What 'Superman' Says About Gaza—And Us
And that, in itself, says something profound.
Despite fierce controversy and calls for boycott by some pro-Israel commentators, Superman is topping the box office charts, making over $220 million globally during its opening weekend.
Gunn has repeatedly insisted that Superman is not about the Middle East. "When I wrote this the Middle Eastern conflict wasn't happening," he told The Times of London. He emphasized that the fictional war between Boravia and Jarhanpur was crafted before the Hamas-led attacks on October 7, 2023, and Israel's ensuing war on Gaza. He even said he tried to steer the narrative away from Middle Eastern analogies once real-world violence erupted. And yet, despite these denials, the allegory has taken hold.
Why?
Because the movie's central dynamic—a powerful, U.S.-backed aggressor invading a poor, largely defenseless neighbor—is all too familiar. Boravia, with its military might, international impunity, and stated mission to "liberate" Jarhanpur from supposed tyranny, mirrors in disturbing ways Israel's ongoing bombardment and occupation of Gaza. The imagery is searing: tanks and drones lining up at a border fence, a young boy clutching a national flag as civilians scatter in fear, and a so-called "just war" increasingly exposed as a campaign of domination. That such scenes resonated so strongly with viewers is not the fault of the audience's "left-wing brain," as Ben Shapiro dismissively put it—it is a reflection of the moral clarity that emerges when oppression is laid bare, even in fictional form.
Online, the reaction was swift and divided. Some called it the most "openly pro-Palestine" content to ever appear in a blockbuster. TikTok creators, influencers, and activists lauded the film's unflinching portrayal of invasion and resistance, with one user declaring, "Superman is antizionist and leaves no room for doubt." Others—particularly in right-wing circles—branded it "Superwoke," accusing Gunn of injecting ideology into entertainment.
Whether or not the film was meant to be about Israel and Palestine, it functioned as a kind of cinematic Rorschach test. When seeing injustice portrayed on the screen, viewers brought with them the images that have been burned into global consciousness after nearly two years of siege on Gaza—images of children killed, hospitals bombed, and international law flouted with impunity. When you witness a conflict where one side wields F-35s and the other buries its dead in mass graves, any story of asymmetrical warfare will inevitably call Palestine to mind.
LONDON, ENGLAND - JULY 02: James Gunn, David Corenswet, Rachel Brosnahan, Nicholas Hoult and Peter Safran attend the "Superman" Fan Event in London's Leicester Square on July 02, 2025 in London, England.
LONDON, ENGLAND - JULY 02: James Gunn, David Corenswet, Rachel Brosnahan, Nicholas Hoult and Peter Safran attend the "Superman" Fan Event in London's Leicester Square on July 02, 2025 in London, England.To be clear, Superman is not a perfect political text. The film's Jarhanpurians—coded as Middle Eastern or South Asian—are largely passive. One of the few named Jarhanpurian characters is a falafel vendor, Malik, who serves as emotional fuel for Superman's arc before being killed off. As The Forward noted, the Jarhanpurians' purpose is less to assert their own dignity than to highlight the hero's morality. And so, while some audiences saw pro-Palestinian messaging, others rightly questioned whether the film reinscribes a savior narrative—centered on a white alien-immigrant superhero—rather than empowering the oppressed to resist on their own terms.
Indeed, as Middle East Eye pointedly observed, Palestinians are not waiting for a white superhero to rescue them. The real heroes are the medics treating the wounded under rubble, the journalists livestreaming amidst bomb blasts, and the people who keep marching for their right to exist. Superman may deliver lines about morality, kindness, and justice, but in the real world, those words are being lived by people with far less privilege and far greater courage.
Still, the film revealed how deeply the public has absorbed the reality of Gaza, how far sympathy for Palestinians has spread beyond Arab or Muslim audiences, and how badly establishment media and politicians have underestimated this shift. When a Warner Brothers tentpole provokes hashtags like "#SupermanIsHamas," it is not because the film is agitprop—it's because the world now sees Gaza everywhere.
