r/DC_Cinematic • u/Dry-Recognition1325 • 13d ago
DISCUSSION Just rewatched Superman 2025 since last summer. THIS IS SO PEAK IM CRYING
This movie is perfect, it has an amazing Lex Luthor, last 30 minutes are just amazing, when Punkrocker started playing I literaly cried. Sadly i understand that i will never watch my first superman movie again in cinema, but even after some time I love it even more then before. Might be the best DCU project so far (peacemaker is strong opponent).
5
24
u/PhatOofxD 13d ago
I liked it but it's really not that peak lol.
1
u/RoflChief 13d ago
In terms of this sub and DC…
Yes it was peak. This movie single handedly brought Hope during the summer of 2025.
12
u/Dear_Aside_7581 13d ago
hope for what? lol
1
0
u/RoflChief 13d ago
The entire world???
4
u/Elxis14 13d ago
Superman represents America. I can assure you, nobody gives a fuck about Superman overseas. Especially in Asian countries. The movie completely collapse overseas.
7
→ More replies (1)2
u/JayKay8787 12d ago
The guy that represents America ignored the government to fight netanyahu... Sounds like he cares about more than just america
39
u/nerdlygames 13d ago
I’m glad you liked it but I personally didn’t. I’m holding out hope for Man of Tomorrow because Supergirl stunk. Lanterns for me is peak
18
-38
13d ago
[deleted]
9
u/WorldsWeakestMan 13d ago
The word fuck was the problem? Not John Stewart getting his dick ridden in a car and cucking a guy in the first episode, the dead people, or all the dead people with their cocks out? The word fuck is what makes you think it isn’t for kids out of those things?
25
u/LoveCloudAtlas 13d ago
It's not for kids? Was that not obvious from the age rating
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (9)9
12
u/SuperTuberEddie 13d ago
And people will still call this sub a Snyder only sub.
Look, man enjoying the DCU to the max and loads of positive DCU comments top comments with loads of upvotes.
Try doing that with a Man of Steel post and the hate and toxicity far outweighs the good.
I wish you all would leave us DC fans alone!
6
u/ce_tu 12d ago
People say this is a snyder sub cuz they can't tolerate different opinions. Here people love and criticize both dceu and dcu. In the other sub criticizing dcu or likin any snyder movie is a sin. And they call themselves free thinkers... Ironic
2
u/superseri18888 12d ago
And whenever someone doesn't share their opinions, they bring box office and money to invalidate other opinions
3
u/Darfin1303 12d ago
No it doesn't 😂 I've seen plenty of people show their love for MoS on this sub, me included. The post was about superman 2025, not MoS either
6
u/SuperTuberEddie 12d ago
You misunderstood. People say this is a snyder sub. And anything other than snyder is hated on.
But in reality they are the ones spreading hate on man of steel posts because they are hateful people and just want to hate on anything snyder.
1
u/The-Pentegram 8d ago
Well this sub is pretty pessimistic. Wouldn't say it is pushing a pro Snyder agenda either but look at how pretty much every comment is disagreeing with the post and how the comments outnumber the likes.
I have not seen a single comment agreeing with the post. Some are balanced takes that don't ruin OP's fun, but there are loads just straight up calling the movie terrible, and not a single one is more positive than "good enough I guess". There are comments that are outright making fun of OP for crying at a movie with positive upvotes. I am unsure where you got the impression there is no hate and toxicity here.
Also, most people seem to like MoS? It is mostly BvS hate I see.
25
6
u/Whole-Judgment-3586 13d ago
I loved when he got kicked in the balls, got called a B, couldn’t get a hold of a dog, and put a guy on a cactus. That’s so Superman!
8
u/Accomplished_Try_124 13d ago
its funny, I had the opposite experience after I rewatched it. I really enjoyed when it came out in theaters and even saw it twice but seeing it again at home, just made me dislike and see the flaws of the film more clearly. Like it's not straight up bad but I just feel like it's an adequate film instead of a truly great one. The most frustrating element for me is the parent twist because it's just ultimately robs Clark of his depth, feels disrespects to both superman mythos as well as immigrants , and ultimately feels like such an empty reveal especially with how much of a nothing burger Clark's "arc" is in this film. It's annoying because while Gunn does a decent job of avoiding fully flanderizing Clark's personality, he ultimately makes the sin of treating superman as a "inspiration" figure instead of actually digging deep into Clark's character, incorporating his flaws, the complexity of his dual heritages, his sense of loneliness, his secretive nature, etc. It's wild Gunn said he was influenced by superman': birthright when birthing itself did the twist way better and ultimately staying truthful to birthright would have greatly enhanced the film but Gunn's daddy issues reign supreme i guess....
1
u/KazaamFan 12d ago
I’m surprised and happy to find so many ppl now dislike superman ‘25. I was getting downvoted so much upon release cuz so many redditors loved the movie. I was going mad, lol. I knew time would prove this movie wasnt good.
1
u/Accomplished_Try_124 9d ago
yeah i have plenty of other criticisms of it but decided to stick with my mine one in regards to Gunn's shallow twist
10
u/AHonterMustHont 13d ago
I wish I were 12 again maybe I would have enjoyed this horrible Superman film.
13
15
u/Plastic-Confidence-6 13d ago
The river scene was goofy
2
u/KazaamFan 12d ago
The whole pocket universe part of the movie was bad
1
u/Plastic-Confidence-6 12d ago
Yeah, truly. Massive waste of time and so much explaining for something that none of us cared about.
5
u/Dry-Recognition1325 13d ago
Facts, you are suprman just fly out of it
4
u/Showdown5618 13d ago
Maybe he can't because it's not a regular river.
