by Hudson Moura
In Superman (2025), written and directed by James Gunn, the iconic Kryptonian returns not just to save the world, but to reflect it. Far from being a mere visual spectacle, this latest installment of the DC universe offers a compelling and timely engagement with the political anxieties of our era, while simultaneously preserving the emotional and narrative heart of the superhero genre. The film is both a tribute to classic superhero archetypes and a bold reassertion of their political relevance in the twenty-first century.
David Corenswet’s Superman is refreshingly human, despite his alien origins. He is not a distant, godlike figure, but a relatable and principled individual who champions the vulnerable—not only humans, but also animals. His portrayal foregrounds the three central tenets of the superhero mythos: power, mission, and identity. By grounding Superman’s mission in social justice, empathy, and civic responsibility, Gunn reminds us that the superhero is not simply a figure of domination or exceptionalism, but one of moral clarity and communal service.
Among the film’s most touching elements is its portrayal of friendship—genuine, interdependent, and emotionally grounded. This Superman does not operate in isolation. He thrives through connection, leaning on a colorful ensemble of superhero allies whose presence challenges the myth of the lone savior. These friendships are not decorative but essential, offering emotional depth and narrative contrast to Superman’s moral vision. His vulnerability and reliance on others reflect a contemporary sensibility in which strength is defined not by solitude but by solidarity. This is especially evident in his interactions with allies like Green Lantern, who brings a pragmatic idealism that both supports and challenges Superman’s ethics, and Mr. Terrific, whose sharp intellect and moral precision offer a counterbalance to Superman’s emotional instincts. Together, they form a collective front grounded in trust, complementarity, and shared responsibility—an ethos far removed from the myth of the solitary, all-knowing hero.
The film is also enriched by the delightful presence of Krypto, Superman’s “foster” loyal dog, which reinforces this relational ethic—a bond rooted not in control, but in mutual care. Wisely, Gunn resists the temptation to anthropomorphize the animal with dialogue, instead letting Krypto act like a real dog—playful, loyal, and grounded. These choices lend the film a welcome emotional authenticity, keeping its fantastical elements tethered to recognizable human (and animal) behavior.
Indeed, Superman deftly resonates with contemporary political discourse, particularly in light of the post-Trumpian landscape in the United States. The film’s engagement with the term “alien” is more than metaphorical—it critiques xenophobic rhetoric that dehumanizes migrants, casting Superman as the ideal counterpoint: an alien who becomes not only a citizen but a civic exemplar. The figure of Lex Luthor serves as a mirror to the authoritarian tendencies of populist leaders: a man obsessed with controlling the multiverse, claiming exclusive access to “truth,” and branding himself as the savior of society: the “king”—parallels that are difficult to ignore in today’s media-saturated political environment. The infamous image of Trump as Superman is cleverly subverted here: it is not Superman but Luthor who embodies the fantasy of omnipotent power fused with moral absolutism.
Cinema and Politics: A Historic Symbiosis
Superman is not an anomaly in politicizing its narrative. In fact, it joins a long tradition in which cinema and politics have been inextricably linked. From D.W. Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation (1915)—which notoriously romanticized the Civil War and glorified the Ku Klux Klan under the pretext of cinematic innovation—to Charlie Chaplin’s Modern Times (1936), a sharp critique of industrial capitalism and the dehumanization of labor, and The Great Dictator (1940), a daring satire of fascism and antisemitism, the moving image has long served as a contested space where political ideologies are projected, challenged, and reimagined. In Canada, the very foundation of national cinema was political: the creation of the National Film Board in 1939 served wartime propaganda needs and laid the groundwork for a publicly funded film culture.
As the reach of cinema expands globally through streaming platforms, its political meanings are increasingly refracted through diverse cultural lenses. A film like Superman may be read in North America as a commentary on immigration, while in other geopolitical contexts it may evoke broader concerns about surveillance, governance, or colonial power. The future of this intersection promises even more complexity, as artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and transmedia storytelling reshape not only how films are made and consumed but also how they are interpreted and politicized. The cinema of tomorrow will likely deepen its role as a site of political imagination, resistance, and redefinition—especially as it continues to address the crises of democracy, climate, and identity on a planetary scale.
It’s true that Hollywood often shies away from overtly political films, largely because of the unpredictability of public interest—what feels urgent during development may seem outdated by the time a film is released, sometimes years later. However, superhero films are political by nature. Their very foundations—power, justice, identity, and societal order—are inherently tied to political discourse. Integrating political themes not only enhances narrative depth but also allows these films to resonate more profoundly with contemporary realities. Superman (2025) is a prime example of how entertainment and politics can be meaningfully intertwined, enriching both the storyline and its cultural relevance.
One of the most debated aspects of Superman (2025) is its subtle yet potent engagement with contemporary geopolitical conflicts, particularly those echoing the Israel-Palestine and Russia-Ukraine crises. While James Gunn refrains from overt political commentary, the film is rich in allegorical texture. In one subplot, Superman navigates a territorial dispute involving illegal settlements justified by ancestral claims, a scenario that unmistakably resonates with the contested narratives of land and sovereignty in the Middle East. Similarly, Lex Luthor’s manipulation of public perception through deepfakes and AI-generated disinformation draws unsettling parallels with Russian hybrid warfare tactics. The symbolic fragility of Kandor—Krypton’s last city—evokes the statelessness of displaced peoples, while Superman’s refusal to take sides in a fictional border war reflects ethical tensions around global intervention. These threads underscore how Superman uses science fiction to illuminate the real-world complexities of occupation, resistance, and the moral ambiguity of power.
James Gunn’s Superman succeeds not merely because of its action sequences or visual spectacle, but because it reclaims the superhero as a deeply political figure. It reminds us that the stories we tell about power—who holds it, how it is used, and for whom—are always political, whether we acknowledge it or not. In this sense, Superman (2025) is both a crowd-pleaser and a civic meditation, urging viewers to reimagine what strength looks like in an age of division. 
(4/5)
Watch my interview on Global News, where I discuss the box office success of Superman (2025), directed by James Gunn, and explore how the film engages with contemporary political themes—including parallels to the rhetoric and politics of Donald Trump’s ongoing influence:
https://globalnews.ca/video/11296601/political-undertones-in-blockbuster-films
“Superman” continues to dominate the box office, but beneath the capes and superpowers, some viewers are pointing to political parallels in the storyline. From references to global conflicts like Israel-Palestine and Russia Ukraine to broader commentary on power and justice, blockbuster films have long been a lens for real-world issues. Hudson Moura, politics and film professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, joins Miranda Anthistle to discuss how cinema shapes public discourse.