Superman fans claim film is critical of Israel
For the latest updates, follow us on Instagram @arabnews.lifestyle
A scene showing a heavily armed military force attacking civilians across a border, where children's lives are at risk, has sparked comparisons to the Israel-Gaza war.
yall were not kidding about how anti-israel and pro palestine that superman movie was, and they were not slick with it AT ALL pic.twitter.com/U15Es5wqSa
— cassandra²⁰ SHAWN 28.08 (@shawnsalbatross) July 10, 2025
While neither Gunn nor the cast have stated the film references Israel or Palestine, early audiences have drawn their own conclusions, suggesting the conflict serves as an allegorical backdrop.
One user wrote on X: 'Y'all were not kidding about how anti-Israel and pro-Palestine that superman movie was, and they were not slick with it AT ALL,' while another said: 'Superman was so openly anti-Israel and god it was so good.'
Another user said: 'Not going to lie I really like the anti-Israel sentiment from superman and now I know James Gunn is always standing on business.'
ngl i really like the anti israel sentiment from superman and now ik james gunn is always standing on business https://t.co/cEhrMMK7jH
— n (@cupidmiilktea) July 12, 2025
Though the film never names specific nations, Gunn has said in interviews that it tackles themes of 'politics' and 'morality,' and positions Superman as an immigrant, comments that have also sparked backlash from some US conservatives.
The film is a reboot of the DC franchise and marks the beginning of Gunn's new DC Universe. It stars David Corenswet as Clark Kent/Superman and Rachel Brosnahan as Lois Lane. The cast also includes Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor and Isabela Merced as Hawkgirl.
The movie was released in Saudi Arabia on July 10.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
29 minutes ago
- Arab News
KSA is reshaping the global esports industry
For the second year in a row, Saudi Arabia is taking center stage in the global electronic sports landscape by hosting the Esports World Cup. The championship, held in Riyadh, is running for seven weeks, from July 7 to Aug. 24. It has brought together more than 2,000 elite players representing 100 countries, alongside 200 international teams. With millions of fans expected to tune in worldwide, the championship highlights Saudi Arabia's growing influence in the global gaming industry and its ambition to become a premier hub for competitive esports. This year's tournament marks another major milestone in Saudi Arabia's push to become a world-leading force in competitive gaming and digital entertainment, thanks to the event's exceptional organization and the unprecedented prize pool — the largest in the competition's history, amounting to $70 million. With world-class infrastructure, major titles, and top-tier global talent converging in one location, Saudi Arabia is setting a new standard for esports tournaments in the Middle East. Both this year's tournament and the previous edition mark the beginning of a new era in positioning Saudi Arabia as a global leader in the gaming sector by 2030. The World Cup also supports the Kingdom's broader efforts to diversify the economy, create new job opportunities across various sectors, and provide world-class entertainment experiences. The Kingdom is rapidly emerging as a global catalyst for technological innovation, with the electronic gaming sector driving advancements in artificial intelligence and other cutting-edge technologies Saudi Arabia's National Gaming and Esports Strategy, launched in 2022, is the driving force behind these efforts. It focuses on enhancing the gaming experience, expanding entertainment offerings, and stimulating economic growth. Among the ambitious goals of the National Gaming and Esports Strategy are contributing $13.3 billion annually to non-oil gross domestic product and creating 35,000 job opportunities across the gaming and technology sectors. The strategy also targets establishing 250 game development companies, producing globally competitive games — including at least one globally recognized title by 2030 — and developing infrastructure, talent, and international partnerships to support long-term industry growth and innovation. According to LEAP Forward digital magazine, the global gaming market was valued between $225 billion and $250 billion in 2022 — surpassing the film and music industries combined — and projections estimate it will exceed $600 billion by 2030. Clearly, this sector presents a significant opportunity for national growth Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund is playing a significant role in establishing a centralized hub for game developers, marketers, distributors, hardware manufacturers, and intellectual property holders. Savvy Games Group, owned by the PIF, is driving long-term growth in the global gaming and esports industry while positioning Saudi Arabia as a leading hub for both sectors. Saudi Arabia holds a unique position in the esports industry, supported not only by its Vision 2030 strategy but also by its strong demographic advantage, since more than 63 percent of its population is under the age of 35. By investing in esports, Saudi Arabia is not only positioning itself as a leader in the global gaming industry but also contributing to the goals of its Quality of Life Program — a key initiative under Vision 2030. This program aims to enhance the well-being of citizens and residents by enriching cultural, recreational, and social opportunities. Through initiatives in sports, arts, entertainment, and urban development, it seeks to foster a more vibrant, inclusive, and prosperous society. Saudi Arabia's efforts to localize the gaming industry through various strategic initiatives will support its broader goals of increasing public revenue and driving economic diversification. The Kingdom is rapidly emerging as a global catalyst for technological innovation, with the electronic gaming sector driving advancements in artificial intelligence and other cutting-edge technologies. • Talat Zaki Hafiz is an economist and financial analyst. X: @TalatHafiz