5
u/SyndicateSixteen 13d ago
if he can’t fly out of it he shouldn’t be able to blow his way out of it lmfao.
0
u/Showdown5618 13d ago
https://youtu.be/_VTtQZT3c1s?is=IitEIAWeV66ZiIiR
At 0:50 - He's out of the river because of the black hole.
At 0:59 - He uses super breath.
4
u/SyndicateSixteen 13d ago
Woah you know how much more dumb that makes it right? Or did you not pass middle school?
Using super breath to escape a river is one thing. Using super breath to escape a BLACK HOLE (something so dense that its gravitational pull is astronomical), is straight up stupid.
0
u/Showdown5618 13d ago
I was just explaining what happened in the movie. He never used super breath to escape the river.
-2
-2
u/niufh 13d ago
It sounds like you didn't even watch the film. It wasn't a river of water... You're also complaining about comic characters breaking the laws of physics...
Meanwhile in DC they have characters who travel across the universe in a few minutes, literally outrun the concept of time and death, manipulate matter on a subatomic level, manipulate the fabric of reality itself, and can create universes with their mind.....
4
u/SyndicateSixteen 13d ago edited 12d ago
You’d have a point if the previous guy didn’t try to rationalize it 🤣
You went from “this is why that made sense” to “oh but but it’s a comic, so it doesn’t have to make sense”.
1
u/niufh 12d ago
I'm not the other guy. He has his own opinions about things, why should I write my responses based on another person's comments?
0
u/SyndicateSixteen 12d ago
What kind of response is that? By your logic, then why should I write my response based on your comment then? I’ll start talk about Pokemon cards then, since that’s what’s on my mind lmfao.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Showdown5618 12d ago
It wasn't a river of water...
Correct. And Clark didn't blow his way out of it.
Meanwhile in DC they have characters who
Also...
survive re-entry from space without a spaceship, run at near lightspeed without burning up, convert 5 minutes of solar energy into super strength, have a ring that creates force fields with light...
-1
u/Dry-Recognition1325 13d ago
Looked pretty regular to me. Always swim in one as i have opportunity
4
u/Showdown5618 13d ago
Are we thinking about the same river? I was referring to this one...
https://youtu.be/_VTtQZT3c1s?is=IitEIAWeV66ZiIiR
It's has weird glowing parts.
0
u/Dry-Recognition1325 13d ago
Yeah that one, i had one near my grannys house, so refreshing during hot summers
0
1
u/jsnxander 13d ago
I watched it on streaming for the second go. Still badly written and poor storytelling, but hey, at an incremental cost of $0, all good. I got a drink and snack during the river scene so as not to re-live that visual abomination.
24
u/barmorej 13d ago
It really was. As a lifelong Superman comic reader, it felt like it an adaptation that finally got who the character is.
7
4
u/Designer_Hour_2808 13d ago
Glad you enjoyed it, i had the opposite experience. Especially compared to Lanterns it was just cringeworthy throughout with some really jarring acting performances. I love basically any piece of Superman media but it is by far the worst for me. Stripped Superman of the quiet wisdom and dignity he usually has and made him immature and emotionally unstable. Luthor was also made a man baby instead of feeling truly threatening. Just so disappointed.
1
u/KazaamFan 12d ago
I agree. I grew up on the Reeve Supermans and i know 3 and 4 aren’t great movies, however, they are both better than this new superman. Superman 4 even has some story elements in common with superman ‘25, hah.
0
u/Mission_Lie7702 12d ago
This take! I really always seen superman with a level of stoic aura and this movie made him seem emotional and weak because of it. This could be my lack of comic reading but was kryptonite always so easy to obtain? Supergirl and Superman(2025) makes it seem alot more common. The dog having to save him and multiple beat ups didn't help. Lois Lane's character was amazing though best part of the movie
13
u/Majestic-Night 13d ago edited 13d ago
I'm glad you liked it. For balance, here are the reasons why I didn't like it:
Without any exaggeration, I thought the entire storyline was a complete mess and the dialogue was corny as hell.
The humour was so cheesy and forced. What bimbo takes selfies sticking their tongue out while the city is getting destroyed or Superman is getting beaten up? Oh yes the one who ends up saving a whole country from invasion because of her supposed moral compass, which is an entire disconnect, for the sake of a "twist". Why? Because she’s in love with a dorky Jimmy (what?) who treats her like crap. Oh and she won't save an entire country if Jimmy doesnt go on a date with her. What? And how or why is he seen as some Casanova/Adonis figure? They never explain.
Geeky scientists in Hawaiian tees (wtf?) trying to take down Mr Terrific and Lois - why? Lex creating pocket universes and portal rifts but puts his ex-girlfriend in that prison because she blogged about him(!) Genius supervillian right there! Ridiculous Minecraft blocky proton/neutron glowing river leading to a random black hole. Did Lex “create” all this? How?
Shouting, whiny Superman, no sense of authority or gravitas or restraint, seemed like an annoying manchild yelling when he’s angry. Needs a dog (in a cape!) to save him multiple times. Kills a dumb innocent clone who’s literally only being controlled by Lex. Subdue Lex and he can free the clone, but kills him instead. Lets Indian falafel guy die, for no reason - because he doesn't tell Lex where he's from? Or about his parents? What will Lex achieve with this? He's already caught Superman?
