Man of Steel (2013)

2/4 stars

I believe that movies are best viewed on their own and on their own merits without constantly comparing them to other movies that they were not intended to be like. So when Warner Brothers finally saw fit to reboot the Superman franchise there ought to be a little latitude for reinvention. But, while Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel is not beholden to the Christopher Reeve canon, it is still beholden to Superman as a character. And that is where the movie fails.
Superman is more than Christopher Reeve. By a long tradition of comic books, movies, video games, and television series Superman has entered the cultural mythos as an established character whose lore, values, and personality have become sacred.

My objections to Man of Steel are not solely due to my preference for Christopher Reeve. What I object to is how the heart and soul of Superman has been so thoroughly sucked out. Even his costume is drab and colorless. Henry Cavill plays the role without personality. Instead of the idealistic boy scout we have grown to know and love, he is angsty and much too serious. His performance is like that of a robot. Instead of being Superman as I know him, Cavill plays the sort of impersonal hero that I would expect to address everyone as “Citizen!” As Superman he is dull and emotionless. As Clark Kent he is constantly anxious and facing existential crises.
It is not until the end of the film that he dons the glasses and becomes a reporter at the Daily Planet. The scene is too brief to say much, but in those brief seconds I saw little sign of the winsome mild-mannered reporter that he is supposed to be. He strides in with confidence and makes a charming smile. He is more like an adolescent fantasy of a handsome intern.

Clark’s childhood in Smallville is handled differently than it is in the original film, Here it is doled out in a series of flashbacks that come and go throughout the first act. These scenes run parallel against his adulthood right before he puts on the cape and boots. Clark is unsure of himself and desperately wants to know what his destiny and purpose in life is. As a child we see him struggle to adjust to his powers and his relations with his peers is strained and distant. Pa Kent (Kevin Costner) raises Clark to try to find the right outlet for his powers and to maintain a sense of self-restraint. To the film’s credit these scenes do a great job at revealing how Superman came to be responsible with his abilities without becoming corrupted and tyrannical by them. There is a key moment where Clark has to contend with middle school bullies trying to get him to fight. Instead of refraining from violence out of sheer goodness of heart, the scene more realistically shows how difficult it is to maintain self-control when one is angry. While cornered he is gripping a fence behind him which, after the bullies run off, is shown to have been crushed by his hand. Pa Kent praises Clark for not giving into his baser nature, but admits that a part of him would have been satisfied had Clark knocked their blocks off. Being a good person is hard work and the film presents those difficulties remarkably well.
But the movie never quite develops him into the character that we know. Up to the very end his uncertainties and trauma remain with him. I would have much better liked seeing these pieces of his past add up to the kind and idealistic man he would later become.
One thing I heavily disliked about the flashbacks is how far Pa Kent takes the lessons in self-restraint. His dialogue and actions suggest that he doesn’t want Clark to become a hero at all out of fears for what it would do to society. After saving a bus full of schoolchildren his dad seems more concerned about the attention it would draw to Clark than the lives he saved. And the way the film handles the death of Jonathan Kent is unforgivable. In the original lore Pa Kent’s heart attack was a poignant lesson to Clark about the limitations of his powers and how he cannot save everyone. But, in Man of Steel his death is something easily preventable, but occurs anyway due to over-caution.

The film opens, like in the original, on Krypton. The planet is about to explode thanks to over-mining that has destabilized the planet’s core. Superman’s father, Jor-El (Russell Crowe), is fed up with Krypton’s stagnant culture which is portrayed as being built on eugenics. The Kryptonians are grown in labs with preset destinies and roles to play. Jor-El would rather see his race breed freely without governmental controls. He steals a codex of DNA that he implants in his son in the hopes of reseeding the Kryptonian people somewhere else.
When General Zod (Michael Shannon) stages a rebellion he seeks to acquire the codex for himself so he can rebuild Krypton’s civilization under his rule. With Superman now safely flying in an escape pod for Earth, Zod is too late and his rebellion is quelled swiftly. As we have seen before Zod and his cohorts are sent into the Phantom Zone.

