Superman (2025)

Superman (2025) aims high but ultimately falls flat. While it offers a few flashes of visual spectacle, the story feels disjointed and the pacing drags. Characters lack depth, and the emotional beats never quite land. It’s a disappointing entry that struggles to capture the magic fans expect. Sadly, it’s more forgettable than fantastic. 4/10.

Just a fun time watching this iteration of Superman. David Corenswet and Rachel Brosnahan were absolutely wonderful together and Nicholas Hoult played a great Lex Luthor. Not perfect by any means, but a solid start to the DCU. This was a delightful time with crowd-pleasing moments. Also my first time watching a movie in one of those D-Box seats, pretty nice but don't need to do it again. **4.0/5**

Well, I enjoyed it.

The writing felt a bit all over the place but most of the jokes were on point, the action was very enjoyable, and I think giving Superman a more classic comic feel and less of the apocalyptic Snyder vibe was a good change.

Everyone here does a great job with the acting. Lois and Jimmy are, in my opinion, the standouts. Nicholas Hoult wasn't a great choice for Luthor, with his more manic energy. Personally, I enjoyed Hackman or Cryer's cold, cunning version more.

And, y'all, Krypto is in it. Finally we got a dog!

TLDR: It's good but not great. With that said, I still think you'll have a great time watching it. Also, DEFINITELY SEE IT IN 3D.



***SPOILERS BELOW***

I have two complaints.

They give us two of Superman's coolest villains: Lex Luthor and Bizarro, but lame versions of both. I was expecting something on par with Iron Man vs Ironmonger circa 2008, but Lex never dons his suit. I was pretty sure the masked villain was Bizarro, and later he's revealed to be, but it would have been so much better if the authentic version had been written in.

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://talkingfilms.net/superman-review-james-gunn-gives-the-man-of-steel-a-soul/

"Superman isn't perfect. It struggles with pacing, has too many characters, and offers some clunky narrative solutions. But as the official cinematic introduction to the new DCU, it succeeds where it matters most: establishing the central pillars of the saga, giving us a worthy protagonist, and showcasing a filmmaker with a clear vision.

David Corenswet is the Superman this generation needs: a symbol of kindness, hope, and - above all - conviction-led action. Rachel Brosnahan and Nicholas Hoult round out a high-quality central trio, and even with its flaws, it's hard not to leave the theater satisfied.

James Gunn delivers a clear statement of intent: DC's future is in good hands. Bring on the rest of Chapter One: Gods and Monsters. If this is the path forward, maybe - finally - DC can fly as high as its greatest hero."

Rating: B+

Considerable chatter has been devoted in recent years to the question of whether the movie industry is producing too many superhero/action-adventure films. Much of that talk has specifically focused on whether certain franchises/mythologies have been overdone. That’s particularly true where the “Superman” mythos is concerned, a body of work that has assumed multiple forms on TV and the big screen since the 1970s. And, after viewing this latest iteration involving this storied and much beloved character, I can’t help but concur with the opinion that the man from the planet Krypton needs to be given a serious rest for a while. In my opinion, what has been called the biggest disappointment of this summer’s blockbuster season is an assessment that’s, unfortunately, right on target. In short, writer-director James Gunn’s latest is a hot mess that strains viewer interest not long into its overlong 2:09:00 runtime (a duration that honestly feels even longer than the official tally) and never manages to get it back. The biggest problem here rests with an overstuffed narrative that at times becomes challenging to follow, thanks to a screenplay that’s loaded with incongruities, rampant assumptions and a noticeable lack of back story; film editing tediously in need of much-needed snipping; overreliance on comic relief that grows progressively tiresome (especially with Superman’s annoyingly overzealous canine pal, Krypto); and an overall production whose vision is both tedious and not particularly original (especially in the rather ho-hum action sequences that we’ve seen so many, many times before in better films, most notably those from the Marvel Universe). In addition, the picture’s attempts at updating the nature of the Superman mythology for the present day are uneven at best, including some elements that are sufficiently contemporary with others that are woefully anachronistic (e.g., why are elements involving The Daily Planet newspaper portrayed in much the same way as they were in the past, given that today’s journalism business is a very different animal from what it was years ago?). To its credit, the film’s attempts at evolving the protagonist’s character into a paragon of “wokeness” (a source of much criticism in some circles) provides an intriguing spin on the nature of the Man of Steel – one very much in line with Superman’s traditional embodiment as a champion of “truth, justice and the American way” – even if it is somewhat excessive on occasion. That’s especially true where matters involving “aliens” (like Kal El himself) are symbolically demonized as threats to society, a less-than-subtle allusion to how many perceive today’s immigrants. However, the attempt at making the film’s hero more socially relevant is at times undermined by inconsistent character development, a problem that plagues many of this release’s other players, too. And that’s unfortunate in light of the performances on display, including a capable Christopher Reeve-esque portrayal by the film’s lead (David Corenswet), as well as fine supporting characterizations of mythology staples Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan) and Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult). In essence, though, “Superman” regrettably feels like an offering created by committee, a production that desperately should have gone through several more rounds of revisions before being committed to a final print. What’s more, if this picture was meant to lead off a new franchise involving this character, it comes up short all around, a prospect that doesn’t bode particularly well for the artistic future of this series. Superman deserves better than this, but that’s noticeably lacking in this release, one that, over time, is likely to become forgettable, particularly when measured against its superior predecessors, films that commendably and authentically depict its protagonist as a genuinely super-man.