SUPERMAN – the true superhero who must DIE to live FOREVER

James Gunn’s Superman premieres on July 11 this year. Expectations are undoubtedly high, but are they any different from those surrounding Man of Steel? We already know that story, including Superman’s death and resurrection. And it was precisely that titanic effort by Batman that made me realize James Gunn has been given a tremendous opportunity—to tell Kal-El’s story anew within the superhero genre, in a precise and innovative way.

SUPERMAN SHOULD FINALLY DIE EFFECTIVELY, first experiencing greatness and then a radical fall, all because of that very greatness, whose consequence is an inevitable destruction—first on a moral level, and then physically. And it doesn’t matter what the comics say. Gunn has the right to his own interpretation. For too long, Superman in cinema has existed as an untouchable archetype, defying even the logic of fantasy—where radical perfection, possessing self-awareness, coexists in an imperfect world, leading to an inevitable ethical conflict.

Watching the teaser, I got the distinct impression that this version of Superman will be in genuine conflict with his surroundings from the start. His actions, though noble and flawless, will eventually become hostile to humanity precisely because of their idealism. This natural consequence of perfection has never been fully explored in Superman films. Zack Snyder attempted it to some extent but ultimately followed a more conventional path, not making his hero explicitly rebellious. James Gunn, however, wouldn’t be himself if he didn’t seize this chance to reboot Superman’s story. It seems logical to me that it’s time for a revolution in how Clark Kent is portrayed.

However, there is one issue with the teaser. While Superman lying in the snow, bleeding from his mouth, is a compelling image, the sight of a dog approaching him like an unstoppable icebreaker is not. Superman in a red cape alongside his similarly caped pup is a step too far. Hopefully, James Gunn remembers that Guardians of the Galaxy has ended, and pulling Superman into a similar aesthetic would be not only a parody but also outright embarrassing. Still, I won’t dismiss the entire project just yet—who knows, maybe this superhero I’ve always disliked (along with Spider-Man) will finally be given a narrative that makes me believe in his power and charisma. I don’t need Henry Cavill for that, as long as David Corenswet’s looks are backed by real character. And the teaser shows glimpses of it.

These glimpses align with my belief that Kal-El’s radical superheroic perfection will inevitably lead him to an ethical conflict with an imperfect world. I know this echoes Doctor Manhattan, but if Superman falls into this conflict, he will be far more human—bloody, irrational in his perfect rationality.

Some elements of this social conflict can already be seen in the teaser, even though Clark Kent is still able to restrain himself when the mob throws cans and garbage at him. But from divine perfection, it’s only a short step to satanic vengeance—using that perfection to justify radical action, believing that since all others are flawed, they are inherently inferior both biologically and axiomatically. The only question is: what role will Lex Luthor play in this? This time, with Nicholas Hoult in the role, he looks almost perfect—at least as a representation of the evil that Superman will have to face.

Now, everything is in James Gunn’s hands. He could tell the same old story again—Superman defeats Luthor and other villains, becoming Earth’s ultimate protector while also enjoying the benefits of “human” life, including social, romantic, and political aspects. But if that’s the case, then why reboot at all? I prefer to see this differently—with the hope that Gunn will take the bold step of demythologizing the character, telling his story as profoundly as the sheer amount of anger in Kal-El’s eyes suggests. Watch the teaser and pay attention to Superman’s gaze. He’s the perfect candidate for an antagonist—though a unique kind. His conflict with Luthor should serve as a trigger, releasing his pent-up anger and permanently altering how he views humanity. Even Lois Lane won’t be able to change him.

And yet, paradoxically, his downfall will be the beginning of his legend. As the ultimate superhero, he won’t fall completely. His rage will have limits, and he will direct his aggression inward—because only he will know how to destroy himself in a way that ensures that even in death, or perhaps because of it, he will be reborn as an unprecedented guardian spirit for humanity.

Does that sound religious, even Christ-like? Yes, and that’s exactly how it should sound—because among all superheroes, Superman has the greatest messianic potential. His difference, forged by power, is so distant from biological humans yet rooted in their world that conflict is unavoidable. Filmmakers have so far downplayed this conflict, stripping Superman of moral dilemmas more suited to villains than heroes. Superman’s power has always been equated with absolute good—but that’s not how it works. Power, or omnipotence at a certain level, eventually leaves morality behind. Following the path of Watchmen’s Manhattan, a being of absolute ability will eventually realize that nothing ties him to a flawed world. And if that world turns against him, tragedy may follow.

Someone will die. And since Superman is a human-created character, it makes the most sense—for both cultural and entertainment value—that it be him. Not as a one-dimensional heroic archetype, but as part of this alternative rebooted narrative that James Gunn is crafting.

Thus, Gunn turning Superman into another cash grab would be the worst possible outcome. That said, I don’t expect this revolution to fully emerge in the first film. Instead, we might get subtle hints—twists, ambiguities, an open-ended conclusion, and so on. Overall, I’m hoping for a well-executed trilogy. A complete one. One that presents Superman as a timeless superhero, cemented in legend, with the power to endure in cinematic history—regardless of its ethical stance or how far it strays from the comics.