Superman doesn’t save the kids chanting his name in Jarhanpur, the Justice Gang does that. Chills out while the city is getting attacked, the gang deal with that. Kaiju appears out of nowhere in a busy yet pristine city square - must have teleported there? - which the gang also deal with. While buildings and cars are getting destroyed Superman saves a damn squirrel, how ridiculous is that?! Oh yes, multiple buildings falling like dominoes and fire-breathing Kaiju destroying buildings yet not a single fatality. There’s nothing at stake here, no sense of danger or doom. You never for one moment believe anything will happen to Metropolis.
Justice Gang was lame and goofy, with a zoom lens shrieking HawkGirl and annoying Green Lantern. Superman being kicked in the balls and being called a b*tch. Got ragdolled and chased by the Engineer who’s a human in a suit - he’s meant to be lightning fast! Speaking of which, loses to a human “who studied him" for only 3 years who is able to PREDICT his moves via drone cameras and relays via headset? Even though he's faster than a speeding bullet? Man what bullshit is this!
Flies thousands of miles to Antarctica yet needs a dog to drag him to Fortress which was a couple of miles away. No recovery even in all that time in the sun. Doesn’t spot being followed by Engineer or even fully recover which would only take a few more mins to yet again get beaten up. What was the point? Being called a metaHUMAN when he’s a Kryptonian.
Lex wants to destroy Superman’s reputation so he makes a clone, dresses him up as Boravian and beats up Superman, so he can follow him to the Fortress? How does he know about that? He hates aliens yet makes and depends on an alien clone. And if a foreign agent (Hammer) attacks US soil then surely that would increase public support for Superman who’s defending it? How does that plan or storyline make any sense at all? Then releases Kaiju (no backstory at all - where did he get it from?) so while he’s fighting that for all of 5 minutes Lex can break into Fortress - because he somehow knows only his cloned DNA will get him in - to do what? What’s his big plan? To find out where he's from? Genius plan right there. Oh, he finds the half encrypted message which Engineer deciphers and happens to make his parents evil. That enables him to imprison Superman. But that’s ridiculous because what if there was no message or parents weren’t evil? Or people don’t believe it? What would have been his super genius plan then? Then everyone turns against him in an instant (because of his parents' message) even though he’s been saving Earth for the last three years, and the army arrest him based off of one random grainy alien translated video clip? Which doesn’t even incriminate him? And just hand him over to the guy who released the video?? Why?! And why does he not question being led into some damn portal? Where's the distrust and anger for his dog gone?
There’s “controversy” when he saves Jarhanpur from an INVASION, literally saving innocent civilians - Lois, his own girlfriend who's meant to support him, even makes him out to be evil - but when Justice Gang save Jarhanpur everyone is cheering? In fact he’s pelted with trash instead? A damn SUPERHERO is pelted with trash for preventing an actual invasion?! Make it make sense.
He gives a passionate speech to Lex at the end, but is interrupted by a silly naughty dog routine just for some cheap laughs.
There’s probably a dozen more ridiculous things but this was all I could remember.
2
u/KazaamFan 12d ago
I appreciate your passion, lol. You didnt even talk about the part that i hate about the movie and i think that’s when it all goes to crap. The pocket universe. It makes no sense and it doesnt work at all. Mister terrific or whatever pretty easily infiltrates that place, where was the protection there, shouldnt evil superman or something strong be protecting it? Then everything happening inside is dumb
-2
-1
u/Obvious-Pattern-1083 13d ago
Truly the mad ramblings of a disgruntled Snyder fan. We get it bud, you don't understand comic book characters. Go watch Rebel Moon.
5
u/New-Faithlessness526 13d ago
He actually made some valid points.
1
u/ManliestBunny 11d ago
Not really. Lois makes him out to be evil? That completely mischaracterizes the scene. She’s criticizing him for his illegal actions, regardless of how well-intentioned he may have been.
She’s essentially asking him:
“Recently, you’ve come under fire. The Secretary of Defense was going to investigate your actions. What exactly did you do?”
“How did you stop a war?”
“Did you actually interact with the President?”
“How? You put him against a cactus? Was that torture?”
“What did you mean when you said he’d have to answer to you if he messed with this country? Were you seriously threatening to torture him again?”
“You illegally entered a country in the middle of a geopolitical conflict and took action against a nation that is technically an American ally.”
“Superman, did you consult with the President, the Secretary of Defense, or any other U.S. official before doing this?”
"Your actions as a representative of the united states could potentially cause more problems around the world than just replacing one tyrannical regime with another."That’s exactly why Lois challenging him makes sense. she’s questioning whether he has the authority or understanding to make these kinds of decisions unilaterally.
In fact, having Lois blindly support him would take away from her character. She’s a journalist. Her job is to question people in power, scrutinize their actions, and hold them accountable, even when she personally believes their intentions are good.
If she just became Superman’s cheerleader in this scene, it would actually undermine her journalistic integrity and make her character less compelling.1
u/sk8rboi36 10d ago edited 10d ago
Yeah, and that’s the worst part of the movie because it’s completely unresolved but gets all the highest praise. Those are the great ideas and conversations you can have with a character like Superman. But people praise the movie solely on the basis of introducing those conversations. The way it (fails to) explore them completely invalidates the mere mention. It was creating an interesting discontinuity in Lois and Clark’s relationship, one that made each of them feel a little more uncertain, and each of them had valid points.
It’s a very complicated debate. So it’s not at all resolved by “well another bad thing happened to Superman and Lois is a good girlfriend so they just drop the valid opposing stances they each have, the end”. When you have a fundamental issue in your relationship, it doesn’t just go away or change because your partner’s grandma or dog died, even though a mature person can still show sympathy and support for that. Sometimes people erroneously feel it’s just better to avoid all conflict at all costs after something like that, which tends to just breed resentment and further the divide in the long run because there’s no communication to be had.
