"Supergirl" Movie Review

    Following up a successful franchise is never an easy task.  Sequels are hit or miss in terms of successfulness and spin-offs tend to fail more often than sequels.  Still, the notion of a “Supergirl” film had (and still has) promise.  Supergirl has always been one of the most interesting characters in the Superman mythology and has had numerous successful solo comic book runs.  Plus, The CW has a hit in their own “Supergirl” show currently so clearly a movie could easily be a run away classic.

    Unfortunately, “Supergirl” doesn’t fly to the heights of it’s potential.  The film follows the events of the Christopher Reeve Superman films and features Marc McClure reprising his role of Jimmy Olsen.  McClure is the only returning cast member which is a shame since a cameo from Christopher Reeve could have went a long way.  Reeve was actually going to film a cameo at one point but bowed out before production began.  A scene was written which would have featured Supergirl having to rescue an ill Superman from the clutches of the film’s villain.

    The film remains a landmark because it was the first mainstream superhero movie to feature a female lead.  Before “Wonder Woman”, “Captain Marvel”, or even “Catwoman”, “Supergirl” was the first out of the gates. It’s just a shame that it wasn’t a better film.

    The movie follows Kara as she journeys to Earth in order to recover the power source for the Kryptonian community of Argo City.  Upon arriving to Earth, she adopts the mantle of Supergirl and follows in her cousin’s footsteps in fighting crime while on the planet.  The power source is found by a witch named Selena who uses it to perform “real” magic.  In order to recover the power source and protect the Earth, Supergirl must stop Selena.

    Helen Slater is a delightful Supergirl.  It’s a shame that she wasn’t in more films after starring in this because she had a real presence.  The rest of the cast doesn’t deserve the same acclaim however.  Faye Dunaway plays Selena and she is easily the worst part of the film.  Dunaway is typically a very good actress but she just seemed out of her element in this project.

    The film is rather dull and feels like a less enjoyable version of the previous Superman films.  As a huge Superman fan, I had high hopes for this film upon rewatching it and I remember really enjoying this as a kid so I was disappointed to revisit it only to be mildly enjoyed.  That being said, there are worse ways to spend a few hours.

Grade: D

"Superman IV: The Quest For Peace" Movie Review

    The Christopher Reeve Superman remains the definitive take on the ‘Man of Steel’ in my opinion.  I think the first two Superman films are among the best movies ever made.  The Superman franchise sadly went down in quality greatly following those two masterpieces.  “Superman III” has some good moments but ended up foiled by it’s attempts at comedy.  “Superman IV: The Quest For Peace” ended up in even worse shape and proved to be an embarrassing swan song for Christopher Reeve in the role he made so iconic.

    “Superman IV: The Quest For Peace” was made by Canon Films with a shoe string budget.  Not exactly a promising start for a film in which it’s predecessors were famous for pushing the limits of special effects.  There were literally moments in the film where the wires could be seen and scenes that ended up being used multiple times to save on the budget.

    Christopher Reeve returns as the Man of Steel in his final appearance as Superman.  Not only does he star in the film, but he also helped develop the story about disarmament of nuclear weapons.  The film sees the welcomed return of Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor.  Hackman is such a joy to watch as he hams it up.  Hackman helps elevate this film ever so slightly, it’s just a shame he isn’t in more of the film.  Jon Cryer adds some comedy as Lenny Luther, Lex’s nitwit nephew.  Hilariously enough, Cryer has recently been cast as Lex Luthor in the CW series “Supergirl”.  Margot Kidder is once again hardly in the movie and her absence is felt.

    One of the worst parts of the movie to many fans is that Nuclear Man is the main villain.  This angered many fans since he wasn’t a character original to the source material.  I am not sure why they chose to create a new villain when Superman has a great rogue’s gallery that weren’t touched up until that point but the filmmakers did.  Still, I remember actually enjoying Nuclear Man as a kid (although the costume is ridiculous). Nuclear Man, interstingly enough, just made his comic debut in 2018.

    The movie isn’t as terrible as many make it out to be nor is it anywhere near as good as it should have been.  “Superman IV: The Quest For Peace” is ultimately a film bogged down by lofty ideas in a no budget and cartoonish production.

Grade: D

"Superman III" Movie Review

    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-