I have seen recently a lot of arguments about Superman 4, mainly from people who argue that the film's message of nuclear disarmament should trump any problems with effects and story development. No movie, however noble it tries to be, is above criticism if it fails to capture the viewer. And Superman 4's problems completely overshadow any of its noble stances.
Let's start with the most obvious flaw, the special (used loosely) effects. Anyone (like those I mention above) who say effects are unimportant to the movie's message need more bran in their diets. Great effects are most important in films such as these to create the illusion that the man we see on screen is really doing what he's doing. The first two Superman films did this, and are classics. Superman 4 fails at even the most basic effects. The flying scenes are the worst; you can see the wires in several shots, and the one particular shot of Superman (and Nuclear Man) coming straight at the camera is seen over and over again. In addition, the effects for space (black curtains) are visible, and there are many examples of bad green screening (the scene where Clark and Lois fall from his balcony being the most blatant).
The story is also choppy in its execution. The basic premise is that Superman (Chris Reeve) is trying to destroy all nuclear weapons to protect Earth, but Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) creates Nuclear Man (Mark Pillow) to destroy him. On paper, it's a good start. However, the story is littered with subplots that do little to nothing to advance the story (a direct result of editing 45 minutes out of what was released to theaters). Where did Lenny Luthor (Jon Cryer) come from? Why does Lacy Warfield (played uninspiredly by Mariel Hemingway) have the hots for Clark? How does the computer in the missile with the DNA for Nuclear Man know how to create him AND a costume from simple black material? None of these are explained, and it leaves you confused as to why these characters are important.
The actors try their best with the material they have; Reeve turns in as good a performance as you could expect (though he isn't as svelte as he was previously, a minor quibble) as Hackman is good. As I stated, though, Hemingway is a bore as Lacy, and Nuclear Man will forever be identified with the 80s (not to mention Pillow never gets to actually be heard, since Hackman's voice is dubbed over his). That said, if the material was better, the performances would've stood out more.
Then there are scenes which leave you simply scratching your head. How does Clark find another green crystal in the spaceship on his farm (didn't he take it out in Superman 1)? Another one is the scene where Superman repairs the Great Wall of China with...Super Repair Vision? I've never heard of him using that in the comics! Of course, the ultimate silly scene is near the end of the movie, when Nuclear Man takes Lacy into space...and she can breathe normally!!! Isn't that physically impossible??? Not to mention it's immediately followed by Superman moving the moon out of orbit to block the sun and take Nuclear Man's power away. Watch out for tidal waves, Earth!
In conclusion, Superman 4 will be remembered as a cinematic failure in spite of its intentions to educate the world about the dangers of nuclear weapons. While the actors try hard, they can't overcome the obvious lack of care from the producers about developing the story and making the film look good. And when the producers don't care, why should the viewing public care?
Let's start with the most obvious flaw, the special (used loosely) effects. Anyone (like those I mention above) who say effects are unimportant to the movie's message need more bran in their diets. Great effects are most important in films such as these to create the illusion that the man we see on screen is really doing what he's doing. The first two Superman films did this, and are classics. Superman 4 fails at even the most basic effects. The flying scenes are the worst; you can see the wires in several shots, and the one particular shot of Superman (and Nuclear Man) coming straight at the camera is seen over and over again. In addition, the effects for space (black curtains) are visible, and there are many examples of bad green screening (the scene where Clark and Lois fall from his balcony being the most blatant).
The story is also choppy in its execution. The basic premise is that Superman (Chris Reeve) is trying to destroy all nuclear weapons to protect Earth, but Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) creates Nuclear Man (Mark Pillow) to destroy him. On paper, it's a good start. However, the story is littered with subplots that do little to nothing to advance the story (a direct result of editing 45 minutes out of what was released to theaters). Where did Lenny Luthor (Jon Cryer) come from? Why does Lacy Warfield (played uninspiredly by Mariel Hemingway) have the hots for Clark? How does the computer in the missile with the DNA for Nuclear Man know how to create him AND a costume from simple black material? None of these are explained, and it leaves you confused as to why these characters are important.
The actors try their best with the material they have; Reeve turns in as good a performance as you could expect (though he isn't as svelte as he was previously, a minor quibble) as Hackman is good. As I stated, though, Hemingway is a bore as Lacy, and Nuclear Man will forever be identified with the 80s (not to mention Pillow never gets to actually be heard, since Hackman's voice is dubbed over his). That said, if the material was better, the performances would've stood out more.
Then there are scenes which leave you simply scratching your head. How does Clark find another green crystal in the spaceship on his farm (didn't he take it out in Superman 1)? Another one is the scene where Superman repairs the Great Wall of China with...Super Repair Vision? I've never heard of him using that in the comics! Of course, the ultimate silly scene is near the end of the movie, when Nuclear Man takes Lacy into space...and she can breathe normally!!! Isn't that physically impossible??? Not to mention it's immediately followed by Superman moving the moon out of orbit to block the sun and take Nuclear Man's power away. Watch out for tidal waves, Earth!
In conclusion, Superman 4 will be remembered as a cinematic failure in spite of its intentions to educate the world about the dangers of nuclear weapons. While the actors try hard, they can't overcome the obvious lack of care from the producers about developing the story and making the film look good. And when the producers don't care, why should the viewing public care?