Superman Was Always an Immigrant

It might surprise you that the superhero known for his catchphrase “Truth, Justice, and the American Way” has some political issues attached to him. In James Gunn’s upcoming Superman movie, the basic origin story of the character remains unchanged. However, when Gunn recently referred to Superman as an immigrant in an interview, it sparked controversy among conservative media outlets who criticized the film as a politically charged, “woke” attempt to push liberal ideology onto viewers.

To anyone even slightly acquainted with Superman’s backstory, this situation might appear absurd. Created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster in 1938 – two Jewish immigrants’ children born in Cleveland – the character was initially depicted as an infant refugee sent to Earth by his alien parents. This tale is as unchangeable as Batman’s mother’s pearl necklace being left in a back alley. However, facts seem to be insignificant amidst a strong wave of anger. This one, however, seems particularly misleading. To refresh our memories, here’s a summary of the claims made thus far.

What exactly did James Gunn say?

During an interview with The Sunday Times published on Friday, the director expressed that Superman embodies the spirit of America: “A foreigner who settled in this land, yet for me, it’s primarily a tale that emphasizes the importance of basic human compassion – something we seem to have forgotten.” When queried if the movie resonates differently among liberal and conservative spectators, he admitted there might be a difference, but further stated, “It’s about promoting kindness, and sadly there will always be those who lack empathy and find it offensive simply because it advocates for compassion. But they can go jump in a lake.

People were normal about this, right?

Instead of their normal symbol, they joked about the character having an “MS-13” insignia on his cape, and they referred to this as a “wokeness barrier.

Superman, originating from a distant planet and now residing on Earth, can be considered an immigrant, albeit one who arrived through unconventional means. His adoptive parents in Kansas may have broken immigration rules to ensure him American citizenship, but the details might not sway those with heated opinions in today’s racially sensitive environment. The term “immigrant” has taken on a charged connotation due to organizations like ICE being accused of detaining people suspected of being undocumented immigrants regardless of their actual status. Given this context, Superman, who is white and American-accented as Clark Kent, doesn’t fit the narrow stereotype some proponents of mass deportation might hold about immigrants.

How did Gunn and the cast respond?

During interviews on the red carpet with Variety, Director Gunn, his brother Sean (who has a minor role in the film), and Nathan Fillion, who plays Green Lantern/Guy Gardener, were questioned about the conservative backlash. While being tactful, Gunn stated that he wouldn’t judge anyone, emphasizing that the movie is focused on kindness, a theme that everyone can understand and connect with.

Sean Gunn expressed a similar sentiment but in a more straightforward manner: “We stand with our people, and that includes immigrants! Yes, Superman is an immigrant, and so are the individuals we support in this country. If you don’t agree with that, then perhaps you’re not truly embracing the American spirit.” Meanwhile, Fillion playfully dismissed the controversy in a way reminiscent of his character: “Aww, someone needs a comforting embrace! It’s just a movie, folks.

Has anyone else of note said anything about the controversy?

Interestingly enough, Dean Cain – known for his role in Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman – has expressed an opinion that aligns with viewing Superman as an immigrant tale. However, he then launched into a peculiar rant about a movie (that he hadn’t watched) promoting values similar to those found in Somalia, which he described as wanting to abolish all American rules. This statement seems rather incongruous coming from someone who portrayed the symbol of justice, but it does shed light on the underlying nativism and intense racial prejudice fueling this argument.

On another occasion, Cain has voiced criticism towards current versions of Superman for allegedly abandoning “the American way.” In an interview with Fox News back in 2020, he stated that he wouldn’t be able to say the classic phrase “Truth, justice, and the American way” if he portrayed the character today. This statement was promptly refuted by comic writer Tom King, who had incorporated the phrase into a Superman comic published in the same year. (Notably, the White House shared a manipulated image of the official Superman poster on Friday, replacing Corenswet’s face with Donald Trump’s and altering the “Look up” tagline to read “The American way.”)

What’s the deal with “the American way”?

Fans of comics will recognize that the famous motto associated with Superman hasn’t always stayed the same. The phrase “Truth and justice” was first introduced when Superman made his debut in 1940 during a radio serial, but after the United States entered World War II in 1942, the show added “the American way” to Superman’s mission statement. This longer version gained popularity during the 1950s, an era marked by increasing Cold War tensions, and it was also used in the iconic Christopher Reeves portrayal of the character in the 1978 film “Superman: The Movie.” However, this extended motto didn’t appear in a comic until 1991. Just two decades later, the character began grappling with its meaning, even going so far as to renounce his U.S. citizenship to avoid being perceived as an instrument of U.S. policy.

