By Norman S.

In a powerful scene from James Gunn’s Superman, two children in the war-scarred country of Jarhanpur drive a flagpole into the ground. This daring statement inspires Jarhanpur’s weary citizens to chant “Superman!” repeatedly, just moments before the Boravian nation leads yet another siege against them. We’ve seen this storyline before—and not necessarily just in film.

Although James Gunn is known for directing films without much of a strong political agenda, his 2025 movie Superman is blunt about its stance. It’s also surprisingly quite subversive by paralleling real-world conflicts. By having such an iconic character like Superman stand strongly for something, Gunn makes it clear how crucial it is for audiences to stand up for justice in their own communities.

Gunn emphasizes the film’s political focus most strongly through its main characters, including Superman and his arch-nemesis, Lex Luthor. Luthor, a billionaire, spends most of the film trying to eliminate Superman and annex Boravia. Then he would receive half of the Jarhanpurian land that Boravia colonized, which would supply him with all the labor—and money—he needs. This storyline overtly parallels the way that President Donald Trump has grotesquely described Gaza as “incredible real estate” and “oceanfront property” that he would like to own. By having Luthor mirror Trump, Gunn relays that corrupt politicians are among us, and that we have the power to dethrone them, for we are not in a film. 

In order to occupy Jarhanpur, Luthor obtained Kryptonite, Superman’s weakness, to leave him weak and unable to save humanity. When an injured Superman watches the children raise the aforementioned flag on TV,  the song “Raising the Flag” by John Murphy begins to play. The children shout Superman’s name, followed by other civilians, as the camera focuses back on the waving flag. This scene made me hold my breath as I watched their helpless outcry. The screenplay, potent music, and visible human emotion came together eloquently to present a scene of devastation as something that could not be ignored.

For Gunn to have this conflict portrayed via the characters’ televisions while they watch is a bold move. For we, too, are watching similar events occur in places such as Ukraine and Palestine. The children who reside in these war-torn countries with hopes and dreams do not have a Superman. Gunn warns the audience that they must stand up for what is right and cultivate change—in other words, they must also strive to be superheroes.

Gunn’s political focus is ultimately working. Conservatives are fuming over his film, hurling terms like  “woke” and “culture war.” Nonetheless, Gunn’s decision to make these choices in such a visible way, despite anticipating censure and controversy, is not only bold. It also goes to show that silence is not an option—not even for a high-profile Hollywood director.