Superman the Movie- Again

[Powerboy]

I just watched "Superman" [the Movie] again and had the same reaction I did when I watched it a couple of years ago which was about the same reaction as when I watched it the first time when it first came out. If anything I think I had a stronger and more positive reaction to it than ever before.

NOW this is NOT a thread intended to be yet another lame excuse to criticize other versions of the character in live action movies. Onward.

I don't know exactly why but I found many parts of the movie to be incredibly touching as in "I seem to have something in both my eyes and I think it's raining".

Of course, the Krypton scenes with a father and mother having to say goodbye forever to their child that they will never see again is going to have that emotional quality and then it carries over to the sort of classic Coming of Age story with Clark in Smallville with the death of Jonathan Kent with dialogue that, depending on who you are, is either corny or profound and maybe it's both. I know some find the country home and the Cheerios to be corny but that's how I grew up so corny versus realistic is all in your life experiences.

Of course, for Clark, the sadness continues when he is compelled to leave home and his mother for twelve years. By the time he becomes Superman, I actually welcomed the fact that the rest of the movie would be more lighthearted although I readily admit it's that first hour that I find so powerful for the most part.

Still, there are moments that I find so good.

Clark taking his glasses off and about to tell Lois who he really is as it shows the essence of Superman here, how lonely he is, unable to be who he truly is as Clark or to share his life as Superman.

Forgot to mention this was the Donner cut and the scene with Jor-El in the Fortress where Superman goes to hug the image of his father only to look at his empty arms which again emphasizes the core loneliness of the character.

Superman's rescue of Lois and the helicopter which had people in the theater jumping in their seats when it first came out.

Lois and her joking and risque demonstrations of how she feels about him with the most profound moment being when she says, "Why are you?" When he gives her a puzzled look, she concludes, "I mean, why are you here?' But the initial question seems like one of those questions about life that you just can't quite find the right words to frame. It's almost like a writer saying: Why does this character exist? What is it in us that needs him to exist? Because there are things within us that we need a character like this.

Well, I could go on and on but actually only home watching movies due to recovering from the flu and I'm sure plenty of people can fill in the blanks about why this was such a wonderful movie and portrayal of Superman. And I'm sure a few uncouth individuals can explain why it wasn't. [joking]

But everybody has an opinion.

[superduperman]

It really pioneered a lot of what we now consider standard aspects of the character today. Krypton as a truly alien looking world, the "S" as a family symbol (you can thank or blame Marlon Brando's quirky demands for that one depending on what you think of it), Jor-El leaving a recorded message for Kal explaining his origins and history in his ship. The scene with him lifting up a truck as a baby is probably what began my obsession with Superman's origin. I first saw it on a lunchbox when I was four or five. Gene Hackman IS Lex Luthor! I wish his version had a bigger influence on the character than it did. But you can see it in versions like Young Justice with his quirky quips. Christopher Reeves IS Superman. He was clearly the basis for Byrne's look after the reboot. And, of course, Frank's on his run. He defined Superman for an entire generation. Including me!

[manofsteel1979]

One thing that always gets me every single time is the scene where Chris goes from Clark to Superman and back again within a sentence. He takes off the glasses he literally seems to grow about three inches in height, his voice changes. Its a wonder of acting. To this day he's the only version where you can buy why no one in Clark's immediate orbit would ever figure out he's Superman.

I just watched the three hour cut recently and in spite of its flaws, it's shear ambition in 1978 to actually attempt to do a credible version of Superman that could capture the full scope of the character given the technical limitations of 40 years ago is still pretty astounding. It doesn't always succeed, but when it does...Wow.

Top notch cast, Marlon Brando, Glen Ford, Jackie Cooper, Gene Hackman...Etc. Terrence Stamp as Zod is just iconic.

Plus...John Williams' score. Possibly his best overall score imo.

While I think it's influence has caused some unintended damage to the character in the comics and other media, the good ultimately outweighs the bad and it's a perrenial classic by any measure.

[Soubhagya]

I love this film. All of it except for the ending. I can see some of the elements which can look dated to the modern audience. But i am in love with this film. My favorite scenes are Superman's reveal in the helicopter scene and the date at the rooftop between Superman and Lois. The chemistry between Reeve and Kidder is amazing. Romance in superhero films are rarely done as well as this. Luthor is really entertaining. And by focusing on a character driven narrative was great. Reeve was simply wonderful in the role.

[Powerboy]

It really pioneered a lot of what we now consider standard aspects of the character today. Krypton as a truly alien looking world, the "S" as a family symbol (you can thank or blame Marlon Brando's quirky demands for that one depending on what you think of it), Jor-El leaving a recorded message for Kal explaining his origins and history in his ship. The scene with him lifting up a truck as a baby is probably what began my obsession with Superman's origin. I first saw it on a lunchbox when I was four or five. Gene Hackman IS Lex Luthor! I wish his version had a bigger influence on the character than it did. But you can see it in versions like Young Justice with his quirky quips. Christopher Reeves IS Superman. He was clearly the basis for Byrne's look after the reboot. And, of course, Frank's on his run. He defined Superman for an entire generation. Including me!

I remember in the theater in 1979 someone going, "That's an error. Why is Jor-El wearing the Superman symbol?" I didn't totally get it myself until I read a review and also read the book about the making of the movie since it's never verbally explained in the movie. While other members of the council were wearing symbols, they weren't equivalents to English letters and I didn't get it. But it was a perfect setup for Lois Lane to be the one that gives him a name.

Oh yes, Artificial Intelligence Jor-El starts here for better or worse overall though I suspect they had no idea it would permeate the comics too. I don't know if Donner and company realized comics would do reboots that would even make it possible to change that in the comics.

Gene Hackman doesn't get enough credit for his portrayal of Lex Luthor. I know there are people who consider it the worst aspect of the movie but I also knew people who felt the first hour was so "heavy" that it desperately needed to lighten up.

And, although his was not the first live action performance as Superman, for most people, Christopher Reeve has become THE Superman, the standard against which everyone is compared.

manofsteel1979
One thing that always gets me every single time is the scene where Chris goes from Clark to Superman and back again within a sentence. He takes off the glasses he literally seems to grow about three inches in height, his voice changes. Its a wonder of acting. To this day he's the only version where you can buy why no one in Clark's immediate orbit would ever figure out he's Superman.

I just watched the three hour cut recently and in spite of its flaws, it's shear ambition in 1978 to actually attempt to do a credible version of Superman that could capture the full scope of the character given the technical limitations of 40 years ago is still pretty astounding. It doesn't always succeed, but when it does...Wow.

Top notch cast, Marlon Brando, Glen Ford, Jackie Cooper, Gene Hackman...Etc. Terrence Stamp as Zod is just iconic.

Plus...John Williams' score. Possibly his best overall score imo.

While I think it's influence has caused some unintended damage to the character in the comics and other media, the good ultimately outweighs the bad and it's a perrenial classic by any measure.

Yes, that scene where he wants to tell Lois who he really is. As he takes of the glasses, he straightens up so you realize he had been slouching before and his voice, posture and entire personality suddenly changes and then, he slips back into being Clark. You realize how lonely he is and, also, as you say, the only portrayal that it's even semi-believable that people who have seen him up close in both identities would not see it's the same man.

Soubhagya

I love this film. All of it except for the ending. I can see some of the elements which can look dated to the modern audience. But i am in love with this film. My favorite scenes are Superman's reveal in the helicopter scene and the date at the rooftop between Superman and Lois. The chemistry between Reeve and Kidder is amazing. Romance in superhero films are rarely done as well as this. Luthor is really entertaining. And by focusing on a character driven narrative was great. Reeve was simply wonderful in the role.

I actually loved the ending. Thinking about the logical problems with it came later. For me, it was the moment when he really became one of us, so to speak. He broke free of twelve years of conditioning. The loneliness he was feeling just couldn't be held in anymore and he made a choice that had not been planned out for him in a textbook when he was a baby.

