Ranking The Spider-Man Shows

Today is National Spider-Man Day! Because of that, we now officially have 11 Spider-Man shows to date. Considering the excessive amount of films starting the beloved web swinger, it makes all the sense in the world to have a near equal amount of shows to go along with that. Even though history with each show can be seen as quite complicated, they are nevertheless all fascinating to talk about.

Because of all this and more, it’s time to rank each series involving Spider-Man at the forefront from worst to best! Time to stop wasting anymore time and web swing right in!

11.) Ultimate Spider-Man

The timing of Ultimate Spider-Man could not have been much worse. It was made right after the most beloved Spider-Man show to date in The Spectacular Spider-Man saw an abrupt end due to Disney buying Marvel and wanting to have a Spider-Man show of their own, aiming for a more lighthearted and kid-friendly tone attached to it. Despite the show lasting for four seasons and gaining over 100 episodes, this is seen as an absolute stinker to this very day. Ultimate Spider-Man abandons the traditional core themes that Spider-Man is always known for in favor of nonstop slapstick comedy, obnoxious four wall breaking, obvious merchandise placement, and having a Peter Parker that feels more in line with Deadpool than Spider-Man. Oh, and did I mention it has little to nothing to do with the Ultimate Spider-Man comics despite the title. The fact that Spectacular Spider-Man was cancelled in favor of this is the real salt on the wound. When taking all of those elements into affect, it easy to see just why this ranks as my least favorite Spider-Man show to date.

10.) Spider-Man & His Amazing Friends (2021)

Despite what the title may suggest, this has little in common with the Spider-Man series of the same name that released back in the 1980s. Instead of Ice-Man and Firestar, we see Peter Parker teaming up with Gwen Stacy (known as Ghost-Spider here) and Miles Morales (known as……Spin (?!) here) in their grade school kid incarnations. On one hand, this show does it’s job at offering Spidey tales for a clearly VERY young demographic. On the other hand, there is almost NOTHING to recommend her to any Spider-Man that is NOT part of the obvious pre-school targeted audience. It’s about as filler, substance free and “put something in the background to distract the kids” as they come. It may not be quite my least favorite Spidey show or the one I have the most gripes with but I can think of a Spidey show I would want to rewatch less than Spidey and His Amazing Friends (2021).

9.) Spider-Man (2017)

Disney’s 2nd attempt at making a Spider-Man cartoon is a mild improvement over Ultimate but still no where near good enough to do it’s title character justice. This does have the ingredients of a back-to-basics approach for Peter Parker, with a more emphasis on his personal life and connections to his friends/allies and having significant less pointless dumb down humor for the most brainless children. However, it tries to do justice to so many different storylines throughout Peter’s history that it’s unable to do almost any of them justice. It’s like the writers couldn’t make up their mind on what specific stories they wanted to tackle that they just threw whatever stories at the wall to see what sticks. Also, it’s quite bizarre to have Miles Morales in this version be of similar age to Peter Parker. And don’t get me started on it’s cheap as hell animation. It has solid voice acting and definitely has more ambition than the Spider-Man shows listed before but Marvel’s Spider-Man (2017) still showed Disney failing to crack the code on making a solid Spidey tale that works.

8.) Spider-Man (1967)/7.) Spider-Man (1981)

The two very first attempts at creating a stand-alone Spider-Man show more or less feel like perfect counterparts for one another. Both shows has the exact same titles, both shows are really hard to tell apart from the other, and both shows are remember more for their memes and iconic theme songs than they are of the actual quality and content in either show. These two shows do deserve a free pass for coming out during a time where Spider-Man was less known to the general public and it was harder than ever to make a successful cartoon due to it’s low budget. However, I can never feel the desire to ever go back and rewatch these shows in any way due to aging as well as a multiple decades supply of Spider-Milk. I still put these two shows this far on the list due to it’s undeniable impact on classic Spider-Man themes songs and meme culture.

6.) Spider-Man & His Amazing Friends (1981)

When it comes to classic Spider-Man cartoons of the late 1960s to early 1980s, this is the one that has aged the best and most consistent in quality. Here, we see Spider-Man informing his own superhero team for the first time ever, pairing him with heroes like Iceman and Firestar from the X-Men (for……some reason). It also has that traditional monster-of-the-week that became a stable for cartoons such as this, while fully utilizing Marvel villains normally not associated with Spider-Man but still finding ways to make it work. Stan Lee’s fingerprints is all over this show and it certainly did make for the better. It may not be a show that will appeal to the last few generations of Spider-Man fans, but Spider-Man & His Amazing Friends does at least offer a unique Saturday morning cartoon vibe that kids who grew up in that era can look very fondly upon, while being a nice blast for the past for those who miss their Saturday morning cartoons feeling very episodic with not much homework attached to it.

5.) Spider-Man: Unlimited

Spider-Man: Unlimited has to have the most bizarre concept of any Spider-Man show thus far. We see a Spider-Man that is fighting not for NYC but to free an alternate Earth from an evil ruler known as the High Evolutionary. This is clear an attempt to ape the success of Batman Beyond, with a much darker tone and a focus on a different iteration of Spider-Man. However, it never could keep the consistency that it’s 1994 predecessor have nor does it fully utilize Spider-Man 2099 very well. Thankfully, this version of Spider-Man did get his cameo in Across the Spider-Verse, opening up the doors for potential future stories with Miguel O’hara now that other Spider-folks that don’t have Peter Parker’s name attached to it can draw an audience. Unlimited may not be the winner it needed to be at the time it came out but it’s certainly one of the most unique Spider-Man shows released, which makes it worth giving at least one watch.

4.) Spider-Man: The New Animated Series

Believe it or not, MTV once took their shot at making a Spider-Man show back in 2003. Set in an alternate timeline after Sam Raimi’s first Spider-Man movie, Spider-Man: The New Animated Series offers a new, distinct, and downright mature take on the character, which led to many fans feel quite divided on the show. Similar to the newer released Spider-Man show, it has it’s own original animated art style, offers it’s own spin to the film franchise it’s based on, and makes bold choices to it’s cast of characters that may be off putting to certain people. Not to mention, that complete downer of an ending is still an all-timer! While there are certainly aspects that has aged poorly (particularly the 3D animation), Spider-Man: The New Animated Series deserves credits for being able to tell more adult-oriented stories of Peter Parker and his struggles to adapting to his college life as Spider-Man without sacrificing the gravitas of the character. Also, Neil Patrick Harris is pretty good here. Just a shame it didn’t get the ratings MTV wanted because I would have been curious to see how this version of Spider-Man went forward in the future.

3.) Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man

It might’ve took three times (four if you count the PBS-friendly Spidey And His Amazing Friends) but Disney has finally been able to crack the code on how to make a solid Spider-Man cartoon. Blending the traditional comic book panel traits of the character’s well-known origin while incorporating new distinct traits of it’s own, Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man is able to find the right balance of exploring the thrills of being Spider-Man and the chills of being Peter Parker, something which The Ultimate Spider-Man and Spider-Man (2017) failed to do. The newer cast of characters the show chooses to explore are (mostly) intriguing, it’s callbacks and references all feel earned, the theme song is dope as hell, and it’s able to use it’s alternate timeline and multiverse concept to not just reuse plot assets of the MCU or recurring fan favorite characters but also show how Peter’s life would’ve been different in the MCU if things play out a different way and he made all new friends and allies in the process. There are some strange creative decisions I’m not a fan of and the animation style won’t be to everyone’s taste but for the most part, Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man is a winner and is the best Spidey show for the past 15+ yearsI’m definitely intrigued to see Season 2 and 3!

2.) Spider-Man: The Animated Series (1994)

Here’s the one Spidey cartoon that was so important at introduction Spider-Man to the mainstream media and pop culture entertainment. Spider-Man: The Animated Series (1994) stands proudly alongside the likes of Batman: The Animated Series and X-Men: The Animated Series as being classic 1990s superhero cartoons that help introduce iconic superheroes to new generations and beyond. Even though it’s targeted towards children, the core themes and characters that make Spider-Man so special is presented throughout the entire series. Whether it involves it’s solid storytelling, impactful character moments, or for hilarious memes, every Spider-Man fan of old and now should be well aware of this show’s existence. Let’s also not forget it’s killer theme song, faithful adaptions of the characters, and even go as far to have Madame Web at the end voiced by Stan Lee’s wife. You can definitely argue that it’s animation has aged to some degree and doesn’t have the most consistent pacing but that doesn’t change the fact that Spider-Man: The Animated Series (1994) is a true must see for any kind of Spider-Man fan.

