Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
You'd think after the last film, they would have thrown in the towel. The director(s) were pissed they couldn't do the movies they wanted. The studio was disappointed that their schlocky, wannabe kid's film of Superman 3 fell flat.
Guess what. They DID give up.
Word has it, that Reeves still wanted to do a Superman flick, and the original showrunners said, "knock yourself out."
So they got.....GOLAN GLOBUS!? Oh, boy. We're in for a ride, aren't we?
Let's watch!
It's no surprise that this film arouses some serious misgivings in people. It's...not a great film. Much of the budget was allegedly stolen to make....Masters of the Universe. Yes, that one. The one with Glam-i-tor.
The effects in the cold open really show off the cheapness. The overlays are awful. The props are awful. If I had watched this out of context, I might have assumed this was the first or second film. Key effects and even full shots are reused multiple times. The plot, from what I recall, is also a huge cheese fest.
And....I don't care. I want the cheese. Give me the cheese.
Irresponsible reporting for the sake of profit!? In these United States!? Surely you jest!
Even in this film, we can't seem to avoid the preconditions nascent in USian culture that led us to...well, today. Historically, journalism was stilted, opinionated, and did outright lie to suit it's political position. Look it up if you like:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism
The idea of journalism being objective or impartial is a relatively new idea historically. It's arguable that it never really attained that ideal. The primary A plot in this film is motivated by the Daily Planet leveraging a nuclear crisis to drive sales, using their connection to Superman to, in modern parlance, "sell clicks". It would be an unthinkable 80s invention, but we've seen in reality in the last several years. It's hard not to watch even this cheesy film and not hear the creaking of the Overton Window in motion.
Universe, the cheapness.
The film doesn't waste any time in doing callbacks to earlier films. They recall the Lois Lane flying sequence from the first film, but with limited dialog and no internal monologue. They play into the reveal of Clark as Superman, only to erase Lane's knowledge of it with the "super kiss" from the theatrical cut of Superman 2.
Recalling such elements is a means to borrow magic from earlier films so as help us ignore the shortcomings of this one. We've already touched on the lackluster effects, but the film is still trying.
Unlike Superman 2, we have Luthor (Gene Hackman) back. Margot Kidder as Lois Lane is back. This film already feels on more solid ground as a result. Despite the frequent callbacks to previous films, the writing seems to finally strike the correct tone.
In fact, we finally get what I've been wanting since I started rewatching this series: A Lex Luthor who finally feels like part of the plot. In the 78 film, Luthor was overshadowed by Zod's powerful introduction. Yet, because of studio shenanigans, he was the primary antagonist of the film. In the follow up film, Luthor had some excellent moments, was was ultimately sidelined once more.
However, Nuclear Man hits different. He feels like someone who can easily be handled by someone such as Luthor. He it's existing as a dual or superior antagonist, but as an agent to the proper villain. We also get a proper city-destruction sequence that neither Superman 2 or 3 could adequately pull off. It works for me paradoxically, because it feels more narrow and confined. The shots are more close up, and it helps to maintain the illusion while reducing cost. This is a tired and true technique we've seen in so many B-movies, and it works here.
Superman 4 is...not a great film.
It gets by on callbacks to much better films, while having a thin, basic plot. There's no great filmmaking here, but there's still something about it for me.
It's not *trying* to be great. It's not trying to make allegories to immigration and USian cultural assimilation. It's not trying to be a dark moment where we dine on the ashes of choices not taken. If anything, Superman 4 manages by sticking to basics. Nuclear Man has less presence than my cat trying to disembowel a foam rubber ball. The romance subplot is dropped. And the subplot with the Daily Planet takeover feels like an irrelevant detail.
And honestly? I don't care. It's corny, cheesy fun. I had the most fun with this film compared to any of the previous three despite it's many, many shortcomings.
Take it or leave it, Fedi.
@socketwench - One of the things I absolutely love about Nuclear Man is that Gene Hackman provides the voice for him. It really lends credence to Nuclear Man being an extension of himself.
@dolari I wish this was the plot of Superman 1.
@socketwench - Parts of it almost were! In the original Mario Puzo draft, one of the mini-sodes was Superman getting sick and nearly dying from radiation.
@socketwench I think the thing that bugged me most was the "repair the Great Wall of China vision"...