Superman : Good for the time, but it has not aged well

Good for the time, but it has not aged well

When I saw this as a kid, it was incredible. I loved it. It is still entertaining, and Christopher Reeve gave an awesome performance (as well as the others) and the magnificent score by John Williams is so powerful. However, the movie itself has not aged well.
First, the special effects. While some were done well, others have aged terribly.
Second, the script. It had too many glaring plot holes: turning the world back, and Superman "fixing" the San Andreas Fault Line.
Third, Lex Luthor. No offense to Gene Hackman, but he played it too comical and not sinister. That is what Luthor is, was and will always be: a cold, calculating bastard, not someone who monologues while throwing in jokes every now and then. This is what truly takes away the conflict between the two. It is also the greatest weakness of this film. It's enjoyable, still, but in retrospect, it fails to capture the timelessness a spectacular movie.
Of course that's my opinion, I could be wrong.

Re: Good for the time, but it has not aged well

I saw it when it came out. I loved it. It's the standard I hold other comic book movies to. If I don't feel like a child at some point, I probably won't like the movie. Just a positive movie. I get why it might be corny to many. That's what Superman was back then.

Re: Good for the time, but it has not aged well

I just watched this last night on Netflix for the first time in years and thought it was ten times better than any recent super hero movie. True the special effects are not up to par with modern movies, but that just means the movie relies more on the actors' performances. The musical score is wonderful. Brando and Ford are two of the best actors ever and their small parts in this leave a lasting impact throughout the movie. I could watch this version over and over again and never tire of it. I grew bored with The Man of Steel before the second half.

"The end of the shoelace is called the...IT DOESN'T MATTER!"

Re: Good for the time, but it has not aged well

Watched on Netflix this passed Saturday, its still a great film.

Re: Good for the time, but it has not aged well

Am watching this for the first time in about 20 years, as it's on Netflix. You're right about some things: Lex Luthor is way too comical and not nearly menacing enough.

However, the music score is great and some of the scenes are really well shot, even with primitive special effects. For example, the helicopter scene is terrifying and seeing Superman fly up for the first time to save the day is spectacular. I liked when Superman as Clark Kent saved Lois Lane by catching the bullet fired by the mugger. You really aren't sure what happened until you see Clark hold the bullet in his hand. Nowadays, that scene would be shot in "bullet time" and you would see the bullet fly towards Lois from multiple angles before Superman caught it.

All of Brando's scenes are fun to watch as well.

Re: Good for the time, but it has not aged well

Those things are not plot holes, a plot hole is when something doesn't make sense in relation to the plot of the film. Also he doesn't turn the world back, he goes back in time by flying so fast, the world just looks like it goes backwards because he is going faster than it is turning. Fixing the fault line seems fine to me too.

I agree about Lex Luthor though. It is like they used him for some comic relief in the film but they already had Otis for that, I think Lex should have been more serious.

Re: Good for the time, but it has not aged well


Also he doesn't turn the world back, he goes back in time by flying so fast, the world just looks like it goes backwards because he is going faster than it is turning.


Exactly!

WHY is it so hard for people to understand this?



I guess they missed the part where the dam UNBREAKS apart?

In the original script, Lois was not supposed to die. Superman does not go back in time. This idea of time travel was supposed to be the ending for Superman II.

Hasn't these people seen Richard Donner's cut of Superman II? Remember Perry White's Toothpaste going back into the tube? Superman did not make his toothpaste do that.

What we see are these things being undone or going in reverse because TIME is going BACKWARDS... Because Superman is flying backwards in time... and what we are seeing is what HE SEES.

Remember the speed trail behind Superman that formed light rings around the Earth? According to "science", as you approach the speed of light, TIME SLOWS DOWN. While traveling at the speed of light, TIME STOPS. The next step would be going backwards in time.

Sadly, it was just very poorly executed on film...

Re: Good for the time, but it has not aged well

I loved the film as a kid and I love it just as much as an adult.

The effects? The only one that bothers me is the one of a teenage Clark running by the train. But that bothered me as a kid, too. It never looked right. And there are a few shots of miniatures near the end that are really bad.

The plot holes never bothered me. Turning back time never once bothered me. And what was wrong with Superman fixing the fault? That still looks spectacular to me.

I love Hackman's Luthor. Maybe my favorite supervillain performance ever.

Superman the Movie is the best superhero film.

Re: Good for the time, but it has not aged well

It's a timeless epic like Jaws, Star Wars and ET.

It's the opposite of a cynical movie. You watch it and you feel good, unlike films now ie no political agendas, no shoehorned tokens. The good old days.

Re: Good for the time, but it has not aged well

Maybe you'd like the way Lex Luthor was played by Michael Rosenbaum in Smallville.

My password is password
Top