Your opinion on the Superman movies starring Christopher Reeve.

[Osiris-Rex]

I loved Superman. The spectacle. The acting. Reeve was so charismatic and Kidder was adorable.
Superman II not as much. Didn't really like the villains. And got too much of a been there done that vibe.
Superman III was terrible. An embarrassment. Richard Pryor totally destroyed the movie.
Superman IV was so cheap. But entertaining in spots. At least it wasn't Superman III. I did like Lenny Luthor.

[stargazer01]

I think whoever does the next Man Of Steel movie should think about bringing back some of that old Superman magic.

I want more of that confident Superman from the first movie. And the light-hearted moments.

Not the campy villains or clumsy Clark. Or amnesia kisses.

[Jokerz79]

Superman 78 a milestone for the medium and only great Superman movie ever made IMO.

Superman II Good loved it more as a kid but still enjoy it and still my 2nd favorite Superman film that is live action.

Superman II (Donner Cut) Is the Superior version IMO until the end being stuck with time travel ending hurt it if not for that it would be better than the Theatrical cut.

Superman III The Good Jerk Superman (Found him more of a Jerk than Evil) and fight between Superman vs Jerk Superman, The Lana and Smallville Plot, Robert Vaughn not his character just him Vaughn was always awesome no matter what, & Also the Pryor stuff is good and very funny just didn't belong in a Superman movie. Overall enjoyable for various reasons but not good.

Superman IV: There are scenes to enjoy like Superman and Lois, Perry fighting to keep the Planet from becoming a tabloid, and that's it I still watch this occasionally but it's bad on almost every level the only good things about it was the actors and seeing Chris one last time as Superman.

[DCStu]

Superman 4 is NOT a great movie (anything but) but AT LEAST despite everything it's heart is in the right place. The same can't be said of Batman & Robin.

[Osiris-Rex]

Superman 4 is NOT a great movie (anything but) but AT LEAST despite everything it's heart is in the right place. The same can't be said of Batman & Robin.

Batman & Robin was a not very well executed homage to the 1966 Adam West Batman, that killed the franchise. Superman IV was the dying gasp of a franchise that had already been destroyed by Superman III.

[Vampire Savior]

I did not understand why Superman needed to give up his powers to be with Lois... unless... he was unable to have sex with her without destroying her. I mean, it is kind of implied. If so, that's actually some really deep stuff there. it's very deep in its shallowness. If that's the case, maybe the movie should have come out and said it instead of beating around the bush.

[Linda Lee]

I did not understand why Superman needed to give up his powers to be with Lois... unless... he was unable to have sex with her without destroying her. I mean, it is kind of implied. If so, that's actually some really deep stuff there. it's very deep in its shallowness. If that's the case, maybe the movie should have come out and said it instead of beating around the bush.

Hahahahahahhahhahahahahahaha oomg seriously?

[stargazer01]

I did not understand why Superman needed to give up his powers to be with Lois... unless... he was unable to have sex with her without destroying her. I mean, it is kind of implied. If so, that's actually some really deep stuff there. it's very deep in its shallowness. If that's the case, maybe the movie should have come out and said it instead of beating around the bush.

Yeah, it's not clear why he had to give them up. It doesn't makes sense, unless his parents thought it was impossible for him to be with a human woman while being super.

It comes off more like he can't be Superman and have a close relationship with any human. Maybe the writers/director felt it was inappropriate to explain it exactly.. but they still thought it was ok to show Clark in a bed with a woman.. lol

Hahahahahahhahhahahahahahaha oomg seriously?

I don't think he/she was joking. He actually makes a good point, imo.

[Yoda]

I know it's like objectively a horrible movie, but Superman IV really was like my favorite movie as a kid. I can remember watching it over and over again on HBO, I think, back in the day. I loved it. And I also have a very strong memory being freaked the f' out at the woman who got turned into a robot in Superman III. That scared the crap out of me.

Today, I still enjoy Superman. Particularly just Christopher Reeve's portrayal of Clark and Superman and Margo Kidder's Lois Lane. Superman II I think has aged a lot worse than the first, and the ending with the amnesia kiss is just bad and creepy to me now.

It comes off more like he can't be Superman and have a close relationship with any human.

That is the way I have always interpreted it. Though I find that argument to be pretty weak. The sex stuff is just kinda dumb to me. He can interact with the world day to day and not kill people by accident.

[Osiris-Rex]

I did not understand why Superman needed to give up his powers to be with Lois... unless... he was unable to have sex with her without destroying her. I mean, it is kind of implied. If so, that's actually some really deep stuff there. it's very deep in its shallowness. If that's the case, maybe the movie should have come out and said it instead of beating around the bush.

