atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823 
|
Post by atp on Jan 26, 2013 8:32:13 GMT -5
I never ever thought I would say this, but now Superman 3 is the only one which I can sit through as a complete movie!
Yes, it has its faults, but on the other hand the production values are great, and the tone and content of the film are consistent.
STM is perfect up until the interview scene, but then goes to heck after that. All the Lex/Otis nonsense really drag the film down, and the turning the world back crap just kills it.
S2 has some great scenes, but you could never ever consider it to be a consistent movie. It will always feel like an unfinished patchwork.
S4 is pure crap as well already know. Enough said....
SR has some decent scenes, but again is not watchable as a full movie.
What do you think? Which of the Superman films could you actually watch and enjoy as a complete movie from start to finish?
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Jan 26, 2013 8:36:21 GMT -5
STM is the only one I ever have any desire to watch. I hate the theatrical SII.
Believe it or not, I just DVR'd a nice hi-def Superman III, which I'm gonna watch when I get a chance. I haven't seen that movie straight through in at least fifteen years.
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Jan 26, 2013 8:50:10 GMT -5
I think SIII is pretty bad but last time I watched it all the way through (last year?) for the first time in recent memory I quite got into it. Despite myself, I am entertained by the Pryor nonsense.
I dunno, The Reeve films I've just seen too many times over the last 30 years. It doesn't really count I don't watch them all the way through any more. I'll sometimes stick STM on from the "This is Lex Luthor...!" scene and just watch the last 30 mins (and really enjoy it).
I've seen SR 4-5 times all the way through inc twice at the cinema, never again. That's a real pity. I'd rather stick on disrespectful III than the downbeat, dreary crap of SR.
Donner Superman II, watched it once. Never again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Jan 26, 2013 8:51:12 GMT -5
I still maintain that, for all its faults, The Donner Cut is PACED more like it should be. Theatrical is so uneven.
I have an SR FanEdit (Booshman's?) that I've been meaning to watch.
|
|
|
|
Post by TylerDurden389 on Jan 26, 2013 11:31:29 GMT -5
I still maintain that, for all its faults, The Donner Cut is PACED more like it should be. Theatrical is so uneven. Disagree. Theatrical's pace may be uneven, but IMO Donner Cut's pace is all over the road. RIC for this guy here. |
|
Shane
New Member
Posts: 2,031
|
Post by Shane on Jan 26, 2013 19:38:13 GMT -5
SR
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Tripper on Jan 26, 2013 19:46:12 GMT -5
STM
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt in the Hat on Jan 26, 2013 21:16:22 GMT -5
Theatrical superman 1, Donner's cut S2. But I'll watch the others every now and again.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 26, 2013 23:02:49 GMT -5
SII fan cuts that blend both the theatrical and the Donner cut.
STM was a setup for SII, so even though there's great stuff there- I always considered it a setup.
SIII is horrible to sit through imo. Yes, it's consistent- but I definitely prefer the cheaper looking SIV to SIII any day of the week. At least SIV tried for greatness. Lester's SIII felt to me like Lester was laughing all the way to the bank.
Still..... in all the films, Reeve as Supes still keeps it from being a complete waste.
SR- like STM- I still feel is a setup film..... I love enough of it, but it was just laying down track to reintroduce the characters and bridge the decades at the same time for the sequel.
|
|
Knight
New Member
@Knighty80
Posts: 1,069
|
Post by Knight on Jan 27, 2013 6:31:59 GMT -5
STM, I still love it, all of it.
SII, Don't bother with the theatrical anymore. -The Paris Bomb plot is soo dour, ugh! Shot in the rain, slow paced too. Superman seems to take years to get there. Forget it. Between the RIC and the DC there is an excellent sequel. There's more Donner footage in the RIC than there is in the DC. -Wishes the pq of the RIC was DVD standard, ah well.
SIII, I'm totally fine with that now and I always enjoy watching it, I enjoy Pryor too. The computer plot is indeed pants, but everything around it is good. I would prefer a cut with the TV broadcast opening credits though. All that slapstick stuff is terrible.
SIV I have forgiven a lot, yea, most of it is shite. Reeve however, is the only saving grace about the film. It's heart is in the right place but falls short.
Returns, I watch now and again but it feels like it's a waste of time because there wasn't a follow up.
|
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jan 27, 2013 11:36:38 GMT -5
Funny, I was just watching SIII last night.
SII and SIII for sure.
I always have had trouble getting through the Krypton and Smallville scenes in STM. Yes, they are well done, but I've always found them unpleasant. People talk about Robot Vera, the Rancor, and other shit that scared them as little kids.
But for me, the Krypton/Smallville scenes are my personal Robot Vera.
I didn't enjoy watching Kryptonians die horribly, losing the ground beneath them, explosions and fire everywhere, your friends, family and colleagues screaming helplessly in terror all around you, plunging to their deaths.