Back on Earth the adult Clark Kent makes his first acquaintance with Lois Lane (Amy Adams) when she stumbles upon an old Kryptonian scout ship that Clark was exploring. The movie dodges entirely the whole notion that Lane doesn’t know Clark Kent is Superman by having her uncover his identity early on. At the end of the film when he starts his first day at the Daily Planet she already knows who he is.
Man of Steel handles their love story even worse than the Reeve films did. Their first kiss comes out of nowhere, following only a small handful of meetings, all of which are professional and unflirtatious. The kiss is, in fact, the first indication that Lois was attracted to Superman at all.
Adams’ performance as Lois is markedly different than Margot Kidder’s. She is more like a journalist who stubbornly puts herself in dangerous situations for her paper. Kidder’s Lois Lane was more like a gossip columnist. Amy Adams plays the sort of stubborn journalist who sniffs out cover-ups and pesters the powers that be to find the truth. What is unfortunate is that that is all there is to her personality. Kidder was full of personality while Adams has virtually none.

During the final act, after Zod comes to Earth to take back the codex and terraform the planet for a new Krypton, the action scenes have the same problems that I have had with Superman Returns. The CGI, instead of being put to any artful use, is used to show things moving so fast that they are hard to make out. Superman zips about at high speeds, burning objects are hurled around in hundreds of shots per second, and explosions dominate much of the foreground. A lot of the action shots are also done in close-up which only furthers obscures a clear view. Computer generated special effects are at their best when they are used to show the audience things they haven’t seen before and couldn’t have seen otherwise. Too often they are utilized, like in this movie, to create highly kinetic action that is impossible to process and appreciate.

At the end of the day Superman is not an action movie star. Who he is as a character is just as important as what he does. Probably even more so. What the makers of Man of Steel don’t seem to understand is that when reinventing a character certain core traits need to be preserved if he is to be that character at all. What I saw was a very depressed and beleaguered man wearing a Superman costume. But I didn’t see Superman.
Back in 2013 I heard a few yea-sayers claim that “this is not your father’s Superman!” Perhaps we should consider that our fathers were right.

Director: Zack Snyder
Writers: David S. Goyer, Christopher Nolan
Producers: Christopher Nolan, Charles Roven, Deborah Snyder, Emma Thomas, Jon Peters, Lloyd Phillips, Thomas Tull, Wesley Coller, Curt Kanemoto
Cast: Henry Cavill (Superman/Clark Kent), Amy Adams (Lois Lane), Michael Shannon (Zod), Diane Lane (Martha Kent), Russell Crowe (Jor-El), Antje Traue (Faora-Ul), Harry Lennix (General Swanwick), Richard Schiff (Dr. Emil Hamilton), Christopher Meloni (Colonel Nathan Hardy), Kevin Costner (Jonathan Kent), Ayelet Zurer (Lara Lora-Van), Laurence Fishburne (Perry White)
Composer: Hans Zimmer
Cinematographer: Amir Mokri
Editor: David Brenner

Superman Returns (2006)

3/4 stars

Superman Returns makes a solid effort to recapture the spirit of the original Superman movies. This is most clear in the film’s casting, where the performances are largely imitative of the original actors. It all makes for a conscious and deliberate attempt at producing a theoretical reconstruction of what a Superman 5 could have been had it been made back when Christopher Reeve, Margot Kidder, and Gene Hackman were in their prime. And it mostly succeeds.