What does Superman have to say about undocumented immigrants?

In the TV show “Smallville”, Clark Kent, portrayed by Tom Welling, is known for defending an undocumented Mexican immigrant named Javier (Tyler Posey) from the authorities and identifying himself as an illegal immigrant. Although James Gunn’s film doesn’t express this connection explicitly, it hints at a similar theme. The character of Superman, played by David Corenswet, faces derogatory remarks from billionaire Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult), which suggest an alienation and dehumanization of Superman. Luthor refers to him as “it” and uses the media to portray him as a destructive influence, aiming to strip him of his civil rights. This is where the movie takes a more direct approach with its political commentary.

Luthor, supported by the U.S. government, confines both extraterrestrial beings and political adversaries in a detention center hidden within another dimension. The movie clearly illustrates the infringement upon these characters’ human rights as they are thrust into a lawless and timeless abyss, deprived of fair trial, a topic that resonates with current discussions regarding deportations.

Are there other political parallels in the film?

A recent review on Letterboxd, which was heavily circulated on social media, suggested that Gunn’s Superman had an “anti-Israel” stance. However, it’s important to note that while some scenes in the movie might resemble Israel’s occupation of Palestine, the political references are not as explicit. Similar to other DC and Marvel productions, the countries portrayed in Superman are fictional and do not directly correspond to real-world geopolitical entities. The militarized nation of Boravia and its invaded country, Jarhanpur, were inspired by comic book characters. In the film, Boravia is depicted as resembling a former Soviet state, while Jarhanpur appears to be loosely based on West Asia, but its inhabitants speak with American accents.

In a recent statement, Gunn clarified that when writing this story, neither Israel nor Palestine were in his thoughts. The film doesn’t delve deeply into the political motivations behind Boravia’s attacks, only suggesting U.S. alliance as a factor. Instead, these events serve to create a dilemma for Superman, who strives to assist but must navigate diplomatic hurdles to save people. Lois Lane (played by Rachel Brosnahan) queries him about this predicament, and he firmly chooses selflessness over governmental bureaucracy, setting the stage for a tale where he aids the citizens of Jarhanpur against Boravia’s military, despite the administrative chaos it would cause. However, in the end, it’s his companions, the Justice Gang, who carry out this mission while Superman is in Metropolis.

Does the movie live up to Gunn’s political promises?

In his own interpretation, Gunn portrays the movie as emphasizing “the essence of human compassion,” and his Superman exhibits characteristics that are in line with this philosophy. In a situation where Metropolis is under attack by a fire-spewing monster (kaiju), the protagonist demonstrates not only rescue efforts for civilians but also attempts to persuade his fellow superheroes, the Justice Gang, against employing deadly methods on the creature. Later, when dealing with another significant threat (an “extra-dimensional entity”), the Justice Gang seems to recall Superman’s advice and make an effort to subdue the giant monster without causing its demise.

As a devoted film enthusiast, it’s hard not to notice the predictable shortcomings that often surface in superhero movies. In this case, Superman, who consistently strives for a peaceful resolution to every predicament and even attempts to guide some villains onto the right path, seems to take an uncharacteristic step when he fails to intervene as Ultraman, his clone, is met with a bus accident leading to his demise in a black hole. Although it happens swiftly, it may evoke memories of the climax in “Batman Begins,” where the Dark Knight (Christian Bale) makes a similar choice, choosing not to save the villainous Ra’s Al Ghul (Liam Neeson), instead declaring: “I won’t kill you, but I don’t have to save you.

In simpler terms, the ending isn’t particularly heroic, especially considering the movie’s recurring themes about recognizing human dignity. However, it’s a brief moment in a film that also makes broader political statements, such as suggesting that the U.S. government implicitly supports invasions of vulnerable countries and justifies stripping people of their fundamental rights with weak excuses.

The movie, Superman, may have its share of imperfections. However, when it comes to Gunn’s political perspective and portrayal of “the American way,” the film maintains a straightforward simplicity that mirrors Superman’s character. Denying this is misleading.

2025-07-12 01:55