1.) The Spectacular Spider-Man

The Spectacular Spider-Man is widely regarded by fans as one of the best, if not the best Spider-Man show that has ever been made and for PLENTY of good reasons! It’s a series that has enormous respects towards the character of Peter Parker and understands perfectly why Spider-Man is one of the most iconic and relatable superheroes in history. It’s able to greatly showcased these relatable aspects of Peter in his adventures as Spider-Man along with not being afraid to explore mature themes such as stress, relationships, balancing school and work, and even dark/sensitive topics such as gambling and drug addiction. Despite being targeted towards children, it’s able to deliver a quality superhero show that anyone of any age can understand or relate to without needing to dumb everything down. When it comes to the televisions show and streaming series involving our beloved web swinger thus far, there is not one series that gets as much right and finds the right balance for everything than The Spectacular Spider-Man! Filled with fantastic storytelling and character development along with some dope as hell action sequences, The Spectacular Spider-Man is an near perfect adaption of Spider-Man and one that is a must watch for any fan of the character!

Ranking All 90 Marvel Movies (2/2) (45-1)

Since I felt putting all 90 Marvel movies was a bit too much for one list, I decided to make a second post of it! That way, there’s most stability and this specific ranking doesn’t feel too clutter for one piece. My previous one was rankings from #90 to #46. This list will consist of #45 to #1!

No more time and filler! Let’s finish this MASSIVE movie ranking!

45.) Thor

44.) Spider-Man: Far From Home

43.) X-Men

42.) Avengers: Age of Ultron

41.) Ant-Man

40.) Doctor Strange In The Multiverse of Madness

39.) Deadpool & Wolverine

38.) Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance

37.) Spider-Man 3

36.) Deadpool 2

35.) The Incredible Hulk

34.) Blade

33.) The Wolverine

32.) Black Panther: Wakanda Forever

31.) Thunderbolts*

30.) Big Hero 6

29.) Blade II

28.) Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2

27.) Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings

26.) Thor Ragnarök

25.) The Fantastic Four: First Steps

24.) X2: X-Men United

23.) Kick-Ass

22.) Men in Black

21.) Iron Man

20.) X-Men: First Class

19.) Captain America: The First Avenger

18.) Iron Man 3

17.) Captain America: Civil War

16.) Deadpool

15.) Spider-Man: No Way Home

14.) Kingsman: The Secret Service

13.) Spider-Man

12.) Avengers: Infinity War

11.) Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3

10.) Avengers Endgame

9.) Black Panther

8.) The Avengers

7.) Captain America: The Winter Soldier

6.) X-Men: Days of Future Past

5.) Guardians of the Galaxy

4.) Spider-Man: Across The Spider-Verse

3.) Spider-Man 2

2.) Logan

1.) Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

Ranking All The DC Comics Movies (57-26) (1/2)

Now that Superman (2025) is now out in theaters, I decided to do something totally insane and rank every single DC movie ever! Not just the movies related to the DC Extended Universe or the brand new DC Universe but all theatrically-released films that have some sort of connection to DC. That includes all the Batman, Superman, DC imprints, and even animated films that have been released in theaters of all kind!

Throughout last year, I actually took the time to watch every other DC-related film that I haven’t got around to just for the sake of making this list. Why? Because I have no life whatsoever and I like making insane lists! That’s why!

But anyways, let’s get into list making and rank all 57 theatrically-released DC Comics films from best to worst! If you agree with this list, awesome! If you disagree, fine and I likely will by the time I actually publish this! Either way, let’s have some fun and rank these superhero flicks!

Btw, NO I’m not going into any sort of description of each said film because then this list would take a million years to make! I’m just gonna let the ranked number for each film speak for themselves!

57.) Catwoman

56.) Steel

55.) Jonah Hex

54.) The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

53.) Joker Folie À Deux

52.) Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice

51.) Superman IV: The Quest For Peace

50.) Batman: The Killing Joke

49.) Suicide Squad

48.) Justice League (2017)

47.) Wonder Woman 1984

46.) Batman & Robin

45.) Red 2

44.) Green Lantern

43.) Superman III

42.) The Kitchen

41.) Aquaman & The Lost Kingdom

40.) The Losers

39.) The Return of Swamp Thing

38.) Black Adam

37.) The Flash

36.) The League of Super-Pets

35.) Supergirl

34.) Man of Steel

33.) Superman Returns

32.) Batman: Forever

31.) Shazam!: Fury of the Gods

30.) Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders

29.) Joker

28.) Red

27.) Constantine

26.) Swamp Thing

Man of Steel (2013)- A Superman For A “Modern Audience”

Well, that title is certainly quite the click-bait, isn’t it?!

I do wanna make something clear that when I claim that Man of Steel is a Superman made for a “modern audience”, I am NOT referring to THAT kind of “modern audience”, A.K.A. the one that gets described in this current day and age, particularly by a certain OBNXIOUS movie review who shall NOT be named! But…..if you know, you know!

Back in 2013, the term, “modern audience” meant a very different thing. It didn’t mean so much about changing classic IPs to align a proper race/gender ratio and what was considered to be the “correct” politics back in the early 2010s but more of finding a way to gain a new generation of fans by updating classic IPs to have them fit in the so-called “modern” era.

In the case of Man of Steel, it attempts to update Superman in a way that removes itself from the light heart, campy days of Christopher Reeve and lean more into the dark, gritty, and realistic nature of Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy. This was a move that I imagine was done to try to capitalize on the success of those three Batman films, along with promoting Christopher Nolan’s involvement as co-writer and executive producer to boost ticket sales.

It’s also worth mentioning about the complicated development history of Man of Steel. Originally, the film was meant to act as a full-on reboot and as it’s own standalone film, hoping it’s success would lead to MoS as being Part 1 of a new Superman trilogy after Superman Returns turned out to be such a massive disappointment. However, during the film’s development, Marvel’s The Avengers released worldwide and it ended up being an absolute (No pun intended!) Hulk smash hit! And after numerous of failed attempts at starting their own cinematic universe of superheroes with the likes of Superman Returns and more recently Green Lantern (Don’t remind Ryan Reynolds of that!), DC and Warner Bros decided that they wanted Man of Steel to act as the launching pad for their brand new DC Extended Universe, finally finding their answer to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

However, instead of being lighthearted and comedic like most of the films under the Marvel Studios’ umbrella are, they wanted this universe to be more dark, gritty, and realistic in terms of tone and feel. Not only because they just didn’t want to blatantly copy and paste the same tone and feel that Marvel has but that was what also what made DC superhero films stand out on their own compared to Marvel for better or worse. And considering that DC and WB was coming straight off of The Dark Knight films, pretty much their only notable film successes with comic book superheroes in recent memory, they clearly wanted to ride that train as much as they can in the hopes of acting as a perfect countermeasure to Marvel.

Because of that, Man of Steel became not just the beginning of this newest iteration of Clark Kent/Superman played by Henry Cavill but also the new age of DC films from here on out. Because back in the 2010s, literally EVERYTHING had to be a cinematic universe or else you just didn’t get with the program. Regardless of the end results of this particularly cinematic universe over a decade later, I think it’s important to look at this film as it’s own thing like it was originally intended to. Was Zack Snyder able to make Superman work in the year 2013 and be able to bring in a new “modern” audience for the man of tomorrow? Well……it’s complicated!

It’s no secret that Man of Steel was one of the most polarizing superhero films of all time when it came out 12 years ago and it’s still highly debated to this very day. From it’s more broody tone to it’s gloriously excessive actions to the way it’s tells it’s story and some of the narrative/character choices the film makes, it has certainly left PLENTY of room for discussion among fans, critics, and the general audience. And I think a good majority of that has to do with the changes made to the source material in order to have Superman fit in the more “modern” times.

Instead of having a Superman sticking to his morals of hope and optimism, you now have a Superman that dares to question his morals and feels more grim than hopeful about the way he goes about his superhero ways. Instead of having a Clark Kent that is able to adjust to the modern world smoothly with only a handful of critics against him, you now have a Clark Kent that is unable to adjust to the modern world because almost everybody hates him since he’s an alien and not human. Instead of having a Man of Tomorrow that is able to preserve collateral damage and saves civilians lives at every turn, you now have a Man of Tomorrow that causes so much destruction and chaos while only saving a civilian if they are in his way or just happens to bump into one that is in danger. While these changes might fit for a “modern” take on Superman, it’s not one that seems to fit with the character’s overall history.

