Superman (2025 film)

[ranger_scout]

I enjoyed seeing the film in IMAX, but I found it had too many flaws. I liked that Lois wasn't a typical damsel in distress, but I didn't like that the movie was mostly about politics, and the message Superman's real parents sent didn't make sense.

[ZariusTwo]

I didn't mind the movie's political messages because you need something for current generations to connect and relate to, and it's not like DC haven't done Kal's parents being douchebags before (it was a big plot point almost ten years ago during the Rebirth era when Jor was Mr. Oz)

My issue was it was fifty jokes a minute and it was awkward because not even Silver Age had potty humour

Corenswet was great, Holt was great, Rachel was great, the cast were all very solid, I just wish they were comic book and not cartoon characters

If this came out in the 90s alongside Batman and Robin, I doubt it'd be getting the praise it's getting right now.


I give it a 7/10.

Superman and Lois already told several good Superman movies over four years.

[ranger_scout]

Nicholas Hoult was a great Lex Luthor, even though I know who he and the creative team based his portrayal on.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by ranger_scout

Nicholas Hoult was a great Lex Luthor, even though I know who he and the creative team based his portrayal on.

I loved how he had this gang of gamer dudes working for him, cheering and giving high fives when they took Superman down. Like they weren't under duress, they were having a blast working for Lex. Those paychecks must be phat.

[IMJ]

Lex was done very well. And the whole thing tapped into that Gen Y "gamer" sensibility incredibly well. I was surprised that it felt so relevant and on point. And to be honest, I thought the social media $#!( talking of Superman by a bunch of monkey's was great.

[Mr. Entertainment]

https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Su...5)#tab=summary

Wow, this movie's doing better than I predicted. I figured it'd be tomorrow when it crosses 400, but here we are.

It beat Superman Returns, so let's see if it can beat or be around the same against Man of Steel in week 3 or 4.

[Andrew NDB]

Yeah, it's going to end up doing exactly what Man of Steel did. Which was considered a major underperformance which made WB nervous enough to scrap Man of Steel 2 and force Batman into things.

[RaphaelinSTL]

I liked the movie fine, but like with most summer popcorn movies ... I never think about them much 24 hours after I watch them, and I'll never rewatch them ever again. Then again, I don't do that with many movies these days. Last movie I felt compelled to rewatch immediately was The Substance.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Yeah, it's going to end up doing exactly what Man of Steel did. Which was considered a major underperformance, which made WB nervous enough to scrap Man of Steel 2 and force Batman into things.

That was also coming off of The Dark Knight trilogy, though, so that makes sense why they were so shocked and scared after Man of Steel underperformed.

[Mr. Entertainment]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Yeah, it's going to end up doing exactly what Man of Steel did. Which was considered a major underperformance which made WB nervous enough to scrap Man of Steel 2 and force Batman into things.

I'm not exactly "rooting" for it, especially when your next movies are Supergirl and Clayface... But if it overachieves itself (especially given the international numbers) maybe it could lead to movies the fans/ audience really want to see.

[Mr. Entertainment]

Originally Posted by RaphaelinSTL

I liked the movie fine, but like with most summer popcorn movies ... I never think about them much 24 hours after I watch them, and I'll never rewatch them ever again. Then again, I don't do that with many movies these days. Last movie I felt compelled to rewatch immediately was The Substance.

Theses are basically my thoughts as well. I'm an admirer of the movie and curious what it'll do for WB and DC, but I had no interest in actually seeing it due to numerous factors as the CGI bloat across the whole movie, too many characters that could've been introduced in other media, another Superman vs Luthor movie redux ×3, etc.

[IMJ]

It was a solid movie, but it seems that there is no escaping the ongoing "sensibility of stupidity" from Hollywood, made even worse by other "obvious" routes they could have taken.

For example, the Ultraman as a "clone of Superman" was incredibly stupid decision-making, especially when there are a variety of other outlets in the lore that would have done the exact same thing and made sense......

-Bizarro - explained by Luthor's "dimension hopping machine" for example.

-An other-dimensional Superman (i.e., Cavill) who has a "pass the torch moment" and returns to the Snyderverse as explained by Luthor's "dimension hopping machine".

-basically any number of "strong" Superman villains from canon who could have been under Luthor's employ.

Just a dumb decision that inexplicably happens in literally every single Hollywood movie, made worse when there are other clear, obvious and no-brainer executions of said stupid idea. They could have done any of those things to almost the exact same effect and outcome, but instead they inject a f'n clone.

[Andrew NDB]

Should have been Mongul and Warworld instead of a dumb clone and reality warping. Luthor could have made contact across the stars or something and worked out some kind of alliance and we'd get the same movie hitting the same beats but much better.

