Welcome to the Superhero Movie Guidebook! For an introduction to this series, click here. Check here for past entries and future updates every Thursday.
And we’re back! I was Muppets-ing too hard last week to get an update out, but our march through every live-action superhero film continues with arguably the most important entry of all: 1978’s SUPERMAN.
SUPERMAN set the stage for so much of the formula that would follow it, not the least of which was that it was the first big-budget, high-grossing superhero film. It was at one point the most expensive movie ever made, but it was also a massive success, grossing over $300 million, a mammoth return for its time. Its success led to three sequels, and we’ll get to them in good time. It didn’t immediately set off a firestorm of other superhero movies, but it did start certain tropes that would become standard in the genre: for instance, the big reveal of the new hero, followed by a montage of lesser rapid-fire heroic deeds.
The movie starred Christopher Reeve as Clark Kent/Superman, though he only got third-billing in the credits after the more famous and higher-paid Marlon Brando (Jor-El) and Gene Hackman (Lex Luthor). That was still better than Margot Kidder, whose name shows up eighth for playing Lois Lane. But Reeve and Kidder still make the movie what it is: a flawed but incredibly fun entry into the realm of superhero blockbusters. Reeve’s charm is incredible, and his chemistry with Kidder is electric.
Not pictured: the laws of aerodynamics
The film starts, oddly, by setting up its sequel. As we’ll get into more when revisiting said sequel, SUPERMAN and the majority of SUPERMAN II were shot at the same time, so the former begins by introducing the villains that will plague Clark in the next movie: a trio of Kryptonian criminals led by General Zod. From there, Brando sleepwalks us through the destruction of Krypton; one of the greatest actors of all time, you can kind of feel his lack of interest in this movie. But we get there all the same, with baby Superman’s parents sending him away in the nick of time.
Parents, amirite?
By the time he crashes to Earth, Clark is a little kid. He’s conveniently found by the Kents, who immediately learn their new child is a little different …
Sure, but when Bryan Singer tried pretty much the same thing…
Clark wins the race, and the train industry never recovered
… and try to teach him restraint. That’s the lesson Jonathan Kent tries to impart to a now-teenage Clark. Clark agrees, then challenges his non-superhuman father to a race, promptly causing him to have a heart attack and die.
Way to murder your dad, Clark!
Blah blah blah, fortress of solitude, additional time jump, and finally, Clark is an adult and makes his way to Metropolis. The movie certainly wasn’t afraid to take its time in establishing these parts of the Superman mythos; check out the time stamp when we finally get our first good look at Reeve:
Reeve is still easily the best Superman we’ve ever had, and I don’t say that just to be one of those people always claiming new things aren’t as good. He gave us the bumbling, awkward Clark Kent that’s become mostly standard since, but also transformed into the charismatic hero who swoops in to save the day:
Kidder is also the best Lois Lane we’ve seen. Amy Adams is a better actress, but she’s going to need to be given better material to approach the combination of gorgeous, tough, and flustered that Kidder pulled off so well.
Pictured: an acceptable reason for defying the space-time continuum
Other cast members include Jackie Cooper as Daily Planet editor Perry White. I was in journalism myself for a very brief period of time, and was disappointed that not all editors are grouchy but funny cigar chain-smokers. Most are, though.
Not pictured: the Pulitzer that his cigar won
Marc McClure checks in as Jimmy Olsen, who doesn’t do much but looks outstanding:
Pictured: literally my ideal look
And of course there’s Hackman as the self-described greatest evil mastermind of all time, Lex Luthor. Years ago, I found Hackman’s Luthor too dumb to be an enjoyable villain. He doesn’t really do anything genuinely intelligent, but manages to gain control over two missiles thanks to the stupidity of the worst the armed forces have to offer. The first plan involves his female accomplice/girlfriend, Miss Teschmacher, pretending to be unconscious while goofball henchman Otis changes the codes on the missile. It’s supposed to be a funny scene, but in 2014, it’s hard not to think about the fact that an army sergeant is ordering his men to look away while he practically molests a seemingly helpless woman.
Even STRIPES had a higher opinion of the army
And of course, Luthor’s endgame, with control over multiple missiles, is to gain some really nice real estate:
Not pictured: competence. Or even good penmanship
But rewatching the movie for the first time in years, I actually liked this Lex for the context. This wasn’t a movie interested in making viewers confront true villainy; even the deaths of millions are described with a smile. Instead, it’s a fun romp, and what better way to keep it light than having the bad guy be undone because he left the hero to die slowly and unsupervised, only to be saved because the villain’s girlfriend had the hots for Superman.