And of course, you also have the most controversial decision made in the film. Instead of having a Superman that has a moral stance against killing no matter what, you now have a Superman that goes as far as to kill his main opponent because he believes there could be no other outcome except that.

When looking at those factors, this can be seen as quite a betrayal for what Superman stands for. Man of Steel doesn’t so much feel like it’s trying to honor the Superman mythos but more trying to deconstruct and dissect it, given the impression that it’s deeper and more mature than your typical superhero flick when it’s really not. It’s a film that can be seen as mistaking dourness and pro-faced seriousness for depth and nuance. It’s a world that feels too much of a bleak reflection off our current world rather than it’s own unique world for Superman. This is a Superman that has more in line with Homelander from The Boys before Homelander from The Boys was even a thing.

The thing is though is that it COULD’VE gotten away from this if they tried. If they were able to use this dark and broody approach of Superman to have him become brighter and more hopeful by the end of the film. If they were able to use it’s massive scope and action sequences to deliver real stakes and hard hitting character moments. If they were able to use it’s motivational speeches and lines from the trailer to have it actually mean something in the grand scheme of things. If they were able to use it’s dark tone and feel for a purpose and not just because……that’s what The Dark Knight did. If they were able to deconstruct and dissect the traditional Superman mythos while also remember to put the pieces back into place.

And make no mistake, there are PLENTY of standout moments in Man of Steel where you can see that potential. You got the modern technology that’s able to deliver the Dragon Ball Z-like fights scenes that die hard fans have always dreamed off seeing on the big screen. You got a cast full of immensely talented cast that feel right for their roles. You got a grand musical score in Han Zimmer that gives the film it’s own gloom yet beautiful beating heart to it, almost feeling like it’s own character. You even got a structure which if done right, could be a fresh and inventive way of telling a Superman origin story that has been told many times over, having Batman Begins be to origin stories what Into the Spider-Verse has been to animation!

When it comes to elements such as action, scale, scope, casting, score, special effects, and ideas in terms of narrative, this is everything that a modern Superman film should consist off. And if we are to grade this film strictly from a technical and sound perspective, this should be the perfect Superman film for a “modern” audience. The kind of film that not only gains a new legion of fans but inspires a generation of upcoming filmmakers and lovers of superheroes to make their own work based off the man of tomorrow! The kind of film that would make the O.G. Clark Kent, Christopher Reeve, the O.G. Lois Lane, Margot Kiddler, and the O.G. Superman behind the camera himself, Richard Donner, very proud! Unfortunately, aside from an INCREDIBLY diehard fanbase/cult that Zack Snyder has gain over the years, Man of Steel fails to live up to those ideals that it DESEPREATELY wants to strive towards.

While nearly everything from the technical side of things, sound and audio side of things, acting side of things, and action/scale side of things are aces, the overall story and script leaves PLENTY to be desired. Most of the characters come off as plot devices and motivation for Superman than actual characters, the dialogue strikes a fine line between being poetic/inspiring and just being plain pretentious, the way it’s tell it’s origin story feels so disjointed and scattershot because it’s being told in non-chronologically, and it’s overall themes feel not so much explored but just told directly to the audiences, given the impression that the film thinks it’s too “smart” for it’s audience. It has all the elements that makes for an amazing trailer but NOT for an amazing film.

That’s might be just why I was actually quite a big fan of this film when I first saw it back in 2013. I SAW the potential when watching it with my very eyes on the big screen. I was blown away by the visuals, inspired by the quotes made for the trailers, was thrilled by the non-stop action and explosions, and found the morals to be interpreted in a way that I always imagined a modern Superman film should consist of. And because of that, I wore rose-colored glasses the whole way through because I just assumed I didn’t actually need to critique or analyze because well….the film was too smart for me that I didn’t think I needed to bother.

That is also why the more I’ve thought about Man of Steel over the years and the more times I’ve gone back and rewatched it, it…….kinda gets worse for me. Once I’m able to take those rose-colored glasses off, all I see are amazing concepts, ideas, and potential that is never has fully utilized as well as it should be. It’s a film full of eye popping moments but not one that commits to being a consistent narrative or a grand vision of it’s own. It’s a film that is loaded with action but fails to deliver consequential stakes due to Superman and Zod being practically invisible and the film failing to make the city of Metropolis and it’s people it’s own distinct character. It’s a film that has inspirational quotes and lines of dialogue that don’t amount anything to the story or characters. It’s a film that thinks it’s being faithful to Superman while also wanting to critique him in ways that I don’t think the filmmakers intended. Quite simply, it falls short of it’s ambition.

If there is one thing that I think anyone can agree upon regarding this film is that Man of Steel should NOT have been a film that kicked off a new DC universe with. It’s bizarre tone and feel is NOT one that can work as a consistent one for an entire cinematic universe of cinematic storytelling. Plus, Zack Snyder up to that point (and even now) has been quite a divisive filmmaker with an incredibly distinct vision that isn’t really appealing to mainstream audiences. Up to that point, the only film in Snyder’s filmography that had great appeal to mainstream audiences was his 2005 remake of Dawn of the Dead, which was also co-written by James Gunn (Don’t tell the Snyder bros that!).

This is honestly why I believe Man of Steel should have taken place in it’s own universe with Superman without any ties to the other DC characters. Similar to that of Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy and Matt Reeve’s Batman universe, the world of Man of Steel should have been one that should have existed in it’s own terms and merits, being able to explore it’s ideas and concepts with multiple films and potential spin-offs. Plus, it’s more bleak and somber tone could’ve been one that worked more comfortably with more limited installments instead of with a whole decades worth of superhero cinematic content with different characters and stories.

If it was given a chance to be it’s own thing while also having planted seeds of it’s own that it was able to grow upon with future standalone Superman sequels, Man of Steel could have been seen as a grand re-introduction to the character of Superman and one that could successfully redefined Superman to a new generation the same way that Christopher Nolan did with Batman. However, due to it’s shortcomings, it’s obligation to start a new DC universe, and the follow-ups which came after tripling down on the things that don’t work rather than what does, you can’t help but see wasted potential. As it’s own thing, Man of Steel is functional on a surface level but not on a depth level.

I sure hope now that James Gunn is taking over Superman and is looking to create a new generation of Superman fans of it’s own, I sure hope he is able to learn from Zack Snyder’s shortcoming here. Make sure you know EXACTLY the kind of film you are making and the message you are trying to convey to the audience! If you are gonna create a new version of Superman for a “modern” audience, make sure to at LEAST capture the spirit of what the character has always stand for and only make changes that fit with the overall narrative and not ones for the sake of change!

Make those same mistakes and we might have another Man of Steel on our hands!

Next Up: Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice

Superman IV: The Quest For Peace (1987)- When Nothing Matters Anymore

Welp, this is about as bad as a Superman film can get! And about as bad as a superhero movie can get! And about as bad as well…..anything can get!

Superman IV: The Quest For Peace represented a complete rock bottom for not just Superman but the entire comic book movie genre up to that point! Even after the severely underperforming and poorly received Superman III, Warner Bros and DC still felt they could squeeze at least one more feature film with the man of tomorrow! The problem though is that the anticipation for a new Superman film was at an all time low in 1987!

Even though Alexander Salking and his son Ilya, the producers of the Superman series, was able to get the box office grosses they wanted from Superman III, there was very little enthusiasm from the cast and crew to do a fourth one. Christopher Reeve was hesitant on returning, they couldn’t get Richard Lester to come back, and the commercial failure of 1984’s Supergirl made the Salkings consider that perhaps this DC franchise had run its course. Regardless, they pushed through with another installment anyway!

Christopher Reeve was offered six million dollar signs from the studio to come back one more time, they were able to get Sidney J. Furie to take over the director’s chair (which originally went to Wes Craven before he dropped out due to him and Reeve not getting along), and decided that the whole story would be about Superman trying to solve the nuclear arm crisis from around the world, which was a major talking point during Ronald Reagan’s presidency throughout the 1980s. If even a word of what I just said sounds appealing to you, then I can assure you…..Superman IV: The Quest For Peace is anything BUT that!

