Make the DC Universe Great Again

While many of us went to James Gunn’s Superman in hopes of seeing a good SupermanThe first big superhero from DC Comics, Superman has survived any number of pretenders to the throne, besting not only other comic titans but even Wolrd War II to remain one of only three comics to continue publishing since the 1940s. movie, just because the character is cool and it would be nice to see a fun film starring Big Blue, not everyone out there on the Internet had the same hopes for the film. I know, it’s going to come as a shock to many of you out there to learn that there are people on the Internet that enjoy being contrarians, that have a stick tightly shoved up their ass and feel the need to fight against things that go against their perception of how a fandom should be. The Snyder Bros. (as I mentioned recently) have it out for Superman because they have this weird fantasy that if Gunn’s new DC UniverseThe successor to WB's failed cinematic universe, the DCEU. Headed by James Gunn and Peter Safran, this new DC Universe carries over some continuity from the former film and TV series while crafting a new, rebooted universe for the future. somehow fails then Zack Snyder will be brought back in and he can finish his grand, five-part Justice LeagueThe premiere team at DC Comics, their version of the Avengers (which actually came before the Avengers and, really, has existed in some fomr since the early 1940s), the Justice League is the team-up to end all team-ups, featuring some of the most popular, and longest running, characters in all of comics history (and also Booster Gold). series he had been working on.

This, of course, ignores the fact that Warners were not happy with Zack Snyder’s vision after Man of Steel and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, not the Box Office returns for those films, nor the critical and cultural response to the pictures. When Zack had personal matters he had to attend to while filming Justice League (the death of his daughter specifically), he left the project and the WB brought Joss Whedon in to finish (and remake) the film. And then, after, Snyder was not invited back to continue his vision. That is not the direction a studio is going to take if they have any desire to ever finish a five-part saga, guys. Sorry to burst your bubble.

We aren’t really here to discuss the Snyder Bros., though. That was just a gateway for me to find other people online (and on TV) complaining about Superman. The reason: apparently Superman is “woke”. The right-wing commentariat are pitching a fit over the film because they feel it’s left-wing propaganda meant to critique the Trump administration’s current regime. “They made Superman into an immigrant that wants to help people, will fight against anyone, and wants to stop all war! How dare they!”

So… that’s idiotic, of course. Yes, all those things are in the movie but that’s not because this film is inherently political. Instead, those parts of Superman’s character are included in the movie because they’re core parts of Superman’s character. You can’t adapt Superman without including some (if not all) of those traits of his character because he’s supposed to be the Big Blue Boy Scout. He’s the beacon of hope fighting for Truth, Justice, and a Better Tomorrow (because DC changed that last bit away from “The American Way” a few years ago). That’s just who he is.

I’m sure you can see why the Snyder Bros. aligned themselves well with the right-wing media, of course. The version of Superman they love from over in Man of Steel barely exhibits these traits. He might be an alien from another planet, but he’s not the kind and caring person we expect from Superman. He lets people die. He destroys half a city without worrying about the collateral damage. He straight up murders a guy all because Zack Snyder thought it was cool (this is not hyperbole but something Snyder specifically fought to have included in the script). Man of Steel isn’t an unwatchable film, but it is a bad Superman movie all because Snyder thought that a man from another planet should be a god and not someone that related to the common man.

I don’t think Gunn’s Superman is inherently political. It’s not specifically commenting on the politics of today but, instead resetting the character where most of his fans think he should be – that shining beacon of hope – and if that just so happens to comment on current politics that’s just because the current atmosphere has shifted very far in one direction (spoilers: it’s rightward) and making the classic, Silver Age-style Superman now can’t help but be a comment on the world we live in today.

But politics aren’t at the forefront of Gunn’s Superman. His real desire is to reset the character back from Man of Steel and show that this version of Big Blue is different from Snyder’s. This isn’t done maliciously, mind you. I know that Gunn and Snyder are friends in real life and Gunn isn’t looking to attack Snyder or that director’s work with his own film. But the character of Superman needed a reset after Snyder’s mishandling of the character, and Superman is in commentary with that film and that universe.

