If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Den Of Geek)   Ten remarkable things about Superman IV: The Quest for Peace   (denofgeek.com) divider line 60
    More: Amusing, Superman IV, Superman II, Fortress of Solitude, Tobe Hooper, Perry White, Karate Kid, Lex Luthor, Krypton  
•       •       •

6004 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 22 Dec 2013 at 10:14 PM (36 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



60 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-22 09:58:16 PM
Jon Cryer was in that?
 
2013-12-22 10:02:28 PM

fusillade762: Jon Cryer was in that?


Oof, was he ever. Never has the absence of Ned Beatty felt more painful.
 
2013-12-22 10:10:19 PM
11) someone actually thought this film was a good idea.

/The comics actually did this did this story much better about a decade later, in the Superman: King of the World arc that took up the first half of 1999 and was the big swan song for the Jurgens/Simonson/Kesel/Ordway team that had been on the books the entire decade.
 
2013-12-22 10:22:41 PM
# 1-9: That it was greenlit in the first place.

#10: That Gene Hackman reprised his role in this farce.
 
2013-12-22 10:23:14 PM
It. Was. A. Horrible. Terrible. Piece. Of. Rancid. Monkey. Shiat?
 
2013-12-22 10:24:36 PM
12 month old article?  Really?

Obligatory creepy shot with you know who....

adamcarolla.com
 
2013-12-22 10:26:39 PM
And Superman being a superdick....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcrTzpovMfk
 
2013-12-22 10:27:31 PM

Apos: # 1-9: That it was greenlit in the first place.

#10: That Gene Hackman reprised his role in this farce.


Close the thread, nothing more to see here
 
2013-12-22 10:34:49 PM
I've been arguing this (extremely unpopular) case for years. But I prefer this film to Superman III

1. Because we got Gene Hackman back

2. Because, at least from a story standpoint, its heart was in the right place

3. Mariel Hemingway's legs

And 4. It taught me that gravity exists on the moon.
 
2013-12-22 10:39:47 PM
#1: It was worse than Superman III???  (Actually, S3 had its moments, as when Superman's evil self is flying around the world committing such dastardly acts as blowing out the Olympic flame, and straightening the Leaning Tower of Pisa.)
 
2013-12-22 10:49:23 PM
Superman 4 makes Superman 3 look like Superman I
 
2013-12-22 10:58:22 PM
By the mid-80s, original series producers Alexander and Ilya Salkind had sold the Superman rights to Cannon Films, a production company more used to making cheap action movies such as The Delta Force and Missing In Action.Cannon were also famous for producing Tobe Hooper's weird space nude female vampire movieLifeforce, and dance craze sequel  Breakdance 2: Electric Boogaloo.

Wha????
 
2013-12-22 10:58:43 PM
#1-#10----it sucked.
 
2013-12-22 11:01:26 PM
 
2013-12-22 11:08:35 PM

Snapper Carr: Superman 4 makes Superman 3 look like Superman I


Superman 4 makes Superman Returns look like Superman 3.
 
2013-12-22 11:11:34 PM
It was actually the smartest of all the movies made, at least from conception: why DOESN'T Superman just enforce peace?
 
2013-12-22 11:15:33 PM
Man of Steel was awesome.
 
2013-12-22 11:17:48 PM

Fano: It was actually the smartest of all the movies made, at least from conception: why DOESN'T Superman just enforce peace?


Because then he becomes a god among men. And we've seen what happens then.
 
2013-12-22 11:28:13 PM
Finding out who liked the movie would be a great starting point for the elimination phase of a eugenics program.
 
2013-12-22 11:29:05 PM

Confabulat: Fano: It was actually the smartest of all the movies made, at least from conception: why DOESN'T Superman just enforce peace?

Because then he becomes a god among men. And we've seen what happens then.


Well yeah, and there are plenty of good reasons not to but it least it wasn't another Lex Luthor land swi---dammit, can't they think of ANYTHING else for Luthor to do?

It was botched of course, but the idea behind it was pretty ahead of the curve prior to Watchmen movie or (I think) even the first semiserious Batman movie.
 
2013-12-22 11:38:48 PM
Superman's 'rebuild Great Wall of China' vision.
 
2013-12-22 11:48:03 PM
It was a Golan-Globus movie. Those guys were famous for churning out B-grade action movies in the 80s. It was doomed from the start.

Fano: It was actually the smartest of all the movies made, at least from conception: why DOESN'T Superman just enforce peace?


