IMDb > Superman IV: The Quest for Peace (1987) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Superman IV: The Quest for Peace
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 11 of 25: [Prev][6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [Next]
Index 250 reviews in total 

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

The worst superman movie.

Author: alexander klein ( from Bogota, Colombia
8 July 2004

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

SPOILER WARNING!!!!! will definetely enjoy this one.....but it's a ridiculous movie.....mainly because of the nuclear man and lex luthor's cousin......those were just pathetic aditions to the movie.......nuclear man appeared in a ridiculous way.....and the way how lex luthor escapes out of prison is totally pathetic.......things like this are all over this's dumb.......the special effects here are awful and so is the story......the thing about getting rid off the nuclear weapons was well intentioned but how they handled it was terrible....and bringing nuclear man was the worst thing they could've done.......the musical score isn't that bad, the bad thing is the main's totally screwed up, it just doesn't have the same power that makes all John Williams' scores excellent......the nuclear man theme is pretty good and it was composed by John Williams....but this can't make a movie rise up....and definetely not with this one.......the first two superman movies will be remembered.....but forget this one......* out of 5

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Sorry, slip-shod final act. *sighs* How...sad.

Author: Elswet from .: Fiendish Writings in the Dark :.
25 October 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Where are the effects? Nuclear Man has to be the lamest bad guy in a long sad history of comic strip bad guys, to grace the silver screen. And Jon Cryer? Lenny should have been in a cage, not acting in a movie. Mariel Hemingway? I admire her acting talents and truly believe she is a very under-rated and under-appreciated actress, but she belonged less in this movie than Arnold Schwarzenegger at a baby shower. What was she thinking? And what happened to the budget? Where are those effects? Why does Superman fly like he no longer knows how? They couldn't afford another wire for his feet? And speaking of wires, when he lands on the moon, WHY didn't they edit out the wires?! Appalling!

And what happened to Clark Kent? He was bumbling, but lovable. Now he's this dork who trips over his own two feet and can't carry on a coherent or half-way intelligent conversation? What happened? This has every aspect of a poorly-made "B" movie. How very disappointing.

Did they put everything they had into "Masters of the Universe" and just say to h3LL with Superman? What? I do not know what anyone who was involved with this was thinking , but everyone should have just taken a breather, found a reality check, and done something else for 8 months instead. Margot Kidder, though still and always a bright beacon in every performance which I have ever had the pleasure to witness, looks drawn and tired; as though she is still in shock at having been drawn into yet another of these movies. And Mark Pillow?! WTF?! Look him up here on IMDb. He's done a grand total of....TWO things!! Nuclear Man in this and an appearance in some obscure TV show. Go figure. Again, with the low budget.

The budget for this movie was obviously a paltry sum compared to the other three installments. A cheap and petty thing to do to Reeve. He deserved so much more from the producers of this travesty. And so did the fans.

Do yourself a favor and just forget they made this one. Love 1, 3, and yes, even 2, but skip this one. Keep your love of Reeve and Superman intact.

Premise In the face of the end of the cold war, America has decided to strive to be "second to none" in their stockpiling of nuclear arms. Superman has been enlisted to help save the world from itself, by a young student. Meanwhile, the Daily Planet has been taken over by the tabloid king from H3LL, and Editor Perry White (veteran actor Jackie Cooper) is chomping at the bit to knock the new owner cold.

Furthermore, Lacy Warfield (Hemingway), the new owner's daughter, is after Clark, or Superman..or Clark?..or Superman? on a double date with Lois, Lacy and Clark and Superman...all have a really tragic time. Confused yet? So were the actors, apparently, as this scene was about the most ludicrous thing I've ever had to witness. This is where Clark Kent becomes an incoherent boob, instead of the lovable absent-minded, mild-mannered man we all admired./Premise

This production attempts to be political, but it just does not manage to pull it off. The whole lack of budget and lack of quality throughout does not manage to do anything but damage the franchise, in my opinion, and was a bitter disappointment.