[DragonPiece]

There are a lot of good things about the film, but I didn't like how Superman was the real person and Clark was clearly just a disguise and he overplayed being a clutz. That's why I like more modern takes on the character.

[Jim Kelly]

There are certain movies that achieve a status where they become indelible cultural touchstones. I came to this realization about SUPERMAN (1978) when I went to see it at a matinee in a second run movie house, more than a decade ago. I had seen the movie many many times before that, of course, but this was the first time since Reeve's death and seeing him up there on the big screen, larger than life--I realized that he had transcended from human to mythic stature.

I get a lot of push-back on my point of view when I announce it on this forum. Other posters start to pick apart the movie, say its dated. Which is really beside the point.

You can take THE WIZARD OF OZ (1939) and pick it apart, spot all the errors, critique its social values. All of that deconstruction may be valid. But that's not germaine to the status of the movie as something that transcends its time and lives among the gods. Warts and all, THE WIZARD OF OZ is a magnificent motion picture that will never and should never be replicated.

The same goes for SUPERMAN.

There are so many great scenes in the movie, already mentioned. However, the scene that I always think of as a true sign of its brilliance is that leaving home scene with Clark and Martha. At that point, early in the movie, you come to realize this is not just any matinee picture--this is a film that expresses big ideas that are both universal and specific.

[adkal]

One thing that always gets me every single time is the scene where Chris goes from Clark to Superman and back again within a sentence. He takes off the glasses he literally seems to grow about three inches in height, his voice changes. Its a wonder of acting. To this day he's the only version where you can buy why no one in Clark's immediate orbit would ever figure out he's Superman.

It's such an important scene (and moment).

I don't know if it was intended to be this way, but the scene in the Daily Planet in Superman Returns where Lois and Richard and talking about Clark and how he has some physical resemblance to Superman always came across as if they were trying to flip the above scene in Superman: The Movie. Meh

[manofsteel1979]

It's such an important scene (and moment).

I don't know if it was intended to be this way, but the scene in the Daily Planet in Superman Returns where Lois and Richard and talking about Clark and how he has some physical resemblance to Superman always came across as if they were trying to flip the above scene in Superman: The Movie. Meh

Yeah. A classic case of telling instead of showing. Probably because as decent as Routh was in both roles, he just couldn't pull off the duality as convincing as Reeve. To be fair though, who could?

There have been better Clark Kent's and some can even argue there have been better Supermen , but none of them ether before or since could pull off the slight of hand that it requires for one actor to convincingly play a dual role and simultaneously be convincing in story that the conceit that a room full of journalists wouldn't recognize that Clark and Superman are the same guy, while convincing the audience it was the same guy essentially playing two parts with district personalities and still not have Superman come off as someone afflicted with a multiple personality disorder , thus ruining the " trick."

It's an impossible fine line that no one should have been able to pull off effectively. But Chris Reeve did it for several movies.

[Powerboy]

There are certain movies that achieve a status where they become indelible cultural touchstones. I came to this realization about SUPERMAN (1978) when I went to see it at a matinee in a second run movie house, more than a decade ago. I had seen the movie many many times before that, or course, but this was the first time since Reeve's death and seeing him up there on the big screen, larger than life--I realized that he had transcended from human to mythic stature.

I get a lot of push-back on my point of view when I announce it on this forum. Other posters start to pick apart the movie, say its dated. Which is really beside the point.

You can take THE WIZARD OF OZ (1939) and pick it apart, spot all the errors, critique its social values. All of that deconstruction may be valid. But that's not germaine to the status of the movie as something that transcends its time and lives among the gods. Warts and all, THE WIZARD OF OZ is a magnificent motion picture that will never and should never be replicated.

The same goes for SUPERMAN.

There are so many great scenes in the movie, already mentioned. However, the scene that I always think of as a true sign of its brilliance is that leaving home scene with Clark and Martha. At that point, early in the movie, you come to realiize this is not just any matinee picture--this is a film that expresses big ideas that are both universal and specific.