Let’s look at things that happen in the film (and yes there will be spoilers) to see how they are commenting, directly or indirectly, on Man of Steel and its cinematic universe sequels. In the film, Clark is an alien, as he was in Man of Steel. In that film his father, Jonathan Kent, told Clark that protecting his secret was the most important thing he could do, and if that meant that people had to die (Pa Kent included) to protect the secret, then so be it. In Superman, by contrast, Jonathan Kent is proud of his boy because he puts himself out there, in the line of fire, to save people. He didn’t tell his son how to live his life, he taught him right from wrong and let his son decide who he should be and because he was raised by kind and loving parents, Clark grew up to be a benevolent Superman.

In Superman, Big Blue is constantly fighting dangers that attack Metropolis. Very often there is collateral damage, but it’s not the fault of Superman. Instead of letting people die, he does everything he can to prevent every death possible. He checks on people after an attack and stops whatever he’s doing to save someone in danger. He takes the hits so no one else has to. Hell, at one point he goes out of his way to save a single squirrel because he didn’t want any death or harm to fall on any living creature. By contrast, Superman in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, is caught in an explosion in a government building and passively watches as everyone nearby dies. Then, instead of searching the building for any survivors, he flies off because his feelings were hurt. That’s not a good look for our hero.

In Superman, Clark flies off to stop a war between two countries, one of which thinks the people of the other country are scum and need to be killed or displaced (here we have shades of the Israel/Palestine conflict, even though Gunn wrote the script in 2023 before that conflict came to its most recent head). Clark doesn’t want anyone to die, and that’s his explanation for why he flew into the dominant country, Boravia, and kidnapped its leader for a little chat. Superman gave the man a stern talking to, which could be seen as threatening him, but he didn’t view it as such and said the only threat was that he’d fly back and talk to him again more thoroughly. Meanwhile, Snyder’s Superman doesn’t even consider stopping wars or violence, it seems, and Snyder even paints a dark future for the character where he goes insane and conquers the world.

Now, yes, Superman is an alien immigrant here, but that’s a core of the character. He has to be an alien immigrant because that’s how Superman’s story always starts. Hell, that’s one of the few things Snyder’s version even maintained. But that’s not a commentary on the current, anti-immigrant administration we have right now (in large part because they took office in January of 2025 and this film was already done filming by then). Did Gunn see how things were going in the world and use it to draw inspiration? I’m sure he did, but that’s called making your story relatable. Lex employs people to kill Superman because they hate that Superman is an alien with unbelievable powers. Lex spreads lies about Superman online to discredit him. Lex is playing the game of the current world, and to do otherwise would make this film feel like it takes place in another era disconnected completely from our own.

I think the part that worked best for me, and that shows how Gunn’s Superman is different from Snyder’s Man of Steel comes at the end. Lex has the world in his grasp, terrorizing it with a rift that threatens to tear the globe apart. If this were Snyder’s film he’d have had Superman kill Lex to stop the rift (as Superman killed Zod in that 2013 movie). Instead, he talks Lex down while Mr. Terrific gets the code and saves the day. In that speech to Lex, Clark acknowledges that the billionaire thinks Superman is a god, but that’s not how Clark views it. He came from a planet, he has powers, but he grew up in America and he just wants to do right by the world. He’s as human as anyone else, deep down, and no one should view him as a god.

That’s Superman. That’s the guy that we all want to see on screen, the guy with immense powers that uses them for good because to do anything else would waste these gifts that could help people. That’s all he wants, to help, and then he wants to be a guy like anyone else. That’s the true core of Superman, which Snyder never understood but Gunn absolutely gets. And if that’s political, somehow, then that’s more a comment on the world we live in now than anything in Gunn’s film.