Superman IV: The Quest For Peace is not only what happens when a franchise stops caring but when the people involved don’t even try to hide the fact that they are not trying anymore! From the obvious green screen effects to the lazy editing to the phoned-in performances to the awful transaction from scene-to-scene, Quest For Peace is what you get when the people involved with it feels like nothing matters anymore! Throw in an absurdly stupid script that defies any sorts of logic, dialogue that had to make the actors themselves feel embarrassed to say out loud, and no sense of flow or rhythm in terms of pacing and structure and you get quite a shitty picture!

The biggest comparison of this complete low point of Superman could be to that of when Batman had his own low point with the abominable Batman & Robin (which would come out 10 years later after this movie). Just like that other notable DC cinematic disaster that came out in the 20th century, that also saw the titled character at his absolute low point, leading into becoming a full-on parody, adapting a “we don’t care how stupid and dumb this all is” mindset, and having the only goal from behind the scenes is to sell as many toys and action figures to children as possible. However, I think Superman IV leans much worse than that!

As much as both films can lean into the “so bad it’s good” category among the most memorable superhero movies, Batman and Robin seemed like a much more competent product compared to Supes’s own fourth movie. It had it’s handful of heartfelt moments (most notably that special scene between Bruce & Alfred), a unique visual vibe that’s full of bright lights and colors that makes the film look pretty to look at, and had such an bizarrely over-the-top campiness to it that you can help but be gloriously entertained by it. Superman IV has none of those unique traits whatsoever.

There are no moments of heart, no moments of genuine emotion, no interesting way of telling it’s story about it’s current topics surrounding global annihilation, and no menacing bad guys that feels like a legit threat to our heroes. All we get is a dull, lifeless, and cheap-looking trainwreck where the only parts of genuine entertainment are the moments that are downright awful so much so that it’s HILARIOUS!

I mean who didn’t get some laughs at some of the most RIDICULOUS moments scattered throughout the film! Remember all the flying sequences with Superman that looks like it was shot in a backyard? Or when Superman is able to gain new powers out of nowhere just because? Or when the main bad guy tells Superman that if he doesn’t tell where Lois is, then he will “hurt” people? And then proceeds to stand out and do a bunch of random stuff while Superman is just staying shouting, “STOP! DON’T DO IT! THE PEOPLE!” Or when Superman loses a battle because….the main villain….scratches him in the neck? Or how about just about any moment where Lex Luthor tries to pronounce the word, “nuclear”? Or how about the fact the whole reason Superman is doing anything in this movie at all is because……a kid wrote him a letter, asking Superman to get all the missiles in the world and get them off the planet, solving the nuclear crisis just…..like that?

Believe it or not, these are moments I honestly COULD forgive or just shake off as being pointless nitpicks if the rest of the film was actually engaging or interesting! But Superman IV is anything BUT that! Even Superman III, despite it’s severe flaws in terms of story and tone, was at least somewhat engaging because of the fact that something was ALWAYS going on that you couldn’t help but have your eyes on the screen because of that! With Superman IV, you basically have to cherry pick the moments that stand out in any way, shape, or form because nothing from the movie as a whole does!

It might seem like I’m beating a dead horse here but Superman IV: The Quest For Peace is just the worst kind of bad! It’s the kind of bad that has no substance, no memorability, no point, no care, and no matter in the world! It’s a film that not only doesn’t need to exist but it feels like even the cast and crew working on it don’t believe it needed to exist either! As we should all know by the now in the year of our lord 2025, nothing matter anymore and just embrace nihilism!

In all seriousness, it really is a shame that such an iconic cinematic figure like Christopher Reeve’s Superman had to go out on such an embarrassing low like A Quest For Peace! He will always be a legend and be remember as the definitive Clark Kent and Superman but these last two Superman films did not do him any truth or justice in any meaningful (or American) way. (Yes, I completely intended that pun!) I just wish he was given at least one more quality film that was able to send his version of Superman up in the air (I’m on a ROLL today!) for one last time!

Regardless, despite how abysmal this film is, how bad Superman III is, and how Superman II fell just short of greatness, Christopher Reeve will still always be Superman in our hearts! He was the one that inspired us all to be the best version of ourselves and was the one man that got the ball rolling with superheroes! Even if Superman IV represented when nothing matter anymore for Superman, we can at least look back at the time to where it did matter for Superman!

And that is all thanks to Christopher Reeves!

RIP Good Sir

We will forever miss you!

Next Up: Superman Returns

Superman II (1980)- When Director’s Cuts Actually Matter

Director’s cuts for films tends to be a big talking point nowadays with film discourse. Whenever a highly beloved/controversial director takes their jab at directing a film from a well-known IP, questions always spur online about how much of the finished product is actually theirs to behold. Was the finished film one in which the director themselves had in mind from the start or is it just what the higher ups at the studios wanted it to be? With studios and producers having more a say on a final film product than ever before, that question tends to get ask every time a big film comes out when it lacks overall quality!

Of course, there is no director more famous/infamous with only being able to get the exact vision they intended with a film than Zack Snyder. Nearly EVERY single time a film of his has come out and it’s not well received by critics or general audiences, the immediate reaction from Snyder and his fanbase is ALWAYS about how his original cut was much better and you need to watch that in order to get the full satisfying motion picture. From Watchmen to Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice to Justice League to new Rebel Moon movies, there is no one that loves the word “Director’s Cut” more than Zack Snyder himself. Although I will be talking about his full director’s cut of Batman V Superman and Justice League later on in the marathon, it does give the indication as to how much someone’s opinion on a movie can change drastically when they see what the person behind the camera intended all along.

However, there are some instances where director’s cuts tends to be VERY complicated. Not necessarily that the entire quality of the motion picture changes on a dime but the way that a certain director decides to tell the exact same story in an entirely different way than someone else does. And this exact example I will be talking about today is no other than with Superman II.

As you could tell based off the title of this piece and my intro, Superman II featured a lot of different changes from both the original 1980 film and it’s sequel. After the massive success of Superman: The Movie, Warner Bros demanded a sequel ASAP. However, the production of it’s sequel went through it’s fair share of shake-ups, controversies, and mass difficulties in getting a quality product in theaters and even when it came out of theaters. Because of all this and more, Superman II was the product of two different directors, Richard Donner and Richard Lester. Yes, both directors have the exact same first names. I do NOT believe that was a coincidence whatsoever.

Following the success of the 1976 film The Omen, Donner was hired by WB to direct the original Superman movie along with it’s sequel. And to make sure that deal would be met, both movies would be film back-to-back simultaneously. However, tensions arose between Donner and the producers behind the films, particularly the father-son duo of Alexander and Ilya Sakling and Pierre Spengler. From clashing visions to scheduling conflicts, things became a mess from behind the scenes. It got so bad that the producers decided to bring in Richard Lester as a “co-producer”, A.K.A. a back-up director, and basically told Donner to just finish the first film and let them deal with finishing the second film. After Superman: The Movie became the hit that it did, the production of Superman II resumed but with Lester now behind the camera. Although, Donner had already shot 70% of the film, Lester had to go back and reshot much of the film, radically changing the tone and several sequences, just so he could get full director’s credit for Superman II.

So, yeah! That was quite a chaotic history involving the making of the second cinematic installment involving the man of tomorrow! Although Lester’s version ended up being a box office hit with a mostly positive reception, interest grew of what Donner’s original version of Superman II was like. And considering we were now starting to enter the era of DVDs and re-releasing films with extended or director’s cuts, what better time than any to release a cut of Superman II in which Richard Donner had his full name on the cover.

Unfortunately, despite high demands and a fan campaign asking for Warner Bros to release the Donner cut for the film’s 25th anniversary, they were unable to do that because of complicated reasons. With circumstances such as Marlon Brando suing the studio over royalties, which prevented his likeness being used, Richard Donner having never completed actually filming the whole movie, and the man behind the camera himself admitting he didn’t really have an interest in releasing one, it seemed highly unlikely that it would ever see the day. However, by the time 2006 came around, things changed and the studio actually gave into the demand, releasing the “Donner Cut” of Superman II on DVD.

While the Donner Cut was being assembled, an attempt was made to restore as much original footage of Donner’s original vision as possible. After all, some of Lester’s footage was needed to make the story feel actually coherent, being able to fill in the leaping gaps and create a proper bridge between Superman: The Movie and Superman II. Even though he wasn’t able to save his 100% vision due to the film being WAY too late to go back and reshoot, Superman II: The Donner Cut still remains one of the more unique director’s cuts of any mainstream film that has ever been released.