Kevin Spacey, in particular, fills in Hackman’s shoes as Lex Luthor remarkably well. Spacey doesn’t stoop to parody, but makes the role his own while keeping Hackman’s mannerisms and tone largely intact. What he does best is recapturing the narcissism of the character. He portrays arrogance and indifference to humanity a bit more convincing than Hackman did, but he is not as charming or funny. Their respective performances complement each other, broadening Luthor as a character, while each puts their own spin on him.
Among the more minor characters like Jimmy Olsen and Perry White, the recasts involve performances so spot on in imitation that there isn’t much to say about them if you had seen the previous movies. Sam Huntington is the spitting image of Marc McClure as Olsen, aside from being slightly more animated than McClure was. Frank Langella meanwhile plays White exactly as I remembered him when Jackie Cooper played him.
Brandon Routh as Superman, however, is a bit of a mixed bag. He has the right build for Superman, square jaw and everything. But, Routh’s performance as Superman is a trifle dull. He has the physicality of the character down, but not quite the personality. As Clark Kent, he is a bit better, although his imitation of Reeve’s winsome mannerisms boil down to mere mimicry. Reeve’s behavior as Kent was more charming and believable than Routh’s which is flat at times and doesn’t command as much attention.
Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane is the most transformative of all the performances in Superman Returns. Margot Kidder was more charismatic and more fun than Bosworth, but Bosworth adds a level of maturity and emotion to the role that Kidder didn’t quite capture. Of all the recasts Kate Bosworth is the least convincing as a continuation of the character in the originals, but she is better written.

The film opens with a bit of expository text saying that Superman had left Earth some time ago – later revealed to have been five years – after learning that scientists had discovered Krypton, his homeworld. He had flown off to go find it, but the movie never quite makes it clear what he intended to do when he got there. When he returns he says the planet was completely barren of life and that he truly is the last of his race. Would he have stayed if he found living Kryptonians there? Superman never says.
What makes for a point of contention with his friends and family is that he never said goodbye to anyone when he left. Lois is still angry with him and we discover that in his absence she had written an article for the Daily Planet called Why the World Doesn’t Need Superman which earned her a Pulitzer for journalism. The contents of the article are not specified other than that Lois began to feel that the Earth’s reliance on a godlike savior was not in the people of Earth’s best interest. She later expresses some regret for writing it, although she obviously keeps the Pulitzer. I know I would have.
Clark Kent, speaking for Superman, tells Lois that perhaps the reason he had not said goodbye is because it was too painful for him. I find this flimsy at best. It’s not a strong and emotionally detailed explanation and I couldn’t but wonder about his poor mother, Martha. The old woman spent five years wondering if Clark was dead and I don’t think avoiding a painful goodbye justifies putting one’s widowed mother through that.
When he comes home he finds a lot of things have happened since he was gone. Lois is with a new partner (James Marsden) and she now has a son. The revelations of what Clark had missed while he was gone suggests that Superman was mistaken in thinking that his kinship with Krypton was more important than the relationships he had on Earth. The theme is not dealt with explicitly, but these events say something about what family really means. Family is not always blood.

Luthor, meanwhile, is involved in a plot to raise a new continent from the sea where he would be its absolute ruler. That’s good old Lex for ya. After acquiring several of the same Kryptonian crystals used to build the Fortress of Solitude – Superman’s base in the North Pole – Lex wants to use them in a similar way to create a new landmass in the Atlantic. The only problem is such an event would eliminate much of the American east coast and even destroy parts of northern Africa. Naturally, Luthor doesn’t care. But the return of Superman won’t make this easy.

Superman Returns is a breath of fresh air. It’s story is solid and ends the series on a poignant note. Director Bryan Singer, who had given new life to X-Men a few years prior, salvages the Superman series from the dimwitted dreck that characterized the earlier sequels. It is certainly the second best film in the series after the first one.
It’s only weak points are the occasional pale imitations made by some of the cast and I have some reservations about its visual treatment of Superman. In the original movies when Superman was flying and saving the world he was the central focus of the camera. He soared gloriously with each shot good enough to hang on a wall. But, by 2006 Superman in flight is achieved through CGI which was still a bit primitive at the time. To avoid these problems Superman is often shot from a distance or in shadow, obscuring a clear view of him. When he flies he zips past the screen quickly instead of letting the camera remain fixed on him like in the original movies. My favorite parts of the older films were when Superman would fly toward the screen, his fist thrust forward heroically as John Williams’ classic score heightened the excitement. That is sadly lacking here most of the time and I missed it. This movie was made in a time when CGI objects would move at high speeds to disguise the fakeness of the special effects. The older filmmakers, however, didn’t balk at the matte lines and obvious super-imposures the flying scenes entailed and they were better for it.

