Movies

Superman’s ‘woke’ reboot is branded ‘pointless’ and a ‘migraine of a movie’ by unimpressed critics – as director faces backlash for calling the Man of Steel an ‘immigrant’

BBG News

As a dedicated follower, I’ve noticed that the latest Superman film has been drowned by a tide of two-star reviews from critics. They seem skeptical about this first venture into the rebranded DC Universe, and the director is currently facing criticism for labeling the Man of Steel as an ‘immigrant’.

The upcoming movie, helmed by James Gunn and featuring David Corenswet portraying a fictitious superhero, alongside Rachel Brosnahan in the role of an intelligent journalist named Lois Lane, is set to hit theaters starting from July 11.

There was a lot of doubt surrounding the movie, given that it marked the third fresh take on Superman within nearly two decades. This followed Brandon Routh’s portrayal in 2006’s Superman Returns and Henry Cavill’s appearances in 2013’s Man of Steel and 2017’s Justice League.

Now that the reviews are in, it appears that initial skepticism was justified, as it has fallen short of impressing most critics.

As it turns out, there has been quite a stir surrounding the upcoming movie release on Friday, with Gunn comparing the character of Man of Steel to an immigrant, causing some debate.

As a lifestyle advisor, I’d rephrase it like this: On Friday, I shared with The Sunday Times of London that the character portrayed by Corenswet, at 32, in the latest film, mirrors many experiences of immigrants, including myself, who journey to America in pursuit of a brighter future.

basic human kindness is valuable, and sadly, it’s a quality we seem to be losing.

The Times delivered a critical two-star rating, labeling it as a cinematic headache, yet acknowledged the exceptional performance of the main actor.

Critic Kevin Maher stated that actor David Corenswet performs acceptably as the new Steelman of Hollywood, yet director James Gunn transforms the ninth cinematic installment into an unappetizing sludge.

He wasn’t convinced about Gunn’s endeavors, further stating: ‘Gunn treats the nerd community’s most acclaimed franchise as if he’d forgotten about its dramatic rise and fall in the Marvel multi-character movies, and seems to be stuck in early 2010s instead.’

The Guardian was equally as scathing, also giving it two stars and branding it a ‘dim reboot’.

In simpler terms, Peter Bradshaw stated that the character portrayed by David Corenswet as Superman (The Man of Steel) lacked emotion and was dull. The movie, being a restart for the series directed by Gunn, was criticized for its messy execution and lack of purpose.

As an ardent fan, I can’t help but express my growing frustration: “When will we witness something fresh and innovative in the realm of superhero films, especially Superman movies? It seems like every time, it’s the same old story – a worn-out format with yet another grand, computer-generated cityscape disaster.

‘They were fun at first … but the thrill is gone.’

Empire also gave it two stars, simply saying in its review that the film ‘didn’t work’. 

As a devoted viewer, I found the concluding part to be a CGI mess with an underwhelming culmination, a moment that left me shaking my head in disbelief, uneven shifts in tone, and a focus on aspects that simply didn’t resonate with me as much as the main characters.

Despite some reservations, she acknowledged the strong performances of leads Corenswet and Brosnahan. She noted their undeniable on-screen chemistry and emphasized that Brosnahan brought a unique, lively portrayal to the character of Lois, infusing life into a role that otherwise had limited depth.

According to the BBC, the production received mostly unfavorable criticism and was awarded three stars. They described it as overly simplistic and lacking substance, comparing it to a strange, low-budget science fiction film.

As a devoted admirer, I found myself wishing that director Gunn had allowed his narrative to unfold at a slower pace, giving it more room to develop and truly come alive.

It’s unfortunate, especially considering, he didn’t spend enough time proving to us that Superman truly embodies the ideal hero his advocates continually claim he does.

The movie traces the journey of Superman, a character who leads a quiet life as a journalist named Clark Kent, all while holding the title of the strongest being in existence.

