I’ve been drinking comic book smoothies since I was two years old, and my mom tried to potty train my brother and me by bribing us with comics. It worked. Now I’m 48, and next to people saying that Alan Moore’s ‘Watchmen’ can’t be filmed (clearly it was, and quite successfully), the thing I hear most from comic book fans and writers is how hard it is to write Superman. That never made sense to me. He’s just a dude with a lot of power. You can kill him, like you can kill the Sentry or Thor, you could probably even take out Dr. Manhatten if you convinced him to write himself out of existence. And it’s not like Superman doesn’t have weaknesses; he has plenty. He’s got allergies, he’s got feelings. He’s smart, but he’s not a genius. You could trick him into some kind of Jigsaw trap from ‘Saw’ that has a bunch of kryptonite syringes laced with AIDS. Or you could capture Lois and force him to eat Kryptonite donuts until he gets diabetes, then deprive him of Kryptonian insulin. My point is, as with any writing, don’t be lazy; you have to be creative with every character, or you end up with the Marvel Universe. Ha! I kid (kind of).

After seeing Superman 2025, I felt compelled to get some thoughts out before I was inundated with noise from the media monkeys, but then the part of me that liked the parts of the movie that I liked, really liked those parts. I wanted to be fair to those aspects of the movie and let them breathe. Then I started to hear the media monkeys, and I realized that I was in a very small minority that did not like the picture as a whole. And if there’s one thing that will give me diarrhea faster than a speeding taco from the 2am joint down the street, it’s movies that have a bunch of cool scenes, but together don’t add up to something I would want to revisit. And I really wanted to like this movie. Especially the new Superman movie. Superman is important. It’s important to get a new Superman movie right, and it’s even more important when that new Superman movie is supposed to serve as the new foundation of DC’s new cinematic universe. And it’s all in the hands of James Gunn.

I’m not a Snyder-bro, though I enjoyed some of his universe. I thought Cavil was fine, a bit morose and depressing for Superman, but that was the take on that universe. And though I absolutely recognize the importance of Superman, I’ve never really gravitated to him as a character. So, going into this, I had low expectations. Of course, I wanted to enjoy it, but if there was one thing I was hoping to walk away with, it was to be inspired and hopeful. Instead, I left feeling some of the most mid feelings one could feel after watching a Superman picture.
I realize I’m in a very small minority by feeling this way. As I’m writing this, the movie sits with a 93% audience rating. I couldn’t give two shits about what some moldy fruit site tells me about a movie, but that does track with what I’ve been hearing from my communities, despite the three other people I saw the movie with all feeling the same mid feelings that I felt. And the protruding thought in all of that was that this was Gunn’s most lackluster thing he’s put out.

That said, this movie is filled with misfits, and they’re all written well. But they also bog the movie down and take away from this being a Superman picture. Instead, it feels like Gunn just wants to be the first to finally make these characters cool. Nathan Fillion’s Guy Gardner was unexpected fun. I like the actress from ‘The Last of Us’ who plays Hawkgirl, but I half expected her to get slapped into the side of a building and make that streaky-glass sound as she slid down the side. Gunn’s Drax version of a “boo-hoo” Metamorpho with undefined motivations was tedious. Jimmy Olsen was the most non-Jimmy Olsen he’s ever been. A character that’s defined by his “go get it” work ethic instead is turned into a “aw gee, do I have ta?” shlub. Perry White is pretty non-existent. And I had no idea how Lois Lane had her job. She felt vapid and incompetent. She was cruel and unappreciative of Clark, and just a downright dick of a character. Which is what most of Gunn’s characters are. Dicks. Dicks with hearts of gold, yeah, yeah, I get it. I just wish this new DC universe was a bit more earnest.

However, there was one bright spot in the circus of misfits. My second favorite part of this movie was Robert Downey Jr. reprising his role from Tropic Thunder as Mr. Terrific. This is a character that always stands out in the comics. With the words “FAIR PLAY” embroidered on his jacket sleeves, Michael Holt, aka Mr. Terrific, is a dude who believes that as long as the playing field is fair, he’s gonna kick your ass. And even if it’s not, he’ll still probably kick your ass by outminding you. I enjoyed almost all of his scenes due to his dry and aloof sense of humor. And he was the only member of the Justice Gang who had heart.

Before I douse this whole thing with green kryptonite juice, is that David Corenswet was a near-perfect Superman. This guy wears the suit well, despite Gunn’s juvenile writing. I don’t believe any actor will ever exude the balance of clumsy charm and heroic sincerity that Christopher Reeve had, but with a more mature script, and fewer misfit characters, I feel like Corenswet could possibly serve as a solid-ish foundation to what looks like is going to be a pretty hodgepodge of a DC Cinematic Universe. My favorite scene of his was “Hey Buddy, eyes up here!” It’s Corenswet’s most confident line of the movie, but sadly, it didn’t feel any more important seeing it in the theater than it did in the trailer. I did feel like this Sups genuinely cared about people, something I didn’t really get from Cavil. All in all, Corenswet’s Man of Steel had a pleasantness and positivity that this new version of the character needed, with a good focus on his humanity. Something Gunn nailed with him not winning every fight, and struggling to succeed in the fights he did win.

