Review: Superman IV: The Quest for Peace


While a schoolkid asks Superman (Christopher Reeve) to intervene in the arms race between the USA and Russia, Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) has escaped from prison and has devised a new scheme. With a lock of Superman’s hair he attaches it to a nuclear missile that Superman has sent (along with every other nuclear missile) towards the sun. The result creates Nuclear Man (Mark Pillow), a solar-powered super-being who is to be Superman’s evil match. Or at least a match for The Ultimate Warrior at the next Wrestlemania. Meanwhile, tycoon Sam Wanamaker has acquired The Daily Planet and intends to Rupert Murdoch the shit out of it. Mariel Hemingway plays his daughter, who has designs on mild-mannered reporter Clark Kent (Reeve again). Jon Cryer plays Lex Luthor’s dopey nephew Lenny. Esmond Knight turns up briefly as an Elder because Harry Andrews and Trevor Howard read the script. Susannah York also apparently read the script and only provides her voice as Superman’s mum.

 

After the debacle of “Superman III”, The Salkinds thankfully handed the Superman franchise over to another mob. Unfortunately, that mob were Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus of The Cannon Group, home to every Chuck Norris, Michael Dudikoff, and 80s-era Charles Bronson film you’ve ever seen. The result was this cheap-looking hack-job from 1987, directed by Sidney J. Furie (the highly underrated supernatural horror film “The Entity”, and the rather mediocre “Iron Eagle”). The screenplay comes from the team of Lawrence Konner and Mark Rosenthal (“The Jewel of the Nile” and “Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country”), who wrote the story with leading man Christopher Reeve. They don’t do any better really, than the previous team, though I’m not about to call this one worse than “Superman III”. That’s two hairs I frankly can’t be bothered splitting. Both films are pretty lousy, and both sully the good name of Superman. I saw this one in theatres when I was about 7 and even then I wasn’t overly fussed with it. I was pretty astute back then, it seems.

 

On the plus side of things, Alexander Courage (“The Left-Handed Gun”) does a much better job of adapting John Williams’ “Superman” theme this time around than did Ken Thorne previously. His overall score seems more complete and not as piecemeal as the scores for “Superman II” and “Superman III”. Meanwhile, it may be a bit corny and belated, but Superman taking on nuclear disarmament is at least an idea in its head, so that’s one thing it has over “Superman III” (Which didn’t have a brain in its Atari-programmed head). It’s a little too corny that a little kid writes to Superman to ask him to end the arms race, though. Does he want a Red Rider BB Gun for Christmas too, Jiminy Cricket? Ultimately, though, Cannon just weren’t interested in making a quality film here, and the film truly does look cheap from start to finish. The FX are appalling, even for 1987. I mean, Nuclear Man isn’t a bad idea at all on paper, but has been rendered (or ruined) by the cheesiest FX Golan-Globus could steal, and a David Soul meets one of the members of Dokken ‘non-actor’ in the role by the name of Mark Pillow (He did 13 episodes of “Wiseguy” and one other TV role, and that’s it). Yes, our super-villain’s creation is played by a Pillow, folks. Mr. Pillow may look like a late 80s wrestler (let’s say WCW or NWA, rather than WWF/E), but his scant movie credits and the fact that Gene Hackman ends up dubbing British-born Pillow’s voice show that he’s clearly inadequate as an actor. To continue the wrestling theme, he’s almost as big a flop as The Shockmaster (YouTube it, kiddies. Seriously, it’s hilarious). I did wonder if he was gonna rock Superman like a hurricane at one point though, or maybe bring about the winds of change (Yes, that’s a couple of Scorpions references, not Dokken. Your point?). From what I’ve read, apparently he used to be a Chippendales dancer. I would’ve stuck with that profession.

 

Meanwhile, after being sent to the naughty corner in “Superman III” for speaking out in favour of Richard Donner (who was sacked from “Superman II”), Margot Kidder is back as Lois Lane. It’s a shame, because I rather liked Annette O’Toole’s Lana Lang (who, you may remember, was employed by Perry White at the end of the film but is never even mentioned here), but it’s for the best really, as Lois Lane is the bigger character. But bringing Lois back to the fore doesn’t bring as much to the table as you’d like, sadly. Unfortunately, not only was Kidder showing her age by this point (even Jackie Cooper looked relatively the same age as he did in 1978 and Reeve hadn’t changed at all), but she has the aura of complete boredom here. Worse still, there is a complete and utter disconnect between Lois and Clark in this. We all know why Kidder and Lois were demoted in “Superman III”, but let’s face it, when they did what they did at the end of “Superman II”, they rendered Lois Lane pretty much useless as a character anyway. So yes, Lois is in a lot more of this one, but…it’s too little, too late. The filmmakers never quite figure out what to do with Mariel Hemingway’s character, either. Hemingway has always been too sweet, gawky and mousy to convince as possible femme fatales, but the filmmakers never really decide to go either way with her, and when she acts all femme fatale it’s merely because the screenplay (awkwardly) dictates it. It results in a completely pointless role and thankless task for Ms. Hemingway in addition to her fatal miscasting. She can be thankful, though, that she at least gets listed ahead of Kidder in the credits, though. Kidder is shockingly listed ninth in the credits! Ninth! The leading lady! Sam Wanamaker, a talented character actor is well-cast but appallingly underused as a Rupert Murdoch-type. Gene Hackman has come back into the fold after defiantly opting out of “Superman III” (smartest actor of all-time? No, he made “The Quick and the Dead” and “Absolute Power”. Still pretty smart, though). Lex Luthor isn’t as effective here as he was in the first film, but he at least fits in better here than in the crowded cast of “Superman II” (where he really shouldn’t have turned up at all). Such a shame that the film is of such shoddy quality. I guess ‘ol Gene needed to pay for an extension on his beach house or something here. Also, was ‘genius supervillain’ Luthor’s complete botching of the word ‘nuclear’ meant to be a sly joke, or does Gene Hackman just no speaka the good English? ‘Nucular’, Gene? ‘Nucular’? Jon Cryer and his goofy punk hairdo are certainly a significant upgrade from the bozos Robert Vaughn was hanging around with as the villain in “Superman III”, though.

 

Production values just aren’t up to snuff in this outing, and while director Furie is no Richard Donner, we all know the two names to blame here. Despite the occasionally interesting nuclear themes, hack producers Golan-Globus (who slashed the proposed budget in half before shooting began) put the final nail in the coffin of this movie franchise with a pretty cheapjack effort. Watch the first film and 2013’s “Man of Steel” and skip any other “Superman” films, folks.

 

Rating: C

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Review: Hellraiser (2022)

Review: Cinderella (1950)

Review: Eugenie de Sade