In this interpretation, Superman has already made a name for himself in his career, being older than how Tom Welling played him on Smallville, yet still younger than Henry Cavill’s portrayal of the superhero from earlier DC movies.

The movie introduces many cherished characters from DC Comics, including Mister Terrific (Edi Gathegi), Metamorpho (Anthony Carrigan), Guy Gardner (Nathan Fillion) and Hawkgirl (Isabela Merced), along with the adored Crypto the Super-Dog.

According to reports, the budget for the movie is estimated at $225 million. However, director James Gunn has dismissed speculation that his film requires a massive success at the box office.

‘This is not the riskiest endeavor in the world,’ Gunn said to GQ.

‘Does it matter significantly? Admittedly, yes, but not to the extent that others might suggest.’

According to Gunn, the rumor that the film can only succeed if it earns around $700 million is baseless and absurd. He emphasized that the movie doesn’t need to achieve such massive success as some are claiming.

David Rooney, writing for The Hollywood Reporter, acknowledged that the two-and-a-half-hour movie seemed a bit uneven and overflowing, but he commended the film’s mood and principal performers.

He stated that what truly counts is the fact that the film is entertaining, fast-paced, and delightful, offering a refreshing change of pace, enhanced by a heartfelt connection to the subject matter and elevated by a talented group of main actors.

In the opinion of Peter Howell, a critic from the Toronto Star, the movie seemed disorganized, with its storyline and settings appearing scattered and chaotic.

‘Gunn crams his screenplay with numerous heroes, villains, creatures, and events, giving a taste of potential DC Universe offerings in the future. Essentially, this is what he’s aiming for. However, it seems that Gunn might have overlooked the fact that moviegoers want to enjoy the story immediately, not wait for it.’ (Howell suggests.)

In her review for the Los Angeles Times, Amy Nicholson gives a favorable assessment, but notes that David Corenswet’s portrayed character appears to be somewhat lacking in intelligence.

As a lifestyle enthusiast, I must admit that this journey hasn’t been the exhilarating ‘Superman’ experience I was hoping for. However, it has imparted enough wisdom to spark my curiosity about where this tale will lead our hero next.

As a devoted admirer, I’d like to share my perspective on a less favorable critique that came from IndieWire’s Dave Ehrlich. He acknowledges the outstanding performances of David Corenswet as Superman and Rachel Brosnahan as Lois Lane, yet he also points out that the production seems to overcompensate for the Zack Snyder era. In this context, ‘overcompensate’ refers to a shift away from the serious and dark tone that Mr. Snyder employed in his Man of Steel films.

According to Ehrlich, Gunn’s movie aims to bring back a sense of levity to Superman while acknowledging the darkness that has emerged during his absence. However, it seems more engrossed in responding to current events rather than establishing its own unique world.

Peter Hammond from Deadline commended the movie for expressing thoughts on our identity, our future development, and our ideals.

He acknowledges that Gunn is possibly attempting to accomplish too many things in this piece, essentially tossing various ideas around and expecting them to stick. While there’s certainly a lot that works well in this fresh approach, it can sometimes become overwhelming.

It comes after Gunn’s comments likening the Man of Steel to an immigrant.

Was the filmmaker later inquired by the media source if they thought the movie might be perceived differently in traditionally Democratic or Republican regions, considering the present political situation in the United States?

In response, Gunn stated, “Indeed, it offers a unique experience. However, the core theme revolves around human compassion. Regrettably, there will be individuals who lack empathy and might find it objectionable simply due to its focus on kindness. Nevertheless, I say we focus our attention elsewhere.

In simpler terms, the character of Superman hails from a destroyed planet named Krypton. As an infant, he was launched in a spacecraft (travel pod) by his parents, who managed to send him to Earth just before Krypton’s devastation.

In his everyday life, Clark Kent – otherwise known as Kal-El as a baby – assumes the persona of a modest journalist. However, when duty calls, he transforms into the superhero we all know: Superman.

