Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Taraparain Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

leplatypus For sure, the results is awful as the feat is impossible to get, even for a Superman! In the man of steel comics, you can find brilliant comics about a dark or stupid clone of Superman called Bizzaro! And you can also find other comics about Superman becoming internationally involved (like in the beautiful Peace on Earth in which he wants to eradicate starvation). Here, we have the two stories mixed together with Luthor being the conductor behind but the production just tears everything apart! Luthor is becoming a mere clown assisted by a rock and roll nephew??? There are a lot of scenes that doesn't make sense at all: sure it was the same for S3, but the entire movie was funny and the crazy things make laugh: here it's totally serious and those nonsense just don't fit: humans flying alone and even breathing in space, Supe rebuilding China wall with his eyes ! Clone is seeded by the sun and born as a talking adult with his costume neatly done (even with the chest N for Nuclear Man!) and I could go on: the scratches, the krypton crystal, … The effects are horrible: done 10 years after the first and the effects looks like a poor 50s B-movie: wires everywhere, moon space is a dark curtain (not even flat), same shots used in different parts…. And the final blow with a salvage editing: if I watched only the screen version, I rate it 1 because the elements of each plots don't make sense together. My dad DVD has deleted scenes and those lost 30 minutes helps the movie: the 1st dumb clone is not that bad and the race arms is much better told with the Kremlin and everything else! At the end, if this quest for peace was challenging, all the more than Supe had a view of the whole planet instead of saving Lois or a cat or a man drowning, this last Christopher movie is nonetheless a missed opportunity!

Ian (Flash Review)This has a 3.6 IMDb score. That is very low. This movie wasn't that bad. Much better that Superman III. Sure the effects are below standards even for '87 but it was amusing and had all the components for a complete comic book story. Lois and Lex Luthor are back for the full movie and there is a corny and stereotypical villain with superpowers. There are some cheesy battles in the city and Superman, as a public service announcement storyline, declares he will rid the world of nuclear weapons. It was fun and I got what I expected, perhaps a notch below but it certainly wasn't terrible. And I finally finished off the Reeves Superman era!

Eric Stevenson I just got done watching the best Superman movie and now I have to deal with the worst Superman movie. It's amazing how disillusioned I was while watching this. I'm just glad to be done with all the movies in this series. These were films that got worse with every installment until we finally tanked with the most painful of all. I was surprised at how this movie was only 90 minutes long. It felt more like hours because of how bad it was! Maybe it would have worked better if it actually was longer. Then again, I have seen deleted scenes that are incredibly stupid.Anyway, there are so many of these scenes that are entirely pointless. We get some parts in the beginning that show Clark Kent trying to sell his house. This adds up to nothing and is stupid. Then there's really big subplot where this new woman falls in love with Clark Kent. We later get scenes of him changing personas while getting an interview with Lois Lane. Again, all of this means nothing. It seems like every scene is just taken from the other movies. We see Lois find out his true identity and then he erases her memory. This is lifted directly from "Superman II" and has no meaning. We see Lex Luthor communicate directly to Superman in the same way as the first movie.The plot is that Superman is trying to get rid of the world's nuclear weapons, but Lex Luthor creates a villain named Nuclear Man. We literally see him being born as in we actually briefly see this guy as a fetus that turns into a grown man. What? There's another scene where Luthor is with this woman in a dress from the French Revolution. What does any of this mean?! The special effects are downright terrible. They literally had nine years to improve and the blue screen effects are among the worst I've ever seen.The pacing in the film is terrible. So many pointless scenes and then a bunch of dragged out action scenes. Nuclear Man kidnaps a woman and takes her into space even though she can't breathe in space. Were the people working on this even trying? This movie was so awful there wasn't another Superman film released in theaters until 19 years later with "Superman Returns". Watching the movie, you can see why the production on these films went through so much trouble. While I didn't like "Batman Vs. Superman", I'd still take it over this! *

Uriah43 Although he is imprisoned, Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) further demonstrates that there is no correction facility that can hold him as he breaks out once again and plots revenge on the man that put him there. To that end, he fiendishly combines Superman's DNA and nuclear fusion to create a superhuman being he calls "Nuclear Man" (Mark Pillow). Meanwhile, the newspaper known as the Daily Planet has been bought by a wealthy tabloid publisher named "David Warfield" (Sam Wanamaker) who promptly changes the journalistic format of the newspaper to one that specializes in cheap sensationalism. He also replaces the editor "Perry White" (Jackie Cooper) with his daughter "Lacy Warfield" (Mariel Hemingway) to solidify the new format. Interestingly enough, while "Lois Lane" (Margot Kidder) continues to harbor a deep infatuation for "Superman" (Christopher Reeve) Lacy develops a romantic interest in "Clark Kent" (also played by Christopher Reeve) instead. And this creates a unique problem in itself when Lois and Lacy agree have a double-date with both Superman and Clark Kent. Now, rather than reveal any more let me just state that I am perfectly aware that this particular film has been roundly condemned by a vast majority of critics and even had the dubious distinction of garnering two Golden Raspberry nominations: "Worst Supporting Actress" (Mariel Hemingway) and "Worst Visual Effects". Additionally, Esquire magazine ranked it at #40 of the worst 50 movies ever made. That's pretty bad. Even so, while I agree that the special effects could have used significant improvement, I disagree with the assessment concerning Mariel Hemingway's performance. For starters, I didn't think her performance was that bad and I certainly don't think it merited a Raspberry Award nomination. If anything, I thought her presence actually helped liven up the picture to a certain degree. Likewise, I also disagree with the overall evaluation of the film by Esquire magazine. Case in point, it was nominated for an International Fantasy Film Award in the category for "Best Film" and ranked #4 at the box office upon its release. So there you have it. In any case--and not that it means anything--I personally thought this movie was better than its predecessor. So, for all of the reasons just mentioned, I have rated this film accordingly. Slightly above average.