Admit it. You didn't think I was going to show up. It's okay. I understand. Sorry about losing you money in that bet, though.
This Vent-Hole (hereinafter known as IVH), if lost or stolen will not be replaced nor purchase price refunded. Violation of IVH rules will result in expulsion without refund. Admission to certain functions within the IVH may require additional innuendo; enter at your own risk. Frivolity and silliness are highly recommended for all riders. Flamewars are expressly forbidden and political ranting is strongly discouraged. Please consult your counselor, magistrate or religious functionary before usage. A copy of IVH rules can be obtained from one or more members wearing tie-dyed oxford shirts after written requests. Any transmission, rebroadcasting or any other pictures, descriptions or accounts of the IVH without expressed written consent is strictly prohibited. Comment below if you agree with said terms.
After Further Review: Superman III is Still Awful, Yet Not That Bad
I had a chance today to watch Superman III on Encore. It has long been my assertion, as well as that of other people, that this film was the worst of all of the theatrically released Superman movies in history. Today, upon further review, I still consider it the worst, but it’s not as awful as I thought it was, in retrospect. There is an aspect of the film that makes it worth suffering through. I'll explain later.
First, remember what we’re comparing this to: the first two Superman movies were, in order, good and great (Superman II is still a top-rate sequel, in my mind). Those movies were filmed in tandem, by the same primary cast and director, and there was continuity between the two.
Therefore, the third installment was bound to be a let down, and it was.
According to my understanding, having read articles about the film in the past—and once given a box set of all four of the Superman movies featuring Christopher Reeve—the third film was a concoction of the two producers, Alexander and Ilya Salkind. In fact, from what I’ve read, this was their original vision for the first film. I shudder at the prospect of that fact.
Reeve hated this movie, and most of the cast from the first two films were peeved at the way the Salkinds dissed Donner—Donner’s name was taken off the second film, despite having directed it—even to the point that Gene Hackman refused to even take part in the third film. In addition, the Salkinds relegated Margot Kidder’s Lois Lane to a bookended cameo appearance, because she dared to speak up about what jackasses they were.
The director of this movie? Richard Lester. If the name seems familiar, you probably saw A Hard Day’s Night, Help, and A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum. That's right; the director of this film once directed Ringo, Paul, John, and George in two slapstick musical movies. So, you can understand how he might fuck this one up. Moreover, what makes this movie crap in general is his insistence of sight gags, and inserting Richard Pryor in random scenes for comic effect.
By the way? It fails. Every time. I didn't laugh at most of Pryor's scenes. This was clearly a vehicle for him to associate his name with the Superman franchise, but it's really not his role, his movie, or anything he should have been associated with. In fact, his character looks lost in most of the movie, and so does he.
Nevertheless, here’s why it’s not all that bad: I sort of like the 35-40 minutes near the end, where Superman is handed some Kryptonite laced with tobacco tar substance, and starts acting like a total ass. He starts hitting on women, hanging out in bars, fucking with the Olympics, and straightens the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Then it all culminates in an epic fight with himself (as Clark Kent), in a junkyard.
It is sort of a read into Superman’s conscious state, in that he is fucking tired of being Clark fucking Kent all the time; tired of being a fucking superhero, and just wants to kick back, drink a beer, watch porno, and be left alone. I get that. I think anyone who has ever that much responsibility, even in a smaller state, has felt like that. I won’t vouch for the watching porno part of that; some may choose to paint or bike. Whatever fits. ;-)
Of course, once everything is set right again, Superman goes back to saving people, dodging missiles, nearly dying, and then he wins. The close of the movie is, well…meh.
Yet you rather leave the movie feeling that you were cheated out of something much, much better than this. The subplot where Lois is traded for Lana Lane? The villain where Lex Luthor is replaced by Not Lex Luthor and his sister, and the dimwitted, slutty moll? Gus Gorman? Who the fuck is Gus Gorman, and why do we care? This isn’t what we bought in the first two movies for. Not for that shit.
Superman III should have been much better than what it ended up being. As it was, however, it could have been much, much worse. Not that The Quest for Peace was great in and of itself. That one contains a heavy-handed message that nuclear proliferation cannot be solved by superheroes but by “the people,” with subtexts about cloning, solar power, war profiteering, and how Rupert Murdoch conducts business. (Yeah, I’ve seen that movie way too many times.)
Oh, and if you’re wondering where I was last week?
See, there’s this thing called “sleep.” In addition, when I was supposed to post, I was in it. I know that is unfamiliar to most denizens of the Vent Hole, but…it happens sometime. Sorry. Now, if only I…zzzzzzzzzzz.
Actress Marg Helgenberger and Actor Donald (NO RELATION TO DANNY) Glover are the guests.
Danny Devito sleeps on the Green Room Couch...
The Monologue
DeVito Interview:
Brie Larson:
Henry Cho:
What Did We Learn on the Show Tonight, Craig?