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Netanyahu's inconsequential visit to Washington
It might have been naive to believe that the meeting in Washington this week between America's President Donald Trump and Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was going to lead to an announcement of a ceasefire agreement in Gaza between Israel and Hamas. After all, there have already been many false dawns. But having observed the terrible humanitarian tragedy that has unfolded in the territory over the past 21 months, who can blame any decent human being for hoping and praying for this nightmare to finally come to an end? It is for those who create the obstacles, or who are not using the full weight of their influence to stop this human suffering, to answer the question of what is preventing them from ending a war that no one is winning, and which is only causing immense hurt while harming the prospect of any future peace between the two peoples. Netanyahu arrived in the US in a very different state of mind compared with his previous visits since the war started. He was much more confident. He is now convinced that Israel's show of force in Iran, with Tehran's proxies considerably weakened, and his success in pulling in the US to participate in an attack on Iran's nuclear installations, have considerably elevated his status in Washington. Astonishingly, he also managed to drag Trump into an interfering role in the legal proceedings against him. The US president described Netanyahu's corruption trial a witch-hunt, which it most definitely is not, and even threatened to halt American aid to Israel if it was not brought to an immediate halt. The Israeli prime minister's visit to Washington was part of his attempts to secure his political survival and revival. Trump seemed to play his part, and even took part in a piece of grotesque theater in which Netanyahu presented him with a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize. Trump, who previously pledged he would be 'very firm' with Netanyahu about ending the war in Gaza, on this occasion, and for no apparent reason, completely refrained from putting any pressure at all on the Israeli leader. While the immediate hopes for a ceasefire agreement were dashed, Israeli and Hamas negotiating teams were still engaged in proximity talks in Doha in an effort to resolve their differences, and Trump expressed cautious optimism when he declared that the negotiations to end the war in Gaza had been 'going along very well.' Israeli sources told journalists that 90 percent of outstanding issues have been resolved but the negotiations require more time. While the ability to reach an agreement on most issues is always a positive development, it ultimately means very little because in negotiations of this nature nothing is agreed until everything is agreed — and what remains unsettled includes those issues that are crucial to both sides, including an Israeli agreement to end the war, whether Israel will maintain a presence in the Gaza Strip, and whether the leadership of Hamas will be exiled. These sticking points will determine whether or not a ceasefire deal can be reached. Meanwhile, time is running out for the people of Gaza, and very quickly. Netanyahu's trip to Washington reflected his determination to remain in power, and possibly to avoid justice by derailing his corruption trial. Yossi Mekelberg What should obviously worry Gazans, and also those who believe in human rights and the rule of law, is that they have suffered immensely, even before the war began and immeasurably since. They have for months also been subjected to speculation about their possible removal from Gaza altogether. Other reports warn of the prospect of hundreds of thousands of them being pushed into the south of the territory. The very fact that the 'option' of a so-called 'voluntary migration' was even discussed with Netanyahu and his delegation in Washington is disturbing. The euphemisms of a 'humanitarian city' and 'voluntary migration' serve to sedate and deceive decent people around the world, or ease their consciences, when what is actually being suggested are most probably acts tantamount to horrendous war crimes on a huge scale. When Netanyahu says in Washington, 'If people want to stay, they can stay, but if they want to leave, they should be able to leave,' he is being disingenuous. Nearly two years of war have rendered Gaza almost uninhabitable, and instead of suggesting it be rebuilt, Israel's prime minister, with the support of the US, is saying that its residents might be better off going somewhere else. One cannot imagine a lower level of shamelessness to which this Israeli government might sink. When the war began this displacement was not one of Israel's objectives; it emerged as Israeli forces occupied most of the Gaza Strip, and then the extreme right wing in the country received a boost from Trump's misguided and tactless idea about rebuilding the territory