Who's seeing Superman early?

[Dark Shadow]

We went to see it last Friday night and then once again yesterday (along with Fantastic Four). We really liked the way Corenswet portrayed the character, very solid & earnest performance. Hoult's come a long way since I first saw him in X-Men: First Class, very strong performance as a young brattish Luthor. I saw shades of Kidder & Hatcher in Brosnahan's portrayal, but she also brought something of her own to this version of Lois. Gisondo's Jimmy was my least favorite of the classic foursome, I have a hard time buying into him as written. He was great in Santa Clarita Diet, maybe if he was written as more of an incidental charmer than an irresistible head turner, it might have worked better. There were some other aspects of the film that just didn't work for me, but it was easier to "overlook" most of those on the second viewing. Overall though, it was a fun experience and definitely worth the repeat viewing.

[EMCE Hammer]

I've managed to avoid the spoliers and I'm going to see it tonight with a couple of teenagers.

[Dannyc]

As a kid, i got stuck seeing Chariots of Fire and A Room with a View lol.

[TrekStar]

I think it would be cool if they made a Ghandi figure.

[Dan2Dan]

This week BF & I will be taking Nephew to the theater nearly everyday. Today we took to see Superman. He laughed and enjoyed it so that made me happy. He doesn't know aot of the history so for him to enjoy the movie worked out.

That's really cool! When I was young, my dad (and my friends' dads) took me to see several/many films that I knew nothing about, but which were favorites of theirs. Some I came to really love (James Bond, re-releases of various Harryhousen films), some I liked or at least enjoyed without really 'getting' it (Pink Panther), some others scared the sh-t out of me (remake of invasion of the body snatchers) and some others (Ghandi), well, they meant well....

[monitor_ep]

This week BF & I will be taking Nephew to the theater nearly everyday. Today we took to see Superman. He laughed and enjoyed it so that made me happy. He doesn't know alot of the history so for him to enjoy the movie worked out.

[Earth 2 Chris]

If you want to listen to 6 fellow nerds discuss the film, check out the latest episode of Superman Movie Minute. Myself and my co-host Rob Kelly are joined by other folks from the Fire and Water Network (including my wife Cindy). Spoiler warning, we all liked/loved it, so it's a fun discussion about a very fun movie!

https://fireandwaterpodcast.com/podcast/smm2025/

[B-Lister]

Well said.

[Dan2Dan]

Many creators say Superman is hard to write for because he's so powerful, and has a pretty ridiculous Rogue's Gallery. The best Superman writers know that the best Superman stories put his humanity at the core, and write human stories on a Superhuman level. That's what we have here, and the good far outweighs the bad as a result.

I was burnt out on Superhero films. Marvel just feels like a shell of itself after Endgame, and DC just felt like it couldn't make a good film. (Exceptions being the first WW, Aquaman, and Blue Beetle, all of which suffered by association to worse films, as well as certain actors involvement). This truly feels like a breath of fresh air. Fun from start to finish.

I just saw that, in its second weekend, the domestic box office for Superman is projected to drop only about 53%. I think that's good news for the film, and that the drop implies pretty good word-of-mouth and that audiences are liking Gunn's version.

While I haven't seen the film yet, the two widely discussed aspects of it that appeal to me most are, I think, very much in line with your views: (1) the generally brighter look/feel/tone of this film compared to the Snyder films, and (2) presenting an incrementally less powerful version of Superman.

I'm definitely one of those people who never bought Superman comic books because he was just too powerful. I felt like most Superman stories I'd ever encountered in any media repeatedly relied on kryptonite as a storytelling device to "turn him down to 2 from 11." (Even my beloved 1978 Superman film did this.) My personal all-time favorite version of Superman is in the 1940 Fleischer Superman cartoons precisely because of this aspect.

I also totally agree with, and will expand on, your additional point about burnout. I personally think that general audiences have definitely burned out on superhero films, in significant part because, exactly as you referenced, so many of them recently have been bad/critical failures. So I feel like new super hero films now face a 'branding headwind' right out of the gate.

Coincidentally, I recently watched the Blue Beetle movie when it premiered on TV. I enjoyed it and it was definitely better than I expected, even if the modern Jaime Reyes version of Blue Beetle isn't my childhood version of the character (from the superlative 1987 DeMatties/Giffen/Maguire "Justice League" comic book reboot). That said, my primary critique of that film was how badly miscast Susan Sarandon was as the evil, bloodthirsty, racist corporate industrialist. For as long as I can remember, she has been an outspoken activist in real life in direct opposition to all of those characteristics. So all I saw on screen was her longstanding public persona unsuccessfully chewing the scenery against type. I also think that particular fim faced two other headwinds: (1) no one outside of comic book fandom has ever heard of the Blue Beetle, and (2) that name is kind of lame, honestly. But man, that post-credit scene was awesome! Too bad the promise of that will go unfulfilled....

[B-Lister]

I will concede that the first Donner film is close to the source material. And again, was fine for its time. Filmmaking has changed a lot since then. The movie is quite slow in parts, but it is expertly acted, and damn near flawlessly cast. When I refer to not liking the Reeve films, generally I mean the sequels. Though I still take issue with Superman selfishly reversing time. As for "silver age wackiness" I feel Gunn knows what he's doing, and won't overdo it. We're not gonna see a bunch of Kryptonite color changes, or silly powers. He seems to know where it crosses the line between fun and foolishness. You have to have some silliness but too much pulls the audience out of the spectacle.

One of the big criticisms of this film I'm seeing is how CROWDED it is. Yes it's an ensemble, but no role is wasted. Every character has something to DO, and it all contributes to the narrative.

You seem to be a fan of a good soundtrack, and I'll say this one has that. Beats of John Williams mixed with multiple other genres, including old school punk rock. It shouldn't work but somehow it does.