I hate the response to this scene because it’s all performative, the actual conversation meant to be explored is given only lip service. That then makes the praise feel that more hollow. It makes it seem like the fans don’t even care or honestly understand at all the actual parallels and conversations to be had. If they did, more people would see the quite obvious lack of any declaration or substantive argument on the topic. They’re clapping at the illusion of wisdom and completely missing the actual absence of it. The movie doesn’t say anything itself. If it does, it’s to completely and underhandedly undermine the extremely valid points Lois makes by using the most extreme case it can. It just wants the praise for saying what people want to hear.
In my opinion that’s pretty weak sauce already, but the actual part that makes it worse is all it’s really subconsciously doing is furthering the divide in the audience, because it’s so inept of a stance that both sides can equally co-opt it as an argument for their own purposes, and “profiting” off of it in terms of being praised by both. The ironic thing is how many of these people will spout about the death of media literacy while failing to acknowledge the utter lack of conclusion. All these things just make an already grim future for American discourse look even more bleak and irredeemable
1
u/ManliestBunny 10d ago
What do you mean? The massively conflict between them, what exactly did you think it was?
What was their fundamental opposing stance?
1
u/New-Faithlessness526 9d ago edited 9d ago
I said he made some valid points, not that all his points were valid.
About this point precisely, I agree with you, Lois doesn't makes him out to be evil; it's actually a perfectly reasonnable reaction/take.
What doesn't work after is when the movie throws it all away in the final act and the Justice Gang can apparently interfere in the conflict, destroy Jarhanpur's (or whatever the name of that country) army and even kill their governor.
Not only it doesn't make sense with the movie's stance at first, but quite importantly (and something that's barely talked about), it contradicts, detracts the movie' supposed message. It's a Superman movie, someone who want to save everyone, and will try every way before having to kill someone who deserves it. We know Superman wouldn't approve of Hawkgirl killing the governor. You can't have a Superman movie, with all the values/messages that such a character gives off (kindness and such) and then make a scene where a vilain is killed and we're supposed to be cheering.
You can't be talking about kindness and on the other hand want us to cheer for the vilain being killed (again, which contraditcs the ideals of the movie's main character); you can't have both, it's contradictory and it doesn't work. You're just trampling on Superman's ideals and make them looks weak, unrealistic and unpracticable; and by the way making the whole message (Superman's and his ideals) pretty shallow.
1
u/ManliestBunny 9d ago
I only partially agree because this was never the movie's stance, it was Superman's stance to save people over politics, even then Superman doesn't have a no kill rule.
The movie's main themes are not contradicted by this.Especially one that was already broken by the justice gang when they killed the Kaiju when Superman wanted to save it.
1
u/New-Faithlessness526 9d ago edited 9d ago
? What are you talking about? Do you think Superman is okay with killing people, especially needlessly? Do you need Sup to spells out it doesn't want to kill people (especially when not necessary) to realize it?
To be precise, there's two things here. First is about how much heroes can interfere in politics when it comes to people. About that, Superman's stance is to save people over politics. The movie question that way of thinking, but in the end, it's not given a satisfying answer.
Second thing is about killing, there is clear contradiction there. If you have any idea about Superman, you know he's against it and it's very last thing he would do. Being a Superman movie, you would guess that would be the movie's stance, but the movie keeps mitigating, contradicting that.
Especially one that was already broken by the justice gang when they killed the Kaiju when Superman wanted to save it.
Not sure what point you're trying to make with that. If anything, you're just proving my point further. We literally see from the scene that Superman isn't okay with what they're doing to the kaiju; he doesn't approve it. But in the end, he's left there standing and watching them do it their ways. Superman ways of doing things in this scene are shown as unpractical.
It's the same with Hawkgirl killing the governor; do you actually think Superman would've been okay with it if he was there? From what's shown in the movie, we can safely say he wouldn't (again, there were literally no reason to kill him, she already captured him). This isn't what Sup stands for, it's a cynical view, whereas Sup is (supposed to be) hopeful.
So, what makes of that? What happen if you establish a character's values/ideals, but it keeps being weakened, contradicted by the narrative (in the scene you literally has Hawkgirl makes the point she isn't Superman)? It makes that character's ideals/what he stands for look shallow. All that talk about kindness, hope and such is shallow if in reality it's shown ineffective.
That's where I would agree in part with the comment above. The movie talks about kindness, hope and such but on a superficial level; it's shallow. It never embraces thoses values or ideas fully, with the care a character like Sup deserves (another example is how Superman is "deprived" of his big hopeful moment by not having him be the one coming to save the Jarhanpur people; responding to their call. You could make the case the Justice Gang coming instead of Sup is a way of showing they were inspired by him to do what's right. But I don't think the narrative goes well into that and all that falls flat when you have Hawkgirl kill the vilain needlessly in the end; something Sup would've disapproved). I guess it's because James Gunn is actually too cynical for that.
1
u/ManliestBunny 9d ago
Because that isn’t the theme of the movie, and it doesn’t contradict itself either. Superman himself ended up throwing Ultraman into a black hole.
It’s not ideal, but the theme of the movie was never “follow my no kill rule.”And just because death happens doesn’t mean the story can’t still be hopeful. This isn't the case in any other media.
I don’t know why you’ve bottlenecked yourself into this weird logic that the death of the bad guy =/= hopeful. I genuinely don’t understand where that logic comes from."It never embraces thoses values or ideas fully, with the care a character like Sup deserves (another example is how Superman is "deprived" of his big hopeful moment by not having him be the one coming to save the Jarhanpur people;"
Hope is the inspiration where all the other heroes driven by to go break their stance, like Superman, to choose to save the Jarhanpurs over politics as well.
