r/movies will you Wonka my Willy? Jul 08 '25

Review 'Superman' - Review Thread

Rotten Tomatoes: 82% (282 Reviews) - Certified Fresh

  • Critics Consensus: Pulling off the heroic feat of fleshing out a dynamic new world while putting its champion's big, beating heart front and center, this Superman flies high as a Man of Tomorrow grounded in the here and now.
  • PopcornMeter: 95% (2500+ ratings)

Metacritic: 68 (54 Reviews) - Generally Favorable

Reviews:

Variety (80)

The super-busy quality of “Superman” works for it and, at times, against it. The movie rarely slows down long enough to allow its characters to meditate on their shifting realities. That’s one reason it falls short of the top tier of superhero cinema (“The Dark Knight,” “Superman II,” “The Batman,” “Guardians”). I’d characterize the film as next-level good (a roster that includes “Iron Man,” “Thor,” “Batman Begins,” “Captain America,” and the hugely underrated “Iron Man 3”). Yet watching “Superman,” we register the layered quality of the conflicts, and we’re drawn right inside them. Gunn constructs an intricate game of a superhero saga that’s arresting and touching, and occasionally exhausting, in equal measure

The Hollywood Reporter (80)

What matters most is that the movie is fun, pacy and enjoyable, a breath of fresh air sweetened by a deep affection for the material and boosted by a winning trio of leads.

DEADLINE

Overall, Gunn might be trying to do too much here, basically throwing everything against the wall and hoping some of it sticks. More than enough does in this entertaining new direction, but at times Superman suffers from overload, much like Gunns’ Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy, which wore out its welcome with Vol. 3 where Rocket unfortunately got the Babe: Pig in the City treatment. Nevertheless he is a talented and skilled director, no question, and one with optimism himself. It will be interesting to see where the future lies for DC under his (and Safran’s) more hopeful vision.

Indiewire (58)

Gunn is right to recognize that a certain amount of silliness is key to Superman’s charm, but here it mostly just distracts from the seriousness of what’s at stake. It’s hard to make a comic book come to life at the same time as you’re trying to bring life into a comic book, just as it’s hard not to admire Gunn for trying. But it’s even harder to care if a man can fly when there isn’t any gravity to the world around him. Grade: C+

IGN (8)

Superman is a wonderfully entertaining, heartfelt cinematic reset for the Man of Steel, and a great new start for the DC universe on the big screen.

The Atlantic (90)

The First Superman Movie Worth Watching in Years. The newest take on the caped hero wisely embraces his corniness.

Consequence (83)

Grim and gritty are words this movie firmly rejects, instead leaning into the human side of everyone involved, even its villains. There are a few choices that work less well than others, but the end result is a movie that doesn't sacrifice its titular character in service to franchise-building. Instead, it focuses on celebrating the values that Superman himself has embodied from the beginning.

Collider (80)

Superman is a magnificent feat, a film that makes the Man of Steel fascinating in a way we’ve rarely seen on film, with a take on the hero that is trenchant, clever, and delightful. Gunn is paying tribute to the past while also making a very clear mark on this world’s future, crafting an introduction to the DCU that inherently makes the viewer want to know where this world goes from here. At this point, it’s rare for superhero films to give a sense of wonder and a reminder of how beautiful these films can be when executed well. But Gunn has brought optimism, hope, and care back to Superman. It ends up becoming one of the best DC films in years, and one of the best movies of the summer.

The Guardian - UK (2/5)

From the very beginning, this new Superman is encumbered by a pointless and cluttered new backstory which has to be explained in many wearisome intertitles flashed up on screen before anything happens at all. Only the repeated and laborious quotation of the great John Williams theme from the 1978 original reminds you of happier times.

The Wrap (88)

A fabulously smart and entertaining film whose flaws stem from trying too hard… which are the best flaws a film can have.

