crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 11, 2015 17:56:54 GMT -5
It's not that I HATE Superman 3 exactly.... it is just that it just doesn't feel like a Superman movie. It's just a movie with Superman in it. It's not just Richard Pryor either.... there's no sense of scale to the picture... no sense of epic-ness.
They tried to tell an intimate story about the duality between Clark and Superman but it didn't go anywhere. Lana and Clark? So Lana moves to Metropolis and gets a minimum wage job at the Planet.. so what? Does she end up with Clark? We'll never now because the movie doesn't care.
Superman internally struggling with who he is? The Evil Superman is never explained and is quickly forgotten about "Sorry that guy's gone."
The special effects are great but so what.. what does Superman ACTUALLY DO in the movie? Nothing of consequence.
I don't hate Superman III but it is the most pedestrian entry in the Superman series... felt more like a made for TV movie.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 12, 2015 14:40:33 GMT -5
It's not that I HATE Superman 3 exactly.... it is just that it just doesn't feel like a Superman movie. It's just a movie with Superman in it. It's not just Richard Pryor either.... there's no sense of scale to the picture... no sense of epic-ness. They tried to tell an intimate story about the duality between Clark and Superman but it didn't go anywhere. Lana and Clark? So Lana moves to Metropolis and gets a minimum wage job at the Planet.. so what? Does she end up with Clark? We'll never now because the movie doesn't care. Superman internally struggling with who he is? The Evil Superman is never explained and is quickly forgotten about "Sorry that guy's gone." The special effects are great but so what.. what does Superman ACTUALLY DO in the movie? Nothing of consequence. I don't hate Superman III but it is the most pedestrian entry in the Superman series... felt more like a made for TV movie. Thank Richard Lester for the tv movie look. If you subtract all of the Donner footage from SII and see Lester's work raw and out in the open- aside from one great shirt rip/change into costume moment, there's very little epicness that Lester offers as a director. Storywise: blame the writers. They could have added more depth, but chose to make it unfunny schtick. Great cast, lousy script, worse director.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,769
|
Post by atp on Sept 13, 2015 2:02:57 GMT -5
i love the junkyard battle. but wonder: could it have been even better as good superman vs evil superman, rather than clark kent vs evil superman?
Thaughts? Comments?
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 13, 2015 12:56:19 GMT -5
i love the junkyard battle. but wonder: could it have been even better as good superman vs evil superman, rather than clark kent vs evil superman? Thaughts? Comments? Maybe if we ask REALY nicely, Mr. Thau will create in CGI Superman suit over Clark in Junkyard battle so we can see a true Superman vs Superman fight! Then when "good" Superman wins instead of the shirt open he could put on his Clark glasses and run as fast as he can to Lana's house to bone her.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Sept 13, 2015 13:53:25 GMT -5
I really enjoy SIII.
In fact, I love it.
SIII is a curious thing. It obviously doesn't touch the first two movies, but there's still something about it that I find unceasingly watchable, enjoyable and fun. It's a little easier to appreciate if you're not doing a marathon. Watching it right after Superman I and II is a rough transition. Watching it randomly is more fun.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 13, 2015 15:17:50 GMT -5
The bad parts of III are truly god awful but the good parts stand up to the best of any superhero movies. That stuff with Clark and Lana and Evil Superman is some of the best in the whole series. Otoole is still arguably the best take on Lana Lang. And Reeve gets to expand on what he was already doing. Clark gets fleshed out more on his own away from Superman and comes off as a credible persona on his own for the first time since STM. i love the junkyard battle. but wonder: could it have been even better as good superman vs evil superman, rather than clark kent vs evil superman? Thaughts? Comments? I think it being Clark vs Superman says a lot more psychologically speaking. It's a lot deeper. Superman sees his human side as his weak side but in the end the human side wins. Just makes for a stronger contrast to me.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 14, 2015 10:21:12 GMT -5
The bad parts of III are truly god awful but the good parts stand up to the best of any superhero movies. That stuff with Clark and Lana and Evil Superman is some of the best in the whole series. Otoole is still arguably the best take on Lana Lang. And Reeve gets to expand on what he was already doing. Clark gets fleshed out more on his own away from Superman and comes off as a credible persona on his own for the first time since STM. i love the junkyard battle. but wonder: could it have been even better as good superman vs evil superman, rather than clark kent vs evil superman? Thaughts? Comments? I think it being Clark vs Superman says a lot more psychologically speaking. It's a lot deeper. Superman sees his human side as his weak side but in the end the human side wins. Just makes for a stronger contrast to me. I think it had the potential to be deeper psychologically- but I think WB & the Salkinds (and Lester) were thinking: "kids film" and "Richard Pryor comedy".... with Donner's work, it was an entertaining mix- not deep, but effective and definitely emotional. With SIII? I felt like the series regressed tremendously from its ambitions to be an epic with STM- but SIII isn't that far from the low-brow comedy shtick that Lester added into SII. On the SII commentary by Ilya Salkind, he says he was distracted and would have cut out more of Lester's silliness from the Metro battle. If so, I wonder where he was on SIII.... anyhow- much like SIV, watchable for the cast imo. But only to a degree. I loved the casting of Lana, but hated the script and direction.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,769