As throwbacks go, Superman Returns is satisfying and a joy to watch. The series at the time was in sore need of revitalization and Singer delivers. Binge-watching the series has altered the experience a bit, but in 2006 this movie was like revisiting an old friend and it was a happy reunion.

Director: Bryan Singer
Writers: Michael Dougherty, Dan Harris, Bryan Singer
Producers: Jon Peters, Bryan Singer, Gilbert Adler, Loren Orleans (IMAX version), William Fay, Chris Lee, Scott Mednick, Thomas Tull, Stephen Jones
Cast: Brandon Routh (Superman/Clark Kent), Kate Bosworth (Lois Lane), Kevin Spacey (Lex Luthor), James Marsden (Richard White), Parker Posey (Kitty Kowalski), Frank Langella (Perry White), Sam Huntington (Jimmy Olsen), Eva Marie Saint (Martha Kent), Marlon Brando (Jor-El [archival footage])
Composer: John Ottman
Cinematographer: Newton Thomas Sigel
Editors: Elliot Graham, John Ottman

Superman IV: The Quest for Peace (1987)

1.5/4 stars

Superman IV is one of the most egregious cases of mismanagement of a film’s production in history. Producers Yoram Globus and Menahem Golan, who bought the Superman rights from the Salkinds, made one bad creative decision after another. Their company, the Cannon Group, held onto the rights for only a year before Warner came and bailed them out, purchasing much of their library. In a few words, the Cannon Group blew it.
I suspect that Superman IV’s producers had no faith in the series’ viability after the disgrace that was Supergirl and Superman III. Perhaps they should have watched the first one.

But, without even knowing the production history, a viewer only needs to watch Superman IV to realize that serious budgetary restraints was holding the film back. At a mere 89 minutes in length, the film charges ahead with the pace of a TV movie. One would think that a movie with such a short runtime would not attempt to juggle several subplots, but, alas, there are a total of three. Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) and his nephew Lenny (Jon Cryer) create an anti-Superman named Nuclear Man (Mark Pillow) whose sole purpose is to destroy Superman. I suppose this is intended to be the film’s main plot, but the screentime and attention it receives is about the same as the others. We also have The Daily Planet taken over by a sleazy tabloid journalist (Sam Wanamaker) whose only slightly less sleazy daughter (Mariel Hemingway) has an infatuation with Clark Kent (Christopher Reeve). She starts off cynical and manipulative, but Clark’s winsome mannerisms triggers a protective streak in her and her fondness for him grows into something more. And to top everything off Superman declares to the United Nations that he is going to single-handedly rid the world of nuclear weapons. How do the delegates respond? Anger? Threats? Saber-rattling? Not a bit. They give the Man of Steel thunderous applause. We are not that far off from the days of Goldwater – especially in 1987 – and this is all brainlessly naive. I am not against the idea of a superhero coming to earth and tossing all the world’s nuclear arsenal into the sun. Personally, I think that would be fantastic. But, it’s not going to happen and no meaningful commentary can be made resolving them this way in a story. And the warmongering, genocidal, child-killing sociopaths currently residing in the world theater certainly wouldn’t cheer him on. World peace has always been a buzzword for them, primed for lip service and little else. If you don’t agree, watch the news.
It bears mentioning that society would also just rebuild them again. What is Superman going to do? Throw the scientists and piles of textbook research into the sun too?