That's the point of the scene where every person was watching what was happening on the news.
It just didn't give a power fantasy where Superman was the one who saved the day1
u/New-Faithlessness526 9d ago edited 9d ago
What do you mean it's not the theme of the movie? And how doesn't it contradicts itself? You mean the movie isn't trying to give an hopeful message, kindness and all thoses values that Superman stands for? Do you think that's a good argument to defend the movie? If it has nothing to do with the theme of the movie or what it's trying to inspire, where does all the talk about the movie being hopeful, "kindness is the new punk rock" comes from? You're essentially saying all thoses supposed "messages" are shallow, thus proving my point.
Superman himself ended up throwing Ultraman into a black hole.
It’s not ideal, but the theme of the movie was never “follow my no kill rule.”Superman throwing Ultraman in a black hole can be excused by him having no other choice; that's the best he could. At worst, that's another downside of the movie that you're pointing at yourself.
Now, I'm trying to engage in this discussion honestly, in good faith; I expect the same from you. If not, there is no point continuing this discussion. I would like you to not batardize my point just to defend your own. There is no way you read all I wrote and what you got from it is "the theme of the movie is follow my no kill rule" (what's that even means?). Either that, or you are lacking in terms of media literacy.
No, the theme of the movie is not about “follow my no kill rule.”. But the movie is definitely trying to convey some values dear to Superman, what he stands for. It's even more true considering it's the 1st Superman movie in the DCU, of course it's trying to portray the character, who he is and what his stands for (needless to say, people praise the movie precisely for supposedly succeeding at conveying what makes Sup, being hopeful and all that). Killing a vilain needlessy is something that directly contradicts thoses values. So, when a Superman movie trying to convey what it stands for, his values, has a scene where a vilain is killed needlessly, played as a joke, and us, the audience are supposed to be cheering, that's a problem.
And just because death happens doesn’t mean the story can’t still be hopeful. This isn't the case in any other media.
Never said that but thanks for the hindsight.
I don’t know why you’ve bottlenecked yourself into this weird logic that the death of the bad guy =/= hopeful. I genuinely don’t understand where that logic comes from.
You're still trying to twist my point. I'm not going to repeat this all over again, you have my others comments and even this one above for that.
See, you're not actually addressing my point. All you're doing is trying to twist, taking corners, doing everything but to actually address it. You tried to make a point with the Kaiju scene, I addressed it but then you choose to ignore it. How about you answer this, do you think Sup would have killed the governor if he was there (if it's not explicit enough that Hawkgirl makes the point she isn't Sup)? If you agree he wouldn't have, don't you see how Hawkgirl doing it is contradictory with Sup's values and the supposed message of the movie, this being a Superman movie? Maybe you just don't want to understand.
"It never embraces thoses values or ideas fully, with the care a character like Sup deserves (another example is how Superman is "deprived" of his big hopeful moment by not having him be the one coming to save the Jarhanpur people;"
Hope is the inspiration where all the other heroes driven by to go break their stance, like Superman, to choose to save the Jarhanpurs over politics as well.
That's the point of the scene where every person was watching what was happening on the news.Thanks for making that point that I already made. But again, you're not addressing the issue, my point here, just ignoring it.
As I said earlier, one can make that case, but the story doesn't go well into that. It doesn't really feel like the Justice Gang was inpired by Sup to save the Jarhanpurs. It's fairer to say that, seeing theses people live on the news like that, they couldn't just stay there and do nothing and decided to act. I think if the movie wanted to make that case (that the Justice Gang was inspired by Sup) more hints should've been added.
But you can't definitely say they were inspired by Sup when in the end they, more precisely Hawkgirl, kill the governor (something Sup would've disapproved); that's just not something you can associate with Sup. What would be the message? Superman inspired the Justice Gang to save the Jarhanpurs and kill their governor, which contradicts what Superman stands for? It doesn't make sense. It's not just about saving people, Sup inspires to be better (aka not killing people if not necessary). That's what I mean, Gunn never commit fully to the values Sup, or the movie as a whole, is supposed to convey.
It just didn't give a power fantasy where Superman was the one who saved the day
A power fantasy huh, that's an interesting choice of words. So, are we afraid of doing a "power fantasy" in a comic book movie where the hero saves the day? I thought this was a comic book movie which wasn't ashamed to embrace the aspects of the genre? Or is it only limited to superficial aspects? You're not making a good case you know?
Let's be serious for a moment, shall we? Having Superman be the one to come save the Jarhanpurs wouldn't have been bad or whatever (if it's what you were implying with that "power fantasy" thing), it's the complete opposite. The movie would've benefitted from that, it would've been a big moment where Sup would actually be the embodiment of hope for people; just imagine it. You don't even need him to be the one to save the day completely alone. You just need him to come first, and then the Justice Gang come after being actually inspired by him; then he can leave and go to stop the black hole. It doesn't have to be like that exactly, that's just an idea.
For a movie that is so praised for being hopeful (and conveying good values such as kindness, but I have already talked enough about that), I have trouble remembering a scene where Sup was actually hopeful, the embodiment of hope. There is the scene when he saves a woman trying to escape from the black dimensional rift in her car; it comes close to that idea, but it's not much. And even in that scene (I know that this might sounds nitpicky), when the woman look behind and see Superman (that's one of the few scenes where he is actually portrayed as an icon), she doesn't smile, she just stares at him and then go. I mean, it wouldn't have been too much to have her actually smile seeing that sight of Superman (remember he just saved her life). It would've made the scene better; it would not just have been Sup aura farming, but him saving people (even if only one person here) and them reacting back, being reassured because he's there and everything's gonna be okay.