Many creators say Superman is hard to write for because he's so powerful, and has a pretty ridiculous Rogue's Gallery. The best Superman writers know that the best Superman stories put his humanity at the core, and write human stories on a Superhuman level. That's what we have here, and the good far outweighs the bad as a result.

I was burnt out on Superhero films. Marvel just feels like a shell of itself after Endgame, and DC just felt like it couldn't make a good film. (Exceptions being the first WW, Aquaman, and Blue Beetle, all of which suffered by association to worse films, as well as certain actors involvement). This truly feels like a breath of fresh air. Fun from start to finish.

[Dan2Dan]

It's the best cinematic version of the character ever. Bar. None. Cavill was criminally underutilized, Routh was the victim of a garbage script. Reeve was fine for the time, but is now dated and corny, despite being iconic. I loved seeing them lean hard into silver age wackiness and have the effects technology to make it work. Previous films put Superman in OUR world. This was the first time I felt we were in HIS. Tons of amazing easter eggs, from the ads for Chocos, Big Belly Burger, Zesti Cola and Soder, to the oft-overlooked detail of Lois' Delaware License Plate (Metropolis is in Delaware. Gotham is in New Jersey).

I'm not the type to romanticize something just because it's old. The Reeve films are fine, but they're not great, and they're certainly dated. But they diverged from the source material, and they do drag on a bit. Again, not criticizing the films nor saying they're bad. But I am saying this is a better, more faithful adaptation, and there shouldn't be any reason to disagree with that so long as you don't misconstrue my opinion as an attack on your childhood. Because it certainly isn't an attack, any more than it is anything but my opinion.

I hope your obvious, genuine enthusiasm translates at the box office. I have an 18-year-old daughter, and she has proven to be an amazingly accurate bellwether of box office success over the last 3-4 years. Most recently, she saw the Minecraft movie three times. Despite being very well aware of my lifelong love of comic books and superheroes, she has not said one word about this Superman film, which I don't think is a great portent for its box office fortunes, candidly. Obviously, the Silver Age callbacks will be totally lost on her generation.

I am very interested in seeing this film. Looks good to me. While I am not a fan of a lot of that Silver Age 'zaniness' (like the McFarlane figure with the lion head and Alfred E. Neuman alternative head), I have found something to like in (almost) every Superman film other than Superman III with Richard Pryor, which I thought was risible, even as a kid.

My slightly alternative take on Superman's filmography would be that: (1) Donner's 1978 Superman is one of the greatest genre films of all time and the best Superman movie ever made by a wide margin, which didn't deviate from the source material very much and took that material surprisingly seriously for its time - key to its success, both creatively and financially, (2) Superman II, which I thought was awesome as a 10 year old boy, is, on hindsight, clearly a flawed film with two directors, (3) Superman III with Richard Pryor evidenced all the worst instincts of the Salkinds and is notably very rarely shown on TV anymore, (4) Superman IV, which I saw in the cinema as a 17 year old boy with money from my own summer job, and yet I was the only person in the cinema when I watched it (still the only time that has ever happened in my 55 years of life), was also brutal, (5) the Brandon Routh/Bryan Singer/Kevin Spacey 'sequel' film seemingly had all the 'catalytic elements' to be a great success, but was, clearly, a disappointment, (6) Man, I thought the Snyder/Cavill "Man of Steel" was an awesome film, right from the beginning with the Soundgarden soundtrack, (6) Batman v Superman was a huge letdown, (7) the theatrical cut of Justice League was such a huge disappointment. I liked the Snyder cut considerably more, but that didn't suddenly transform the film from a C+ to an A; maybe to a B+?, and (8) as a Proud, but open minded and clear-eyed, American who has lived on three continents and worked on five, I think Superman's international association with "the American Way" will be a very substantial headwind to its international box office, regardless of the film's actual content....

[powersthatbe]

I wouldn't be surprised in Gunn's DC Superman universe seeing obscure 70s villians like Terra Man and Black Rock pop up(even for a second .).

[B-Lister]

It's the best cinematic version of the character ever. Bar. None. Cavill was criminally underutilized, Routh was the victim of a garbage script. Reeve was fine for the time, but is now dated and corny, despite being iconic. I loved seeing them lean hard into silver age wackiness and have the effects technology to make it work. Previous films put Superman in OUR world. This was the first time I felt we were in HIS. Tons of amazing easter eggs, from the ads for Chocos, Big Belly Burger, Zesti Cola and Soder, to the oft-overlooked detail of Lois' Delaware License Plate (Metropolis is in Delaware. Gotham is in New Jersey).

I'm not the type to romanticize something just because it's old. The Reeve films are fine, but they're not great, and they're certainly dated. But they diverged from the source material, and they do drag on a bit. Again, not criticizing the films nor saying they're bad. But I am saying this is a better, more faithful adaptation, and there shouldn't be any reason to disagree with that so long as you don't misconstrue my opinion as an attack on your childhood. Because it certainly isn't an attack, any more than it is anything but my opinion.

[sprytel]

Probably for the best that they cut it. I don't love the idea that Krypto was killing and maiming yeti.

Maybe the Krypto part would have setup a scene in the FoS where Luthor's gang gets attacked by an angry yeti... but that also seem unnecessary. The movie worked just fine without it.

[monitor_ep]

From one of the VFX Supervisor on the set:
There were supposed to be several Yetis in the movie.

When Krypto was dragging Superman to the FOS they pass by several dead Abominable Snowmen and Superman tells Krypto "you've got to stop killing the Abominable Snowmen"

This explains the Yetis figures with pull apart limbs and bloody marks.
IMG_20250522_112508~2.jpg