Christopher Reeve played Superman/Clark Kent in Superman (1978)
Reeve would go on to reprise his career-defining portrayal of the Man of Steel in three more sequels, but I chose to focus on his performance here as it's probably the film in which most focus has been given to his performance. I should note that he's just about on par with this film in
Superman II, he technically has a bit more of an arc in that one in terms of the whole 'superhero decides to not be superhero any longer' but to be perfectly honest, it doesn't really give his performance that much more variety, he certainly doesn't reach the heights of say Tobey Maguire in
Spiderman 2 in that regard but rather maintains more or less the same sort of characterisation established in the first film. He doesn't really show Superman as changing, rather it's more the film and direction that does that for him. Anyway I haven't seen any of III and IV and maybe I shouldn't, given their lacklustre reception. Anyway,
Superman is a very fun action film from the 70's, and I believe the first proper superhero motion picture. It has its dated elements and when you get down to it, the plot, including that last-minute twist, is all a bit ridiculous, but it certainly is a delightful ride and feels just like a comic book brought to cinematic life.
Christopher Reeve has been declared to be the definitive Superman by many. Well, with regards to this I both agree, and also have reservations about whether it's necessarily earth-shattering praise. As Superman, Reeve certainly looks the part. The costume just seems to fit him perfectly, and I'm not just talking about his physique and appearance, which are both of the very All-American variety. Reeve carries himself in the suit exactly how one would imagine a god amongst men, would carry himself. When he flies you believe the man flies, when he fights it just seems to be the right sort of way, each movement he makes when in the superman costume is just perfectly fitting to the straightforward, idealistic heroism that superman espouses. However, I will sa he falters a bit in the scenes where Superman needs to bring a bit more than just his All-American heroics into the fray. He's actually quite good in expressing the sorrow in Clark Kent in the film's climax over a certain 'death' (though this being a Superman film it's clear that certain someone isn't going to die, which lessens the dramatic impact to an extent for me but I digress), but he never really manages to convey the intensity of his fight against Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman), though I must say this might be due to another reason I'll get onto in a future review.
As Clark Kent, Reeve is also good. Technically speaking it's an act Superman puts on, and Reeve certainly is entertaining enough when doing his nerdy, nervy schtick as the reporter for the Daily Planet. I won't say he's ever hilarious but he's funny, however one does wonder how much of this is actual acting, and how much is genuine discomfort and awkwardness Reeve feels in the role, which was seen in a great deal many of his performances post-Superman. He's also far from the funniest character in the film, with Hackman (I'll get onto that more in the near future), Ned Beatty as the enjoyable idiotic Otis, and Valerie Perrine's bimbo Eve Teschmacher all doing much more with the comical aspects of their performances. His bumbling harried routine is however, enjoyable, it's probably the writing as well as the actors playing off him that makes these scenes work that well, I'll give Reeve credit though he plays off the likes of Jackie Cooper well. He also has a certain awkward, likable chemistry with Margot Kidder as Lois Lane, it's no George McFly-Lorraine Baines sorta deal but it's sweet enough, as for Lois Lane's attraction to Superman well Reeve doesn't really need to work too hard on that aspect of his performance, his Superman is pretty much sex appeal epitomized in spandex.
Which leads to the question, is it more the excellence of casting or the performance itself, that makes Reeve the definitive Superman? I think it's a bit of both, but more to the former, and also the way the direction and script utilises Superman. The film knows that the way Reeve fits into its vision is as a straightforward superhero, which works perfectly for the film as anything else would've probably seemed ill-fitting. He's probably the most important cog to the film's success, but does he give the best performance? Not quite. As I've mentioned before Gene Hackman is by far the MVP of the film in terms of just the quality of his performance and just the impact he makes on the viewer, and you could argue that the likes of Beatty and Perrine also give more impressive work within their limitations, and (controversial I know) even the likes of Marlon Brando, Trevor Howard and Terrence Stamp in the opening scenes of the film make more of an immediate visceral impact with their short performances. However, I digress. Reeve really is the perfect Superman and Clark Kent for Richard Donner's vision, even if I don't think his performance is a masterclass in acting in any respect.
Rating: 3.5/5
Brandon Routh played Superman/Clark Kent in Superman Returns (2006)
Oh,
Superman Returns. What else can be used to describe this film apart from words like 'trainwreck', 'mess'. It's kind of an admirable failure in the sense that I can see what director Bryan Singer was going for, a re-emulation of the original
Superman with some additions of his own
X-Men, glossy sort of variety of SFX, familial issues and (attempted) emotional undercurrent, and some of that comes through in a positive way (there's a pretty good action sequence involving Superman saving a falling plane), but mostly it fails and not even in a spectacular, entertaining way. It wants to both pay homage to the original films but also stand out as a film in itself, but completely nullifies most of the positive attributes of the originals and lacks any sort of real daring to make it's own sort of mark, I mean the least that can be said for something like
Batman & Robin that it was daring in how awful it was, this is more like
Batman Forever in that it's so bland in its badness that it ends up being more forgettable than anything.
