WHY JAMES GUNN’S SUPERMAN IS NOT SO SUPER!

I was really looking forward to seeing James Gunn's Superman (2025). I bought two pre-release tickets weeks before the opening night to view it at the Hoyts, Forest Hill (the one with the Gold Class electric recliner seats). I left the launch screening on Thursday July 10th utterly disappointed — and I really didn’t want to be. 

WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THE SUPERMAN STORY

The two creators of Superman were two Jewish teenagers, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, both born in 1914. Their creation of a 'superman' was inspired by their challenging experiences as immigrants in the United States who also had to endure the harshness of the rising global antisemitism. 

Siegel and Shuster could not afford to go to college, but found financial success by creating comics (including increasingly popular newspaper comic strips). In the early 1930s they began drawing on their Jewish heritage and the aspirations of their messianic hope. By 1933, they published their first Superman comic strip - presenting to the world an ultra-immigrant (from the planet of Krypton), who came to America as a baby, who looked like any other American, but was secretly different because of His Krypton physiology. Surely if the world could accept and embrace such a character then surely Americans could open their hearts also to their Jewish immigrants. 

The creators of Superman clearly defined the world of Superman. It was our world. But like the fiction of C. S. Lewis’s mythopoeia (his Trilogy and Septet), Siegel and Shuster created a “Supposal”. That is, they framed their Superman story in an imaginative way founded on the on the idea: 

“Suppose there was a planet within our universe in which its people resembled earth’s human beings - yet had certain other supernatural powers or abilities. Suppose that for some reason this planet was about explode and the parents of a newborn child were able to send their child on a journey to our earth where he would be able to blend in but use his powers for great good.” 

Siegal and Shuster have the space-craft with the infant Kal-El crash-land on a farm near Smallville, Kansas, owned by John and Martha Kent. As it turns out, the effect of the gravity of earth is something that the young Kal-El is able to manage so that he can fly at will. The radiation of the earth's Sun has the effect of giving Kal-El extraordinary strength. This was something that his Father, Jor-El (note the Hebrew implications of these names — “El” means 'God' or 'mighty one' in Hebrew) anticipated and sent his son, Kal-El, to earth with a message embedded into a crystal telling his son that he was to be a “savior of the helpless and oppressed” to the people of earth.

SUPERMAN AS A JEWISH MESSIANIC-LIKE HERO

The original concept of Superman could be seen as an embodiment of the Jewish hope of all that the Messiah was expected to be. That is, Siegel and Shuster’s Superman was a Christological figure. He grew up respecting his earth-parents - especially his mother. He was to be an example of courage, humility, masculine strength and moral purity — without ever being a show-off or braggart. He was to look ordinary so that no one would ever imagine just how strong, powerful, or fast, he was. In this way he could just fit into society and blend in with other ordinary people. Jor-El had told him in his crystalized message that Kal-El was to use his extraordinary strength to uphold truth, justice and “the way” of the people of earth. 

I like the idea of a super-hero who selflessly helps the helpless and rescues the oppressed in virtual anonymity thanks to his Clarke Kent disguise and has hypno-glasses (which hinder people from perceiving that Clark Kent was Superman). There are many parallels between this original concept of Superman and Jesus Christ! Jesus the Christ, the True Desire and Hope of Israel, was omnipotently strong - yet looked ordinary (note Isaiah 53:1-2). Jesus was the epitome of humility, like Siegel and Shuster had imagined the Messiah to be and had their Superman exhibit. And these traits are why I was so disappointed with James Gunn's 2025 Superman. 

WHAT I DID NOT LIKE ABOUT THE 2025 GUNN SUPERMAN

The meta-narrative of James Gunn’s Superman over-looked several non-negotiables in fictional story-telling. The first of these is that fictional stories, especially mythopoeic stories, require a 'world' where there are rules. Unlike the world of Siegal and Shuster, the world in which James Gunn’s Superman is not set in this world. It is part of a multiverse - rather than our universe. In our universe there are governing physical laws. For example, “ex nihilo nihil fit” - from nothing, nothing comes. Yet in James Gunn's multiverse, Lex Luther not only creates things apparently out of nothing, he creates entire universes from out of nothing and does so in a previously non-existent dimension as well.

Secondly, James Gunn's Superman was not a model of moral excellence. Perhaps we could overlook the foul language that he used (although this is the first time that anyone playing Superman has used expletives). This is the first time a Superman has killed human beings. This is the first-time that a Superman has spouted ontological nonsense about what a human-being is - and virtually renounced his own ontological identity (this happens in the final exchange between Kal-El and Lex Luther. 

