it just wasn't a Superman movie. It was a Richard Pryor movie, in the tradition of the Toy, Brewsters Millions, and See No Evil/Hear No Evil. Taken in that context, as a Richard Pryor movie with Superman in a backup role, its actually not too bad of a comedy.
As far as the script below, it plays too fast and loose with the comic continuity IMO, though I like the inclusion of Brainiac.
In fact, I had some lengthy conversations with some friends of mine...we were pretty disappointed with Superman Returns, and I feel that Brainiac or Eradicator or some amalgamation of the two would have made an excellent villain...if you wanted to tie in the previous continuity, I would have had Lex be a critical aid in the defeat of the kryptonian threat....you could have planned for a trilogy of movies...Superman Returns, the Death of Superman, and the Return of Superman, with lots of interesting things going on in the background of Superman Returns...like full pardon for Lex, Superman proposal to Lois, etc...build things over 2-3 movies...
SR wasn't HORRIBLE, but it was dissappointing...I have even more criticism for the Hulk movie...
> Just found this link at Supermanhomepage.com:
> After reading it, I can say this had potential to be a better film than the Superman III that ultimately came out in 1983, although there's a lot of work to be done.
> What do you guys think?
> it just wasn't a Superman movie. It was a Richard Pryor movie, in the tradition of the Toy, Brewsters Millions, and See No Evil/Hear No Evil.
...which is exactly why it's considered the worst of the Reeve movies.
>Taken in that context, as a Richard Pryor movie with Superman in a backup role, its actually not too bad of a comedy.
That's not what they were trying to make, though. It was Superman III, not "The Wacky Adventures of Richard Pryor and Kid Krypton."