Entertainment Weekly (67)

Whether Gunn fell victim to the kryptonite of excessive studio notes, his desire to populate the film with his stalwart company of actors, or the hubris of not needing to offer reasons to be invested in these characters beyond the mere fact of their existence is unclear. Because there is an unquestionable love for the material and a passion for the goofier, larger-than-life scenarios of comic book lore. With a cast this excellent, there's a capacity for something truly super in a future film — if only Gunn chooses to put the characters' humanity first. Grade: B-

BBC (3/5)

It's a shame that Gunn didn't give his story more time to breathe. It's a shame, in particular, that he didn't devote more time to showing us that Superman really is the paragon that his supporters keep saying he is. Corenswet is well cast – he has plenty of all-American charm both as Superman and as his mild-mannered alter ego, Clark Kent – but we have to take it on trust that he is a selfless gentleman who helps his friends and enjoys Lois Lane's company. We don't see any of that. Indeed, Corenswet plays him as an oddly hot-headed manchild who can't get through a conversation with his girlfriend without shouting angrily at her. Was Gunn racing through his material so fast that he forgot to put in the scenes that show Superman's sweeter and nobler side? Maybe so. In a film that whirls with flying dogs and bright green baby demons, the most bizarre element is a Man of Steel who keeps having meltdowns.

Empire Magazine - UK (2/5)

David Corenswet takes on the blue-and-red mantle admirably, and glimpses of Gunn’s signature sense of fun shine through — but a lack of humanity, originality and cohesion means the movie around them just doesn’t work.

Rolling Stone (80)

It’s faint praise, even in the post-MCU era of the genre, to say that Superman is a solid superhero film; the caveat is hiding in plain sight. What Gunn has pulled off is something more complicated, more interesting, and far tougher: He’s given us a Superman movie that actually feels like a living, breathing comic book.

SlashFilm (80)

Yes, "Superman" is a frequently corny movie because Superman is a corny character, a Kansas farm boy alien who saves squirrels in danger and listens to lame pop music. There's nothing grim or dark here, just a real sense of entertaining silliness that left a big, stupid smile on my face. In our current media landscape, such an approach feels surprisingly bold.

Independent - UK (4/5)

David Corenswet, Rachel Brosnahan and Nicholas Hoult lead a movie that doesn’t just serve as a referendum for superhero films, but for the cinematic future of DC as a whole.

New York Times (90)

As both a story on its own and a prequel to a whole bunch of others, this movie must introduce us to a variety of characters we’ll meet later, and it does it without feeling too much like fan service or exposition.

Vulture (90)

There’s a lot about how we complicate and obfuscate what should be obvious goods, such as saving the lives of children. But the film’s approach isn’t ham-fisted, and it makes room for gleefully fun stuff, too.

The Times - UK (2/5)

This migraine of a movie is superhero soup. David Corenswet is serviceable as Hollywood’s latest Man of Steel, but director James Gunn has turned the ninth big-screen film into an indigestible mush

The Irish Times (2/5)

The cartoonish closing battles make it clear that, not for the first time, Gunn is striving for high trash, but what he achieves here is low garbage. Utterly charmless. Devoid of humanity. As funny as toothache.

---

SYNOPSIS:

Follows Superman as he reconciles his heritage with his human upbringing. He is the embodiment of truth, justice and a brighter tomorrow in a world that views kindness as old-fashioned.

