Look! Up in the Sky!

This is Asteroid G’s regular column documenting the rise of superhero films in Hollywood. For the complete story, make sure to read the previous parts:

• Part 1: Batman ‘66

When it was released, Batman ‘66 was a moderate success. The show it was a part of remained on the air for three seasons, with a full 120 episodes produced (plus the movie), and it helped to spawn a series of other shows and copycat products that stuck around in the market for a time. You had the likes of The Green Hornet (which lasted a season), the film The Wild World of Batwoman (unrelated to DC comics and clearly rushed out to capitalize on the success of the TV series), and, of course, the cartoons to follow as well. This was a specific, campy era for superheroes, which worked in the moment because, in comics, superheroes were campy. The Silver Age of Comics was marked by increasingly silly (albeit enjoyable) stories that didn’t bother trying to ground their heroes in anything like the real work. They were “stories for kids”, not tales to be taken seriously.

There were a few more superhero films over the following years, most of which were not based on anything in the DC or Marvel stables. They tended to fit into one kind of exploitation genre or another, such as Black Belt Jones or Hercules in New York (we could spend weeks just covering all the various Hercules films of the 1960s and 1970s, frankly), but it wasn’t until 1977 that we actually had a film that helped to redefine cinematic blockbusters. And that film was, of course… not Superman. No, that was the following year.

Star Wars and the Man in the Sky

Do we get to Superman: The Movie without first having Star Wars? The answer is a bit of yes and a bit of no. In 1973 the Salkinds purchased the rights to make a Superman film, and set about working for the next few years to get something off the ground. Mario Puzo had scripts submitted by 1975, Marlo Brando was signed on soon after to play Jor-El, Superman’s father, Gene Hackman was brought in soon after, but through it all the main meat of the film languished in development hell all the way up through 1977. And we all know what film came out in 1977 that absolutely changed the game. Yep: Star Wars.

Now, let’s be clear; George Lucas’s epic isn’t the first cinematic blockbuster to redefine the landscape. That would have been Jaws, released two years earlier in 1975. But while that shark movie was a cinematic powerhouse that showed how successful movies could be, Star Wars upped the ante, illustrating the power of spectacle. That first film in Lucas’ soon-to-be franchise blew the doors off at the Box office, and showed audiences just what to expect from their big-budget stories. Without Star Wars changing the game, who knows what Superman: The Movie would have looked like. Suddenly, everyone needed something to compete with Star Wars.

Just look at the marketing for Superman: The Movie. “You’ll believe a man can fly!” The movie sold itself on its spectacle, as well as the fact that, yes, this is Superman, in all his big, blue glory. It was a film that first and foremost wanted you to get absorbed in the visuals, to lose yourself in the power of what was on screen. This wasn’t just any superhero film, and it certainly wasn’t Batman ‘66. This was a new kind of superhero film for a new era. Forget Hercules, we have the man from Krypton now, a hero from outer space come to our planet to save us all.

But How Did It Redefine Superheroes?

The difference between Superman: The Movie and everything that came before was night and day. The best we’d had in the way of Superman tales up to that point were either campy television shows (like the George Reeves Adventures of Superman) or cartoons and serials that had to substitute animation for actual superpowers. Superman: The Movie didn’t rely on campy effects (well, not campy for the era) or silly storytelling. It tried to show us a Superman story that plausibly put the lead actor, Christopher Reeve, in as our hero and had him front and center in the effects.

One of the most impressive effects for the era was Superman flying. That was a complicated rig and green screen setup that (at least for the first movie) really helped to sell the effect of Superman flying. Having that in place, and making it look authentic, gave audiences exactly what they were looking for: Superman on screen, like they’d never seen him before. While we can tear apart the effect now, with decades to study it and plenty of other more impressive effects sequences to have come along since then, there’s no denying that for 1978 this Superman looked legit.

Of course, the best part of that film is Christopher Reeve. He wasn’t the first choice for the role, as a series of other actors were pitched the role and all of them turned it down (from Robert Redford to Burt Reynolds and Sylvester Stallone). Some performers wanted the role but were turned away, like Neil Diamond and Arnold Schwarzenegger. It was casting director Lynn Stalmaster who suggested Reeve for the role, and though they initially thought him too skinny to play Superman, eventually the producers did bring him in for a screen test and he blew them all away in the role.

