Superman The Movie

[Jim Kelly]

I watched the movie at least 10 times when it was in the theatres. Later on I got it on VHS and I now have it on DVD, plus seeing it sometimes on TV and sometimes in second run threatres. And I was a grown up person when it came out. So my memory of the movie is quite clear and not glossed over with nostalgia--even though I'm nostalgic for the movie and the times when I saw it back then.

I remember quite well my reaction to the movie and the reaction of family and friends. There are parts that are deliberately cheesy and they're there for effect. I'm a Canadian--but Canadians are very good observers of the Amercian experience (it's one of our national pastimes).

Around the time of the Bicentennial, there was a growing desire in the States to feel good about yourselves. The USA had gone through the Vietnam War and Watergate--plus assassinations and other upheavals--that caused a national identity crisis. A lot of movies and TV shows depicted the country in a negative light, but there was a growing effort to bring back a sense of national pride.

The beginning bit of STM is cheesy but becomes awesome. In fact, the first thing you saw in the theatre was the red S projected on the theatrre screen curtains. Those curtains open and then you see black and white curtains that open and a black and white movie which is quaint and reminds the audience of simpler times and the cheesy old comics and movies about Superman, but as the camera goes past the spinning "Daily Planet" globe, we're transported into outer space and into a completely different reality--which is awesome.

That's a thematic approach throughout the move. We're deliberately shown things that are reminders of simpler times in America and then those elements are turned and shown in a new light as truly awesome. It was a clever and insightful way to get Americans to look at their culture with a new sense of what it meant. Superman himself comes across as superficial, but the more we see his psychological struggle and understand his philosophical position, we come to love him in a profound way--just as Americans returned to loving their country in a meaningful way.

The three movies that followed SUPERMAN THE MOVIE went down and down in quality. It's hard to watch either SUPERMAN III or THE QUEST FOR PEACE all the way through--those movies really make me cringe. But SUPERMAN THE MOVIE had a clear vision and every scene in the movie is there for a reason.

[LoneNecromancer]

Just watched it again, and it reminded me that out of all of my issues with MOS the biggest disappointment was the lack of John Williams' score. No matter how great Gene Hackman and Ned Beatty are that score outshines them all. Sure the rest of it is so cheesy that my DVD attracts mice but that music makes up for it.

Really? I loved Zimmer's score for MoS, didn't miss the classic theme at all. That and what he did for TDKR are probably the best scores I've heard in (comparatively recent) superhero movies lately, I don't remember many memorable tracks at all from the other ones I've seen from the past few years.

[Flash Gordon]

It's crazily disjointed and sometimes it's a mess, but there is a good superman film in there.

[Powerboy]

On the old forum, after watching and writing my thoughts on MoS (which I liked), I went back and rewatched StM for the first time in a long time. I posted a "review/ thoughts" on the old forum but I'll repost them here though I have to split it up because it's too long for one post.

Perhaps the most stunning thing about “Superman” (popularly referred to as “Superman the Movie” because the advertising at the time announced: “Superman is now The Movie. You will believe a man can fly.”) is the musical score by John Williams which enhances everything. However, in a world in which “Star Wars” had only come out the year before and special effects on such a level were a brand new phenomenon, the ability to portray Superman and his setting in a way that looked believable for the first time is not to be underestimated. Combined with an all-star cast of great actors and you’ve got something going here.

Krypton had previously been portrayed in the Kirk Alyn serials and in the first episode of the George Reeves television show but it came across as a medieval council chamber or a scene out of the “Flash Gordon” serials no matter the performances of the actors. But in this movie, an audience in 1978-79 already knew they were about to experience something exceptional just from the sweeping vista of Krypton right at the beginning. No, the Krypton of the comics was not an Arctic wasteland but it worked well for the bleak situation that the planet was in.

The movie makers also had the courage to spend several minutes on setting up the second movie as well as make us feel Jor-El’s loss as he prepares to send his son into the stars. Admittedly, when he says things like, “I will be with you all the days of your life…”, I picture Lara’s wanting to say, “I think you mean “We”, sweetheart.”

But this is a Superman who is being prepared from the time he is a baby. On his trip to Earth, we are told that he is being more or less sleep taught all of the knowledge that has been collected in the twenty-eight known galaxies, “sleep teaching” being the forerunner of the idea of some sort of direct implant.