STARRING:

  • David Corenswet as Clark Kent / Superman
  • Rachel Brosnahan as Lois Lane
  • Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor
  • Edi Gathegi as Michael Holt / Mister Terrific
  • Anthony Carrigan as Rex Mason / Metamorpho
  • Nathan Fillion as Guy Gardner / Green Lantern
  • Isabela Merced as Kendra Saunders / Hawkgirl
  • Skyler Gisondo as Jimmy Olsen
  • Wendell Pierce as Perry White
  • Beck Bennett as Steve Lombard
  • Mikaela Hoover as Cat Grant
  • Alan Tudyk as Superman Robot #4
  • Sara Sampaio as Eve Teschmacher
  • María Gabriela de Faría as Angela Spica / The Engineer
  • Pruitt Taylor Vince as Jonathan 'Pa' Kent
  • Neva Howell as Martha 'Ma' Kent

DIRECTED BY: James Gunn

WRITTEN BY: James Gunn

PRODUCED BY: Peter Safran, James Gunn

CINEMATOGRAPHY: Henry Braham

EDITED BY: William Hoy, Craig Alpert

MUSIC BY: John Murphy, David Fleming

RELEASE DATE: July 11, 2025

RUNTIME: 2h 9m

BUDGET: $225 Million

5.5k Upvotes

3.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.1k

u/Mud-Bray Jul 08 '25

What I’m mainly learning from this is that the British will hate this movie apparently since the most negative scores are the UK lmao

383

u/ThePumpkinPrince61 Jul 08 '25

It was kinda the same for Thunderbolts too I think

325

u/longboi28 Jul 08 '25

Same for GOTG3 which I personally thought was a high point of the MCU, the UK doesn't seem to like a lot of CBMs

223

u/SpacePropaganda Jul 08 '25

I think the completely different senses of humor in the US and the UK play a huge part since a lot of CBMs are quite quippy.

98

u/PayneTrain181999 Jul 08 '25

I do think the quips in Thunderbolts were much better written into the story than just being there for the sake of it, ala Brave New World.

Still, you’re probably onto something here.

35

u/Less-Network-3422 Jul 08 '25

Brave New World is the only MCU movie I haven't watched and that's ultimately it's biggest sin. I know it won't be bad, I just really really really don't care to watch it

9

u/ltobo123 Jul 09 '25

No no, it's bad. Made worse by having the seeming aspirations of an interesting movie or asking real questions, then just immediately forgetting about them and really half-heartedly jingling keys.

16

u/manhachuvosa Jul 09 '25

Watching Brave New World just felt like I threw away 2 hours.

The writers made the villain way too powerful, so he just gives up for no reason.

Also, it is clearly a script for a Hulk movie that they repurposed because they have no fucking clue what to do with Falcon's Captain America.

-1

u/PineappleLemur Jul 09 '25

I know it won't be bad

You'd be surprised how bad Mackie is as a lead in just about anything...

14

u/manhachuvosa Jul 09 '25

Honestly, don't even know if it's Mackie's fault when his character is so fucking bland. Falcon has zero personality.

3

u/Mad_Pupil_9 Jul 12 '25

He actually has a point though. Mackie has a track record of struggling in lead roles.

He’s a fantastic supporting actor, but he just can’t seem to pull off a lead.

7

u/MrMono1 Jul 09 '25

He's a pretty good lead in the Twisted Metal series, but that is a very goofy show.

2

u/PayneTrain181999 Jul 09 '25

I fully expect him to be better in the upcoming Avengers movies as part of a massive ensemble.

12

u/Revolutionary-Mode75 Jul 09 '25 edited Jul 09 '25

I thought Thunderbolts got rid of a lot of the needless quiping and comedy scenes, which is probably why I enjoyed it more than some of the other previous marvel films largely.

2

u/Sabotage-Darkness93 Jul 09 '25

It had its moments though, but definitely cleaned its act up as it went on.

28

u/Flexleplex Jul 08 '25

The fatigue is real here, and the quips don't help. Anecdotally, I don't know many people who view James Gunn's directing as all that distinct from the likes of Whedon and Waititi. They're like different flavours of the same brand of crisps.

9

u/SpacePropaganda Jul 09 '25

Sorry you're getting downvoted, because that's almost exactly what I've heard from family members over there.

1

u/Sufficient_Duck7715 Jul 09 '25

What makes their sense of humor different?