Thirdly, then there is the introduction of Kal-El’s cousin, Kara-Zor-El. She is the epitome of a wild-child who is unable to get drunk on earth and is now forced to travel to a planet with a red-sun which is the only place in the multi-verse where she can get drunk! It seems to me that James Gunn’s Superman, and his Supergirl cousin, are a far cry from what Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster had envisaged for their concept of Superman — especially their Jewish messianic hope. 

CONCLUSION

Superman is my favourite superhero. As a Christian thinker who has an appreciation for the redemptive use fictional literature and especially mythopoeia, I would like Hollywood to give more consideration to superheroes who reflect Jesus Christ - especially since Christ was the Ultimate Superhero! I would also like to encourage other preachers to consider how culture's ache for a virtuous hero is actually an intuitive ache to be reconciled to God the Father through the work of the eternal divine son of God. 

Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though He was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted Him and bestowed on Him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

PHILIPPIANS 2:5-11

Amen.

WHY AQUAMAN DIDN'T WORK

WHY AQUAMAN DIDN'T WORK

I'm a superhero fan. Several times I have loved a superhero movie even though critics have not. For example, I thought, Superman Returns was one of the best Superman movies ever made (despite Jor-El returning from his few years of absence in search of his home planet Krypton quite a bit younger than when he left). I even found something to like in the Batman Versus Superman movie! Which is why I could ignore the many critics who had slammed the latest Aquaman movie.

Most of the superhero characters of DC and Marvel were developed by Jewish creators who infused an almost messianic identity into their superheroes. Aquaman was originally illustrated by Paul Norris and written by Mortimer Weisinger (who was also an editor of the Superman series). Aquaman first appeared in 1941 and was then re-invented to be the king of the lost city of Atlantis in the 1990s (not by Weisinger though). The 2018 movie is built on this storyline. But it has some problems.

SUPERHEROES ARE MEANT TO BE SUPER

The Graeco-Roman gods were fornicating, uncaring, distant, and unreliable. The best superheroes were not. The pre-eminent superhero, Superman, possessed many Christ-like attributes including moral virtue. Their mission was simple: uphold justice and protect the innocent. 



Perhaps it's not surprising that in this post-modern world of moral-relativism, the superhero story writers now have our superheroes behaving more like 'bad boys' than exemplars of virtue. If there's any doubt about this, then consider the latest instalment: Aquaman. He's a swearing, hard-drinking, life-taking, super-powered descendent of Neptune. While all this might seem odd, there's more. 

As I watched Aquaman I couldn't help but think of the Inkling, the famous pub-based drinking writers' group which included C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien. Lewis created the world of Narnia. Tolkien created the world of Middle Earth. Their stories have become classics. This Aquaman story will never be a classic. The worlds of Lewis and Tolkien were mythological worlds where the rules were clear and virtuous. The rules within the Aquaman story are not clear or are the characters virtuous. The struggles within these worlds is not primarily one of power but of good versus evil. The struggle within Aquaman is for power, not about good overcoming evil. The characters within these worlds are relatable. Peter, Susan, Edmund and Lucy enter the world of Narnia and with them so do every other 8, 10, 12, and 14 year old boy and girl. When Frodo is selected to carry the Ring to its destruction, it's not just Bilbo Baggins who befriends him for the journey, we all do. Even though they are hobbits, we relate to them. But in the Aquaman story, there's not much we can relate to. In the mythological worlds of Lewis and Tolkien, there is certain logical consistency. In Aquaman, these underwater breathing people (UBP) need underwater space-ships and harnessed sea-creatures to travel - although they can travel quite effortlessly without them. These UBPs can also breathe air when out of the sea. Yet, when their water-filled face-masks are broken when on the surface, they can't breathe. This inconsistency was confusing. In essence, the thing that makes Lewis's and Tolkien's mythological worlds work, is that they conform to the grand metanarrative, the ultimate story of reality.

Ordinarily at this point in my criticisms, Aquaman purists would protest that I have failed to grasp the finer points of the mythology. But since this version of the myth was only created around 2016 it hasn't really had time to garner such purists. But if there were to be such criticism, I would take issue with such a mythology that lacks a virtuous hero, does not offer hope against evil, is not coherent, and does not conform to the grans metanarrative. 

What do you think? Leave your comments below.