Superman movie franchise gets a reboot. It's official.

[huedell]

A load of BS Anthony?

Not to me.

Why does the "post smack of unfairness"? Because I don't agree
with your opinion?

No.

Because of...

The difference between a "good Superman farce" and a "good
Superman porn" as entries into the Superman movie legacy is quite different ---and YOU know better, man.

That's an "unfair" point---"porn vs. farce" come on...

AND...if you reply by saying...

What I do know is that NEITHER a "good Superman farce" or a "good
Superman porn" belong as entries in this series. If III was a stand-alone
movie that they wanted to make as a farce or comedy, then so be it. After
all, no one's complaining about the '66 Batman series and that was a farce,
camp, whatever you want to call it. But they didn't go that route....they
shoehorned it in as part of the series, which was for the most part played
straight in I and II (yes some humor but not Pryoresque). And that's WHY
people have a problem with it in context with the previous 2.

All I can say is that I look at it as a nicely made farcical comedy ---and---because of that alone I'm not going to say "it sucks" or it was "horrible"
because that alone isn't a good enough reason.

Now---Superman IV---was full of gags ---some were okay---most were
mediocre----but bottom-line --the production was a MESS---
kinda like SUPERMAN II's production technique---but without all the treats
SUPERMAN II had...and of course we all know THAT list. We're all
fans of II.

It's SUPERMAN III that gets us in these debates---and, again, I think it's
an underrated film----mostly because of comicbook fan stubborness
---that's where I get the term "misguided" from.

I see SUPERMAN III as a real enjoyable movie---I don't even need to start
reasoning with ANYONE---including MYSELF---about whether it should be "stand alone" in the series or not---that's too much wasted thought
right there.

[Hector]

you did see the same Superman 3 I did, right? Or was it the Bizarro World one that didn't suck eggs. Tightest of the 4?? Seriously?? WOW.

[Hector]

Good Superman porn...lol...that was some good stuff...Anthony.

[huedell]

High five!

[Hector]

Come on Hue...smile a bit...it's all in good fun.

[The Toyroom]

A load of BS Anthony?

Not to me.
No.
Because of...
That's an "unfair" point---"porn vs. farce" come on...

It's an extreme analogy, jackass. And I use that term with love and endearment before you get on you high horse because you're quite often as stubborn as a mule.

It's SUPERMAN III that gets us in these debates---and, again, I think it's an underrated film----mostly because of comicbook fan stubborness
---that's where I get the term "misguided" from.

Don't pull the comic-fan vs. non-comic fan card....the general, casual moviegoer can see that the tone of III doesn't match up with that of I and II. It has NOTHING TO DO about comic book inaccuracy. I and II have comic-book inaccuracies but they're still good flicks.

I see SUPERMAN as a real enjoyable movie---I don't even need to start
reasoning with ANYONE---including MYSELF---about whether it should be "stand alone" in the series or not---that's too much wasted thought
right there.

Whatever helps you sleep at night, dude. Let's just say that for all intents and purposes the Superman movie franchise "jumps the shark" with III. I'm sure even YOU will admit that.

[The Toyroom]

Good Superman porn...lol...that was some good stuff...Anthony.

Thanks! I'm here all week.

[huedell]

Don't pull the comic-fan vs. non-comic fan card....the general,
casual moviegoer can see that the tone of III doesn't match up with that of
I and II. It has NOTHING TO DO about comic book inaccuracy. I and II have comic-book inaccuracies but they're still good flicks.

No need to get your "comicbook fan hackles" up---man---

You're totally missing my point. I pulled no such "card".

Bottom line is---if a movie is good---then who cares if it matched up
with the previous two???

Rating the movie's quality is where you should start and end in my book.

To rate it so harshly JUST because of the franchise context makes no sense
to me.

Whatever helps you sleep at night, dude. Let's just say that for all
intents and purposes the Superman movie franchise "jumps the shark" with
III. I'm sure even YOU will admit that.

Meh. The franchise jumped the shark with the dues-ex-machina ending of
TMP and the uneven production of II already----but I won't condemn those
movies---as they were fine enough----even with their "gaps".

Now...
The "jackass" stuff you went off with. Wow. I'm (almost) speechless---I know
we're in a heated debate---and you gave yourself a "buffer"
with the "term of endearment" crap---but you're really getting nasty man---

----you always have taken that approach on the Net though.

I prefer the "high horse" to the nastiness, personally.

[Hector]

Thanks! I'm here all week.

[huedell]

Come on Hue...smile a bit...it's all in good fun.

It very well may be----but let's just say my "tone" here
is more to make some solid points about III---and others
seem to fall back on quite shallow stances on the movie...
and personal jabs at the same time.

Am I guiltless here?

Most likely not....but, hey...it's the Net and these
inconsistincies in these debates are bound to happen.

I guess what it comes down to is that I like SUPERMAN III
---and you and Anthony vehemently hate it.

No need to get nasty or childish over the issue though

[The Toyroom]

No need to get your "comicbook fan hackles" up---man---You're totally missing my point. I pulled no such "card".

Hugh, you said:

It's SUPERMAN III that gets us in these debates---and, again, I think it's
an underrated film----mostly because of comicbook fan stubborness
---that's where I get the term "misguided" from.

So yeah, ya did pull the card.

Bottom line is---if a movie is good---then who cares if it matched up
with the previous two???

But it's NOT good (IMO) and the difference in tone from the previous films is only one of the reasons but it's the most apparent right off the bat.

To rate it so harshly JUST because of the franchise context makes no sense
to me.

It's NOT the only reason but it IS the most glaring along with Richard Pryor. Sorry, like his stand-ups but not his movies, unless it's with Gene Wilder.

Now...
The "jackass" stuff you went off with. Wow. I'm (almost) speechless---I know
we're in a heated debate---and you gave yourself a "buffer"
with the "term of endearment" crap---but you're really getting nasty man---

It's called sarcasm. If I really wanted to be nasty I'm sure there are better words to use that "jackass". Some might make the filter, others might not. Lighten up, dude. You take things waaay to seriously in these debates and ALWAYS play the victim. I might be the only one saying it but I know I'm not the only one thinking it.

----you always have taken that approach on the Net though.

Oh yeah...I'm such an ogre on these boards....I'm getting reprimanded all the time. Seriously dude. LIGHTEN UP!

I prefer the "high horse" to the nastiness, personally.

Sometimes I think you just like typing.
(I do hope that's enough emoticons to convey my sarcasm via the Net. I wouldn't want to offend.)

[LadyZod]

You know... I liked all 4 Donner era Superman movies.

I enjoyed Supergirl.

I loved the Superboy TV show.

I was addicted to Lois and Clark.

I watch Smallville.

And I enjoyed Superman Returns.

They all have their faults. I'll even list them:

Superman the Movie: Stupid star shaped rocket ship, and turning back time by flying around the world real fast. (Although I insist he DIDN'T turn back time as others think... HE and HE alone TIME TRAVELED! He used to time travel in the comics at that time by flying fast enough to break the time barrier, and by showing the earth spin in reverse it was just a way of showing us how FAST he was flying. That's why the stuff he did before, like saving the dam still happened.)

Superman II: Stupid forget-me-Lois kiss, and my favorite: CELLOPHANE \ S / !!!

Superman III: The use of a rich supervillain that is NOT Lex. The use of a killer computer that is NOT Brainiac. Richard Pryor.

Superman IV: Nuclear Man instead of Bizarro.

Supergirl: Omegahedron and return to Argo city.

Superboy TV Show: Going to college in FLORIDA?!?!

Lois and Clark: Frog-eating clones. Nuff said.

Smallville: No tights, no flight. Killing Bo Duke.

Superman Returns: Illegitimate Kryptonian Monchichi, no personality having Lois, hair parted on the wrong side.