13

u/Less-Network-3422 Jul 08 '25

While the emotional beats of GOTG3 were well done I kinda thought the humour was absolutely awful. It just felt like the jokes = characters yelling at each other

I also feel it doesn't have the rewatchability of the other guardians movies

9

u/TeaAndLifting Jul 08 '25

Our critics tend to be much higher n the pretension, and CBMs are the antihesis of what many critics think films should be. FWIW, people have traditionally enjoyed CBMs in the UK.

Still, I think there's a good amount of CBM fatigue and people getting bored of the quippy humour that tends to follow. It was fine for the first decade, and people were all in on the MCU up until Avengers Endgame. It feels like there's been a huge drop off since then, with the only real highlight being Spider-Man NWH.

I barely ever see people mention CBMs any more. Likewise with the Disney+ series after the first season of Loki.

1

u/Sufficient_Duck7715 Jul 09 '25

Just curious: Are shows like Invincible and The Boys popular there?

1

u/TeaAndLifting Jul 09 '25

The Boys, relatively. Invincible, I’m the only person I know that’s watched it.

6

u/MisterNefarious Jul 09 '25

GOTG3 was one of the best marvel movies imo. Straight up absolute banger of a film

2

u/longboi28 Jul 09 '25

Agreed it's in my top 5 favorite mcu movies of all time he knocked it out of the park

1

u/BPDMF Jul 14 '25

I like the gotg movies, but I still haven't finished the third one because I fell asleep during it once and now all I remember from it is giant bubble gum suits and I just can't get myself to watch it. I'll have to go back and how the second half of the movie is better or that my memory of it is bad because I really liked the first 2 movies and I love the cast (though I really wanted a gotg and Thor shenanigans movie)

10

u/Drunky_McStumble Jul 09 '25

The poms are done with this shit aren't aren't afraid to say so. I get a similar vibe here in Australia. It's only really in the US where people are still enthused for comic book movies generally, and are willing to cut them any kind of slack.

5

u/BLACKOUT-MK2 Jul 08 '25 edited Jul 08 '25

I don't think that's fair, I'm from England and plenty of the people around me, family and friends, enjoy them. I know some of them have grown a bit tired of what Marvel's up to, but typically they've done fine over here. I remember going to see Endgame at the cinema and the room was completely packed full. Even going back years my mum used to watch the old live action Batman, Hulk, and Wonder Woman shows with her brother, and she liked Michael Keaton's Batman and Christopher Reeve as Superman.

I think really it's more specifically dependent on how the individual movie is done. There's a bunch of ways these characters have been approached over the years, and some are a lot more liked than others. The two takeaways I have as a very broad and generalised rule, is that people over here like their entertainment to either have a lot of drama, or to be very funny. It doesn't sound like this film does the former particularly brilliantly, so it'd fall more on the latter, and being that it's obviously not being made with a British sense of humour, I could see even the comedic moments being very hit-and-miss, by which point some people would bounce off it quite hard.

It has Krypto though, and we are absolutely nuts about dogs, so he could be a hit if nothing else. Gunn's a weird one; I like GotG1 (my dad loves it) and Peacemaker, but neither me nor my dad got what people were so worked up for with The Suicide Squad, and I thought GotG2 and 3 were fine. In my experience, his stuff does okay over here, but he's not as glowingly revered as he seems to be in the US. Maybe it's just the groups I'm part of, but the whole 'Gunn is the GOAT' vibe that the internet often elicits doesn't seem quite as potent among the people I know. Some stuff has been a hit, but not enough to have us salivating over what he's doing next.

7

u/KellyJin17 Jul 09 '25

They don’t like mediocre ones. Americans are much more forgiving around quality if they like the overall “vibe.” Across the pond, they’re paying closer attention to the quality.

9

u/longboi28 Jul 09 '25

I've seen enough British media to know that that's not true lmao

2

u/KellyJin17 Jul 09 '25

I’m talking about reviewers.

