badly done, a story the product of the 80s, nuclear weapons and a film trying to give message,,,nuclear is bad, a bad villain in nuclear man, nowhere near the class of villains on show in superman 2. and the days long gone whed you could believe a man could fly, the effects on show are bad, but i have to admit its a good bad film, dont expect the masterpiece of 1 and 2, or even as good as 3, but, they gave it a shot
Quite possibly the worst movie I've ever seen. Terrible writing, cheap special effects, bad continuity, illogical plot devices, unforgivable errors, and a heavy-handed, left-wing political message on top of it all.
Sydney Furie directed this Reeves vehicle, with cold war implications, and nuclear disarmament...and some kind of nuclear powered villain running around. Uhu. Arguably the worst movie of 1987.
Look up in the sky, it's a bird, it's a plane, it's Superman! I admire the greatest superhero in the world who is both an American and world icon. Here is the fourth chapter of the "Superman" film series that packs punches and is as powerful as steel.
In "Superman IV - The Quest For Peace", Superman crusades for nuclear disarmament to prevent possible nuclear war. At the same time, he fights the Luthor-created Nuclear Man as he, like always, protects the truth, justice, and the American Way. The special effects (SFX) are plenty in all the action scenes, which still flies in good quality just like its predecessors. What a great superhero movie!
Adapted from the DC Comics series by Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel and directed by Sidney J. Furie, this 1987-released "Superman" film features the finest acting performances from the following cast members:
1.) Christopher Reeve (Clark Kent/Superman)
2.) Margot Kidder (Lois Lane)
3.) Marc McClure (Jimmy Olsen)
4.) Jackie Cooper (Perry White)
5.) Gene Hackman (Lex Luthor)
6.) Jon Cryer (Lenny)
7.) Sam Wanamaker (David Warfield)
8.) Mariel Hemingway (Lacy Warfield)
9.) Mark Pillow (Nuclear Man)
The background instrumental music is so powerful that it reflects the mythical Superman hero. The main theme is in my head now, and I can hear it!
Whether you read comic books or not, go ahead and enjoy the fourth chapter of the "Superman" film series, highly recommended for all audiences.
Horrible. You'd think that at some point the director would've said "hey, this movie really sucks, let's fix it." Superman decides to *really* change the world for the better, starting by single-handedly disarming the world of Nuclear Weapons. The explosion of them going off in space is used by Lex Luthor to create "Nuclear Man." A super powerful foe, tougher than Superman in a toe-to-toe fight, and also recharges by sunlight. The fist-fight gets so epic that they duke it out on the moon. -it sounds at least really epic and entertaining, right? Trust me, it's not. Where a comic could've used inner dialog and splash pages, this movie just sucked.
this movie seemed thrown together just to make a quick buck. i loved the scenes dealing with the nuclear threat of the 80s. but the sun man or nuclear guy, just didnt cut it
This film is only saved by the cast that has done so well in their roles since the first film. The script could have been better developed and the special effects are looking a bit cheesy by this point.
A close subject to Christopher Reeves helping to develop a provocative theme ? nuclear disarmament. But with the return of Lex Luthor and another supervillain called Nuclear Man doesn?t save the franchise from becoming a box-office a dud.
Lex Luthor returns and has a proposition ? giving nuclear arms merchant a deal they can?t refuse. But in order to do so, he has to find a way to stop Superman from doing the world a favor ? nuclear disarmament. So Lex Luthor creates Nuclear Man, a supervillain based on power of the Sun and stronger, faster than Superman. Will Superman able to stop Nuclear Man before it?s too late to stop nuclear disarmament?
As the series fail to ignite its popularity, the movie was cheaply made that is noticeable throughout the film. The script feels amateurish in many ways as if you are watching a copycat film with cheap special effects and half bake fight scenes. The editing is even not well done as the sequence felt a little rushed. Fans may be disappointed with this chapter even though it is a personal subject to Christopher Reeves. A movie only fans will continue watching even though it isn?t that good.
A sub-par event for the man of steel. It's good to see them bring back Lex Luthor, at least, but this outing definitely pales in comparison to the first two.
Ouch. Releasing this movie after Superman III seems like the series was trying to push the limits of how corny it can get. It's bad that we don't get to see Lex Luthor actually being the real villain, and it's even worse that they got the potentially most corny, laughable villain ever. As great as this cast is,not even they could have saved this horrible script or the laughable "special effects".
This one could have used some work, because it lightly touched on an issue that could have been interesting (Superman wondering what his role on Earth should be). Utlimately, though, it doesn't expand on it and follows a bland route to the end. It's mediocre in every sense of the word.
So, what can i say? I don't know. Obsession covers it nicely. I love Superman. To be honest, it could never go wrong. you would really have to do something wrong to annoy me. after reading the comics as a kid i loved the movies and the tv series and everything pretty much! gr8 movie!
I saaw it - I was not particularly impressed...but then I've seen ALOT of Superman movies (and the original TV series, and the cartoons) -- seeing it once was enough....
Had some interesting premises, such as Superman ridding the world of nuclear weapons. Unfortunately the script was crap and it was badly directed. A waste of Chrostopher Reeve's talent
Only Christopher Reeve manages to save this tired 3rd sequel to the comic book franchise successfully started by Richard Donner in 1978, moderately done by Richard Lester for the second movie and destroyed by him in the third movie (good concept, though) and decimated by the director of "12 Angry Men."
too short, some of the effects were a little cheesy and how did the one girl survive in the vacuum of space? still, christopher reeve pulls it through one last time
I love comic books and therefore I always buy the adaptations - it's anal, I know... I've never liked Superman though, and Reeve as him, is even worse.
a great movie.alot of peopel think this was the worse one but i think is was awesome.and having superman face a being more powerful then him was interesting.
This was a good movie overall. It would have been better if it was not butchered before having a theatrical release. The Deleted Scenes on the new DVD show what the movie could have been like if they were not cut out.
The studio is to blame for the movie's failure. Not the director. Cannon did not know how to make a superhero movie.
MCT:September 11, 2008
MCT:July 26, 2008
MCT:July 7, 2008
MCT:July 3, 2008
MCT:June 4, 2008
MCT:May 14, 2008
MCT:April 24, 2008
MCT:March 18, 2008
MCT:November 15, 2007
