Superman

[TREK_GOD_1]

It's the incongruity of turning a Superman movie into a Richard Pryor comedy. It's not as incompetently made as Superman IV but it's infinitely more baffling.

Superman III was nonsense; the Salkinds knew they were watering down the property (more than already seen with the slapstick in II), all to jump on the popularity of Pryor, which--as the film clearly shows--was a greater priority than making a Superman film. Its only bright spot was the Smallville sequence, with the natural, believable chemistry Clark had with Lana, as opposed to his dysfunctional relationship with Lois. Lana should have been elevated to the love of his life status in the film, but that--ultimately--was smothered by the Pryor BS and all things Vaughn (a very strong actor in other parts).

 

[Skipper]

I still don't know why they didn't use Brainiac in Superman III. I mean, if you're going to use an evil supercomputer anyway, might as well use the one that people have heard of!

Probably at the time (heck, even today!) very few people knew who was Braniac. One always overstimates what not-comics book readers know about comics. I still remember when I had to explain to a co-worker of mine (an otherwise intelligent and well informed person) who the Joker was and his relationship with Batman.

 

[The Realist]

True. Prior to the announcement of the Supergirl TV series, my wife had no idea there was any such character.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

One thing that genuinely gave me the creeps about Superman III was when Ross Webster's sister was taken over by the computer.

 

[Skipper]

True. Prior to the announcement of the Supergirl TV series, my wife had no idea there was any such character.

I remember that there were some resistances to make an Iron Man movie because of his relative obscurity. As if it really mattered how many dozens of thousands heard a character's name when you have to convince millions of people in all the world to watch a movie about him/her. At least the MCU movies showed us that there isn't a direct correlation between how much a character is known and how commercially successful is the relative movie.

 

[cooleddie74]

One thing that genuinely gave me the creeps about Superman III was when Ross Webster's sister was taken over by the computer.

One of the creepiest cinematic moments for any kid in the 1980s. The only downside is that cybernetic Vera Webster is defeated so quickly and didn't have any time to really battle Superman.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Probably at the time (heck, even today!) very few people knew who was Braniac. One always overstimates what not-comics book readers know about comics. I still remember when I had to explain to a co-worker of mine (an otherwise intelligent and well informed person) who the Joker was and his relationship with Batman.

I have a different experience; although I read the comics and was well aware of the character, I knew people who had been exposed to Brainiac only as an adapted character since 1966, when he was a featured villain on Filmation's popular The New Adventures of Superman / The Superman - Aquaman Hour of Adventure and The Batman-Superman Hour shows. In the 70s, he had a bit more exposure on 1978's Challenge of the Superfriends, so among two generations, there were people who knew who and what Braniac was by the time Superman III went into production. He was arguably Superman's 2nd most known villain up to that point in history.

 

[JD]

Depends on the comic.

Yeah, I guess I should have expected that. How about we limit to the post-Crisis on Infinite Earths comics, and the current comics, since that's the stuff I'm most interested.

 

[theenglish]

I remember that there were some resistances to make an Iron Man movie because of his relative obscurity. As if it really mattered how many dozens of thousands heard a character's name when you have to convince millions of people in all the world to watch a movie about him/her. At least the MCU movies showed us that there isn't a direct correlation between how much a character is known and how commercially successful is the relative movie.

That is very true--Iron Man was strongly marketed based on the cast rather than the character. Not surprising considering the mediocre adaptations of lesser known characters that had appeared previously.

 

[Skipper]

Interesting how, for example, Guardians of the Galaxy did way better than The Hulk from a financial and critics' point of view and the latter was surely better know then the former.

 

[Skipper]

That is very true--Iron Man was strongly marketed based on the cast rather than the character. Not surprising considering the mediocre adaptations of lesser known characters that had appeared previously.

Immediately post Crisis he could fly in the space and hold his breath for a couple of hours. After some stories he could hold his breath indefinitely. He is still limited by the speed of light (his pre-Crisis counterpart could travel between solar system by opening hyperspace passages).

 

[dupersuper]

Yeah, I guess I should have expected that. How about we limit to the post-Crisis on Infinite Earths comics, and the current comics, since that's the stuff I'm most interested.

Post Crisis Superman could hold his breath for several hours, allowing him to zip around space some. He eventually got a power up that allowed him to go far longer, after the Eradicator repowered him up when he returned from the dead.

Current Superman...we don't know. We just had another reboot, so we'll have to see where they land. He seems to be able to zip around space again in the Futures End stuff (Imperious Lex, for example), so we'll see if that's how they go.

 

[theenglish]

He spent a lot of time in Space in the past few years.

 

[Mudd]

Yeah, I guess I should have expected that. How about we limit to the post-Crisis on Infinite Earths comics, and the current comics, since that's the stuff I'm most interested.

Because others of us are interested in other things.

At this point, I gotta say "This is not my Superman" is a pretty sad opinion to have while endorsing the Routh movie version. Hoechlin is so much more Superman and Tulloch so astronomically superior to the character of Lois as she appeared in that movie that it beggars fair comparison.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

Dan Murrell continues Superman Month on his Schmoedown podcast All My Movies with looking at both versions of Superman II:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

Because Superman III wasn't a Superman film; It was supposed to be a Richard Pryor comedy with Superman in it. (You laugh but honestly that's how I always thought they approached it after watching it first run in the theaters. In those days Richard Pryor was a big comedy name in film. Hell you almost expected to see Gene Wilder with a cameo.)

​

Heck, I'm kinda surprised that they didn't cast Gene Wilder as the not-Lex Luthor bad guy. But that might have tipped their hand a little too much as far as how silly the movie was going to be.

 

[Kor]

You guys are stirring up my morbid curiosity to watch Superman III again. I haven't seen it in many years.

Kor

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I enjoyed SIII last time I saw it. It's both amusing and silly AF, but also at times it is clever. It has a Silver Age comic book tone, and I can image reading something from that era not too far from it.

As just one example of one aspect, that of Superman split into two parts, consider the Silver Age Superman Red/Superman Blue story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman_Red/Superman_Blue#Silver_Age_story

 

[Mudd]

I can see myself watching the first Superman movie again with someone else who was interested. The other Reeve movies? Nah.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Is the Donner cut for 2 that different?