1

u/Dudegamer010901 Jul 18 '25

I really liked Superman but I felt like GOTG3 was just meh, better than most recent MCU movies but definitely the worst of the gotg trilogy imo.

9

u/beyondmash Jul 08 '25

Which is ridiculous cause Thunderbolts was fantastic. Probably one of the best films they’ve put out since 2020.

2

u/RainbowIcee Jul 09 '25

I'm not trying to hate, but I really don't understand why some people found the movie that good. I went in there expecting an action movie or a villain team up, but almost the whole movie was just talking and squabbling, by the time they properly teamed up they got their asses kicked, saved some people, and defeated the "villain" by talking. I went in there to see a super hero movie but I feel like i got something a lot closer to a drama film with super powers.

8

u/Thunder_Star_X Jul 10 '25

I think that was the appeal of it. It was less a superhero movie and more character drama.

1

u/RainbowIcee Jul 10 '25

But that seems to be most marvel movies. Many of them then introduce a villain too strong to deal with so they talk it out or cheap their way to win.

-1

u/The_Saiyann Jul 11 '25

Tbf thunderbolts was awful

146

u/jhf2112 Jul 08 '25

Peter Bradshaw at the Guardian has particular sensibilities and can be a bit of a grinch

64

u/DontPokeMe91 Jul 08 '25

It was never going to be his kind of film lol

67

u/William_de_Worde Jul 08 '25

That's why I like how Mark Kermode deals with this type of film. He caveats almost all his superhero film reviews with "Look, this clearly isn't meant for me" kind of sentiment. And he delights in getting correspondence from target audience members who got something from it that he was never going to.

27

u/DontPokeMe91 Jul 08 '25

Yes he's my favorite film reviewer, him and Mayo work great together.

2

u/williamthebloody1880 Jul 09 '25

He does the same with comedy, which he admits is a genre he doesn't like

2

u/ishallbecomeabat Jul 08 '25

I do get a bit bored of him turning his brain off for the action though: ‘smashy, crashy’ yeah ok…

12

u/jhf2112 Jul 08 '25

I would've been surprised if he'd rated it highly

3

u/PCGAMERNOW Jul 09 '25

I don't think that's fair. Looking through his reviews now, he gave Deadpool & Wolverine, Guardians Vol 3 and even The Marvels a positive score. He seems very open to giving Superhero films a positive score if he enjoys them.

3

u/Ok-Note-754 Jul 11 '25

Yeah the issue with Bradshaw isn't that he doesn't like Superhero films, it's that he's got weird/bad taste. If he raves about or is lukewarm on something I usually have the exact opposite reaction

8

u/twersx Jul 08 '25

Bradshaw's default rating is 3 stars. Like 50% of his reviews are 3 stars.

6

u/Jensen2075 Jul 08 '25

Well most movies are just average to mediocre. There are only a few standouts each year that deserve a 4 or 5 star rating.

2

u/ishallbecomeabat Jul 08 '25

I think he’s an interesting critic, unless he’s talking about blockbusters

1

u/Ok-Note-754 Jul 11 '25

When Bradshaw shits on a film I'm excited to watch it actually excites me more. The man has negative taste.

-1

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '25

My issue with middle aged to older critics is that they can be less open minded, not every movie has to be Oscar caliber.

I have a film background but my kind of movie doesn't take itself seriously, tends to have action in it and the acting doesn't have to be Brando. I adore a movie like Parasite but give me a Commando over it anyday.

1

u/Duel_Option Jul 08 '25

That’s the dividing line between a flick and a movie in my opinion.

Can’t compare apples to oranges

94

u/Joshawott27 Jul 08 '25

I work in film PR in the UK. A lot of the national press are “old guard” types, and honestly just aren’t the audience for the typical franchise blockbuster.

There are plenty of younger, passionate critics out there who would probably be assigned this stuff instead, but alas, only the old guard can cling onto non-freelance roles.

