Superman is quirky, entertaining, and ideology-free

MPAA Rating: PG-13
Reel Rating: 3.5 out of 4 reels

Superman is one of pop culture’s best-known Christ figures, and now comic book juggernaut James Gunn has released the third great cinematic adaptation of the Superman story. This new film also serves as a reboot of the DC cinematic universe, which never really found its footing.

The 1978 film, starring Christopher Reeves, was a triumph of innocent fun and visual effects, and the 2013 version, with Harry Cavill in the starring role, was a masterpiece of Christological-themed mythology (and one of my first reviews for Catholic World Report).

This entry, starring David Corenswet, fits nicely between the two. It’s definitely entertaining, but not as campy as Reeve or as sober as Cavill. Only time will tell if Superman can successfully launch Warner Bros’ efforts.

Superman is a classic example of “in media res,” where the audience is thrown into the middle of a story without much background. Nothing is said about Superman’s childhood, career as a journalist, or current relationship with Lois Lane. Instead, he lies bloodied in the middle of Antarctica only to be rescued by his trusty dog Krypto (Jolene).

Superman (Corenswet) has fallen on hard times. Despite stopping a major war and saving Metropolis from multiple otherworldly threats, he is unpopular in many circles, especially with Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult), who has created the supervillain Ultraman to defeat him. Yet his ultimate undoing may come not from his enemies but from a sudden revelation deep within his origins that threatens to turn the whole planet against him.

From the first scene, it is evident that Gunn, who directed the Guardians of the Galaxy films, has taken a firm grasp of the reins. The film has all the hallmarks: catchy songs, witty banter, oddball characters, bizarre in-jokes, and a Nathan Fillion cameo. Most importantly, it is endlessly entertaining. He understands that any superhero film, no matter how dark and brooding, is a little silly, and isn’t afraid to acknowledge the genre’s inherent nature.

For example, this is the first time Krypto has graced the silver screen. I was skeptical when I saw him in the trailer, but in Gunn’s tongue-in-cheek world, he works. It’s not that Gunn doesn’t explore the rich history of Superman’s philosophy—only that it first must be fun. The film also stays clear of obvious political leanings, aiming instead for more universal appeal. Anybody claiming the film is too “woke” or “based” is missing the point.

When I was at film school, a professor once stated that if we wanted an audience to immediately hate a character, “Have them kick a dog.” It’s trendy in the genre today for metahumans to be morally ambiguous or complex; in this sense, Superman is a breath of fresh air. Even if his actions are sometimes rash, his motives and values are always pure. When confronted with the unintended ramifications of interfering in an international conflict, he just yells, “People were going to die!” Lex Luthor not only kidnaps Superman’s dog, but he also tortures him. He also uses an alien baby as ransom to keep Superman imprisoned. When freed, Superman saves the child at great cost to himself (and the special effects team). The point is basic but refreshing: defending the innocent is the most basic quality of a superhero.

In the climactic scene, Superman and Luthor square off in a classic monologue scene in which both characters reveal their hidden intentions. Luthor admits, despite his enormous wealth, that he is envious of the Man of Steel. But it runs deeper than that. He finds Superman’s existence offensive because he believes it brings down the collective worth of humanity. If Superman can lift a building, why do humans need to engineer a crane? Nothing we do then matters.

Superman admits his powers are daunting, but insists it is his humanity that defines him. He didn’t learn about good and evil from his biological parents, but from the simple Kansas farmers who raised him. Superman also knows that he makes mistakes and is limited in his scope, which also puts him in the same boat as everyone else.

There is a way to interpret Superman’s vision as negative. Human nature, on its own, is stained by original sin and prone to evil. Before the Incarnation, paganism reigned as the preeminent philosophy, which disdained the poor and valued power, although there were, as C. S. Lewis noted, “gleams of celestial strength and beauty falling on a jungle of filth and imbecility.” We do not need our heroes to “be human” but to rise above.

However, understood as a Christ figure, Superman’s speech to Luther represents not the fallen nature of humanity but the love of God, who willingly took on “our weakness.” He became human to save humanity. It could be either, but I’m betting on the latter.

In a deeply divided culture, it is vital to have popular art that provides simple enjoyment. I don’t think Superman will be as well remembered as its predecessors, but it is an entertaining, competent summer blockbuster that doesn’t overstay its welcome. It affirms basic Christian values without allowing itself to be claimed by a political ideology. That’s pretty super in 2025.