The Dawn of DC: Gunn vs Snyder

By Lorelei Guzevicius
Entertainment Editor

James Gunn’s Superman (2025) received a roaring ovation during its summer release. Fans rapidly compared the new adaptation of the Kryptonian to Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel (2013).

However, these two adaptations are distinct and almost incomparable since they depict very specific themes. Gunn’s Superman, brought to life by actor David Corenswet, has been a superhero publicly for three years, allowing for the portrayal of an optimistic and morally grounded character. He has an unwavering place in society: help those in need, making him the poster child of what a comic-book hero should be. Gunn created a movie that feels like a nostalgic callback to what superman is; a man in a cape that feels bigger than life. Fans left the theatres with an innate need to blast the song Punkrocker by the Teddybears and be kind to those around you, even the squirrels. Contrarily, Snyder’s Superman, embodied by Henry Cavill, voices a more morally confounded character, struggling to find his identity and understand his place in a messy world. He voices an internal struggle, demonstrating his confusing path in finding his purpose as a hero. This is fitting since Man of Steel is a Superman origin story and Superman would not be a three-dimensional character if he had gone from Clark Kent, local nerd, to Superman, our hero, without any character development. It focuses less on his heroic gestures but rather on the portrayal of a more realistic and dark superhero. Since Snyder took these liberties, fans felt Superman lacked the traditional Superman portrayal.

The opinion of which Superman film is better is utterly based on the viewer’s innate definition of a superhero. Are they meant to be depicted as morally grey or innately kind?