Instead of feeling like a complete finished film, it comes across as more of a “what if”. What if Richard Donner had full control from start to finish? What if he was able to film the two movies back-to-back fully like he intended? Well, the answers we got to those questions involves a director’s cut of Superman II that features several major differences from the film that was released in theaters back in the early 1980s.

Because of that, let’s take a look at some of the key differences between The Donner Cut and the Theatrical Cut.

More Sincerity, Less Comedy

Richard Donner has always viewed Superman as a modern mythology. Because of that, Superman: The Movie and his cut for Superman II reflected that, with a more serious approach to it’s subject matter and means of telling it’s story. Sure, the film definitely contains enough of a sense of humor, especially when compared to say…..Zack Snyder’s Superman, but for the most part, it’s a more serious, albeit sincere tone throughout the entire film. With Lester on the other hand, it was quite different. You have all the funny business with Lex, Non, the evil Kryptonian that doesn’t talk, acting like an overgrown baby, shots of civilians in the city during the final battle, one which involves a guy with roller skates and another guy talking on the phone, and the Kryptonians putting their faces on Mount Rushmore. Donner, on the other hand, cut most of the jokes that he probably felt cut the tension with each individual sense and just got right into the meat of them.

While I’m fairly certain this is more of a studio mandate rather than what Lester wanted personally, I say I prefer Donner’s take on what the tone of the film should be here. I like how he decided to take things more seriously without going too far and be able to incorporate a sense of humor when the film requires it. I guess we now know which superhero film to ACTUALLY thank for all that awkward humor that’s always thrown into every MCU film since 2012!

More Epic In Scale, Less Action

Just like the first thing, I imagine this was more of a decision from the studios to add more action scenes into the theatrically released film and less so on the director himself. Warner Bros craved to add in more action into the picture and less of the slower moving parts with certain scenes being too stretched out. Because of that, we get more mythical Normal Rockwell-esque Visuals with the Donner Cut and less of that mythical cinematography in Lester’s cut. And also because of that, we get more added in action in the theatrical version compared to Donner’s version.

The biggest example of this comes with the big fight in Metropolis between Zod, his minions, and Superman. This is a fight that ends with Superman running away and luring them to the Fortress of Solitude. From there, Superman tricks them into depowering themselves by reversing the effects of the crystal chamber. In the Donner version, it cuts right to this bit. In the Lester version, there is an additional fight scene added in the Fortress of Solitude first.

While I can understand the crave for more action in your Superman movie, the way that Lester went about to get more action really devoid the film of eternal logic. The Evil Kryptonians can now just suddenly teleport and shoot energy beams while Superman is now able to create holographic duplicates of himself. Not to mention, the bizarre power when Superman peels the “S” off his costume and hurls it onto Non like a big blanket. I like action but not if it comes at the cause of the actual quality of the film. Because of that, point goes to Donner here!

More Music From Superman: The Movie Instead of The Score From Superman II

As if the clash over Donner and the producers wasn’t insane enough, a similar thing happened in the production for Superman II with the legendary John Williams. While he was originally slated to score Superman II, Williams ended up getting into a feud with Lester after Ilya Salkind left the projection room. When he returned, John told him that he couldn’t get along with Lester and exited the film. To take his place, Lester brought in his frequent composer Ken Thorne. Because of that, Lester’s version offers a much different and more energetic score this time around, feeling like a composer’s own vision instead of trying too hard to match Williams. However, in Donner’s version, he reuses most of William’s score from the original film instead of using Thorne’s score from the original theater cut.

While I hate the circumstances leading to the situation, I give credit to Lester for being able to make the soundtrack work and feel like it’s own thing compared to the first film. No one is ever gonna top John William’s magnificent Superman theme from the original but the score here works well enough. And while I can definitely see why Donner would prefer to do more of William’s score instead of Thorne, you do get a sense that some of the tracks don’t match certain scenes the way they should and comes across as being overedited sometimes.

More Rough Around The Edges

This difference is a bit obvious but Lester’s version certainly feels more like a complete vision than with Donner’s. While The Donner Cut offers an interesting look of Superman II from the man that made the original such a classic, it doesn’t come off as a finished product. Had Richard been able to complete the Superman sequel that he started back in 1979, it would’ve certainly looked much better. However, with The Donner Cut that released back in 2006, it is simply the best he could do over 25 years later. Much of Lester’s footage remains in the film because it was needed to tell the full story, with a bit of jarring test footage in the middle from Donner thrown in for good measure.

While we’ll never know how a 100% version of Superman II would’ve looked like under Richard Donner, he still did the best with what he could do given the minimal material he had left to work with decades later. Even if I do like most of Donner’s ideas more, I do think by the end, Lester’s film ended up with the superior film, largely due to the fact that it feels the most complete and finished.

More Lex Luthor

Once Lester came on board to do reshoots for Superman II, Gene Hackman was reluctant to do any of them without Donner. Because of that, Lester could only use what Donner already had with Lex Luthor and just roll along from there. He had just enough of Lex to tell story and nothing more. In the Donner Cut, Luther is given a slightly bigger role than before. With more emphasis on the funny business with Lex and his co-workers, Hackman is given a bit more of a screen presence than he did in the original theatrically released version.

While I still wish Hackman was given more to do as Lex this time around, I’m glad Donner was able to salvage what he could and have Luthor contribute a bit more to the plot than he did with Lester’s cut.

Lois Lane Is Much Smarter

Lois Lane is a very smart character, perfectly matching the wits and skills of her counterpart, Clark Kent. So much so that Lois is able to discover the realization that Clark Kent is indeed Superman himself, something which no one else was able to do. At the end of the original film, Lois briefly notices the resemblance between Clark and Superman but just hand waves it off. In Donner’s version, this thread immediately continues with Lois scribbling some glasses on a picture of Superman, realizing that Clark Kent and Superman might just be the same person. To prove this claim right, she jumps out a window of the building of The Daily Plant to make Clark save her. But Clark is able to convince her that he isn’t Superman. Once the two are at Niagra Falls, Lois spots Clark without glasses and yet again suspects that he is Superman. Later at the hotel, Lois shoots a bullet from a gun right at Clark Kent, which nothing happens. After that, Clark admits that he’s Superman and Lois admits that the gun only had blanks. In Lester’s version, the first time that Lois suspects that Clark is Superman is at Niagara Falls. It’s only when they are at the hotel, Clark drops his glasses into a fire and retrieves it without burning himself, revealing to Lois that he is Superman.

Both of these takes work in their own right but I find myself leaning more towards Donner’s version here. With the way it builds upon Lois flirting around with the fact that Clark Kent and Superman might be one of the same from the first movie, Donner’s feels more of an organic follow-up to Lois’s development. Although, Lester’s version looks much better since Donner never actually got to film the scene in the hotel. Instead, he had to set for a repurposed test footage with Christopher Reeve and Margot Kidder respectively. While it works fairly well, the sound and performances do feel off and the continuity doesn’t mix and mash with the rest of the film.

Marlin Brando Returns

In the Donner Cut, Marlon Brando returns as Jor-El where he basically plays the same role he did in the first film. He mostly acts as a driving force for Kal-El, offering guidance to his own son beyond the grave. In the Lester Cut, Jor-El was replaced by Superman’s mother, Lara, played by Susannah York. The reason he doesn’t show up in Lester’s version is because after Superman: The Movie became a massive success, Marlon Brando sued the producers because he was owed nearly 12% of the box office revenue. Because the studio refused to pay him for any of the box office revenue for the sequel , Brando’s scenes had to be reshot in the theatrical release with Lara instead. Thankfully, Warner Bros was able to work out a deal with Brando to put himself back in Donner’s version.

Giving the circumstances, I think Lester did very well with what he could do. Plus, it did make sense to have Superman’s mother be a guiding force for him in his version, while the original film had Superman’s father play that same role. I don’t mind either one here but I do wish for an outcome that had both of Superman’s parents acting as that special emotional support for their son beyond their death. When thinking about what would act as a proper mirror of the original, I’d say Lester wins here. When it comes to acting as a part of Clark’s development here, I would probably go with Donner here.

Zod And His Crew Escape In Different Ways

In the Donner cut, the movie starts with a recap of the previous film, which ends with Superman carrying a nuclear missile out int space. It’s the shockwave from that missile that hits the Phantom Zone prison and allows for the evil Kryptonians to escape. In the Lester Cut, Superman stops a terrorist attack in Paris by tossing a hydrogen bomb into space, which frees the evil Kryptonains.

