Did you ever think that Superman and punk-rock were compatible?
Spoilers ahead!
Superman, directed by James Gunn, tells a new tale about the pop culture icon—one that displays strong immigrant empowerment, an unapologetic pro-Palestinian stance, anti-brainwashing commentary and that signature screw-the-rich mentality that the roots of punk subculture were undeniably acquainted with. Cinema is art, and art is rarely surface level. If you watch the movie expecting pure fantasy, you’re doing yourself a disservice.
Superman, after getting wrapped up in trying to end the Israeli-Palestinian—woah, sorry, the Boravian-Jorhanpurian—border conflict, ends up getting accused of being an alien threat, turning the world against him and giving his archnemesis, businessman and infinite-jillionare Lex Luthor, the perfect excuse to bring the government into his schemes to kill Superman.
The movie looks good, boasts cool shots and has decent humor. As an installment in a larger franchise, it’s wonderful how the plot leaves the audience with no necessary research or knowledge to understand what’s going on or to enjoy it fully.
Now to the best part.
Even though most people going to a Superman movie aren’t looking for high art, this movie makes it a point to establish itself as political commentary as soon as Boravia and Jorhanpur become plotpoints. In short, Boravia wants to take over Jorhanpur and kill a lot of people in the process. It’s later revealed that Boravia’s leader plans to give Luthor half of Jorhanpur’s land.
Superman’s unapologetic stance against Boravia’s conquest shows this movie’s pro-Palestinian stance, and the antagonization of Luthor warns against excessive wealth. The movie develops the political parallels as it progresses: Luthor plans to profit off his sector of Jorhanpur, which reminds me of Trump’s desire to claim and develop Gaza. The president of Boravia commands his forces to fill Jorhanpur with blood (which sounds similar to statements made by some Israeli officials). Like Israel, Boravia has a strong relationship with the United States, and finally, Superman faces a lot of backlash for his anti-Boravian actions (which reminds me of the suppression of pro-Palestinian protests).
In the first quarter of the movie, Luthor and his team discover a damaged message from Superman’s parents, piece it together and release it to the public. The recovered portion of the message features Superman’s parents telling him to conquer Earth—a sentiment that Superman was unaware of.
The central theme, immigrant empowerment, comes from Superman’s ostracization as an alien after Luthor exposes the complete video.
Luthor’s concerning “correctional facilities” remind me of Florida’s infamous Alligator Alcatraz. The denial of Superman’s rights and the fear that the alien is a threat strike the same chord as anti-immigrant perspectives in America.
Luthor also envies Superman’s innate abilities and subsequent fandom (as opposed to working for his notoriety, like Luthor), a belief which echoes the statistically incorrect notion that immigrants are taking a significant portion of jobs from American citizens. And even though the biggest allegation is that Superman is on Earth to conquer, another claim that’s ethically less concerning but still treated equally by Luthor is the fear that Superman has a “secret harem”—which feels similar to the notion that a lot of anti-immigrant voices (and other oppressors, like racist white Americans to Black men in recent history) use: that immigrants are sexually immoral.
The first flaw in the main message is that the threat Superman poses is infinitely more believable than the threats immigrants pose in the real world. The evidence of Superman’s conquest, to the outside observer, is not a complicated situation: the video is reasonable proof of malicious intent. In the real world, the “threats” posed by illegal immigration are debatable and often based on inaccuracy.
The abundance of tiny plot holes also bothered me.
The way the villains translate and expose Superman’s parents’ message is unclear and convoluted. How would Earth’s top linguists translate a message from an entirely different planet? How does the nanotechnology villain, the Engineer, recover the rest of the video? The nanotechnology’s futuristic properties and microscopic nature make it the perfect excuse to cause whatever Gunn wants to happen without a good explanation—even though her powers still end up making no sense if you think about them for more than five seconds.
Some of the movie’s characters also just act kind of dumbly. I’m all for characters acting illogically if it’s part of their character (like Superman being too trusting), but there are moments that seem just conveniently dumb enough for the plot to move along.
Either way, Superman is… a mixed bag? I love its punk-rock attitude towards today’s cultural and political landscape, even if it’s a bit on the nose (and maybe coincidental), but without it, Superman just adds up to a kind of good superhero blockbuster with solid characters.
At least it’s entertaining, though, which is the baseline for entertainment.
Whether you’re watching Superman for the fun or the politics, I’d say it’s not a waste of time.
It gets a solid 7/10 from me.