The third installment of a franchise always tends to be the trickiest installment of them all to pull off. By that point, you start to run short on original ideas and it’s when the audience start to feel fatigue of your franchise since they are already familiar with your game and have seen all of the tricks you can pull out of your butts. There’s just so many times where the audience wants to see the Death Star get blown up! It’s also at this point where the studios are as desperate to make as much money as possible now that the brand is as popular as it is and the higher ups wanting higher box office numbers with each new installment. This leads to more emphasis on selling toys, comics, games, merchandise, etc than ever before! Because of that, the studios want to make sure the film aims to as big of a wide audience as possible! This usually results in studios being more involved with film production than before to make sure it has enough content in there for a wide majority of audience, the director having less creative freedom than before because of studio notes, and the desire to make the film more dumb down compared to the previous two films, to make sure it’s age appropriate for young kids and families to see in theaters! If you want a good example of exactly what I just said, look no further than Superman III!
Superman III was basically went the Superman franchise started to lose all of the hearts and wonders that it had from the beginning. While Superman II certainly had dents in it’s armor from both behind and in front of the camera, it was still able to hold together strongly because it built upon the original classics by having the world be more expanded upon, the characters being further developed, and the action and special effects being taken to the next level. This third installment with the man of tomorrow does the exact opposite of that. Instead of heart and wonder, it’s now just gags and slap stick. Instead of important social/political commentary, it’s now just mindless action and explosion. Instead of intimidating villains that pose a real threat to our heroes, they are now cartoon characters that you can’t take seriously. Instead of being smart, it’s now a self-parody! Putting all of this crap together, you get the complete s*itshow that is Superman III!
As you would expect, just like the last time around, Superman III had quite a bit of a rocky production! From disagreements on the script/budgeting to the cast feuding with the producers, it was not a smooth ship sailing to theaters in 1983! And unfortunately, it is very noticeable when you look at it on the screen! The effects looks worse because of it’s cheaper budget, the action as much less thought put into it with no weight, you have supporting characters that serve no purpose other than to be the comic relief (Poor Richard Pryor!), and it has little to no connections to the first two Superman movies!
All you have to do is look at two separate scenes in regards to how tonally all over the place in Superman III! Sometimes it’s all silly and goofy and other times, it gets dark really quickly!
Does those two scenes feel like they belong in the same movie? No, no they don’t!
Granted having a film be funny and dark CAN work if there is a properly balanced tone throughout and if the movie had an actual functioning brain in it’s head, knowing when to be funny and when to be serious! But, there in lies the problem!
Superman III does the exact opposite of what the last two films did, it refuses to take itself seriously by any measures! There’s no tonal balance that director Richard Lester is able to control, no genuine enough stakes to get invested in, and the only stand out sequences are the ones that are either obnoxious silly or obnoxiously serious! This is what you get when you become a self-parody!
For as much as other Part Three films have floundered, they at least did so because of a desire to try to top the bar the previous two films set up, only to end up having the whole foundation crumble right in front of you because of overreliance of your own ambition. Superman III doesn’t even attempt to be in the same wheelhouse as Superman: The Movie or Superman II. It has no desire to be a logical continuation of the first two films or offer an interesting expansion on the world of Superman. I’m willing to bet if you watched the first two films and watch this one without knowing it’s suppose to be the third Superman movie with Christopher Reeves, you would NEVER guest this was suppose to exist in the same universe as the prior two Superman movies. The tone is much different, the scenes feel much more weightless, the characters are giving much less to do, and the whole thing it seems to have room for is ridiculous action and gags throughout.
At times, Superman III feels even more of a soft reboot than even Superman Returns (I’ll certainly go into that more once the time comes!). It just exists in it’s own, immature bubble without a care in the world of honoring it’s title character or even trying to function in it’s own sandbox. It’s just well….. a self-parody!
It’s hard to tell if how much of the studio politics played into the decision making of the film, how much of the film was what Lester wanted, and/or if this film would have even been made at all if Warner Bros wasn’t able to overpay Christopher Reeve to get him to come back, but Superman III follows victim to many disappointing threequels out there, forgetting what made it’s franchise successful in the first place and crushing the entire foundation in the process. What makes this third chapter stink more than most of them though is it’s lack of desire to be as engaging, interesting, or entertaining as the previous two Superman films were! That’s what you get when you become a self-parody!
With a mostly negative reception from fans and critics alike and a disappointing time at the box office, you would think this was the end of the Christopher Reeve run of Superman. Believe it or not, that wasn’t the case! There was actually one more film! A film that somehow managed to be even worse than this one and be up there as one of the worst superhero films ever!
Tune in next time and I will tell you ALL about it!
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).
Adam's Blog 