Wow... this movie must be bad if you actually felt compelled to read "Maximum Carnage" at one point.
Great review of what may very well be the all-time worst comic book movie. If you're looking for another bad comic book movie to review from the same time period may I recommend the "The Return of Swamp?"
"Great review of what may very well be the all-time worst comic book movie."
All-time worst superhero movie? I think there are a lot worse superhero films than Superman 4. Catwoman, Supergirl, Electra, the 1994 Fantastic Four movie, the old 1990's and 1970's Captain America films, etc.
As awful as that movie was, I don't think the plan of Superman confiscating all the nuclear weapons on Earth was a bad one, as long as he stuck around afterwards to manage the fallout ( i.e. the situations with Israel and Russia that you mentioned ). The problem was that the movie was too stupid to offer a coherent analysis of the actual implications of a godlike being from space deciding to act towards giving us world peace, and thus it was just another dumb-assed subplot.
Cable in Nicieza's late, lamented Cable and Deadpool series offers us a similar scenario from an intelligent perspective.
I'll watch the Review later this evening, but I'm interested in one thing. So far, I only know the first one of the old Superman movies. What's your personal take on "Superman Returns" which I thought was pretty bad.
Unfortunately the Agonybooth had already done a pretty stellar job ripping this movie to shreds, so most of your complaints were nothing new to me. But I loved the banter back and forth between you and the Critic. It's a little unfortunate that you gave away in one of your earlier comments that you were doing this, though. :(
Hrm, maybe you said it in the review but I forgot, but you compared the Superman series to the Batman movie series. Which did you think was worse: Batman & Robin or Superman IV?
(actually, how do you think each of the four movies stack up against their corresponding movie of the other superhero?)
Incidentally, one of the questions I was gonna ask in that interview was if you'd ever review a bad comic book movie. Guess that answers that question, lol.
You think you'll do any more bad comic movie in the futures (please dot the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen movie, please do the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen movie...)
Pretty good review. Personally, I agree with Nitz the Bloody that the issue itself isn't a bad one to deal with, but it was extremely badly done in the movie. It must have been designed for an audience that would think "nukes are bad" without going into the geopolitical nuts and bolts.
On that subject, I do want to respond and say that while nukes may have prevented wars between superpowers, it's far from a good tradeoff. In essence, we've swapped the greater likelihood of millions dying in conventional warfare for the far smaller but still tangible possibility of COMPLETE AND TOTAL ANNILIATION! Forgive my emphasis, but the human race that comes up with these crappy comics and crappier movies is the same human race holding onto these nukes. And few people set out to make crappy comics, just like few people set out to start a nuclear war.
"What's your personal take on "Superman Returns" which I thought was pretty bad."
SUPERMAN RETURNS is, at absolute worst, a disappointment. Virtually every story and design element in it is pulled from various eras and incarnations of the mythology. Where the movie fails is in gelling those elements into a cohesive, tightly plotted story and in some of its casting (Bosworth and Spacey in particular). That's it. Full stop. It's not the worst Superman movie by a long shot. It's not even the worst comic book movie (Christopher Nolan's Frank Miller/Tim Burton/Joel Schumacher hybrid Batman movies have that dishonor sewn up). It's so-so, no more, no less. Anyone who insists it's an "abomination" or that Bryan Singer knew nothing of the source material is either lying, self-deluded, or just plain ignorant of Superman's greater history. And I've seen examples of all three.
Truthfully, if SUPERMAN RETURNS is the next Superman movie to come under the NC knife, then ALL of the movies should be given the same treatment. Because really, they're all kind of mediocre, especially compared to the Fleischer and Timm cartoons.
I love the review, but my only complaint lies with what Hasoon said: that was definitely not a Victorian costume, its style was more akin to the late eighteenth century. (The Victorians had more taste than that. :P)
I remember another article on that movie mentioning that we got the "wall-building vision" (like the Silver Age comics and the old Adventures of Superman show didn't pull one-shot powers of nowhere) because they didn't have the budget to make Superman rebuild the wall at superspeed. Not that it doesn't still look lame.
The sad thing is that I think Nuclear Man could have been a decent opponent were he done right. That didn't happen here.
Ah, you know what this movie reminds me of a Pre-Crisis Superman comic. A time where Superman can move planets, travel warp 9 speed, and can physically grab a black hole or worm hole and close it up all nice and pretty like.
Physics don't apply ever with Superman lol.
To be honest I want a Superman movie where he fights something that he cannot beat, or...someone...something that gives him a hard time. I am tired of these Superman vs Lex Luthor movies. How about Superman and Doomsday, or Superman against Darksyde. How about Bizarro, or Brainiac, hell even Metallo. I don't know I just want to see an actual live action fist fight like how WB did for the Animated Series down to the Justice League.
To see the man of steel struggle against an enemy making it where it seems he might loose just brings a bigger perspective then some human that Superman can easily Xray to see if there's any Kryptonite near the guy.
I was surprised you didn't riff on some of the more hilarious moments. Right before Superman says "Don't so it! The PEOPLE!" Nuclear Man says "Tell me where she is, Superman! Or I WILL HURT PEOPLE!!" Seriously? Is this villain so retarded that he can't come up with a threat better-sounding than "I will hurt people?" And then a car somehow buckles inward without even hitting him, when the clear intent of the special effect was to have it buckle as it hit him.
You and the Critic did a great job, especially with the reference to the Batman and Robin review and the game show bit, and should do a review of Superman Returns together!
Linkara's point about comparing the Batman and Superman movies is a lot closer than I think even he is aware of. Both had an earlier, corny, budget starved theatrical film in the days of comics not being taken seriously ("Superman and the Mole Men" from 1951 and "Batman" from 1966). Then they each had four in-continuity films over a similar time span (Superman from '78 to '87 and Batman from '89 to '97), the latter two of each being seen as significantly inferior.
Then, in the days of the comic movie boom, each series got a revival film ("Batman Begins" in 2005 and "Superman Returns" in 2006), although only one of these was a continuity reboot. The only points of disconnect are 1993's "Batman: Mask of the Phantasm" (Superman's DCAU persona was limited to the small screen) and 2008's "The Dark Knight" (which has no equivalent since the sequel to Returns got scrapped).
Um, Linkara? Are you sure you're not related to Wolverine, at all? Or Deadpool? Or even Squirrel Girl? Or do you secretly have the mutant ability to integrate yourself into the reviews of other people?
Hate to disagree with you but you're WRONG! Not about it being a crappy movie, but about it being the worst of the four SUPERMAN films. I still think that honor belongs to Superman 3! The fourth one was bad but in a popcorn chomping, goofy sort of way. The third one is AWFUL, six ways to Sunday! The plot sucked, Lana Lang was wasted and Supes was too (har, har) and Richard Pryor wasn't even funny! If ever a super-hero movie needed shredding, it was Superman 3--but only if you couldn't find a DVD of ELEKTRA!
Classic. You two do work well together. I'm surprised you didn't pull a "I'm Batman, and I can breathe in space!" reference near the end.
ReplyDeleteI need to watch the other Superman movies again.
You know this makes it official you are made of win!
ReplyDelete-kayla
Wow... this movie must be bad if you actually felt compelled to read "Maximum Carnage" at one point.
ReplyDeleteGreat review of what may very well be the all-time worst comic book movie. If you're looking for another bad comic book movie to review from the same time period may I recommend the "The Return of Swamp?"
As I have stated multiple times: I LIKE MAXIMUM CARNAGE.
ReplyDelete"Great review of what may very well be the all-time worst comic book movie."
ReplyDeleteAll-time worst superhero movie? I think there are a lot worse superhero films than Superman 4. Catwoman, Supergirl, Electra, the 1994 Fantastic Four movie, the old 1990's and 1970's Captain America films, etc.
You definitely need to do more reviews together :-) Maybe next time he can help you review a comic book...
ReplyDeletemaybe lex was dancing with Jeannete from Secret Six...okay, maybe not.