It’s mostly a minor difference but Lester’s cut at least gives Superman an actual reason to throw yet another bomb into space, just like he did at the end of the previous film. And with the way both cuts recaps the begin of the previous movie, Donner’s version does better at showing how exactly the events from the previous movie leads into it’s sequel. Unlike with Lester’s version, which comes across as more of a prologue read by the narrator of a tv show, telling viewers what happened in last week’s episode. Tough call, but I give the slight edge to Donner on this one, with at least having the beginning feel more consistent with the previous film.

Why Superman Gives Up His Powers

In both versions, Superman gives up his superpowers to be with Lois Lane. In the Donner Cut, Superman admits to himself and his father Jor-El that while he’s being selfish, he just wants to relax and be happy with another woman. His father argues that his son can NOT favor one human over the rest of humanity. Feeling he can no longer serve humanity in an objective way that would make his parents and himself proud, he gives up his powers. In Lester’s cut, Superman talks with his mother Lara instead. The conversation is much shorter, with Lara telling her son that if wants to be a mortal, then he must become one.

If we are looking through the perspective of what’s the right thing for Clark Kent himself to do and he achieves it, then Lester’s cut wins here. If we are looking through the perspective of what’s the right thing for Kal-El himself to do and he does the exact opposite of that, then Donner’s Cut wins. For the benefit of Superman’s overall arc in the film, I give this one to Donner!

No Magic Kiss

And lastly, the magic kiss is NOT presented in the Donner Cut. In Lester’s Cut, Superman II ends with Lois’ memory of knowing Clark Kent is Superman is wiped away in the form of a magic kiss. However, with the Donner Cut, Lois’ memory gets wiped by Superman flying around the world and rewinding time back before Lois figured out he was Clark Kent. It’s basically the exact same ending as Superman II except nearly the whole movie gets reverted back to square one.

As much as both ending come off as cheap plot gimmicks and glorified deux ex machina, I honestly believe Donner’s version is even worse, making the whole film feel like it never happened and undoing all the character progression like it’s some glorified Saturday Morning cartoon that prohibits progression in it’s story. The magic kiss is cheesy but I’ll still take that over a lazy rehash of the ending of the first movie.

I think you can now see why your experience with Superman II can be quite different by watching both of these cuts on their own terms! And that’s not even going into the two other notable cuts of this movie: 1.) the fan edited version that combined the best of both Donner and Lester while trimming the notable fats from both version and 2.) the ABC televised version that added 19 minutes of footage to the theatrical release, including alternate scenes involving Lex Luthor and an alternate ending. When putting all of that together, there’s not just one, not two, not even three, but FOUR different versions of Superman II you can watch. Not even Zack Snyder can dream of having THAT many cuts for just one feature film!

I will say despite the two different versions of Superman II that I’ve seen, my opinion on the film is largely the same. In the sense, that it’s a very, VERY good sequel that perhaps falls JUST shy of the greatness the original film had, largely due to these conflicting directorial visions, confusing character motivations, and feeling the need to pull it’s punches more times than not. Even so, I will say that I still would consider it to be the second best Superman movie to date (unless my rewatch of Man of Steel or Zack Snyder’s Justice League changes my mind).

Had we got one complete version from either Richard Donner or Richard Lester from beginning of production to the very end, then I think we could have gotten a perfect follow-up to Superman: The Movie, acting as that perfect two-part story figure that Christopher Nolan got superbly right with Batman Begins and The Dark Knight many years later. Instead we can only imagine what would’ve happened if either one of these gentlemen got both of their hands on this sequel from the very start!

Next Up: Superman III

Superman (1978) Retrospective: The Birth Of The Superhero

If there is one film medium that has been a dominant force for the 21st century, that would be comic books and superheroes. While we are now living in an era where this subgenre of movies is not as strong as it was in the previous two decades, there is no denying that they have changed the way that blockbusters have been made for the past 25+ years. However, even before the likes of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy, and the multiple DC Cinematic universe attempts, even before the likes of Blade (1998), X-Men (2000), and Spider-Man (2002) rolled around, and even before Tim Burton’s or Joel Schumacher’s Batman made their ways onto the scene, there was one superhero movie that stood proudly on his own. Not only working as a near perfect example of what a superhero movie should consist of but it set the template and tropes on how a superhero movie or even a blockbuster in general should operated. That one film I’m talking about is no other than Superman (1978), directed by Richard Donner and played by the OG Superman himself, Christopher Reeves.

This was the superhero movie that changed everything! It proved that a film based off of a comic book superhero can work and translate onto the big screen as well as it possibly can. It proved that big cinematic experiences of this kind can be just as compelling as say a giant space opera or an intense thriller involving a big shark (Bet you can guess which two blockbusters I’m referring to from back then!). And most importantly, it proved that comic books and superheroes can shine a very bright light on pop culture, telling stories with impactful themes and unforgettable role models that anyone can look up to (No pun intended!)!

This was the birth of the superhero genre!

This is Superman (1978)!

To prove that this was indeed the one film that started this ongoing superhero movie trend, I decided to name six distinct tropes that this film laid out which is still being followed up to this day. Even nearly 50 years after Superman (1978) came out, these are all common beats you still see in superhero films to this day. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if we see some of/if not all of these with James Gunn’s Superman come July. Nevertheless, here are the six common tropes and cliches with superhero movies that Superman (1978) started.

1.) Origin Story

When it comes to the first chapter of a superhero story, it usually starts off with showcasing their origins. This is the part of the story where you find our where exactly the titled superhero came from, who gave birth to them, and how they got their powers and became the actual titled superhero. It’s become such a staple at this point that folks will call blasphemy if a certain version of a comic book superhero does NOT contain the origin in some way, shape, or form. No matter how many different stories we get off Spider-Man or Batman, we ALWAYS need to see Uncle Ben and the Waynes being shot in cold blood.

In the case of Superman, his origin involves his biological parents, Jor-El and Lara Lor-Van, sending him off to Earth while his home planet Krypton is on the verge of collapse. Clark is then discovered in Kansas by Jonathan and Martha Kent, who would adapt him and raised him as their son. It’s doing this sequence where Clark must discover what he was destined to be by his own mother and father, while learning what it means to live among the human beings on Earth by his adoptive mother and father.

This is a nice origin story that is able to be more about being an outcast rather than just a traditional “fish out of water” story. This is about Clark Kent learning to blend in with a brand new home not just as Clark Kent himself but as Superman. And even with all the criticism and rejection among the public, he still wants to do what is right. He wants to be the hero that his birth parents always envisioned of him. He wants to save people’s lives while stopping those that put them in harm’s away. And most importantly, he just wants to do good things for the goodness of mankind. Regardless if he will do it in a legal or illegal way, he is determined to be a hero at all costs, regardless of what the public thinks of him.

While the 1/3rd of this movie does take it’s time on establishing the origins of Clark Kent’s transformation into Superman, it is important to always showcases the answers to the questions that anyone might have about it’s title hero. Whether it’s like a traditional first installment with a superhero that spends the first half establishing the hero’s origin story (Spider-Man (2002), Batman Begins, Iron Man, or Captain America: The First Avenger) or uses an opening sequence or flashbacks scenes to establish their origins (Batman (1989) and The Incredible Hulk), showcasing a superhero’s origin is always urgent in order to get audience’s connected with the hero’s journey. While I can’t say for certain, I guarantee that the origin of a superhero would not be as much of a staple as it is if it weren’t for this film showcasing these exact important events.

2.) Secret Identity

A usual key component for a superhero story is with the main superhero having to keep their identity a secret. There are always exceptions such as when Tony Stark revealed his true self at the end of Iron Man or Diana Prince always representing Wonder Woman but more often than not, these are usually stories about the main superhero having to learn to keep their superhero life a secret and finding room to focus on their normal, everyday life. You have Peter Parker who has to learn how to balance himself between being Spider-Man and Peter Parker, you have Bruce Wayne needing to let his playboy billionaire side shine in the day and his crime fighting vigilante side shine in the night. In this case, we have Clark Kent needing to keep Superman and Clark Kent as two separate identities.

Of course, the main jab at Superman is how it’s unfathomable how anyone can’t tell the difference between Clark Kent and Superman because they both look exactly the same. Like, all you need to do is remove the glasses and you can see it’s literally the exact same person. How can a superhero who is trying to protect his secret identity do so by basically hiding in plain sight? That is a question with Superman that I thought about for years and could never find the answer to. That was until……I saw Christopher Reeve’s performance.