I also didn't enjoy watching Jonathan Kent's death or Clark leaving home. As a little kid, whose family was most important to him, these scenes in Krypton and Smallville were 10 times scarier than anything in The Exorcist. Or for that matter, scarier than Robot Vera.
So for me, I don't enjoy STM until he's at the Fortress talking to Jor El.
Everything prior is too fucking intense and devoid of any humor or happiness. Definitely not for kids.
When I dwell on these early scenes, I can still feel my 7 year old self breathing a sigh of relief when we get inside that taxi cab and hearing that New York cabbie say, "Here you are, pal, the Daily Planet."
Love everything from that cabbie going forward.
Why? Because it's fun, heroic, and it has Christopher Reeve as Superman.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 27, 2013 14:12:06 GMT -5
That's interesting.... it really seems to be timing for when you experience these films, that can color what you enjoy most from them.
I caught STM probably a bit older--- maybe 12 or 13? So it is a big jump developmentwise on when you see the film.
The seriousness of the phantom zone trial/ the Smallville scenes I dug immensely, because I'd grown up with comics being something 'not cool' to be into---the tv Batman at the time was purely camp and kids' stuff--- so for there to be a superhero movie that treated it as serious (well, until Metropolis) as a biopic of a historical figure, was mind-blowing. If not for the original Star Wars JUST coming out slightly before Superman--- I daresay Superman might have been even bigger at the boxoffice as SW came at a time when EVERYTHING at the cinemas was REALLY dark, with very little for kids & adults to enjoy at once.
Anyhow, the balls for the filmmakers (I will give credit to the Salkinds for getting the film even started, despite their firing of Donner) to treat it the material that seriously at the time (and so close to the spirit of the comics) was fantastic. So, yeah, consequently that's probably why I enjoy the heavy treatment (when done well) of stuff like TDK and SR and don't mind the darker stuff necessarily for superhero films.
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Jan 27, 2013 16:53:02 GMT -5
Dunno about that, I always enjoyed this stuff when I was kid. By the time I was 9 I knew the film backward, first 45 mins included.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2013 16:59:41 GMT -5
SII. It's the easiest one to watch, most enjoyable though STM is a better film.
I agree with Enrique to an extent. When I was a kid I skipped right past all the Krypton Smallville stuff and straight to him becoming Superman at the fortress. Now as an adult I can really appreciate how fantastic the first hour or so is.
I actually find SIII very watchable too believe it or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 27, 2013 20:42:12 GMT -5
Having most everyone I know having had kids and seeing them enter the 7-10 age range.... some kids definitely seem able to handle movies with a few edges, whereas others wig out a bit easier.... so..... hard to judge what is too much at times-
Having said that, I never thought that "Superman Returns" were for kids 12 or under. I think it is too dark and intense for them. And for those who thought the darkness was fine, I've always said that there could have/should have been more superhero action to satisfy that audience, too.
I love enough of the movie and admire what how difficult the amibitions were to achieve in SR- but it's one of the few times I wish WB would have put some creative pressure on Singer to have more superhero action to go along with his own desires to tell a personal drama as well with SR.
Oh well.
Agreed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on Jan 27, 2013 20:59:50 GMT -5
STM - Theatrical
S2 - Theatrical
That's about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jan 27, 2013 21:27:08 GMT -5
Having most everyone I know having had kids and seeing them enter the 7-10 age range.... some kids definitely seem able to handle movies with a few edges, whereas others wig out a bit easier.... so..... hard to judge what is too much at times- Having said that, I never thought that "Superman Returns" were for kids 12 or under. I think it is too dark and intense for them. And for those who thought the darkness was fine, I've always said that there could have/should have been more superhero action to satisfy that audience, too. I love enough of the movie and admire what how difficult the amibitions were to achieve in SR- but it's one of the few times I wish WB would have put some creative pressure on Singer to have more superhero action to go along with his own desires to tell a personal drama as well with SR. Oh well. Agreed. Everyone has different buttons. I know some segments on Sesame Street scared the shit outta some kids, while I found them...interesting as a kid. Some kids were shitting bricks at the Rancor. Me? I found it disturbing to see grandfatherly types screaming and being hurled around while buildings fell on them. |
|
Melv
New Member
Posts: 546
|
Post by Melv on Jan 28, 2013 7:19:17 GMT -5
I think STM is the best and therefore most rewatchable but I find parts of it boring.
I love, love everything until we see Otis. I hate the missile programming scene and, while it doesn't actually bother me, realise the 'Can You Read My Mind' scene is cheese of the highest order.
I recently watched SII and SIII with my GF and cynical cousin respectively and found them both easier to watch than I remembered. SII used to really bother me before the Donner cut, but now that's out and really not as good as I'd made it out to be in my mind, Lester's version has risen higher and I accept it for what it is. Hate some of the slapstick though.
The Donner cut is awful. Terrible music editing and an unnecessary use of alternate takes to make it different. It could have been so much more.
III is well made but completely flawed conceptually. Have to take it for what it is but I can't often watch it all the way through. It was the first I ever saw and always remember my Dad loving Clark blowing the penguin out and coming out of the photobooth so I have a fond nostalgic love for it in that respect.
SIV is pure shit but I can't help but watch it now and again because it's Superman.
SR, I just rewatch the action scenes every now and again. I've tried to watch it all the way through a few times in the last couple of years but once Supes lands on the Krypto-island I remember that nothing particularly interesting or exciting happens and I just switch off.
Bar STM, I honestly think MOS will become my new favourite, and if the action is good enough, I'll probably watch that more than the rest.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on Jan 28, 2013 15:29:57 GMT -5
STM is, so far, the best and most consistent film. Krypton, Smallville, FOS, Metropolis, all good. It's the missile scheme that really slows it down and prevents it from being perfect. The third act was the victim of the rush to get the film completed, while the first two acts were unscathed.
S2 is less consistent, but more enjoyable. It hits higher highs than STM, but lower lows than STM (waaaaay low). The action sequences are better, there's more Superman, but the slapstick is dumb, the reshoots look cheap, and it just doesn't feel as polished.
S3 is a consistent and polished film, it's just that screenplay is crap. It's the only Superman movie without any production crises, Chris Reeve was in his prime, but the result was stupid, forgettable, and Superman took a backseat in his own movie. What a missed opportunity.
S4 is not consistent or polished (since it was gutted) and the screenplay is crap too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2013 15:50:36 GMT -5
hard to disagree with any of that Jimbo
|
|
Kirok
New Member
"You have failed this city!"
Posts: 3,179
|
Post by Kirok on Jan 28, 2013 18:32:53 GMT -5
S3 is a consistent and polished film, it's just that screenplay is crap. It's the only Superman movie without any production crises, Chris Reeve was in his prime, but the result was stupid, forgettable, and Superman took a backseat in his own movie. What a missed opportunity. Never thought about it in those terms, Jim. What a shame indeed. As for the original question, STM for me. Still my favorite all time comic book film. |
|
|
|
Post by Ollie W on Jan 28, 2013 23:08:15 GMT -5
Been a while since I last made a post but here we go;
STM: Still the film I find myself going back to more then any other. It retains the heart, humour and visual style that I expect in a Superman movie. The three parts treat the character with respect and continue to entertain me to this day. No other film has left such a lasting impression on me and through STM I gained an appreciation for the art of filmmaking.
Since the release of the Donner cut a lot has been made of Superman turning back time at the end of STM. I especially enjoyed Olly Harper's and Captain Logan's discussion about the scene during their recent commentary. For me the scene is a little like the ending to Jaws in that when Spielberg pitched his ending to author Peter Benchley the screenwriter felt the ending was too far fetched. Spielberg reasoned that the audience would at this point be so engulfed by the film that it would work.
Given the context of the film at that moment when Superman finds Lois dead I can buy into the idea that he turns back time. However the lack of consequences for his actions remain a letdown and perhaps that would have been improved upon had Donner properly finished Superman II as Selutron has suggested.
SII: Since the release of the Donner cut I've found a renewed appreciation for this film. For years I'd found it unwatchable as the seams and joins and thoughts of what might have been made the film less than enjoyable. Warts and all I now see it as a solid sequel and a fair effort by Lester under what must have been difficult circumstances. Fair to say Lester filmed some great Superman moments during his two outings. That said I still feel that its the Donner footage that remains in the theatrical cut that truly anchors the film. Without it Superman II would have been a mess.
SIII: I get what ATP is trying to say about the film being consistent. It's a fairly light Superman film that doesn't take itself too seriously. But for me it's more a series of entertaining moments in an otherwise lacklustre film. As has been mentioned many times over SIII has some of the best flying scenes, especially the take off's and landings. It also has some great moments with Clark returning to Smallville, and the junkyard battle is always a highlight.
SIV: For years I stuck up for SIV. Seemingly it's good intentions were enough for me. It's been said that the story is as much at fault as the budget by I disagree there. I feel that the film was dumbed down as a result of the budget and that the story premise was an interesting direction. That said SIV remains as far from a complete movie as you can get.
SR: Still a complete letdown. The story idea was good but the execution was awful. It's Singer's love letter to STM and yet it does nothing as well as the original. Why this movie has to look and feel so flat is beyond me, it's Superman! The flying scenes are average. The FOS looks no where near as magical a place as it did in STM and SII. Kate Bosworth is the worst Lois Lane ever! Recycled lines from STM are generally out of place and work less effective than in the original.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on Jan 29, 2013 0:28:57 GMT -5
Nice seeing you around again, Ollie  |
|
|
|
Post by Ollie W on Jan 29, 2013 1:13:28 GMT -5
Nice seeing you around again, Ollie Thanks Jimbo it's good to be back. |
|
Shane
New Member
Posts: 2,031
|
Post by Shane on Jan 29, 2013 1:39:04 GMT -5
Nice seeing you around again, Ollie Thanks Jimbo it's good to be back. wow ollie welcome back mate |
|
