Watching Superman: The Movie 1978 for the first time

[CyberCubed]

After watching Man of Steel I decided to go back and finally watch through the 1978 Superman movie. I had seen bits and pieces of it when I was a kid when it was rerun on TV but I never actually truly sat down to watch it from beginning to end. So I don't have any nostalgia for it but I wanted to see if I could enjoy it despite its age.

Thankfully the movie is actually quite enjoyable. I can now understand why people still have much love for this movie and most of it holds up quite well. Christopher Reeve is an excellent Clark/Superman and Lois and Luthor's roles are done very well. The chemistry between the main cast is the best part of the movie, including young Clark with his parents.

Lex Luthor and his underlings remind me of the Adam West Batman show, but in a good way. Otis is the bumbling villain sidekick and Luthor is a bit too campy and humorous but it works very well in the context of this movie.

Overall I liked the movie and think it holds up well. I'll have to watch Superman II next.

My only gripes:

- Some scenes went on way too long. The Superman/Lois flying sequence was too dragged out for my tastes, same with Jor El explaining Clark's past during that full sequence with the stars and a voice over.

- Luthor with hair. Yeah I know why he had it, but its really weird seeing Luthor with hair for the entire movie when I've always known him as being bald.

I'm going to watch Superman II in a few days hopefully its as good.

[ZariusTwo]

I'm going to watch Superman II in a few days hopefully its as good.

Which cut will you watch? There are two versions of SII, one by Richard Donner and one by Richard Lester

I'd recommend Donner's version for consistency's sake.

[Shreddhead]

The Richard Donner Cut is definitely the superior film, none of that cellophane superman logo crap.... Though I think the scene with the gun is a little over the top.

[gobo]

Do you believe a man can fly now?

[chrisdude]

When I and II were being shot together, the focus was shifted to finishing I, and Donner left the project before finishing II. So the Richard Donner Cut of Superman II is Superman II, the way Donner intended it, before he completed Superman: The Movie.

The Richard Donner cut of Superman II is the better movie, but it doesn't fit the canon of I, III, IV, or even Returns. I would definitely watch the theatrical version first.

EDIT____________
That being said, I still consider Superman II my favorite superhero movie of all. The Donner cut is better, but I can't really call it a "movie," being an alternative cut.

I'm glad you enjoyed Superman: The Movie. I'm about to show the movie to the biggest Superman fan I know. He's always avoided it, and resented the series for being goofy, but he's about to find out that it excels at everything Man of Steel doesn't. :lol:

[CyberCubed]

Honestly the thing I found most amusing in the movie was in the Daily Planet how everyone was on typewriters instead of computers. For some reason I didn't expect that and when I saw the desks full of typewriters I laughed and remembered what year this movie was made.

When did companies start to use computers over typewriters? I thought the home computer was around by the late 70's and early 80's?

[ZariusTwo]

You'll find Superman III is the movie that deals a lot with computers, in their very basic forms despite being depicted as state-of-the-art

The Richard Donner cut of Superman II is the better movie, but it doesn't fit the canon of I, III, IV, or even Returns.

How does it not fit the canon of I? It compliments it pretty well up to the repeat of I's ending.

And noone in their right mind wants to count the canon of III, IV and even Returns

There are a lot of fanedits of II which you can find at www.fanedit.org. My pick's always been "The Booshman Cut"

[chrisdude]

How does it not fit the canon of I? It compliments it pretty well up to the repeat of I's ending.You said it, right there. The ending Donner planned for Superman II was instead used for Superman I, because they were in a hurry, and hadn't come up with an ending for I. Then Donner left the project before writing an ending for Superman II that would fit with the final version of Superman I.
And noone in their right mind wants to count the canon of III, IV and even Returns

There are a lot of fanedits of II which you can find at www.fanedit.org. My pick's always been "The Booshman Cut"I do. Good or bad, canon is canon, and fan edits are not. It's not our call what to "count." Of course Returns isn't a perfect fit, but it is an official release.

[ZariusTwo]

II's repeated ending isnt even a flaw, just a bit of creative lazyness. However, it actually makes sense for Supes to do that again since it's a handy power. Logically, Donner's cut makes more sense because it's the culmination of the arc between Clark and Jor-El, which is not consistently upheld by Lester's cut. You're obviously not thinking about this from a storyline standpoint.

The general consensus from fans is that you can easily end II with Lois knowing who he is and being left on the balcony, which actually would have synched up a lot with the ideas in the comics at the time and would have made an old movie look very concurrent.

I do. Good or bad, canon is canon, and fan edits are not. It's not our call what to "count." Of course Returns isn't a perfect fit, but it is an official release.

Except Returns ignores III and IV. Your logic is flawed and you come off as hypocritical.

And yes, it IS our call what to "count". We're the paying public and movies are served to us for consumption, this is also why comics go through reboots and retcons all the damn time because a large crop of writers today started out as fans and part of the consumer public. If we think our turkey is too dry, we'll want to tinker with it so it tastes a bit better. I recommend you watch that episode of MST3K where something the crew found unlikeable occured and they spend a whole skit coming up with better outcomes for the movie they watched. Just because something is "official" doesnt mean you have to accept what is given to you if you feel it lets you and the franchise down. People who sheepishly follow what "canon" dictates ultimately do nothing but stifile creativity.

