Black Adam Is a Dreary Superhero Slugfest
The new DC Comics-based film wants to critique the superhero status quo. Instead, it ends up supporting it.

There is an interesting idea lurking at the margins of Black Adam, a noisy new DC Comics superhero movie starring Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson: What if superheroes—the self-styled good guys with strange powers and moral codes—are actually defenders of an ugly, imperialist status quo? Sadly, this muddled, thoroughly mediocre movie whiffs on its most intriguing question, resolving in a shrug and an onslaught of perfunctory computer-generated punching.
The story is set in the fictional middle eastern locale of Kahndaq, which in the past was the site of a brutal slave regime and in the present is ruled by Intergang, a group of stateless, militaristic oppressors. After a shootout and some magical shenanigans involving a mystical MacGuffin known as the Crown of Sabbac, a superpowered being who initially calls himself "Teth-Adam" (Johnson) arises at the word "Shazam." Comic book fans will understand the connection to another superhero who bears that name, but given the clear similarities between the two characters—both wear suits adorned with lightning bolts—more casual viewers may find themselves Googling for background and context.
It's rarely a good sign when a film requires offline reading to fully understand, but make no mistake: This is not a movie concerned with context. Indeed, shortly after Adam's magical rise, the story introduced a quartet of heroes who've never appeared on the big screen before: Hawkman, Dr. Fate, Cyclone, and Atom Smasher, all of whom are given no more than cursory introductions that amount to little more than summaries of their powers, like stats on the back of a superhero trading card.
They call themselves the Justice Society, not to be confused with the Justice League—although, once again, the movie does nothing to clear up any potential confusion. Rather, it simply asserts that this new gang of costumed characters has awesome powers, most of which can be derived just from their names, and thus, the rules of super-movies being what they are, they are destined to fight Adam.
This is where things almost become interesting: The Justice Society declares themselves the good guys, and given the implied association with the Justice League—a DC Comics super-team that typically consists of A-list heroes like Superman and Wonder Woman—even viewers who don't know these characters from the comics are likely primed to think of them that way.
Yet when they arrive in Kahndaq, they go after Adam, who has been busying himself murdering Intergang mercenaries, not the oppressors. Hawkman, their leader, declares them defenders of global stability and demands Black Adam stop with all the extrajudicial killing (he actually uses this phrase). But the people of Kahndaq are on Adam's side. They don't care about stability. They care about freedom from oppression.
So is Adam, who has no compunctions about murder when it suits him, actually a good guy? Does the Justice Society actually represent the side of right? Are superheroes actually just lame, self-deluded imperialists defending privilege? The movie half-heartedly raises these questions but doesn't bother to answer them, preferring super-powered slugfests to anything resembling thematic coherence. Eventually, a unifying villain arises—you can tell he's a bad guy because he's cherry-red, with ram horns, and a demon-deep voice—that unifies the various heroes and anti-heroes, all of whom turn out to be good guys, more or less.
The punching is fine, as far as it goes, and a few of the sequences are reasonably well staged, but it suffers from the same CG bloat that tends to weigh down so many of today's big-budget superhero films. And the movie's colors have been manipulated in ways that are almost distracting: Virtually all of the images look as if they've been run through a particularly aggressive Instagram filter.
The overmuscled, endlessly charming Dwayne Johnson makes a fine Black Adam, although his charm is turned down here by the hero's dour mood. A subplot involving a superhero-obsessed local kid who tries to train the murderous, sullen Adam to be a hero is mostly annoying and largely ripped off from better bits in Terminator 2.
Meanwhile, the idea of using a superhero-obsessed kid as the audience surrogate in a superhero franchise reeks not only of fan service but of a more general unwillingness to engage with anything that might actually connect with the real world: The movie's reason for connecting with this kid, for rooting for him, is based solely in the fact that he's a fan of superheroes—presumably just like the viewers.
It's probably too much to ask a comic book movie starring an ex-wrestler to be a psychologically nuanced treatise on global affairs and pop culture hegemony. Failing that, however, I'd settle for a rousing, entertaining movie. But this dreary computer-generated punch-fest mostly just serves the superhero status quo that, in its best moments, it seems to want to critique.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
On Rotten Tomatoes it has a 44% critic score and an 88% audience score. That's a good sign.
Yup. Reads as "Potentially worth ~2 hrs. and a bag of popcorn." to me.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot (ks-14) of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs
...
Just open the link——————–>>> http://Www.TopCityPay.Com
So, pretentious asshole leftists like Suderman hate it and general movie-goers enjoy it. Strangely, throughout his entire condescending review it felt like he was being intentionally overly critical of what sounds like a decent standard superhero movie. To me it sounds fine, but not exciting enough to be worth seeing in theaters (though I don't think most movies are worth their ticket price)
these are children's movies.
Do you want more adults in the room? Because this is how you get more adults in the room.
Suderman doesn't like it? Must be worth watching.
What if superheroes—the self-styled good guys with strange powers and moral codes—are actually defenders of an ugly, imperialist status quo?
This isn't even a sane question in this universe, and is entirely moot, given that there are world-ending superbeings constantly trying to enslave or outright kill all of mankind.
Trying to use super hero popcorn movies to shoehorn in social signaling is lazy writing and not much else. It doesn't even make sense in context.
