Exit Poll: Does James Gunn set up a DC Universe worth investing in?

William Hughes: Yes…ish? If the question was “Would you watch another Superman movie written and directed by James Gunn?” the answer would be a much less qualified “Hell yes.” David Corenswet, Rachel Brosnahan, and especially Nicholas Hoult are giving top-notch performances here as some of comic-dom’s most iconic characters, and the simple fact that Gunn knows exactly who his Superman is, and what he wants, papers over a lot of the film’s weirder touches. But while I mostly trust Gunn as a director, and even more as a guy with an eye for casting—Edi Gathegi is great here, to pick just one name out of many—I’m less sold on whether other creators will be able to play as deftly in this (very lightly sketched) space. Ask me again, maybe, after Craig Gillespie and Ana Nogueira’s Supergirl; I liked the glimpse of Milly Alcock’s character we got here, but this billion-dollar enterprise can’t work if it’s just “The James Gunn Cinematic Universe.”

Saloni Gajjar: Yes. Sign me up for more Krypto! Look, I had issues with Superman’s confounding portrayal of women like Eve Teschmacher (even if her selfies helped the plot) and Cat Grant, but I was pleasantly surprised by the outright political messaging and I’m curious to see how much that will evolve as the universe expands. I was also charmed by the Clark/Lois romance (from the opening interview to that swoonworthy kiss at the end!), the Justice Gang, and…did I mention Krypto already? I was swept up in the sunnier, sweeter, grounded-in-humanity DC Universe that Gunn wants to let flourish. I’m keeping my fingers crossed for Supergirl and its creative team, but as a fan of Peacemaker and Creature Commandos (and I’m cautiously optimistic about Lanterns, sue me), I think this franchise is worth keeping an eye out on. It reminds me of The Avengers days, when superhero movies were big, fun, and somewhat confident in their tone.

Mary Kate Carr: Not really. I’m not a hater. I’ve been a DC fan since childhood, so I’d love to be wrong, and I even thought the movie was fairly enjoyable. But as a reset for DC and a rebuke of “superhero fatigue,” Superman falls short. I like the “return to kindness” angle, but the rest of the story—and what was set up for the ongoing DCU—was rote superhero stuff that wears thinner every time we see it. (I couldn’t be less interested in the “superpowers vs. government” thing at this point). Gunn has an undeniable knack for making lesser-known comic heroes pop (Metamorpho and even more so Mister Terrific have great moments), but some of that undercut Supes, which is a dubious way to re-launch the franchise. The treatment of female characters in his ensemble gave me serious qualms about the whole endeavor. And, frankly, Corenswet was good, but not “Robert Downey Jr. anchoring an entire studio” good. I don’t know that there’s enough electricity here to charge DC Studios through a new era. 

Danette Chavez: Yes, albeit with some of the caveats William’s already shared. Gunn can’t avoid some of his worst tendencies (the casual misogyny, abundance of plot) or some of the genre’s, like the CG-sludge-filled finale. But what this Superman movie gets right about the Superman character is one of his most important traits: he’s always striving to be better. Some recent filmmakers have omitted just how conscious this decision is on Supe’s behalf, but making that a key part of his interpretation is one of Gunn’s smartest moves. The third-act reveal about his parents’ “dreams” for their son only reinforces this quality. That gives me hope for future installments, even the ones that go beyond Superman. If Gunn’s collaborators can tap into the essence of characters like Guy Gardner, Hawkgirl, and Mister Terrific, they’ll really have birthed a viable cinematic universe.