That said (and here comes the green kryptonite juice), a lot of the fight scenes devolved into cartoons, not unlike the ending of Flashpoint, James Gunn’s self-proclaimed favorite DCEU movie. Speaking of Cartoons, I don’t know if they ever used a real dog for Krypto, but I was taken out of most of his scenes by this Animaniacs version of him. It was too fluid and slapstick. Also, what’s with Gunn’s weird obsession with abusing animals in his movies? And where’s Clark? There was really only one scene of Clark Kent, and that was in the Daily Planet, fake arguing with Lois. The other two scenes where he was “Clark” were in the apartment, “real arguing” with Lois, but she knows he’s Superman, so he’s not really being Clark, and then at the farm, where, again, everyone knows he’s Superman. So we never got to see his Clark Kent as a character living in this adoptive world that he’s supposed to care so much about, something that absolutely defines the actor’s who has played Superman since Christopher Reeve.

Can we talk about the Lex factor? I love Gene Hackman’s Lex Luthor. When he played the character there wasn’t a bar set. He was a great contrast to Reeve’s everyman take on Superman. But then there was one after another of this petulant, man-baby Lex. Until Bruce Timm came along and gave us an imposing version of the character that we could see holding his ground against the Man of Steel in a game of wits. And every time he was beaten, he didn’t cry, he started his next plot. And here we have Nicholas Holt, an actor that has only played two different characters, the best being the boy in ‘About a Boy’, and he’s annoying as ever. I can’t stand the guy, and he’s playing another sniveling, baby-man version of a guy that should one day be wearing an imposing Kryptonite green and pink powersuit going toe to toe with Sups. That’s not this lex.

And the parents. It doesn’t surprise me that Gunn portrayed the Kents as goobers, but these are the folks who molded Clark to be Superman. Yes, we see that they’re good people, but there needs to be more intention and less accident with their role in Clark’s outcome. Then there’s the El’s. What? Lara and Jor-El are Omnimans? I understand that the takeaway is that Kal El made his own way the right way and did the right thing when he became Superman. But why, other than Gunn blatantly saying, “Look! See what I did?! It’s so different!” Shut up.
More characters that Gunn screwed up are Ultraman and The Engineer. And I know I’m gonna be pulled over by the nitpick police, but Stormwatch and the Authority are some of the best comics ever written, and the Engineer is a big part of that. Go read Warren Ellis’ run on the book. Here, Gunn reduces to ANOTHER metallic-clad, marginalized villain. The Engineer is a leader; here, she’s the ultimate follower, and Gunn has a Stormwatch movie planned. Good luck. Then there’s Ultraman, leader of the Crime Syndicate. Sloth from Goonies had more leadership qualities than this shell. They do this in the MCU too, where they use a character’s name, but it’s not the character in any way. Why not just follow the lead of the comics or get creative and write a brand new character? All you end up doing is losing that character for future use in so many possible stories, and alienating the dork fans who could be driving the word-of-mouth machine for you in the most profitable way: longevity, something I don’t feel this movie has.

Which brings me to my biggest regret for this picture: It’s a flash in the pan. For me, it all comes down to writing. Gunn writes for the audience that gets distracted by BIG and FUNNY, which is most of today’s modern theater-going audience. Younger generations need to be overly stimulated to focus for long periods of time, or steeped in so much drama that they can’t help but feel compelled to “wait for it.” One of the best examples of this and biggest failures of this movie is how quickly the public demonized Superman based on very little evidence and tabloidic hearsay from a trash media talking head and a known sociopath. This is Superman, a guy who’s saved countless lives through nothing but complete altruism, and no signs of self-involvement. But Gunn knew that would be a fast and hard hit of drama for the rapidly devolving Neanderthalic audience. Sure, maybe Gunn’s got one over on me, and that was a complete allegory, intentionally holding a mirror to today’s society. But knowing Gunn’s M.O., that’s probably giving him too much credit.

Dick Donner’s Superman 78′ will never be forgotten for one super reason… Christopher Reeve. It’s still revered and relevant almost 50 years later because his movie was 90% about Superman, getting to know him as the hero, the reporter, and the son, and the 10% about the characters he’s surrounded with. As much as I liked Corenswet’s fit into the character, the movie was too busy and overcrowded, and didn’t give him the space to create a fully formed character. It wasn’t even a fully formed Superman movie; it was more of a shotgun intro of the new status quo for a shared DC movie world. Gunn put too much focus on making sure we knew it was his universe with his flavor, and not enough focus on allowing us to get to know the three parts of the main character, i.e., Superman, Clark, and Kal-El. Too much flash and not enough substance, as the adage goes. But that is the way of the Gunn.