Reeve was legitimately great as Clark Kent and Superman, the two sides of the character. He could be bumbling and nebbish as Clark, somehow selling the idea that everyone could look at him and not see Superman. Then he could look big and strong, but still kind, as Superman and be the beacon of hope and justice everyone expects from the character. Reeve had it all, and it’s fair to say that without him in the role the movie wouldn’t work anywhere near as well. The reason why it took so long to find the right Superman is because so few could perform the character the way Reeve could.

The movie isn’t perfect, of course. One of the biggest issues with it is that, if you know the comics, the film isn’t particularly accurate. Yes, the broad strokes are there – Jor-El sends his only son, Kal-El, to Earth as Krypton explodes, he’s then raised by the Kents as their son, grows up in Smallville, goes to Metropolis to work at the Daily Planet, and then battles with Lex Luthor for the fate of America – but so many of the details are changed in this film, and later movies, that it’s pretty clear the production team didn’t really care about being accurate. They just wanted to make a big movie.

Take all the times Superman’s powers shift and change in these films. Did you know Superman can throw out his S-shield symbol as a weapon? Or that he can kiss people and wipe their memories. And there’s the most egregious instance, where he flies around the world so fast that he makes it move backwards in time so he can change events. Sure, it’s supposed to look like he’s just traveling so fast he goes back in time, but even then, that’s not traditionally one of his powers (you’re thinking of The FlashStruck by lightning while working in his lab, Barry Allen became a speedster known as The Flash, launching an entire set of super-fast superheroes., Hollywood). The film plays fast and loose with Superman’s powers and his story, and the sequels only get worse.

Its Influence on the Future

The film was a massive success, powered by its great special effects and lead performance from Reeve. Pulling in, over time, $300 Mil against its $55 Mil budget, the film proved the power of superhero films for another decade. Flash Gordon, Zorro, The Lone Ranger, and Hercules all made return appearances after this film’s success, with everyone trying to get their own superhero back on screens in front of people. Then you had other comic and pulp adaptations as well, with the likes of Swamp Thing, Conan, and The Toxic Avenger also arriving on the scene. And let’s not discount that even Marvel wanted their own piece of the pie and, for some reason, released Howard the Duck in 1986 (with none other than George Lucas himself backing the production).

Of course, the success of the film also lead to multiple sequels. Superman: The Movie begat Superman II, Superman III, and Superman IV: The Quest for Peace, as well as spin-off Supergirl. None of these were as successful as the first film, but at least the first two films were modest successes at the Box Office. The fourth film, and the Supergirl spin-off, though were so bad that they effectively ended the franchise for good. It would be a few years before DC would let their next big superhero on the scene (you know, the one from Gotham City).

But the biggest takeaway you could have from Superman: The Movie was what the film itself represented. For starters, it was a movie that treated the concept of the hero with respect. Yes, it played fast and loose with the details, sure, but it wasn’t a film that talked down to the audience. This wasn’t like Batman ‘66, which, like the TV show it was attached to, was meant for kids. This was an all ages (as Hollywood likes to put it, “four quadrant”) film that wants you to be able to enjoy the character and the film no matter who you are. It’s a comic book movie made for everyone.

But the fact that it could play fast and loose with the material and the audiences would still show up also taught Hollywood a bad lesson: why treat the source material with respect when the ticket buyers don’t care. Change what you want, throw out whatever seems too “campy”, and don’t bother to respect what the comic book fans love. The following Superman films worried less and less about crafting stories true to the title hero, and the following years featured other films that also didn’t much care what fans wanted. Hollywood, the executives thought, knew better.

That, of course, set the perfect stage for what came next as the Batman descended onto the screen to audiences eager for the next big superhero event.

Next Time On…

Burton’s Batman '89 proves the power of the superhero genre all over again, as the auteur’s specific vision for the hero shows Hollywood just how far they can bend the source material without breaking their audience. And, well, it can bend pretty darn far.