However, do let me state, that the flaw was not in the writing, but in the direction. The premise was a good one. It could have worked. They just had their minds on "MotU," rather than on Superman, where it belonged. MotU, while it does carry with it some cult following, was a total bomb in the mainstream audience. Not even Billy Barty could save it.

I LOVE Margot Kidder's acting. But WHY has she never grown accustomed to those dentures? Or is that some kind of anomaly? Just a question.

Additionally, there are a number of irregularities in this film. Did anyone notice the fact that they had it daytime in the US, Italy, and in China at the same time? Or that the capes billow even with no atmosphere on the moon? Or that the whole fight scene on the moon was slow motion to imply 0 gravity, even though gravity would affect neither Superman nor Nuclear Man? Or that the flag pole was irreparably bent when Superman was knocked onto it and yet it's straight as an arrow after the fight? Or that Mark Pillow was about the worst excuse for an actor since Arnold Schwarzenegger in Conan? Or that by moving the moon as he did, Superman would have destroyed Earth and everyone on it? Or that Lacy would not have survived outside our atmosphere with or without Nuclear Man's being conscious? Or that she would have burned up on re-entry, regardless of Superman's having her in his arms? Or that Superman now has the ability to hover in the air, rather than fly? When did that happen? Or that Superman can move fast as a speeding bullet, yet when he's fighting or trying to save someone, he's about as slow as an 80 year old Alzheimer's patient on gin? Wow what a disgrace.

This sad attempt rates a 1.3/10 from...

the Fiend :.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

the best

Author: ( from exeter
20 June 2003

people might think im thick but i think this is the best of the serious chris reeve does a great job again in his final superman film its a shame that 45 minutes was cut maybe in 2006 the full version will come out. CHRIS REEVE IS SUPERMAN

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

If they ever do the Special Edition...

Author: ElPpo
19 November 2001

If they ever do the Special Edition of this movie, could they restore the 45 of minutes they took out in the original. Since recently deleted scenes were added to Superman: The Movie, I think it is a good idea to do the same thing to this movie. The movie still sucks but a least it would make sense!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Superman "Bore"

Author: Danny Vega ( from Clinton, MO
17 November 2001

As a Superman fan since birth, I'm terribly disappointed in this film. Such a waste of good talent (Hackman & Reeves) and a waste of $17 million. If they wanted to give away $17 million, they could have written the check out payable to me. Christopher Reeves mentioned in his auto biography that he was basically forced to do this film in order to do "Somewhere in Time". With this in mind, he still displayed a performance that rivaled the previous. Good job Mr. Reeves.

As for the film, I continue to say "What 4th Superman?"

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Unfortunate End to an Entertaining Series

Author: criddic2 ( from United States
13 November 2001

Many people have written about this movie and how bad it is. Well, it is bad. Can't deny it. Some of the effects are among the worst ever displayed in a major motion picture. The script is chopped up so bad that some scenes wind up being incoherent. One saving grace is the sincerity of the performances. Christopher Reeve is still a believable Superman/Clark Kent, while Gene Hackman makes a pleasing return to the series as Lex Luthor. It should either have just dealt with nuclear arms or the solar powered villain, not both. The zany subplot with Mariel Hemingway falling for Clark is mildly amusing.

I have heard/read a great deal concerning cut scenes and a grossly cut budget. Why did they do that to Superman? Didn't the producers know that fans wanted to see a worthy movie, not a cheap imitation?

The real problem was that the Salkinds left after #3, leaving the filmmakers with cheap producers, and not choosing a better director than Sydney J. Furie.

At least #3 had entertaining elements, even if it did throw out the Lois Lane character and any trace of the previous two movies. I liked the sweetness of the Smallville scenes and the humor provided by Richard Pryor; I even liked some of the special effects sequences. But #4 is virtually a child's wind-up toy. Reeve had good intentions with his input as co-writer and 2nd unit director, I'm sure. He remains true to character.

It should have been better. * *

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Hurried, half-assed and slapdash

Author: The Spectacular Spider-Man from Can you get me a cup of coffee, please?
2 August 2001

You know when you have to get a job done, say some homework or tidying your room, and you just can't be bothered to do it properly? What do you do then? You cut corners, you rush the job just to get it finished. The end justifies the means. Well, that's what happened on Superman IV. Everything comes down to how rushed this film was. The special effects especially are the sort of last-minute 'at least it's something' crap the BBC used to put into Doctor Who. An inexcusably lame movie, and yes, it even reaches the level of awfulness of (dun dun DUNNN)....Batman & Robin! On the other hand, this is the only bad Superflick ever made: Superman, Superman II, Superman III, the pilot movie for Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman and the animated The Last Son of Krypton and The Batman/Superman Movie are all decent Man of Steel entertainment.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

not as good as I-III, but a decent laugh

Author: Paul Reubens from NC
24 July 2001

This is definitely not what the Superman Saga should be remembered for. However, it is a decent idea and it does bring back Hackman as Lex Luther which is good to see. However, his sidekick, Otisburg, must have read the script and opted not to audition!

The movie is inspired by Iran-Contra (Oliver North 80s) and the Cold War of the middle and late 80s. Nuclear war is something that Superman opposes and he decides to rid the planet of all nuclear warheads. As he is tossing the missiles into the sun like they are toothpicks, Luther has been secretely formulating a plan to use Superman's own DNA against him. He steals a piece of Superman's hair (over his ears) from a museum and makes a potion that will react with solar energy to form Nuclear Man. The concoction is fastened to a missile and when Superman throws it into the sun, Nuclear Man pops out and heads over to the moon (where Superman happens to be) and they have a brief battle.

Nuclear Man, controlled by Luther, decides to hit up earth and goes to visit his master. Luther can control Nuclear Man by shutting the curtains and blocking the sun. He gets his energy from the sun, not from eating hot dogs and Doritos in a bowl like humans.

Anyways, they have their usual battles and Superman almost is carved to death, but returns and throws Nuclear Man into a nuclear power plant which gives unlimited energy for 1,000 years. Great ending!

This is all, I seriously doubt there will be another sequel given Superman's (Reeve's) current condition of handicapped circus sideshow!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

As it stands, less than brilliant.

Author: Tom Bixby ( from Metropolis, England
25 May 2001

There are often movies that come along in which you think, "yes, it was bad and it could have been better". The thing with Superman IV : The Quest For Peace, is that never a truer word has been said. It COULD be better, and iam sure that in its entirety with the previously unseen footage in the 134 minute cut of the movie, it would be good. As it is i must judge a patchwork movie. That is the main problem, the movie is badly operated on. Forget the special effects, they work nicely and arent as bad as people and critics will have you believe, we have seen worse. The direction by Sidney J Furie and presumably Christopher Reeve is at best good. The acting by the regulars and fun performances from John Cryer as Lex's nephew and Mariel Hemingway as Lacey Warfield [the love interest] are acceptable [certainly no worse than in any other sci=fi/action movie. And the plot, which has Superman fending off Nuclear arms from the worlds powers and defeating Luthors evil Nuclearman in the process is quite an exciting tale. The problem is that the movie is cut to ribbons. We see about fifteen minutes of what looks like Gene Hackmans best performance as Lex Luther, and Christopher Reeve's character comes over as vey wooden because we miss out alot of his characters development. As an 89 minute movie, Superman : The Quest For Peace is very lukewarm. As a 134minute movie, it looks to be alot better. Those of you who can get the extended version released, you know who you are. Help us, help yourself, get it released.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Why is everyone so negative?

Author: unamachita from All over the U.S.
25 August 1999

I don't get it...this is my favorite of the Superman movies. Maybe I am just uncritical, or maybe I was too young to properly appreciate the first Superman movie when it came out, I don't know. This movie made me laugh a lot. Chris Reeve really gets to exercise his comic side in this one, especially as Clark. It's silly, sure, but where's the harm in that? Who really expects a deep, significant story out of this franchise, anyway? It's just brain candy for a couple hours' mindless enjoyment. Don't expect anything more than that, and you won't be disappointed.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 11 of 25: [Prev][6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history