World SUPERMAN IV wasn't that bad.

[Morgoth]

Everyone talks about 1 and 2 being the good Super movies, but I rented 4 yesterday, I haven't seen it since I was about 12, and it really wasn't bad at all.

It had a different director which helped, Chris co-wrote it, and it felt more like the comics than 2 and 3 did.

2 sucked with all that campy cheese crap, I can't wait to see the Donner cut, and 3 is all garbage.

But 4 really wasn't campy at all, sure it had 80's special effects but it really was not bad at all.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

sure it had 80's special effects but it really was not bad at all.

80's special effects? No, Superman IV had BAD special effects, bad, underfunded, uncompleted special effects.

There were some wonderful special effects created in the 1980's. Superman III and Supergirl had far better effects than Superman IV, for example.

 

[gimmen64]

I have to agree that Superman IV wasn't that bad at all. I prefer Superman IV over Superman III any day. Superman III was the crapiest, campiest and stupid Superman Movie.

 

[elvislennon2005]

I like Superman IV. I will say that the effects are not as good as the other Superman movies. But I like the story. It was a good movie to me. Superman III is one I didn't care for. The only part of it that I can watch it when Superman turns bad to the end of the movie. As for Superman IV, I can watch it from beginning to end. I would like to see a director's cut of Superman IV and see all the missing scenes.

 

[lordofthenerds]

No, Superman IV really was that bad. Not only was it the definition of corny, but it also had a terrible plot. I mean, Superman and nuclear weapons do not mix. Also actually go with Bizarro, not the lame copy off of the character.

 

[matthooper]

Superman 4 is absolutely horrible. It's corny, contrived, rediculous..... but it's better than part 3. Much better.

It feels like at least they tried in part 4. Part 3 is truly one of the worst films ever made. Richard Lester should have been locked up after releasing that atrocity on us.

 

[lordofthenerds]

Superman 4 is absolutely horrible. It's corny, contrived, rediculous..... but it's better than part 3. Much better.

It feels like at least they tried in part 4. Part 3 is truly one of the worst films ever made. Richard Lester should have been locked up after releasing that atrocity on us.

I'm not sure if 4 is better than 3 though...I'd say they're equally appalling.

 

[KaptainKrypton]

Superman IV was a film that was destined to fail right out of the gate. It sank to the bottom the day the Salkinds relenquished the rights to Cannon. As a film, I loved the acting scenes and it's very apparent the returning actors fit their respective roles like a comfy old pair of tennis shoes. However, the editing and other post-production (titles, FX, sound) shoot this thing in the balls before jumpstreet. Despite these problems, I have a special edition running around in my head that would blow people away.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Despite these problems, I have a special edition running around in my head that would blow people away.

Or just blow.

 

[BasinCityBlues]

Now Superman III was not a good movie, but a good portion of the Clark and Lana scenes were pretty good as well as the clark vs. superman fight. Christopher Reeve also gave a good performance as both SUperman and Clark Kent. Although The stale humor, the stupid villain, and the woman turning into a robot was what ruined it for me.

Even though I have still yet to see Superman IV, from the clips I saw, Christopher Reeve and Gene Hackman certainly give their characters their dignity.

 

[KaptainKrypton]

Or just blow.

One day, Kevin. One day, I'll show you what I've been babbling about for years to people. How's your BF cut coming, dude? I've been working on my cut of Supergirl for quite a while now and I have the basic framework of all of the edits that I'd want done using ReDo. I need to get a hold of a good editing program and a good computer, though.

 

[Morgoth]

I have to agree that Superman IV wasn't that bad at all. I prefer Superman IV over Superman III any day. Superman III was the crapiest, campiest and stupid Superman Movie.

Agreed. IV was much better, and you can tell they were trying to clean up after the mess left by part 3 and that awful director.

Can't wait to see Donner's version of 2, because Lester ruined part 2 also.

 

[Morgoth]

No, Superman IV really was that bad. Not only was it the definition of corny, but it also had a terrible plot. I mean, Superman and nuclear weapons do not mix. Also actually go with Bizarro, not the lame copy off of the character.

No 3 was corny and campy and crap. For an 80's movie it wasn't bad, it was way better in comparison to 2 and three. Even 2 had more cheese than 4.

Sure the villian sucked but still it was better than 3.

 

[Bruce_Wayne29]

Now Superman III was not a good movie, but a good portion of the Clark and Lana scenes were pretty good as well as the clark vs. superman fight. Christopher Reeve also gave a good performance as both SUperman and Clark Kent. Although The stale humor, the stupid villain, and the woman turning into a robot was what ruined it for me.

I totally agree with you on this. As far as IV it has some bad stuff in there and alot of the time they use really bad special effects but there's some good stuff in there too. So it's an unbalanced movie but I actually prefer to watch that than to see the new movie.

 

[kal-el1990]

i really like superman 3 and 4. the effects sucked in 4 but i still love it because apart from nuclear man he is dealing witrh such a real world disater, the threat of nuclear war. and i love his speach to the UN and the line where he says "effective imediaty im going to rid our planet of all nuclear weapons" is gold!!!!

 

[KaptainKrypton]

I totally agree with you on this. As far as IV it has some bad stuff in there and alot of the time they use really bad special effects but there's some good stuff in there too. So it's an unbalanced movie but I actually prefer to watch that than to see the new movie.