Even Gunn's framing of Superman as "an immigrant" touched off fierce debate, with conservative pundits recoiling at the suggestion that a refugee from Krypton could embody the American immigrant story. But that, too, is part of the tension: if Superman is a refugee who stands up to bullies, who uses his power to shield the powerless, then what happens when audiences draw connections between that ethos and the very people being demonized by Western governments?
The film doesn't just expose geopolitical parallels—it exposes cultural contradictions. America wants to believe in Superman's values, but recoils when those values are applied consistently, especially when they implicate allies like Israel. It wants to celebrate rebellion in fiction but criminalize resistance in reality. And it wants to embrace immigrants in theory while deporting, detaining, and defunding them in practice.
That's why Superman matters—not because it offers a perfect analogy for Gaza, but because it unintentionally lays bare the moral hypocrisy at the heart of so much political discourse. The discomfort it generates is revealing. When people see children under fire and think immediately of Gaza, the problem isn't that the film is too political—it's that reality is too brutal to ignore.
This isn't the first time a Hollywood film has echoed global struggles, and it won't be the last. But what's different now is the speed and intensity with which audiences connect the dots—and the growing unwillingness to let sanitized narratives obscure the truth. Even in the heart of a superhero spectacle, people are demanding moral clarity.
In the end, Gunn may not have set out to make a film about Palestine. But the world saw Gaza in it anyway.
And that, in itself, is a kind of justice.
Faisal Kutty is a Toronto-based lawyer, law professor, and frequent contributor to The Toronto Star.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
4 minutes ago
- New York Post
Left-wing hedge fund D.E. Shaw fears ‘reprisals' over DEI from Trump administration: sources
Staffers at the notoriously secretive hedge fund D.E. Shaw fear the wildly lucrative left-wing firm could face 'reprisals' from the Trump administration over its woke DEI policies, The Post has learned. The New York-based powerhouse founded by billionaire David E. Shaw — whose algorithm-driven trades made it the most profitable hedge fund in 2024, raking in $11.1 billion for investors, according to Institutional Investor magazine — has grown remarkably quiet of late when it comes to diversity, equality, and inclusion, sources said. D.E. Shaw did not respond to The Post's emailed request for comment for this article. 8 Billionaire David E. Shaw, who has a long history of donating to Democrats, founded the money-spinning firm in 1988. YouTube/WebsEdge Science The company, which gave a young Jeff Bezos his big break in finance before he set up Amazon in 1994, has promoted DEI policies for years. A June 2019 memo obtained by The Post that was written by managing director Eddie Fishman encouraged staffers 'to display their pronouns' that 'align with their gender identity' in their emails so managers could 'foster an inclusive culture.' 8 The June 2019 memo. Obtained by the NY Post But a review by The Post of archived pages from D.E. Shaw's website shows that its DEI language has since been scrubbed, including references to how the firm 'actively promotes LGBTQ+ inclusion.' Now, its site merely says it's seeking 'talented people with diverse perspectives and backgrounds.' One insider said top brass at the Wall Street firm — whose 74-year-old namesake helped bankroll the presidential campaigns of Kamala Harris, Joe Biden, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton — made 'a strategic move' to steer away from full-throated wokeness over fear of catching the attention of the White House. 'There was some concern that aggressive policies would make the firm a target for reprisals by the current administration,' the source said. 'And we were about as aggressive as you could get.' 'They were going 100 miles an hour on DEI in public, only then to drop to zero and fall off a cliff,' said another staffer. 'The communications have certainly been ratcheted back,' claimed a third employee. 