It is interesting that after all these years they are sticking with this idea. On the Supergirl TV show Clark got Lois pregnant while they were visiting Argo City, where Superman and Supergirl don't have their powers.
Plus Lois and Clark went back to Argo City so the baby wouldn't injure Lois while she was carrying the baby.

[manofsteel1979]

I got the steel case 2007 SUPERMAN COLLECTORS' EDITION 14 DISC DVD SET back when SUPERMAN RETURNS came out. But I found SUPERMAN III and SUPERMAN IV hard to watch. I never did go to see III when it was in the theatres originally and never really wanted to see it, but I did get the comic book adaptation, which was good enough. I did see IV in the theatres back in the day--and I got the comic book--but it doesn't hold up. Sadly, now when I try to watch most of the DVDs from that steel case, they don't play--I don't know if it was a poor quality in their manufacture or if it's because of being in the case for over a decade, but they all seem to have damage. I might be pushed to replace them all, but it's a bitter pill.

The first and second Christopher Reeve movies were never allowed to be adapted as comic books. Which is why DC put out tabloid editions that paid tribute to the movies, but didn't actually adapt them--and why they released the original novels by Elliot Maggin, rather than novelizations. It was something to do with the contract signed with Mario Puzo that prohibited using that material in any other form. Likewise they couldn't use any original characters created for the movies--like Ursa and Non. But given that SUPERMAN RETURNS seemed to be freed from that restriction and as the comics have used some of those characters and ideas, I wonder if it would be possible to do an adaptation of the first two movies in comic book form. I'd like to see SUPERMAN THE COMIC BOOK DONNER CUT--adapting the whole story as one big epic.

Glad I'm not the only one who's DVD'S from that set stopped working. I ended up replacing them with the Anthology blu-ray set which is nearly identical in content. I paid 40 bucks for mine like three years ago.

The movies themselves... For nostalgia reasons I will always love them, warts and all, and Chris Reeve pulled off a miracle with his portrayle. He doesn't have a badly acted scene in all 4 of those movies IMO and he's the reason to see those films. That being said , the first one aside , the films just haven't aged well and if not for Reeve and John Williams score, they probably wouldn't be as fondly remembered.

And I've said it before, while I do like the movies, and they are important in the genre, I do think they in some ways have had an inadvertent negative effect on the character because some creators and fans hold the films as the end all be all when it comes to Superman and has hurt his evolution in comics and other media compared to his contemporaries. For awhile in the mid 2000's I was starting to get the impression DC Comics thought Superman began in 1978, not 1938. In other words you don't see Batman being held up against the 1989 Batman movie or the Adam West series as THE standard blueprint. Superman in many ways is still held up against the Reeve films as the only proper way to do the character.

[stargazer01]

I know it's like objectively a horrible movie, but Superman IV really was like my favorite movie as a kid. I can remember watching it over and over again on HBO, I think, back in the day. I loved it. And I also have a very strong memory being freaked the f' out at the woman who got turned into a robot in Superman III. That scared the crap out of me.

Today, I still enjoy Superman. Particularly just Christopher Reeve's portrayal of Clark and Superman and Margo Kidder's Lois Lane. Superman II I think has aged a lot worse than the first, and the ending with the amnesia kiss is just bad and creepy to me now.




That is the way I have always interpreted it. Though I find that argument to be pretty weak. The sex stuff is just kinda dumb to me. He can interact with the world day to day and not kill people by accident.

I can totally see a kid in the 80s and 90s enjoying Superman 4 for the comedy and action scenes. Today's kids, not sure. They've changed.

Regarding the sex stuff in Superman with a human, well, it's a mystery to me. I find it difficult that he could control his body that much during that time lol. But I just accept it and don't overthink it. It is what it is.

[LordUltimus]

I can totally see a kid in the 80s and 90s enjoying Superman 4 for the comedy and action scenes. Today's kids, not sure. They've changed.

Regarding the sex stuff in Superman with a human, well, it's a mystery to me. I find it difficult that he could control his body that much during that time lol. But I just accept it and don't overthink it. It is what it is.

Didn't he lose his powers at the time, and the scene was supposed to signify that he could actually be with a woman without fear of "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex"?

[Jim Kelly]

Glad I'm not the only one who's DVD'S from that set stopped working. I ended up replacing them with the Anthology blu-ray set which is nearly identical in content. I paid 40 bucks for mine like three years ago.

Misery loves company, I guess, and it's good to know I'm not the only who had this problem. But, at the same time, it's quite unfortunate if this is a shared problem. I'll have to buy the new DVDs to replace them in the near future.

[Celgress]

I did indeed like and enjoy the original movies. They were great.