Jumping from there to being adopted by the Kents as a toddler, the story then jumped to teenage Clark Kent who resents that he has to hold back and be pushed around (“Guys like that Brad. I just want to tear them apart”) but accepts that there is a reason. He also exults in his powers when he is free to use them such as outrunning a train, one in which a young Lois Lane sees him for the first time although she never seems to later recognize that the running boy must be the same man with powers that shows up many years later. (Then again, in theaters in the original release, the scene was cut drastically and it was never explicitly stated to be Lois).

The death of his father is devastating for young Clark. I remember that, in 1979, I found all of the Smallville stuff to be very realistic and pulled me into the character. It’s hard to try to recapture or remember precisely how you felt about something 35 years ago at a different age and time in your life, especially while trying to juxtapose it with how you feel about it now when you can quote most of the movie from memory and yet also acknowledge that time has moved on and other valid interpretations have arisen.

That said, I found the Smallville parts and the scene where he tells his adoptive mother he has to leave, with it being unclear even to him whether or not he will ever be able to come back and it will be a long time even if he can, to be very moving. I thought it had great real emotion and feeling to it and also that the whole “Young Clark Kent” part of the movie did a beautiful job of capturing both the American small town myth and the “Coming of Age” myth, blending them beautifully. I reacted the same to Clark having to say goodbye to Martha Kent the same way I did decades ago. “Sheesh, I’ve got something in my eyes- both of them.” What can I say? She played the lonely old person card. Worked then. Works now.

[Powerboy]

When Jor-El’s artificial intelligence image speaks to Clark or Kal-El in the Fortress of Solitude, one thing I really like was when Jor-El said that by this time, when Kal is eighteen Earth years old, Jor-El will have been dead for many thousands of Earth years. Being a fan of serious science fiction (not just space fantasy), I was amazed that a superhero movie was being realistic about the realities of time moving slower for a person in a ship moving at near-light speeds so that thousands of years went by on Earth and on Krypton had it still existed while Kal aged only a few months. That would also explain how he could absorb so much information. Later in the movie, Lex Luthor states that the rocket ship left Krypton in 1948 and took three years to reach Earth, undercutting the previous statement by Jor-El. This was probably a problem with having too many writers and not catching this. I choose to go with Jor-El’s original version that fits in with Einstein’s proven theories.

At any rate, Jor-El teaching Kal to become the hope of humanity is a wonderful scene in so many ways. There’s the music, the visual effects, the wonderful dialogue. “For this reason most of all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you, my only son.” It is also clear in the dialogue that Clark stays here for twelve years. “By the time you return to the confines of your own body and galaxy, twelve of your years will have passed.”

It was nice to rewatch this and get a “Lois Lane refresher”. I notice her facial expressions. Everything Clark says that seems to make him a bumpkin also brings an expression to her face that implies she is really interested in him for the first time. When she guesses that he wants half his check to go to his grey-haired old mother and he replies, perhaps with a bit of irritation, “Actually, she’s silver-haired,” the look on her face and the way she walks closer to him says a lot. Even before that, when she does something to make him look foolish and claims that was not the intent, his response, “Of course not. Why would anyone want to make a total stranger look foolish?” leaves her wondering if it was naiveté or sharp sarcasm. When he says, “Swell”, she acts like it makes him a sore thumb but again she starts talking to him more than she did before. But his act of pretending to be timid and cowardly quickly turns her off. Also, we sort of accept the premise of why he pretends to be this way because we know the story though it is never specifically defined in this version of the story. For him, it is her act of bravery against a robber than seems to make him realize she is more than an ordinary person.

At this point, a huge dramatic shift takes place. After the seriousness, even mythical and folklore style, of the first hour, Lex Luthor and his sidekicks become comedy relief. This may have been necessary specifically because of the seriousness of the first hour and I know people who welcomed it. It was funny though I always felt that the first hour was the best part of the movie except for Christopher Reeves’s performance.

