Superman: The Movie 4K UHD (1978)

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Bolty

So we've arrived at a place where Superman 4 is better than Man of Steel.

False

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by Bolty

So we've arrived at a place where Superman 4 is better than Man of Steel.

Never underestimate the dim bulbs on this site...

[welcometothepartypal]

Originally Posted by JediJones77

Why don't YOU be careful about insinuating I said something which I CLEARLY did not say AT ALL?

Maybe you didn't mean it but I got the same impression as starmike.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Bolty

So we've arrived at a place where Superman 4 is better than Man of Steel.

Man of Steel is a masterpiece compared to Superman IV.

Seriously, the Salkinds truly have/had no shame as Superman IV has to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen on multiple levels. The fact they even considered making something like that...let alone do it...was truly pathetic.

[RalphoR]

Originally Posted by bolty

so we've arrived at a place where superman 4 is better than man of steel.

art-file-color-blk_25f92b64-744a-4127-9dc0-9a6936affcec_650x650.jpg

[ProfXtacy]

Well it has a better Superman.

But then it also has rebuild the wall of China vision.

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Man of Steel is a masterpiece compared to Superman IV.

Seriously, the Salkinds truly have/had no shame as Superman IV has to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen on multiple levels. The fact they even considered making something like that...let alone do it...was truly pathetic.

The Salkinds didn't make Superman IV, Cannon did.

Which explains everything...

[ShellBeacher]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Man of Steel is a masterpiece compared to Superman IV.

Seriously, the Salkinds truly have/had no shame as Superman IV has to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen on multiple levels. The fact they even considered making something like that...let alone do it...was truly pathetic.

Guess what -- The Salkinds had nothing to do with Superman IV. If we're going to argue, let's at least get the facts straight! You might want to blame CANNON FILMS. Because Reeve's heart truly was in the right place...at least he tried. And whatever was "considered" really has nothing to do with what finally ended up on screens.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by ShellBeacher

Guess what -- The Salkinds had nothing to do with Superman IV. If we're going to argue, let's at least get the facts straight! You might want to blame CANNON FILMS. Because Reeve's heart truly was in the right place...at least he tried. And whatever was "considered" really has nothing to do with what finally ended up on screens.

Wow, so I actually have to give the Salkinds some credit.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by ShellBeacher

Guess what -- The Salkinds had nothing to do with Superman IV. If we're going to argue, let's at least get the facts straight! You might want to blame CANNON FILMS. Because Reeve's heart truly was in the right place...at least he tried. And whatever was "considered" really has nothing to do with what finally ended up on screens.

Milton Keynes?

[Jay Mammoth]

That character has been around for over 80 years with many different takes on the character from different writers. I love the Reeves Ol Boy Scout version and Cavills more conflicted version.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Jay Mammoth

That character has been around for over 80 years with many different takes on the character from different writers. I love the Reeves Ol Boy Scout version and Cavills more conflicted version.

Correct. Look how Frank Miller portrayed him as puppet for American conservatism in the 80s.

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by Jay Mammoth

That character has been around for over 80 years with many different takes on the character from different writers. I love the Reeves Ol Boy Scout version and Cavills more conflicted version.

No, you're not allowed to like more than one sole version of a character. No more.

[Laservampire]

Watched about 40 minutes of the 4K last night, this was one of the films I remember watching on a dubbed pan & scan VHS as a kid and thinking "wow, I wish I could make out what was actually happening here" (similarly with Close Encounters and Blade Runner)

Nice to finaly have a clear picture, somewhat. But my god those are some UGLY optical effects in this film.

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by Laservampire

Watched about 40 minutes of the 4K last night, this was one of the films I remember watching on a dubbed pan & scan VHS as a kid and thinking "wow, I wish I could make out what was actually happening here" (similarly with Close Encounters and Blade Runner)

Nice to finaly have a clear picture, somewhat. But my god those are some UGLY optical effects in this film.

They should have replaced it all with CG.

[captainsolo]

Originally Posted by Bolty

So we've arrived at a place where Superman 4 is better than Man of Steel.

I avoided IV for years hearing all the bad mouthing and constant jokes. Finally seeing it and the level of effort people put in to try and struggle against Cannon made it much more palatable for me. Sure, it's woefully put together because of the cheapskates who bought the franchise rights and the plot idea is a bit misguided: but it had good intentions and the character felt right both of which were nowhere to be seen in Man of Steel I'd argue.

So yes...in that sense I would actually say it is better than MoS. That's just my own opinion. I like Cavill in the role but he never got a really good film story to work with.

[JediJones77]

The co-writer of the original Superman, Tom Mankiewicz, warned Christopher Reeve not to use the nuclear weapons disarmament plot. That idea was all Reeve's, and he pushed for it But, arguably, it would've sunk the film even if the effects had been up to par. I know, as kids, we just thought that story idea was corny, preachy, didn't sound like any fun at all, and never had any desire to see the film. Keep in mind, this was an era where if a film got up to a part 3 or especially 4, the audiences were naturally highly skeptical of whether the movie was any good, so being a high numbered sequel was a serious disadvantage in marketing. Movies numbered that high didn't get the benefit of the doubt.

As an adult now, the story idea sounds somewhat more interesting, because I know a lot more about politics and the Cold War. The problem from that perspective is the serious lack of development the story idea gets in the movie. Superman decides to violate the elders and get rid of the nukes. Then he spends the rest of the movie fighting Nuclear Man, before giving a speech saying he's decided not to get rid of the nukes after all. The story never explores the real world implications of what he's doing, that would've led him to possibly change his mind. I even saw an interview with Reeve where he's asked about nuclear disarmament and explained that it's problematic because of how it could encourage conventional warfare. But the movie introduces a realistic premise and then fails to explore the real-life implications of it.

[rubystone356]

in other news. .anyone checking out the new Superman 78 comis from DC?
It seems more like a proper Superman 3. Issues 2 comes out this week. There is also one for Batman 89.

https://www.dccomics.com/blog/2021/0...in-superman-78

Jacob

[JediJones77]

They had previously done this for the Batman and Wonder Woman TV shows.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_%2766

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonder_Woman_%2777

[Laservampire]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

They should have replaced it all with CG.

Sarcasm aside, if the elements still existed, I don't think it would be all that sacrilegious to digitally re-do the matte effects a la Blade Runner Final Cut (luckily the CG in that one wasn't too egregious)