None of these disparate plots connect with each other, and each is resolved in the same rapid fire succession in which they are introduced. The anti-nuclear message meets no significant conflict or resistance in the narrative, even when there ought to be. And the tabloid journalist nonsense gets tidied up in a bit of dialogue. The only plot thread that gets resolved with any discernible effort from the heroes is Nuclear Man, who is defeated in an uninspired fight sequence shot in small cheaply constructed sets. The whole film looks and feels like one of those edited compilations of episodes from a TV show cobbled together into a movie.

Apparently, Superman IV was supposed to be longer, if not necessarily better. Originally Nuclear Man was to be the second anti-Superman Luthor creates after the first one is shown to be defective and easily defeated. But those scenes ended up on the cutting room floor and Nuclear Man’s entrance is re-edited to suggest a one and only appearance. This would account for the poor pacing of his introduction and the quick manner in which he is later dispatched.

Confidence is key to any creative endeavor, even when the ideas are good, which they are not in this case. Why a production team would actively seek the IP of a franchise they saw no box office potential in is beyond me. The company had dozens of projects all being made at once, putting on a budgetary strain when doling out financing.
But, Superman is not Smokey and the Bandit or Ma and Pa Kettle. The franchise deserved better. The first film on its own demonstrated that Superman thrived and was profitable when given respectful attention.

Superman IV: The Quest for Peace – and the series as a whole – only further proves something that I have believed for a long time. Producers are nothing but a necessary evil that often contributes to the death of art.

Director: Sidney J. Furie
Writers: Christopher Reeve, Lawrence Konner, Mark Rosenthal
Producers: Yoram Globus, Menahem Golan, Michael J. Kagan, Graham Easton
Cast: Christopher Reeve (Superman/Clark Kent), Gene Hackman (Lex Luthor), Jackie Cooper (Perry White), Marc McClure (Jimmy Olsen), Jon Cryer (Lenny), Sam Wanamaker (David Warfield), Mark Pillow (Nuclear Man), Mariel Hemingway (Lacy Warfield), Margot Kidder (Lois Lane)
Composers: Alexander Courage, John Williams
Cinematographer: Ernest Day
Editor: John Shirley

Superman II (1980)

3/4 stars

Superman II has all the excitement and visual spectacle of the original Superman film, but lacks its wit and plausibility. As a superhero movie it’s about as good as Tim Burton’s Batman or the first Avengers. But there isn’t much here of what made the 1978 Superman movie special.

In the first film it opened with three Kryptonian criminals being charged with sedition. General Zod (Terence Stamp), Ursa (Sarah Douglas), and Non (Jack O’Halloran) are condemned to dwell inside a floating disc called the Phantom Zone which floats off into space just as baby Superman’s escape pod leaves the planet. Now, in Superman II we find out what happened to them.
The sequel opens with Superman (Christopher Reeve) rushing to Paris after a group of terrorists with a hydrogen bomb take control of the Eiffel Tower. Superman saves the day by rescuing hostages and flying the bomb up into outer space where it explodes harmlessly. Unfortunately, the Phantom Zone just happened to be flying by and the shock waves shatter it, releasing Zod and gang. Ursa murders a couple of astronauts on the moon, and then the trio land in Houston, Texas. Zod wants to rule the planet and be worshiped by its denizens, but upon hearing stories of Superman he realizes that there is one threat to him and his ambitions that must be removed if he is to succeed.
The three villains have only a low kind of cunning and rely mostly on brute strength and their powers to get what they want. As movie bad guys go they have none of Lex Luthor’s (Gene Hackman) charisma and act more like playground bullies than anything else. Much of their scenes consist of wrecking havoc, causing property damage, and making comments about puny earthlings. Lex is regrettably given less to do. He joins forces with the Zod gang in the hopes of getting revenge against Superman, but he is forcibly sidelined by the new villains; his scenes little more than standing in a corner uttering some witticism.

