This post was updated Aug. 3 at 5:05 p.m.
Warning: spoilers ahead.
It’s got a dog! It’s narratively ambiguous! It’s Superman!
Released in theaters July 11, director James Gunn’s latest film unravels his take on the cultural icon that is the “Man of Steel.” Introducing a less orthodox take of the Superman origin story, the film unusually begins with several canon Superman milestones, unlike its predecessor films. Superman, also known as Clark Kent (David Corenswet) has been donning the cape and trunks for three years. Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan) knows Superman’s identity and is in a relationship with Clark Kent. Throughout the film, Superman is met with challenges that redefine the superhero as a whole, including media scrutiny for meddling in international affairs, the reveal of his Kryptonian parents’ colonial intentions and the abduction of his superdog. Ultimately, the lack of resolution makes the overall plot unclear, with the only concrete resolution being that the dog is alive and there is a happy ending, somehow.
Gunn provides new perspectives on the Superman origin while doing justice to the beloved mythos. Even the soundtrack pays homage to John Williams’ original “Theme from Superman” with John Murphy and David Fleming’s reprise of the famous tune sewn throughout the soundtrack. Though the film raises serious considerations for a superpowered vigilante, the tone is balanced with comedic moments harbored through the characters’ chemistry. The casting and performances of the actors leads the audience through the plot points by portraying figures grounded in reality. The emotional investment toward the characters makes one forget about the intriguing questions posed in the first half of the film.
Almost.
Corenswet’s performance of the Clark Kent and Superman duality does the beloved superhero significant justice. Corenswet captures the soft decibel of the Kansas farm boy’s nature while making a distinct switch to the assured, friendly superhuman. The dichotomy makes it very convincing that Clark Kent’s secret identity could be kept for so long, with or without the film’s explanation of glasses’ hypnosis warping people’s perception of his Clark Kent face. Details such as “what the hey” type of cursing and empathy toward all humans and aliens keep the hero down to earth. Despite playing two personas, the consistent elements of Corenswet’s character makes the compassionate altruism of the Man of Tomorrow steadfast even when the world is turned against him.
Brosnahan delivers a performance that shows how the pen can be mightier than the sword through the character Lois Lane. Brosnahan’s Lois is a sharp journalist who is the human perspective questioning the truth of Superman. Lois’ own dual identity, wanting to give romance a chance while still being an astute journalist, clashes with Clark’s duality, bringing emotional conflict to the story. Brosnahan’s performance implements a savvy and strong sense of justice and acts as the driving motivation for Superman’s jailbreak and the unraveling of Lex Luthor’s (Nicholas Hoult) plans for territorial invasion.
Consistent with the rest of the cast’s exemplary acting, the representation of Lex Luthor is undeniably true to character – balancing evil tendencies with tastefully comedic tone throughout. From having an army of monkeybots troll Superman online to a lawless game of Russian roulette kill an innocent bystander, he is no doubt a daunting, yet entertaining antagonist to watch. Hoult brings the superficial villain down to earth as a self-aware megalomaniac who wishes to be super.
The rest of the cast continues to prove that the strength of the movie “Superman” is in its characters. In the film, the Justice Gang is a directionless trio of Green Lantern (Nathan Fillion), Mr. Terrific (Edi Gathegi), and Hawkgirl (Isabela Merced). If it isn’t the themes of found family or mundane gag humor that prove this was a James Gunn film, the scene with a character disarming a swarm of grunts with a floating projectile most definitely would. While the performances carry the pathos of the film, they cannot hide the messy loose ends in the conclusion.
The climactic moment in which Superman confronts Lex Luthor and declares himself as human as everyone else – because he experiences emotions and deems them to be his greatest strength – is welcome. In fact, this plot point is to be applauded for correctly portraying the altruistic characterization of Superman. However, the declaration in this final confrontation feels out of place and loses its impact when directly followed by Luthor getting mauled by Krypto the Superdog. The juxtaposition of these two consecutive events is unfortunately anticlimactic.
Although the anticipation of Lois’ exposé of Lex Luthor was well-built and ultimately satisfying, its impact seemed too wide-reaching, making it appear as a fix-all deus ex machina. It seemed too easy that Superman’s reputation was restored by a singular story. The final act of the film fails to explain the consequences of superpowered intervention in international affairs and how institutions would accurately see Superman or the Justice Gang, who stopped a war by assassinating a president.
The final interview between Superman and Lois leaves the mending of the people’s trust in Superman and the resolution to the couple’s initial conflict up in the air, because interviews mean something different for Lois and Superman. “Superman” checked many boxes that make a memorable Superman story, but the film lacked structure to connect certain vague emotional plot points.
Although the film did not stick the landing when answering all questions it raised, Gunn presented an emotional experience, capturing the heart that makes Clark Kent human and thus “Superman.”
Comments are closed.