For those of us born into an industrial era of cars and electrical power, it may be impossible to truly comprehend a world of horses and buggies. Likewise, I suspect that for anyone who grew up in a Post- Star Wars, let alone a Post- CGI era, it may be difficult to imagine the thrill of some of the stuff that happened in this movie. Superman’s first appearance, before he even had a name, rescuing Lois Lane and the helicopter pilot, had the audience cheering as much as the people on the street in the movie were cheering. The movie glosses over and just about ignores the fact that the world just discovered that life on other planets exists and that there’s a guy who can defy the Laws of Physics, ignoring gravity to soar through the air. But this was the 1970s. “Close Encounters” was a brand new sort of movie idea, a plot dealing with first contact with an alien species. “Chariots of the Gods” was a hot new idea ripe for fantasy. It is understandable that a superhero movie saw no need to include what the audience and writers in that time would perceive as a totally different story concept. Today, a new version of Superman almost cannot avoid the fact that it is also a “first contact with alien life” story as well as a superhero story. But in that time, dealing with the reality that this was also a science fiction “There’s life outside the Earth” idea just wasn’t perceived as important. In fact, it would probably have been considered extraneous to the main plot and unnecessary. Likewise, the people seem to have little if any fear about what this invincible man might do or be shocked over the very fact that this being who defies everything we know about reality even exists although, at first, a lot of people assume it must be a hoax, an elaborate magic trick. Times change. Was it realistic? In the real world or something a little closer to it, no. But in 1979 and at the chosen realism level of the story, it worked.

[Powerboy]

The reaction of the movie audience to that rescue was phenomenal (and, at my first time seeing it, it wasn’t even an American audience but a Canadian audience) and Superman then continued stopping robberies, burglaries and saving cats from trees. I somehow suspect that, as clichéd as that was, a god who thinks even a little girl and her pet are important may change the world more than the part about being a super cop and stopping a bunch of common crimes.

Superman in this version also gains a fortunate situational advantage when, on his first night before even having a name, he rescues Air Force One with the President aboard. That most certainly earns him some immediate trust or at least benefit of the doubt points.

I found myself laughing in a good way when he rescued the cat and in other scenes. I believe there are various ways a story can work. The more realistic approach feels more meaningful to me but one does enjoy a version that embraces even the most “Silver Age” aspects of the genre.

Above I said there was no reason given for the secret identity and, in the original theatrical release, there was not. But in the DVD release I have, there is a scene that was deleted from the original release and I about want to strangle whoever decided to delete the scene for it give so much more real feeling to the characters to the point of an entirely different perspective. Superman admits he got carried away on the first night and revealed himself publicly apparently before he was supposed to according to Jor-El’s timetable. But the AI Jor-El understands and forgives him. Superman says it just felt so good to be accepted and among people again. But he doesn’t understand the need for this secret identity, this pretense. Jor-El explains that without it, he would be on-call every moment of the day and night with no chance to be a person with friends. Sentient nature, human or Kryptonian or any other, would be to call upon him even for things they could resolve for themselves. Being able to contact him anytime would weaken rather than inspire humanity. It would also allow people to strike at him through those he loved. Finally, when Superman admits there was a certain vanity in his revealing himself, Jor-El tells him that all sentient beings feel vanity. Superman must learn to control it but it would be foolish to pretend he does not feel it. Jor then says it was vanity, the inability to believe they could be mistaken, that destroyed Krypton and that he could have held his son in his arms were it not for vanity. This leaves Superman stretching out his arms and realizing how much he longs to feel the warmth of a father’s love from this AI that is as close to his biological father as he has ever known.

I love the scene where Superman (still not yet named) meets Lois on the balcony and she asks perhaps the ultimate question: “Why are you?” She abridges it to, “Why are you here?” But the original phrasing is the poignant one. It can mean what each member of the audience thinks is the most important meaning. Certainly, “How and why do you even exist?” is but one interpretation and, for me, the answer is, “Because we need for you to.” Stepping back, one could ask, “Why are we sitting in this theater watching you? Why do we fantasize about a character like you?” Almost the same: “Because we need to.”

In watching “Smallville”, when Christopher Reeve did his guest appearance, one of the producers talked about the amount of money, time and work that went into the flying sequences for the first Superman movie as a way of explaining why those flying sequences (I believe the movie started filming in 1976) looked so great and held up for so long and, even in the early 21st century with CGI, they were only finally beginning to look dated. It was because they sometimes spent three weeks filming a flying scene that would not even amount to ten seconds on-screen. The average big budget move got in about two minutes of film per day (that is, two minutes that would end up in the final product in the theater). A mega budget movie would get about one minute of film per day. There were points with the special effects scenes where they were willing to settle for ten seconds of film per three weeks. That’s how meticulous they were being. They also got extraordinary studio backing. I believe they had something like a one year shooting schedule (typical even for major budget would have been six months) and the studio okayed expanding to eighteen months, longer if necessary. That explained the greatness of the flying scenes. That kind of willingness to spend whatever it takes both in terms of money and time can compensate and explain how something filmed in the mid-1970s can compete visually for over two decades before starting to look dated.

[Powerboy]

Can You Read My Mind?

Okay, in writing my thoughts on MoS, I said a few things that were probably mild potshots at S: TM so fair is fair. In making those remarks, I think I had my mind set in “realistic mode” while watching MoS and so made fun of less realistic aspects of S: TM. But I have different sets of glasses. I have nostalgia glasses, modern glasses, Golden age, Silver age, Bronze age glasses, and so on. While watching MoS, I had my modern or realistic glasses on. While watching S: TM, I have my “Sense of Wonder” glasses on. While it’s fair, from one point of view, to praise MoS for its character realism and criticize S: TM, it’s also fair, from another point of view, to praise S: TM for something where it wins.

In watching Superman flying with Lois, I sat there absolutely mesmerized watching a thirty-five year old flying scene that I’ve seen several times before though not in recent years. My eyes were riveted to every detail. The romance of it was overwhelming and I don’t mean the “romance novel” aspect but the sheer sense of wonder. Here’s the guy I would dream of being when I was a little boy doing what I would have dreamed of doing when I was a little boy. Okay, let’s leave the yucky girl out of it at that age but you know what I mean. As much as I love the realism of another version, this is close to the Superman I would still dream of being though I think I’d still honestly choose the George Reeves version (the character himself, not the whole world setting and stories).

As I sit here with the flying scene with Lois on “Pause”, it occurs to me that the movie gains something by sacrificing some “realism”. By not dealing with every or most details and issues that would really occur were such a being to appear, it is able to focus more on some more primal things such as the sheer wonder of flight and the growing love between two people of different worlds in more ways than one. A more realistic version, for all its advantages, simply does not have time to make us feel that childlike wonder in how good it would feel to be able to lift off and fly fulfilling all of our innocent childhood fantasies.

The later scenes of Superman flying underground through the heat and lava and then lifting the San Andreas fault are things that are almost unimaginable in how amazing they were at the time when nothing like that could ever have been shown before in such a way that it looked the least bit believable.

I haven’t said much about Lex Luthor or his “plan”. The Luthor part is the weakest part of the movie and we all know that the plan is absurd on every level. It would not get the desired results and it is equally absurd that the military would not catch the changes in trajectory or that the plan to make the changes would ever have succeeded. In that sense, it’s very old style comic book. Likewise, one presumes that some people somewhere must have been killed by the destruction and the earthquake but we never see that part. Is it possible that Superman saved everybody? Maybe or maybe not but we never see for sure so we can believe what we want.

We’ve also heard many times how, if Superman could fly fast enough to break the time barrier, presumably exceeding light speed, he should easily have been able to catch both missiles. Yes, because the abilities of extremely high level comic book characters were never inconsistent until this.  But, once again, the whole thing is done to show that, finally, Superman has to become his own man and not just dutifully follow every dictate of what his AI father thinks he should do. He stops being a god and becomes a human, caring about another person he loves enough to break the almighty rules and choose his own destiny. Could it have been done in a different way? Of course. But it worked on the level of meaning if not on the cerebral level.

By the time this movie ended on this viewing, I was utterly hyped as much as I was the first time when I was far younger. Heck, I was listening to the closing music and making “orchestra conductor motions”. I literally wanted to jump out of my chair and pace I was so hyped.

If I had to choose only one live action version of Superman in the movies to ever see again (and I don’t have to), I’d choose this version. Well, if we counted television, I would choose “Smallville” only because there are so many more hours of it then “The Adventures of Superman” and “Lois and Clark”. But that’s the “Trapped on a desert island with only one version” scenario. Of course, I’d choose whichever version had the most to watch without going into repeats. I don’t want every version of Superman to be this version. The character is open to so many great ways of doing the story. Who (not me) just wants to see the same version rehashed over and over and over? So I love the realistic take too. But this movie perfectly captures the sheer wonder and myth of Superman more than any other version ever has (in my opinion).

Though it isn’t the most realistic, it makes me want to be like that guy. Interestingly, Kevin Costner made an interesting remark in the MoS features, that they say movies are unrealistic and you can’t base your behavior on fantasies. BUT he also said that that’s sometimes not true because movies give you a view into the highlights of a person’s life and the impact his choices can make and, especially when you are young, movies and comics and other media can make you see the effects those choices have and you say, “That guy. Superman. That’s what I want to be, a person like him.”

