TEHRAN-A land of stark imbalance — where a heavily armed military, backed by a global superpower, storms the borders of a poor, besieged nation. Its people, trapped behind border fences, stand their ground with nothing but stones and flags against tanks and soldiers. The world’s media wavers between terms like “legitimate defense” and “right to life,” unsure of how to frame the suffering. Leading the assault is a commander long shielded from accountability by diplomatic alliances and military support. And then suddenly, a hero descends from the sky — uninvited, unaffiliated, moved only by the will to save lives.

What you just read is not a report on the Middle East or an analysis of current global politics — it is the plot of a fictional film that audiences around the world have lined up to see: “Superman” (2025).

Written and directed by James Gunn, the film was released on July 11, 2025, and over the past three weeks has drawn international attention for its political undertones — with many viewers interpreting it as a reflection of Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

“Feels like a major cultural moment that Israel is quite clearly the bad guy villain country in a big budget Hollywood movie,” wrote an X user.                   
                                                                                    
Boravia as Israel

In the 2025 film Superman, the fictional and powerful nation of Boravia, backed by a militaristic billionaire named Lex Luthor, seeks to invade and occupy the impoverished, besieged land of Jarhanpur — home to people with distinctly Eastern features. As world governments remain silent, Superman crosses political borders without hesitation to protect the defenseless people of Jarhanpur.

Casting choices reinforce the metaphor: Boravians are portrayed by white actors, while Jarhanpurians are played by Middle Eastern, South Asian, and Black actors.

Viewers have described Gunn’s film as anti-Israel, interpreting Jarhanpur as a fictional reflection of Palestine — a land whose people are being slaughtered by the ruthless, heavily armed forces of Boravia (seen as a stand-in for Israel). Boravia’s president, Vasil Ghurkos, is shown receiving military, financial, and strategic support from a wealthy American tech mogul, widely compared to Donald Trump.

U.S. diplomacy vs. Superman’s duty

In this story, Superman breaks away from his usual stereotypical role. No longer is he the justice-seeking representative of the U.S. battling bank robbers or Aliens. This time, U.S. itself is part of the villainous front — and Superman, for standing up for the oppressed people of a fictional nation and intervening without legal authorization or alignment with the U.S. government, is constantly criticized and even arrested.

His interview with Lois Lane directly mirrors the discourse within U.S. foreign diplomacy. In that exchange, Superman distances himself from the United States and defines himself simply as someone trying to save innocent lives under oppression.

At one point, Lois questions Superman’s involvement in the conflict by arguing that the people of Jarhanpur are not “innocent.” This part of the dialogue starkly exposes the cruelty of Western media narratives and Zionist propaganda that attempt to justify atrocities and the dehumanization of Palestinians. 

By using arguments like “they voted for Hamas” or labeling them “anti-Semitic,” such narratives undermine the moral obligation to stand with oppressed nations. In response, Superman declares that the people of Jarhanpur do not need to be “innocent” in order to deserve protection.

Moreover, the hero’s stance is worlds apart from the morally ambiguous, relativistic tone often taken by the U.S. toward oppressed nations. Superman does not fall into the trap of “both sides are wrong.” Instead, he takes a clear stand on the side of justice, and actively seeks to punish the aggressor. And for that reason, this version of Superman is no longer U.S.’s favorite.

James Gunn, in an interview with Comicbook.com, firmly rejected any connection between his film and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, stating: “When I wrote this the Middle Eastern conflict wasn’t happening. So, I tried to do little things to move it away from that, but it doesn’t have anything to do with the Middle East.”

A blend of Netanyahu and Ben-Gurion

While a few media outlets have attempted to liken the conflict between Boravia and Jarhanpur to the war between Russia and Ukraine, the film’s narrative structure, power dynamics, and the reaction of the U.S. government suggest that the Israel-Palestine parallel is far more fitting. 

Boravia is a U.S. ally — unlike Russia — and the U.S. opposition to Superman's intervention against Boravia’s invasion stands in stark contrast to America’s enthusiastic support for Ukraine in its defense against Russian aggression.

Vasil Ghurkos, with his Slavic accent and a visual style reminiscent of Benjamin Netanyahu, appears to be a caricatured version of the Zionist Regime Prime Minister more than of Vladimir Putin (not to mention that Boravia’s president physically resembles David Ben-Gurion). Furthermore, the stark racial contrast — white Boravians versus brown-skinned Jarhanpurians — clearly evokes the imagery of the Israel-Palestine war far more than that of Russia and Ukraine.

In a desperate attempt to deflect these comparisons, the Jerusalem Post published an article trying to associate Boravia’s dictatorship with Iran or Hamas, and eventually settled on superficial similarities between Ghurkos and Russian leadership as a way to redirect the allegory.

Luthor’s Abu Ghraib and Unit 8200

Over the course of the story, when Superman turns himself in to the government, Lex Luthor takes him to his secret, nightmarish prison — a place hidden in another dimension. Luthor explains that he rents out some of the prison’s cells to governments seeking to quietly detain political dissidents without due process. 

This part of the film unmistakably evokes memories of extrajudicial detention centers like Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib — facilities where the U.S., under the guise of fighting terrorism, held individuals without legal accountability.

In this same eerie location, Luthor unveils his cyber army: a group of robotic monkeys stationed behind computer screens, orchestrating online hate campaigns against Superman. This portrayal of digital warfare by a supervillain is virtually unprecedented in superhero narratives — and strongly calls to mind Unit 8200, Zionist Regime’s elite cyber-intelligence division.

A full-blown Trump

The film’s allegory becomes even more explicit when it's revealed that Lex Luthor — a ruthless billionaire who clearly resembles Donald Trump — has been supplying weapons to Boravia in exchange for a large portion of Jarhanpurian land. This plotline mirrors the U.S.'s active role in funding, arming, and politically backing Israeli settler colonialism. Echoing this dynamic, Donald Trump, during a February 4, 2025 press conference with Benjamin Netanyahu, openly declared: “We’re going to take over Gaza and we’re going to own it.” 

The statement effectively outlined a vision for full American control and redevelopment of the Gaza Strip — reflecting the same imperial logic that the film critiques through its SF narrative.

The world loves Anti-Israel Superman

James Gunn’s “Superman” has surpassed $300 million at the U.S. box office within its first three weeks, making it the most successful solo Superman film in domestic history, even outpacing “Man of Steel” (2013). This commercial success comes despite boycott campaigns by certain Israelis over the film’s anti-genocide subtext.

The movie faced backlash from pro-Israel media and commentators. The Jerusalem Post wrote: “I find it so disrespectful and distressing that a superhero created by two Jewish artists, is now being used to promote anti-Israeli messages …”

 Similarly, Ben Shapiro, a prominent right-wing commentator and staunch defender of Israel, responded with a brief but telling remark: “Not Good.” 

Superman was created by two young Jewish artists, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, and his Jewish roots have been widely explored — notably in Roy Schwartz’s book “Is Superman Circumcised?” Adding to this irony, the lead role in James Gunn’s 2025 film is played by David Corenswet, a Jewish actor, even as Zionist critics accuse the film of carrying anti-Israel messages.

Just as international audiences once compared the plight of Gazans to the story of “The Hunger Games,” their reaction to the new Superman film shows that even while watching a sci-fi blockbuster, many are still looking for reflections of the real world. 

In spite of powerful media narratives and Zionist propaganda, these viewers want to know the truth — about who the real oppressors are, who the true victims are, and where the real heroes stand.

AH/SAB