{"id":1251228,"date":"2026-03-01T07:22:07","date_gmt":"2026-03-01T07:22:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.polygon.com\/?p=612757"},"modified":"2026-03-01T07:22:07","modified_gmt":"2026-03-01T07:22:07","slug":"lois-lane-seems-terrible-at-interviewing-superman-but-is-she-playing-a-dangerous-game","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/arcader.org\/news\/lois-lane-seems-terrible-at-interviewing-superman-but-is-she-playing-a-dangerous-game\/","title":{"rendered":"Lois Lane seems terrible at interviewing Superman, but is she playing a dangerous game?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Lois Lane in James Gunn\u2019s Superman<\/a><\/em> cracked me up and annoyed me at the same time. My initial take on the 2025 version of Lois (played by Rachel Brosnahan) was that she\u2019s an absolutely terrible<\/em> journalist. Even by the standards of a comic book movie featuring a woman who can turn her hands into buzzsaws (because something-something nanotech, don\u2019t examine it too closely), Lois\u2019 idea of reporting in this movie seems hilariously unrealistic.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s nothing new for movies, which pretty much never get journalism right<\/a> \u2014 or any other profession, for that matter. Screen interpretations of real-world jobs are almost always simplified and superficial at best, outright ridiculous at worst. Scientists usually laugh at movie science<\/a>, lawyers don\u2019t recognize anything about real law<\/a> in courtroom dramas, and so forth. Movies and TV even get highly specific jobs like forensic pathology radically wrong<\/a> in an attempt to goose the drama levels and keep the action moving.<\/p>\n

For most viewers, that\u2019s fine \u2014 a story that accurately depicted the slow, incremental, years-long process behind scientific research or a significant court case would generally be pretty dull. Generally, audiences will prefer the amped-up, imaginary, dramatic version of a given job. It\u2019s just harder to ignore a laughable break from reality when it\u2019s your <\/em>job being done incredibly badly on screen. <\/p>\n

Still, there\u2019s another read to Lois\u2019 actions in Superman<\/em>. It\u2019s possible she\u2019s the worst interviewer on the planet (or at the Daily Planet), wasting an incredible opportunity to dig into one of the most important, powerful, and enigmatic figures in the world. It\u2019s also possible that she\u2019s more devious \u2014 or self-destructive, or daring \u2014 than Gunn ever openly admits or explores. And I admit I like that option a whole lot better.<\/p>\n

The crux of the question comes in a scene not terribly far into the movie, a sequence highlighted in Superman\u2019s first full theatrical trailer. Lois has been dating Clark Kent\/Superman for about three months. During that time, Clark has been writing news stories about Superman where he quotes himself, presenting those quotes as \u201cexclusive interviews\u201d Superman has given Clark. Lois rightly points out that this is unethical for a journalist, so Superman invites Lois to interview him, instead. As the trailer shows, the interview goes wrong quickly.<\/p>\n

[Ed. note: <\/strong>Spoilers ahead for how this one specific scene turns out in Superman<\/em>.]<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n