"We’re all part of the same team." Well, naturally. But not always: there was one episode of "The Powerpuff Girls" where a very vainglorious ex-cop tried to kill them for stealing the police's thunder. Neither side always remembers that, but it eternally remains true. (In my universe, many of the superheroes I write about have been given legal status as auxiliary cops, to make it clear).
Where the film differs from a lot of the Superman stories is that Jor-El still manages to play a major role in raising his son, instead of just being a distant memory. But, of course, if you're casting the one and only Marlon Brando in the part and paying him more than any other actor in the movie, he's got to earn his keep.
It's been a minute since I've seen this, but this makes me want to rewatch it; the original movie is such a classic. I admit I've always liked Superman II a bit more, if only because of General Zod, but this is a great reminder why the original is so good.
Superman II is also great, just marred a bit because they changed directors midstream. The first is probably the better movie overall, but both are great fun.
Great write-up! I enjoyed reliving the film through your recap and analysis. I also love how the film makes a backstory for why he still says things like "swell" even though they updated it to the then-modern day--he was just studying in the fortress of solitude all that time he was away and doesn't realize the slang has changed!
"The film portrays Superman as a young man craving human connection."
That part surprised me the most when I finally watched the movie. I assumed Superman was just this perfect, sanitized, unrealistic figure. But the film and Reeve make it abundantly clear that he is fallible and human (in the non-genetic sense)--which makes him more admirable, in a sense. Your post excellently drew out the sense that even with him being this larger than life figure, his desires and character are often very personal and "down-to-earth."
Thanks for writing! I remember seeing you make a note a bit back about Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story. I know that sometimes documentaries can straddle the fine line of being respectful and touching and being emotionally exploitative. What was your opinion on it?
Thank you! I thought the documentary was effective and respectful. It didn't strike me as exploitative or manipulative. The filmmakers seemed to realize that it was inherently emotional, so there was no reason to get manipulative. The parts that touched on the friendship between Christopher Reeve and Robin Williams hit me especially hard.
Great article. This movie has always been one of my favorites, for as long as I can remember. And Geoffrey Unsworth's cinematography is really stunning. The movie still looks like a million dollars. What's interesting about the spin-the-earth-backwards-to-rewind-time scene is that Donner originally planned it as the ending for Superman II, but had to use it for Superman when the Salkand's (Producers for the film) demanded that Donner stop shooting Superman II and finish the first film (he was shooting both simultaneously). It would be interesting to see how Donner chose to finish the first film had he been allowed to finish the second.
I remember hearing something like that when I got the Richard Donner cut of Superman II. I'm curious how it would have turned out if he had gotten to finish it properly. A full Donner series could have been great.
Thank you for fighting back against both the "Superman is invincible, so boring" misconception and the "origin stories don't need to be retold because 'everyone already knows it'" argument!
"We’re all part of the same team." Well, naturally. But not always: there was one episode of "The Powerpuff Girls" where a very vainglorious ex-cop tried to kill them for stealing the police's thunder. Neither side always remembers that, but it eternally remains true. (In my universe, many of the superheroes I write about have been given legal status as auxiliary cops, to make it clear).
Where the film differs from a lot of the Superman stories is that Jor-El still manages to play a major role in raising his son, instead of just being a distant memory. But, of course, if you're casting the one and only Marlon Brando in the part and paying him more than any other actor in the movie, he's got to earn his keep.
Good point about Jor-El. Kryptonian scenes can easily come across as extra baggage, but they made Jor-El count here.
It's been a minute since I've seen this, but this makes me want to rewatch it; the original movie is such a classic. I admit I've always liked Superman II a bit more, if only because of General Zod, but this is a great reminder why the original is so good.
Superman II is also great, just marred a bit because they changed directors midstream. The first is probably the better movie overall, but both are great fun.
Great write-up! I enjoyed reliving the film through your recap and analysis. I also love how the film makes a backstory for why he still says things like "swell" even though they updated it to the then-modern day--he was just studying in the fortress of solitude all that time he was away and doesn't realize the slang has changed!
"The film portrays Superman as a young man craving human connection."
That part surprised me the most when I finally watched the movie. I assumed Superman was just this perfect, sanitized, unrealistic figure. But the film and Reeve make it abundantly clear that he is fallible and human (in the non-genetic sense)--which makes him more admirable, in a sense. Your post excellently drew out the sense that even with him being this larger than life figure, his desires and character are often very personal and "down-to-earth."
Thanks for writing! I remember seeing you make a note a bit back about Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story. I know that sometimes documentaries can straddle the fine line of being respectful and touching and being emotionally exploitative. What was your opinion on it?
Thank you! I thought the documentary was effective and respectful. It didn't strike me as exploitative or manipulative. The filmmakers seemed to realize that it was inherently emotional, so there was no reason to get manipulative. The parts that touched on the friendship between Christopher Reeve and Robin Williams hit me especially hard.
Great article. This movie has always been one of my favorites, for as long as I can remember. And Geoffrey Unsworth's cinematography is really stunning. The movie still looks like a million dollars. What's interesting about the spin-the-earth-backwards-to-rewind-time scene is that Donner originally planned it as the ending for Superman II, but had to use it for Superman when the Salkand's (Producers for the film) demanded that Donner stop shooting Superman II and finish the first film (he was shooting both simultaneously). It would be interesting to see how Donner chose to finish the first film had he been allowed to finish the second.
I remember hearing something like that when I got the Richard Donner cut of Superman II. I'm curious how it would have turned out if he had gotten to finish it properly. A full Donner series could have been great.
For sure. A tragedy that he wasn’t allowed to finish Superman II. That’s a movie that really hasn’t held up well
Wonderfully written and really hits home.
Beautifully written!
Thank you for fighting back against both the "Superman is invincible, so boring" misconception and the "origin stories don't need to be retold because 'everyone already knows it'" argument!
😄
Thank you! Always happy to fight against that misconception!
This is great. Superman: The Movie is my favourite movie, and this is a great encapsulation of why. Thank you.