Supermn III is exactly the sort of movie they had intended to make in the first place. If you watch the original version of "II" you can distinctly tell which scenes were directed by Richard Donner and which were directed by Richard Lester. "III" was intended to feature Brainiac with as the villan before they fired Richard Donner and Tom Mankowitcz from the franchise.

I didn't know this originally, but Richard Donner was supposed to do Superman 2 but was replaced by Lester, who had reshot some of Donner's footage. Also, Hackman did not come back for reshoots. I wonder if Siskel and Ebert ever found out about this.

Superman 3 is good enough. 4 is when it ended

@@sha11235 Ebert at least found out about it, I’m sure.

Haha. I was just going to comment about that. Boy, it did go wrong and fast. Superman 3 was a total disaster. Should have never been made at all because it destroyed the sterling legacy of this great franchise with Reeves. If they'd have stopped at 2, it would have been a perfect classic. Still is, but the following movies were a joke.

skoolbus amen, bruh RIP to a legend

He certainly was.

@@3000_Year_Old_Man But GB 2 was great.

Well Siskel would've been right about III IF... Richard Pryor was not included in it.

@Jason Thompson The third was great!

Superman III was okay. I'm just glad Gene was long spared from seeing the live abortion known as Man of Steel.

How was he to know?

Her name is Sarah Douglas, and yes she was.

A disappointing blow job

Well, Gene didn't know that at the time.

Actually, the beginning of the fall they made a special about the summer of 81 and how blockbusters and kid films were knocking off adult oriented movies. Hopefully that show will be downloaded.

When I first saw this, it was on ABC so there was added footage I didn't know about, which I missed when I caught this on cable years later.

The Dick Lester version is still superior and just hangs together better as a coherent film...the Donner version is a bit too brief at 15 min less than the original, and includes a "screen test" scene btw Clark & Lois that doesn't quite gel with the rest of it.

I didn't know about this until years later, but I still did love this sequel. Seeing Donner's version, it's pretty much a wash. Both versions work.

Man,you ain't never lied.

Nobody lives forever.

@@acrovader Thanks for that insightful comment. But they didn't exactly die of natural causes.

All gone way too soon, for sure.

You are right indeed. Very sad because i grew up loving them all.

She would have gone off him being an average Joe

Ebert even flipped back the other way. In his Lethal Weapon review, he said, "Richard Donner has directed a lot of classy pictures. My favorites are "Inside Moves," "Ladyhawke" and the original "Superman," which is still the best. This time he tops himself."

Ned Beatty didn't really do much in the sequel.

Don't forget Don Corleone as Jor-El!!

Don't forget Miss Tesmacher as well she was great really funny and gorgeous and sexy too👍🏻

Actually better than the first. Faster and funnier.

And, much like Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back, the films were also helped along by incredible classic scores that were hard to forget. The original Superman score really elevated the movies to something more than just popcorn fun.

@@steveconn It went the opposite direction of SW and ESB, where the first Star Wars was the faster and funnier one.

For real. I think it was Ebert during the Superman III review where he says it was exactly what he was worried the first movie would be. A shame too because the third and fourth films could have been just as amazing as the first two.

Such a shame! Instead of Brainiac or Bizarro, we got Richard Pryor and Robert Vaughn.

Scrapyard fight is fun

She said "made" not "need".

Its good, but no where near as good as Superman the Movie

I think because here it isn't an origin story and you have those three Kryptonian villians.

That all happened when Jaws came out in the summer of 1975 and started the summer blockbuster. Then in 1977, Star Wars later cemented that.

@@patrickshields5251 oh yea for sure. And I realised that years later when I was an adult. Because having grown up during and after the wave of all these movies, I grew up at the time where big action blockbusters were the norm, even the majority. But I didn't realise that fantasy flicks were rare back in the day and what dominated the screens were adult movies from everywhere on the planet. There's even a teacher that told me that when he was a teenager, there wasn't much of these movies and he and his friends were to the theater to watch art movies and films by Godard and so forth. What he was telling me was so alien to what I knew. I wish I had lived it, I wish young people would have the chance to see movies that are not just made for children aka popcorn flicks. Although the TV shows nowadays that you can find on Netflix are of good quality.

@@johnnyskinwalker4095 Shortly after this review, they did a special episode covering the topic called "I Was A Teenage Movie: Hollywood in 1981". It's now on KZfaq.

THERE was a time where I fantasized about doing what they did and having my own show.

Siskel can be a bit pompous at times but I love watching these

Yes, Hackman is retired though. So is Ned Beatty, who played Otis.

The Bride of Frankenstein.

@@ricardocantoral7672 Was gonna post the same thing lol

Terminator 2, aliens

Star trek 2 The Wrath of Khan.

Blade 2

No, people largely still love II. I myself still prefer the original, and recently I discovered extra reason why. II is cheaper than the original. The Movie had beef, including full orchestra. This movie was cheapened, including the orchestration and animation. The intro is not as artful and mature and much more comic-book. And 2 things that bothered me a long time: the East Houston father dropped on the ground bounces on a mattress under that dirt (and his ridiculous English-accented son), and the still photo of the White House (frozen water fountains!). Indicative of too much cheapness. I like this movie, but it is not the robust quality of the origin story.

@@theOlLineRebel The first movie tells the origin story flawlessly in my opinion. It’s the benchmark for how all origin comic book movies were to be made going forward. The second movie has more action and an extremely well told love story with a lot of heart and emotion attached to it. I think you can make a case for either movie being the best.

Well said. Exactly. Donner wasn't only a good director, but he was also a fan. He had respect for the material. I've said it before, because Donner had like 70 or 75% of the movie made, something like that. I get it, the producers wanted to replace Donner. And i know they didn't wanted to use Brando's footage so they need it to do reshots anyway. But appart from that, i think if Lester would've tried to stay as faithful as possible to that script that Donner was working on, if he would've follow that closely and just focus on doing the footage missing, what they needed to finish the film, maybe people wouldn't be so hard on him. And i get that he needed to film more than half of the picture in order to get credit. But to me that's no excuse. He made a lot of changes. Rewrote, and reshot scenes and added a lot of humor. And the problem was that the humor it felt out of place. Especially in the third act. Superman fighting 3 Kryptonians and everyone is going on with their lives like nothing is happening. I'd look up if i see Superman. You have people on a fast food restaurant. "You forgot your change..." "sound what sound ?" While he's talking on the phone. "My hair!" "Your hair ? What about mine?" The ice cream thing. Another guy on the phone. I can't remember if it was the same "Yeah, yeah, hahaha, yeah" all of that while the Kryptonians are using their super breath to create chaos. Was that supposed to be funny ?

Christian Garcia Agree completely. That whole scene that you mention with the hair comment and the guy in the phone booth is ridiculous. I’ll always remember a man yelling out in the theater as the credits were over when he said, “Donner did it better.” He was absolutely right. Everything you mention is spot on.

At least he didn't have complete disrespect for the character like Zack.

If you’re going to get logical, you’re in for a long movie.

The branch kept her afloat, allowing her to swim to the shoreline.

General Zod: _É o pau, é a pedra, é o fim do caminho_

Yes, they screwed the cast of "The Three Musketeers" as well.

@@gallery7596 And after Supergirl, Santa Claus and Christopher Columbus, their careers were over.

right. and why Richard Pryor? I just think that was an obvious cash grab

They really should have went with Brainiac like they originally planned.

Horribly wrong.

We agree to disagree.

Had some good moments. The Clark vs. evil Superman battle was awesome.

the script, period

@@jimjones4838 Movies are always about the script.

I question for you, Is Superman 2 release 1980 or 1981 I'm so confused?

I love the fact that film is mentioned in Family Guy.

Actually I think their criticism got more detailed and incisive as the years went on. Their peak probably came 10 or 15 years after this.

Seems to be the case worldwide. My old local theatre closed recently as well. Got to travel 12 miles now to get to one.

Update; it has reopened

@@oobrocks That is good to hear. Although, I have to be honest - I fear for a lot of cinemas future - what with online streaming.

Agreed

Ive noticed that. I mean in the unedited version of T1, there's an entire sex scene between Reese and Sarah. And you could sense the sexual tension for most of the time they're together. But then again Gene called the Terminator an "alien" as if he was asleep for the first hour.

Always seemed a bit of a stretch that she wouldn't be turned off by a guy infatuated with an old Polaroid and irradiated jizz

A bit of a stretch that Sarah isn't turned off by a guy that's infatuated with an old Polaroid and has irradiated ramjam

Hello, I don't know if you'll even see this response to your year old comment but I agree. I was 11 in 1981, and when I saw Superman II in the theatre, I was jarred the same way by the shockwave and the flamethrower. On the other hand, my 11 year old self was moved (almost) to tears watching Clark get beat up.

@@kennedytaylor4783 I agree that Clark getting beat up was emotional. Reeve's acting in that scene, especially when he's lying on the floor talking to Lois and realizing what a huge mistake he's made, is very moving. Despite my vitriol directed at the technical aspects of the movie, I think that SUPERMAN II is a very good movie. After seeing SUPERMAN in 1978, it instantly became my favorite movie at the time and I expected its sequel to be no less than the greatest movie ever made. So, I couldn't help but be let down in some ways. I still ended up seeing it multiple times in the theater and will watch the Blu-ray every couple of years.

I completely disagree with that. We are talking about 1980 and 1981 visual effects here. That was absolutely cutting edge stuff for its time. It’s hard to even see what the original Star Wars movies look like because George Lucas got rid of all of that for special editions . But It didn’t look vastly superior to anything you saw in the superman movies.