I always thought the plight to rid the world of nuclear weapons was a fool's errand. Superman can't be everywhere at once, so what guarantee does he have that every country will keep their word and not secretly make more? Is he the official UN nuclear weapons inspector from that point forward? So he's going to perpetually fly around every country and inspect their weapons plants and nuclear reactor facilities on an annual basis? That sounds exhausting.

And why just nuclear weapons? Why not go after biological or chemical weapons next? Or any weapon of mass destruction. And if he's going after weapons, he might as well resolve issues of genocide and suffering too (because those things won't stop just because he got rid of the WMDs. They'll just become slower and more messy). Stop foiling bank heists and go to Darfur and fix that shiat. And then he'll have to disband the armies that commit genocide and suffering, and topple the corrupt governments that sanction them, and then replace them with -- what? Puppet Pro-Superman states? Making the world safe for American capitalism? This would lead to massive conflict -- he'd essentially have to fight every military in the world, no sweat for him but that is ultimately what he must do if his goal is total world peace.

But world peace isn't technically achievable because it implies a state of healthy economic equilibrium (a mutually beneficial balance between haves and have nots), and the world is not and will never be in that state. So after he abolishes war, Superman will then have to go after injustice, inequality and exploitation, because the only people who really want peace are the rich (it cements their privilege and position indefinitely). Conflict is waged by the have-nots upon the haves, so Superman will have to come up with a plan by which the poor are affluent enough that they don't have to fight for their way of life. That means eliminating the concept of disposable underclasses which, to my knowledge, no apex civilization has ever been able to live without since the dawn of human history. That means getting rid of slavery, sweatshops and human trafficking, improving conditions for women and children in the third world, and a whole bunch of other Kryptonian-enforced sanctions, regulations, laws, rules and edicts. Superman would pretty much have to be a benign totalitarian dictator of the Earth. And many cultures would vehemently repel his impositions, leading to probably mass loss of life (either by themselves or fighting Supes). In the end, he would be worse for humankind then before he started trying to make the world a better place.

It's a huge mess, and not something I think Superman wants to take up.


/Incidentally, if you want to rob the Metropolis bank, simply do it during Daily Planet business hours.
 
2013-12-22 11:53:26 PM

Fano: It was actually the smartest of all the movies made, at least from conception: why DOESN'T Superman just enforce peace?


Because he would have to be a global dictator to do that.
 
2013-12-22 11:54:01 PM

LucklessWonder: Man of Steel was awesome.


I farkin' love this film - except for overuse of double-zooms...
 
2013-12-23 12:03:10 AM

B.L.Z. Bub: Fano: It was actually the smartest of all the movies made, at least from conception: why DOESN'T Superman just enforce peace?

Because he would have to be a global dictator to do that.


upload.wikimedia.org

Close enough?
 
2013-12-23 12:06:52 AM

movieman_1979: And 4. It taught me that gravity exists on the moon.


Of course gravity exists on the moon. Why wouldn't it? Everything has gravity. It's 1/7 as strong as Earth's gravity, but it's still gravity.
 
2013-12-23 12:21:50 AM

Ishkur: It was a Golan-Globus movie. Those guys were famous for churning out B-grade action movies in the 80s. It was doomed from the start.

Fano: It was actually the smartest of all the movies made, at least from conception: why DOESN'T Superman just enforce peace?

I always thought the plight to rid the world of nuclear weapons was a fool's errand. Superman can't be everywhere at once, so what guarantee does he have that every country will keep their word and not secretly make more? Is he the official UN nuclear weapons inspector from that point forward? So he's going to perpetually fly around every country and inspect their weapons plants and nuclear reactor facilities on an annual basis? That sounds exhausting.

And why just nuclear weapons? Why not go after biological or chemical weapons next? Or any weapon of mass destruction. And if he's going after weapons, he might as well resolve issues of genocide and suffering too (because those things won't stop just because he got rid of the WMDs. They'll just become slower and more messy). Stop foiling bank heists and go to Darfur and fix that shiat. And then he'll have to disband the armies that commit genocide and suffering, and topple the corrupt governments that sanction them, and then replace them with -- what? Puppet Pro-Superman states? Making the world safe for American capitalism? This would lead to massive conflict -- he'd essentially have to fight every military in the world, no sweat for him but that is ultimately what he must do if his goal is total world peace.