The main aspect that makes Reeve’s performance stand out perfectly as both Clark Kent and Superman is the fact that they feel like two completely different people when you watch them. As Clark Kent, he’s the typical nerdy, awkward man who is a bit of a dweb that is the last person you would ever expect to be a superhero in red and blue pajamas. As Superman, he’s this brave, heroic figure that you would never suggest could be some weak, submissive geek that lets his female co-worker fight his battles for him. I’m pretty sure if you asked Clark Kent in real life that he looks just like Superman, he would be able to PERFECTLY convince you that he is NOT Superman and just said, “Yeah, I guess that’s true! But I assure you, I am NOT him!” All you had to do is see how Clark Kent and Superman act so different in each scene and how perfectly Reeves is able to make them both convincing as two separate characters!

You are lying to yourselves if you ACTUALLY believe these two guys could be the exact same person if you just judge based off their appearance and personality and NOT just looks.

The secret identity tends to play a big role in most superhero movies, especially with origin stories, but I don’t think there has been a superhero movie that’s been able to capture just exactly what it means to be an average everyday joe to being the world’s biggest savior than with Superman (1978). A story which sees a man has to convince that his personal self and superhero self is NOT one of the same despite looking exactly alike. And this is in large part thanks to Christopher Reeve’s pitch perfect portrayals as both Clark Kent and Superman respectively.

3.) Love Interest

Of course, you can’t have a traditional superhero story without a traditional love interest. This is usually always added to give a story a bit of an emotional anchor and give motivation for the main superhero to do what he does. There are times where it can fall into some pretty infamous tropes. From being a constant damsel n distress to acting as a “trophy” for the main hero to getting the “fridge” treatment, this can be seen as the weakest part of the story if you are not too careful and learn too much into one of these tropes. There’s only so many times where people want to see Gwen Stacy die so Spider-Man can be sad only to get replaced by a love interest that’s hotter but much more blander (*cough* Mary Jane Watson *cough*). Thankfully, Superman (1978) is able to find a love story that works quite fondly with Superman and Lois Lane.

To be sure, it does involve Lois Lane having to be saved at least a few times by Superman. There are two notable moments of that, from falling off of a building and another instance that will be discussed later on. However, that doesn’t change the fact that Lois is a strong character in her own right and can even being seen saving Clark Kent on some occasions. She’s feisty, strong-willed, always determined to get the job done, and is always able to give Clark the emotional support whenever they need it. However, what makes her a perfect equal to Superman is how they will both stop at nothing to accomplish their goals for the greater good.

Lois Lane in general is someone that is as fearless as Superman is and always shows dedication to finding truth and justice for every report she covers as a journalist with the Daily Planet. Sure, she might not be as invincible as Superman is and is certainly not bullet proof but when it comes to her heart and free will, she is about as equal to Superman as someone can possibly get. That’s what makes the two a perfect couple and Lois Lane a perfect love interest.

Just watch this scene and tell me that it is NOT magical!

I wouldn’t be surprised if this is what inspired Disney to making the magical carpet scene in Aladdin.

Most superhero movies tend to always botch the love story. Mostly because it usually only acts to give the superhero a love interest and have it play second-fiddled to everything else going on, usually only acting like a box that needs to be checked off. But with Superman (1978), Lois Lane helps acts as the pure heart of the film and helps Clark fill that missing hole he had within himself in his early days as Superman.

4.) Saving People’s Lives

This is simply one component that a superhero movie can NOT live without. You need scenes and moments that shows a superhero actually being well…….a superhero. Throughout superhero movie history, we’ve seen plenty of examples of superheroes filling their good superhero duties by saving the lives of folks they’ve sworn to protect. We’ve seen Spider-Man saving people from a burning building, we’ve seen Iron Man rescuing passengers from a plane. With Superman, we get to see him rescuing innocent people from natural disasters and bridges on the verge of collapsing.

While the main protagonist saving people has never been anything out of the ordinary, there’s always something special when a superhero does it. This is mostly because they are able to save people in ways that an average person won’t be able to. They are gifted the skills, power, wealth, and/or resources to be able to rescue lives and give themselves a name which regular people would not be able to. With Superman, he is just using the powers that was gifted to him by his parents and home world for the benefit for others and not just himself.

And I know you might be wondering why I am not referring to Superman saving a specific important character at the near tail end of the film. Well, that’s because I’m saving that for the very next part.

5.) The Big Third Act Climax

Okay, this movie doesn’t have the traditional big third act battle that most superhero movies those. This isn’t like the third act of every Avengers movie where there is always so much crap that goes on at the same time that it can be hard to keep track off. This isn’t even like the big climaxes to Superman II, Man of Steel, or Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice where it involves Superman having to fight a powerful being that is even stronger than himself. This involves Superman having to save the day from the wreckage that Lex Luthor causes, a wreckage that could cause a worldwide nuclear war. Much like the climax to Spider-Man (2002) (expect without the ass-kicking 101 scene with the Green Goblin), it involves Clark having to be the hero to the world that he believes himself to be.

I already partially covered the meaning and purpose of the climax in my last part where it involves Superman having to save the very people he has sworn to protect. However, what part I missed out on is the part where he has to save Lois Lane after she partially died. After Superman fails to save Lois from the earthquake that Lex Luthor caused, he commits the biggest deus ex machina imaginable by using his superpowers to rotate the earth back and turning back time.

Can this be considered “cheating”?! Heck yeah!

Does this make any sense whatsoever?! Heck no!

However, that doesn’t change the fact that the third act climax is where Superman faces his toughest challenge yet, the part of the film where the main superhero finds himself pushed beyond measure to be the hero for everybody and the ones he loves. That always tend to be the blueprint for most third acts in superhero stories and I have no doubt this is the one superhero movie where many filmmakers got their first inspiration from.

6.) Being A Symbol

This might be the most important trope of all for every superhero story brought to the big screen. That is having your main character be a symbol. Not just for the characters in the story but for the audience as well! For superheroes to exist for as long as they have, they must have inspirations. They must have folks that would love nothing more to follow in their footsteps and become superheroes of their own in any way, shape, or form. Thankfully, Superman (1978) is able to succeed at that in both ways.

In the context of the movie, the public now has a very positive view on Superman and sees him as being mankind greatest superhero. When it comes to pop culture, the entire world and entertainment industry has followed in this film’s footsteps of making not just more Superman incarnations but also more superheroes of his kind.

Since this film came out, we have gotten more Superman films, shows, games, and comics that most certainly got it’s initial template from this 1978 gamechanger. Also, since this film came out, we have gotten many different superhero films, shows, games, and comics of it’s kind. The kind that I imagine would not exist if it wasn’t for the impact that Richard Donner and Christopher Reeve brought to the world.

Above all, Superman (1978) is able to prove that it’s title hero is in face the symbol he set himself out to be. Not only through the truth, justice, and American way that the character himself claims but through having that impact on the whole world, being the kind of hero that his parents always thought of him has and what I imagine the world saw Christopher Reeve has.

Being that exact symbol!

A symbol of……you guessed it……hope!

In conclusion, superhero movies wouldn’t be where they have been for a long time now if it wasn’t for Superman (1978). This is not only the superhero film that got the ball rolling but it’s the superhero film that laid the groundwork for all the beats, tropes, and basic structure that nearly every film based off of a comic book and superhero is expected to follow upon. This overexposed subgenre only ever became what it is and has grown to be for nearly the past five decades due to the groundbreaking success of Superman (1978).

This was the birth of the superhero!

This was Superman (1978)!

Next Up: Superman II: When Director’s Cuts Matter

Marvel Rivals “Gooner” Controversy Explained

Marvel Rivals has been the most talked about video game at the moment. Since it released for free back in December, Marvel fans and gamers cannot seem to stop gushing over how good this game really is. While the overall premise of the game is nothing more than “Overwatch but with Marvel superheroes” with a few live service elements from Fortnite throw in there for good measure, it’s overall variety in terms of it’s seasonal content and expansive, colorful roster of Marvel’s most iconic comic book characters has been the main features that has had folks keep coming back to it. From the immersive gameplay to the intriguing maps/setting to the appealing art style to the fun as hell banter that is played through every single match, this has perhaps been the most successful Marvel related thing since well……Avengers: Endgame. The one main Marvel feature of the 2020s that seems to have united Marvel fans, comic book fans, and gamers worldwide for this fun and immersive experience. I have put over 60 hours into this game since it launched and I still find myself keep coming back for more. If that’s not the sign of a great game with a ton of replay value, I don’t know what is.