[Sacred Knight]

Eh. The Rocky series has "Gonna Fly Now" and "Eye of the Tiger". Half a dozen Disney movies have classics originally made for it. Jaws has one if the most iconic pieces of music ever. The James Bond theme and classic songs like Goldfinger, Diamonds are Forever, Live and Let Die, that came out of that film series. The Indiana Jones theme. Moon River from Breakfast at Tiffany's.

I wouldn't put Superman's theme above all of those, and there's plenty more.

Well, I'd probably rephrase that as best instrumental piece in a film of all time. I love Indiana Jones and Jaws for instance, but imo Superman blows those away. With ease. Star Wars main march does too, at that. Its between those two for me and I still give Superman the slight edge. Behind those two I have the theme for A Summer Place. Love that tune.

As for original songs, Moon River is definitely up there. Disney original songs are usually always winners. Frankly I think the Bond songs stink though, just personal opinion.

[DochaDocha]

I have no problems calling Superman a cheesy or corny movie, while still praising it for what it was, and what it set out to do. Who knows, maybe in the 1970's, people would've thought only a moron would try to make superhero stories quasi-realistic. Perhaps in the future, The Dark Knight will be frowned upon as pretentious and absurd, and the absolute wrong way to make a comic book superhero movie. These movies weren't cheaply made, not now and not then, so you have to get butts in the seats, and an easy way to do that is to match or exceed the expectations of the moviegoers. The worst thing I'll say about Superman is that it's extremely dated. If I say it's corny, I don't mean that to equate the movie as trashy and not worth seeing.

[BBally]

Still remains my personal favorite Superhero movie, I might not consider it the best since there are better made Superhero films out there but as the film in the genre that I would rewatch over others, it's this one. True, the film isn't perfect but it has a lot of heart and Christopher Reeve in my personal opinion, remains the best actor to ever portray a Superhero, unlike all the other actors as good as they are, when I see Christian Bale playing Batman, I see Christian Bale playing Batman but when I see Christopher Reeve playing Superman, I see not the actor but the character coming to life.

[Guy1]

The reaction of the movie audience to that rescue was phenomenal (and, at my first time seeing it, it wasn’t even an American audience but a Canadian audience) and Superman then continued stopping robberies, burglaries and saving cats from trees.

There's one thing that always bothered me about the cat save. After Superman gives the girl her cat, she runs inside and tells her mom about Superman. The abusive mom flips out and you hear her slap her daughter. Sooo....Superman didn't hear this? Dude has super hearing, yet we never see him fly back and tell the mom to knock it off.

[Guy1]

That nitpick aside, yes, SM1 is an awesome movie. Especially the version that shows him strolling through the security in Lex's fortress. Bullets? Yawn. Fire? Not a singe. Ice? Superman laughs at it. That part was just great.

[kimchimafia]

StM was pretty weird for me at first. I liked it as a kid, loved the Reeve and the score but didn't remember much else. I think I liked the second one better back then.

After that though, I didn't care for StM until recently. Now I freakin' love it and honestly one of my favorite movies of all time.

That nitpick aside, yes, SM1 is an awesome movie. Especially the version that shows him strolling through the security in Lex's fortress. Bullets? Yawn. Fire? Not a singe. Ice? Superman laughs at it. That part was just great.

7:29 onwards

Always liked it how Reeveman took the time to calm the people down around him before he "super-drilled" into the ground.

[exile001]

Loved it as a kid, love it now. I can understand people finding it cheesy and dated, but it's still a very enjoyable time.

I probably like the time-reversing ending now more than as a kid. My child brain couldn't suspend disbelief enough to accept it or the logic questions that follow (e.g. why not go back a capture Lex much earlier? He was a wanted criminal when first introduced). Now, I'm old enough to just go with it.

[Crimson Knight]

There's one thing that always bothered me about the cat save. After Superman gives the girl her cat, she runs inside and tells her mom about Superman. The abusive mom flips out and you hear her slap her daughter. Sooo....Superman didn't hear this? Dude has super hearing, yet we never see him fly back and tell the mom to knock it off.

I always have an issue with that myself, and keep wondering is that the times, where such a thing would be acceptable, or encouraged, or was it a statement by the makers, to make us question, for better or worse, all these different things in regards to punishment, abuse, all that?

Or, was it them trying to have Superman not interfere? Rescue a cat, stop a robber, save Lois, all that, but not interfere with something as big, perhaps, as abuse, or parents and children. Something more complicated, perhaps, than saving people from an out of control helicopter, or stuff like that.