Superman II’s subplot involving Clark Kent’s growing romance with Lois Lane (Margot Kidder) is slightly more interesting. Lois, who has been growing increasingly suspicious of Kent’s true identity, finally uncovers the truth. Superman is in love with Lois, but he discovers that for the two of them to be together he must sacrifice his powers and immortality. We are not told why and Superman accepts it without question. The time they spend together as a human couple is sweet and hopeful, but is sadly short-lived. Zod and his friends threaten Metropolis and it becomes clear to Clark that the world needs Superman. Clark and Lois’s breakup, however, represents one of several different failings that Superman II has in its writing. The movie does not convincingly establish that Clark Kent and Lois Lane are in love at all. Their interactions throughout the majority of the film is not much different than the simple infatuation they had in the first one. That they are deeply in love is something we are told more than we are shown. Break-ups can take a serious emotional toll on a person, and for a moment in the movie’s final scenes it appears that something poignant will be made of it. Lois tells Clark that he is “a tough act to follow” after he tries to suggest that someday she may meet someone else. I think a lot of people following a break-up feel as Lois does, even when their boyfriend isn’t the Man of Steel. But, the film cops out of any further dramatic tension by Superman implausibly wiping her memories clean with a kiss.
This kiss is just one of several stupid moments in the movie. I cannot abide arbitrary powers being lazily introduced to get the main characters out of a bind, and Superman II is full of moments like this. In the original film, Superman’s powers, while impossible, are at least explicable to the audience. We understand that he has super strength, laser vision, and can fly. We also know why he has these powers, being an alien living on a planet with a different sun and atmosphere. But, in the sequel his powers expand beyond any plausibility. Instead of changing into his costume with super speed he now makes his civie clothes magically vanish as the Superman garb materializes out of thin air. When Non charges at him Superman pulls an S off his chest and throws it at him. The material expands into a sort of plastic wrap that temporarily takes Non out of the fight. These moments are pure dei ex machina, lacking any sort of explanation and occurring from a standpoint of quick convenience.

In the final act, Superman and the Zod gang do battle in the streets of Metropolis and later in the Fortress of Solitude. The Metropolis scenes as action set pieces are not very exciting. There is little energy to them, with most of the fight just smashing things one by one at a slow rate and some petty taunts from Zod. There is a sense of city-wide chaos one would expect that is lacking here. The fight feels more like an elaborate street brawl while the rest of the city remains asleep or dully watches on.
The real purpose of the Metropolis battle seems to be product placement. There is an annoying scene in the first Superman involving Cheerios, but it is brief enough to not detract from that movie’s greatness. In Superman II, though, we are fed a whole marching gallery of products obnoxiously shot to hold the viewer’s attention. In the span of a single minute I counted about four or five products strutting their stuff while Metropolis is under attack. These include, but are not limited to, KFC, Coca-Cola, and even Marlboro cigarettes. I doubt Superman would have approved.

When all is said and done I find Superman II to be a sufficiently entertaining movie. I was not bored by it by any means. And I can get behind its plot and adventure, if not so much its execution. But, as Lois said of Superman himself, the first movie is a tough act to follow.

Directors: Richard Lester, Richard Donner
Writers: Jerry Siegel, Joe Shuster, Mario Puzo, David Newman, Leslie Newman, Tom Mankiewicz
Producers: Pierre Spengler, Ilya Salkind, Alexander Salkind
Cast: Gene Hackman (Lex Luthor), Christopher Reeve (Superman/Clark Kent), Ned Beatty (Otis), Jackie Cooper (Perry White), Sarah Douglas (Ursa), Margot Kidder (Lois Lane), Jack O’Halloran (Non), Valerie Perrine (Eve Teschmacher), Susannah York (Lara), E. G. Marshall (The President), Terence Stamp (General Zod)
Composers: Ken Thorne, John Williams (Superman Theme)
Cinematographers: Robert Paynter, Geoffrey Unsworth
Editor: John Victor Smith

Superman: The Movie (1978)

4/4 stars

Superhero movies tend to have a distinct formula these days. They often open in the middle of the action where the heroes, already familiar to the audience, are on some unrelated mission that goes south. They take a brief break for some funny dialogue before the movie’s main conflict is introduced and they are then whisked away on some adventure. What follows for the next two to three hours is constant action, displays of special effects, and witty banter. The fans are familiar with the characters, and it is that familiarity that carries the movie rather than the plot. It’s akin to seeing a circus performance. You’re there for the clowns and the elephants. No one cares what the ringleader and lion trainers have to say.