as a 'Gaza riviera' — but not for the Palestinians. The timing of this Trump-Netanyahu summit, following the 12-day war against Iran last month, gave it a different flavor than previous meetings, as both leaders see themselves, not without reason, as victorious. The true extent of the damage to Iran's nuclear program is still unknown but one thing is not in question: Israel's initial military success, which gave its air force total freedom to operate in Iran, created the opportunity for Netanyahu to tempt Trump into getting involved to help, allegedly, finish the job using the kind of weaponry only the US possesses. On the one hand there is a sense in Washington that Netanyahu owes the American president for this assistance and should pay him back by showing more flexibility on the Palestinian issue. However, although Trump is not the type of person who ever believes he owes anyone anything, what Israel did in Iran actually gave him the chance to demonstrate determination and conviction as the US commander-in-chief and, within 24 hours, also to assert his authority by dictating to Israel that the war was over, to actually conclude it, and to suggest that decisions about the future of Iran's nuclear program should now move to the diplomatic sphere — thus becoming a peacemaker. Nevertheless, Trump has in mind a larger agenda: the expansion of the Abraham Accords to other countries within the region and beyond. But by now there is a recognition within his administration that this is not feasible without progress, firstly toward the end of war in Gaza and the reconstruction of the territory, and then to establish a genuine peace process between the Israelis and Palestinians that can lead to a two-state solution. Netanyahu and his government remain a major obstacle to this, albeit not the only one. The question now is what Trump will do. What is quickly becoming clear is that from Netanyahu's perspective the visit to Washington was part of the unofficial launch of his reelection campaign. The cracks in his coalition are growing but the war with Iran has enhanced his position in opinion polls. His trip to Washington reflected his determination to remain in power, and possibly to avoid justice by derailing his corruption trial. Trump and Netanyahu are not exactly soulmates but they do understand how they can serve each other's interests and personal ambitions. Sadly this will not necessarily help bring an end to the war in Gaza or restore regional stability.
Arab News
2 hours ago
- Arab News
Gaza reveals the brutal new ethos of global geopolitics
The systematic destruction of Gaza transcends diplomatic failure and exposes a fundamental realignment in international ethical and political frameworks. This realignment is characterized by deliberate, structured complicity from dominant global powers, facilitating military operations independently verified by UN bodies, human rights monitors, and jurists as satisfying the legal criteria for genocide. Such complicity operates through four measurable channels: continuous arms transfers exceeding $18 billion documented since October 2023, recurrent diplomatic obstruction via five Security Council vetoes blocking ceasefire resolutions, methodical disinformation campaigns targeting mortality data, and the wholesale deprivation of humanitarian assistance. Officially confirmed direct fatalities now exceed 56,000, with civilians comprising over 70 percent of this figure. Yet this represents only the immediate kinetic impact. Rigorous analyses — validated by studies of siege warfare in Mosul (2016-2017) and Fallujah (2004) — demonstrate that indirect deaths from engineered famine, hospital collapses, and waterborne diseases consistently quadruple direct casualties. Applied to Gaza's density (5,791 persons per sq. km) and a 92 percent acute food insecurity rate, the adjusted mortality projection easily surpasses 250,000. It is the obliteration of some 10 percent of Gaza's pre-conflict population within 19 months, which exceeds the cumulative death tolls of Bosnia (1992-1995) and surpasses the pace of Rwanda's 1994 genocide. What is more, the denial infrastructure operates with clinical precision, beginning with systematic data suppression that dismisses Gaza Health Ministry figures — historically corroborated by the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and Human Rights Watch — despite admissions of lacking alternative methodologies. The denial even extends to linguistic obfuscation, where over 14,000 child deaths are classified as 'collateral damage' despite targeting protocols permitting 100:1 civilian-to-combatant ratios and documented deployment of 2,000-pound bombs on designated safe zones. Simultaneously, physical erasure manifests through the destruction of 87 percent of Gaza's cemeteries and enforced mass anonymous interments, denying both life and dignity after death through the obliteration of burial rites. Together, these mechanisms transmute tacit consent into active participation in normalizing atrocities. Furthermore, the systematic inversion of ethical language serves as both instrument and symptom of collective moral abdication. Military operations documented to violate international humanitarian law, including the destruction of 72 hospitals and 85 percent of educational facilities per the UN's Satellite Center analysis, persistently receive the paradoxical designation of 'the world's most moral army.' Such linguistic corruption extends to the reframing of ceasefire demands to prevent further child casualties (12,500-plus