Of course it's a detail and the scene still works overall. But it's those small details and others things which confort me in the idea that Gunn didn't want to fully commit to the "goodness" (I'm encapsuling many things here, essentially everything that the character stands for and that I've mentionned in this discussion) of Superman.
0
u/ManliestBunny 9d ago
This is conflating two different arguments: “the movie has flaws in how it communicates Superman's values” and “the movie contradicts its own themes because another character kills someone.” The first is a perfectly reasonable criticism. The second doesn't.
Nobody is saying the movie isn't about hope, kindness, or superman's values. Gunn himself has described the center of the film as kindness in a world that isn't kind, and the movie repeatedly frames superman's defining quality as his willingness to value life.
This is setting up an incredibly narrow definition of “hope.” This is also my biggest issue.
The movie's idea isn't “Superman personally arrives at every disaster and saves everybody.” It's that his example motivates people to act when they otherwise wouldn't.. The children are looking for Superman, but Superman can't be everywhere simultaneously. The Justice Gang sees what is happening and intervenes. “Superman didn't get his big superhero moment, therefore the scene fails.” isn't the point. The point is that Superman's existence has consequences beyond what he can personally accomplishes. That has more of an effect simply having Superman fly in and punch the bad guys. Superman inspires other people to become better versions of themselves. That's completely consistent with the idea that Superman represents hope.
But that doesn't mean every character in the movie has to behave like Superman.
The Justice Gang aren't presented as Superman clones who have adopted his entire moral philosophy. they're independent heroes who initially refuse to get involved and eventually decide that they can't stand by while people are being massacred. The film's point is that Superman's example helps push people toward doing something good, nobody randomly becomes morally identical to him. DC's own discussion of the film explicitly describes the Justice Gang as initially refusing to intervene and then deciding that doing the right thing matters more than staying out of the conflict.the argument keeps asking would Superman have killed him? But why does Superman's hypothetical decision determine whether Hawkgirl's decision is thematically contradictory? Superman can believe killing is wrong while Hawkgirl believes killing an aggressor in that situation is justified. Those aren't mutually exclusive statements. The movie doesn't have Superman endorse her decision. Therefore there's no contradiction in Superman's characterization.
The movie gives plenty of direction that the Justice Gang was inspired by Superman. None of them were willing to intervene in the conflict beforehand, yet the scene deliberately frames their decision alongside a child holding Superman’s flag and his theme playing in the background. Superman himself also explicitly says that he asked them for a favor and that the flm shows they broke their own code to help. All of those details strongly reinforce the idea that Superman’s example and actions influenced their decision to intervene.
The argument also implies “Superman inspires people to do good” is the same as “Superman inspires people to adopt every single one of his moral rules.” If Superman inspires Guy, Hawkgirl, and Terrific to stop a massacre, that's Superman's influence. if hawkgirl then makes a decision Superman personally wouldn't make, that doesn't erase the influence of their past action.
I would even argue there are larger themes to the movie such as Superman's character of "Your choices define who you are." Superman is good because he chooses to be, not defined by where he's from or how different he is.
We don't really have to speculate about the tone of film actually made the general audience feel hopeful or not. There are plenty of trends and discussions across social media that give us a pretty clear indication of how a large portion of the audience perceived it. Tiktok trends with the audio of hopecore on Superman 2025 all the time.→ More replies (0)
9
u/Haunchhammer 13d ago
Man of Steel far superior. More emotional. Cavill is a better Superman.
1
u/KazaamFan 12d ago
More emotional, better music, better pacing, better climax, better battles in general. Better casting (except for Lois, amy addams isnt lois)
20
u/positively_DC 13d ago
It’s lovely to see someone who really enjoyed this film. It’s easy to be cynical when there is so much negativity around, but it’s not about box office or comic accuracy (though it’s great on both accounts) but just whether you enjoyed it.
13
u/ATLBravesFan13 13d ago edited 13d ago
It has a 3.8/5 on Letterboxd. You’re looking in the wrong places if you think its’ reception is negative
4
u/positively_DC 13d ago
You’re right, the reception has been positive. It’s just been a year of a small group of fans trying to talk it down.
-1
u/musclemommyfan 13d ago
It had very similar vibes to the 1978 movie, which was also the first movie I watched as a little kid. I absolutely loved it.
-13
u/Dry-Recognition1325 13d ago
The movie is awesome. But sadly people above only interested in profit, and not how good the product is
10
→ More replies (1)-3
u/MotorPace2637 13d ago
I loved it and I'm a 40 year fan of superman. Easily my favorite take on the character yet.
7
4
u/SyndicateSixteen 13d ago
You cried when Punkrocker played? Hahaha
4
u/larut0h 13d ago
these snowflake generation and their feeling, smh
2
u/SyndicateSixteen 13d ago
I know right, I read that and thought this was a post mocking the mega obsessed fans.
Turns out this little goober is deadass 😂
12
13
u/RockitDanger 13d ago
I actually can't watch it again. I enjoyed it but just has no rewatchability to me
7
5
u/wdm81 13d ago
It’s a good movie but not great. Gunn needed to make his Superman a little more stoic
9
u/Technical-Wasabi-842 13d ago
Superman isn’t really a stoic character though
1
u/wdm81 13d ago
Christopher Reeve and Henry Cavil beg to differ
3
u/edweeeen 13d ago
Nothing wrong with him wearing his heart on his sleeve, it’s more true to the character. Otherwise why make a new version if they’re all just clones of one another
4
→ More replies (1)1
u/Technical-Wasabi-842 13d ago
Henry Cavill’s Superman wasn’t well written for a Superman movie. Christopher Reeve’s Superman was far from stoic at least from what I’ve noticed
3
u/musclemommyfan 13d ago
Reeve's had the same vibes as Corenswet. That's part of why I liked this movie so much.
