12 Ways Warner Bros. Totally Botched Henry Cavill's Superman
In January 2011, Warner Bros. announced (via Deadline) that British actor Henry Cavill had been chosen to star in the studio's latest Superman reboot. At the time, the then-untitled project's director, Zack Snyder, described Cavill as "the perfect choice to don the cape and S shield." Two years later, "Man of Steel" soared into theaters, bringing Kal-El back to the big screen after a seven-year absence and — in the words of Warner Bros. Picture Group president Jeff Robinov — taking a "first step" into a greater DC universe.
In December 2022, Cavill took to Instagram to announce that he would be stepping down as Superman. "My turn to wear the cape has passed," he wrote, "but what Superman stands for never will. It's been a fun ride with you all, onwards and upwards." This optimism belied the true story behind Cavill's Man of Steel, however, who left behind a tarnished legacy of behind-the-scenes drama, studio meddling, and critical disasters. Blame for the failure of the DC Extended Universe's Superman no doubt lies with many people, but, from beginning to end, one studio oversaw it all. This is how Warner Bros. botched Henry Cavill's Superman.
New era, wrong director
"Man of Steel" was the first live-action Superman movie since 2006's "Superman Returns," a so-so outing for the Last Son of Krypton that garnered decent reviews and relatively disappointing box office returns. "Superman Returns," meanwhile, had been the first Superman movie since 1987's "Superman IV: The Quest for Peace," a full-blown cinematic atrocity that can be comfortably counted among the worst blockbusters of all time. It cannot be understated, then, how important it was for "Man of Steel" to reignite the world's love of Superman.
Unfortunately, Warner Bros. chose the wrong man for the job. I'm probably going to have to go into hiding for saying this — catch me if you can, #SnyderVerse fans — but Zack Snyder was woefully unsuited to directing a solo Superman movie. It seems that Warner Bros. was too blinded by the success of Christopher Nolan's "Dark Knight" trilogy to remember that a Superman movie ought to be earnest, colorful, and, to steal a word from Henry Cavill himself, "joyful." Instead, they brought in Snyder, a director who had previously helmed "300," "Watchmen," and "Sucker Punch," three completely different genre flicks that are nonetheless united by the director's idiosyncratic style and penchant for violence. The result? A muted suit, a gut-wrenching neck-snap, and a slew of mixed-to-negative reviews. There certainly wasn't a lot of joy.
That's not to say Snyder didn't have a place in the DCEU — I'd argue that he was the perfect choice to direct "Justice League," a movie that practically demanded the bombastic, over-the-top spectacle that he does so well. He just wasn't the right fit for Superman. The misfire of "Man of Steel" set Cavill's Superman off on the wrong foot, and neither he nor the DCEU ever recovered.
The momentum stalls
Five years before "Man of Steel" and the birth of the DCEU, Marvel Studios released "Iron Man," which acted as both the first movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and the debut of Robert Downey Jr.'s now-iconic Tony Stark. "Iron Man" faced a similar task to "Man of Steel": It needed to firmly establish its hero in our minds so that he could be used as the foundation for a shared universe. Now, there are myriad reasons why Stark succeeded where Clark failed, but much of it comes down to simple momentum. "Iron Man" was released in 2008; "Iron Man 2" was released in 2010. "Man of Steel" was released in 2013; "Man of Steel 2" does not exist.
Superman made his second DCEU appearance in "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice," a crossover that forced him to share screen time with another superhero. His third appearance was in "Justice League," a much bigger crossover that excluded him from two-thirds of the movie and then forced him to share screen-time with five other superheroes. Why were we not given more time in Superman's world? "Man of Steel 2" could have better explored his allies and enemies, offered Kal-El a more spacious character arc, and allowed Cavill to better implant himself as Superman in the public consciousness. As it happened, Warner's failure to produce a sequel to Snyder's original movie meant that Cavill's Superman never achieved the momentum enjoyed by his Marvel counterpart. By the time anybody was taking the idea seriously, it was far too late.