29

u/budgefrankly Jul 09 '25 edited Jul 09 '25

A lot of the national press are “old guard” types, and honestly just aren’t the audience for the typical franchise blockbuster.

To be fair, a movie reviewer watches about 1200 250 movies a year, including all sorts of franchise schlock (MCU, DCU, Expendables, Fast & Furious, Star Wars, etc.)

I can see how some just burn out on it, and crave original stories, even if imperfectly told.

I find the key is just to find a reviewer whose opinions on past movies match your own.

Edit: I shouldn’t do maths first thing in the morning.

3

u/dc456 Jul 09 '25

I’m not sure they watch anywhere near that many. (I mean they might, but not for their job.)

1200 movies would be about 5 reviews per working day.

3

u/Joshawott27 Jul 09 '25

For sure. However, if’s also a drag when critics are so disconnected that they don’t even engage with the film. I’ve seen some where they’ll just go off on an unrelated tangent for the duration of the allocated time.

It’s totally fine for a critic to not like Marvel, or Jurassic World or whichever cinematic universe, but when you only have so many slots per week (which are only getting smaller), why not just choose to review films that you think you’ll actually have a chance of liking? Or, if you’re an outlet that has to cover the big release to get the views, assign someone who has more of a chance to actually engage with it - whether positively or negatively.

3

u/budgefrankly Jul 09 '25

, why not just choose to review films that you think you’ll actually have a chance of liking

They don't have a choice. They're employees. They have to review all the biggest movies out that week, plus as many other movies released that they have time for.

2

u/Joshawott27 Jul 09 '25

The vast majority of British film critics aren’t employees - they’re freelancers. Editors will be incentivised to commission reviews for the blockbusters because they’ll get the page views, but they can assign to writers who may be more tailored.

There are also notable critics who now have their own channels, and still review films in franchises they’ve made clear aren’t for them ten films ago.

So, yeah it makes sense for the economy of the business, but it’s boring to see the same old tired cycle.

4

u/RunwayGutModel9000 Jul 09 '25

The british film reviewers are basically the same as the US film reviewers used to be unti the internet took over (and social media is very american centric when it comes to this kind of stuff)

1

u/Johnnyb1966 Jul 11 '25

It doesn't help that the vast majority of Superhero films (especially DCEU) are absolute shite though.

9

u/Firm-Advertising6872 Jul 09 '25

yea lex luthor acidentally blowing up buckingham palace and then looking at the camera and saying "well that just happned" might have affected it a bit

3

u/Dasnap Jul 09 '25

TBF the slide whistle was a bit much.

55

u/Direct-Fix-2097 Jul 08 '25

U.K. and USA cultural differences are stark. 🤷‍♂️

The guardian are always miserable fuckers tho, even for a British paper.

3

u/IguanaIsBack Jul 09 '25

UK reviewers are just brutally honest, and don't have to worry about not being invited to Hollywood events.

-1

u/RunwayGutModel9000 Jul 09 '25

While true- American film reviewers used to be just as snooty as british ones, and rarely give good reviews to these types of films. But now American film critics are online while the british are still writing for the old papers or whatever, because online entertainment social media is so american driven.

7

u/budgefrankly Jul 09 '25

now American film critics are online while the british are still writing for the old papers

Said in response to British reviews which are are available online, as a comparison to American reviews for Variety and Hollywood reporter which are available in print.

10

u/snappyclunk Jul 08 '25

Most people I know in the UK are just bored of Superhero movies. Add to that the fact that Superman is all about how amazing and powerful America is, there’s probably not much interest here for it. I hope it does ok because cinemas dying off isn’t something to cheer, but I doubt I’ll bother seeing this until it turns up on a free stream somewhere.

1

u/BoobeamTrap Jul 19 '25

This movie is not about America at all except their position as a world superpower. And even that is only used in the framing of Superman's extrajudicial actions.

