James Gunn‘s take on Superman launched into cinemas this week and has received some interesting reactions from the critics.
In Deadline, Pete Hammond said Gunn had “loaded this flick with tons of action, some quite ludicrous, and takes his cues from any number of inspirations, including the past movies, TV shows, and particularly Grant Morrison and Frank Quitely’s All Star Superman book that has informed much of his script.”
Overall, Hammond says Gunn’s film “might be trying to do too much” and is “basically throwing everything against the wall and hoping some of it sticks.”
“More than enough does in this entertaining new direction, but at times Superman suffers from overload, much like Gunn’s Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy, which wore out its welcome with Vol. 3, where Rocket unfortunately got the Babe: Pig in the City treatment,” he wrote.
In a largely negative review, The Guardian says the reboot is “encumbered by a pointless and cluttered new backstory which has to be explained in many wearisome intertitles flashed up on screen before anything happens at all.”
In a daming conclusion, the paper wrote: “How many more superhero films in general, and Superman films in particular, do we need to see that all end with the same spectacular faux-apocalypse in the big city with CGI skyscrapers collapsing? They were fun at first … but the thrill is gone.”
Vanity Fair praises some of the film’s performances, particularly Nicholas Hoult, who the magazine said “convincingly renders a petulant bully whose immense wealth and influence have, he presumes, given him power over his insecurities and inadequacies.”
The magazine says the film “makes many smart and unexpected choices” before its CGI-heavy ending.
NME said the film puts some “pep back in Clark Kent’s pants” and concludes that the overall film is “solid rather than spectacular.”
“Gunn’s Guardians humour flashes here and there (but not enough), with nods to DC universe fictional band The Mighty Crabjoys and some crowd-pleasing cameos,” the magazine said.
Erik Kain in Forbes said the film was “painfully mediocre” and described Nicholas Hoult’s Lex Luthor as “generic and forgettable as the rest of the film.”
“What a crushing disappointment,” the magazine’s review ends.
Kevin Maher of The Times of London gave the film a similarly negative assessment in his review titled: “This migraine of a movie is superhero soup.”
Although despite the two stars given to the film, Maher also states that there are “glimmers of intrigue, as well as quirks and curios” in the film.
“Rachel Brosnahan performs miracles with her threadbare Lois Lane, making you wish for more than the paltry scenes she’s given with Corenswet (a serviceable turn),” Maher writes. “There’s a handful of callbacks to the Reeve era, including the title font, as well as a belaboured running gag about office gofer Jimmy Olsen (Skyler Gisondo) being irresistible to women.”
G. Allen Johnson at the San Francisco Chronicle was a lot less forgiving in his criticisms, writing: “Superman is a mess, but it’s a colorful one. It’s either a terrible superhero movie or an OK parody, take your pick.”
Alison Willmore at New York Magazine praised the film’s originality. Willmore wrote: “Instead of another origin story, it gives us sights we haven’t yet seen — like Krypto bounding through the air after one of the many monkeys enlisted to rage-tweet from a Luthor-created pocket dimension. What a good, good boy.”
We reported this morning that Warner Bros has clocked $22.5M from previews of Superman. That figure would make the remake the best previews YTD and a record for James Gunn, as well as higher than the previews for Barbie ($22.3M) and Matt Reeves’ The Batman ($21.6M, $134M opening).
Superman is currently on 82% on Rotten Tomatoes.
Get our Breaking News Alerts and Keep your inbox happy.
