Home to some of the world’s most loved heroes like Ironman, Batman, Wonder-Woman, and so many more, the DC Universe and the Marvel Cinematic Universe are the face of franchises in Hollywood. This summer, both franchises released a film, with viewers across the globe saying a new era of superhero films launched. Marvel entered yet another new phase of their timeline with the release of “The Fantastic Four: First Steps.” At the same time, DC saw a complete rebirth of their cinematic universe with “Superman,” directed by James Gunn. With both films releasing in July, a battle ensued across the cinematic world over which of these films was the real blockbuster of the summer.
VFX and Practical Effects
Each film had to rely heavily on VFX to capture their vision. This is common with most superhero movies, since the fight scenes, powers, and suits are so hard to recreate in real life while still resembling their comic counterparts. “Superman” tried to use the best of both worlds in regards to practical vs. visual effects. Most fight scenes had to use CGI because the sheer scale of damage inflicted by both Superman and his respective foes would be impossible to execute on a practical level.
“It [“Superman”] was also a little underwhelming on the VFX and fighting scenes where I expected more,” junior Nolan Shindle said.
Gunn emphasized attempting to use practical effects whenever possible, and this showed in the film. In the scenes where Superman returned to the Fortress of Solitude, his collection of robotic servants were all made using practical effects. Gunn hired the company “Legacy Effects,” who built the cast of robots completely from scratch. Even with some VFX being involved, the realism really shows in the theater, where the various characters’ interactions with the robots appear very natural.
However, some scenes were far too grand in scale to be done practically. During the climax of the film, Metropolis slowly splits in half due the universe splitting apart, and it was done almost entirely with VFX. The scene looked amazing regardless, and Gunn’s attempt to use practical effects when he could made the movie appear higher quality.
VFX played a significantly larger role in “The Fantastic Four” than in “Superman.” Each of the four heroes have a unique set of powers, all of which had their challenges in recreating on the big screen. The character of Ben Grimm, AKA the Thing, was one the bigger challenges for effects artists when creating the film. The main problem in displaying him on the big screen is he is literally made out of rock. Filmmakers were faced with a difficult choice to either go fully CGI or to attempt to mix in both virtual and practical effects. In the end, the full CGI effect they went for looked amazing. The Thing came alive on screen in a way we have not seen in the past “Fantastic Four” films. Overall, “The Fantastic Four” did have to rely far heavier on VFX in comparison to “Superman.” All of the cast’s unique powers each provided their own challenges for the effects artists to recreate, where “Superman” only had a few major powers which needed to be made. However, some audience members were quick to criticize the lack of practical effects.
“Maybe kids will enjoy it more, but for me, my heart still belongs to that movie from 20 years ago — with its real stone costume and far less CGI than what we get today,” moviegoer Freddy F. said (Rotten Tomatoes).
Similarly to “Superman,” though, filmmakers used practical effects wherever they could. To capture the 60s aesthetic present in “The Fantastic Four”, director Matt Shakman made nearly all sets using practical effects. From Mr. Fantastic’s lab to the vibrant streets of New York, he meticulously crafted his sets to capture his vision perfectly, They also used filming techniques primarily used in the 60s to keep building off the 60s aesthetic. One example is the rocketship the Fantastic Four uses. Shakman used a 1 to 130 scale miniature to capture all of the rocket shots.
While both films were visually appealing and used practical and VFX, “The Fantastic Four” did a far better job in my opinion at using effects. While Gunn’s practical robots and flying effects for “Superman” are a standout positive for the film, Shakman undertook a far greater challenge in recreating the Fantastic Four’s abilities on screen, and they turned out to be extremely well done.
Theme
Both “Superman” and “The Fantastic Four” did an exceptional job at developing their own respective themes. “Superman” does a great job at not just building up its main message of kindness and hope, but also having real-world commentary. “Superman,” in recent media, has slowly lost what made the hero so inspirational and recognizable when he was first introduced to the public in 1938. While he has retained both his iconic red, blue and yellow suit and his alter-ego as a journalist, adaptations of “Superman” over the years have slowly diluted his kindness. A prime example of this is in the last adaptation of “Superman,” played by Henry Cavill. Cavill did an exceptional job at portraying Superman’s abilities, but a lackluster script made him appear cold and brutish on screen. The screenwriters attempted to make Superman more realistic and gritty, but they lost the essential parts of the character while doing this. Thankfully, David Corenswett’s rendition of “Superman” broke free of this curse. Superman appears far more friendly and caring in contrast to Cavill’s Superman, even going out of his way to save a squirrel in the chaos of a fight scene.