"Trying to use super hero popcorn movies to shoehorn in social signaling is lazy writing and not much else. It doesn’t even make sense in context."
Agreed. A good many reasons not to do so:
1. The virtue signaling is usually going to be more of the woke cause of the day stuff, rather than something ACTUALLY meaningful, like fighting against an authoritarian status quo (the side which the left and hollywood are on, and do not want change to).
2. We so rarely get to turn off our brains and be free of *the narrative* that I would take a mindless beat-em-up over one with ANY message shoehorned in, being that its likely to align with #1 above.
3. The writers aren't smart enough to do it well. They can hardly write the actual plot / story well enough nowadays with terrible plot-holes, set-up/pay-off failures, and unlikable characters with non-existent arcs. Adding in any kind of coherent social message in a subtle or even artful way would be like expecting a Down's kid to give you a proper analysis of Dostoyevsky.
Its how we end up with movie's like Black Panther spending lots of time guilting the whites about slavery and colonialism, not addressing the very dark African roots of the aforementioned, and ending up opening up Wakanda to...start a community center in Oakland rather than addressing the CURRENT SLAVERY STILL HAPPENING IN AFRICA, or helping the very poor, technologically unadvanced, sick/starving regions in neighboring African countries...no the most important thing is helping black people in California, who already live in the richest state of the richest country in the world, who enjoy a quality of life many times better than those in Africa today.
The writer's dont want to take any risks, and arent smart enough to look beyond 'hey, lets insert woke-cause-of-America-today!' and leave it at that knowing hollywood, the MSM, and corporate america will already be there ready to compete for who can applaud the wokeness louder than the others, complete with 99% positive critic reviews on Rotten Tomatoes right out of the gate.
Ill add that "The Woman King" fits perfectly into this conversation, especially my last paragraph
The Woman King, while it's a fine movie, is literally a whitewashing of African history by white people. It's such a literal case of 'white savior' mentality that the mind boggles.
Not to mention that the subject matter is well over a hundred years out of date in terms of actual relevance to today even if it was historically accurate, which it isn't.
And its level of revisionism is on par with "What if Hitler was trying to save the Jews, and also that he won WW2"
Probably the worst own-goal in recent history, complete with a full propaganda campaign from the critics/reviewers, which might have worked if they aimed for an unlikely but possible 80-90%, rather than the blatantly fabricated 100%. Its Kim Jong Un level of propaganda.
It's a well constructed movie that doesn't totally rely on CGI, and thus I can't totally demonize it considering what the alternative's are these days. Better to have a vision in the first place than a round-table of hacks.
I think that's probably a factor that lends to it's high score, since people are getting tired of CGI fuck-fests. Same thing happened with the new Top Gun movie. It's score is outrageously good for what it actually was.
Nolan's batman movies addressed the surveillance state and economic inequality that fueled rise of socialist anarchists like Bane. The 90s X-men cartoon dealt with civil rights themes.
Pop culture can be topical. It has to strike the right balance. A lot of the CW superhero shows are basically MSNBC production and the story and characters are stiff, on the nose allusion to contemporary culture war. Everything is a reflection of lefty talking points. So those shows flopped.
>Its how we end up with movie’s like Black Panther
While I agree that the characters focused excessively on America in the end of "Black Panther," I really appreciated the anti-wokeness of the movie's main message. The main villain is a maniac who is convinced that the world and the system is broken and things that only grand, violent systemic change can fix it. He wants to use Wakanda's advanced technology to implement said violent change. The hero agrees that the world has problems, but advocates working for change through gradual peaceful reform and acts of charity. It's a total rejection of the woke ideology that supports violent protest and advocates tearing down the system.
There is an interesting idea lurking at the margins of Black Adam, a noisy new DC Comics superhero movie starring Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson: What if superheroes—the self-styled good guys with strange powers and moral codes—are actually defenders of an ugly, imperialist status quo?
Like in the Amazon series, The Boys?
fucking love The Boys.
That's . . . not really what The Boy is about. Its more background/c-plot stuff.
Why 99% of Movies are Garbage today.
It’s gotten to the point where I prefer watching The Critical Drinker reviews more than the entire medium of movies or TV fiction.
At least anything made in the last 15 years or so.
DC tends to suck balls. I do like "Pennyworth" though.
He's a villain you dumb fucks. You're not supposed to cheer for him any more than you cheer for the Joker in his movie.
How does that "no killing" rule work out for Batman, with the revolving door at Arkham?
Pretty badly for the citizens of Gotham he ends up killing.
Batman kills now. He racks up more kills in a single Batfleck movie than most war flicks.
Let’s be realistic for a second. Forget Batman, the Joker would never survive the police ride to the nuthouse. There would be an “accident” and that’s the end of the series.
The original Justice Society dates back to the 1940s and included Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman and the Golden Age version of the Flash, Green Lantern and the Atom. However this one is one of the DC revivals so they leave off members who are in or have counterparts in the Justice League. Which is how you get the B-Class superheroes.
Have you never seen 'Predator', Suderman?
“What if superheroes—the self-styled good guys with strange powers and moral codes—are actually defenders of an ugly, imperialist status quo?”
That’s only an interesting question to pseudo-intellectuals and Wokeism’s sycophants.
I probably won’t watch it because they cast a douche in the starring role, not because of the story or CGI.
He’s a comically bad actor who only gets parts because he checks off the non-white box.