Rating:  -
Released in '83 'Superman III' returned to the more heavy-handed comedic style that dominated the first Superman. The comedy provided ala Richard Pryor and the curvaceous Pamela Stephenson was a little too much in my opinion. However Clark's return to Smallville and his reunion with Lana Lang (Annette O'Toole) was enjoyable and pretty much saved this film for me.
Not the best, but it's still Christopher Reeve so why not?
Rating: -
After two major hit movies, the third entry in the Superman movie series was definitely viewed as a letdown. Indeed, compared to both the commercial success of the first two films as well as the quality of the films themselves, it is indeed a weak sequel. However that doesn't mean it's outright bad.
The third entry has Supemran / Clark Kent (Christopher Reeve, once again playign the aprt to perfection even if thw writing and the film itself are less than stellar) returns to Smallville, his hometown, where he hooks up with old flame Lana Lang (Annette O'Toole). Meanwhile, a down on his luck computer geek named Gus Gorman (Richard Pryor) has used his keyboarding skills and with the help of an evil industrialist (Robert Vaughn), plans on buildiding his "Super" computer and turning it into a weapon. Of course, Superman naturally gets in their way, and now they must achieve kryptonite and get him out of the way. They do indeed achieve it, but it does not kill him. However, it splits him into two separate personalities: Clark Kent and Superman, with Supemran being the foe, Clark now must get control of his other half before it destroys him in time to stop them from destroying the world with the "Super" computer.
First of all, let me start off with the good aspects of the film. Reeve is once again fantastic as Superman. He manages to overcome the film's flaws and turn in another magnifificent performance. It's also nice to see Samllville revisited, and the subplot with him and Lana was nice.
Now for the bad. Richard Pryor for the most part wasn't all that great. He was a truly brilliant comedian, but he's just out of place in a Superman movie. With him in it, the film automatically becomes more of a comedy (take a look at the opening credits sequence) and he just doesn't make a great villian. Next, Robert Vaughn's Webster is one of the worst villians ever. I know a lot of people complained that Hackman's Luthor was campy and over the top, but Vaughn surpasses him by MILES. And his henchman are much more annoying than Luthor's Eve and Otis. The score by Ken Thorne is autrocious, and you automatically yearn for John William's truly astounding score from the first two films to swell up out of nowhere. Add to that a cheesy soundtrack of original songs from Georgio Moroder and it just adds to the film's campiness.
I can go on and on about more positives and negatives, but I'll just say that "Superman III" is worth checking out, even if you will be a little disappointed by the end.
Rating:  -
Although there was bright promise in the storyline, the inclusion of Pryor, Vaughn and the "Super" computer, caused this thing to bomb! They should have stayed with the synthetic kryptonite and actually split Superman into two entities - the scene of Kent battling the "evil" Superman whether in his head or in reality is still a mystery. Good "Superman" battling "Evil" Superman should have been premise enough to hold everyone's interest. Scrap the rest and you might have had a picture equal to the previous films.
Rating:  -
I'll be frank: SUPERMAN III is NOT a good film. Having heard both from people who loved the movie and hated the movie, I watched it with an open mind, but in the end it was clear to me that this movie is weak. Very weak.
Half of the movie revolves around Gus Gorman (Richard Pryor!), a dim-witted computer programmer who becomes involved in crime when he begins working for millionaire Ross Webster (Robert Vaughn). The other half of the film revolves around Superman (Christopher Reeve), as he is reunited with high school sweetheart Lana Lang (Annette O'Toole) and becomes evil when exposed to synthetic kryptonite.
One can't help but wonder what David and Leslie Newman, who co-wrote the previous two SUPERMAN films, were thinking when they wrote this film. It opens with a cringeworthy slapstick sequence, and gets worse from there. Any and all scenes involving Richard Pryor are completely out of place in this film, making it seem more like an unfunny comedy than a superhero film. Director Richard Lester tries his best to make the movie work, but ultimately, it doesn't, thanks in part to the absence of Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor and the near-absence of Margot Kidder as Lois Lane (Kidder has a total of about three minutes on-screen). Christopher Reeve, however, is excellent as always, and Annette O'Toole is a good fit for the part of Lana Lang; interestingly, she portrayed Clark's mother, Martha Kent, on the hit Superman TV series SMALLVILLE.
SUPERMAN III is mediocre at best, a failed attempt to continue an excellent series. While it couldn't hold my attention for the 125 minute runtime, I can think of worse movies to watch late at night with a bowl of popcorn and a Coke. Superman fans may want to check it out; all others, steer clear.
Rating: -
The opening sequence of Superman III is a 10 minute bit of slapstick that will make you physically ill. It's very hard to watch. It makes you fear that Superman will finally arrive with a little Chaplin moustache and a cane. Horrid.
Also, a question to the late Richard Pryor: Why did you play your role of a guy who realizes a latent talent as a computer whiz as a guy who can barely formulate a thought and speak it as a complete sentence? You were also very hard to watch.
Richard Lester, shame on you. What happened to you in the twenty some years between A HARD DAYS NIGHT and this? Why do you hate us so?
It goes to show, not everyone can be the Beatles, and not everyone can be Richard Donner.
|