[chrisdude]

II's repeated ending isnt a flaw. It actually makes sense for Supes to do that again since it's a handy power. Logically, Donner's cut makes more sense b ecause iot's the culmination of the arc between Clark and Jor-El, which is not consistently upheld by Lester's cut. You're obviously not thinking about this from a storyline standpoint.You can have your opinion of what works better. I'm saying that Donner wrote the ending for II before he wrote the ending of I. He then shifted the ending to I, so they could get the movie out on time. Then he left the project before writing a new ending for II. Donner's cut for Superman II is his vision for Superman II, from before he borrowed that ending for I. You may think it works better, but it is an actual unfinished product.

Except Returns ignores III and IV. Your logic is flawed and you come off as hypocritical.Returns purposely continues after II. But is still doesn't fit with the Donner cut. I don't see how that makes me a hypocrite.

And yes, it IS our call what to "count". We're the paying public and movies are served to us for consumption, and if we think our turkey is too dry, we'll want to tinker with it so it tastes a bit better. I recommend you watch that episode of MST3K where something the crew found unlikeable occured and they spend a whole skit coming up with better outcomes for the movie they watched. Just because something is "official" doesnt mean you have to accept what is given to you if you feel it lets you and the franchise down. People who sheepishly follow what "canon" dictates ultimately do nothing but stifile creativity.You can't compare an art form to the "customer is always right" world of food service. If you don't want to stifle creativity, don't try to change someone else's work. If you wanna be creative, make your own movie.

These franchises exist as intellectual properties that can change hands, their entries are created by different writers, directors, actors, etc, who may not do things the way you want. But that's the nature of the entity, as it exists. You need legal rights to add or take from it. Like any work of art, you're free to interpret what's there however you want, but it's not yours to change.

Making a fan edit and pretending the parts of the movie you didn't like didn't happen is like pretending that an embarrassing thing you did yesterday didn't happen. You may convince yourself of a false reality, but it's all in your own head. The real event happened, and everyone else knows it.
Whether you like it or not, there is a real movie that exists, and is meaningful to people other than yourself, because it was made within the parameters which the medium sets.

[Krutch]

If you're going back to watch some Superman stuff, I'd recommend watching the pilot for Lois and Clark. It's possibly my favourite Superman "movie"(it's runtime is about an hour and a half).

Just ignore the mullet and the 90sness lol

[ZariusTwo]

Not to mention Lois and Clark is the only Superman show that ever gets to display the badass black Super-suit from the 90s comics in later seasons, and was doing the "New Krypton" stuff way ahead of the books at the time too

Lord Nor>General Zod:P

[shuriken]

Lois and Clark was Awesome. Haven't seen Man of Steel, but have always enjoyed the first two movies. Hell 3 and 4 are terrible but enjoyable.

[Cure]

You can't compare an art form to the "customer is always right" world of food service. If you don't want to stifle creativity, don't try to change someone else's work. If you wanna be creative, make your own movie.

These franchises exist as intellectual properties that can change hands, their entries are created by different writers, directors, actors, etc, who may not do things the way you want. But that's the nature of the entity, as it exists. You need legal rights to add or take from it. Like any work of art, you're free to interpret what's there however you want, but it's not yours to change.

Making a fan edit and pretending the parts of the movie you didn't like didn't happen is like pretending that an embarrassing thing you did yesterday didn't happen. You may convince yourself of a false reality, but it's all in your own head. The real event happened, and everyone else knows it.
Whether you like it or not, there is a real movie that exists, and is meaningful to people other than yourself, because it was made within the parameters which the medium sets.

You're alright with me, homie.

[ZariusTwo]

You may think it works better, but it is an actual unfinished product.

Seems pretty complete to me, and you've yet to say why you think the repeated ending taints it somewhat when I gave a perfectly valid reason as to why it didnt. Seems to me you can't come up with one.

The story makes ten times more sense in Donner's cut than it ever did in Lester's cut, regardless of the "incompleteness", which really does come down to a measly 5% difference and only annoys people who saw the first film and/or hate repetition. I don't mind it, the movie is complete, not JUST to me, but several others, but hey, you want to follow a cut of the film that has no coherance or respect for the story that came before, go right ahead.

Making a fan edit and pretending the parts of the movie you didn't like didn't happen is like pretending that an embarrassing thing you did yesterday didn't happen. You may convince yourself of a false reality, but it's all in your own head. The real event happened, and everyone else knows it.
Whether you like it or not, there is a real movie that exists, and is meaningful to people other than yourself, because it was made within the parameters which the medium sets.

What a load of pretentious bollocks

I know what really happened. That's not the point. The point is if I can change it, I'll do my darndest to see if it works with the changes. That's the whole appeal of the process, taking something and molding it into something different. It's not to replace the movie, that's impossible, but it is to provide an alternative viewing experiance.