What about Routh though? Well, all I can say about this performance is that on the positive side, he doesn't cause me active pain watching him unlike say, Kevin Spacey and Parker Poesy's absolutely dreadful attempts to emulate Hackman and Perrine in their incredibly unintimidating villainous double-act of sorts, Kate Bosworth who is blandness incarnate as Lois Lane, James Marsden who for some reason thought it'd be fun to take the thankless role of third-wheel 'love interest' over the also kind of thankless (thanks Bryan Singer) but at least a bit more substantial role of Cyclops in
X Men: the Last Stand (not quite the Michael Madsen-picks-
Wyatt Earp over
Pulp Fiction of this generation but you get my drift). Routh is a bit better than these actors because instead of trying to grotesquely ape his predecessor like Spacey and Poesy, or just be content with taking the paycheck and giving a few stilted reactions to the camera like Marsden and Bosworth, he actually genuinely seems to be trying for some conviction in the role.
I would say he actually wears the suit well, and handles the action scenes well, the problem is that the writing of Superman in this film is absolutely dreadful and undermines any good intentions he might have had in playing the role. After all it very confusingly places him in an 'not-quite-origin story but origin-story-esque' tone with which to approach his Superman, making it quite awkward seeing him switch almost randomly in the film to a confident, top-of-his game Superman and at times a highly inadequate one, his characterization is all over the place, one scene he's saving the day the other he's spying on Lois Lane. As Clark Kent, too, I don't think Routh is anywhere near as adept at Reeve was at playing the bumbling reporter, it feels like even more of an act and also, more importantly, isn't very funny. In fact, Routh and the film make any scene concerning Clark Kent/Superman's personal dilemmas incredibly uncomfortable to watch because of just how...un-Superman like he is in his dealings with them. He always seems a bit out of his element whenever it isn't an action sequence.
Beyond the clearly messy characterization of Superman, this portrayal of Superman is also inherently flawed in that Routh just ends up being very forgettable. He doesn't espouse any sort of particular style as Superman, he seems to be trying for a bit of that All-American vibe Reeve gave but fails quite poorly, of course the direction and script is largely to blame here though as it give Routh absolutely no opportunity to do anything worthwhile with his Superman. It's just an ill-conceived performance in an ill-conceived film, and it's a shame this film ended up sinking Routh's career for a while, since he's clearly quite a talented performer in certain roles like his entertaining villainous vegan turn in
Scott Pilgrim v.s. the World.
Rating: 2/5
Henry Cavill played Superman/Clark Kent in Man of Steel (2013)
I have to admit that
Man of Steel is very much a guilty pleasure for me. I went in expecting to hate it, because I'm decidedly not a Zack Snyder fan (I think
300 and
Watchmen are pretty lacklustre films, and though I like
Sucker Punch to an extent I'm well aware it's not a good film, I probably just liked the idea behind it and the visuals, oh and the soundtrack). His brand of over-the-top, pseudo-grandiose style filmmaking though works pretty well here, and I ended up thoroughly enjoying and even (in certain scenes) loving it. The score is absolutely amazing, one of my all-time favourites, and though Snyder does perhaps cheat by completely relying on Hans Zimmer in certain scenes to hit the audience over the head with EPIC-ness by playing it over and over again in each moment where 'Superman does something COOL', I certainly didn't mind as it made every one of these scenes so fun to watch, and send chills down my spine, even when I should really be questioning what on earth is going on in some of the more messily edited fight scenes, or what on earth Zod is actually trying to achieve. Speaking of Zod, I think Michael Shannon is as always incredibly fun to watch when he goes super OTT in his villainy, is it really necessary for him to repeat 'I WILL FIND YOU' to the council on Krypton, maybe not but it involves Michael Shannon screaming so why not. The rest of the supporting cast is good down to the small supporting players of Aylet Zurer as the entertainingly slinky Faora, Christopher Meloni as arguably the bravest character in the whole film Colonel Nathan Hardy, Laurence Fishburne as an enjoyable Perry white. Also, controversial, controversial, but I think Russell Crowe is fantastic as Jor-El and far better than Marlon Brando was in the role, granted he has more material but I also thought he brough such grandeur to the role, which contrasted well with the earthly mentoring of Kevin Costner and Diane Lane's Jonathan and Martha Kent who I really liked in their smaller roles too. Really the only real bum notes are as I said, some of the messy editing, questionable dialogue, Amy Adams, plot incredulities, actually those are some major faults but then again, Hans Zimmer does help excuse a great deal.