Super-zero
What would a Superman movie be without at least one bout of good ol' fashioned superheroics? You know what I'm talking about: An innocent civilian finds themselves in mortal peril, forcing the mild-mannered Clark Kent to transform into the Man of Steel, take to the skies, and save the day. It's the helicopter sequence in "Superman: The Movie," the Niagara Falls rescue in "Superman II," Ricky's harvester showdown in "Superman III," the subway chase in "The Quest for Peace" — hell, even "Superman Returns" has a plane crash. These moments define Superman, and they often make for the most exciting and inspiring scenes in their respective movies. So why didn't Henry Cavill get one?
Sure, he came close. At one point, "Man of Steel" sees Clark rescue some workers during an oil rig fire, while "Batman v Superman" depicts a brief yet beautiful montage of random acts of heroism. The former features the character long before his prime, however, and the latter is dogged by overwrought opining on the nature of godhood and Darwinian evolution. There's no swelling score, no edge-of-your-seat climax; there's still no joy. Both of these movies choose to fill their runtimes with dour drama and "Justice League" set-up instead, apparently under some misguided belief that Superman is better portrayed as a tragic hero than a boy scout. Consequently, a decade later, we're left with lingering memories of a man who was too preoccupied with toppling skyscrapers to go out and save a damn life.
Lois and Clark
The love between Clark Kent and Lois Lane (Amy Adams) is one of the strongest pillars of the Superman mythos. Their relationship has enjoyed many highs and endured many lows since they first met in the pages of "Action Comics" #1 in 1938, and it has become a stalwart facet of Superman's adventures across comics, TV, and film.
Adams gives a fine performance as Lois in the DCEU, proving more than capable of living up to Margot Kidder in the Reeve series. It's just a shame that the latter-day Superman movies so badly bungle her and Clark's romance. Despite Lois appearing in "Man of Steel," "Batman v Superman," and "Justice League," the core relationship in Superman's life is undercooked and rushed: She first meets Superman in "Man of Steel," and they're on the cusp of a marriage proposal at the beginning of "Batman v Superman." Meanwhile, Lois' role in the theatrical cut of "Justice League" amounts to little more than a glorified pep talk, and "Zack Snyder's Justice League" is more interested in using her as the lynchpin for Superman's future downfall than anything else.
I'm not saying that Warner Bros. should have devoted 90 minutes of "Justice League" to a dating montage — and we certainly didn't need a retread of the horrific "Superman II" memory-wipe — but just a little more time to enjoy this iconic relationship might have reaped untold benefits for Cavill's Superman.
Let's kill Jimmy
Lois Lane wasn't the only beloved Superman character who was given short shrift by the DCEU, either. Honestly, you can't help but wonder if somebody at Warner Bros. had a bet going to see how many classic sidekicks and allies they could kill off as quickly as possible.
Jimmy Olsen is the most egregious example of this. The comic book version of Jimmy has been appearing in Superman stories since 1941 (not counting a few unnamed appearances before then), and even starred in his own run of comics, "Superman's Pal Jimmy Olsen," in the 1950s. He is a close colleague of both Lois and Clark, and hehas been referred to by DC as "Superman's best friend." In the DCEU, though, he is anything but. Portrayed by Michael Cassidy, Jimmy turns up in a single scene in "Batman v Superman," in which he is summarily executed by a random warlord.
Then there's Professor Hamilton, who was introduced to DC in 1987's "The Adventures of Superman" #424. The Professor is a sometimes-friend, sometimes-enemy + of Kal-El who plays a vital part in the "Death of Superman" arc, on which "Batman v Superman" was loosely based. In the DCEU, Emil Hamilton (Richard Schiff) features in "Man of Steel" alone and, frankly, does precious little before his death in the final act. That same movie is equally unceremonious in wiping out the Jor-El A.I. (Russell Crowe), a character so deeply ingrained in the DC Universe that he even had a cameo in "The Lego Batman Movie."
These supporting characters had so much potential to brighten up Superman's world. By wiping them out so quickly and callously, however, Warner Bros. did nothing less than tear it down, piece-by-piece.
The false Lex
And so we come to Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg). It's easy to see the reasoning behind Zack Snyder and Warner Bros.' decision to cast Eisenberg as a sociopathic, tech bro take on Superman's archnemesis — this was clearly supposed to be a supervillain for the digital era, the kind of monster with whom we are all very familiar. Unfortunately, there are a few serious issues with Eisenberg's Lex. Together, they amount to a critical failure for both Luthor and his Kryptonian foe.
