Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
It's Friday night, all. Time for #wenchwatches
Tonight: #superman3
After last week's heavy thoughts over Superman 2, I was hoping that this week would be lighter and sillier.
But no. We're getting an unemployed Richard Pryor right out of the gate being denied an unemployment check.
AMERICA, EVERYONE!
Eugh. Well, let's watch anyways.
I actually don't remember this film at *all* from my youth. I remember Pryor, as I also loved Brewster's Millions (1985), but beyond that I kept crossing it in my memory with Superman 4, The Quest for Peace. Audiences apparently agreed with my childhood opinions and didn't think much of this film either.
The few things I do remember happen early on in the first act during the chemical plant sequence. Compared to previous films, it's nice to see a more complex sequence rather than a montage of much smaller ones. It helps keep the interest up.
ROBERT VAUGHN!?
Yes, this is the only of the original Superman films which does *not* feature Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) at all. Instead, we have Vaughn as Ross Webster, our evil industrialist.
Vaughn is no Hackman, but he's a competent actor when he wants to be. After all, he single-handedly classed up Corman's "Battle Beyond The Stars". Like in that film, he brings the same sort of intensity to his villainous role.
One thing that's been frustrating with this film is just how *dull* it is.
After watching Superman 2 last week, I asked a friend if she had a copy of the theatrical cut -- rather than my Richard Donner cut. As such, I rewatched the film twice over the course of two days. My friend is also a bit of a film buff, and we spent a lot of time chatting and comparing the two films.
One thing I learned during that was the considerable amount of studio interference we had. Originally, Lord Zod was going to be the primary villain for "Superman 1", explaining the court sequence in the intro that never gets followed up on. Much of the ideas were later repurposed for "Superman 2". Compounding this was the original director of Donner wanted a more serious film, while the studio wanted a campier, fun film instead.
Who did they bring in? Richard Lester. The same Richard Lester who is the sole director of this film. This explains a heck of this film, including Pryor's involvement. The feel is *significantly* campier, and thus, the plot a lot less interesting.
The A plot follows Gus Gorman (Pryor), as he uses his computer skills to put Webster's (Vaughn) evil machinations into effect. The B plot is Clark feeling homesick and returning to Smallville ostensibly to do a story on small-town America. This side plot also introduces Lana Lang as a potential alternate love interest compared to Lois Lane.
I kinda see what the film is trying to do here. They spent considerable amount of time having Lang and Clark interact, building up a lot of "If things were different" tension. As the third act starts, she and Superman (who is currently under the spell of synthetic kryptonite) have a moment together. Lang, however, isn't interested. In this way, she's a foil for Lane. Lana Lang isn't interested in Superman, but Clark. Lois Lane is interested in Superman, but not Clark. This would be more effective if the film actually made this parallel more strongly. Unfortunately, Lane (Kidder) barely has a cameo appearance in the first act.
Wow. Superman getting sloshed at a bar.
How is this not a meme, in the year of our cat, 2025?
Yeah kid...the whole *country* is "just in a slump"...
The end of the third act not only has considerable meme potential -- particularly the Superman vs. Super-Clark sequence -- it also continues the unintentional metaphors of the last film.
Under the effect of the the synthetic kryptonite, Superman has become mean and selfish. He's been censured by most nations for his acts, yet we're still stuck with him here in the US.
I mentioned in the last review that if we take the argument of Superman as being a representation of an idealized (and completely mythical) America, the 2025 parallels write themselves. As a result, on this rewatching, the entire battle in the garbage dump feels a bit like a fight for nation's soul.
Through the fourth act, I started to remember more and more of this film. During the fight with the "Ultimate Computer". I started to remember an important detail.
As a kid, I *liked* this film more than my sibling. And it's in the forth act I can finally see why: It's the most sci-fi of the films. Webster fights Superman through videogame like controls. The computer eventually defends itself using a kryptonite ray, and finally building a cyborg to defend itself. I remember waiting the entire film for this sequence.
It's fun, but like everything else in the film, it utterly lacks any emotional gravitas. The threat simply comes too late, the redemption come too easily, and nothing has any sort of staying power.
So that's #superman3 and that's #wenchwaches
Superman 3 is clearly the weakest of all the films we've watched so far. Lacking Luthor or Lois Lane, we're given villains we know won't last longer than the single film. Despite Pryor's and Vaughn's attempts, neither of them form the kind of on-screen presence that this film desperately needed.
Combined with lackluster, goofy writing, this film just doesn't have much going for it at all. It has it's moments, particularly the sequence with The Ultimate Computer, but none of them last.
In a way, it's very much like "Batman Forever". Instead of the vision of Batman (1989) or Batman Returns, we get something a reviewer once described as:
"Exactly what the studios wanted. Safe and marketable."
And that's what Superman 3 is. Safe to the point of being *un*remarkable.
Skip this one, Fedi, unless if you want to. You're not missing anything.
@socketwench The only part worthy in this movie is Richard Prior doing creative accounting with the company's extra cents in the payroll.
I mean, remove Superman from the movie and we got an awesome hacker-themed comedy.
@yuki2501 In that light, I'm fondly remembering Jumpin' Jack Flash (1986).
@socketwench - One of the things that really REALLY bothers me with Superman 3, is the trans-insults with Vera, and even the subtle hint that she is trans herself. I didn't see that until recently, and it's made the movie even MORE unpalatable for me.
I thought the camp was stupid. I wanted the more "grounded" Superman 1. Then Superman 4 happened, and I didn't know how good Superman 3 had it.