Anyway, what about Henry Cavill, whose ascension into Superman-dom was one of the most heated discussions in recent comic book casting history, well until Jesse Eisenberg and Ben Affleck in the upcoming
Batman v.s. Superman over whom debates have started that do dwarf the Cavill conflicts of those days. Anyway, I'll deal with several of the issues people had with the casting in the first place. That Cavill isn't American was an issue had by many in the first place, well as this film and
The Man From U.N.C.L.E. shows Cavill is perfectly adept at playing an American, his accent isn't perfect but at least it's consistent. Another is that he doesn't really look anything like Reeve's incarnation of Superman. Well to that I say, look what they tried to do in that regard with
Superman Returns, the film was definitely better off without trying to emulate Reeve since no one else can do that sort of Superman as well as he does, and anyway it wouldn't be fitting to Synder's overall, much darker and somewhat grittier version of the Man of Steel origin story.
What about the performance itself, though? Well to that I have to say, Cavill may not be the definitive Superman, but he definitely gives the best performance in the role of Superman, in my books. It makes sense to look at this performance in a chronological fashion since that's more or less the straightforward approach to seeing the development of Superman this film takes. Young Clark Kent is actually surprisingly not at all badly done by Dylan Sprayberry and Cooper Timberline, setting Cavill in quite a good position to carry on their work by giving a suitably understated, somewhat morose young man who's finding his place in the universe. He has good chemistry with Costner and Lane and does well to show hints of Kent's innate heroism soon to bloom but in a subtle fashion, but also just the all-round selflessness of Kent as a hero. Cavill has an honesty around his character that may not be as overt and appealing as Reeves' but it certainly feels more realistic, and most importantly helps establish Clark Kent as a hero-in-the-making.
Anyway as the film goes on we get more and more insight into what exactly Clark Kent is, a man born for greatness, which leads to some of the best scenes of the film. The scenes in which he rescues people even without the Superman costume are pretty exhilarating in part due to Cavill's performance, which reflects a man doing good not for grandeur or publicity, but simply because it is the right thing to do. The scenes with him and Crowe I would argue are downright brilliant, even if the writing justifying these scenes is somewhat questionable. They share such a sense of understated connection for one another even though they barely know one another, and though Crowe is certainly the highlight of these scenes with the magnificently grandiose approach he takes to each of his monologues, Cavill is good in reflecting the gradual progression of Clark Kent into Superman.
So finally we get Superman and though Cavill may not be Reeves, he's certainly very good in being Superman in the physical sense of just seeming well-fitted to his suit, flying, fighting, all of that stuff, what I do like is that Cavill starts off the physical portrayal of these abilities as a bit of a work in progress, tinged with a hint of insecurity, which makes his eventual mastery of Superman's skills all the more satisfying to watch. He very soon develops into the hero the film needs in the direc consequences from Zod's invasion of earth, and I'm not going to lie, I may be commiting cinematic blasphemy here but quite frankly I think Cavill shows a great deal more conviction than Reeves in his dealings with the film's villains. He's far more driven, intimidating, and just packs more of a punch overall when saying lines like 'YOU THINK YOU CAN THREATEN MY MOTHER'. Might just be me, but his Superman just seems more heroic and well, super, overall in contrast to Reeves who does strike me sometimes as giving a performance more about superhuman posturing than actual superhuman strength and actions.
Cavill also gets more emotional scenes to deal with in this version of the Man of Steel's origins, and here he also trumps Reeves. He's moving in any scene he deals with the loss of Jonathan Kent, his unwanted decision to kill off Zod to save the lives of a family, and just gradually the way the events of the film wear down on Superman. He manages to strike a certain sort of chemistry with Lois Lane even though Amy Adams is really quite bland in the role, I thought he managed to make Superman in these scenes have a very effective sort of low-key charm, as well as a burgeoning attraction. Now having said all this I will admit that though I like this performance, it's not a great performane, there are moments of inexperience which is to expected from an actor handling his first leading role, he has a few slightly off line-readings and to be fair Superman is probably the least depthful of all the big superhero roles, but I think Cavill acquits himself admirably as Superman, with some great high points, and is nicely understated as Clark Kent, also if the final scene is anything to go by he's nailed the Daily Planet, geeky reporter Clark Kent quite well. He may not scream SUPERMAN by his mere presence in the way Reeves does but I do think he gives a better performance, one that I think entirely vindicates his casting choice. It'll be interesting to see what direction he takes the character in
Batman v.s. Superman: Dawn of Justice.
Rating: 4/5
Final Superman Ranking:
1. Cavill (4/5)
2. Reeves, Superman (3.5/5)
3. Reeves, Superman II (3.5/5)
4. Routh (2/5)
-large-picture.jpg)
