DVD : Superman III

In association with Amazon.com

Rating:

- Why?
From the opening scene, an overbudget homage to slapstick, this one looks as bad as it turned out to be. What would happen if the Man of Steel, through no fault of his own, was thrown into a bad Richard Prior movie. Well, here is the mess that director Richard Lester (think Joel Schumaker and the "Batman" movies) made of the "Superman" franchise. We get Clark foregoing Lois for Lana Lang. We get Superman as a bum. We get Robert Vaughn skiing on a skyscraper. The only redeeming quality is in the fight between Clark and Superman. Beyond that, you should stay away from this one at all costs. I wasn't lucky enough to have been warned, I saw it on opening day.

Rating:

- Stunningly Bad!!!!!!!!
I went back and rented all of the Superman movies after they came out on DVD. The first two Superman movies were entertaining. This one is incredibly dumb!

It clearly shows that Richard Donner (the director of the first feature) was definitely the sole talent behind the success of Superman. In the documentaries featured in the DVD of the first feature, Donner emphasized the word "verismilitude" as the main focus of the Superman movies. This was what made the first Superman so entertaining. Donner was fired after the first one's release and not given credit for directing II, but he filmed much of it and clearly set the tone for how II was to be done. This gave Richard Lester a very easy path to work on.

Superman III is the first feature without any of Donner's services, and the result is a complete disaster. Gone is Donner's verismilitude and what's left is lame attempts at dumb humor scene after scene. What is Richard Pryor doing in a Superman movie anyway? All of the actors looked embarrasing in their roles. Christopher Reeve looks especially bored. Maybe he saw what a turkey he was in, or maybe he was just tired of the role.

This clearly killed the series.

Rating:

- Superman III is a joke!
I remember seeing this movie when I was like about 5 years old. I didn't see it in the theater because I was too young to go see it. I remembered when I rented this movie alot too. Right now I really hate it because it's the worst of the series. Why the hell did they have to put Richard Pryor? Yes, of course he is a funny actor but he didn't have to be in the Superman series. Superman III wasn't suppose to be funny it was suppose to be action and the best of the series as they said in the trailer from what I saw on DVD. Did you also know that Richard Pryor's part plays through the whole movie? Just like the first guy said when he was talking about this movie that it's more of a Richard Pryor movie than a Superman sequel. Whatever happened to the flying scene where Superman and Lois Lane are together? If you want to see a good Superman movie go rent or buy Superman II. Because I think that Superman II is the best of the series not III and IV. Infact, Superman IV is more of a kids movie to me I think it's just a rip off from the first Superman movie nothing big really happens in IV except a new villian who calls himself the nuclear man. I think Superman IV is so fake. Well, that's all I have to say about this dumb movie. As I said stick with Superman I and II.

Rating:

- Nearly, Oh so nearly!
Its not as bad as all that is our Superman III. An enjoyable dollop of entertainment but for choosing the route of comedy and heaven knows why! It went down the route Richard Donner spoke of avoiding with the first movie and obviously Richard Lester thought he would break away from it all together and try to tickle our funny bones with the use of Richard Pryor (who was hot property at the time) and Robert Vaughn. It takes us back to smallville which is great but one can't help feeling Lois Lane is dreadfully missed as Clarke gets all cosy with his old flame from high school. There are some great moments here esp. the battle between Clarke and Superman which is certainly this movies saving grace because as a sign of things to come it is clearly becoming unhinged from the first two movies. Compared with what was to follow though, number IV made this look like Schindler's List. There is basically enough to keep the Superman fan happy but only just.

Rating:

- Why 2 stars?
Indeed, why give the movie 2 stars? Because of one of its two saving graces...it was better than the horrible acting and story of Superman IV.

It was a movie that might have been better titled "Richard Pryor and Superman, Live" without the cheap, bad humor that is normally found in a Richard Pryor concert. (Aside: I always felt Eddie Murphy was funnier at any rate.)

The menace any villain may have had is completely undercut by the humor. In fact, the only menace--its other saving grace--I felt was the evil Superman vs. good Superman. That scene was pretty classic and should have placed in a more serious story. After all, who would have known that cigarettes not only cause cancer but bad Kryptonite, too? What would adding milk instead of tar done? Given Superman an evil Supercow to fight with?

Some of the effects were kind of cool--a notable favorite is the bubble that surrounds Superman, depriving him of air. However, it just leads to another fallacy that has disturbed me often...if air is such a problem, then how does Superman manage to hurtle an elevator out into space in Superman II and fight the hideous acting...er...monstrosity called Nuclear Man in Superman IV? Does he hold his breath? Pretty Super Lungs there, pal.

Admit one thing though--wouldn't you have loved to have a Superman game on an Atari or Commodore that featured you firing missiles at Superman?

Seriously, just watch Superman I and Superman II, two movies that bookend each other nicely and don't leave you hanging for another sequel. Forget that III and IV were ever made and you'll enjoy the "complete" story quite well; the one that Mario Puzo envisioned as complete at any rate.

page 15 of 26