Superman II (1980) - The sequel nobody wants to admit is mediocre!

Richard Donner's 1978 film, Superman was a smash hit across the world, and is still loved as one of the greatest achievements in cinematic history. So much so that ever since Christopher Reeve hung up the tights in the late 1980s, each actor to play the hero on cinema screens since then has never lived up to Reeve's incredible performance in that first film. And while his third and fourth outings are generally the least liked out his outings, it's rare to hear a lot of criticism being aimed at the first sequel produced for this incarnation back in 1980. And honestly, I can see the seeds of disappointment that were to come from this first sequel...

Now due to a lot of tension between Donner and the producers, he was forced to leave production of this second film, with Richard Lester taking over, and reshooting many parts of the film, in order to claim credit as director. And it is very obvious from the outcome of this film. Lester's trade mark comedy feels very out of place, especially in the town battle between Reeve's Superman and our far from intimidating antagonists. General Zod is a bore here, and the two additional threats don't impress me either. Their performances are very stiff, which is very obvious in scenes of them flying around or fighting Superman. The fight choreography in these moments is extremely lacklustre, even for a film from the early 80s. This also has an impact on Reeve's near pitch performance as Superman, as you can see him struggling to perform fights against these actors. I think a better fight choreographer would've been beneficial to this film.

The threat in this film feels extremely lacklustre, which is a huge shame as Donner did such an incredible job making the film's danger feel very real and intimidating. Here, possibly due to the reshoots or even the rather sluggish and slower paced editing, there doesn't feel like I should really care about what's happening. The action generally feels weightless, and while there are some amazing special effects shots, it doesn't do enough to sell the scope and threat our characters are facing. Another minor problem is the over reliance on recapping the first film in the opening titles. Audiences went to this film, because they were sold on the first one. And the once epic opening title sequence from the first film, feels extremely mundane in this sequel, not helped by it being interrupted constantly by this unnecessary recapping.

That isn't to say everything about this film is awful, there is in fact a lot to enjoy. The chemistry between Reeve's Superman and Margot Kidder's Lois Lane was very convincing, and gave some of the more naturally comical moments, particularly the first half of the film as we see Lois slowly unravel the truth about Superman/Clark Kent. I would generally say the first half of this film is far superior to the second half. Any scene with Superman and Lois, I was invested in. I also really liked the concept of Superman willingly giving up his powers, which would've been amazing to explore more. I personally would've cut Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor out of this film entirely, not only to give the plot line about Superman losing his powers more screen time, but also because sadly Luthor is a wasted character here.

Again something Richard Donner did superbly with Luthor in the first film. But that was simply because he was the sole antagonist, and therefore needed the necessary focus time. Additionally, while the action in the 2nd half is very lacklustre, the first half has some brilliant action highlights. The Eiffel Tower sequence is brimming with tension, and starts the film with a literal bang! And while it's two quick moments, the moments of peril at Niagara Falls are very exciting scenes, and add to the building drama between Lois and Superman.

Overall, is this film awful? No! But does it live up to the standards of the first film? Also, no! Here you find a film that still has a lot of love and care into it, but still feels like a tiny step backwards in quality. Unlikely nowadays where film sequels can occasionally surpass it's original, we have to remember that it use to be common that sequels never surpass the first film. And while most people agree that Superman II didn't surpass Richard Donner's original film, the flaws in this film seem to be brushed over more. There is director's cut of the film, using only the material shot by Richard Donner prior to his departure. And while it does feel more in line with the original film, I believe it wouldn't have been anymore popular than the theatrical cut that was released. Is it the worst Superman film ever? No, I'd say Quest For Peace from 1987 holds that distinction. But I wouldn't say Superman II is the grand sequel that Donner's original deserved...

SCORES

Story: 3.5/5

Characters: 3.5/5

Production: 3.5/5

Acting: 4/5

Music: 4/5

TOTAL: 7.4/10