'It's not as in-your-face as it once was.' 8 Amazon founder Jeff Bezos met his ex-wife Mackenzie Scott while working at D.E. Shaw. The then-couple quit in 1994 when Bezos set up the online retail giant. REUTERS 8 Top DOJ lawyer Harmeet K. Dhillon issued a stern warning to corporate America in a Senate hearing on July 23: 'The goal is clear: either DEI will end on its own, or we will kill it.' CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images D.E. Shaw's retreat follows a Supreme Court ruling last month and a White House-led crackdown on corporate DEI policies, which critics say lower performance standards and foster so-called reverse discrimination. Top Department of Justice lawyer Harmeet K. Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for civil rights, issued the starkest of warnings to corporate America during a testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on July 23. 'The goal is clear: either DEI will end on its own, or we will kill it,' the top Trump administration official said. Nevertheless, five sources with direct knowledge of the matter told The Post that executives at the company — founded by computer scientist Shaw in 1988 after he did stints at Stanford, Columbia and Morgan Stanley — are still paying lip service to wokeness to the rank and file. 'They have said internally that our commitment and programs regarding DEI are not changing,' said another senior D.E. Shaw source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. 'They have themselves in a bit of a bind. They went hardcore DEI to appear progressive and cater to liberal recruits,' a veteran of the firm added. 'Internally, they are putting a brave face on it. But they are now very worried that the administration will start looking into them.' 8 President Trump has ordered the DOJ to crack down on the DEI policies that flourished under the Biden-Harris administration. Bloomberg via Getty Images 8 The woke job placements mysteriously disappeared from the DE Shaw website after The Post approached the firm for comment about its DEI policies. Fearing Trump's ire, the hedge fund appears to have axed its 'inclusive' Bridge internship. The program was set up in 2016 for 'historically underrepresented' groups in finance. The 'woke' job placement schemes still featured prominently on D.E. Shaw's website last week. But they have now been deleted after The Post approached the firm for comment on their DEI policies on Friday. According to an archived version of D.E. Shaw's Campus website — an online recruitment portal — the firm created three programs aimed at diverse recruitment. Its 'Discovery' program was 'designed for students who self-identify as women', while 'Momentum' was aimed at those 'who self-identify as part of the LGBTQIA+ community D.E. Shaw also had a program called 'Latitude,' which was 'for students who self-identify as Native American or Alaska Native, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.' 8 One scheme called Momentum was open to students who self-identify as part of the 'LGBTQIA+ community.' Other Wall Street giants including Goldman Sachs, BlackRock, Bank of America and Jamie Dimon's JPMorgan Chase have scaled back their public commitments to DEI. The Post reported exclusively how Goldman decided to give woke the boot — on its website at least — when its partners met with CEO David Solomon in Miami in February. The Post attempted to speak to additional employees at D.E. Shaw, but they declined, citing fears of retribution from D.E. Shaw's management, which has even been known to weigh in on whether employees can attend social gatherings with people who have left the company. 'It is definitely something that people are talking about at the firm,' a separate person briefed on the matter told The Post. 'The irony is that the whole firm is still very white and very male,' said another source. 8 Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers is one of the biggest names among the DE Shaw alumni. He served both the second Clinton and first Obama administrations. Getty Images The hedge fund's leadership team counts two females, Alexis Halaby and managing director Anne Dinning, amongst its ranks. The firm last made major headlines in 2022 when it was forced to pay a $52 million defamation settlement to one of its former rising stars, Dan Michalow, after an arbitration panel found that it had falsely accused him of sexual misconduct. Michalow, who always denied any wrongdoing, left the company not long after the start of the #MeToo movement, where hundreds of rich and powerful men were accused of sexual misdeeds. Aside from Amazon's Bezos and his ex-wife, Mackenzie Scott, D.E. Shaw's most famous alum is arguably Lawrence Summers. He served as treasury secretary under Bill Clinton and as director of Barack Obama's National Economic Council.