But, Superman: The Movie, the film that jump-started the genre, defies that formula. It takes its time establishing its characters and their motivations. It’s also well-performed, artfully photographed, and cleverly written. It is, in fact, what a lot of superhero flicks are not. It’s a movie.

Superman was made in the old Hollywood tradition, playing much like the rousing screen epics that preceded it. Clark Kent’s path to becoming Superman occupies much of the film’s first hour and when he finally does we understand his character completely. Christopher Reeve’s Superman is more than a costume fighting bad guys. He is a personality we get to know and root for. Superman is the classic story of a man born to become something greater. As his adopted father Johnathan Kent (Glenn Ford) puts it, he was put on this Earth for a reason. Clark Kent follows in the tradition of screen epics like Ben-Hur or Gone with the Wind where the situation and conflict serve the characters rather than the other way around. The movie is not a spectacle of human action figures playing out a scenario, but the story of a man growing into his potential.

The film opens on the planet Krypton, a place millions of light years from Earth where crystalline architecture is all the rave and the people wear glowing costumes that anticipate the special effects of Tron. The planet is about to be fatally engulfed in a solar flare, and Superman’s father, Jor-El (Marlon Brando), tries to warn Krypton’s elder council that they need to evacuate. They don’t believe him, so he builds a small spacecraft in secret to send his infant son to Earth where he will be safe.
When he gets there he is found by a childless couple in Kansas, the Kents, who adopt him. It is Johnathan Kent’s values that make Clark Kent the man he becomes. During those years as a teenager on the Kent family farm, Clark learns that his powers are a gift to help others weaker than himself and that selflessness and restraint are the highest obligation of the strong.
Clark Kent’s rearing in Smallville, Kansas make for the strongest scenes in the movie. Everything that Superman believes in and is sent to protect are established there in rural Americana – a setting of open wheat fields and country roads, gorgeously shot in wide-angles.
After Pa Kent dies of a heart attack, Clark learns more about his history and where he comes from. He decides to move to the big city of Metropolis and gets a job as a writer for the Daily Planet. It is here that his persona as Clark Kent fully takes off. Christopher Reeve is a great Superman, but he is an even better Clark Kent. He presents himself as bumbling and clumsy as well as a trifle naive. Clark Kent largely represents the people that Superman is there to protect. Like them, Clark is played as easily taken advantage of, but has something in him that kinder souls want to shelter and keep out of trouble. In a way, the alter ego of Clark Kent is closer to who Superman truly is. He abhors violence and has a love of justice and peace. He is the sort of man who just wants everyone to get along. By contrast Bruce Wayne is more of a mask that hides his true identity as Batman. In Superman the reverse is true, with Clark Kent being the true core of his being, while Superman is his mask.

At the Daily Planet he meets a reporter named Lois Lane (Margot Kidder) who finds Clark affable enough, but cannot abide his apparent lack of spine. When they are mugged in an alleyway, Clark insists in non-resistance, but Lois scoffs and tries to struggle with their assailant. The mugger’s gun goes off which Clark surreptitiously catches with his hand, but then pretends to faint. Lois not seeing the trick and assuming the mugger only missed, is disgusted.
Clark is infatuated with Lois, but she has her eyes on Superman after he rescues her from a near accident in a helicopter. On top of this Superman has already begun to make a reputation for himself stopping heists, apprehending criminals, and rescuing cats stuck in trees. She gets an opportunity to interview Superman for the paper and their sexual chemistry is clear from the start. The interaction is flirtatious and Lois finds herself stumbling into innuendos when she tries to speak. She and everyone else doesn’t see what the audience sees, which is that Superman is just Clark Kent with his glasses off. It’s the sort of logical discrepancy that I would call an elephant in the room if it wasn’t for all of the jokes that have been made of it over the years. It’s more of a dead horse than an elephant really.