As you're probably well aware by now, "Batman v Superman" is very much not "Man of Steel 2." The franchise-friendly nature of this movie means that Lex is forced to act as an antagonist to both Batman and Superman, and his personal relationship with Supes suffers as a result; screen time that should have been dedicated to building their animosity is given to some contrived plan to force a confrontation between the two heroes. This might have worked out nicely if "Batman v Superman" had been Lex's second appearance (and Superman's third) but, as it stands, his role in the Batman-Superman throw-down feels shallow and unearned.
Worse still, after "Batman v Superman" spends a good deal of time setting up Lex as a more modern version of the character, the franchise chickens out and reverts to type. When he next appears in a "Justice League" post-credits scene (one that's also included in "Zack Snyder's Justice League"), he's basically riffing on Gene Hackman, all tailored suits and cunning plans — despite the fact that Eisenberg was clearly cast to subvert this approach. At least we'll likely never have to suffer the further decline of the DCEU's Lex Luthor. Small mercies, eh?
Justice League, assemble!
You probably don't need me to tell you what went wrong with "Justice League." In case you're somehow unaware, it began in 2017 when Zack Snyder stepped down from the project mid-production in order to be with his family after his daughter's sudden death. This was, of course, an unavoidable tragedy for which nobody could possibly be blamed, and, in personal terms, Snyder clearly made the right decision in stepping down. Sadly, his departure left a gap in the director's chair, and Warner Bros. chose the worst person in the world to fill it.
The studio gave "The Avengers" director and all-round awful guy Joss Whedon approximately $25 million and two months to reshoot and complete "Justice League." Snyder was a great match for a Justice League movie, as "Zack Snyder's Justice League" later proved. Whedon, however, was not. The theatrical cut of "Justice League" is a bland, disappointing mess filled with crass humor, agonizing dialogue, and the worst special effects this side of the year 2000. It was critically panned and, for a production of that scale, earned peanuts at the box office. The movie's impact on Henry Cavill's Superman, who doesn't show up until halfway through, was cataclysmic: Now associated with one mediocre solo movie and two bona fide disasters, the character's troubled legacy was beginning to cement. And that's to say nothing of...
The mustache
Superman's "Justice League" mustache fiasco could well be the DCEU's nadir. When Joss Whedon and Warner Bros. recalled the movie's cast for reshoots in 2017, Henry Cavill was deep in principal photography on "Mission: Impossible — Fallout," leading to a tricky conundrum for each movie's crew: For the sixth installment in Tom Cruise's ongoing attempt to Evel Knievel himself into an early grave, Cavill was required to grow a mustache; Superman, famously, is clean-shaven. You see where the problem lies.
Now, Warner Bros. isn't totally at fault, here. Although the studio refused to delay reshoots until Cavill was ready, Paramount Pictures was just as stubborn in the bubbling war over the actor's face. According to "Fallout" director Christopher McQuarrie, he offered to temporarily shut down his movie in exchange for a payment from Warner Bros. to cover the number of production days lost, but Paramount refused to allow it. In the end, both movies shot simultaneously, and the VFX artists on "Justice League" were presented with the unenviable and difficult task of digitally removing Cavill's mustache.
As for the outcome — well, let's just say it left a little something to be desired. As soon as images of Superman's CGI face leaked online, the internet burst into a veritable symphony of mockery and scorn, almost certainly damaging the word-of-mouth for "Justice League" and inflicting irreparable damage to the reputation of DCEU's Superman. A slight push of the movie's release date would have been a small price to pay to quite literally save face.
Wilderness years
After the dust settled on the "Justice League" catastrophe, Superman ... well, did nothing. No, really, he basically just vanished from the DCEU altogether. More adventures with the Justice League? Nope. "Man of Steel 2"? Nope. Cameos? Nope, and no, "Shazam!" doesn't count. So, what happened?
It's hard not to assume that Warner Bros. didn't know what to do with Superman during this time. In fact, it's hard to assume they didn't know what to do at all during this time. The studio appeared to careen at random between disjointed DCEU spin-offs such as "Birds of Prey" and "The Suicide Squad" and A-list Justice League projects like "Aquaman" and "Wonder Woman: 1984." At the same time, it poured time and money into Elseworld-style standalone movies such as "Joker" and "The Batman." Oh, and it also planned out a whole future for the franchise, one that relied way too much on Ezra Miller and inexplicably involved the return of Michael Keaton's Batman. It was, to put it kindly, a total mess.