But world peace isn't technically achievable because it implies a state of healthy economic equilibrium (a mutually beneficial balance between haves and have nots), and the world is not and will never be in that state. So after he abolishes war, Superman will then have to go after injustice, inequality and exploitation, because the only people who really want peace are the rich (it cements their privilege and position indefinitely). Conflict is waged by ...


www.smbc-comics.com
 
2013-12-23 12:25:59 AM
This film DOES NOT EXIST!  Nor does a film they claimed to be the third movie in the series; we all know that the third movie was called Superman Returns.  And Superman II was directed by Richard Donner.
 
2013-12-23 12:36:07 AM
John Cryer did an interview last spring one of the things he talked about was this movie and how awesome it was to be cast in a superman movie... and how disappointing the final film turned out to be.

http://www.avclub.com/article/jon-cryer-on-charlie-sheens-work-ethic -a nd-correct-97494
 
2013-12-23 12:42:46 AM
Nov 15 2012

timely find, subby
 
2013-12-23 01:04:41 AM

UberNeuman: LucklessWonder: Man of Steel was awesome.

I farkin' love this film - except for overuse of double-zooms...


And the over use of the electronic/mechanical spaceship sound effect they used, and the lack of the characters being convincing, the poor casting for pretty much all of the characters, and the stupid part where it's not the sun that gives Kryptonians their power but the atmosphere, or a combination of both, they weren't totally clear on that.  Jeesh, even Superman Returns was better. I will say though that Man of Steel had a good special effects team.
 
2013-12-23 01:17:21 AM
They forgot to mention the reason it was so low budget. Short version: Cannon asked Warner Brothers for $40 million to make Superman IV, secretly took a little less than half of that to buy the rights and produce Masters of the Universe, told Sidney Furie that he had a bigger budget than he really had (they told him $30 million but only ever planned on giving him $20 million), then kept trimming Superman IV's budget back to finance a few super low budget movies.

They also got the original run time wrong. It wasn't 45 minutes longer (that's all the deleted stuff on the DVD and Blu-ray), but a little over an hour. Superman's 50th anniversary was going to be the next year (1988) and Cannon's plan was to have a big 50th anniversary movie. Cannon being Cannon however, they wanted to do it as cheaply as possible. They were so certain that Superman IV would be a massive hit like the first two that they could easily go back and shoot a little bit of filler around the cut footage and construct a new movie out of that. That didn't happen and the rights reverted back to the Salkinds (they had only licensed the rights to Cannon, not sold them). They rebooted the whole thing with the Superboy TV series, which was supposed to lead into what they were calling Superman: The New Movie, using the cast of the show in a new big-budget series of films.

It's sad because there's a really genuinely good film buried somewhere deep down in there and, with the proper budget and producers, it could have been dug out and potentially been the one that brought that iteration of the series back to the promise of Donner's original.

Listen to the commentary track by Mark Rosenthal on the current DVDs and Blu-rays. He basically walks the listener through what a nightmare working with Cannon was and what was cut out or changed for either budget reasons or Golan/Globus interference.
 
2013-12-23 01:57:13 AM
I'll agree that III holds up pretty damn well considering the bar's not set very high on it. It hasn't aged badly at all. If anything I enjoy it more than I did when it came out. IV was already terrible and time hasn't been kind to it one bit. I still say parts of Returns work just fine, all you really have to do is cut out anything involving the damn kid but even then it reads more like a long fanfilm than a film of its own, and not just because of the weak story.

Man of Steel I'll have to get drunk and watch it again to really judge it. I just don't like Snyder very much and Goyer gets more and more on my nerves every time I have to think about his writing. Like Returns it relies too much on special effects to cover up a weak story, with the added bonus of contributing to the overuse of Zod in every Superman property since 2004.

/The best Superman anything is still the animated series.
 
2013-12-23 02:36:10 AM

Snapper Carr: Superman 4 makes Superman 3 look like Superman I


Superman Returns makes Superman 4 look like Superman 2.
 
2013-12-23 03:03:34 AM
Cannon Films made 6,324 films during the 1980s and only 7 of them are worth a sh*t:

1. Barfly

2. 52 Pick Up

3. Ninja III: The Domination

4. Runaway Train

5. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2

6. Tough Guys Don't Dance

7. Street Smart
 
2013-12-23 03:39:32 AM
I'll admit I enjoyed Man of Steel. It wasn't perfect, but it was fun.
 
2013-12-23 04:03:53 AM

Sinbox: Cannon Films made 6,324 films during the 1980s and only 7 of them are worth a sh*t:

1. Barfly

2. 52 Pick Up

3. Ninja III: The Domination

4. Runaway Train

5. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2

6. Tough Guys Don't Dance

7. Street Smart


Oy. Let's not forget Delta Force, wherein Chuck Norris's motorbike literally farts rockets.
 
