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 7
    More: Amusing, Superman IV, Superman II, Fortress of Solitude, Tobe Hooper, Perry White, Karate Kid, Lex Luthor, Krypton  
•       •       •

6015 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 22 Dec 2013 at 10:14 PM (43 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-12-23 03:17:47 PM  
2 votes:

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


Christopher Reeve only agreed to do Superman IV if the studio financed Street Smart, which was a film Reeve was trying to get made for some time. It was the first major starring role for Morgan Freeman, who was mostly known at the time for playing Easy Reader on The Electric Company, and two years before he became a star with Driving Miss Daisy. So if Superman IV wasn't made, Morgan Freeman might not have become a movie star.
2013-12-22 11:53:26 PM  
2 votes:

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.
2013-12-23 12:03:10 AM  
1 votes:

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?
2013-12-22 11:48:03 PM  
1 votes:
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 11:15:33 PM  
1 votes:
Man of Steel was awesome.
2013-12-22 10:49:23 PM  
1 votes:
Superman 4 makes Superman 3 look like Superman I
2013-12-22 10:10:19 PM  
1 votes:
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.
 
Displayed 7 of 7 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report