Over the past week, several outlets have broken this review embargo, with The Daily Beast posting a scathing review titled The Terrible New ‘Superman’ Movie Is the Final Nail in the Grave for the Superhero Genre, which spread quickly despite being online for just a few minutes.

This contrasts with The Sunday Times, which published a glowing review of Superman, describing it as a “triumph.” There were also partial leaks from sources like Variety, where a critic hinted that Amazon’s mid-tier film Heads of State was more enjoyable than Superman, though not in the form of a full review.

There have been numerous “teases” about the movie from people who’ve attended early screenings—of which there have been many. Many don’t realize that even saying something like “I’m not going to say anything, but I can’t wait for you guys to see this!” still technically violates the embargo. I've also seen insiders push back on the negative buzz, claiming, “This is not what I’ve heard at all,” based on other reports from those who've already seen the film.

It's unclear exactly what happened with the outlets that released reviews early, but such actions often result in repercussions from studios, including losing invitations to future advance screenings.

Controlling the narrative around this film is especially crucial because this is a major project for WB and DC. It marks the first official installment in James Gunn’s new DCU, a vision he’s personally shaping and setting the tone for everything that follows. However, with only a handful of outlets leaking so far, it's still too soon to judge. But the idea that Gunn would produce a poorly received Superman film doesn't align with his track record across Marvel and DC projects. Here’s a look at his previous work:

• Guardians of the Galaxy – 92% critic, 92% audience
• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 – 85% critic, 87% audience
• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 – 82% critic, 94% audience
• The Suicide Squad – 90% critic, 82% audience
• Peacemaker (show) – 93% critic, 89% audience

That’s why Gunn was considered a safe choice to lead DC Films—he hasn’t missed with any of his prior comic book projects.

It seems improbable that Superman will be broadly panned, and even if it underperforms compared to his earlier films, it’s likely A) to be a massive box office success and B) well-received by audiences who increasingly ignore critical opinion (see Jurassic Park: Rebirth).

We’re still early in the process, and frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if more reviews surface before tomorrow afternoon when the embargo officially lifts. If that happens, I’ll update accordingly and provide a full review summary tomorrow.

Update: A new wide-ranging GQ interview with the cast doesn’t break the embargo outright, but does offer a clear, largely positive take on the film:

“The result is one of the most distinct superhero films in a long time, with a tone that feels honest and true to the spirit of Superman—and therefore at odds with pretty much everything else in the genre right now. Gunn’s approach is colorful, in both its palette and the costumes; proudly fantastical, with flying orbs, robots, portals, and giant monsters; and at times endearingly, intentionally corny (see: Krypto the super dog). But late in the third act, Superman delivers an impassioned monologue about himself that essentially states Gunn’s thesis about the character and his core values. You won’t find any controversial neck-snapping here.”

The above is the detailed content of Early 'Superman' Reviews Keep Breaking Embargo. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!