With James Gunn’s new DCU hinging on its success, the live-action “Superman” slated for 2025 has much at stake — and early feedback indicates it has excelled magnificently. Despite a handful of lukewarm critiques, including one that flouted the review embargo, the consensus from critics, film journalists, and influencers is overwhelmingly positive. They hail it as the superhero film enthusiasts have been anticipating for years, with emphatic praise for the performances, costumes, special effects, and screenplay.

The movie’s narrative follows an already-established Clark Kent, portrayed by David Corenswet, as he juggles life on Earth — from his adoptive family and job as a journalist at the Daily Planet to his incredible heritage as Krypton’s own Superman. Drawing inspiration from the “All-Star Superman” comics and the character’s rich history, the film crafts an engaging story. So, what are the critics saying? Here’s a summary of the most glowing endorsements — alongside a few critiques.

Overall, critics are enamored with this latest portrayal of Kal-El, with the film achieving an 86% rating on Rotten Tomatoes at the time of writing. Tim Grierson of Screen International labeled the film as “an ambitious, occasionally stirring movie that is more peculiar, edgy, and introspective than most blockbusters,” while The Mary Sue’s Rachel Leishman shared on her X (formerly Twitter) account, “[‘Superman’] is a reminder that Clark Kent has always epitomized hope and the potential for goodness in the world.”

The Wrap’s William Bibbiani noted that while the film occasionally falls short of its ambitions, it nevertheless “shoves everything super about Superman into a single motion picture, and it’s bursting at the seams with strange, wonderful, intricate ideas.” Variety’s Courtney Howard, meanwhile, had special praise for each actor involved in the piece. “Corenswet has that heroic shimmer. [Nicholas] Hoult is delightfully diabolical. [Rachel] Brosnahan brims w/ vim [and] vigor,” she said on X.

Multiple reporters and bloggers noted that James Gunn has managed to capture what makes Superman so special in this movie. The Hollywood Reporter’s David Rooney summed general critical sentiments up perfectly by calling the film “very much a comic-book action-adventure but one with a warm human heart.” But not every early reaction has been positive.  

While most of the early reactions had a lot of praise for James Gunn’s work, a couple of reviews have drubbed “Superman.” The Daily Beast’s Nick Schager, in a critique that briefly went live before the review embargo broke, provided the first major anti-Supes salvo. He flat-out branded the film as “terrible,” saying it “gets tangled up in fanciful nonsense that soon renders the entire affair superficial and silly.”

Other negative reviews have emerged from The Toronto Star, The Times (U.K.), and the San Francisco Chronicle, the latter of which declared that “Superman” is “a mess, but it’s a colorful one. It’s either a terrible superhero movie or an OK parody, take your pick.” 

The negative reviews are clearly the outliers so far, but it remains to be seen if more emerge and — even more importantly — what the audience response is like as public screenings begin. For now, however, “Superman,” James Gunn, and the film’s stars are getting the response they no doubt hoped for — and possibly giving DC Studios and the superhero genre a much-needed shot in the arm.