Superman's never the most interesting character in his movie

[DochaDocha]

Okay, that's a bit of hyperbole. I think. With all the talk about how what should've been MoS 2 became a Batman or JL-lite movie, and how uninteresting Superman is in that movie, it made me wonder if there even is a live-action movie in which Superman is the best character.

• Superman: the Movie - Argument could be made it's Jor-El.
• Superman II - Is there a more iconic line from all Superman movies than "Kneel before Zod!"?
• Superman III - This might go to Gus Gorman, even though Pryor played Gorman too straight.
• Superman IV - I think this is one in which Superman might actually win. Also the worst movie.
• Superman Returns - Maybe it is Superman, but I find the character so frustrating that I tend to think that Spacey's rehash of Gene Hackman's Luthor was better executed than Routh's Snooperman. How's the peeping, Tommy?
• Man of Steel - People debate whether or not Cavill is the right guy. People also debate whether or not Cavill did a good job. However, IMO Zod was the best character in the movie, and in ways Jor-El was more interesting and better fleshed out.
• Batman v. Superman - "43 lines"

Perhaps the implied criticism here is too harsh. In comic book circles, there's that saying that a hero is only as good as his cast of villains, so maybe it's to be expected that the villains and supporting cast are to be just as interesting, if not more, than the hero himself.

At least I have the discontinued line of Superman animated movies...

[FishyZombie]

I dunno about Superman: The Movie. Marlon Brando was as great as he could have been in his role, but he had even less screen time than Russell Crowe's Jor-El. I think he did anyway, I didn't bring a stop watch when I watched it. So I think Superman takes that. Can't argue with anything else here though.

[darkseidpwns]

This is reaching quite a bit, he maybe a non entity in BVS but otherwise I think he's gotten a better deal than Batman who mostly has been overshadowed by his villains in the majority of his movies.

[Adekis]

First of all, Superman's the most interesting character in Superman and the Mole Men and it's not even close.

Secondly, I'd argue that you're wrong about at least some of those movies. For example, in Superman I find Jor-El and Krypton in general to be excruciatingly boring. In Superman II while Zod is more memorable, it's obvious that the filmmakers are trying to really explore Superman's character, as seen in the way he failingly fluctuates between being brave and mild-mannered while trying to deal with Rocky, or his "self-sacrifice" at erasing Lois's mind at the end. In fact I think every single attempt to explore the character in that movie fails miserably and that the mind-erasure kiss is really a heinous crime against Lois's privacy, but they were trying. In contrast, Zod is a catch-phrase and an imperious glare, not a real character. In Superman III Gus Gorman's really not all that cool. If you wanted to argue that Superman is less interesting than Clark Kent, this is the movie to do it, but it's just as easily argued that there's no difference. I do think that Lorelei was only a little bit more respect away from being the most interesting character though, I'm serious.

In Returns I think there's a lot of really interesting characters. As much as I dislike the mopey stalking Superman, as in Superman II you can see where they're trying to do something unique, and the way he can really only communicate effectively as Clark is fascinating, which is enough to put him on top in my book. In Man of Steel, Zod's definitely more interesting-- but honestly, I still think Kal gives him a pretty good run for his money.

As for Dawn of Justice... well, Bruce, Lois and Lex are all clearly more active characters, but I think of it like JFK. Superman is the central figure of the movie, it's entirely about him. He is not the "main character" in any way shape or form. If you care about Kal's arc, that makes the movie. Maybe Bruce's arc is more compelling, but Kal's is no less important.

