Superman IV: Em Busca da Paz

Its Supes versus Nukes for the fourth, much-derided Superman adventure often slated for its repressing low-budget, inferior special effects and a whole wad of plot holes and incoherence – thanks no doubt to the extraction of a whole fifty minutes, much of the film's middle portion. Yet, among the wreckage are signs that there was a good film in here somewhere, as our hero struggles to decide whether or not to intervene in human history and the character's rather touching realisation that he is not just a visitor to Earth. A nicely-toned return to the Lois-Clark-Superman relationship also could have rooted the film back to its glorious predecessors - bar number three - but once Nuclear Man shows up and the film's story is cut in half, all promise and potential disappears from the project and the audience is left with a strictly mediocre re-tread of Superman II.

* (1 out of 5)

Superman IV: The Quest For Peace

Directed by: Sidney J. Furie, 1987

Perversely bad. With major budget cuts (from $28 to $16m) and story problems, the moviemakers suddenly found themselves cutting corners in all areas. And it shows. Completely lacking in awe, fun and excitement, Superman IV most of all feels like a bad joke.

The fact that it comes across more cartoonish than the previous three is hardly intentional, as everything - from effects to dialogue - just seems oddly rushed and second-rate.

The only highlight is Gene Hackman - who returns in high spirits as Lex Luthor. Christopher Reeve co-scripted this time and he again personifies the Man of Steel. But most of his co-stars are either wasted (Mariel Hemingway) or hysterical (John Cryer).

The new villian, Nuclear Man (as played by Mark Pillow), looks like a Swedish showwrestler in a home-made Halloween suit, complete with mullet hair and horrendous over-acting mannerisms.

Director Sidney J. Furie (the man behind the otherwise taut thriller The Entity) seems unable to create any sparks and Superman IV falls completely flat, head first. Game over.

Note: Certain scenes had to be borrowed from the previous movies, most notably Superman and Lois on their romantic evening flight above the Manhattan skyline. How they even managed to make this scene look worse than in the original is really mind-boggling.

Superman (Christopher Reeve) continues his life of costumed superhero and Daily Planet reporter Clark Kent. As the Daily Planet is taken over by tabloid magnate David Warfield (Sam Wanamaker), Clark and fellow reporter Lois Lane (Margot Kidder) find themselves uneasy with the more sensationalist route taken by the paper's new owner and editor/David's daughter Lacy (Mariel Hemingway) who also has a crush on Clark. Meanwhile the failure of a summit between the United States and Soviet Union causes both nations to increase production of their nuclear stockpiles. A young boy, Jeremy (Damian McLawhorn), writes a letter to Superman asking why Superman can't dispose of the nuclear weapons himself, and while he's uncertain about whether he should get involved following public pressure Superman makes an announcement that he will rid the world of nuclear weapons singlehandedly. While Superman's words and actions are met with approval by the public and (I think) several public officials, they irk war profiteers, military strategic think tanks, and others whose pocketbooks and political standing is threatened by the new development. Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) having escaped from prison with the aid of his dimwitted nephew Lenny Luthor (Jon Cryer) formulates a plan with the help of those with vested interest in preserving the arms race to create a nuclear clone of Superman which comes in the form of Nuclear Man (physically played by Mark Pillow, voiced by Gene Hackman) who has the power to destroy the Superman.

Following the disappointing response to Superman III and disastrous response to Supergirl, Ilya and Alexander Salkind scrapped a planned Superman IV and out of financial necessity sold the rights to Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus of The Cannon Group, Inc. For $5 million in 1985. When Christopher Reeve was approached by Cannon to reprise his role he was reluctant, but Cannon offered Reeve $6 million, story input, director approval, and financing and distribution for Reeve's long stalled pet project Street Smart. With Reeve on board, Cannon was able to lure back other veteran members of the Superman cast such as Gene Hackman and Margot Kidder who hated the Salkinds for their abusive treatment (especially of Richard Donner) and underhanded and duplicitous dealings so the change in producers was seen as a fresh start. While Superman IV was a priority for Cannon, the movie beset with production difficulties from day one with the promised $36 million budget slashed to $17 million, which lead to downscaling in the special effects and locations with noticeable results. As a company, Cannon had often kept themselves afloat with foreign presales to upcoming movies as well as sales of TV and home media rights to current films used to keep the cycle afloat with their primary output being action and horror fare of $5 million or less that could continue this endless cycle and in essence "robbing Peter to pay paul". With movies above that $5 million threshold the company didn't have that windfall hence why Superman IV was so troubled. Superman IV is considered the worst film in the Superman series and often labeled one of the worst of all time, and it's hard to disagree because not only is it a stupid story, but unlike the previous films it's not even technically competent.

