Skip to main content

The Template:Richard Donner's SUPERMAN:THE MOVIE

SUPERMAN:THE MOVIE Christopher Reeve, Margot Kidder, Gene Hackman, Ned Beatty. Dir. Richard Donner, Warner, 1978

I think Nick Hornby said that pop music must serve more than nostalgia to keep us playing it over & over again. That's true of films, too. Watching Richard Donner's SUPERMAN for the first time in 20 years tonight, I found myself almost as giddy as the 11 year-old me seeing it on a big screen 44 years ago, yet I also found its story still resonant, somewhat to my surprise. Look at the film's gorgeous opening scenes on Krypton, in which Marlon Brando's Jor El warns its rulers the sun will go full nova in days. They retaliate, censuring & silencing him, evoking our leaders' response to Dr. Anthony Fauci or Greta Thunberg & the legion of scientists behind both. Dystopian futures ideally reflect our present in some way, but screenwriter Mario Puzo, with help from Laraine & David Newman & BONNIE&CLYDE's Robert Benton, presents a dystopian past, as Krypton explodes 50 years before the action of Donner's film. Given that Donner specifically included anti-apaartheid & green-friendly signs & slogans throughout LETHAL WEAPON, it's conceivable he meant the Krypton scenes to align with early warnings about climate change, but the entire sequence is now prescient regardless of intent. 

Full disclosure:even in 1978 a desperate need for others' approval allowed me to agree with smart-aleck friends who blasted SUPERMAN's notorious ending as ludicrous. That particular criticism dogs the picture today, too, but if anything is ludicrous that critique is. 

We've been watching for 2 hours. We've accepted that being from a world with two red suns will make Kal El nigh invulnerable on a world with one yellow sun, which is NOT how science works. We've accepted that a pair of horn rims and parting his hair to the other side makes an impenetrable disguise. The US Navy transports two nuclear missiles overland with an escort of three or four trucks, missile armed and visible, and that's no problem, but the idea that Superman can reverse time by spinning the Earth backward - this is the hill we die on? 

Suspension of belief remained intact through equally farcical science early on, but the reversal of time is our Ted-Danson-brings-Saving-Private-Ryan-to-a-grinding-halt moment? 

Maybe we object that Kal El ignores his father's prohibition of interfering with human history. If so, we may have missed the point of the movie, which seems to me that merely by sending Kal El to earth Jor El has already broken his own commandment. The very existence of a superbeing, never mind one who keeps planes from crashing and missiles from landing, irrevocably changes human history. Kal El may not, as his father says, be human, but after a lifetime on Earth he chooses free will and ignores Jor El, with no apparent consequence, except that it tips Margot Kidder's Lois Lane that Clark Kent may have a secret, setting up the other half of SUPERMAN II, as the Krypton sequence does at the film's beginning. 

I thought I was one smart kid in '78. From 11 onward I could tell anyone foolish enough to ask every problem and flaw in the film. I thought that made me cool. Even if it did, now I see those problems & yet find that suspension of disbelief, helped along by a little nostalgia, makes all those criticisms superfluous, if not silly. Today, even the shortcomings contribute to the movie's sense of innocence. SUPERMAN forged the template. Fast forward 30 years to IRON MAN to find a film shot through with SUPERMAN's DNA. 

Donner, producers Ilya & Alexander Salkind, and screenwriter Puzo, the creators of the template, have one key advantage over every subsequent superhero film - a complete absence of cynicism, in story & in production. Two years later Warner Brothers, confident of a hit in SUPERMAN II, cheaped out a little on the visual effects, which look crude compared to the first - & its effects didn't exactly give George Lucas sleepless nights - and the fall from innocence began. 

Everything works in SUPERMAN:THE MOVIE. The things that didn't work then don't much matter now, leading me to think they probably didn't matter then, either. What makes it all work, however, isn't the set pieces or the visual effects or even being the first of the modern superhero movies. It's the performances of Puzo's well-drawn characters. 

As a kid, I had no idea who Glenn Ford was. Today I own GILDA and have seen a few of his noirs and I love his late-career victory lap here as Jonathan Kent, Clark/Kal's surrogate dad. So it goes throughout. Jackie Coogan's all-bark-no-bite "Chief" Perry White is the model against which J.K. Simmons's J. Jonah Jameson  rebels. 

Valerie Perrine and Ned Beatty almost upstage Gene Hackman's hilariously vain Lex Luthor. When Beatty's Otis tells Luthor "my arm was too short" to write the correct missile coordinates I laughed for a few minutes. SUPERMAN makes me wish Hackman did more comedies. 

