James Gunn’s Superman has stirred conversations around its perceived political undertones, with viewers identifying parallels between its fictional international conflict and the ongoing Israel-Palestine situation, despite the director’s claim of no intentional geopolitical commentary.
The film opens with Superman preventing an invasion by Boravia—an Eastern European-coded nation—into Jarhanpur, a fictional country marked by its brown-skinned population and Middle Eastern cues, and later sees the hero avert a second assault, prompting discussion about implicit analogies to real-world conflicts.
Though Boravia and Jarhanpur have canonical roots in DC Comics, their direct confrontation is newly constructed for the film, and the visual symbolism, such as Boravian soldiers clashing with unarmed Jarhanpurian civilians, has led to online speculation associating the two with Israel and Palestine, respectively.
A scene in which Superman and Lois Lane debate the morality of intervention further echoes rhetoric commonly seen in discussions about Gaza, with Boravia’s justification for invasion mirroring claims often made by pro-Israel factions, and Superman’s response aligning with arguments made by those concerned about civilian casualties and occupation.
Despite the depiction of Boravia as a U.S. ally and the moral complexity introduced through Lois’s doubts, the film ultimately portrays Boravia’s leadership as corrupt, thus framing Superman’s unilateral intervention as justified.
However, this position has led to criticisms that the film simultaneously vilifies Boravia while oversimplifying the plight of the Jarhanpurians, who appear largely as passive victims and props for the hero’s moral decisions. The inclusion of Malik, the only Middle Eastern-coded character with notable screen time, reinforces this imbalance; his limited role as a falafel vendor and eventual martyr for Superman’s emotional growth has drawn criticism for perpetuating racial stereotypes.
Amidst these geopolitical readings, the film also rekindles the longstanding debate over Superman’s identity as an immigrant, particularly after Gunn described the character as emblematic of the American immigrant experience. This framing has provoked backlash from some conservative commentators, who accuse the film of promoting a “woke” agenda while downplaying traditional patriotic themes like “truth, justice and the American way,” according to The Guardian.
However, critics have noted that the slogan has rarely been central to Superman’s mythos and that his immigrant identity has long been a part of the character’s narrative.
While the film aims to present Superman as a moral force standing above politics, its decision to place him at the centre of a fictional international crisis inevitably invites real-world interpretations.
Though Gunn claims the story was not inspired by any specific geopolitical event, the timing of its release amid heightened tensions in the Middle East has amplified scrutiny. The movie ultimately positions Superman as a protector of life rather than a political actor, yet it hesitates to confront the ethical complexities of intervention with the depth its themes invite.