BUT, I am a fan. I'm not a fair weather fan. I stick to Supes through thick and thin, and root him on regardless of whether it involves Atari 2600 graphics and Richard Pryor, Cellophane shields, a Daily Planet building where the globe is not on the roof, but on the awning at the front of the building, Superboy casting changes between seasons, a neverending trek to reach the point where a cape is worn, or a dumbass story involving Jimmy Olsen and a witch.

I won't sit here and completely tear apart what I love. And what I love is the essence of Superman. It's what he stands for and what he does. Maybe it hasn't been captured perfectly by hollywood. Heck, it hasn't been captured perfectly by the comics either. But I can sit there and watch Superman IV and enjoy it, because I'm usually drunk by the time I get that into the dvd player and if I squint my eyes enough nuclear man IS Bizarro, and all is right in the world of Superman.

But seriously, it's all fun, right?

Although I will no longer sit through Superman II unless it's the so called Donner Cut. Lois with a gun... so worth it!

[Hector]

It very well may be----but let's just say my "tone" here
is more to make some solid points about III---and others
seem to fall back on quite shallow stances on the movie...
and personal jabs at the same time.

Am I guiltless here?

Most likely not....but, hey...it's the Net and these
inconsistincies in these debates are bound to happen.

I guess what it comes down to is that I like SUPERMAN III
---and you and Anthony vehemently hate it.

No need to get nasty or childish over the issue though

I'm a nice guy and you love me, Hue.

[Hector]

So yeah, ya did pull the card.

It's SUPERMAN III that gets us in these debates---and, again, I think it's
an underrated film----mostly because of comicbook fan stubborness
---that's where I get the term "misguided" from.


Hue is the MASTER of that...good catch, Anthony.

[Hector]

You know... I liked all 4 Donner era Superman movies.

I enjoyed Supergirl.

I loved the Superboy TV show.

I was addicted to Lois and Clark.

I watch Smallville.

And I enjoyed Superman Returns.

They all have their faults. I'll even list them:

Superman the Movie: Stupid star shaped rocket ship, and turning back time by flying around the world real fast. (Although I insist he DIDN'T turn back time as others think... HE and HE alone TIME TRAVELED! He used to time travel in the comics at that time by flying fast enough to break the time barrier, and by showing the earth spin in reverse it was just a way of showing us how FAST he was flying. That's why the stuff he did before, like saving the dam still happened.)

Superman II: Stupid forget-me-Lois kiss, and my favorite: CELLOPHANE \ S / !!!

Superman III: The use of a rich supervillain that is NOT Lex. The use of a killer computer that is NOT Brainiac. Richard Pryor.

Superman IV: Nuclear Man instead of Bizarro.

Supergirl: Omegahedron and return to Argo city.

Superboy TV Show: Going to college in FLORIDA?!?!

Lois and Clark: Frog-eating clones. Nuff said.

Smallville: No tights, no flight. Killing Bo Duke.

Superman Returns: Illegitimate Kryptonian Monchichi, no personality having Lois, hair parted on the wrong side.


BUT, I am a fan. I'm not a fair weather fan. I stick to Supes through thick and thin, and root him on regardless of whether it involves Atari 2600 graphics and Richard Pryor, Cellophane shields, a Daily Planet building where the globe is not on the roof, but on the awning at the front of the building, Superboy casting changes between seasons, a neverending trek to reach the point where a cape is worn, or a dumbass story involving Jimmy Olsen and a witch.

I won't sit here and completely tear apart what I love. And what I love is the essence of Superman. It's what he stands for and what he does. Maybe it hasn't been captured perfectly by hollywood. Heck, it hasn't been captured perfectly by the comics either. But I can sit there and watch Superman IV and enjoy it, because I'm usually drunk by the time I get that into the dvd player and if I squint my eyes enough nuclear man IS Bizarro, and all is right in the world of Superman.

But seriously, it's all fun, right?

Although I will no longer sit through Superman II unless it's the so called Donner Cut. Lois with a gun... so worth it!

Excellent post, bravo.