Moreover, this breezy tone makes the impact all the stronger when something bad actually does happen: Superman fails. The missile aimed at the San Andreas fault hits home, setting off a chain reaction of catastrophe that he must struggle to stop:
If this followed previous Superman history, there should be Mole Men down here
And even though he averts the worst of disaster, he still can’t save Lois herself from dying in about the worst way possible, swallowed up by the earth itself. It’s a shocking, moving moment to see the hero not able to save the damsel in distress.
And then something rather infamous happens; namely, Superman going back in time to save Lois:
Not pictured: science
Visually, Superman appears to fly around the Earth so fast that it rotates the wrong direction, then he makes it rotate correctly again, and presto: back in time. (Just like in real life!) I’ve read an alternate explanation: that Superman simply went so fast that he tore a rift in time; the direction of Earth’s rotation was just to show what the time travel would look like while doing so, and the backwards rotation has nothing to do with the time travel (but was just a clumsy visual effect). That’s a little more satisfying, though you still have to ignore the fact that he couldn’t fly that fast to stop the damn missiles.
But I’d like to propose an alternate explanation: Superman doesn’t travel back in time at all, and the whole thing is in his mind. A cop-out, admittedly, but I like it anyway. Think about this character. His powers have never been able to get him what he really wanted. He was unpopular in high school in part because he couldn’t use them to stand up for himself. He kinda inadvertently killed his adopted father. He has his real father’s voice in his head telling him not to interfere with human history. His powers did help him woo Lois, but even then, she didn’t want Clark. And now, he had failed to save this woman he loves, specifically because he can’t fly fast enough.
Doesn’t it make some sense that he would concoct a fantasy where he can break all those rules and personal limitations, defy all logic and sense, and get a do-over to get everything right, be the successful hero and save the girl? That’s all b.s. on my part, of course, but director Richard Donner was just making up crap as he went along, too.
In the actual ending, everything is fine, and Superman even takes Lex directly to prison. Because he’s Superman, the Constitution does not apply.
Not pictured: due process
–
Next week: DR. STRANGE (1978)
Pretty spot-on review there, chief. Superman: The Movie is one of my favorite superhero films for a whole ton of reasons, but the biggest one is that it sells the characters. There’s that famous tagline, “You will believe a man can fly,” but I’d almost say that a better one is, “You will believe that someone like Superman could actually exist.” Reeve’s the one live action Superman film actor who I think nails Clark Kent and Superman perfectly. Routh did a good C.K. in Superman Returns, but his Superman wasn’t quite there, for my tastes, and Cavill’s Superman in Man of Steel was solid, but… well, the plot doesn’t really give us a chance to see what his Clark Kent would’ve been like.
Everyone’s acting in this film is good, really. Like you said, Reeve’s and Kidder’s chemistry is just pitch perfect, especially in the interview scene. I would have cut the “Can You Read My Mind?” poem– it’s arguably too much and makes the scene go on waaay too long– but it does gets its point across (Lois Lane’s completely taken by Supes). Kidder captures both Lois’ tough and tender sides very well, although I don’t get why they decided to give her spelling problems. Jimmy doesn’t get much to do, but he does it well, and I think the Kents deserve special praise, too: Glenn Ford’s “You are here for a reason” is one of the lines that always comes to mind when I think about the film.
Totally agree with you about Gene Hackman, too. I mean, the film doesn’t take Lex Luthor seriously at all, which is a bit of a bummer, but that’s not really Hackman’s fault and frankly, he pulls off goofy Luthor brilliantly. Warren Beatty and Valerie Perrine are also great as Otis and Eve Teschmacher; they’ve got this glorious chemistry with Luthor that’s a delight to watch (you get the feeling the actors got on pretty well, especially Gene and Valerie).
As for Marlon Brando… I read some Richard Donner interviews where he said he had a lot of fun with Marlon Brando on the set, so maybe the apparent boredom’s just the stoicism Brando was trying to bring to the role. I’ve read (and possibly heard, I forget) that Brando refused to memorize his lines and read them from cue cards held during filming and, infamously, off of baby Kal-El’s diaper. I think he’s got pretty good reading skills, though.
I think plot is where the film suffers a little bit, although there are some things it does well, like the way it portrays Clark’s first day at the Daily Planet. Some things are a bit puzzling, however… like, one thing I never really got was how Superman spent twelve years in the Fortress of Solitude. I mean, he’s like, 18 when he gets there and 30 when he comes out, so (a) the world’s probably changed quite a bit since he went in there in a way I don’t recall the film really acknowledging and (b) just what exactly is he going to write on his resume for The Daily Planet? “Conducted dozen-year interview with crystal hologram of alien from exploded world”? “Chilled with polar bears”? (get it, nyar nyar nyar nyar)
As for the “turning back time” being all in Superman’s head… interesting idea, but impossible [in the context of the movie]! It sets up Superman II! Unless that was a dream, which would explain some of the wackier parts of it (cellophane “S” and all). Got a few things to say about that film, too, so… off to that review!