Indeed they did. Even later in the 90s. The 80s are sorely missed by those who lived them.

Oh yes, I remember those from the 1970s. And things went wrong: no cup, or no ice, or no flavoring just soda water. Some machines stole your money or kept your change.

@@r5t6y7u8 I don’t think I ever saw one in my life. They used to have coffee machines like that, I saw one of these a few times. The machine would dispense a cup and then pour coffee into it… I haven’t see any of those since the 90s and the one I saw was ancient

The best joke was the joke about Zod mentioning the President looked like an over the hill movie actor, and the President responded, "We had to make one part in this film historically accurate."

Not sure why this states 1981, as it was 1980. Could be the long runs they had back then. But it WAS a huge hit.

@@theOlLineRebel Superman II wasn’t released in the United States until the summer of 1981, as did Raiders.

Looks like Lester was very careful to only release his own footage as promotional clips.

*Reeve

@@jamesanderson6373 *Whatever

It was released in Europe in late 1980, then it got released in the US in mid 1981

Except the ending. It's too bad Tom Welling was too much of a pussy to wear the suit.

Naah...the Dick Lester version is superior, the comedy works better and is a more coherent film...the Donner version is a bit too brief at 15 min less than the original, and includes a "screen test" scene btw Clark & Lois that doesn't quite gel with the rest of it.

@@eargasm1072 The Donner cut appropriately reduces the comedy and keeps up the visual grandeur of the previous film.

Agreed. Sure wish Donner had been given a chance to complete his duo films. Lester's take is far too goofy too often. And, a lot of this movie looks and feels cheap. There was no financial reason for this, as the first one was a massive success. They knew the formula worked and had a wonderful director who helped pull it all off. Getting rid of Donner was just stupid.

@@eargasm1072 Lester was awful. Everything was a goof to him. Bleech.

There’s nothing to recommend Batman 1989 besides a cool Gotham City and some good Nicholson one-liners. The plot is garbage. And Returns was even worse. Nolan’s Bat films blow them away.

@@jedijones Nolan's Bat films are mundane and painfully desperate to stay relevant with the times, especially the latter two of the trilogy. The 1989 Batman was badly constructed but at least it exhibited a good deal of imagination and it can easily be seen as a satire of a morally bankrupt, urban society.

​​@@ricardocantoral7672More like a Fox News caricature of urban life, and a bunch of direct to video action movie tropes doing a Batman cosplay. Without the art direction, soundtrack, and acting, there's nothing special about it. It's made for a time before Batman fans had standards.

In what universe?

To me what damage Superman 2 after rewatching it I kind of felt most of the action scenes came off more in a cartoony fashion and near the End Having superman kiss Lois to make him forget just seemed a bit of a cheat out as Superman 2 had been parody loads of times but I feel the richard donner cut of Superman 2 fixed what he intended and showed People the Superman 2 he had in mind

I don’t disagree

@@SkankHunt3000 They're showing the original movie in theaters again this weekend and next week, and the Donner Cut in a smaller number of theaters.

I like Kidder’s performance in part 2 better than in the first. She seems more spunky and witty. I think she looked attractive in the first three Superman films but had bad hair, makeup and outfits in part 4. She looks nice in the TV interviews promoting part 4 but bad in the movie.

Lethal Weapon 2 is arguably better than the first, also. But your list is spot on.

She says she now believes she was wrong that he was Superman.

@@jedijones I know. My point was, the Clark disappearing act is "solved," but if Lois thinks they're both one in the same, she doesn't question why she never sees the two of them in the same place at the same time. Superman (in uniform) never showed up to save her. He's suspiciously M.I.A, so Lois should've still had questions is what I'm saying.

MrCrystalcranium I though Margot Kidder was pretty when I was kid. Now she looks like rough work; at best a model from old Virginia Slims magazine ad.

Margot was sexy (people should also check her out in "Gailey, Gailey") but I must admit in the Fortress of Solitudes scene Reeve is prettier than she is.

Kidder, Allen and Winger were girl-next-door types. The hot glamour women at that time were Farrah Fawcett, Raquel Welch, Jacquelyn Smith etc Today the GND are Kristen Bell, Emma Stone and Reese Witherspoon. The glamours are Scarlett Johanson, Megan Fox and Olivia Wilde.

amaxamon you know, I have to agree. I absolutely loved it as a kid, more than the first one. So did my parents and grandparents. So did the critics. However, it has aged badly and the original stands out as clearly superior in nearly every respect. The one element I think is memorable and powerful was Superman relinquishing his power and going back to the ruins of the FOS begging the now darkened specter of his father for a second chance. The green crystal glowing in the ashes has fantastic symbology; hope springs eternal.