This is what I try to get across to people. I consider the movie unfinished. The principal photography was already wrapped, but the post-production was not even remotely finished properly. If this movie was given the George Lucas-Special Edition-treatment, then it would be a hell of a lot better. Warner Brothers needs to hire me for this one.

 

[elvislennon2005]

Now Superman III was not a good movie, but a good portion of the Clark and Lana scenes were pretty good as well as the clark vs. superman fight. Christopher Reeve also gave a good performance as both SUperman and Clark Kent. Although The stale humor, the stupid villain, and the woman turning into a robot was what ruined it for me.

Even though I have still yet to see Superman IV, from the clips I saw, Christopher Reeve and Gene Hackman certainly give their characters their dignity.

You need to see Superman IV for yourself and don't let people on here tell you not to see it or it's a waste of time. Judge for yourself. I have seen the movie and love it. As for Christopher Reeve and Gene Hackman given their characters dignity. I would say they did. They gave it just as they did in 1 and 2. It wasn't there acting that was the problem for most fans it was the story line. I personally have no problem with that. I think it was a great story line it was just that they deleted some scenes that shouldn't of been deleted. Plus, a bigger budget for the movie would of help. Other than that. It was a good movie.

 

[lordofthenerds]

No 3 was corny and campy and crap. For an 80's movie it wasn't bad, it was way better in comparison to 2 and three. Even 2 had more cheese than 4.

When the villain is a guy showing off all of his bare legs you should start to realize that the movie your watching is about as corny/cheesy as its gets. But I agree that 2 and 3 were very corny as well.

Sure the villian sucked but still it was better than 3.

I agree. But 3's main villain was a computer, so that isn't very hard to beat.

 

[BatFitz]

I like 4 better than 3. But aside from the cornyness(even a word?) in III, I enjoy Evil Supes Vs. Clark and some of Pryor's jokes "I don't wanna go to jail! That have rapists and robbers. And rapists who rape robbers." heh...but basically SIV was the second one I ever saw (S:TM being the first)....I was born the year it came out and that was our other Superman movie on VHS besides our taped copy of the KCOP version of S:TM...which I wish I still had, oh and SIV was also extended...(with the tornado scene and such)

 

[buggs0268]

The story wasn't bad, and a lot that was there was good, but it needed a re-write with someone who was really a strong writer like Mankelweitcz was. Also, they needed to take Lenny out of it, and Lex should have been more subteranian, hiding out in dank places before the arms dealers came in. Also, the arms dealers should have been move visciouse to demaning Lex take care of the problem with threats. It should have had a much more adult treatment done. Alot that was there was gold, but there was a lot that needed polishing. And Warner's should have watched over that prodcuction, and when finding out that Golum and Globus spent the money given to them for this on other films, they should have demanded that profits they were generating from other film be sent right into the S4 production. Also, they should have rented the Zoptic process from the Salkind's to do the flying effects.

 

[KaptainKrypton]

^It's funny, buggs. Everyone else I talk to hates Lenny, but I think he's hilarious and have for a long time (it might also be because he annoys other people...and I find that funny, too). I'm in agreeance with you on some of the writing issues, but I still think the overall plot is a hell of a leg up on S:III. It's like they started out with a big studio doing the pre-production and principal, and then they let Roger Corman finish the damn thing.

 

[Guyverjay]

LOL Superman 4 is awful

That lame women being able to survive in the vacuum of space at the end is the icing on the cake

 

[captain_jimbo]

Everyone talks about 1 and 2 being the good Super movies, but I rented 4 yesterday, I haven't seen it since I was about 12, and it really wasn't bad at all.

It had a different director which helped, Chris co-wrote it, and it felt more like the comics than 2 and 3 did.

2 sucked with all that campy cheese crap, I can't wait to see the Donner cut, and 3 is all garbage.

But 4 really wasn't campy at all, sure it had 80's special effects but it really was not bad at all.

I agree I still really love Superman IV, despite the flaws.

...although I also love Superman II.

 

[buggs0268]

LOL Superman 4 is awful

That lame women being able to survive in the vacuum of space at the end is the icing on the cake

That shot wasn't supposed to be set in space. It was supposed to be where they were still in the atmosphere, but they didnt do that shot till there was no money, so instead of being able to get the proper background plate of them still in the atmosphere and the land and the sky going dark from the moon going in front of the sun, they had to work with plates they already had, and the space backlgrounds was already in the can, so they did it with that as that was what they had. All because Golon and Globus took most of the 40 millions Warner's gave to them to make S4 and put it into other movies, like He-Man, which they felt was going to make more money based on the popularity of the cartoon at the time.

 

[elvislennon2005]

That shot wasn't supposed to be set in space. It was supposed to be where they were still in the atmosphere, but they didnt do that shot till there was no money, so instead of being able to get the proper background plate of them still in the atmosphere and the land and the sky going dark from the moon going in front of the sun, they had to work with plates they already had, and the space backlgrounds was already in the can, so they did it with that as that was what they had. All because Golon and Globus took most of the 40 millions Warner's gave to them to make S4 and put it into other movies, like He-Man, which they felt was going to make more money based on the popularity of the cartoon at the time.

Yep, that is right. That shot wasn't supposed to be set in space. That was one of the many flaws because lack of a big budget.

Here is one that is easy to tell what is going on. When Superman and Nuclear Man are in space. Nuclear Man makes his nails longer. Well, Superman grabs the arms and when you see a view of both of them that is above them. Pause it and notice their feet. They are flat as if they were fight standing on a floor. Shouldn't their feet be pointed downwards since they are in space and since they are flying. t: