Superman III Movie Review

Is it a bird? Is it an aeroplane? No, it's the character’s lore flying out of the window, as Lester shows his complete disregard for the hero’s comic book roots.

Genre: Action / Comedy / Sci-Fi

Director: Richard Lester

Cast: Christopher Reeve, Richard Pryor, Annette O’Toole, Robert Vaughn, Pamela Stephenson, Annie Ross, Jackie Cooper, Marc McClure, Gavan O’Herlihy & Margot Kidder.

Run Time: 125 min.

US Release: 17 June 1983

UK Release: 19 July 1983

German Release: 09 March 1984

Having mixed up yesterday’s review with a Batman one, I will post today my review for Superman III, a massive departure in style and tone from the original two “Donner” flicks. With Richard Donner having been fired mid-filming of Superman II, the Salkinds rehired the former writing team, David and Leslie Newman. Richard Lester returned to direct, leaning heavier on comedy, with fewer references to the comics, as he now had full control. The result is a picture that feels completely unrecognisable were it not for its cast, as well as alienated from its predecessors.

— WARNING, THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS! —

Gus Gorman (Richard Pryor) is hired by web tycoon Ross Webster (Robert Vaughn) to use a newly built supercomputer to monopolise the world’s markets. When Superman (Christopher Reeve) thwarts their initial plans by saving a chemical plant first, then restoring a disrupted oil tanker fleet, Webster orders Gus to create a synthetic version of Kryptonite to kill the Man of Steel. However, Gus substitutes an unknown element in the recipe with tar; the resulting laced rock does not kill Superman; instead, it slowly alters his personality, turning him into a selfish, destructive anti-hero who causes global chaos, neglecting his heroic duties.

In a junkyard, the corrupted Superman splits into two entities, resulting in a brutal fight between the evil Superman and his moral human persona, Clark Kent. Clark ultimately destroys the dark side. Restored to his heroic self, Krypton’s last son flies to Webster’s Grand Canyon hideout to confront the villains, including their monolithic supercomputer. The machine becomes sentient, turning against its creators. Thanks to a sudden change of heart, Gus helps disable the machine, allowing Superman to destroy the supercomputer using a volatile acid.

Originally, producer Ilya Salkind had written a cosmic, multi-page treatment that introduced Brainiac, Mister Mxyzptlk, and Supergirl. However, Warner Bros. rejected the script, finding it too bizarre plus financially risky. As such, the Newmans were brought in to rewrite the script, with the final product having been signed off by the studio, director Richard Lester, as well as the Salkinds.

The biggest mistake the screenplay made was to strip away the “other-worldly wonder” established by Donner, replacing it with campy, slapstick-like comedy. Even worse, the premise clashes in tone, unsure if it wants to be a corporate tech-thriller, a serious superhero film or a simple sitcom. The climax, where a supercomputer turns into a sentient, horror-feature-like cyborg, feels completely detached from the established universe. Worse, it even sidebenches one of its most important characters, Lois Lane.

That said, where the narrative shows promise is during the moments in Smallville, as Clark reconnects with his high school crush Lana Lang, who has a child of her own. The innocent romance is sweet, feeling genuine plus wholesome. Then there is the evil Superman and junkyard fight plotline, caused by synthetic kryptonite, which brought an unexpected psychological aspect to the premise, though unfortunately it was quickly resolved to return to the character of Gus.

The dialogue itself is one of the worst parts. It leans heavily into gag-heavy goofiness and cartoonish monologues. It sounds more like stand-up comedy at times than coherent movie dialogue.

One of the biggest mistakes made by the writers is rewriting the script around Richard Pryor to maximise his screen time. The character of Gus Gorman is given so much time in front of the camera that Superman essentially feels like a supporting character in his own flick. Furthermore, the character makes no sense: Gus goes from being chronically unemployed to becoming a masterful, satellite-hacking computer genius overnight.

Christopher Reeve delivers once again a masterclass performance as Clark Kent / Superman, especially once the superhero gets exposed to the synthetic Kryptonite. He gave the character of hope an unforeseen spin that wasn’t seen as of then, by depicting him as depressed, cruel and selfish. Before that, his chemistry with Annette O’Toole, who plays Lana Lang, is impeccable. O’Toole herself gives a warm, grounded, just like deeply sympathetic rendition.

Then there is Robert Vaughn as Ross Webster, who feels like a cheap, less-threatening imitation of Lex Luthor.

Much like the screenplay, the cinematography suffers from severe dysfunctionality. Most of the feature looks flat, using bright, uninspired lighting that suits more of a TV sitcom. On top of that, it suffers from bizarre, static framing, as well as unnecessary close-ups during segments featuring the Man of Steel. In contrast, the Smallville sequences did a remarkable job of capturing the small-town warmth. 

Effect-wise, one of the best moments is the junkyard fight, where Superman is split in two: dark Kryptonian versus humbled Clark Kent. The camera placements and split-screen matting have been executed effortlessly for its time, selling the illusion of having two physical Reeves in the same place. Then there are the redefined flying mechanics plus the Vera cyborg transformation, which remain effective to this day. Sadly, it also makes use of obvious blue-screen effects and visible miniatures.

---

Verdict: Despite a handful of positive ideas, Superman III ultimately cannot escape the weight of its many errors. Christopher Reeve remains excellent, while his dual performance as Superman and Clark Kent provides the picture with its strongest material. The Smallville sequences also offer some much-needed warmth, particularly through Reeve and Annette O’Toole’s charming chemistry. Unfortunately, the film’s campy tone, painfully weak dialogue plus excessive focus on Richard Pryor’s Gus Gorman undermine the story at every turn. Its flat cinematography, inconsistent effects, just like bizarre supercomputer climax further chip away at the sense of wonder established by the earlier movies. While the corrupted Superman storyline briefly introduces intriguing psychological elements, it is frustratingly underdeveloped. Superman III earns no more than a disappointing 4.0 out of 10. 

Do you agree with my take on the third Superman instalment? Or are you a fan of the slapstick humour by Richard Pryor? Let me know in the comments below & as always, thank you for reading!I will continue with my review of Superman IV: The Quest for Peace next week.