This is a movement that you're not going to silence with a few snap judgements. It may be an underground thing, but it's been blossoming as of late, fans, aka talented members of the public that pay to watch these movies, are starting to take these products under their own consideration. It does not make them harbingers of "false realitys", it makes them creative and independent thinkers who don't accept the reality the official product has given them. There are different lenses from which to see the world, without variety, the world is a pretty boring place.

You're content to be boring and follow the pack. I do not subscribe to that notion.

[Leo656]

I'll concur that the "Lois & Clark" pilot is awesome. It's crazy close to the comics of the time, a modest budget notwithstanding. I always loved Cain's portrayal; as both Clark and Superman he was a lot more pro-active and aggressive, much more like George Reeves than Chris Reeve. The writing took a serious dive halfway through the show's run but the early stuff was great. And Teri Hatcher may still be the best Lois ever.

[chrisdude]

Seems pretty complete to me, and you've yet to say why you think the repeated ending taints it somewhat when I gave a perfectly valid reason as to why it didnt. Seems to me you can't come up with one.

The story makes ten times more sense in Donner's cut than it ever did in Lester's cut, regardless of the "incompleteness", which really does come down to a measly 5% difference and only annoys people who saw the first film and/or hate repetition. I don't mind it, the movie is complete, not JUST to me, but several others, but hey, you want to follow a cut of the film that has no coherance or respect for the story that came before, go right ahead.My point is that that version of Superman II wasn't meant to go along with the final version of Superman: The Movie. The ending was awaiting a rewrite, and Donner didn't get to do it. I've owned the Donner cut since the day it came out, and I enjoy it. I can just accept that it's not real/doesn't matter. It's a fun little 'what if.'

What a load of pretentious bollocks

I know what really happened. That's not the point. The point is if I can change it, I'll do my darndest to see if it works with the changes. That's the whole appeal of the process, taking something and molding it into something different. It's not to replace the movie, that's impossible, but it is to provide an alternative viewing experiance.What in the wide hell could be more pretentious than editing someone else's movie? :teek:

This is a movement that you're not going to silence with a few snap judgements. It may be an underground thing, but it's been blossoming as of late, fans, aka talented members of the public that pay to watch these movies, are starting to take these products under their own consideration. It does not make them harbingers of "false realitys", it makes them creative and independent thinkers who don't accept the reality the official product has given them. There are different lenses from which to see the world, without variety, the world is a pretty boring place.

You're content to be boring and follow the pack. I do not subscribe to that notion.Rebels playing with action figures, dude...

Deep.

[CyberCubed]

Watched the Richard Donner Superman II cut, I liked it more than the first movie. It was also really funny which I didn't expect. Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor is hilarious. Also loved all the Lois/Superman/Clark scenes.

One thing I don't understand is why did Superman have to spin back the planet again? Zod and his minions were dead, no good guys dies, and the only difference was Lois knew who Superman was, which I thought he was fine with. What was the point?

[chrisdude]

One thing I don't understand is why did Superman have to spin back the planet again? Zod and his minions were dead, no good guys dies, and the only difference was Lois knew who Superman was, which I thought he was fine with. What was the point?That's what I've been fussing about, man. That's a pre-Superman I version of Superman II, written before they decided to turn back the world in Superman I, so it doesn't exactly make sense. The ending was rewritten for the final cut.

[ZariusTwo]

On the Donner cut documentary, they admitted they were originally going to go with the memory-erasing kiss from Lester's cut but the writer of the movie said, (and even I agree that this reasoning is stupid) "Only Superman should kiss Lois, not Clark Kent", so they went with turning back time again.

Oh and chrisdude...sorry for being a d*ck in this thread

[CyberCubed]

So I'm on a Superman kick lately what else should I check out? Any stand out episodes of Smallville should I watch?

[ZariusTwo]

So I'm on a Superman kick lately what else should I check out? Any stand out episodes of Smallville should I watch?

The season two ep with Dr. Swann (Christopher Reeve in one of his last active roles) is great and begins to sow the seeds for a rather creative direction for the show, all of season two is a must-see really, as Clark tries to defy Jor-El at every turn and there are grim consequences that have long-reaching and tragic reprecussions in later seasons.

[Leo656]

Ugh... I know it's not the first time I've said it, and I'm sure there were some cool things I missed along the way, or have just forgotten about... but I really, REALLY hated that show. I really tried to like it, and once in a while a comic reference or flashy display of the SFX budget almost tricked me into liking it, but nah, it's just not for me.

I "get" that it's an entirely different take on the mythology, and I might be OK with that if it wasn't sold to the general public as somehow being "definitive", or if the public in general knew better... or if the plots made more sense... or if the characters didn't turn heel or face or back more often than Lex Luger and Randy Orton combined (Random Trivia: Lex Luger guest-starred on the old "Adventures of Superboy" show)... or if they didn't introduce random characters from the comics just to almost immediately kill them (By the time he's F'n Superman, he has nobody left to fight, for cryin' out loud!)...