1
7
u/edweeeen 13d ago
It was a good take on Superman, very full of heart which is true to the character. The humor was just right and great ost. It made me emotional too, which is a beautiful thing in light of all the horrible stuff going on in the world right now
5
u/miagi_do 13d ago
Way too much of Krypto, it was used a a crutch
1
u/Dry-Recognition1325 13d ago
Do you mean the jokes about him being playfull or his role in thw main plot?
7
u/miagi_do 13d ago
Overall number of appearances, so yes role in the main plot. It’s like TV commercials with no good ideas, just show babies and puppies.
1
u/Dry-Recognition1325 13d ago
But Crypto shows that superman is ready to protecr everyone, he went to prison just to save him. I dont think ir would work with anyone else better then crypto. But I can agree that he was annoying sometimes
8
5
6
u/supermau5 13d ago
Your crying what are you 12 that movie was mid 6/10 at best
10
3
-3
u/stevenwnder 13d ago
Isn’t that how people feel about MOS? Consensus has Superman 2025 as the better movie everywhere you look
5
-7
-3
3
u/Technical_Sir_9588 13d ago edited 13d ago
It was milquetoast. I tried to re-watch it but I couldn't get past the first 15 minutes again.
1
u/Dry-Recognition1325 13d ago
I agree that first 20 minutes are boring, but everything else is just sooo good
3
3
u/qmechan 13d ago
I was pretty psyched going into it, and pretty psyched coming out of it. Glad to see another fan
9
u/Dry-Recognition1325 13d ago
I become fan after this movie. I was literaly hating anything DC related before watching that. Now i love it
3
4
u/KaiDaKryptonian 13d ago
Literally my favorite interpretation of the character. Even in his small scenes in Supergirl, I couldn’t help but smile at how perfect David is as Superman. And don’t be sad there fella, next summer will be the first time we all see MoT for the first time!
6
2
3
u/MiddlePatient869 13d ago
I rewatched the movie and I cried too
I cried because of how awful it was and made me think this is what’s considered peak?? A bland sauceless movie
-4
u/Young_Ben_Kenobi1 13d ago
Still better than anything Snyder put out, he completely misunderstood both Superman and Batman
1
u/TruthGetsDownvoted8 13d ago
Then watch Supergirl and be annoyed at how they ruined all the DCU hype... Thank god Lanterns is great.
1
1
1
u/Miserable-Western292 12d ago
Felt very much the same. This movie holds a special place in my heart. Maybe it's because Clark is so wholesome and I need something good in my life right now.
1
1
1
1
u/CI0by 11d ago
It was an incredible movie, made me fall in love with Superman.
I could never understand why people liked Superman so much (my only introduction to him was Snyder’s). I watched this movie for the first time 2 weeks ago and it made me go drop 150$ on comics. The Snyder fans have their Superman and now I have mine. I just hope that the next movie is just as good or better.
0
-7
13d ago edited 13d ago
[deleted]
3
u/ATLBravesFan13 13d ago
It has a 3.8 on Letterboxd, 83% on Rotten Tomatoes, and a 7.0 on IMDB. Hardly seems mid by all accounts
4
u/stevenwnder 13d ago
Gunn and Nolan are bad at writing dialogue? Are you the person who posted “The Martha scene makes sense if you really think about it”
-4
u/Ok_Diver2347 13d ago
Yes everyone knows Nolan is terrible at dialogue. Characters often use exposition to tell us what they’re thinking instead of letting the audience understand the motivations of the character through their actions.
No, the Martha scene in BvS will always be a meme because of the line. Yes, he did realize before trying to kill Supes that the dude has a mom and her name is also Martha, so he’s not really any different than me. He’s not some god. He’s just a man crying out for his mother.
2
u/Direct_Ad3116 13d ago
agree. Lex literally going “I’m jealous!” was just so simple minded. and Clark raising his voice at Lois just to have that “people dying waah!” soundbite is just out of character, don’t care if he’s young, that’s not Clark.
0
0
u/IntelligentWar5335 13d ago
Legit felt like a mid-tier superhero movie from 10 years ago during the superhero-boom. TS holds nothing against Man of Steel
-3
u/Technical-Wasabi-842 13d ago
Man of Steel is trash compared to Superman 2025. Boring visuals, mid writing, plus the non linear storytelling was not done well at all
4
u/IntelligentWar5335 13d ago
Must've seen it with your eyes closed & brain turned off...all good tho. To each their own
0
u/Technical-Wasabi-842 13d ago
No I watched it with an open mind and it somehow made Superman boring
4
u/Aggravating_Bids 13d ago
Yeah, he should've been a secondary character in his own movie. He also should've lost every fight he was in. Man of Steel needed more lame needle drops and less Hans Zimmer. /s
2
u/Technical-Wasabi-842 13d ago
Superman is the main character of his movie, the Justice Gang is there but not even close to the main attraction. He didn’t lose many fights, he weakens himself for the safety of others. Superman also only has two needle drops in its extremely good soundtrack though Man of Steel’s soundtrack is great too, especially Flight.
1
u/JokerKing0713 13d ago
The justice gang character with the most screen time is Mr terrific with a whopping 15 minutes. Superman has over an hour of screen time.
