Superman Review 2025: James Gunn's Colourful Reinvention
- Tavia Millward
- Aug 26
- 5 min read
By Tavia Millward, Entertainment Correspondent, Daily Planet, Metropolis
Metropolis knows a thing or two about Superman. We’ve seen him save our skies, punch out galactic gods, and stop the odd meteor from turning Midtown into a parking lot. So when Hollywood decides to once again shine the spotlight on our favourite Kryptonian, one question naturally hovers in the air: do we really need another Superman film?
After watching James Gunn’s Superman (2025), I can say this—it isn’t the Superman you’re used to. Whether that’s good or bad depends entirely on what kind of cape-wearer you’ve been waiting for.
A Superman in Four Timelines
From the very first frames, Gunn tips his hand. The film introduces Kal-El’s story not through the familiar crashing rocket ship or the dusty Kansas farmstead, but by charting his life breakdown across “three centuries, three decades, three months, three weeks, and three minutes.” It’s bold, quirky, and immediately announces: this is not Snyder’s moody, rain-soaked Superman.
Gone are the muted greys and Zimmer’s pounding war drums. In their place: a splash of technicolour, comic-book punch, and a wink that reminds us we’re allowed to have fun with superheroes. This Superman isn’t draped in operatic gravitas—he’s running, flying, and punching with the cheerful chaos of Saturday morning cartoons.
POW! BAM! ZAP!
There’s a kinetic, almost childlike energy to the action. The alien-monster showdowns felt less like a grandiose “battle for the soul of Metropolis” and more like a live-action Power Rangers special. And you know what? I started rooting for Superman the way I did as a kid—leaning forward, grinning, waiting for that knockout blow.
But that childlike joy does have its limits. Outside the brawls, the seams begin to show.
Lois and Clark: The Chemistry Problem
Here’s where the film stumbles hardest: the relationship between Clark Kent and Lois Lane. To put it bluntly, I didn’t buy it. Lois isn’t always in danger (a refreshing change), but she also isn’t written with the sharp wit or journalistic spark that makes her Superman’s equal. The romance feels patched in, as if the film is checking the "Clark and Lois" relationship rather than telling a believable love story.
Superman’s Humanity: Naïve or Noble?
Where the film does succeed is in highlighting Kal-El’s humanity—even when that humanity is flawed. Superman isn’t a seasoned political strategist. In one eyebrow-raising sequence, he talks about barging into a desert nation and demands peace by threatening its leader. It’s clumsy, naïve, and even dangerous—but it’s also quintessentially Superman.
Why? Because he believes in us. He believes humanity is worth saving, that trust is stronger than cynicism, and that—even in a city used to collapsing skyscrapers—we can still be better.
Metropolis: Shrugging Off the Apocalypse
Speaking of skyscrapers, Gunn laces in some cheeky humour about how desensitised Metropolitans have become. Buildings collapse, aliens stomp, interdimensional portals open, and yet commuters keep walking. When you live with Superman and the “Justice Gang” patrolling your skyline, do you really need to panic? Apparently not. Order your coffee, trust the cape, carry on.
Lex Luthor: Smart, Rich, Predictable
And then there’s Lex. Brilliant? Yes. Dangerous? Absolutely. But also frustratingly familiar. This Luthor is still the bitter billionaire who can’t stomach Superman’s applause. He schemes, he profits from war, he tinkers with dimensional travel, and even manages to clone the Man of Steel. Yet for all his genius, he never escapes feeling like a wealthy child throwing a tantrum. If only he’d direct that brilliance into innovation rather than destruction.
The Real Star: Krypto the Superdog
But let’s be honest: audiences didn’t cheer loudest for Superman. They cheered for Krypto. The flying, super-strong, utterly disobedient pup steals the show. When Krypto vanishes, the tension in the theatre is palpable. Superman himself storms into Lex’s office shouting, “WHERE’S THE DOG?” and, for once, we all shared his urgency. Forget doomsday weapons—where’s the dog?
A Patchwork of Hope and Frustration
At its heart, Gunn’s Superman champions the eternal themes: hope, justice, and kindness. And yes, it’s a refreshing contrast to Snyder’s doom-laden mythmaking. But the execution? Uneven. Scenes feel stitched together from different drafts. Dialogue stumbles. Whole subplots—black holes, interdimensional travel—feel underdeveloped yet oddly dominant.
The tonal whiplash is real: one moment, we’re in a high-energy comic-book brawl; the next, we’re mired in soap-opera romance or hard sci-fi exposition. At times, I wondered if I’d missed a prequel.
So, Is It Worth It?
Here’s the truth, Metropolis: Gunn’s Superman isn’t perfect. The writing is clunky, the romance unconvincing, and the plot sometimes veers into chaos. But it is fun. It is colourful. And it reminded me why Superman endures, not because he’s flawless, but because he makes us believe in the possibility of something better.
In an age of cinematic universes and endless reboots, maybe that’s the Superman we need.
So, do we really need another Superman film? If it makes us smile like kids again, if it lets us believe—even for two hours—in truth and justice… then yes, maybe we do.
Behind the Scenes: Behind the Cape with James Gunn
“Great Krypton! James Gunn Just Rewired the Fortress of Solitude!”
By your friendly neighbourhood film sleuth at the Daily Planet
If you thought James Gunn’s Superman (2025) was just another tights-and-cape caper, think again! Behind the comic-panel punches and rainbow-bright frames is a filmmaker taking a big, bold swing—one that splices 1970s Superman optimism with modern blockbuster bravado.
🖼️ “This Looks Like a Job for… Colour!”
In an age of grey filters and grimdark palettes, Gunn pulled the emergency lever and shouted:
“Let’s shoot this like a comic book exploded in Technicolor!”
His colour grading is straight out of the Donner playbook—saturated blues, sun-drenched skies, and a Metropolis that looks like you could actually live there (as long as you don’t mind the occasional alien invasion). Gunn wanted this to feel like a matinee adventure you’d catch in 1978, popcorn in one hand and pure hope in the other.
Filmmakers take note: this isn’t nostalgia for nostalgia’s sake. It’s a conscious aesthetic choice to reframe Superman as a beacon, not a brooder.
🎬 Practical Punches & Pulp Power
While the VFX budget clearly had more zeroes than a LexCorp tax form, Gunn didn’t rely solely on digital trickery. Fight scenes were choreographed with practical stuntwork and wide lenses that mimic classic serial framing. Think: fewer shaky cams, more “you can see the action!”
“If you can’t track Superman’s punch, you’re missing the point,” Gunn reportedly quipped on set.
He even nodded to Power Rangers–style kaiju fights—campy, yes, but full of kinetic clarity. For film students: study how Gunn blocks scenes for spectacle without losing spatial coherence. It’s pulpy and smart.
🪑 Lessons from the Director's Chair
For the filmmaking faithful, here’s what Gunn’s Superman teaches:
Tone is a tool. Don’t fear camp if you can wield it with control.
Visual clarity matters. Bright doesn’t mean shallow—it can mean confident.
Old tricks still work. Wide shots, orchestral cues, and sincere performances haven’t gone out of style.
Nostalgia is a spice, not the meal. Use it to enhance, not to replace.
🦸♂️ Final Word from the Daily Planet Watchtower
James Gunn didn’t just make a Superman movie—he made a love letter to comic-book cinema. It’s flawed, yes, but bursting with intentionality. It dares to say, “What if we stopped trying to make Superman cool… and just let him be good?”
And to that, dear readers, we say:
“Up, up, and away, Mr Gunn. Metropolis salutes you.”
Comments