Title: Superman.
Rated: PG.
Director: Richard Donner.
Story by: Mario Puzo.
Screenplay by: Mario Puzo, David Newman, Leslie Newman, Robert Benton & Tom Mankiewicz (uncredited).
Release Date: 1978.
Runtime: 188 min (Extended TV Cut).
Genre(s): Action, Adventure, Drama.
Cast: Marlon Brando, Gene Hackman, Christopher Reeve, Ned Beatty, Jackie Cooper, Glenn Ford, Margot Kidder, and many more!
Budget: $55,000,000 (estimated).
Gross USA: $134,451,603.
Cumulative Wordlwide Gross: $300,451,603.
My Overall Rating:
You can find out more about my thoughts by visiting me over on my blog here:
Bookidote 
Is it 4/5 or 4/10?? 🤣
It wasn’t a bad movie, but I have no intention of watching it again 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hahahah what’s a pre-Nolan superhero movie that even worked for you though????? 😛
LikeLiked by 1 person
Barbarella? Flash Gordon? 🤣🤣🤣
(just kidding, hated the guts of these movies!!!)
I liked Burton’s Batman, though. Still like it!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hahahaha good to hear about Burton’s Batman! I look forward to when I revisit that one for a review on my blog. 😀 Meanwhile… I still have a bunch of bad ones to go through first… 😛
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good luck! 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Christopher Reeve is Superman end of! 😂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hahahah I won’t disagree with you there, Nicki! Thanks for reading. 😀
LikeLike
I watched the Donner cut for Supes II but didn’t realize there was an extended version of the first one. Doesn’t sound like it’s worth watching unless one is a cinemaphile.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Director’s cut is worth watching. It expands on some of the characters, including a great extra scene between Superman and Jor-El, and gives us a bit more action. The TV cut has its fans, but it’s basically an unrefined work print and isn’t worth watching. But I would argue that the Director’s Cut is the better version of the movie.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Now, are you talking about One, or Two?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think he’s talking about the first movie…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I didn’t even know there was a directors cut for the first movie. Interesting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I honestly only found out when I decided to watch it as my movie-to-review-this-month hahah I knew about the Donner Cut for the 2nd movie but I didn’t realize there was a Director’s Cut AND a TV Cut for the first movie.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I definitely wouldn’t recommend the Extended TV Cut to anyone but a curious cinephile/Superman fan. The theatrical and Director’s Cut are superior final products to fully experience the original movie.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great review sir, I’m just glad you’ve seen the other versions of this classic because anyone going into the 3 hour TV cut uninitiated might wonder what the heck the fuss over Donner’s Superman. It was literally an unrefined work print, whilst containing some interesting little pieces there are too many sequences with over-long scenes that needed tightening editorially.
As for Ned Beatty, watch “Deliverence” and you may have a different view…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Chris. That’s true. Good thing this TV cut is harder to get your hands on. I never had the chance to see it before and thought it’s a cool idea to revisit this cut. I’ll definitely check out the Director’s Cut the next time I do a rewatch but now I’ll move on to the Donner Cut of the 2nd movie next month. It did sadden me to learn that this TV cut of the first movie was only released to make more money instead of respecting the movie’s soul.
I haven’t seen Deliverance but it sounds fantastic. I’ll add it to my watchlist. I imagine he has a less “comedic” role in it. He was pretty fun in Superman as Otis though. It’s just so funny that a mastermind supervillain would keep such sidekicks around. Definitely not like the Lex Luthor we get nowadays!
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Donner Cut of Superman II is interesting, it doesn’t quite work but it’s a glimpse at what could have been had Donner not been fired and able to complete the film.
Oh, Deliverance is certainly not “comedic” – strap yourself in!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t remember if I watched this but I think I will not watch one of those originals. Amazing review, Lashaan! 😃
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ahhh, that’s unfortunate! Thanks for reading, Yesha! 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Though my first exposure to Superman was through George Reeves, I was so young at the time that when Christopher Reeve came on the scene I quickly re-identified him as “The” Superman. I remember loving all the movies, and likely watched them multiple times. Not sure I’d rewatch them now, so I admire your dedication to doing so, and I’m glad to see you’re enjoying them even when extended beyond what might be best for the story. I do sometimes miss those earlier days when there was a lighter feel to the superheros and not so much need to turn them dark and broody and full of self-loathing. There’s certainly a place for that, too, but it’s refreshing to have these less dark visions once in a while.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I honestly didn’t know about George Reeves till recent years. My first Superman was Christopher Reeve and I don’t think anyone else managed to do better. Sure, Henry Cavill’s physics makes his Superman pretty cool but it’s a modern take and doesn’t have the same charm as Reeve’s Superman. And Reeve’s Clark Kent is just perfect. Exactly how I always conceived the character in any format!
I’m having fun working my through the remaining DC live-action movies that I haven’t reviewed on my blog. I’m only missing a couple more but since I’m just keeping it at 1 movie review a month, I should be fine for the upcoming months! 😀 I can’t wait to check out Superman II though. Actually, the rest of the Superman saga pre-Nolan is a blur in my memory.
That’s true. Good thing we can always revisit these for the lighter take on these heroes. I honestly have a hard time imagining them making a more comedy-oriented live-action Batman or Superman anymore. That would be a hard sale.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OMG this is my youth Lashaan! I was 8 years old! And I recall watching it years later on the television 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hahah I’m glad to hear the nostalgia in your comment! 😀
LikeLike
I love all the actors in this.
Poor Christopher Reeves…
Hey, be nice to Ned Beatty! Goofy sidekicks need love too!
There is something about the old school manner of special effects that is charming, and cgi just cannot capture that charm.
Up, up, and awaaaaaay!!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
We lost so many great actors from this movie in the past years. It really is sad. Time flies… Hahah I have nothing against Ned Beatty! Otis was a fun addition to the movie. All-around silly! And I agree. The old-school effects, just like in Batman (1966) give this movie its own charm.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It can be really interesting to consider the different cuts and whether an extended version is worth it. I get the impression that you thought this cut was unnecessarily long?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep, this cut ruins the more subtle moments of the movie. It was only released on TV so that the company could make more money (they were getting paid for each additional minute aired on TV). I’d recommend the theatrical or Director’s Cut for sure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The extended TV cut is basically a look at an unedited, unrefined version of the movie. I could see it being interesting for film students, and it does have its fans, but it doesn’t add anything of significance that isn’t already in the Director’s cut. I would recommend the Extended Director’s Cut over the Theatrical Cut though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It indeed is. A huge, unedited, and unrefined cut. It sort of makes some plot elements seem dumb (e.g. when Superman just stares at his solution to saving a town from drowning while Lois drowns in dirt; him basking in glory for countless minutes because of the length of that sequence makes him seem so silly when Lois is dying around the corner). I’d probably revisit the Director’s Cut the next time I rewatch this movie though.
LikeLike
Great review, Lashaan! I haven’t seen it, but I’m pretty sure I would find it very entertaining, and maybe even more entertaining than the “new” versions of this story!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Juliette! It has its own charm and, for many, it’s a nostalgic trip down memory lane. A lot of its effects might feel quite dated but is still pretty impressive for a movie from the 70s. :O
LikeLiked by 1 person