It is not going to be as hard to top as some make it out to be.
Really...the sequels didn't do it, "Returns" didn't do it...And thanks to jaded audiences and the idea of a 'Comic Book Movie' being commonplace, I seriously doubt anything else will do it as far as Superman is concerned.
Reeve was great, Reeve made the film, but when you take Chris Reeve performance out, it drops major points.
Agreed, but Chris' performance is strongly supported by all the technical aspects of the film.
"Superman: The Movie" was done in a time where movie-making ment so much more. It was made when Hollywood wasn't in a state of rehashing like it is now; when filmmaking was still in a sense of golden age, old hollywood appeal. John Williams is arguably (barely) the greatest American composer of the past 30 years, Geoffrey Unsworth was one of the greatest cinematographers prior to his passing, and so on and so forth.
Lex sucked, Lois sucked, Crystal ball Krypton sucked, the Kents were treated like backwood rednecks, Clark can be done better and not portrayed as a doofus, etc etc.
You're not so much debating with this list of faults...more like whining. But let's see:
1: While I prefer the 'Lexcorp' corporate Luthor, Hackman's depiction was anything but horrible. A little goofy, but was still rather evil (throwing a cop in front of an approaching train, fooling Superman with a plot to poison half of the cities citizens, attempting to blow California clear in two.)
2: Lois was nearly as pitch perfect as Superman in depiction. I'm not that big a fan of Margot Kidder visually, but she also didn't 'suck' as you articulately put.
3: The 'Crystal' motif was unique for the time...and thanks to 30 years of no one else coming up with anything nearly as unique and perfect (honestly, can you think of the Fortress of Solitude lookng any other way?), it's become iconic.
4: What the hell? Upload the 'Smallville' portion of the first film on Youtube and point out to me when Glenn Ford and Phyllis Thaxter acted like 'rednecks.'
5: Clark acting like a doofus was just that...an act. Common knowledge that Kal-El does this in order to seperate Clark from Superman as much as he can.
------------------
OH FOR GOD SAKES.......
Donner's movie is not the holy grail that it is made out to be.
Thanks to 30 years of seasoning, 13 weeks at number one upon release, a massive-for-the-time $300 million domestic draw, Oscar Wins (not just nominations), continuously being referenced in both the comics and other media (Superman: Doomsday. "Smallville") and the fact that after a ridiculously long development process in which film producers tried everything they could to bring Superman back...the first pitch to make it through was a film that's still connected to Donner.
That original film has had more impact on not just Comic Book Adaptations...but the Film Industry in general. It stands shoulder to shoulder with the original Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Jaws, The Exorcist and The Godfather in being this milestone motion picture that had all of the elements in place and hit the right note at the right time.
When a new Superman film comes out, reboot or otherwise, it won't have that same impact...and it certainly won't surpass that impact.
For instance...
the visual effects may look better...but that just makes me think of how much more impressive "Superman: The Movie" was out of the fact that its visual effects, given it being produced in 1977, still hold up fairly well, have a tangible honesty to them and were first employed for that film.
Donner's film was revolutionary for the time...the reboot, no matter how great it could potentially be in quality, will just be seen as another in a long string of CB films.
THAT's the difference.
CFE
