Plot Details: This opinion reveals minor details about the movie's plot.
One of the highlights in Superman III(and there aren’t many) is Christopher Reeve’s acting ability, especially the scene where he is fighting himself. “Evil” Superman, a result from the exposure of synthetic green kryptonite (which acts like “red” kryptonite), is in a fisticuff battle against Clark Kent. Wait-a-minute, aren’t they the same person? It is a battle between his twisted desires and his moral sensibilities. I’m still trying to figure out if the fight was really a physical one or a manifestation of his mind. Regardless, it was a great chance for Reeve to showcase something other than his Big, Blue Boy Scout persona and delve into nasty zone. But this was perhaps the biggest problem Superman ever had to face in the entire movie.
Well, that and the wasteful comedic talents of one Richard Pryor.
Superman III was a far cry in tone and spirit from the previous two Superman films. It went from being serious in nature to goofy and campy in one fell swoop. Director Richard Lester took the franchise and turned it 180-degrees towards a slapstick comedy. I sometimes didn’t realize I was watching a Superman film until Superman actually arrived to do something.
A lot of the problems on film were due to the huge political shenanigans happening behind-the-scenes—and it was a pretty ugly one at that—which, unfortunately, translated into a poor product in the end. The glory that was Superman was reduced to something unrecognizable.
Super Slapstick Comedy
Richard Pryor’s appearance in the movie happened because the actor once voiced on a talk show that he enjoyed watching Superman II. This caught the attention of producer Ilya Salkind who wanted to capitalize on Pryor’s popularity; hence, with Lester at the director’s chair and Pryor onboard for a new Superman movie, it was guaranteed to be a success. And I bet Lester thought that he could go back to his slapstick roots for movie making if he was working with Pryor on the project. The outcome: very bad move.
Pryor is a comedic genius but this wasn’t the vehicle for him. At least not as the character he played. Gus Gorman was nobody special who had an aptitude of doing miracles with computers. Anybody could have filled that role. Pryor wasn’t really needed for it. I could see if they hired him to be a Superman villain along the lines of The Prankster, The Toyman or even Mr. Mxyzptlk. Gus Gorman was nothing memorable to me. However, he still managed to cause enough trouble for Superman. And this was all because he caught the attention of his big, conglomerate boss, Ross Webster.
Webster (played by Robert Vaughn) was Lex Luthor-lite. Seriously, this was what he was. This is the Luthor who is the multi-billionaire, corporate tycoon who gets his thrill of power by always getting what he wants. In fact, Vaughn wasn’t really needed in this one. I wish they actually used Luthor in this movie and in that capacity, but alas, Gene Hackman refused to partake in this sequel and reprise his role as Luthor. This was due to the way the Salkinds treated previous director Richard Donner by getting rid of him.
And the plot was pretty simple: eliminate Superman. Webster needed him out of the way so he could use his super-computer, along with computer genius Gus Gorman, to get whatever he wanted in the world.
Surprisingly, there was an earlier draft of using Vaughn to take over as Lex Luthor (therefore eliminating Gene Hackman from the picture) and having Gus Gorman secretly being the evil Brainiac to explain his incredible genius so he could get the super computer to gain ultimate knowledge and power. Somehow, the whole “Evil” Superman scenario was fleshed out even more as part of Brainiac’s scheme. If this was the route that was originally drafted and actually executed, Superman III would have been a much better movie. Why? Because I realized what this film really lacked… known Superman villains. Who the heck were Ross Webster and Gus Gorman? Exactly. But everyone knows Luthor, Brainiac, and Bizarro. Heck, even Zod finally became a household name.
Despite the lackluster script and miscasting, there were still some good things. Pryor was actually funny at times when he needed to be, and that wasn’t a lot of times as well so I’ll take what I can get. He played the incredibly stupid fool quite well.
“Evil” Superman was actually quite fun, especially when he was drunk (can Superman even get drunk?). He was quite mischievous and insolent at times which must have been fun for Christopher Reeve to play.
A highlight of the movie was the introduction of Lana Lang. Annette O’Toole was brilliantly sweet and very likeable, completely opposite from Margot Kidder’s Lois Lane. I really liked Lana’s injection in the movie and was actually rooting for Clark to win her heart in the end. But of course, as we know, Superman is destined to be with Lois Lane. Still, in this movie, you couldn’t help but root for Clark and Lana.
The character of Lana Lang was introduced mostly because Kidder voiced her displeasure towards the Salkinds about the way they treated Richard Donner. As a result, she got about 5 minutes of screen time in the entire film as a punishment. I think she got off lucky since this film wasn’t up to par with the previous two.
And that’s where the problem lay throughout Superman III… there were no familiar characters at all. Lois Lane and Perry White were shown at the beginning and the end of the movie. Jimmy Olsen had a bit role with the Smallville scenes. Lex Luthor was a no-show. The Fortress of Solitude wasn’t even shown. The only familiar thing was Superman and I sometimes wondered if even he was needed.
The special effects were fun with the highlight on the Superman vs. Kent battle. But because the movie wasn’t grand in scale, nothing seemed as spectacular as the previous two films.
Superman III basically thrashed everything that was done before in Superman and Superman II and instead used it as a vehicle to showcase Richard Pryor’s comedy. Richard Lester’s direction to do a campy movie is the precursor of DC Comics’ unlucky streak with the number "3"; Joel Schumacher’s Batman Forever is a testament to that statement.
A bad decision on the tone of Superman III backfired immensely, and it just goes to show that the third time isn’t necessarily the charm.
Product DetailsOriginal Title:Superman 3 (1983)Actors: Annette O'Toole - Christopher Reeve - Jackie Cooper - Marc McClure - Richard PryorCondition: N...More at iNetVideo.com
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.