And yet, it didn't seem to occur to anybody to bring back the franchise's most recognizable hero. There may be some good reasons for this, some key details that we might learn in the months or years to come, it really doesn't look good from here. What little momentum Cavill's Superman had gathered in the wake of his first three movies was totally spent, essentially sealing his fate — and yet, somehow, the worst was yet to come.
Enter The Rock
If Henry Cavill's Superman was doomed, Dwayne Johnson was his Grim Reaper. The Rock's bizarre obsession with bringing Supes into Black Adam's orbit began with his repeated assertion that "the hierarchy of power in the DC Universe" was about to change. This rhetoric only escalated in the run-up to the release of "Black Adam," in which the actor repeatedly — relentlessly, even — hyped up a showdown between his character and Kal-El. By October 2022, after Cavill had made his long-awaited return in the post-credits scene of "Black Adam," Johnson was claiming responsibility for a secret behind-the-scenes effort to bring back both the actor and the character for more movies. "You have to have Superman in the mix," he said. "So that's why we fought hard to bring Superman back, Henry Cavill, and there was no other Superman, by the way, to bring back Henry Cavill is our generation's Superman and in my opinion, the greatest Superman."
From the way Johnson had been talking, you'd be forgiven for thinking that Black Adam was Superman's true arch-nemesis, and that DC had done us all a great disservice by not having Christopher Reeve battle him in 1978. You'd be wrong, obviously: Black Adam is actually the enemy of Captain Marvel (aka Shazam), and enjoys a tenuous relationship with the Man of Steel at best. That didn't dissuade Johnson, though, who gleefully hijacked Superman for his own purposes and embarked on a runaway vanity tour that led, perhaps inevitably, to a failed bid for control of the entire DCEU. It wasn't exactly the Man of Steel's finest hour. Worst of all, Warner Bros.' inability to rein Johnson in, even as the Gunn-Safran deal was coming over the horizon, denied Cavill the chance for a graceful exit from the DCEU.
The final days
The last fall of Henry Cavill's Superman was a mess of announcements, overhauls, and U-turns. On October 24, doubtless encouraged by the efforts of Dwayne Johnson and Team "Black Adam," Cavill took to Instagram to reveal that he would be stepping back into the role of Superman. "The dawn of hope renewed," he said. "Thank you for your patience, it will be rewarded." For a while, it looked like Cavill's Kal-El really was ready for a comeback — or for a whole day, at least.
On October 25, James Gunn and Peter Safran were announced (via The Hollywood Reporter) as the heads of DC Studios, a brand-new Warner Bros. subdivision intended to helm DC's film, TV, and animation productions. Then, on December 15, Cavill stated that he would not be returning as Superman after all. That same day, Gunn revealed that the hunt was on for a new actor to play the role. Warner Bros. couldn't have given Cavill's Superman a less dignified end if they had killed him with a Kryptonite whoopee cushion.
Make no mistake, blame for this rests firmly on the studio's shoulders. Nobody can deny that the final days of the old DCEU were chaotic, and the emergence of rival bids for control of the studio can only have exacerbated the situation. However, it is the role of a studio to manage situations exactly like this, prevent them from getting worse, and save the people involved from embarrassment. Instead, the wheels simply came off altogether — and Henry Cavill fell harder than anyone.
One last joke
The grim coda of this story took place in the early days of 2023, just as the drama of the previous weeks began to subside. It was during this time that Warner Bros. chose to release a "Black Adam" and "Man of Steel" movie combo pack via digital retailers. Yes, somebody at the studio really did believe that fans would like nothing more than to spend $35 on a bundle that includes both the movie that introduced Henry Cavill's Superman and the one that killed him.
Now, it's probably important to point out that the combo pack's release had probably been planned for a long time, and nobody — certainly nobody at Warner Bros. Home Entertainment — could have foreseen the events of late 2022. Equally, though, you'd hope that someone at the studio would have noticed the bundle and nixed it, rather than blundering ahead with its release and forcing all of us to relive the drama of the previous few months. So sure, this was likely no more than an honest mistake — but that doesn't make it feel any less like one last cruel joke. You've gotta laugh, don't you?