Superman III (1983)
Lists
list by ToonHead2102
14 commentslist by Gaby
6 commentslist by diabolical dr voodoo
7 commentslist by johanlefourbe
6 commentsSuperman III Videos
110 Views
Added 9 years ago
Cover art, photos and screenshots
Reviews
A bad movie
A poor sequel lacking lustre, scope and gravitas
A bad movie
'Superman III' does feature a darker performance from Christopher Reeve, but what a ludicrous script! The film features some nice visual effects, but the effects are used mainly in really boring scenes. The action in this film is just dull and the idea of Superman becoming an alcoholic is... read more
UPC: 085391132028
Update feed
"Released on: 17 June 1983 The Evil Superman versus Clark Kent, the highlight of the film! Some great acting by Christopher Reeve. Although the rest of the film is just Richard Pryor doing comedy with Superman appearing occaionaly."
"Ross Webster Crimes committed: Attempted murder, Brainwashing, Abuse of power, Pollution "
“1983's Superman III is the first entry in this series without any input from Superman director Richard Donner or screenwriter Tom Mankiewicz, whose co”
A poor sequel lacking lustre, scope and gravitas
“1983's Superman III is the first entry in this series without any input from Superman director Richard Donner or screenwriter Tom Mankiewicz, whose conceptual ideas elevated the flawed but still serviceable Superman II, which was heavily rewritten and reshot after producers Alexander and Ilya Salkind fired Donner. Thus, the Salkinds handed the keys for Superman III over to Superman II's substitute director, Richard Lester, and the screenwriting pair of David and Leslie Newman. Although the Newmans retain a credit on the original Superman, Donner detested their comedic scripts for the first two pictures to such an extent that he hired Mankiewicz to rewrite them. Donner and Mankiewicz had plans for further Superman films and intended to use Brainiac as a villain, but Lester and the Newmans f” read more
" Rewatch Viewing Date: June 24th Via: 4K Blu-ray Plot: Entrepreneur Ross Webster teams up with a computer genius in order to realise his own evil intentions. When Superman obstructs his plans, he decides to destroy him. Rating: 4.2/10 Why Did I Watch It? I wanted to revisit all the classic Superman films before the new one to write a review. Review here"
" Clark travels to Smallville for his High School Reunion and reconnect with his childhood sweetheart Lana Lang. Computer programmer Gus Gorman is hired by financial tycoon Ross, to take control of the coffee business, by wiping out all the competition via satellite. After Superman destroys their plan, Ross makes Gus figure out how to find Kryptonite to eliminate Superman, but he uses tar as the missing element. This causes an unusual effect on Superman. Meanwhile Gus gets his machine he wan"
" Clark travels to Smallville for his High School Reunion and reconnect with his childhood sweetheart Lana Lang. Computer programmer Gus Gorman is hired by financial tycoon Ross, to take control of the coffee business, by wiping out all the competition via satellite. After Superman destroys their plan, Ross makes Gus figure out how to find Kryptonite to eliminate Superman, but he uses tar as the missing element. This causes an unusual effect on Superman. Meanwhile Gus gets his machine he wan"
"Critics felt that it just take off the ground, as a movie. When not overusing sight gags, slapstick, and Richard Pryor, Superman III resorts to plot points rehashed from the previous Superman flicks. My thoughts? Superman III feels like a movie, that just doesn’t know it wants to be. Richard Pryor, also feels out of place in this film."
“PROS: The cinematography is beautiful, and the special effects are above average. The score is still rousing, and Christopher Reeve is likable enough as Superman. The film is decently paced and there are one or neat touches such as when Superman turns nasty.
CONS: The storytelling is very clunky for me, while the script is awful. Margot Kidder apparently wanted little to do with this film and if true I'm afraid it does show, while Robert Vaughan is a pretty poor replacement for Gene Hackman and the less said about Pamela Stephenson the better. Also the direction is rather heartless and using Richard Pryor as the source of the laughs just didn't work.
Overall, it is disappointing and lacklustre but it is watchable unlike the fourth. Anyway that is another story. 5/10 Bet” read more
Login


