It's Friday night, all. Time for #wenchwatches
Tonight: #superman3
After last week's heavy thoughts over Superman 2, I was hoping that this week would be lighter and sillier.
But no. We're getting an unemployed Richard Pryor right out of the gate being denied an unemployment check.
AMERICA, EVERYONE!
Eugh. Well, let's watch anyways.
I actually don't remember this film at *all* from my youth. I remember Pryor, as I also loved Brewster's Millions (1985), but beyond that I kept crossing it in my memory with Superman 4, The Quest for Peace. Audiences apparently agreed with my childhood opinions and didn't think much of this film either.
The few things I do remember happen early on in the first act during the chemical plant sequence. Compared to previous films, it's nice to see a more complex sequence rather than a montage of much smaller ones. It helps keep the interest up.
ROBERT VAUGHN!?
Yes, this is the only of the original Superman films which does *not* feature Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) at all. Instead, we have Vaughn as Ross Webster, our evil industrialist.
Vaughn is no Hackman, but he's a competent actor when he wants to be. After all, he single-handedly classed up Corman's "Battle Beyond The Stars". Like in that film, he brings the same sort of intensity to his villainous role.
One thing that's been frustrating with this film is just how *dull* it is.
After watching Superman 2 last week, I asked a friend if she had a copy of the theatrical cut -- rather than my Richard Donner cut. As such, I rewatched the film twice over the course of two days. My friend is also a bit of a film buff, and we spent a lot of time chatting and comparing the two films.
One thing I learned during that was the considerable amount of studio interference we had. Originally, Lord Zod was going to be the primary villain for "Superman 1", explaining the court sequence in the intro that never gets followed up on. Much of the ideas were later repurposed for "Superman 2". Compounding this was the original director of Donner wanted a more serious film, while the studio wanted a campier, fun film instead.
Who did they bring in? Richard Lester. The same Richard Lester who is the sole director of this film. This explains a heck of this film, including Pryor's involvement. The feel is *significantly* campier, and thus, the plot a lot less interesting.
The A plot follows Gus Gorman (Pryor), as he uses his computer skills to put Webster's (Vaughn) evil machinations into effect. The B plot is Clark feeling homesick and returning to Smallville ostensibly to do a story on small-town America. This side plot also introduces Lana Lang as a potential alternate love interest compared to Lois Lane.
I kinda see what the film is trying to do here. They spent considerable amount of time having Lang and Clark interact, building up a lot of "If things were different" tension. As the third act starts, she and Superman (who is currently under the spell of synthetic kryptonite) have a moment together. Lang, however, isn't interested. In this way, she's a foil for Lane. Lana Lang isn't interested in Superman, but Clark. Lois Lane is interested in Superman, but not Clark. This would be more effective if the film actually made this parallel more strongly. Unfortunately, Lane (Kidder) barely has a cameo appearance in the first act.
@socketwench - Kidder was willing to sign on to Superman 3, but the producers did not take kindly to her talking to the press about the bad blood between the Salkinds with Pierre Spengler versus Richard Donner. They punished her by essentially writing out the character.
