Superman Is Not Woke and a Total Disappointment

Summary

The video script critiques the latest Superman film, focusing on its failure to capture the character's essence. The reviewer expresses disappointment in the film's lack of emotional depth and its inability to deliver a truly iconic Superman story. Despite some positive feedback from early screenings, the film is seen as solid but not groundbreaking, missing the impact needed to elevate the DC Universe. The reviewer also touches on their personal journey, using it as a backdrop to reflect on the film's shortcomings. Ultimately, it's a critique of Hollywood's struggle to truly bring Superman to life in a meaningful way.

Takeaways

• 😀 The *Superman* film, directed by James Gunn, has polarized audiences, leaving some feeling apathetic due to its tone and lack of emotional impact.
• 😀 The movie failed to deliver a coherent and focused narrative, which undermines the potential of the iconic superhero.
• 😀 The film's tone, which attempts to mix humor and hope, often feels out of place, diminishing Superman's core values of truth and justice.
• 😀 There is a noticeable frustration that the film focuses on too many characters, diluting Superman’s significance and leaving him without proper development.
• 😀 The film’s portrayal of Superman’s immigrant story and the struggle of Earth’s citizens feels superficial, as it does not dive deeply into these themes.
• 😀 The movie’s tone is described as being irreverent and comedic, which clashes with the traditional heroic qualities that Superman represents.
• 😀 The review emphasizes that the apathy after watching the movie is a major failure for a Superman film, which should inspire hope and excitement.
• 😀 There is disappointment over the lack of a clear cinematic vision for the DC Universe, especially with the absence of Batman in the immediate future.
• 😀 The review argues that DC’s focus on creating a cinematic universe instead of just telling a compelling Superman story may have contributed to the movie’s shortcomings.
• 😀 The film is seen as a 'solid' but 'not a home run,' which, while a positive note for Warner Brothers and DC, doesn't meet the high expectations for such a legendary character.
• 😀 The reviewer hints that the lack of emotional engagement and memorable moments from the movie makes it hard to view it as a triumph for DC's superhero film future.

Q & A

What is the main criticism of James Gunn's approach to Superman in this movie?

The main criticism is that James Gunn fails to capture the gravity and iconic nature of Superman. His approach is seen as a misfire, unable to balance the character's traditional traits with the film's narrative, which feels overwhelmed by secondary characters and political themes.

How does the review describe the film’s portrayal of Superman as a character?

Superman is portrayed as an overwhelmed figure, with the film struggling to highlight his heroic aspects. The review feels that instead of presenting Superman as a symbol of hope and strength, the movie focuses too much on political themes and secondary characters, diluting his impact.

What political theme does the film explore with Superman’s character?

The film explores the idea of Superman as an immigrant, with a backstory that ties him to themes of conquest and colonization. This is presented through his upbringing on Earth by Lara and Jorel, which becomes a controversial and politicized angle.

Why is the movie’s take on Superman’s immigrant narrative considered problematic?

The immigrant narrative is seen as an oversimplification of Superman’s origin and a political tool that detracts from the core Superman story. The review criticizes the film for using this angle without fully exploring its complexity, making it feel forced and out of place within the larger narrative.

What does the reviewer think of the supporting characters in the film?

The reviewer believes the supporting characters, including those like Lara and Jorel, contribute to the film’s overwhelming tone. The focus on multiple characters distracts from Superman himself, making the narrative feel cluttered and unfocused.

Does the reviewer think the film succeeds in its portrayal of Superman as a hero?

No, the reviewer feels the film fails to capture Superman's heroic essence. Despite some good moments and acting, the film doesn’t successfully present Superman as a symbol of hope and justice, and instead leaves viewers with an apathetic, forgettable experience.

How does the reviewer feel about the film’s tonal balance?

The tonal balance is one of the biggest criticisms. The reviewer argues that the film struggles to maintain a serious tone for Superman while also trying to introduce political commentary and secondary characters, which undermines the emotional weight that the character deserves.

What role does James Gunn’s past work play in the review?

James Gunn’s past work with characters like The Guardians of the Galaxy and Peacemaker is noted, but the reviewer suggests that while Gunn is skilled with misfit characters, he was out of his depth with Superman. His style of humor and irreverence doesn’t mesh well with the gravity required for a Superman film.

Does the reviewer believe the film could have been better if it focused solely on Superman?

Yes, the reviewer argues that the film would have been stronger if it had focused more on Superman himself, rather than trying to establish a larger cinematic universe. A simpler, character-driven Superman story would have likely resonated more with audiences.

What does the reviewer think about the future of DC’s cinematic universe after this movie?

The reviewer expresses concern about the future of DC’s cinematic universe, especially without a strong Superman to anchor it. With Batman absent for the foreseeable future, the review suggests that DC's attempts to build a shared universe may struggle without a clear, compelling Superman character at the center.