Thanks to my Amazon Prime membership, I had the opportunity to see an early screening of James Gunn’s new Superman movie.  It’s the movie I’ve been most excited about for some time, so I was glad to have the chance to see it early.

(I do believe, by the way, that it’s difficult making and viewing superhero movies post-Endgame.  By the end of Marvel’s “Infinity Saga,” viewers were used to quality storytelling involving multiple characters interacting on multiple levels.  Spider-Man: No Way Home was able to replicate that density well because it brought in two other Spider-Men.  You could argue that also worked with Deadpool/Wolverine and its use of the multiverse.  All to say that even the best superhero movie post-Endgame will likely feel slight.  And so you walk into Superman with advice given by others: think of it like the first Iron Man movie, when there wasn’t much expectation of anything too far beyond it.)

The ultimate question most of us are asking about the new movie is this: does it work?  On multiple levels and in multiple ways: does it work?  Here are a few ways I’ll answer that question.

First, James Gunn went on record as being done with straightforward retellings of well-known characters.  Instead, Superman jumps right in on a particular moment in the young heroes career.  Does it work?  Yes, and not just because most of us know his origin story.  There are some great moments in the film where origin matters, and those moments take up an appropriate amount of time.

Second, Gunn also decided to bring in a number of “new” characters that some thought would dilute a much-needed emphasis on the core cast.  Does it work?  Yes.  Gunn keeps things moving and tight.  And while there are some powerless characters introduced who don’t do much, every super-powered character has a role to play.  And we know as much about each of them as we need to (and nothing more, really).

Finally, Gunn also had to deal with the issue of world-building, especially if he’s using this movie to start up a new cinematic universe.  That can be a lot to balance.  Does it work?  Yes.  This issue ties into the previous two questions.  You get just enough of everything without feeling like things are being truly shoe-horned into the narrative.  Granted, I watched this movie as a long-time comic reader, so those things probably felt more like easter eggs than world building for me.

While Batman has been the most ubiquitous DC character over the last couple of decades, we’ve never been without some kind of story involving Clark Kent and his amazing powers.  Whether it was an animated series, Smallville, Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel, or the more recent Superman & Lois on the CW, the story of the last son of Krypton has maintained at least some presence in our cultural churn.  And each of those stories has brought an interesting take to a diverse collection.  In some ways, Superman & Lois, which tells the story of the Clark, Lois, and their two sons, was a kind of bookend to the youthfulness of Smallville.  Gunn’s Superman story settles nicely into the “early middle” of that kind of timeline.  And so even though it could feel like a retread, it really isn’t.

There’s a lot more that can be said about the movie (and a lot more likely will be said).  Characterization, acting, music, pacing, special effects: there’s lots of fodder for people to consider.  For now I’ll just say that the movie worked really well.  Gunn took all of the things hinted at in the trailers and wove them together in a pleasantly unexpected way.  There’s a confidence to the story that is wonderfully balanced with a kind of lightness, with an appropriate wink-and-nod that takes things just seriously enough.  I hope it’s a movie that finds an audience.  And I hope it’s the beginning of something special, something more hopeful that humorous.  That is, perhaps, one key way that Superman stands out from the modern super-hero formula: the insistence on hope.  And hope is something that always works.