Los Angeles Times
4 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Columbia genocide scholar may leave over new definition of antisemitism. She's not alone
NEW YORK — For years, Marianne Hirsch, a prominent genocide scholar at Columbia University, has used Hannah Arendt's book about the trial of a Nazi war criminal, 'Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil,' to spark discussion among her students about the Holocaust and its lingering traumas. But after Columbia's recent adoption of a new definition of antisemitism, which casts certain criticism of Israel as hate speech, Hirsch fears she may face official sanction for even mentioning the landmark text by Arendt, a philosopher who criticized Israel's founding. For the first time since she started teaching five decades ago, Hirsch, the daughter of two Holocaust survivors, is now thinking of leaving the classroom altogether. 'A university that treats criticism of Israel as antisemitic and threatens sanctions for those who disobey is no longer a place of open inquiry,' she told the Associated Press. 'I just don't see how I can teach about genocide in that environment.' Hirsch is not alone. At universities across the country, academics have raised alarm about growing efforts to define antisemitism on terms pushed by the Trump administration, often under the threat of federal funding cuts. Promoted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, the definition lists 11 examples of antisemitic conduct, including applying 'double standards' to Israel, comparing the country's policies to Nazism or describing its existence as 'a racist endeavor.' Ahead of a $220-million settlement with the Trump administration announced Wednesday, Columbia agreed to incorporate the IHRA definition and its examples into its disciplinary process. It has been endorsed in some form by Harvard, Yale and dozens of other universities. While supporters say the semantic shift is necessary to combat evolving forms of Jewish hate, civil liberties groups warn it will further suppress pro-Palestinian speech already under attack by President Trump and his administration. For Hirsch, the restrictions on drawing comparisons to the Holocaust and questioning Israel's founding amount to 'clear censorship,' which she fears will chill discussions in the classroom and open her and other faculty up to spurious lawsuits. 'We learn by making analogies,' Hirsch said. 'Now the university is saying that's off limits. How can you have a university course where ideas are not up for discussion or interpretation?' A spokesperson for Columbia didn't respond to an emailed request for comment. When he first drafted the IHRA definition of antisemitism two decades ago, Kenneth Stern said he 'never imagined it would one day serve as a hate speech code.' At the time, Stern was working as the lead antisemitism expert at the American Jewish Committee. The definition and its examples were meant to serve as a broad framework to help European countries track bias against Jews, he said. In recent years, Stern has spoken forcefully against what he sees as its 'weaponization' against pro-Palestinian activists, including anti-Zionist Jews. 'People who believe they're combating hate are seduced by simple solutions to complicated issues,' he said. 'But when used in this context, it's really actually harming our ability to think about antisemitism.' Stern said he delivered that warning to Columbia's leaders last fall after being invited to address them by Claire Shipman, then a co-chair of the board of trustees and the university's current interim president. The conversation seemed productive, Stern said. But in March, shortly after the Trump administration said it would withhold $400 million in federal funding to Columbia over concerns about antisemitism, the university announced it would adopt the IHRA definition for 'training and educational' purposes. Then this month, days before announcing a deal with the Trump administration to restore that funding, Shipman said the university would extend the IHRA definition for disciplinary purposes, deploying its examples when assessing 'discriminatory intent.' 'The formal incorporation of this definition will strengthen our response to and our community's understanding of modern antisemitism,' Shipman wrote. Stern, who now serves as director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate, called the move 'appalling,' predicting it would spur a new wave of litigation against the university while further curtailing pro-Palestinian speech. Already, the university's disciplinary body has faced backlash for investigating students who criticized Israel in op-eds and other venues, often at the behest of pro-Israel groups. 'With this new edict on IHRA, you're going to have more outside groups looking at what professors are teaching, what's in the syllabus, filing complaints and applying public pressure to get people fired,' he said. 'That will undoubtedly harm the university.' Beyond adopting the IHRA definition, Columbia has also agreed to place its Middle East studies department under new supervision, overhaul its rules for protests and coordinate antisemitism training with groups such as the Anti-Defamation League. Last week, the university suspended or expelled nearly 80 students who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Kenneth Marcus, chair of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, said Columbia's actions were an overdue step to protect Jewish students from harassment. He dismissed faculty concerns about the IHRA definition, which he said would 'provide clarity, transparency and standardization' to the university's effort to root out antisemitism. 'There are undoubtedly some Columbia professors who will feel they cannot continue teaching under the new regime,' Marcus said. 'To the extent that they self-terminate, it may be sad for them personally, but it may not be so bad for the students at Columbia University.' But Hirsch, the Columbia professor, said she was committed to continuing her long-standing study of genocides and their aftermath. Part of that work, she said, will involve talking to students about Israel's 'ongoing ethnic cleansing and genocide' in the Gaza Strip, where nearly 60,000 Palestinians have died in 21 months of war — most of them women and children, according to Gaza's Health Ministry — and where experts are warning of rising famine. 'With this capitulation to Trump, it may now be impossible to do that inside Columbia,' Hirsch said. 'If that's the case, I'll continue my work outside the university's gates.' Offenhartz writes for the Associated Press.