ReplyDeleteStill, a very good review on both you and the critic
Plaese do an iRiff! Either of this or some other bad comic movie (Spawn, maybe).
ReplyDeleteAs awful as that movie was, I don't think the plan of Superman confiscating all the nuclear weapons on Earth was a bad one, as long as he stuck around afterwards to manage the fallout ( i.e. the situations with Israel and Russia that you mentioned ). The problem was that the movie was too stupid to offer a coherent analysis of the actual implications of a godlike being from space deciding to act towards giving us world peace, and thus it was just another dumb-assed subplot.
ReplyDeleteCable in Nicieza's late, lamented Cable and Deadpool series offers us a similar scenario from an intelligent perspective.
I'll watch the Review later this evening, but I'm interested in one thing. So far, I only know the first one of the old Superman movies. What's your personal take on "Superman Returns" which I thought was pretty bad.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately the Agonybooth had already done a pretty stellar job ripping this movie to shreds, so most of your complaints were nothing new to me. But I loved the banter back and forth between you and the Critic. It's a little unfortunate that you gave away in one of your earlier comments that you were doing this, though. :(
ReplyDeleteHrm, maybe you said it in the review but I forgot, but you compared the Superman series to the Batman movie series. Which did you think was worse: Batman & Robin or Superman IV?
ReplyDelete(actually, how do you think each of the four movies stack up against their corresponding movie of the other superhero?)
Incidentally, one of the questions I was gonna ask in that interview was if you'd ever review a bad comic book movie. Guess that answers that question, lol.
ReplyDeleteYou think you'll do any more bad comic movie in the futures (please dot the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen movie, please do the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen movie...)
..That is not Victorian costume!
ReplyDeletePretty good review. Personally, I agree with Nitz the Bloody that the issue itself isn't a bad one to deal with, but it was extremely badly done in the movie. It must have been designed for an audience that would think "nukes are bad" without going into the geopolitical nuts and bolts.
ReplyDeleteOn that subject, I do want to respond and say that while nukes may have prevented wars between superpowers, it's far from a good tradeoff. In essence, we've swapped the greater likelihood of millions dying in conventional warfare for the far smaller but still tangible possibility of COMPLETE AND TOTAL ANNILIATION! Forgive my emphasis, but the human race that comes up with these crappy comics and crappier movies is the same human race holding onto these nukes. And few people set out to make crappy comics, just like few people set out to start a nuclear war.
Yet... we keep seeing crappy comics.
"What's your personal take on "Superman Returns" which I thought was pretty bad."
ReplyDeleteSUPERMAN RETURNS is, at absolute worst, a disappointment. Virtually every story and design element in it is pulled from various eras and incarnations of the mythology. Where the movie fails is in gelling those elements into a cohesive, tightly plotted story and in some of its casting (Bosworth and Spacey in particular). That's it. Full stop. It's not the worst Superman movie by a long shot. It's not even the worst comic book movie (Christopher Nolan's Frank Miller/Tim Burton/Joel Schumacher hybrid Batman movies have that dishonor sewn up). It's so-so, no more, no less. Anyone who insists it's an "abomination" or that Bryan Singer knew nothing of the source material is either lying, self-deluded, or just plain ignorant of Superman's greater history. And I've seen examples of all three.
Truthfully, if SUPERMAN RETURNS is the next Superman movie to come under the NC knife, then ALL of the movies should be given the same treatment. Because really, they're all kind of mediocre, especially compared to the Fleischer and Timm cartoons.
where did I AM A MAN even come from?
ReplyDeleteI love the review, but my only complaint lies with what Hasoon said: that was definitely not a Victorian costume, its style was more akin to the late eighteenth century. (The Victorians had more taste than that. :P)
ReplyDeleteI remember another article on that movie mentioning that we got the "wall-building vision" (like the Silver Age comics and the old Adventures of Superman show didn't pull one-shot powers of nowhere) because they didn't have the budget to make Superman rebuild the wall at superspeed. Not that it doesn't still look lame.
ReplyDeleteThe sad thing is that I think Nuclear Man could have been a decent opponent were he done right. That didn't happen here.