UN-verified deaths) as antisemitic acts rather than humanitarian imperatives. Simultaneously, documented state rhetoric explicitly denying a people's existence and invoking territorial expansion from 'river to sea' — a phrase historically associated with settler-colonial projects — faces negligible diplomatic consequence, receiving merely three UN General Assembly condemnations versus 47 for comparable territorial claims elsewhere since 2020. Gaza is a live demonstration of the effective nullification of universal norms. Hafed Al-Ghwell Historical guilt over genocide is weaponized to legitimize current atrocities, despite demographic reality: 82 percent of contemporary Gaza's population descends from refugees displaced before 1948, bearing no conceivable responsibility for European crimes. It generates a grotesque paradox wherein institutions from historically perpetrator nations now systematically accuse genocide victims' descendants of bigotry — a tactic deployed in 68 percent of university protests suppressed according to American Civil Liberties Union documentation. The perversion culminates in the silencing of Shoah descendants themselves, with Jewish-led ceasefire advocacy groups such as IfNotNow facing state surveillance at five times the rate of non-Jewish organizations. The ensuing linguistic ecosystem transforms legal prohibitions into justificatory tools: Where international law prohibits collective punishment, it is reframed as 'self-defense'; where the Genocide Convention criminalizes starvation, it becomes 'sanction enforcement.' It creates a self-replicating corrosion that transcends semantics, operating as the ideological infrastructure enabling the annihilation of Gaza. Overall, the operational pattern emerging from Gaza reveals more than isolated policy failures; it constitutes a blueprint for systemic value erosion overtaking global geopolitics. When states providing 74 percent of Israel's arms imports between October 2023 and July 2025 simultaneously sanction International Criminal Court prosecutors investigating potential war crimes, they actively dismantle the judicial mechanisms created to uphold their proclaimed 'rules-based order.' This material contradiction manifests in quantifiable terms: While the US allocated $61.4 billion in emergency aid to Ukraine within 60 days of invasion, the UN's $2.7 billion humanitarian appeal for Gaza remained 67 percent underfunded after eight months of bombardment that destroyed 62 percent of housing units and 84 percent of health facilities. Moreover, the selective application of principles becomes statistically unambiguous when examining parallel crises. Sudan's conflict displaced 8.6 million civilians by mid-2025 — the largest internal displacement crisis recorded by UNHCR — while pushing 15.3 million into emergency hunger levels, according to IPC assessments. Yet donor conferences secured barely 23 percent of required funding, contrasting sharply with the $186 billion mobilized for Ukraine. The EU's migration containment expenditures demonstrate similar disparity: $4.6 billion paid to Turkiye since 2016, $1.9 billion to Libya's coast guard since 2017, and $102 million to Mauritania in 2025 alone — transactions documented by the EU's own auditors as directly reinforcing regimes with UN-verified torture rates exceeding 40 percent among detained migrants. These financial flows correlate with a 300 percent increase in Mediterranean migrant fatalities since 2020, according to IOM missing migrants data. Inevitably, Gaza has become a horrifying consequence of raw power consistently redefining ethical boundaries. Weapons shipments to conflicts violating international humanitarian law quadrupled among major exporters between 2023-2025, while referrals to the ICC decreased by 38 percent during the same period. When judicial processes face obstruction rates exceeding 90 percent for cases involving powerful states, as indicated by the ICJ's pending docket, the operational precedent becomes clear. Rules apply precisely inversely to geopolitical influence, with consequences calculated in millions of avoidable casualties. The international legal architecture, painstakingly built post-1945, faces unprecedented disrepute. The unchecked ability of powerful states to flout provisional measures from the ICJ regarding genocide risk, and to actively punish the ICC for pursuing arrest warrants, signals a dangerous erosion of much-needed accountability. When core instruments such as the Genocide Convention are rendered unenforceable against specific allies through political obstruction and threats, the entire framework loses legitimacy in the eyes of the Global South. To conclude, the clear hypocrisy is fueling a deepening rift, irrevocably damaging Western claims to moral leadership. The consequence is a world where 'might makes right' is the operational doctrine, humanitarian law is negotiable based on political alignment, and the value of human life is explicitly quantified by passport and geopolitical utility. Gaza stands as the most potent symbol of this new, brutal ethos: a live demonstration of impunity and the effective nullification of universal norms when applied to the disfavored. The lasting repercussion is the entrenchment of a global system where abdication of morality is normalized, and raw power is the sole remaining arbiter. • Hafed Al-Ghwell is a senior fellow and executive director of the North Africa Initiative at the Foreign Policy Institute of the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, DC. X: @HafedAlGhwell
