Second Look is still taking sign-ups for the rest of 2025! Do you have a piece of media or pop culture you want to revisit? Take a second look!
Man of Steel is a study in contrasts. It has some great ideas that could elevate it to being so close to an incredible Superman story – but those ideas wind up being overshadowed by some terrible decisions that instead turn into a muddled mess that doesn’t quite nail the icon of Superman.
Man of Steel released in 2013 and took a timely approach to Superman: Superman as an immigrant. In 2013, the Tea Party had started emerging as a force in America, and that force has only grown in power, bringing with it deep xenophobia that has entrenched every layer of society. Man of Steel asks the question, “How does America respond to an immigrant?”
In 2025, that question is all the more relevant. The Tea Party and the racism and xenophobia it brings have infected every level of American society. As I write this, the Republican party is boasting about its Alligator Alcatraz concentration camp to detain arrested immigrants. More than ever, what Superman is and what Superman represents are a sharp study in contrasts to the world we live in.
In that regard, I give Zack Snyder and David S. Goyer kudos for tackling that issue. Certainly, immigrant narratives have been intertwined throughout Superman’s history, but telling that story in a blockbuster movie feels like a big step. And that could have been made for a story that highlighted not just the ways Superman can inspire the best in us, but also the way he can lead us to a better future (shout out to Louie Blue’s great essay on this very topic from the weekend).
And the movie does give up glimpses of that: A flashback scene shows a young Clark tormented by bullies. How does Clark respond? By saving that kid’s life. Retribution and revenge aren’t part of his vocabulary.
Where does the movie go wrong, then? A good Superman story isn’t defined by Clark Kent alone, but by the people around him. And the movie’s greatest failure is in Jonathan Kent.
For me, the Kents are a central part of the Superman mythos. I approach them with the idea that Clark’s Kryptonian heritage made him super, but it was the Kents – the kindly couple who raised him – who made him a hero. They are typically depicted as humble and kind, instilling the values that help shape Clark into the icon of hope.
Unfortunately, this movie takes a different approach. Jonathan encourages Clark to hide his powers. The movie asks the question “How does America respond to an immigrant?” and Jonathan believes the answer is “They hate and fear them.” That may be a sadly correct answer in the modern moment, but it’s not the Jonathan Kent I want to see. When Clark saves his bully, along with the rest of a bus of kids, he’s admonished by Jonathan. When Clark asks “What was I supposed to do? Let them die?” Jonathan’s response is just “Maybe.” This is echoed in a later line, where Clark remarks “My father believed that if the world found out who I really was, they’d reject me out of fear.” Jonathan is so worried about what happens if Clark’s abilities are discovered that he chooses to die in a tornado rather than let his son save him.
And that change is what ruins the movie for me. It comes so close to getting it! There are moments where we see bits of classic Jonathan shine through. When Clark wonders whether or not he should have attacked his bullies back, Jonathan encourages him that he made the right decision. Kevin Costner does a great performance with the material he was given, providing gravitas, love, and sorrow. But even coming into the movie prepared to give it fresh eyes, I can’t get past the characterization.
Adaptations are hard. Comic books are full of reexaminations and reinterpretations of characters. And I do sincerely believe that it’s to comic fans’ detriment when they insist that a story play it safe and stick to established canon. But changing Jonathan also changes how Clark presents himself to the world, and the movie suffers tremendously for it. For the most part, we get a dour, solitary Clark Kent. He’s afraid to be seen, afraid to show the world the extent of what he can do. It’s only after learning from an AI modeled after his Kryptonian father Jor-El that he becomes willing to show himself to the world.
I’m not sure Snyder understands Superman. He looks at superheroes and sees cool imagery and epic moments. Sometimes his vision does work out. The scene where Superman flies for the first time is incredible. You see joy on Clark’s face! He laughs! Hans Zimmer’s musical score swells to an epic triumph. It’s absolutely the type of scene you expect to see in a Superman film and is probably the highlight of the film:
However, that one moment is contrasted with scenes that sharply misunderstand Superman. There’s a lot of Jesus iconography in the film. A lot. Snyder is fixated on the power fantasy and mythic glory, but misses the context of Superman being created by two Jewish men from immigrant families. The story of Superman evokes Moses, and yet Snyder is not interested in interrogating that – despite otherwise recognizing the immigrant aspects of the character.
The film’s climax underlines Snyder’s poor grasp of Superman, or his willingness to engage with the full context and meaning of the character. The final battle is a brutal affair which sees so much destruction across Metropolis, destruction that is only halted by Superman snapping the neck of General Zod. Perhaps the antithesis of everything Superman stands for.
The best I can say about that particular moment is that I don’t care. By the time the film reaches its conclusion, I’ve lost interest. The final battle is just a big setpiece where Snyder plays with cool toys, and he doesn’t seem to see any other way to solve it than Superman killing. One could perhaps view this as a Superman who is never given the proper tools to solve problems by his parents, but that’s more credit than I’m willing to give.
Of course, there’s plenty more to the movie than Clark and Jonathan. Amy Adams does a good job as Lois Lane, showing herself as a determined, dogged reporter who is devoted to finding the truth. She lacks an energy I expect to see in Lois, but she absolutely presents herself as a tour de force who Clark might fall in love with. Laurence Fishburne’s Perry White doesn’t have a ton to do in the movie, but his presence is always welcome.
Hans Zimmer’s score has a different feeling from John Williams’ famous score from the 1978 Superman movie, but it accents the movie well. There’s a somber quality throughout that suits the tone, but it does reach triumphant heights that also capture the joy of Superman in the brief moments they appear.
Watching Man of Steel is a frustrating experience. The immigrant aspect is such a great lens through which to view Clark, especially in 2025. But so many decisions around that create a movie that is weaker and less interesting. I am hopeful that James Gunn’s version will pick up the best of what Zack Snyder brought, while discarding the rest to show us a hero who will embody hope.