I might have forgiven all that if they bothered to get the main character right, but they didn't, they got it entirely wrong, and they never fixed it, and that's what pissed me off. CLARK CANNOT BE A WHINY JERK! I don't care if you're supposed to be an angsty teenage character, I don't even care if your show IS on the WB/CW, if you can shoot lasers from your eyes, see through chicks' clothes, pick up tanks, bounce bullets off your chest, and (eventually) fly, you Win. You officially win at LIFE, at that point, and have no reason to pout! And ALL he does on Smallville is bitch about how he has these powers and how its his destiny to be this great hero. Yeah, dude, we'd ALL rather be smokin' herb, getting drunk, and having random sex with women we don't love when we're that age, but when the alternative is you get to be SUPERMAN, I think it's a fair trade.

Smallville sucks because Superman LOVES being Superman. Maybe not every day, but it's never been treated as some huge burden to him like it was on this show. In the comics, John Byrne's Superman always had a huge smile when he crashed through a brick wall, because of course he did. Smallville's Clark would probably stand there making the "Blue Steel" pouty face at the wall for a half hour until Jor-El convinced him he HAD to do crash through the wall, it was part of his destiny, and if he didn't do it then three semi-recurring characters would die.

I mean, I guess the show is technically watchable, but to me it only works if you keep telling yourself "This show is absolutely NOT about Superman". The fact so many people that don't know any better and they DO think it's about Superman, despite the fact that the main character is pretty much the opposite, bothers me more than any of the other many problems it has. Part of me still wants to punch out Tom Welling and he never even did anything wrong to me.

[ZariusTwo]

Heh, very true Leo, Smallville gradually begins to have worse booking than TNA in many areas, and having Clark face every textbook Superman villlain over the course of the series and dealing with them in anti-climatic showdowns way before he dons the cape left the door wide open for him living more of a regular life as Superman than he ever did spent in his adolescence and early twenties. It got so bad that, bt the time they were doing flash-forwards to Clark's turn as Superman, he was constantly saving the city from elevator bombs and whatnot, rather than have bigger, badder battles.

[Leo656]

I more or less quit after "Doomsday". That mess was horrible.

Putting away my DVD collection on my new shelving units I came across my entire Superman DVD collection, which has more or less everything. Some stuff I can recommend:

"Look! Up In The Sky! The Amazing Story of Superman" - a pretty good and very comprehensive (if overly sentimental and nostalgic) docu-film covering almost every area of Superman's history in pop culture since before his very earliest appearances in comics, through every live action film and television show, most of the cartoons, and some of the more important comics stories. At times, it comes off almost as a commercial for the Reeve films and "Superman Returns", but consider the timing of its release: SR was a couple weeks away from release in theaters when this was made and the complete film DVD box set was already planned for release a couple months later, so one really can't fault them for using this documentary to "soft-sell" their other products to people. Propaganda aside, it's still ridiculously thorough and comprehensive, although it doesn't go as deeply into the comics as one may want or expect, but several major storylines are covered. Narrated by Kevin Spacey, if that sways you. May hold more appeal for new or casual Superman fans, as hardcores will already know much of the material by heart. Either way, anyone who watches this can definitively say they know everything important about Superman. A+

"Max Fleischer's Superman: 1941-1942" (the one in the yellow case, these have been through infinite inferior-quality releases before this one) - Anyone who has not seen these animated shorts, or has discounted them as "relics" cannot truly understand just how much of what we know about Superman, from the music to the way he looks when he flies, came from these short animated films, which were shown between features at movie theaters back in 1941. The rotoscoping technology used at the time (the same technique made famous by Filmation cartoons in the 1970s-1980s) gave Superman, Lois and the villains a feeling of realistic movement and energy that was simply never seen before in animation (and in some ways, haven't been seen since). I challenge anyone: Compare any of the Fleischer Superman shorts, seen on this set in their re-mastered, "as close to perfect as possible" state, to the Disney classic "Snow White", released only a few years prior, and honestly tell me that Superman is the lesser-quality work. Animation was a couple years more advanced, and while the Fleischer shorts had a fairly high budget for the time, they were still not made on a feature-film budget. The only down notes: Some shorts are heavy on action but almost no dialog (but MAN, is that action great), and given the WWII era, some serious racial anger towards Japanese people shows up occasionally. It's not an overwhelming thing, though. A+

"Superman and the Mole Men" - 1951 live-action film that introduced George Reeves as the character. Interesting period thriller with a deliberate Cold War subtext, with its plot's threat of nuclear destruction mixed with a somewhat heavy-handed "We'd better all learn to live in peace so we don't all blow ourselves up" moral message. Still, it was a good message for the time, very daring and topical, even if it seems quaint and over-done (and maybe a little cheap) through a modern filter, it was a huge deal for Superman as a character at the time, when most of what was in the books had already become watered-down kids's stuff. The plot sets Lois and Clark on the road following a big story, so the Daily Planet and other supporting cast are never seen, but the film told a good action story for its time. Very dated by modern standards, but like most Superman stuff from different eras, the nostalgia factor is half the fun. A, or likely a B if you didn't first see it as a kid.

"Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman" - "Pilot" - A terrific introduction to a fairly underrated Superman show, focusing more on Clark as a person and his "normal" life - moving to Metropolis, getting a job at the Daily Planet, falling in love at first sight with Lois, meeting Lex Luthor, and -Spoiler Alert - thinking it may be a good idea to dress up in a flashy red & blue outfit when flying around the city and bench-pressing buses and whatnot. Bonus points for comic accuracy: The only time, aside from the comics, we actually see Clark and his parents design the costume from square one, complete with all the misfires. The suit used at the end of the mini-movie is obviously a patchwork job and was not the same one used throughout the series - in fact, the costume went through several visible changes in the first few episodes (sometimes from one shot to the next, leaving a few glaring continuity errors), a fact the characters made mention of on the show - but the suit for the pilot does the job and is really more accurate than some of the more recent film versions as far as color and texture (it also pioneered the "raised" look of the S-shield, something that has stuck in every live-action version since). I've always enjoyed Dean Cain's Clark,; compare or rather contrast his Clark Kent from the very first scene, his seemingly normal, well-adjusted-but oh-by-the-way-super-powered-and happy-with-it portrayal, to Tom Welling's "I don't want to have awesome powers and be a hero" version of Clark. I think Cain's Clark/Superman comes off as a much more down-to-Earth, likable, and realistic, committed to his mission without being obsessed or driven. If you can get past a Lex Luthor with hair, a Superman suit that looks like a homemade Halloween costume (although in-context that's entirely the point), and a modest SFX budget, there's a lot to really like here. Sadly, in some ways it was all downhill for the show from the very first episode, as eps were rarely this well-written again. A+.

"Lois & Clark" - "The Green, Green Glow of Home" - Season 1, Kryptonite makes its debut on Lois & Clark, lots of bad stuff happens, and by the end of the hour, this episode proves what any real fan already knew and didn't need to be shown (but it's F*cking great to see it anyway): Even without powers, Clark Kent can and will absolutely lay ridiculous amounts of physical harm on you when you threaten the people he loves. He's almost never technically "Superman" in this episode, it's almost entirely Clark Kent as a de-powered civilian, yet he's never "weak", always heroic, and by the end, he's a more well-rounded and fully-formed character than has possibly been seen in any other medium. The climactic scenes are absolutely brilliantly written and acted, my sentimental favorite of the series. Some great Lois stuff, too, as we slowly see her start to let her guard down and realize there may be more to Clark than she had given him credit for. This single episode of the often-dismissed L&C series gets Clark right in a way Smallville couldn't do in ten seasons with all their money. A+

There's tons more stuff I can recommend but that's plenty for now. :)

[CyberCubed]

Superman: TAS is the best Superman show.

I don't know what it was about Bruce Timm cartoons, but he did almost everything right. I also liked Brainiac being part of Planet Krypton, gave some new dimensions to the character.

[Leo656]

It definitely had the most action and overall best/closest adaptation of comic book stories. The only real "problem" Superman: TAS had was that it was almost entirely an action show with little to no room for character development. The relationship between Lois and Clark, for example, is more or less the same by the series' end as it was in the very beginning; their story never really moves forward. Not the biggest deal, as it was more an action show, but can be slightly frustrating for hardcore fans since we really don't see Lois (or much of "Clark") anymore once the series ended, so viewers who do care are left to use their imagination on what came next for them. I mean, assuming we didn't already know. :lol:

Only other real flaw I can think of is that the series's best episode actually happened on another show: "Justice League Unlimited" episode "For The Man Who Has Everything", a terrific adaptation of Alan Moore's story from Superman Annual 11. The original is well-worth a read, as it's way darker than the cartoon version, although the cartoon is very, very faithful to the source material, as was most of the rest of the Superman/Batman/JL stuff.

[ZariusTwo]

It definitely had the most action and overall best/closest adaptation of comic book stories. The only real "problem" Superman: TAS had was that it was almost entirely an action show with little to no room for character development. The relationship between Lois and Clark, for example, is more or less the same by the series' end

Absolutely, with only "The Late Mr. Kent" giving any real sort of inkling into Lois's private affections for Clark. Still, I was bummed when she chose to romanticly pursue Superman by the end of the show, I grew up on the era of comics (and indeed, on shows like Lois and Clark and Smallville) where the Clark side prevailed. At least the Timm-produced non-canon "Doomsday" movie got it a little more right with Lois preferring Clark.

[Leo656]

Yeah, I just kind of wish that movie was a little better. I like it, but it felt a bit off. I wasn't thrilled with the animation style, although they've done worse since then. At the time it was very jarring as it was the first DC animated project since JLU and the different art style threw me and lots of others off at first. I hate Superman's cheekbone lines, they make him look way too old (and pointy).

