Rating:  -
This is probably great DVD if you're buying it for the nostalgia and want to watch the movie you loved back in the 70s when you were dumber. But to anyone who will be watching the movie for the first time today, it is absolutely horrible. Crazy ridiculous impossible plot with murderous explanation holes (kryptonite? why does that hurt superman again and not ordinary humans?). The real kicker was when he reversed time by spinning the earth backwards.. Oh god... If you finished high school, then this movie isn't for you.
Rating:  -
This movie is many times better than Superman Returns, and so is Superman II. Superman I is highly enjoyable, even after 28 years. It has everything. It has a very good story line, good acting, romance, humor and lots of action. But most of all, it has Christopher Reeve, the best Superman ever. Others may try to imitate him, but he can never be replaced.
Rating:  -
I saw this movie when first released almost 30 years ago. At the time I found it reasonably entertaining, but with many flaws. Years later, that's still my assessment.
Starting with the actors: I think Reeve was very well cast as Superman, but his Clark Kent performance went too far towards silliness (that might be the director's fault rather than Reeve's). Margot Kidder was pretty annoying; her cigarettish voice and stereotyped feminism were grating (I, and many male friends, found the idea that anyone would give up super powers for a roll in the hay with Margot Kidder -- as happened in Superman II -- to be beyond ludicrous). Gene Hackman went way over the top in his scenery-chewing portrayal of Lex Luthor. Ned Beatty was buffoonish (it got to the point that I was ready to leave the theater if I heard him say "MISTER LOO-TORE" one more time).
In fact, these hammy performances point to a bigger problem with the film: it alternated too frequently between somewhat serious drama and understated scenes (Clark's high school years, for example) and segments that were little more than cartoons with live actors. It was as if the screenwriters and director couldn't decide if the movie was a thoughtful story, a romance, an action movie, or a comedy -- so they just stirred up all those elements, but without any overall control of the final product.
Speaking of Clark's high school years, I found that segment of the movie to be by far the most enjoyable; but there is a major issue with the writing of that part. I assume the main part of the movie takes part in "present day", which in this case would be the late 1970s. We know that was 12 years after Clark left home to journey up to his arctic fortress. But that means he would have been in high school in the mid-1960s -- so why were the cars, clothing, and music of his high school years clearly those of the 1950s? Answer -- because the writers wanted to portray the cute "Rock Around the Clock", poodle-skirt era, and didn't bother with the fact that the math didn't add up.
And speaking of the fortress of solitude -- it was a significant departure from that of the comic book tradition. But so was much else in this movie. As traditionally portrayed, Krypton was a beautiful but Earth-like planet -- not a big chunk of monochromatic quartz. And going back to the actors for a moment; I think the film suffers considerably from the excesive screen time given to Marlon Brando as Jor-El (or should I say, the hologram image of Jor-El). That whole sequence was unnecessary.
In short, Reeve was good, other actors not so much; special effects good; quality of the story extremely uneven; faithfulness to the legend, not too good. But it is still worth watching for some very good scenes -- and it is FAR superior to any of its sequels.
Rating: -
I still remember as a kid when this came out the year after Star Wars redefined what going to the movies was. The expectations were so high, and yes this Superman delivered. We believed that a man could fly!
More than a quarter of a century has passed and the movie does not stand the test of time very well, specially the special effects, what then blew our minds looks pedestrian at best today. The plot does have a lot of holes and it is unbelievable, but if we watch thru the eyes of a child this movie is still what was born to be, the best Superman to date and great fun.
Rating: -
I was born in 1976, so I spent most of my developmental years in the wonderful 80's. Although I was still a bit young when "Superman-The Movie" hit the big screen, I caught up with him through VHS and television. Plenty have donned the red cape, from George Reeves to Dean Cain and everyone in between. Brandon Routh, who I have yet to see in the latest film, is the current hero of the day. Christopher Reeve was, is, and always will be Superman to me. I don't care how hokey the special effects look in this particular flick or how bad the third and fourth films were, Reeve is the Man of Steel in my opinion.
This film gives us the origination story of Kal-El, son of Jor-El, of the planet known as Krypton. If you've been around for a few years, you probably know the rest of the story, so I'll skip that and just stick with the performances of the actors and actresses. I've gloated on Reeve enough, but I have to admit that his bungling, country-tinged Clark Kent is perfect. He does a complete 180 degree turn when he rips open his business suit and that "S" bursts onto the scene. Lois Lane is done with sassy flair by the great Margot Kidder. She, much like Reeve, has become her character in my mind. Gene Hackman hams it up as Superman's arch enemy, Lex Luthor. His over-the-top performance is fun to watch on the screen. Ned Beatty portrays the bumbling sidekick, Otis, and Valerie Perrine is a scene stealer as the luscious Eve. Marlon Brando is sufficient as Kent's father, but his performance comes across as rather wooden. Terence Stamp (General Zod), Jack O'Halloran (Non), and Maria Schell (Vond-Ah) have sinister small roles in this feature, but set the stage well for "Superman II." The rest of the cast, primarily reduced to supporting roles, do a wonderful job with what they have to work with.
As stated before, the special effects are pretty hokey by today's standards, but they were top-notch in 1978. They help move the story along at a decent pace without hindering the performers on the screen.
This film set a high standard for future comic book-based films. While many have met, and in some cases surpassed, this standard, "Superman" will always be considered the first of the great modern comic flicks.
Highly recommended to any fan of comic flicks, or anyone who just wants to relive the excitement of seeing ol' Superman fly for the first time!
|