|
Post by atp on Sept 14, 2015 10:35:06 GMT -5
I really enjoy SIII. In fact, I love it. SIII is a curious thing. It obviously doesn't touch the first two movies, but there's still something about it that I find unceasingly watchable, enjoyable and fun. It's a little easier to appreciate if you're not doing a marathon. Watching it right after Superman I and II is a rough transition. Watching it randomly is more fun. It is easy to watch. The pacing is good, and it is the most polished of all three Salkind Superman films. Unlike the other two, it doesn't feel uneven or rushed.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,769
|
Post by atp on Sept 14, 2015 10:37:04 GMT -5
i love the junkyard battle. but wonder: could it have been even better as good superman vs evil superman, rather than clark kent vs evil superman? Thaughts? Comments? I think it being Clark vs Superman says a lot more psychologically speaking. It's a lot deeper. Superman sees his human side as his weak side but in the end the human side wins. Just makes for a stronger contrast to me. Have you seen Kill Bill? I recall David Carradine had a whole monologue about this.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 15, 2015 22:55:25 GMT -5
Wasn't it weird too that Lana would through away her mansion in Smallville for a few miserable rooms off a common elevator in Metropolis?
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 16, 2015 13:28:28 GMT -5
I really enjoy SIII. In fact, I love it. SIII is a curious thing. It obviously doesn't touch the first two movies, but there's still something about it that I find unceasingly watchable, enjoyable and fun. It's a little easier to appreciate if you're not doing a marathon. Watching it right after Superman I and II is a rough transition. Watching it randomly is more fun. It is easy to watch. The pacing is good, and it is the most polished of all three Salkind Superman films. Unlike the other two, it doesn't feel uneven or rushed. There is actually some pretty darn good contemporary editing:
Webster: "Like everybody else in the 20th century Gus-you push buttons"---cut to Olsen taking a foto.
Or:
Webster: "How about somewhere....small"---cut to close up of Poster slapped on side of building in Smallville.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 17, 2015 11:36:42 GMT -5
just ripped out my 1985 Superman III laserdisc and gave it a whirl(I have the blu ray too but i'm in nostalgic mode!!).
Some other witty liners:
Gus: "I don't wanna go to jail because they have robbers and rapists who rape robbers!" --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Stokis:
"This is the 1st time I won anything"
Mrs Stokis: "My hand Mori!"
Mr Stokis: "This is the 1st time I won anything valuable" --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Webster: "This one piss ant little country that thinks it has the gall(balls?) to dictate the economy of an open market"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lana(referring to Brad):
"Oh look he is stewed to the gills in the middle of the afternoon"
Clark(Thinks she is referring to Ricky): "gee...all he had was a chocolate milk shake!"
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,769
|
Post by atp on Dec 4, 2015 15:09:36 GMT -5
Imagine if STM had been made in 1983. Reeve looked so much more solid and built in S3 than in 1978. The special effects were at their peak, and the flying effects were perfected too. Part of me wishes that STM was made at that time.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Dec 4, 2015 15:24:57 GMT -5
How come Lana didn't want to get with Brad?
Brad was a stand up guy who tried to teach Ricky valuable life skills and sportsmanship by bowling correctly.
Lana wasn't no prize either.. did she think she was too good for Brad or something?
Brad had a good job where he provided security to Smallville's only computer. So what if Brad wanted to grab a beer oncer and a while!
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Dec 4, 2015 18:01:19 GMT -5
Imagine if STM had been made in 1983. Reeve looked so much more solid and built in S3 than in 1978. The special effects were at their peak, and the flying effects were perfected too. Part of me wishes that STM was made at that time. Unless it had been with Donned it would have been crap. Plus some recasting would have needed to take place for some roles. I was thinking today how much better IV could have been if Gary Goddard had directed it instead of Furie. MOTU looked better than IV. Goddard seemed to have a better handle on effects heavy genre stuff.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 6, 2015 0:10:32 GMT -5
Imagine if STM had been made in 1983. Reeve looked so much more solid and built in S3 than in 1978. The special effects were at their peak, and the flying effects were perfected too. Part of me wishes that STM was made at that time. Unless it had been with Donned it would have been crap. Plus some recasting would have needed to take place for some roles. I was thinking today how much better IV could have been of Gary Goddard had directed it instead of Furie. MOTU looked better than IV. Goddard seemed to have a better handle on effects heavy genre stuff. I actually can't remember much of the MOTU film. Furie's heart sounded like it was in the right place. Still bizzare to think that all it took was one hit to destroy Furie's career. I would have thought he would have been able to take one or two more hits. But then again--- has Martin Campbell been able to work on anything since Green Lantern?