2013-12-23 04:13:04 AM
In the late 80s, if you saw the names Golan-Globus in front of any given movie, you knew exactly what you were in store for.
 
2013-12-23 06:10:45 AM

aendeuryu: Oy. Let's not forget Delta Force, wherein Chuck Norris's motorbike literally farts rockets.


On top of that, Delta Force had by far the greatest, most triumphant score of any 80s action movie. Seriously, the score is seriously wasted on such a shiat film. Alan Silvestri should've saved that hook for something far more epic, like ABC's Wild World of Sports or the Olympics or something.
 
2013-12-23 08:41:33 AM

Dingleberry Dickwad: UberNeuman: LucklessWonder: Man of Steel was awesome.

I farkin' love this film - except for overuse of double-zooms...

And the over use of the electronic/mechanical spaceship sound effect they used, and the lack of the characters being convincing, the poor casting for pretty much all of the characters, and the stupid part where it's not the sun that gives Kryptonians their power but the atmosphere, or a combination of both, they weren't totally clear on that.  Jeesh, even Superman Returns was better. I will say though that Man of Steel had a good special effects team.


Man of Steel was a good name for it because it was basically a good example of what you get when you take a Superman type character and take away the Jonathan Kent moral code that we've all come to know over the years. Kal-El became "Superman" because he is better than the rest of us. The Kal in that movie became the Man of Steel because he sure as Fark didn't act like Superman.
 
2013-12-23 08:53:23 AM

Ishkur: It was a Golan-Globus movie. Those guys were famous for churning out B-grade action movies in the 80s. It was doomed from the start.

Fano: It was actually the smartest of all the movies made, at least from conception: why DOESN'T Superman just enforce peace?

I always thought the plight to rid the world of nuclear weapons was a fool's errand. Superman can't be everywhere at once, so what guarantee does he have that every country will keep their word and not secretly make more? Is he the official UN nuclear weapons inspector from that point forward? So he's going to perpetually fly around every country and inspect their weapons plants and nuclear reactor facilities on an annual basis? That sounds exhausting.

And why just nuclear weapons? Why not go after biological or chemical weapons next? Or any weapon of mass destruction. And if he's going after weapons, he might as well resolve issues of genocide and suffering too (because those things won't stop just because he got rid of the WMDs. They'll just become slower and more messy). Stop foiling bank heists and go to Darfur and fix that shiat. And then he'll have to disband the armies that commit genocide and suffering, and topple the corrupt governments that sanction them, and then replace them with -- what? Puppet Pro-Superman states? Making the world safe for American capitalism? This would lead to massive conflict -- he'd essentially have to fight every military in the world, no sweat for him but that is ultimately what he must do if his goal is total world peace.

But world peace isn't technically achievable because it implies a state of healthy economic equilibrium (a mutually beneficial balance between haves and have nots), and the world is not and will never be in that state. So after he abolishes war, Superman will then have to go after injustice, inequality and exploitation, because the only people who really want peace are the rich (it cements their privilege and position indefinitely). Conflict is waged by ...


I know all this. The point is, watching it all fall apart despite his good intentions makes for more thoughtful conflict than "Luthor tries another land swindle" or "Superman whomps some alien nazis."

At least it would force people to reconsider the character that is considered a "boring dumb boy scout."

I never said the movie was executed well. It just made for a more interesting problem, because knowing what the right thing to do, and how much to help, can be tricky. I've heard that aid to Africa destroys local markets for clothes and food, keeping them dependent because no one can compete with boatloads of "Free" stuff sent. Despite good intentions.
 
2013-12-23 11:36:33 AM

Omis: Snapper Carr: Superman 4 makes Superman 3 look like Superman I

Superman Returns makes Superman 4 look like Superman 2.


Only on the internet. With the fanboys.

PirateKing: I'll admit I enjoyed Man of Steel. It wasn't perfect, but it was fun.


That's the problem with Man of Steel. It wasn't fun. It was depressing.
 
2013-12-23 12:07:55 PM

peterthx: Omis: Snapper Carr: Superman 4 makes Superman 3 look like Superman I

Superman Returns makes Superman 4 look like Superman 2.

Only on the internet. With the fanboys.

PirateKing: I'll admit I enjoyed Man of Steel. It wasn't perfect, but it was fun.

That's the problem with Man of Steel. It wasn't fun. It was depressing.