However, that hasn’t stopped the game from running into it’s fair share of “controversies”. I put controversies in quotes because I don’t think it’s so much as big of a deal as what certain people are making it out to be but more of it’s not as big of a deal that certain people WANT it to be. In the sense, that this isn’t really being seen as outrage as angry YouTubers would want you to believe outside of some accounts on Twitter and Reddit along with an article or two that was clearly designed for rage bait clicks for folks that were stupid enough to take the bait.

You might be thinking I’m talking about the supposed censorship that took place with key words being banned from the game such as “1989”, “Free Taiwan”, “Hitler”, and “ISIS” or the cringeworthy modes of Presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump as Captain America being taken down (Seriously, that was the most cringeworthy shit EVER!!!!!!). You would be……surprisingly wrong there. (Seriously, how in the world did that controversy just….drop off the face of the earth?!)

What I’m talking about are the eye opening designs of the characters that are presented in the game, most notably the female characters. With certain folks complaining that the designs are too sexualized, too male gazing, and too pandering to the “goon” squad. And with the recent season update that includes Emma Frost and the announcement of the game receiving swimsuit skins later this year, to tie into Marvel Comics’ revival of their Swimsuit special, there has been nonstop “gooner” allegations helmed against this game.

I get that certain folks need to have this conversation over this supposed “controversial” subject matter over this game because well…..it’s 2025 and literally everything needs to be a major talking point about something that is no where near as interesting as everyone is making out to be. All it takes is one clickbait tweet, a juicy quote from an article, or a rage-inducing title of a video to get certain folks fired up and feel like they need to defend something so trivial and minor or else……it will disappear forever because it made a certain someone upset. But in the case of Marvel Rivals, this “gooner” controversy is essentially of an example of a big snowball that certain folks feel the need to push down the mountain, making what should be a minor issue into something major because they couldn’t leave things well enough alone and just not take the bait. The whole “this game is made for the goon squad” is the main element that’s got certain folks triggered….and it’s absolutely hilarious.

The design of female characters in games has been a real toxic discussion over the years. For a while, certain folks have been complaining about women in gaming not being “attractive” enough. This has been seen as a response to backlash over the years of video games being sexist towards women and the majority of female protagonists in games being designed more with male gamers in mind as opposed to female gamers. Characters such as Kay Vess from Star Wars: Outlaws, MJ from Marvel’s Spider-Man 2, and Ciri with the new upcoming The Witcher VI have been subjected to major controversy for their designs. The main talking points around them being that they didn’t look hot enough, had too much “masculine” features, and being made ugly “on purpose” for…..reasons I can’t even comprehend. So much so that there are folks that refused to play those games and many others just because none of the women in them gave them a boner.

Although, there have been some notable exceptions, particularly with games made by Eastern developers, in recent memory that have gone out of their way to make the women in their games as easy on the eyes and visually appealing as possible. Characters such as Tifa Lockhart and Aerith Gainsborough from Final Fantasy VII and the women from Stellar Blade being recent examples of this. Although, there’s has been some hype over the Western developed Grand Theft Auto VI because of how fine the new girl, Lucia, looks in it and…..I guess there’s that. However, there hasn’t been one instance in recent memory where you can tell the main playable female characters were made to look as good as the developers can possibly make them than with Marvel Rivals.

Whether we are talking about Black Widow, Scarlet Witch, Storm, Magik, Hela, Emma Frost, Sue Storm, Luna Snow, Mantis, Psylocke, Dagger, or Squirrel Girl (I left out Peni Parker for a reason!), the women in Marvel Rivals have tended to shine in more ways than one. This most notably comes from their gorgeous outfits, unlockable/buyable skins, flawless hair, and the thick..well….”layers” to their designs. Because of all that and more, I can’t imagine there are certain folks that did NOT want to play as any of those characters just because of how good they look. (There’s a reason that Storm has been one of my top 3 playable characters since launch). While many people have applauded the game for these appealing designs that makes it feel like these characters were ripped straight out of the comic books and stayed true to their original forms, there are those that have condemned it, feeling like it devalues the women of the game in any way or that it’s relying on sex appeal in order to keep the services going for the foreseeable future.

And these aren’t just the typical far-left extremists that certain folks are letting you to believe but even the ones on the other far end political stretch (A.K.A. the “woke” right) that have condemned the game for making the outfits of the female characters too revealing, too slutty, and too “inappropriate” for children. (I wouldn’t be surprised if these are the same kind of folks that constantly blame games like Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto for all of the world’s problems instead of….well….themselves!) And I don’t think I need to go into this recent “GoonerGate” controversy (Yes, that is a real thing!) that I’m sure the game itself has been dragged into because of that. While I can understand a viewpoint or two of this matter, I do think this whole thing is being blow WAY out of proportion by such a small minority.

Yes, I am someone that advocates for my ladies to be well written and fun to play as in games that amounts to them being more than just being sexy eye candy. Yes, I am also someone that doesn’t let how good (or bad) a pixeled female A.I. looks determine my feelings on a video game. However, I do NOT think whatsoever that the way that the women superheroes look in Marvel Rivals detracts from their characters or makes me think of any less of them as a part of their characters history. If anything, it makes me think more of them as characters.

While the game itself might not have it’s own campaign or characterization for the women outside of some good banter and visual flare, they do feel very in-line of how I (and many others) view them as characters in comics, movies, and even games. It’s not just their amazing looks that makes them appealing, it’s their special powers, unique gameplay, suitable voice work, and the way they play off the other characters that make them stand out in the best ways. And even the women with the most revealing outfits, you can tell they feel the most confident about themselves when they wear it. It’s their attractiveness and femininity that empowers them to be the best version of themselves and NOT the other way around. And the best part of it all is that it’s not just the women that look good in Marvel Rivals, it’s the men too.

While the male superhero counterparts may not be as hyper-sexualized as their female counterparts, they too have great and fitting designs that looks like they were ripped straight out of the comics. You can’t tell me that Spider-Man, Wolverine, Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Hulk, Black Panther, and many others don’t look the way they are suppose to and don’t fit them as characters whatsoever. I wouldn’t be surprised if the majority of the designs of this game are considered the definite designs for many newcomers to the Marvel lore. And even the male superheroes that are hyper-sexualized well……they do have great wonders as well.

I can’t imagine how many women (and even some men) that have played this game found themselves themselves gooning over shirtless Namor, daddy Reed Richards, goldy Adam Warlock, completely worthy Loki, totally non-Sebastian Stan Bucky, and twerking Venom with his full cake booty. This is literally a game where both the men AND women get to have fat asses. THIS is the representation that matters!

When it comes to the “gooner” discourse surrounding Marvel Rivals, I see it more as a tongue-and-cheek kind of thing rather than something that should be taken seriously. Because, when playing through the game, you can tell this is all being done out of love, passion, and respect for the characters throughout Marvel’s history instead of pandering and desperation. It would be one thing if the game was bad and you can tell they are relying on attractive men and women to keep the game afloat but that is definitely NOT the case here.

If folks want to continue lambasting this game because of it’s appeal to “gooners”, let them. The game has been a success since it launched during the holiday season and will continue to do so for at least the next few years. I get how annoying online grifters can ruin the fun of something like this because it makes them believe they’ve “won” something and have to keep bringing up irrelevant posts and articles to make certain talking points feel much bigger than they really are. But for folks like us, who can enjoy any game we want without have some sort of bias or pride attached to it, we are the ones that get the last laugh at the end. And also the developers of Marvel Rivals of course.

I also want to keep in mind that if there are women (or even men) out there that do take issue with the way the characters look in the game and have a fair, not extreme, opinion on it, that’s all well and good. I just believe there are FAR worse examples of oversexualized characters in gaming and media that do take away from them as characters if you strip away how good they look. In the case of Marvel Rivals, I strongly believe that (for the most part) the designs of the characters compliment themselves and only adds to the variety of the game rather than take away from it. It’s that nice little icing on a very well made and properly put together cake that anyone can enjoy. And that is perhaps the best possible compliment I can give a game!

In the meantime, I’m going to continue to play the hell out of and enjoy Marvel Rivals! And I recommend you to do the exact same!

To conclude this piece, here’s Knuckles approval ratings of the “mommies” of Marvel Rivals!