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Dec 6, 2015 12:47:48 GMT -5
Look at Fred Dekker. Nuff said. When someone's the fall guy it's hard for them to recover. I'm glad Danny Cannon is getting work on Gotham but I can't name any movies he's done since Judge Dredd. Furie is a good director I just don't think he was the guy for a Superman movie. It always impresses me how Goddard stretched his budget and made the most out of a bad situation. It looks better than what you'd think someone could get out of the production. Cannon screwed over Mattel to let them foot the bill and MOTU still ran out of money during shooting. I have a soft spot for the Cannon era but I'd have literally tarred and feathered those two jacka s ses.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 8, 2015 11:25:08 GMT -5
Look at Fred Dekker. Nuff said. When someone's the fall guy it's hard for them to recover. I'm glad Danny Cannon is getting work on Gotham but I can't name any movies he's done since Judge Dredd. Furie is a good director I just don't think he was the guy for a Superman movie. It always impresses me how Goddard stretched his budget and made the most out of a bad situation. It looks better than what you'd think someone could get out of the production. Cannon screwed over Mattel to let them foot the bill and MOTU still ran out of money during shooting. I have a soft spot for the Cannon era but I'd have literally tarred and feathered those two saucy plate of hunky mans. Eventually, I'll have to take another look at MOTU. I just remember one set looking great, and the rest feeling pretty cheap and remembering how much more I enjoyed "Flash Gordon", cheesy fx and all... but I only saw it once as a kid. I also have a fondness for Cannon- not necessarily that the movies came out where all that great- but they were like a cheaper version of the Salkinds.... and it was fun to see the audacity of their product. Without Cannon, Superman III would have been the final note on the Reeve Superman films.... as much as people hate SIV- I'm glad at least we got to see him and the cast give it one more try.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Dec 8, 2015 18:27:34 GMT -5
The Grayskull throne room looked great. The rest of Eternia looked like California desert and the most of the film was set on earth. But I think Goddard made the look of the film work. The way it was lit and shot was still better than most of cannons crap back then. And keep in mind since it was a cannon film it was still ridiculously underfunded. But everything from the costumes to the effects still liked better than you'd expect from Cannon. True it wasn't as extensive as Superman IV but I think Goddard may have been smart enough to tone the set pieces down and get a couple of decent effects sequences as opposed to a bunch of awful ones.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 10, 2015 11:06:08 GMT -5
From memory, I know one set piece was great and the rest looked cheap set on Earth. I was kind of hoping it was all going to take place in another universe.... much like Flash Gordon, which also looked like sets throughout. I'm good with that for fantasy.
I remember the cheapness of Trek 3's set - when Nimoy wanted to film in Hawaii, but I don't mind stylized cheap sets for fantasy, versus something that's clearly not another planet. When "Star Trek: Generations" filmed in the desert at the last act where it was supposed to be a planet, I would have preferred a green screen anything to the desert if it was another planet.
Anyhow, curious to revisit MOTU sometime...
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Dec 10, 2015 14:40:08 GMT -5
It's interesting how many films have used that story structure to save on costs. Green Lantern was mostly set on earth when the best parts of the film were set in space. The animated first flight took the complete opposite approach. The transformers films are ones where I think fans would like to see more of the films set in space. With MOTU it was clearly cannon being cheap and even most of the Eternia stuff looked cheap. When it was on a decent set it looked good though.
That's another reason why I gotta respect GOTG more. It would have been easy to have a larger chunk of the film set on earth but they went with what made a better more expansive story. Once again it was what Green Lantern should have been.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 11, 2015 1:35:56 GMT -5
It's interesting how many films have used that story structure to save on costs. Green Lantern was mostly set on earth when the best parts of the film were set in space. The animated first flight took the complete opposite approach. The transformers films are ones where I think fans would like to see more of the films set in space. With MOTU it was clearly cannon being cheap and even most of the Eternia stuff looked cheap. When it was on a decent set it looked good though. That's another reason why I gotta respect GOTG more. It would have been easy to have a larger chunk of the film set on earth but they went with what made a better more expansive story. Once again it was what Green Lantern should have been. GOTG is amazing.... especially since I had very little interest in the property OR the director- given his previous work. Truly surprising. Have to give major props to Feige and whoever else at Marvel who went all in on GOTG... (Though it's a pity that didn't also apply with backing Edgar Wright on Antman...)
|
|