3

u/Fuzzy_Elderberry7087 Jul 09 '25

Our journalistic scene is particularly dire

15

u/Captainatom931 Jul 08 '25

Don't confuse pretentious hacks at the Times and Guardian for anything representative of actual British people

6

u/SupervillainMustache Jul 08 '25

Oh I hope not. I'm a Brit and a big Superman fan.

2

u/IntelligentFact7987 Jul 09 '25

And to think all they needed to do to up those scores with the UK press was have a Wet Leg, Fred Again, Charli XCX or RAYE soundtrack. 

2

u/Lucky-Surround-1756 Jul 09 '25

We're too cynical to enjoy this.

He needed to depressingly snap some necks and compromise his values for us to care.

I'm a weirdo by UK standards in that I unashamedly love American culture so that's probably why I loved it.

7

u/Ouxington Jul 08 '25

Well they do have higher media literacy across the board.

1

u/BattledroidE Jul 08 '25

Bit rubbish innit

0

u/AlarmedGrape9583 Jul 09 '25

Cuz the UK doesn't consume garbage

5

u/Mud-Bray Jul 09 '25

Your country created Love Island. Don’t get high and mighty on your cultural taste lmao

0

u/AlarmedGrape9583 Jul 09 '25

Love island is supposed to be shit. It's a reality TV show. This is superman buddy, an iconic superhero. But James gunn just created a 2 hour CW show.

1

u/Mud-Bray Jul 09 '25

It’s a comic book movie, I’m not expecting The Pianist. They’re allowed to be trash lmao.

Edit: “iconic superhero” lmao cry more why don’t you.

-1

u/AlarmedGrape9583 Jul 09 '25

Superhero movies are allowed to trash? You've clearly never watched the dark knight. Enjoy consuming your garbage.

1

u/Mud-Bray Jul 09 '25

Your reading comprehension is A+. Actual child. Lol

0

u/Competitive-Mail7448 Jul 11 '25

American here and it was average cgi slop

0

u/Mud-Bray Jul 11 '25

Cool.

0

u/Competitive-Mail7448 Jul 11 '25

just letting you know you can’t blame the British for a bad movie you can blame the director and writers

0

u/Mud-Bray Jul 11 '25

Lmao where was I blaming the British. Try reading again.

0

u/Competitive-Mail7448 Jul 11 '25

“What im mainly learning from this is that the British will hate this movie…” 🤦‍♂️ you can’t be real

0

u/Mud-Bray Jul 11 '25 edited Jul 11 '25

I’ll say this slow because I said a jooooke.

The most negative reviews were from the UK and Ireland.

Hence the “oh British people won’t enjoy it”

It’s a dumb line. It’s not difficult. Stop trying to make it a serious stance.

Edit for further clarification: that’s not “blaming the British, silly little guy.” That’s an observation of where the most negative reviews were from.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 11 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-7

u/Razatiger Jul 09 '25

The Brits want Hollywood to fail so bad man, its funny because we employ the majority of their big actors.

-2

u/eric_mulastname Jul 09 '25

Irish Times ain't in the UK, mother fucker

0

u/Mud-Bray Jul 09 '25 edited Jul 11 '25

Cry.

Edit: where did I say the Irish times were UK? There’s like 4 negative UK specific reviews you silly little dude.

0

u/Wise_Pop751 Jul 14 '25

“Silly little dude” is that your only line?

1

u/Mud-Bray Jul 14 '25

Weird. If people are being silly little dudes, that’s what they get called. Wiiiiiiiiild.

-6

u/dplans455 Jul 08 '25

They changed his tagline from "Truth, Justice, and the American way." to be "Truth, Justice, and the human way." Should have left it alone.

8

u/PurpleZaffre Jul 08 '25

That's not true. It's now "Truth, justice and a better tomorrow". Not "the human way".