Which leaves Margot Kidder & Christopher Reeve. I had not seen Bob Clark's BLACK CHRISTMAS in 1978 - my parents weren't THAT liberal - so I had no way to know that Kidder's Lois is very much that movie's Barb, now grown up and a workaholic rather than alcoholic. It's a great update to the character, Kidder making her a '70s independent woman - or Hollywood's approximation of one - tough & jaded & vulnerable and wistful without contradicting herself. It is difficult, even with hindsight, to imagine an actor more suited to embody a new Lois than Kidder. 

Reeve, for me, remains the gold standard. I don't necessarily dislike subsequent Supermen so much as I find them disposable & interchangeable, unlike Reeve, whom I accept and adore as both Kal El and Clark Kent. A few grafs back I observed that Kent's physical disguise doesn't seem impenetrable. Reeve's performance as the bumbling & bashful Kent gives it the required opacity. I forget that Reeve trained at Juliard until I watch him essay both Clark & Kal with deceptive ease. It's essentially a comic performance, one he does with such skill it almost looks like he's not working. 

Those who buy into Quentin Tarantino's Bill's theory that Clark Kent is Kal El's critique of humanity have missed a couple points. First, Bill's the villain of KILL BILL, & villains lie. 2.Clark Kent is not weak & cowardly, he's kind, compassionate, and humble. Clark Kent is Kal El's defense of humanity as worthy of redemption. 

Whatever my kvetching as a younger man, tonight I discovered there is nothing I don't like about SUPERMAN:THE MOVIE. It's funny. It's fresh. It's a good '70s New York picture. It's my kind of superhero movie. Always reluctant to pronounce a movie perfect, I will say SUPERMAN is goddamn fine and, brothers & sisters, that ain't bad. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No Return:Stanley Kramer's IT'S A MAD, MAD, MAD, MAD WORLD

 IT'S A MAD, MAD, MAD, MAD WORLD. Spencer Tracy, Ethel Merman, Milton Berle, Mickey Rooney, Sid Caesar. Dir. Stanley Kramer, MGM, 1963 I do not generally write about films I stop watching halfway. What's the point? I either have nothing positive to say about it or was in the wrong mood. In both cases I'm ignorant of its full length to perhaps do it justice. In the case of Stanley Kramer's 1963 comedy smash, however, I feel compelled to make an exception.  My problem with the movie is not my mood, nor disappointment because it's not the movie I once heard. In fact, my biggest problem is that I haven't heard it described in glowing terms, or any, since I was about 9. See, IAMMMMW used to air anually on one or another of the networks, often in December. My parents didn't care for it and never watched it, but my friends watched anytime it aired and talked about it in rapturous terms. Until about 9-10 years old, when it seemed to drop out of conversation, or conv...

Junkie-fatigue: Taylor Hackford's Ray

 Jamie Foxx, Kerry Washington, Terence Howard, Warwick Davis, Curtis Armstrong. Dir. Taylor Hackford, Bristol Bay/Universal, 2004 Jamie Foxx, nominated for both Supporting Actor and Best Actor at the 2004 Academy Awards, won Best Actor for Ray and, watching Ray tonight for the first time in about 15 years, I'm glad it went down that way. Tom Cruise gave a career-best performance in Collateral, for which Foxx received his Supporting Actor nod. It's a great performance, too, but no moreso than Cruise, ignored by the Academy, so it feels right to me that Foxx got his statuette for the movie where he didn't share the spotlight with a star of Cruise's magnitude. Not that it would make much difference if Foxx had some high-voltage costar in Ray, because the movie simply doesn't exist without Foxx and his essay of Ray Charles. Not unlike Coal Miner's Daughter, the other music biopic whose star picked up a Best Actor, Ray occurs from Ray's point of view, so ther...

Obligatory TL;DR Statement of Purpose

 A not-so-brief explanatory note as to how this blog works: I can't recall a time when movies weren't my passion, my compulsion, my addiction. Ever since my parents took me to see Disney's Bedknobs&Broomsticks, I've been hopeless. Born in 1967, I grew up with free range parents. They took my brother and me to all kinds of movies, often using Hollywood as a babysitter. We saw movies about which many parents today would cluck their tongues (though nothing R-rated until I was 12. My first R-rated movie was MONTY PYTHON'S LIFE OF BRIAN.) Though my parents were professionals and we grew up affluent, our home saw its share of dysfunction. Dad was in the house, but not often present. Mom, stressed and disappointed at discovering her marriage wasn't an equal partnership, took out her frustrations on me.  Without getting too far into the weeds, let me just say my adult life has been far from typical middle class stability. I've never had a career. Never finished ...