And yeah, I have always had a huge problem with both the "Lois prefers Superman" and "Superman, not Clark, is the real guy" lines of thinking. Writers who push for either simply don't understand the character, nor basic human psychology. For starters, Clark Kent was raised as Clark Kent for anywhere from 18 to 30 years before becoming Superman; as such, as an adult he would live, think, and act as "Clark", not as "Kal-El" or "Superman". Think about it; you know you're adopted, and one day you grow up and find out your birth parents didn't name you Joe Smith, they named you Bob Jones. You don't STOP being Joe Smith, the person you were your entire life up to that point, and start an entirely new life under your brand-new "Bob Jones" persona. Dean Cain's character nailed it perfectly when he said "Clark is who I am, 'Superman' is what I do." He wouldn't simply stop thinking of himself as "Clark" first and foremost just because he started wearing a cape whenever he went outside. Part of why Superman was dismissed as "silly" for decades up until the 1980s, was because John Byrne was somehow the first and only one to that point to figure out this simple, basic piece of logic: Clark is the real guy, he just puts on a different outfit.

By the same token, "Lois loves Superman but hates Clark" makes her look like a shallow c*nt, and it's why HER character was completely unlikable until the 1980s also. She had no real human decency, she was just a bubble-headed twit who would do anything to knock boots with this super-powered alien demi-god. The old-fashioned trope of constantly trying to expose Superman's secret identity was increasingly boring, silly, and contrived as well, making Lois look increasingly stupid and Superman increasingly dishonest and manipulative. In truth, her motivations from 1938 to 1987 make Lois Lane a terrible human being, and frankly, one someone like Clark should want NOTHING to do with. "Original" Lana was no better, and the convoluted romance between Lois, Lana, Clark and Superman did a lot to ruin everyone involved: Lois and Lana were both scheming, evil, unlikable whores, and Clark/Superman was even worse, a chauvanistic monster playing the two bimbos off of each other for his own sick, shallow thrills. Ugh. Remind me: Why do comic writers love the Silver Age so much again? Even as a kid, I could never figure out why nobody ever saw how BADLY Superman was done as a concept prior to 1986.

The modern comics (and "Lois & Clark") did it right, having Lois fall for Superman initially before eventually dismissing it as a childish fantasy and realizing "good ol' Clark" who's always there for her is the person she should be with. She, and everyone else, never suspected Clark was Superman because he convinced everyone Superman didn't have or need a secret identity, which frees both characters up to be more well-rounded; Lois isn't constantly chasing the secret and he isn't forced to go out of his way to protect it from her, allowing them both to explore more realistic and mature relationship and character arcs.

You lose all of that great stuff when you make "Superman" the main guy over Clark, or have Lois choose Superman over "Clark", but a million writers have handled this stuff and statistically most aren't going to "get it". I'm mostly ok with how they did things in MoS, but watching L&C earlier I can't help but feel let down that we won't get to see their relationship grow and change in the new films in a way similar to how it did on L&C where (first two seasons at least) it was perfect. In MoS, I wasn't 100% sold that Lois is into him simply for being noble and heroic, not just for being ripped and able to fly and punch out skyscrapers. I also will miss the flirting, tension and all the little "cat and mouse" games between the two that have always been so substantial to the story, but I get that in the new film they wanted to simplify and streamline things, and having her know who he is right from the start does that. Time will tell if their on-screen chemistry develops more.

At least in MoS he pretty much is established as "Clark" being who he is and "Superman" being how the world sees him, so they got that part right at least.

Edit: Watching the L&C pilot earlier, was cracked up by a very small "blink and you'll miss it" scene between Lois and Clark at the Planet, where the two of them are sent out on assignment and Lois is none too happy to be working with Clark. She unloads on him verbally, establishing herself as "the dominant one" and trying to make him feel like the lesser partner, as it's established she does to everyone around her. With a smirk, Clark lets her think she has her way, and then, standing behind her in the elevator, just before the doors close, we briefly see him look at her and *completely laughs his ass off* behind her back. We the audience know Clark's already into her, just as we know she's going to resist, but we also know where the story has to end up. It's such a small character moment, but it sets the dynamic between the two perfectly, with Clark along with the audience laughing at Lois's blatantly overdone "tough" exterior while anticipating how much fun "the chase' is going to be. I don't know if Dean Cain just lost his sh*t at the end of the take and they decided to leave it in, or what, but it was a terrific character moment.

[CyberCubed]

I watched the pilot movie of Lois and Clark and it was pretty good. Lois Lane is amazingly hot in this show, I could literally watch the whole show for her alone.

I remember people saying that she was the definitive Lois Lane for TV/Movies and I can see why.

[gobo]

She always seemed too much like a desperate housewife to me.

[Luke795]

She always seemed too much like a desperate housewife to me.

I always thought of her as a Bond Girl.

[Leo656]

She was pretty much the definitive Lois, to me. As a kid I never loved Margot Kidder's version (she's ok I guess but I never "bought" her as the one Superman would fall for). Phyllis Coates and Noell Niel were better, but the old "Adventures of Superman" show rarely used Lois for more than exposition and "damsel in distress" roles, almost never exploring any real relationship interests with her and Superman/Clark. The 1990s cartoon Lois was also great, but again, an element of the character is lost when the story doesn't fully explore the Superman/Lois/Clark relationship triangle. But given that "AoS" and "S:TAS" were both more aimed at children, it's fully understandable why those elements would be reduced.