This says a lot. Looking at it again yesterday, especially the Metropolis parts of it, I can see where it's "dated" in the sense that styles of presentation and cultural attitudes have changed. But I've long sense concluded that about every 15 to 20 years, almost everything from an earlier time starts to feel corny because it's no longer the culture or the way people assume something will be presented.

I did the same thing. When I was younger, I had a hard time watching something like the Errol Flynn Robin Hood or even the musical "Camelot" which are classics because, sometimes, I couldn't get past the obvious stage sets and the feeling that these are people of the 1950s or thereabouts instead of the era it is supposed to be. But then, one day, I got that the Costner Robin wasn't "realistic". It was just a man with 1990s social attitudes in the Middle ages instead of 1950s social attitudes in the Middle ages.

Honestly, the Smallville part is my favorite part of the movie. While the death of Jonathan Kent is emotional and pivotal to later events, I agree that the most emotional moment in the movie was when Clark had to leave and the goodbye scene with his adoptive mother, not knowing if he'll be back or when, the anguish she and Jonathan always felt over fearing "people" would come and take him away because of how they found him, and her heartfelt "Remember us".

[Soubhagya]

I actually loved the ending. Thinking about the logical problems with it came later. For me, it was the moment when he really became one of us, so to speak. He broke free of twelve years of conditioning. The loneliness he was feeling just couldn't be held in anymore and he made a choice that had not been planned out for him in a textbook when he was a baby.

That part was great. When he decides to give up Zor-El's instructions. It speaks something more about his character. Like accepting his human side over his father's opposition. I liked it myself when i first watched it.

But its this time turning aspect which turns me off. Its not about the logic. Its pretty clear that he turns back time by his flight. And how to display turning back time? Montages showing everything happening in reverse. So, Earth also moved in reverse direction. (The one question was what happened to the missile?). My problem with it is that it shows that there are no consequences. It gives the idea that Superman can actually do everything and there is no danger to him or the world at all. All he has to do is turn back time and everything is normal again.

Not a bad ending in my opinion. But its weak considering how strong the film was upto this point. I honestly can't complain about anything else. Even the scene of Lois flying with Superman as she speaks poetry in her mind. That is one complaint made against it that i have heard more then once. It might have been better to do it silently. Like a silent motion picture. When you have poetry in motion perhaps you don't need poetry in speech. But i enjoyed it. That flight sequence along with Lois' poetry was beautiful. But its a complaint i can understand.

[_Feely_]

This film does the Superman franchise so much justice that I fail to understand how said franchise can subsequently be so utterly mishandled for the next 40 years.

It's near perfect.

My favorite part of the movie? The bit where our deiform protagonist - after overcoming his most prominent enemy, averting the destruction of an entire state, saving the lives of everyone (nearly ) caught in harms way; after all that! - is then defeated by his own hubris.

Consider me f**king moved, man.

So many conversations - too many - discuss this movie, its impact and its influence in one-dimensional expressions of style. It's the substance that makes this film so great.

Rarely has there been anything like it for Superman since then.

[RedWhiteAndBlueSupes]

Technically before my time, I watched it in 1995 or so as a kid. But man... I believed a man could fly. Everything about it... Its portrayal of Superman/Kent... The way he uses his powers... His costume... The optimism.. All spot on.

[Lokimaru]

My Gripe about SMtMP is that he latched onto Lois super quick for no other reason then she's Lois Lane. I mean yeah he just came out of spending 12 years being homeschooled by his dad but come on. Guys willing to violate the laws of Space and Time for a chick he literally just met. Hell with how accident prone and willing to put herself in harm's way to get the story she was, how hell she'd managed to stay alive long enough to meet Superman has to be one of the great mysteries of modern cinema. How many times did Superman save her life in the movie? Now extrapolate that to a whole lifetime of doing stupid stuff like that and there's no way she'd be alive at the start of this movie. Death should have been stalking her ass like the cats from Final Destination what with all the times she's cheated him.

[adkal]

Yeah, the timeline is screwy but, y'know, love