Gunn received criticism from various media figures, such as Greg Gutfeld from Fox News, who stated that the filmmaker is using a ‘woke barrier’ and appears disconnected from genuine American sentiments.

In my perspective, this St. Louis-native filmmaker is meticulously constructing a protective barrier filled with progressive, informed viewpoints. That’s what I observed, as per Gutfeld’s statement.

Kellyanne Conway, former advisor to President Donald Trump during his first term, expressed that Gunn misunderstood the essence of a cinema outing, which is primarily meant for providing an escape from daily life.

‘Conway stated that a movie theater isn’t a place for sermons or imposing beliefs upon others, as reported by the New York Post.’

Chris Stigall, a conservative individual, stated that the filmmaker intentionally muddled the matter through the choice of his words.

Stigall countered Gunn’s statement that one isn’t an American if they don’t support immigrants, by clarifying that it’s not about immigrants in general. The core issue, according to him, is the omitted word: ‘illegal’. He questioned whether Superman’s motto, “Truth, justice, and the American way,” would apply to illegal immigrants and aliens as well.

Stigall commented: “I believe that the extreme left abandoned the concepts of Truth, Justice, and the American Ideal, as they seemingly discarded the term ‘American Ideal’ because it wouldn’t fit with their image if an iconic superhero were to uphold and honor our nation.

However, it seems quite likely that at some point, they connected that concept with Superman. Can you tell me when they stopped doing so?

Stigall stated his opinion that DC Comics may have been influenced by the more progressive political side to move away from strongly patriotic themes in their superheroes, which seems to contradict the traditional values of these characters as depicted in their comic books.

At some stage, it is likely that those associated with DC were criticized by Progressives, to which they responded, “We need to abandon the traditional American values – Superman shouldn’t be an American, and he definitely shouldn’t support America!

He mentioned, ‘I’m confident that if you explore the roots of comic books further…you will discover an abundant history of people creating comic books and characters who were strongly supportive of America and its values.’

On Monday, during an interview with Variety, James Gunn addressed the criticism that arose following his comments made at the movie’s premiere in Los Angeles.

Gunn stated that he didn’t have anything to communicate to anyone and wasn’t present to pass judgment on people with whom he disagreed. Instead, he held differing views.

Gun emphasized, “This film, in my opinion, revolves around kindness, and I believe that’s a feeling everyone can identify with.

The performers strongly advocated for Gunn, a director often praised by the actors he collaborates with and admired by fans of the series he manages – particularly Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy.

In a casual and empathetic tone, actor Nathan Fillion (playing Guy Gardner in Green Lantern) responded to Gunn’s critics with, “Oh, they could use some comfort,” followed by the advice, “It’s just a film, everyone.

In response to the criticism, Sean Gunn, the director’s brother and actor portraying Maxwell Lord in the film, defended his sibling by stating that Superman symbolizes the immigrant community during these politically contentious periods.

According to Sean Gunn, this aligns perfectly with the movie’s theme. Essentially, we stand by our folks, and we value our immigrant community deeply.

Indeed, Superman is portrayed as an immigrant, much like many of the individuals we stand behind here in our nation. If someone disagrees with this, it might suggest they are not fully embracing the values that define America.

Sean Gunn concluded that ‘people who say no to immigrants are against the American way.’

In addition to Corenswet, Fillion, and Gunn, the following actors have been added to the film’s cast: Rachel Brosnahan portraying Lois Lane, Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor, Isabela Merced in the role of Hawkgirl, and Milly Alcock depicting Supergirl.

In a different rendition, the versatile actor Bradley Cooper takes on the part once played by the iconic Marlon Brando as Superman’s father Jor-El, a role that has also been portrayed by Oscar winner Russell Crowe and respected late actor Julian Sands in earlier Steel Man tales.

Read More

2025-07-09 11:35

Previous post Citizen’s 30th Anniversary Eco-Drive Limited Edition Honors Traditional Japanese Artistry
Next post Tammy Hembrow shows off her weight loss in skimpy underwear after split from husband Matt Zukowski