The fact that L&C was free to explore that side of things created the opportunity for Hatcher to stake her claim as, to me, the "definitive" Lois Lane. Erica Durance was pretty good on Smallville, and she was definitely gorgeous, but the way she was written was a little annoying sometimes, what with all the pop-culture references and whatnot. It's a toss-up, but I prefer Hatcher's portrayal. Even at the lowest points of the show, the way she and Cain played off of each other made things watchable. And yeah, she was smokin'. A happy side effect of L&C's popularity was that all her early, made-for-video movies full of nude scenes suddenly exploded onto late-night cable. They're awful... but worth a look for a couple obvious reasons. :lol:

It's not surprising Lois was such a strong focus on that show, because the original, very early concept was for a show called "Lois Lane's Metropolis", where she was the main character, Superman was rarely-to-never seen but would be referenced, and Clark was a background character. It would be entirely about Lois as an investigative reporter, with more drama and such than action. Interesting idea, but I don't think it would have been very good or lasted very long. Not surprisingly, very early on someone suggested that there really isn't a point to doing a Superman show without Superman, and the concept evolved into L&C.

I'm glad you liked the pilot, 'Cubed. Here's a few other episodes of L&C that I recommend:
-"Neverending Battle": It's the "real" second episode, but for some reason is always shown as Episode 3, even though it's obvious in watching them which came first. Events make slightly more sense if you watch this one as Ep. 2. Luthor decides to test Superman's limits; the scene where Superman confronts Lex in his office to "demonstrate" just how powerful he is is a terrific scene, and the debut of the "finished" costume they would use for the rest of the series. Ironically, in most of the rest of the episode he's wearing one of the crummy prototype suits, and it can be pretty noticeable. It's minor, though. Another early gem of an episode. A+

-"Strange Visitor (From Another Planet)": Episode 2 which is *really* Episode 3. A shadowy government agency is investigating Superman's supposed alien origins, thinking him to be the "PR Guy" for an impending alien invasion force. The investigation leads Clark to new information about his origins. Events from this episode directly lead to "The Green, Green Glow of Home". Some great scenes involving Clark trying to outsmart a lie detector test, and a great rescue scene near the end. A.

-"Barbarians at the Planet" & "The House of Luthor": The two-part Season 1 finale. Lex asks Lois to marry him, but events transpire which lead to him being exposed to the world for who he really is. The shocking conclusion sadly was more or less the end of John Shea's Lex on the show; he would appear very rarely in future seasons, and his presence would go on to be felt until the very end of the show (including a major Season 4 plotline which would frustratingly see NO resolution due to the show's cancellation), but Lex as a main character was pretty much done with after this episode. The "death trap" scene with the Kryptonite cage was pretty contrived, but all the best death trap scenes have to be. A.

I've been watching a bunch of the first season of L&C the last few days, will probably end up re-watching the entire series. There's lots of great stuff but man, even at the beginning some of the "filler" episodes were brutal. I can see why some people really hate the show, if all they saw were certain episodes it's certainly understandable. It's so good for the most part, though; the acting of the main cast carries it no matter how corny it got sometimes.
There's moments where it's my favorite version of Superman outside the comics; some of the character stuff even outshines the films, and that says a lot. I just wish it had better flying effects; the "cape out" (jumping off-camera while waving the cape in front of the lens to simulate taking off in flight) absolutely screams "no effort". Ah well.

[Andrew NDB]

The only problem with watching Superman I (other than it having aged very poorly and Hackman's Luthor sucking the life out of the movie every time he appears) and then the "Richard Donner Cut" of Superman II is... two movies back to back Superman travels back in time to undo something.

Double the copout. Double the suck.

[Leo656]

It's not the only problem, but it is a big one. Not only can he not do that, he wouldn't do it.

[oldmanwinters]

Great "Best of Supes" list, Leo656.



"Max Fleischer's Superman: 1941-1942" (the one in the yellow case, these have been through infinite inferior-quality releases before this one) - Anyone who has not seen these animated shorts, or has discounted them as "relics" cannot truly understand just how much of what we know about Superman, from the music to the way he looks when he flies, came from these short animated films, which were shown between features at movie theaters back in 1941. :)

Fleischer Superman is just about my all-time favorite take on Superman. It's been a while since I watched the episodes, though, so can you confirm for me whether or not Superman actually "flies" in these episodes? Many times it appears that Superman is simply taking giant leaps rather than flying. I think it took a little while for Siegel and Shuster to establish the fact that Superman could fly in the comics rather than simply "leaping tall buildings in a single bound."

[Andrew NDB]

Great "Best of Supes" list, Leo656.



