James Gunn’sSupermanisn’t a perfect movie, butit sure is a wonderful one. The film was an uplifting tale about the power of love and kindness and the value of all life, even the lives of squirrels. It portrayed its billionaire tech bro antagonist (Lex Luthor, obviously) as a petty, small-minded, insecure loser. It was everything a superhero movie needs to be in this day and age, when the news is constantly filled with reports on the actions of the many Lex Luthors of the real world.
Superman Wasn’t Subtle About Its Spin-Off Potential
But one of my least favourite things about Superman was that you could kind offeelthat it was kicking off an extended DC universe. The moment I saw the Justice Gang (they aren’t quite the Justice League yet), I thought, well, that’s a spin-off. It was much the same when Supergirl, hungover (actually, possibly still drunk) and sarcastic, stumbled around the Fortress of Solitude just before the end credits rolled. You can just tell when a movie is setting up opportunities for future expansion, and Superman wasn’t subtle about it.
Unfortunately, the myriad ensemble characters introduced in Superman do derail it slightly, or at the very least, distract the viewer. Isabela Merced’s Hawkgirl, for instance, has such a minor role in the film that it seems her presence is mostly there to establish that she’s part of the future Justice League.
I feel much the same about Nathan Fillion’s Guy Gardner, his wonderfully stupid bowl cut, and his giant green middle fingers – the Justice Gang provide a cynical foil to Superman’s naive optimism, helping to flesh out the complicated world the Man of Steel is forced to navigate, but the two-dimensionality of these characters in a world dominated by cinematic universes screams, ‘Don’t worry, they’ll get personalities in their own movies and television spin-offs!’
Superman Is Why The Movie Succeeded, Not DC
The thing is, I’m not sure I’m quite as keen on those spin-offs as I was on Superman. What made Superman work was its earnestness – it often crosses the line into being full-on corny, but in the context of the movie, the corniness is endearing, because Superman is an endearing figure. Yeah, he’s a dork, but he’s a dork with a bleeding heart and an unfaltering belief in humanity’s value.
What highlights Superman’s earnestness is the cynicism of the people around him. The Justice Gang are largely unwilling to intervene in Lex Luthor’s machinations because of the implications for them and the world at large, never mind that Superman is in trouble. Lois Lane grills Superman on the ramifications of his unilateral decision to save lives in Jarhanpur – didn’t he consider that this would damage American relations with its historical ally, the invading nation Boravia? What gives him the right to intervene without government approval?
None of the other characters that the movie sets up for spin-offs are like Superman. They’re more self-serving, more sarcastic, often more crass. They’re excellent comic relief when putnextto Superman, but I can’t imagine that their spin-off movies and television shows are going to be at all similar tonally.
Supergirl, funny as her brief appearance is, is funnybecausewe’ve spent a whole movie watching Superman not say a single swear word or show a hint of unwholesomeness. A whole movie about her isn’t exactly unappealing, but she’s averydifferent character from Superman. Superman’s cinematic reboot was buoyed to success because of its hopefulness. Supergirl has no chance of hitting the same notes, just by nature of this interpretation of her character.
The Supergirl movie is slated for release on May 09, 2025.
That’s not to say that the way these characters are portrayed is inherently setting them up for failure. I find the idea of a partying Supergirl very interesting, in a vacuum. But as part of yet another sprawling cinematic universe? I’m not convinced that the rebooted DC Universe is going to fall into the formula-driven patterns of the MCU before it, but god, am I sick of cynicism.