New York Post
4 minutes ago
- New York Post
Mark Levine will reinvest in Israel Bonds as next NYC comptroller — reversing Brad Lander divestment
The leading candidate for Big Apple comptroller says he will reinvest millions of dollars of city pension funds into Israeli bonds — after current Comptroller Brad Lander divested from them. When Lander took office in 2022, the pension funds of city government workers and retirees that he oversees had $39.9 million of assets in Israeli bonds. When the bonds matured, Lander did not reinvest in them, in effect divesting the pension funds from bonds that New York City had invested in since the 1970s. Advertisement Brad Lander did not reinvest in Israeli bonds, despite it being a standard practice by the city since the 1970s Adam Gray for New York Post A campaign rep for Levine — Manhattan's borough president and the Democratic nominee for comptroller and thus likely next comptroller — said his boss will invest in Israel government bonds again if elected. 'We have a globally diversified portfolio, and that should include investments in Israel and Israel Bonds, which have paid solid dividends for 75 years,' Levine had said during the June comptroller primary-race debate with rival and Brooklyn Councilman, Justin Brannan. Advertisement 'We are now the only pension fund in America without that investment,' Levine said at the time. 'I think prudent management for global diversity should include investment in those assets.' Lander was criticized during his mayoral campaign for divesting from Israeli bonds. Foes have noted that he and Israel-bashing socialist buddy Zohran Mamdani cross-endorsed each other in the city's Democratic primary in June — a move that is credited with helping propel the far-left Mamdani well in front of the pack to clinch the party's nomination. Lander recently spelled out his divestment decision in a response letter to First Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro, who had ripped the divesting. Advertisement Lander had accused prior comptrollers of investing pension funds from unionized workers in Israeli bonds for political reasons, not for prudent returns. The Big Apple first invested $30 million in State of Israel Bonds in 1974 under former city Comptroller Harrison Goldin through its pension funds for educators. 'We are now the only pension fund in America without that investment,' Mark Levine (pictured) said during June's debate. 'I think prudent management for global diversity should include investment in those assets.' Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images 'The decision to invest only in Israel bonds, when the funds held no other country's bonds, and to invest assets intended for short-term cash management in longer-term bond instruments, was a political decision, not a fiduciary one,' Lander said in his July 13 letter. Advertisement 'The City's pension fund holdings of Israel bonds amounted to $39,947,160 at the time I took office in January 2022. In January 2023, those bonds matured, and our office was faced with the choice of whether or not to purchase new ones. We consulted our guidelines and made the prudent decision to follow them, and therefore not to continue investing in the sovereign debt of just one country.' Lander, who is Jewish and a self-described Zionist, added, 'To summarize: We treat investments in Israel as we treat investments in any other country. No better, and no worse. 'The [Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions] Movement asks investors to treat Israel worse than other countries; I oppose this effort. You appear to be asking that the City's pension funds treat Israel better than all other countries. That would also be politically motivated, and inconsistent with fiduciary duty.' He then accused Mayor Eric Adams of using the city's divestment of Israeli bonds as a 'cynical ploy' in his desperate re-election campaign. But Lander's predecessor as comptroller, Scott Stringer, said Lander was out of line for claiming that Israeli bonds are not a worthy investment. 'Brad got busted for BDS'ing the pension system. He got caught, and now he has to own up to it,' Stringer told The Post. Stringer said he was infuriated with Lander for claiming Stringer and other prior comptrollers invested in Israeli bonds for political, not sound financial, reasons. Advertisement He said Israeli bonds had always been a sound investment and told Lander to 'f–k off. 'If you get busted, you can't be trusted,' Stringer said. Israeli bonds are considered a solid investment, accumulating about 5% returns on average a year, records show. The New York state pension system, run by state Comptroller Tom DiNapoli, has more than $360 million invested in the Jewish state.
