat him as a one-off villain, that would be a huge mistake. Plus, Luthor’s supposed brilliance is never really demonstrated. His master plan is simple, even obvious — and only works because of dumb luck. His genius inventions feel like magic tricks, with none of the grounded engineering behind something like Tony Stark’s suit, which took time and sacrifice to build. Lex, on the other hand, has everything ready-made, from who knows where. And while he screams in the finale that his intellect is greater than Superman’s strength, the film never gives the audience any real proof. It’s frustrating to watch. Still, since the character survives, there’s hope for better development in the future.

The supporting characters range from genuinely great to completely forgettable. Lois Lane, portrayed by Rachel Brosnahan, is an absolute highlight of the film. She’s striking and charismatic, knows how to stand her ground and ask tough questions — but most importantly, she’s no longer the eternal damsel in distress. Finally, Superman’s companion doesn’t turn into a puddle just because a man in red trunks stands nearby. In fact, for most of the movie, Lois isn’t even sure dating Superman is a good idea. Of course, by the end she returns Clark’s affection, but it all happens much more naturally than in past iterations. Granted, it’s a bit odd that the characters are declaring their love after just three months of dating — but we’ll chalk that up to comic book movie conventions.

The rest of the characters popping in for cameos range from underdeveloped to outright pointless. Guy Gardner, the Green Lantern played by James Gunn’s longtime friend Nathan Fillion, is a strange mash-up of two clichés — the loudmouthed jerk and the arrogant show-off who still craves attention. Hawkgirl… well, she’s just there, flying around and screaming like a bird. Mr. Terrific, on the other hand, gets a bit more screen time — but not without problems.

First off, nobody knows who he is. While audiences may at least vaguely recognize Green Lantern and Hawkgirl from earlier appearances in different forms, the guy with a giant T glued to his face just looks… silly. In the comics, Terrific is a genius-level African-American polymath who essentially beat life before he even started school — winner of countless science awards, owner of a self-made fortune, and a master of a dozen martial arts. There’s just one issue: regular viewers don’t know any of that, and James Gunn doesn’t bother explaining it. Terrific simply exists in the film to do two things — help save Superman at a key moment and lend Lois his airship.

A funny little detail — Terrific fights using circular drones that fly and attack exactly like Yondu’s arrow from Guardians of the Galaxy. A self-referential Easter egg that flirts with self-plagiarism.

Gunn’s desire to introduce Superman and his new universe right from the start backfires on the supporting characters. Their presence, powers, and fan love are acknowledged — but the film itself does nothing to earn or build on that love. Worse, Superman’s companions tend to come off as crude or even dumb, which makes them more off-putting than endearing.

The other characters are even less developed. They exist only to fulfill specific story beats, and add nothing of substance to the overall experience.

As for the visuals and fight scenes — they’re decent. Since the first trailers, the visual effects have been noticeably improved. So even if most of the battles don’t blow your mind, they’re at least pleasing to watch. Toward the finale, though, Clark ends up in a bizarre Minecraft-like world with blocky particles in the river and equally square rocks — but the flying, effects, and action sequences are still well-executed. We only noticed a few overtly cartoonish moments, and even those were quickly hidden behind live-action characters as best as possible.

As for the humor — yes, it’s here. While James Gunn isn’t quite Taika Waititi, he does occasionally go overboard. A scene involving specially trained monkeys who work for Lex and post negative comments about Superman online? That’s definitely too much — a clumsy metaphor for real-life critics that comes off petty. Elsewhere, the jokes are fine and rarely annoying.

The overall tone of the movie is wildly different from anything DC has done before. The new Superman is bright, naive, and straightforward — a light, no-frills film. You could easily imagine it as part of early Marvel Studios, not the modern day but back in Phase One. Whether that’s good or bad is up for debate. Based on the positive reviews, both audiences and critics are happy. But we get the impression that Gunn took the path of least resistance — completely dissolving the identity of DC’s darker universe in favor of trend-chasing crowd-pleasers.

DC used to stand for something a bit more serious and grim than Marvel — but not anymore. What the new Batman will look like remains to be seen, but sadly, we expect more of the same. That said, we don’t doubt that Gunn will succeed in building a unified cinematic universe — it just won’t feel like the DC we used to know.

Superman (2025) is a light and arguably disposable summer blockbuster that demands absolutely nothing from its audience. Even if you don’t recognize all the characters, you’ll still follow the story just fine. The film is not bad — but it’s riddled with issues. Next to some strong heroes and fresh ideas sits a generic plot straight out of the early 2000s.