But, no good superhero movie is lacking in a good villain. In Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) we get a character who is everything that Superman is not. Luthor is greedy, selfish, indifferent to the suffering of others, and always ready with an insult. His first bit of dialogue is “It’s a wonder that brain can generate enough power to keep those legs moving,” referring to his henchman, Otis (Ned Beatty). Otis follows the old tradition of super-villain henchman. He’s comically dimwitted and so incompetent that Luthor’s continual employment of him raises a lot of questions. I wouldn’t trust this guy to lay down and sleep without screwing it up somehow. Perhaps Otis is a relative or something.
Hackman’s performance as Luthor makes for the greatest super-hero villain of all time. His narcissism and constant sarcasm make him infinitely quotable. Luthor lives in awe of himself while holding everyone else around him in disdain. He is the sort of man who has no idols and heroes more impressive to him than himself. His personality is more of perpetual bemusement than anything threatening. He doesn’t wax philosophical or justify his wickedness with dark monologues. Nor is he governed by hate or revenge. He is more like Jabba the Hutt or Ooogie-Boogie. He is aware of what he is and he doesn’t care.
Lex Luthor has a wild scheme to use navy missiles to target the San Andreas fault line. By destroying much of the West coast he hopes to corner the real estate market in what remains. The only thing standing in his way is Superman who is naturally outraged by the sheer loss of life Luthor’s plan entails. Superman asks, “Is that how you get your kicks? Planning for the death of millions of people?” Luthor responds, “No. Causing the deaths of millions of people.” What a guy!

The climax is satisfying and exciting with an ending that sets the stage for more adventures to come fighting Luthor and worse. Superman’s father, Jor-El, left him with instructions to not interfere with human history. During the final act Superman is faced with the consequences of this command and the decision he makes at the end is decidedly un-Kryptonian, but it is certainly a human one.

Superman is the best of the superhero movies and it is the best-looking. It was the most expensive movie made up to that point, and it was done when CGI was in its infancy. Instead of relying on its special effects (still impressive for the time) it is shot in the classic Hollywood tradition of wide-angle lenses and beautiful natural cinematography sadly missed in blockbuster movies of today. It’s paced like a real movie, focusing on the growth of its main character and performed with convincing dramatic effect.
Superhero movies nowadays are often made with their scripts being the last thing on the filmmakers’ minds. They go into production with little more than a planned set of story beats that get hammered out in the course of their making. When a film of this genre starts life with a tight script, it results in something special. Something not typically seen in superhero movies. It results in an actual movie.

Director: Richard Donner
Writers: Jerry Siegel, Joe Shuster, Mario Puzo, David Newman, Leslie Newman, Robert Benton, Tom Mankiewicz
Cast: Marlon Brando (Jor-El), Gene Hackman (Lex Luthor), Christopher Reeve (Clark Kent/Superman), Ned Beatty (Otis), Jackie Cooper (Perry White), Glenn Ford (Pa Kent), Margot Kidder (Lois Lane), Valerie Perrine (Eve Teschmacher) Phyllis Thaxter (Ma Kent), Susannah York (Lara), Jeff East (Young Clark Kent), Marc McClure (Jimmy Olsen)
Producers: Charles Greenlaw, Ilya Salkind, Pierre Spengler, Richard Lester, Alexander Salkind
Composer: John Williams
Cinematographer: Geoffrey Unsworth
Editors: Stuart Baird, Michael Ellis