| Welcome to Global Village Space

Wednesday, July 16, 2025

Does Superman Side with Palestine? James Gunn’s Film Sparks Debate

James Gunn’s Superman pits a fictional Eastern European power against a Middle Eastern-coded nation, drawing clear parallels to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

By News Desk
By News Desk
New'Superman' muscles to $217 million at global box office

James Gunn’s Superman is the latest work of fiction sparking debate for echoing the Israel-Palestine conflict through allegorical storytelling.

The film begins with Superman (David Corenswet) thwarting an attempted invasion by the fictional Eastern European nation of Boravia — characterized by Russian-speaking leaders and onion-domed architecture — into the neighboring country of Jarhanpur, whose people are primarily brown-skinned.

By the movie’s end, Superman must stop Boravia from launching a second invasion. Although Gunn has stated he wasn’t thinking about the Middle East when writing the story, online discourse has been rife with comparisons, with many suggesting Boravia symbolizes Israel and Jarhanpur represents Palestine.

While both nations have appeared in DC comics before, their conflict with each other appears to be an invention of the film. A conversation between Superman and Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan) closely mirrors real-world debates. Lois notes that Boravia claims it is liberating the Jarhanpurians from a tyrannical regime. Superman counters, asserting that Boravia — whose government is shown to be corrupt through ties with Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult) — would only replace one oppressive regime with another.

This exchange strikingly echoes ongoing arguments about Israel’s intentions in Gaza — whether its actions are aimed at freeing Palestinians from Hamas or asserting control over the territory. Visuals of Boravian soldiers in combat gear confronting Jarhanpurian civilians resemble footage of Israeli forces in Gaza’s hospitals and schools.

Read more: You’re a TV star, Harry: Potter series to debut in 2027

Despite these parallels, the film doesn’t come across as overtly anti-Israel. Superman stands firmly against the killing of innocents, regardless of who they are. As he passionately tells Lois, his mission is not rooted in political allegiance but in protecting life. It’s easy to imagine he would have tried to stop the October 7 massacre — not as a partisan act, but because it would have meant saving lives.

Still, even if one sees the film as critical of Israel, it hardly portrays Jarhanpur — or its Middle Eastern-coded characters — in a positive light. The Jarhanpurians primarily exist to serve as helpless victims, giving Superman the chance to display his moral compass and heroism.

Read more: CM Maryam Nawaz Takes Stand Against Dala Culture

The film’s more problematic moments lie in its racial portrayals. The only prominent Middle Eastern character, Malik, exists mainly to develop Superman’s emotional depth. Their friendship underscores Superman’s compassion, and when Malik is kidnapped by Lex Luthor to force Superman’s hand, he ultimately sacrifices himself — complete with a heavy accent — so the hero can triumph. Malik’s job? A stereotypical falafel cart vendor.

In the end, Gunn’s Superman might aim to promote peace, but it stumbles in its representation, leaning on tired tropes even as it tries to navigate complex political allegories.

Here’s how social media users reacted to the parallels:

Load more

Quick Links

Must Read

Popular Articles

Magazine

contact@globalvillagespace.com