Superman I-IV

I was a kid when I last watched these movies, so I decided to put them in my netflix and rewatch them. So far I've watched I-III and here's my opinion on them:

Superman: This was a great movie. Not awesome, but very entertaining nonetheless. It's not the superhero movie that Spiderman and Batman (Nolan's) has become, but it's still pretty good. I never realized how closely Smallville actually got to the original story that was in this movie, so I was impressed with Smallville after watching this.

Superman II: Ok, now THIS movie was just pure awesome. It's a little dated with the special effects, but it's ok because I know they were great for the time it came out. This one was on par with The Dark Knight as far as "putting your eggs in one basket" is concerned. The whole story just built and built and built and the climax came through. This is a movie to stack other superhero movies against. It rivals Spiderman 2, and even gives The Dark Knight a run for it's money (not quite as good, but almost).

Superman III: *expletive* WHAT A PILE OF TRASH! Jesus, this movie was so convaluted that it was ridiculous. Most of the time I can even watch a BAD superhero movie and still be entertained (for instance Batman and Robin was HORRIBLE, but at least it was entertaining). I ALMOST quit watching this movie halfway through. What is it with superhero movies and this formula where they make a really good first movie, and then the second movie just utterly rocks the first movie out of the water it's so good, and then they just drop the ball on the third movie. It happened with Spiderman. It happened in the original Batman (Burton). And I really suspect that it'll happen with the new Batman movies. Is there some kind of rule that says after the first sequel, you MUST completely shit all over the story you've built thus far and run the whole franchise into the ground? Someone explain this to me. The only interesting factoid about this movie is that Annette O'Toole (the woman who plays Martha Kent in Smallville) is in this one as Lana Lang.

I haven't watched the Quest for Peace yet, but they should be putting it in my mailbox as we speak. It can't be as bad as III was, can it?

What did you all think of these movies?

I saw Superman Returns a few years ago, so maybe I'll watch it again too. But Reeves WAS Superman. Just as Bale is Batman. Just as Macguire is Spiderman.

Shadow_Ferret said:

I was never a fan of Christopher Reeves as Superman. Period. But I suspect that might be my age. I grew up on George Reeve reruns.

And really, I never was crazy about the first series of Batman movies either. I do like Christian Bale's portrayal however (saying this not having seen TDK).

Click to expand...

Was Christopher Reeve related to George Reeve or is that a coincidence?

Jcomp said:

Coincidence.

And regarding your question of if part IV can be as bad as part III: Yes it can be. Worse in fact. View at your own risk...

Click to expand...

Well, I *kinda* remember it I think.

This is the one where Lex makes a clone from Superman's DNA, right?

If so, then it's not as bad as III was. It may not be good, but not nearly as bad as III.

I'm just wondering how IV even got made. III was so terrible that you'd have think they'd have stopped with it.

Finally watched it.

I actually thought IV was entertaining. Something I can't say about III.

IV had a decent storyline to it, it just had bad special effects.

Sorry, but Superman III is the worst movie I think I've ever seen. No matter how bad you think Returns was, III is worse. Always, always remember that.

I'm watching Superman Returns right now and I am trying to figure out the hate for it.

It's on par with the original Superman. *shrug*

Definately better than III and IV, not near as good as II, but equal to I.