Fleischer Superman is just about my all-time favorite take on Superman. It's been a while since I watched the episodes, though, so can you confirm for me whether or not Superman actually "flies" in these episodes? Many times it appears that Superman is simply taking giant leaps rather than flying. I think it took a little while for Siegel and Shuster to establish the fact that Superman could fly in the comics rather than simply "leaping tall buildings in a single bound."

The revisionist thinking in that is that when Superman first became Superman, he was still growing stronger... so at first he could only leap, but over time he was able to fly.

[oldmanwinters]

The revisionist thinking in that is that when Superman first became Superman, he was still growing stronger... so at first he could only leap, but over time he was able to fly.


I've always liked the idea of a Superman who slowly learns his full potential. I recently bought the first two volumes of the Superman Dailies reprints and in those early strips, Superman's powers are almost more akin to Spider-man than the Man of Steel of today (super-human rather than god-like, powers derived purely from his advanced Kryptonian genetics rather than enhanced by the yellow sun, explicitly compared to the proportional strength of an ant, impervious to bullets but not necessarily bomb-shells).

It's neat to watch Superman (not just Clark Kent) test his limits only to find out how few limits he actually has.

[gobo]

A nagging curiosity that's been buzzing around in my head about the MoS movie: were the change-ups to the mythos officially ordained by the comics or should I just assume the screenwriters were DBZ fans?

[Leo656]

In a few of the earliest Fleischer cartoons, it is indeed shown that Superman only leaps, but he can fly in most of them. The shorts were produced and shown in a scattered order, so he doesn't "evolve" from leaping to flying exactly; he simply flies in most, leaps in others.

The story goes (according to the documentary that accompanies the cartoons on DVD) that the Fleischer cartoons were the reason Superman gained his ability to fly. In the earliest shorts, he could only leap, but the producers thought it looked silly, as if he were a giant flea, so they asked National Periodicals (before they were DC comics) if they could adapt Superman's abilities so that he could fly, as it would look more dramatic. National immediately agreed, and soon after he was changed across all media to be able to fly. Some dispute this story and say the radio show did it first, but it was around the same time and to me the Fleischers introducing it for the visual medium of animation makes more sense. The general explanation given in all media was that some of Superman's powers kept evolving the longer he was exposed to Earth's yellow sun, which is why some stories set in the far future often showcase a theoretical future-Superman with far greater and more advanced powers than normal.

Off the top of my head, I can't remember which episodes had him simply leap, but they were few and early on, in most of the rest he flies, and it looks pretty awesome.

As far as the changes made in Man of Steel, I'm pretty sure when a company does an adaptation the parent company (in this case DC) has some form of approval over the final product, so I think they would have had at least a little say over what went into the movie. I can only guess, though.

[CyberCubed]

Why are there so many live-action Superman TV series, yet there is only one for Batman (the Adam West Batman) show?

I mean Superman has the 50's series, the serials, radio show, Lois and Clark, Smallville, etc.

Yet Batman only ever had the 60's Adam West show, and the rest were cartoons. Why do they keep launching new Superman live-action shows? I wouldn't be surprised if another one is greenlit in another few years.

[Leo656]

I've wondered that myself. Although Batman also had two movie serials in the 1940s. Pretty weak, but not an entirely bad effort for the time. Batman and Robin weren't super-heroes, they worked for the government as special agents fighting "The Japs". Eh, WWII and all that. They don't hold up terribly well, and they're really cheap, but eh, anything Batman is worth a look.

I would argue that one reason Superman has more shows is that Batman's almost constantly in film development, and producers actually don't like to have films and TV shows of the same property come out at the same time. You'd think the opposite would be true, but the conventional thinking is that multiple versions of the same property confuses the audience, as there are often contradictions between them. So they try and put space between the movie and TV versions of their characters. Since Superman's movies have taken decades at a time to make, TV shows have provided a cheaper way to keep the character in the public eye just as effectively (and with more room for character development) than films.

So I guess the reason could be that most of the focus on Batman has been making movies and cartoons rather than live-action TV shows, although there have been ideas for a few different shows but none got made. I think they were considering a "young Bruce Wayne" show once "Smallville" got huge, but eventually decided against it. They did have the "Birds Of Prey" spin-off show, but Batman wasn't really in that. It was a decent show, though.

I really can't complain that they keep doing Superman shows, but I wouldn't mind a Batman one. I'd prefer a real, in-costume Superman show (watching Lois & Clark has my mind going crazy imagining what could be done with modern budgets) but a Batman show would be welcome.

[CyberCubed]

I would like a realistic Batman show on TV as long as it had no teen drama romance crap. I worry if they made one Batman would be like 18 and Catwoman and Talia would be flirting with him in every damn episode.

[Leo656]

That's probably what it would have been had the Smallville developers gotten a hold of it.

[gobo]

Gotten ahold of what? The Batlicense?

[Leo656]

That's what I was referring to, yes.

[CyberCubed]

I'm surprised they made a Green Arrow show instead of Batman. They also tried to get a new Wonder Woman show on but NBC turned it down.

[NinjaPug]

The CW is currently working on a Wonder Woman show titled Amazon. It didn't get picked up for next season but they're still working on it.