Superman IV is an anti-war movie with Reeve credited with a story credit. Reeve was apparently inspired based on his personally reaction to the failure of the 1986 Reykjavik Summit as well as then President Reagan's military buildup and skepticism towards arms control. Now on the surface that's not an awful idea, but when you have Superman making declarations he will singlehandedly remove all Nuclear Weapons from the Earth without consulting with the leaders it feels like it goes contrary to his character. Now as much as I don't like this direction....it does unfortunately have comic book precedent. In stories that Marv Wolfman wrote for the comic Adventures of Superman that ran concurrently with John Byrne's run in the main series that reintroduced the character "post crisis", Superman did undertake a one man crusade against the fictional Middle Eastern nation of Qurac destroying all their weapons and artillery so as dumb as this plot is, it's not the first time this route has been taken with the character. The movie is a disjointed mess with a number of dangling unresolved subplots and jumps due to the fact that the movie's 110 minute runtime was trimmed to 89 minutes making it the shortest Superman film by a considerable margin. Not that the footage being put back in would've helped because the script is not only stupid with its very reductive look at the arms race and the nature thereof, but the comedy present in these movies has reached the worst of hackneyed writing with Superman now utilizing the dreaded "two dates to the prom" setup that doesn't even have a proper payoff to that tired cliché. In fact many of the "jokes" feel like they're missing punchlines or reactions which is probably a tell tale sign of things that were cut.

Reeve remains good as Superman (his poorly thought out story notwithstanding) and Gene Hackman looks like he's at least having fun despite his knowledge of how bad he movie is. But most of the other performances, effects, and set pieces feel passable at best or unfinished at worst. The Superman films have always had competent work at minimum and you do not get that here. Editing is often shoddy, characters have knowledge of things they shouldn't, things explode despite a lack of projectiles, it wouldn't surprise me if not only was the budget slashed in half, but the post and foley work also felt the wrath of Cannon's budget scissors.

Superman IV is bad, but it is at least fascinatingly bad. The same goofy optimism that began this series is on full display, except without the brain that added substance to the silliness. Even at their lowest point the Salkind Superman movies gave us at least ONE scene that we could say "that's impressive" like the Clark Kent vs. Superman fight in Superman III, or Supergirl being stranded on The Phantom Zone in Supergirl. Here however, I can't name one scene that even approaches good. If you watch this movie you'll watch it all the way to the end, and you'll even laugh, but only in the manner most befitting watching a trainwreck.

SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE pits the Man of Steel against Nuclear Man, Lex Luther's newest creation while ridding the world of nuclear weapons. This is easily the worst of the SUPERMAN movies, and it was doomed to fail right from the start. Cut from its original 134-minute version, it is full of plot holes resulting in a movie with some scenes that just don't make any sense, but even with the extra 45 minutes intact, the movie still wouldn't work because the special effects are cheap and ridiculous, and it shows. Unless you are a diehard fan of the Superman genre, this movie should be avoided.

1 out of 5

This is a truly frustrating film. Somewhere in this mess is a good film that isn't allowed to break free, haphazard and lazy direction from a mediocre director and two very lame scriptwriters make sure of that.

The idea in itself isn't bad. Superman becomes active in disarming the world of nuclear weapons but his arch nemesis Lex Luthor still holds a grudge against the Man of Steel and devices a plan to get rid of him; by creating a super villain of his own.

Reeve shares co-credit story this time around but he's not responsible for the terrible script. There are good things floating around but executed in the poorest manner. And what's more the special effects are terrible, I can't believe they saved money on that front. The film moves along too fast, clocking in at under 90 minutes and some interesting angles are not explored nearly well enough.

So what's good here? Well, Reeve of course. He IS Superman and once again delivers a fantastic performance and shows all too well that he's way too good for this film. Margot Kidder is good as well but her role is minimal and Jackie Cooper appears all too briefly. So that leaves Hackman. Of course it's good to see him, he's a very good actor, but one can't help but think he got a big paycheck and simply did what he had to and nothing more. He doesn't look too excited.

A wasted opportunity this film. Could have been very good but looks incredibly rushed and made without passion. But it's always good to see Reeve in flying action.