[ultrarider7]

How a single line can be more interesting than a man struggling between love and responsability? Regardless of how Superman II ended, that film explored the tragedy of being Superman, that was the focus. Zod was barely a character in the film, he was just an obstacle and a line. I really don't find Jor-El in Superman The Movie more interesting than Clark, when Superman I, II, III and IV are mentioned people think of Christopher Reeve's perfomance as Clark/Supes first, not Lois, Zod or Jor-El, they think of that version of Superman. Since I am open minded about my Superman I have no problem with the "mopey" Clark seem in Returns and it was only in MoS where Zod is an actual character and as interesting as Clark. Ohh BvS again, I loved the film and I found Superman interacting/reacting and how he tries to deal with a world as cynical as ours very interesting. I may be alone in that one but that is more fascinating to me than a guy wanting revenge yet again.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I don't think Superman has to be the most interesting character in his own movie, as long as the movie is good. Luke isn't the most interesting character in Star Wars, and that doesn't make either the movie bad or Luke a bad character.

I think the first Donner movie is the best Superman movie, but that's because the film wisely doesn't make the entire movie from his point of view. The beginning is Joe-El's story, then it's young Clark, then it's Lois & Lex. But the entire movie is all about Superman.

[Superlad93]

That's a pretty subjective statement to begin with. What constitutes as "interesting" for one person isn't at all universal.

For example, Brando's Jor-El did nothing for me. Superman and Lois stole the show the whole time. Zod came close in II, but I was far more captivated by Superman's character arc (a rarity for Clark). Zod in MOS didn't get interesting till just before the final fight and his conversation with Jor-El. BVS is actually where I'd give it to Superman.....but indirectly. He as a character is pretty freakin dry. But the overall arc of introducing Superman as a god, later anthropomorphizing him, and then finally killing him as a man is very interesting. The actual execution didn't work for me at all though. But the thing was that, as Adekis points out, Superman is the reason the story moves at all. There are very fascinating (if ultimately pointlessly melodramatic) conversations being had about him. The idea of "what would it be like if he were real" is inherently novel (but not well executed).

Subjectively speaking, Batman has much the same issue in his movies. In the Dark Knight Trilogy Batman is the least interesting aspect around. His reputation more so than his character, much like BVS with Superman, is what ends up being interesting. The Joker, Bane, Harvey, and even Gordon beat out Batman when it comes to being interesting. Bane, Joker, and Harvey are who people quote and talk about till this day. Batman ended up being a vehicle to tell and counter their stories.

[Osiris-Rex]

For me Superman was the most interesting character in all the movies except Superman v Batman, where Wonder Woman was the most interesting character.
I didn't even like Man of Steel and for me Superman was the most interesting character. I was never all that impressed by Zod. Zod always comes off as just someone
there for Superman to punch. I felt Lex Luthor was the more interesting villain because Superman couldn't just punch his way out to defeat Lex.

[victorsage]

In comic book circles, there's that saying that a hero is only as good as his cast of villains, so maybe it's to be expected that the villains and supporting cast are to be just as interesting, if not more, than the hero himself.

A hero is only as good as the challenges he faces. So villains are important, mostly because they are a big part of the "challenge" aspect, but ultimately they need to be able to bring the hero to his knees so he has something to overcome. That brings out the hero's character.

You have to give him human weakness as well as hopes. Without that there really isn't any point.

[Batmaniac]

Superman's easily the most interesting character in all the Reeve movies. Easily.

[marhawkman]

Well part of it is that he is a non-flamboyant character. As several people have often said about him being a "big blue boy scout".....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TcTyHoP6n8

[Jim Kelly]

I'd say the most intriguing character in Donner's SUPERMAN is Miss Teschmacher. In BATMAN V SUPERMAN it's Diana Prince.

[Kuwagaton]

Gus beats... Jimmy, Perry, and Lois. And only beats Lois because she's not really in the movie. Maybe he beats brad or ricky, but I can't swear to that.

[The Ozman]

I thought one of the biggest problems with Superman Returns was that it made Richard White more of a hero than Superman.

[CharlesInCharge]

Superman the Movie: Lex.

Superman II: Ursa

Superman III: Assuming he's a separate character and not the real thing, Evil Superman.

Superman IV: Superman himself.

I didn't find any of the characters in Superman Returns even remotely compelling, but if I had to choose in MOS and BvS, I'd probably say Lois Lane.