The 2025 film also has underlying messages about immigration. The main villain, Lex Luther, often referred to Superman as an “alien” throughout the film. Gunn did an exceptional job at using this as a metaphor for real-world issues such as illegal immigration into America, which has become a pressing issue over the past decade. While it may have seemed out of place to some viewers, Gunn didn’t make it the film’s main focus, and kept the message of hope at the center by allowing characters to allude to the issue without turning the movie into a political statement.
“The Fantastic Four,” on the other hand, was able to capture the highs and lows many people experience with their family, which created an empowering message. The family dynamics between actors like Joseph Quinn and Ebon Moss-Bachrach as Johnny Storm and The Thing perfectly imitated the playful sibling rivalry many viewers could personally relate to.
“I enjoyed the interaction of the characters with each other. It stood out that the fantastic four are a family before a team,” junior Dylan Cronk said.
The protection of loved ones was another theme explored deeply throughout the film. The film’s primary villain, Galactus, attempts to steal the Fantastic Four’s newborn and use him to escape his role of destroying worlds. Each of the four members of the family try to cope and understand this in their own ways. But, in the end, all four come together as a family to beat their villain. “The Fantastic Four” does a good job at highlighting not only how each of the respective characters deals with stress and anxiety, but also showing how the family has to reconcile with each other’s problems and quirks.
Each of the film’s themes struck home, and did a great job at building up the theme not just through the characters, but also their actions. “Superman’s” theme, however, had not only a much greater role in the film, but left a much greater impact on audiences.
Story/Character Building
“Superman’s” story, while good, could have undergone some significant alterations. One major critique for the film was Superman being significantly weaker than his opponents. Superman possesses nearly every superpower in the book, so it can be especially hard for filmmakers to create villains who could rise up to his playing field. Most of the time, the solution to this issue is to level down Superman rather than build up his villains, which can lead to frustrating fight sequences and often weak storytelling.
‘“I found myself constantly annoyed throughout and found Superman to be far too weak and pathetic at times,” moviegoer James N. said (Rotten Tomatoes).
Another flaw was the film’s main villain. Nicholas Hoult did an exceptional job at depicting Lex Luthor; however, his array of secondary villains are not only two-dimensional, but predictable. One of these villains Superman faces is part of a trope that has occurred over and over again in theaters now, and audiences felt a bit frustrated to see it done yet again. However, the rest of the characters in the film were received relatively well. The character Mr. Terrific became a fan favorite among viewers for his lighthearted scenes but cold demeanor.
“Huge shoutout to Edi Gathegi, who totally shines as Mr. Terrific” Hasan A. said (Rotten Tomatoes).
“The Fantastic Four” suffered from a 1 hour and 45 minute runtime that some viewers found short, noting that the film felt rushed and often boring. The movie had a list of talented actors who were clearly very passionate about the project, but it was hard to explore the mechanics between the Fantastic family members while also moving the plot forward. One pivotal relationship explored was between Reed Richards and his wife, Sue Storm. Pedro Pascal and Vanessa Kirby effectively depict their respective roles as calm, calculated, and caring parents; however, multiple scenes exploring their roles feel rushed and thrown into a place where it shouldn’t be to shorten the film’s runtime. This isn’t the only film that suffers from this, with “Superman” also having issues operating on only a two hour runtime.
Over the last few years, superhero films have begun to crackdown on their runtimes to keep their audiences engaged, creating a film that feels packed together too tightly and it leaves no room for the characters to breathe. This is disappointing for some fans of the franchise, considering how strong the casts were.
Overall, both films suffered when it came to their stories. The directors worked within their restraints to the best of their ability, but both stories could have been much better if they had more time to work with. “The Fantastic Four’s” cast worked especially well together and really made the audience care for the characters, which “Superman” could have expanded upon further.
Both have their own qualities and moments which define modern cinema, and make both of these films certified summer hits. In my personal opinion, “Superman” overall is a much more rounded out film. While there are flaws within the villains, it keeps you on your toes and the story moves relatively faster in comparison to its fantastic foe, making it an enjoyable summer hit.
