Superman 2 - Patreon Version
Added 2025-09-21 12:00:07 +0000 UTCNo Sync Required Version: https://cinebingers.ca/kLPeeGhml9 - For Patreon tier "Bingers on The Wall" or higher.
movie runtime: 02:07:25 (Theatrical cut from Amazon Prime)
Comments
This is unhinged.
Roy A
2025-09-25 18:30:46 +0000 UTCSorry you guys didn't like it, it's a fictional superhero movie that their powers don't make sense, again it's a fictional superhero movie, LMAO it's not a documentary about mortals. I saw it in the movies and that audience generally loved it. You guys just seemed so upset, that you almost became a parody of yourselves. It was entertaining listening to you both and well worth my monthly contribution :) Oh and by the way the critiques of the time loved it and it is still highly rated.......................................................................................................But thanks for the entertainment you guys are funny :) :) :) On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, Superman II has an approval rating of 88% based on 109 reviews, with an average rating of 7.6/10. The site's critics consensus reads, "The humor occasionally stumbles into slapstick territory, and the special effects are dated, but Superman II meets, if not exceeds, the standard set by its predecessor."[50] On Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 83 out of 100, based on 16 critics, indicating "universal acclaim".[51] Audiences polled by CinemaScore during its opening weekend gave the film a rare average grade of "A+" on an A+ to F scale.[52] Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times, who gave the original film very high acclaim,[53] also praised Superman II, giving it four out of four stars. He wrote in his review, "This movie's most intriguing insight is that Superman's disguise as Clark Kent isn't a matter of looks as much as of mental attitude: Clark is disguised not by his glasses but by his ordinariness. Beneath his meek exterior, of course, is concealed a superhero. And, the movie subtly hints, isn't that the case with us all?"[54] Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune awarded three-and-a-half out of four stars[55] and declared it "better than the original."[56] Sheila Benson of the Los Angeles Times called it "the most interesting 'Superman' yet," adding, "This film's fun comes from character, dialogue and performance, not effects. There are, of course, enough effects to fill a dozen Saturday matinee serials but they aren't necessarily the film's deliciousness."[57]
Lana Gorgeous
2025-09-23 20:53:25 +0000 UTCOver 40 years since I last saw this version of the movie in the cinema. I'd forgotten how full of plot holes it is. I still enjoyed it as a piece of nostalgia. Shane Rimmer seemed to get a lot of gigs on movies as a mission controller back in those days - this time sharing the consoles with John Ratzenberger .
GAB
2025-09-23 12:03:10 +0000 UTCEven seeing this as a kid, I never liked the finality of Superman giving up his powers. His mother says he can never go back, yet he does. I think this could have been written better to feel final, but leave a loop hole.
Vwlss Nvwls
2025-09-22 06:08:18 +0000 UTCThe music in this movie was not nearly as good as it when conducted by Williams in the first film. You can *really* hear that the session orchestra used by Ken Thorne was definitely not the London Symphony Orchestra. I hate to say it, but it sounds pretty bad. And yes, George, the visual effects look pretty poor overall , compared to the fist movie. The whole thing just looks a lot cheaper. Note that the story here is credited to Mario Puzo who wrote "The Godfather." The Eiffel tower currently has 1665 steps and of that, only 674 are accessible to the public. The number of steps has changed since the tower was built as some were removed in 1983: https://www.toureiffel.paris/en/news/visit/take-stairs-and-discover-eiffel-tower-new-way George, Superman flies as fast as the story dictates he can! Speaking of, he can travel near or at the speed of light, somehow, but a hydrogen bomb exploding in space can knock him silly for a few moments? I've been to the Canadian side of the Niagara Falls but it's been a long time. I was there in high school on a trip to Buffalo, NY and then Ontario. My first and only trip to Canada so far. It's funny that the bellhop who shows Lois and Clark their room talks about the "Flames of Love" as being "exclusive to this motel" because the place is called the "Honeymoon Haven Hotel" and from the exterior shots you can see it is definitely not a "motel." Hard to believe an employee would make such a mistake. The small boat and other vessels and "barrels" that Lois is near before she jumps in the water are some of the watercraft various people used to try to survive going over the Falls. The red, twin-hulled boat, "Ray Weaver's Rapids Queen 1961" seen in the movie can be seen here: (https://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/38825). S&G you definitely need to react to more movies filmed and set in Canada. "Scott Pilgrim" is not enough! I can think of one such movie I have seen, "Map of the Human Heart" (1992). The lines spoken by Luthor during the balloon ride do not sound at all like Gene Hackman, rather a another actor doing a bad impression of Hackman. This happens several other times in the movie, including when he leaves The Fortress of Solitude and in a scene in The Daily Planet and /or The White House. Apparently this is because Hackman refused to work with Lester and at one point a body double is used in The Fortress of Solitude scenes. Clifton James, who plays the Sheriff talking about fish, was also in "The Untouchables" as the District Attorney who prosecutes Capone. The US Army squad that shows up in the little midwest town is driving a WW2 vintage Jeep (apparently 1942, in this case), which is not something the US Army would likely be using in the late 1970s/early 1980s. The whole town scene was filmed in the UK, which explains why that kid sounds British. Also, the TV report spoke of a "fleet" of gunships but only a single "Army" helicopter shows up, in this case an French Aérospatiale AS350 AStar which was never used by the US Army (though some variants were/are used by various US police forces). The very striking Sarah Douglas would go on to star as "Queen Taramis" in the sequel to "Conan the Barbarian" called "Conan the Destroyer" (1984) and she looks really stunning in that movie. I like how Ursa collects the various patches and badges as she goes along in the movie. George, when this movie was being filmed, Jimmy Carter was the President of the US and he looks nothing like "The President" (played by E.G. Marshall) in this movie. The product placement in this or any movie doesn't bother me in particular because fake products are distracting. However, I find it objectionable that Marlboro trucks and cigarettes were all over the place as this is ostensibly a "children's movie." Speaking of Superman's powers being all over the place in this movie, it is beyond absurd that he is pushed back and pinned/stunned for several minutes by a bus right after he was fighting with Non underground. The real problem was that we just saw Superman fly near or at the speed of light in the first movie and even if that were somehow possible, the stresses inflicted on his body during all that far exceed anything that happens to him in this movie. I really like how Terence Stamp really underplays his lines after he unknowingly loses his powers, speaking almost in a whisper as he instructs Superman to swear allegiance. Both Zod and Ursa really are wonderfully menacing in this movie, but they deserve a better story. Likewise, Margot Kidder and Christopher Reeve continue their wonderful chemistry and charm in this movie, but it is a real letdown that outside of their scenes together, most of the rest of the movie is just so silly. All of these actors really needed a better movie and despite their good efforts, it's largely a mess. The Donner cut isn't great, but it's quite a bit better. I don't care that the amnesia kiss or the super logo tarp existed or not in the comics, they are still pointless elements. The problem with Superman choosing to lose his powers is that it's not only undone too quickly, but it's also not very satisfying. When I watch a superhero movie or show, I don't want to see normal people. It's one thing if a hero is occasionally stymied because he or she cannot safely use such powers without limit, it's another to have them arbitrarily taken away.
REDR58
2025-09-22 05:40:40 +0000 UTC