Man of Steel is one of my favorite Superman movies because it did the one thing that most, if not all, of the Superman movies failed to do... Let him punch someone at full strength and watch them fly through buildings. I always loved that in Superman the Animated Series and Justice League. Superman going all out and punching someone through 5 buildings then catching them and throwing them into the ground creating a crater. Sure, its not perfect but then again, no comic book movie is ever perfect. But it is still one of the best attempts to make Superman actually be Superman.

And I am sick of the whole Neck Snapping argument. I have yet to see anyone complain as much about Batman killing hundreds of people when he blew up the League of Shadow's HQ.
 
2013-12-23 12:12:53 PM

Confabulat: In the late 80s, if you saw the names Golan-Globus in front of any given movie, you knew exactly what you were in store for.


Now you have to look for "The Asylum" or "Nu Image".
 
2013-12-23 12:33:56 PM

yves0010: Man of Steel is one of my favorite Superman movies because it did the one thing that most, if not all, of the Superman movies failed to do... Let him punch someone at full strength and watch them fly through buildings. I always loved that in Superman the Animated Series and Justice League. Superman going all out and punching someone through 5 buildings then catching them and throwing them into the ground creating a crater. Sure, its not perfect but then again, no comic book movie is ever perfect. But it is still one of the best attempts to make Superman actually be Superman.

And I am sick of the whole Neck Snapping argument. I have yet to see anyone complain as much about Batman killing hundreds of people when he blew up the League of Shadow's HQ.


Ohhh. He punched someone. I know that's my barometer for a superhero movie.

Superman isn't Batman. He isn't supposed to be all piss & moan and woe is me.
 
2013-12-23 12:37:36 PM
Superman was interesting in Man of Steel. If you want the one-dimensional Big Blue Boy Scout, that's what the Quest for Peace is for.
 
2013-12-23 12:43:40 PM

peterthx: yves0010: Man of Steel is one of my favorite Superman movies because it did the one thing that most, if not all, of the Superman movies failed to do... Let him punch someone at full strength and watch them fly through buildings. I always loved that in Superman the Animated Series and Justice League. Superman going all out and punching someone through 5 buildings then catching them and throwing them into the ground creating a crater. Sure, its not perfect but then again, no comic book movie is ever perfect. But it is still one of the best attempts to make Superman actually be Superman.

And I am sick of the whole Neck Snapping argument. I have yet to see anyone complain as much about Batman killing hundreds of people when he blew up the League of Shadow's HQ.

Ohhh. He punched someone. I know that's my barometer for a superhero movie.

Superman isn't Batman. He isn't supposed to be all piss & moan and woe is me.


Don't know what Superman movie you watched. I saw a lot of normal kid issues happening in the flash back scenes but no piss and moan and woe is me stuff, excluding his first kill which anyone in that situation would be feeling like that. And yes, Superman needs to show some strength and one way is to actually have a villain his equal on the power scale. Lex has been over played way to much in the movies and its good to see someone he can actually punch without fearing the Cardboard effect.

And I also liked Batman Begins and The Dark Knight because they showed Batman being something most movies forget, a detective.
 
2013-12-23 12:52:01 PM

FirstNationalBastard: 11) someone actually thought this film was a good idea.


Farking this; holy god, I never thought I could see a movie remake/sequel that made me appreciate the original even more.  There it was though, S IV made S:TM seem state of the art in comparison.

Apos: # 1-9: That it was greenlit in the first place.

Farking that.

#10: That Gene Hackman reprised his role in this farce.

Either he was given the same ultimatum that Chris was given, or he just said "easy money" and phoned in his performance.
 
2013-12-23 12:53:45 PM

Confabulat: Superman was interesting in Man of Steel. If you want the one-dimensional Big Blue Boy Scout, that's what the Quest for Peace is for.


Eh, it was an attempt to make him interesting, and while it should have worked, it was executed poorly. There were interesting moments, mostly having to do with his interactions with his dad as a kid, but the rest of the movie kinda sucked with exception to the visual effects. And the people that thought it was a good idea to use that spaceship sound effect all throughout the movie needs to be cockpunched.
 
2013-12-23 12:55:49 PM

movieman_1979: I've been arguing this (extremely unpopular) case for years. But I prefer this film to Superman III

1. Because we got Gene Hackman back


Eh....

2. Because, at least from a story standpoint, its heart was in the right place

I'd give you that one...if only the clone that Lex made turned into another Superman that eventually became Bizarro.  Had it gone that route, at least the movie would've been decent.

3. Mariel Hemingway's legs

Her legs didn't help the fact that everyone noticeably aged; it was worse than "Return of the Jedi" in that aspect.
 
Displayed 50 of 60 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report