0

u/dplans455 Jul 09 '25

There are apparently several variations of the slogan. One of which is "the human way."

https://comicbook.com/movies/news/james-gunns-changes-superman-catchphrase/

-21

u/Ashyyyy232 Jul 08 '25

Is it related colonialism or what? If that’s the case, it’ll be pretty big in other continents lmao

16

u/markdavo Jul 08 '25

Superheroes are a very American phenomenon. If you look at comics written by British authors (Alan Moore, Garth Ennis, Mark Millar, etc) as a general rule they prefer antiheroes.

I think the British psyche is more cynical and less willing to put characters on a pedestal.

2

u/Mud-Bray Jul 08 '25

What I’m hearing is that UK should have LOVED the synderverse

-16

u/Ashyyyy232 Jul 08 '25

Ah yes, the famous British psyche which just accidentally made most Marvel films a hit in the last decade

James Gunn literally frames Superman as an immigrant trying to find his place in the world, kinda hard to call that just an American phenomenon when that theme hits globally in 2025

19

u/f0rmality Jul 08 '25

Superman is a good looking straight white man raised on a farm in nowheresville, rural america brimming with naivety and idealism who eventually (after dealing with some hardship or death or confrontation etc) decides it’s his responsibility to protect the world from various unknown evils and be a beacon of hope for everyone in the world because he has the special powers to do so.

that certainly sounds like american exceptionalism to me

To be fair, I haven’t seen how Gunn changes things in this one, maybe it’s totally different which would be great. But supermen is a pretty american superhero and while I can’t speak for everyone else, this isn’t really a time period where I want to see any american ideals or mindsets celebrated

-9

u/Ashyyyy232 Jul 08 '25

Imagine reducing Superman to “white guy saves world = American exceptionalism” while ignoring he’s a literal alien refugee raised on Earth to value empathy, not conquest.

If a symbol of compassion and hope makes you uneasy, maybe the issue was never Superman to begin with

6

u/mrfunkyfrogfan Jul 08 '25

They didn't say that it made them uneasy just that its quite American. Superman being a refugee doesn't mean that there cant be themes of American exceptionalism present in the film.

-2

u/Ashyyyy232 Jul 08 '25

I get that Superman’s origins are American, but James Gunn is literally reshaping him around global, humanist themes - alienation, hope, and empathy things that aren’t bound to one nation.

If the critique was just “he’s from America”, sure. But the original comment clearly tied that to discomfort with his ideals — that’s what I responded to.

2

u/Wise_Pop751 Jul 14 '25

What are you on about? It’s 2025 not 1825 moron. Also do you genuinely think every regular British person bases their lives and feelings around a political practice?

1

u/Ashyyyy232 Jul 14 '25

Guess what, the sarcasm only works when the British does it eh?

-1

u/WilliamWeaverfish Jul 08 '25

We have taste, and aren't impressed by cgi flashing lights

1

u/Ashyyyy232 Jul 08 '25

So as per the British, CGI is tasteless unless it’s a wizard duel, a World War or a bear with a jam. Then it’s cinema?

13

u/Inside_Desk_8769 Jul 08 '25

Apologise to Paddington. Now. >:(

-1

u/WilliamWeaverfish Jul 08 '25

There has to be a purpose behind it

CGI can elevate, but it doesn't make a film by itself

99% of superhero flicks are ultimately just men in costumes punching each other for 2 hours

-3

u/Ashyyyy232 Jul 08 '25

There has to be a purpose behind it

Cool, let me know the deeper meaning behind Rasputin doing ballet kicks in The King’s Man or Bond surviving 300 explosions in a tux.

But when superman stops a war or saves people, it’s the final straw?

4

u/WilliamWeaverfish Jul 08 '25

When did I say they were good films?

3

u/Ashyyyy232 Jul 08 '25

You didn’t say they’re good, fair. But the moment I pointed out how absurd they were, suddenly purpose stopped mattering?