Hey, great use of the 'intermission' music from the Joy of Sex bit from Kentucky Fried Movie!
ReplyDeleteFantastic review, gents.
Ah, you know what this movie reminds me of a Pre-Crisis Superman comic. A time where Superman can move planets, travel warp 9 speed, and can physically grab a black hole or worm hole and close it up all nice and pretty like.
ReplyDeletePhysics don't apply ever with Superman lol.
To be honest I want a Superman movie where he fights something that he cannot beat, or...someone...something that gives him a hard time. I am tired of these Superman vs Lex Luthor movies. How about Superman and Doomsday, or Superman against Darksyde. How about Bizarro, or Brainiac, hell even Metallo. I don't know I just want to see an actual live action fist fight like how WB did for the Animated Series down to the Justice League.
To see the man of steel struggle against an enemy making it where it seems he might loose just brings a bigger perspective then some human that Superman can easily Xray to see if there's any Kryptonite near the guy.
I was surprised you didn't riff on some of the more hilarious moments. Right before Superman says "Don't so it! The PEOPLE!" Nuclear Man says "Tell me where she is, Superman! Or I WILL HURT PEOPLE!!" Seriously? Is this villain so retarded that he can't come up with a threat better-sounding than "I will hurt people?"
ReplyDeleteAnd then a car somehow buckles inward without even hitting him, when the clear intent of the special effect was to have it buckle as it hit him.
Ever read Christopher Reeve's autobiography? He spends exactly one sentence on this movie, and I quote:
ReplyDelete"The less said about Superman IV, the better."
Linkara, two words...
ReplyDeleteYOU ROCK!
You and the Critic did a great job, especially with the reference to the Batman and Robin review and the game show bit, and should do a review of Superman Returns together!
Clever use of "Bat Credit Card". I never expected to see a callback to that, and the Critic's reaction didn't disappoint. :)
ReplyDeleteGreat job, both of you.
Great review. Linkara, you should do more comic book movie reviews, especially now that they're at the height of popularity.
ReplyDeleteOh, and can someone please tell me what music is used at that part in the review when Clark starts goofing around?
Linkara's point about comparing the Batman and Superman movies is a lot closer than I think even he is aware of. Both had an earlier, corny, budget starved theatrical film in the days of comics not being taken seriously ("Superman and the Mole Men" from 1951 and "Batman" from 1966). Then they each had four in-continuity films over a similar time span (Superman from '78 to '87 and Batman from '89 to '97), the latter two of each being seen as significantly inferior.
ReplyDeleteThen, in the days of the comic movie boom, each series got a revival film ("Batman Begins" in 2005 and "Superman Returns" in 2006), although only one of these was a continuity reboot. The only points of disconnect are 1993's "Batman: Mask of the Phantasm" (Superman's DCAU persona was limited to the small screen) and 2008's "The Dark Knight" (which has no equivalent since the sequel to Returns got scrapped).
Glasses ARE super hot on men. Mmm, yummy.
ReplyDeleteUm, Linkara? Are you sure you're not related to Wolverine, at all? Or Deadpool? Or even Squirrel Girl? Or do you secretly have the mutant ability to integrate yourself into the reviews of other people?
ReplyDeleteDoug sucks. Don't waste your time with him. You can carry this perfectly well on your own. Don't lower yourself to working with a hack like that.
ReplyDeleteHate to disagree with you but you're WRONG! Not about it being a crappy movie, but about it being the worst of the four SUPERMAN films. I still think that honor belongs to Superman 3! The fourth one was bad but in a popcorn chomping, goofy sort of way. The third one is AWFUL, six ways to Sunday! The plot sucked, Lana Lang was wasted and Supes was too (har, har) and Richard Pryor wasn't even funny! If ever a super-hero movie needed shredding, it was Superman 3--but only if you couldn't find a DVD of ELEKTRA!
ReplyDelete-Leader Desslok-
And I thought Batman and Robin was bad. I showed a friend this and didn't think it was actual footage from the movie.
ReplyDelete