[sdp]

Well my theater had the Fleischer Superman shorts and I decided to watch them the way they were always intended, in theaters. I had a lot of fun so I decided to buy a ticket to Superman. I was going to wait until it was on HBO Max but whatever, I think I'll like the movie so might as well watch it. A new Superman movie only comes out once every ten years.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Yeah, it's going to end up doing exactly what Man of Steel did. Which was considered a major underperformance which made WB nervous enough to scrap Man of Steel 2 and force Batman into things.

lol and it's likely going to be the same thing again, I mean Superman is not the huge brand WB wants to make it out to be, its biggest selling point is "existing" and people will buy shirts and merchandise with the Superman logo in perpetuity, you just have to make movies and shows even if the ratings and Box Office is "underwhelming" for such a "big" IP. It's big but people dont' want to watch it if that makes any sense.

There's superhero fatigue and the DC brand for movies is tainted, what were they expecting? It's doing great counting everything, Man of Steel and Superman Returns reboots were similar. It's not whether it's a bad movie or not it's just what superman can get and has been able to get for the last three decades.

I don't think DC fully learned its lesson, so we'll see how things go. I don't think they'll be as paranoid and automatically cancel everything just because one movie underperformed but the fact that they have financial problems likely isn't going to let them do whatever they want unless they actually deliver hits.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by sdp

lol and it's likely going to be the same thing again

I mean, pretty much? Just like WB getting nervous after Man of Steel cancelled a Man of Steel 2 when learning from the lessons of Man of Steel 1 and putting out a proper Man of Steel 2 would have been exactly the direction they should have gone, it doesn't even sound like a Superman (2025) II is a thing being looked at. We're basically going to get BvS next, but spread across a bunch of other group movies and projects.

[sdp]

I realized yesterday as well that the DCEU actually **** out 15 movies, to put some context in it's run which was like less than ten years the MCU up to End game was only 22 movies and that was like 15+ years.

i guess most of us didn't realize since only the Snyder trilogy is connected for real. The other projects besides maybe the first Suicide Squad were mostly stand alone. So they weren't really connected yet suffered the baggage of being in the same universe. what a mess

[Mr. Entertainment]

I think the attitude all these directors have in the past 20 years is that they feel in some molecular way that they have to honor the Donner films when I think they should just worry about having to honor the source material. By that, I mean do what Donner did - take the core appeal of Superman and put it on screen.

What Gunn COULD'VE done is try and spin that, maybe do a secular movie set in space or in the bottle city of Kandor. I don't know - something that's different to audiences, but still has that core appeal of Superman in there that audiences connected with back in 1978.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Mr. Entertainment

I think the attitude all these directors have in the past 20 years is that they feel in some molecular way that they have to honor the Donner films

I don't think Man of Steel did that. Beyond that moment when Cavil looks up and is about to smash the gravity engine's core and he kind of transforms into Christopher Reeve... which they said later on was not intentional at all.

And every time I hear a filmmaker say, "Superman: The Motion Picture is the definitive Superman movie and the best we can hope to do now is be like 1% as good as that movie!" I want to puke. Christopher Reeve is fine in it, Luthor is an idiot and intentionally surrounds himself with morons, it's campy and goofy and it's BORING. Superman II was a little better in that it had credible villains, at least.

[ToTheNines]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

And every time I hear a filmmaker say, "Superman: The Motion Picture is the definitive Superman movie and the best we can hope to do now is be like 1% as good as that movie!" I want to puke. Christopher Reeve is fine in it, Luthor is an idiot and intentionally surrounds himself with morons, it's campy and goofy and it's BORING. Superman II was a little better in that it had credible villains, at least.

Yeah dude, that **** is mind blowing. Nostalgia is a hell of a drug, I guess.

[IMJ]

You know, I was a small kid when Reeve did Superman - that very impressionable age and I was that kid who tied one of my Dad's button up shirts around his neck like a cape and flew around the house.

Superman II was amazing to me - I was 3 and a half years old and basically grew up with that movie playing on cable.

With all of that said - I mean... I hate to say this, but yes Reeve was "Superman" for a generation of kids. But then that generation read the comics and saw Dan Jurgens Superman on the page and that's ultimately what we wanted.

Reeve made... basically 1 and a half to maybe 2 good Superman flicks. The first where nothing happens but it was great because no one had seen that before and the second which was a comic book slugfest. That's it.

I mean..... honestly Reeve as Superman is a little too revered.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

I enjoyed it for what it was. I didn't love it but it was fine. Liked it more than Man of Steel. I actually like how they handled Krypto. Was hoping he would maul Luthor some more.

While I thought most of the cast did good, not sure how I feel about Supergirl at the end. She could be a fun character but I hope they don't make her too rowdy to where I get annoyed by her.

Otherwise, good start to the DCU, so far...