I think it's safe to assume no one was expecting a property like Superman to become a big budget comedy film after the first two movies proved so successful. I honestly am not sure what Warner Bros. or the producers of "Superman III" were thinking when they decided to cast Richard Pryor as the film's main lead opposite Christopher Reeve. Now, I enjoy Richard Pryor and know he was one of the most gifted comedic minds ever while he was alive, but he wasn't a good fit for a Superman movie, at least not in the role he was given.
It is probably not going to shock you to read that "Superman III" was a disappointment to many fans, including myself. The film essentially had an A and B story, as if the movie started off as two different projects that were merged into one. Story A revolved around a bumbling Richard Proyer getting in over his head trying to make a fortune. Story B revolved around Clark Kent visiting his old stomping grounds in Smallville and going to a high school reunion. While the film is set in Smallville, it’s enjoyable and well paced. The Proyer parts are all over the place however. Supposedly Richard Proyer had mentioned wanting to be in a Superman film during a late night show interview and the studio caught wind of that and decided to pursue Proyer to star in this film.
There are good things about the movie. The Clark Kent vs Evil Superman fight is one of the strongest action pieces in the franchise. It really makes you wish they went full Bizarro in this movie. To this day, I still love this scene. The Smallvile scenes are also sweet and sentimental. There are things that work beautifully in this movie, it’s just a shame that the things that don’t work are so epically bad.
The film’s attempts at comedy fall flat even with a comedy genius like Proyer spearheading them. It just doesn’t work in a superhero movie. I feel this fault largely lands with Richard Lester. Lester added many comedic elements to “Superman II” and for the most part they worked, but that was also a movie already fleshed out by a previous director. Richard Lester had limits and a pretty solid blueprint. Richard Lester, given free range, went nuts.
Richard Lester was given plenty of chances to tap into the source material for this film and instead delivered a largely original story. The film was set up perfectly for a classic villain like Brainiac to appear (the final villain is even in the vain of Brainiac). As stated above, Bizarro was even given a perfect possible introduction but the filmmakers decided to ignore the source material completely.
Christopher Reeve is still incredible as Clark Kent/Superman but I don’t think he could be bad in that role. Annette O’Toole is also a more than welcomed edition as Lana Lang, Clark’s high school crush and new romantic interest. Margot Kidder makes an extended cameo but you can tell she checked out of the franchise after the second part. Richard Proyer was basically just Richard Proyer, nothing more to say about him. Proyer was a capable actor and could have fit the role of a villain such as the Toyman and perhaps brought something fresh to the character and role. It’s just a shame the producers chose to use his talents as a cash grab instead of using him as a creative force.
“Superman III” was a movie made on bizzare decisions. The film isn’t a complete waste but it also doesn’t completely work. With a little more self restraint, the film could have been something truly special and a worthy follow up to the first two movies. Instead we got a movie which could be easily skipped.
Grade: C-
No comments:
Post a Comment