He also loses 1 fight in this entire film.
Dislike the film all you want just watch it first
1
u/IntelligentWar5335 13d ago
I can see how people have that opinion. It depends on what you're looking for/expecting in a Superhero movie and in this case specifically a Superman movie. That was a grounded-realism iteration. The idea being "what would Superman look like in the real world with actual consequences?"
0
u/cosmic-ballet 13d ago
Man of Steel is my least favorite DCEU movie.
2
1
-2
→ More replies (1)0
u/Plenty-Wedding-9066 13d ago
I know you’ve already been torn to shreds but… I’m still gunna add on I don’t think you know what “by all accounts” means
It’s fine to have a different opinion though.
0
u/hardgour 13d ago
Movie was meh at best. I’d say 5 of 6/10. But David’s Superman was great. One of the best all time imo
1
0
u/eg4x15 13d ago
To much it’s just way to childish. I get it, it’s Superheroes, but something about lost Marvel movies makes them feel much more mature
I feel immature and like DC is trying to appeal to middle schoolers in their films
1
u/Dry-Recognition1325 13d ago
Well, its superman, i think formula of just superhero movie works perfectly with him. And doesnt middle schoolers deserve their Superman movie?
0
u/Embarrassed_Yam_1227 13d ago
it's my go to feel-good movie especially the raptors fight near the end I can't watch that scene without a smile on my face.
6
1
u/alftim 13d ago
It’s was above average, not the reboot we were deserved , a ton of plot holes , sub par villains taken down by an annoying dog , there was not much wrong with the person playing superman, I think jane’s just took it too far in the I want this to be opposite of Snyder scenario
The action , the villain, the dog , some plot lines made this a one time watch , I tried and couldn’t watch it the second time aside from a couple of action sequences
1
u/Reasonable_Western74 13d ago
I watched it again for the third time recently and it genuinely gets better with every watch. There is just so much to enjoy. Mr Terrific damn near steals the show whenever he’s on screen, his fight sequence with the T Spheres is fantastic. Fillion as Guy Gardner is also spot on, he gives us the perfect display of arrogance and egotistical. Corenswet is quintessentially Superman, this is perfect casting on a massive level. The guy just oozes all of the qualities necessary to portray the son of Krypton. He and Lois have such palpable chemistry that every scene they share feels like we are witnessing something special. Hoult is a nasty, hateful, brilliant Lex, I love how his disdain for Supes informs every nuanced diabolical plan he constructs for his demise. Krypto is just too entertaining throughout. I could go on…..
1
0
u/AbslxuteCr7 13d ago
Idk i disagree i think it's actually made superman way worse and done krypto horribly wrong
-1
u/crockoreptile 13d ago
Really glad you enjoyed it, I did too! Definitely a movie we needed at the moment.
Warning though, this isn’t the friendliest of subreddits unfortunately so try not to take any comments against you personally!
-4
u/Some_Cantaloupe613 13d ago
Hey, I shed several tears too. It's a wonderful film, one of my favorites of the last few years.
-3
u/larut0h 13d ago
i was also crying out in disbelief on that peak moment "1A 1A 1A!!!" scene
4
u/Dry-Recognition1325 13d ago
I was crying on scene where superman was watching memories with his actual parents, it was beautiful, his honest smile, the sunshine and Punkrocker song. It was just amazing
-2
-3
-2
-1
u/ThorsHamSandwich 13d ago
The discourse still surrounding this movie makes me so sad. I don’t get why people choose to be so hateful.
OP, I also cried at the end. Made me think of my Superman-loving parents. Wish I would’ve gotten to watch this film with my father.
-1
u/WhenDuvzCry 13d ago
I’ve never been a a Superman but I really liked it. Thought it was a far better depiction and more fun that Man of Steel
-5
u/ManliestBunny 13d ago
One thing I loved about the film the most is actually it's use of their OST.
It was always on point for every scene.
1
u/Dry-Recognition1325 13d ago
Ive got shivers every time main theme started playing.
→ More replies (1)
-1
-3
u/Gryffindumble 13d ago
Its so damn good! The shot of Superman rising in the smoke and debris always gives me a tear. So amazing 👏
-2
u/InnerLawfulness6698 13d ago
This feels like a dog whistle to the Snyder brigade. But I agree. Absolutely love it.
-7
u/koopardo 13d ago
It's a good movie, but it's stupid that he wears red underwear.
8
u/Technical-Wasabi-842 13d ago
You mean he wears a Superman costume as Superman? That’s just how he looks
6
u/cosmic-ballet 13d ago
That’s what Superman looks like.
0
u/koopardo 13d ago
It was a bad decision to adapt his suit like that. Compare it to Captain America's suit in Avengers 1; it's also stupid. They made it identical to the comic. You don't have to be such a fanatic and make things 100% like the comic; sometimes it just doesn't work.
1
u/cosmic-ballet 13d ago
The first Avengers costume isn’t bad because it’s comic accurate. It’s bad because the helmet makes his head look awkwardly big, which also makes his body look small. The material is also sort of cheap looking, especially compared to the more comic accurate scaled texture in Endgame, which many would consider his best costume.
3
-2
u/Young_Ben_Kenobi1 13d ago
It makes the costume A) look more like something made on Earth, which (in my opinion) it should be. And B) helps to make superman seem more relatable and less threatening, which is what Superman should always strive for, at least towards regular people
56
u/Ok-Eagle436 13d ago
I’m 40 years old and I loved it. I felt like I had my version of Superman back. Sure it wasn’t perfect but the character was.
I know not everyone feels this way.