Skip to main content

Superman III went too far in the direction of cheap laughs and sight gags.

With Man of Steel opening on Friday, Dave McGinn examines what the early Superman movies can teach us about the superhero genre, for better or for worse. Today's instalment: the downward spiral of Superman III and IV

Yuk it up

Unlike so many of today's superhero movies, the Superman franchise starring Christopher Reeve was actually made for kids. But the third instalment, which featured comedian Richard Pryor as a computer genius, went too far in the direction of cheap laughs and sight gags.

Story continues below advertisement

Losing direction

When a new director is brought in to helm a franchise, things are either going to improve mightily or get much worse. When Superman producers fired director Richard Donner, who objected to making the series campy, well, we got Superman III. Directed by Richard Lester, who had previously directed the Beatles movies Help! and A Hard Day's Night, the third chapter signalled the beginning of the franchise's end.

Villain fatigue

Lex Luthor was again featured in Superman IV after already appearing in parts I and II. It doesn't take a brainiac to know there are plenty of other bad guys from the comics that Supes could battle.

New, lame bad guys

Evil Superman from Superman III was an interesting conceit, but Nuclear Man? Who is Nuclear Man? Answer: a lame, blond clone who shoots electricity out of his fingers. His appearance in Superman IV was a clear sign that filmmakers had lost touch with their source material.

The numbers game

Story continues below advertisement

Despite being savaged by critics, Superman III turned a profit. It was made on a budget of $39-million and had a U.S. gross of $59,950,623. But Superman IV tanked. Made on a budget of just $17-million, the movie's U.S. gross was only $15,681,020. Such poor earnings from two poor films shuttered the franchise for 26 years.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter