This is OK, I give it a 6.5/10 but I really want to see Donner's cut of the film!

The second best comicbook movie ever,Reeves does his best acting in this one and if you look at spiderman 2 you will realise its very similar to superman 2.

Also Spider-Man 2 is very similar to Spider-Man as well.

The film is wierd and is too campy for me, but it does have some big iconic scenes, and it is fun to an extent.

Overall: B-

Yeah they both have the same characters and everything. :razz:

huh? lol I meant story-wise. Bad guy associates with Peter, but then tries an experiment and goes horribly wrong. Wants to continue the experiment but Spider-Man fights him first time, and wins the battle. Then the bad guy wins the next fight between the 2 and then Spider-Man comes back and wins. I just summarized the subplot of Spider-Man 2.

Did you expect anything different. That's basically the subplot of every comic-book movie.

Like X2? How Magneto failed his experiment? Oh wait - nevermind, he was basically evil from the start. Or what about Batman, where the Joker tried his experiments and failed? Oh wait nevermind he dropped himself down chemicals. Or Superman, well, you get the point (sorry if this post seems rude). Spider-Man 2 gets my vote for worst comic book film in history. It's a pile of junk.

So you really think SM:2 is worse than F4, The Hulk, The Punisher, Daredevil? Wow.

And what I was trying to allude to is that you expected more out of SM:2 than bad guy vs. good guy, which is the focal of EVERY comic-book movie.

This is my favorite Superhero movie. Christopher Reeves' performance is great. I love the scene at the coffee shop at the end.

A+

I expect a good guy vs. bad guy... obviously. And I wanted more. The good guy vs. bad guy was almost not even a subplot in the movie and Doc Ock had 2 or 3 cameo appearances. That's it. It's not even a 'Spider-Man' movie, it's about Peter Parker if anything! So the name 'Spider-Man 2' is misleading. There is simply no excuse for Spider-Man to be out of the movie that long. It's like the writers just added subplot after subplot to Spider-Man 2 just to try and make it "deeper" when in fact it's just a tangled mess.

Better than Superman 1 since the movie follows general Zod and his two followers from the first movie and segwayed them into the sequel. Here we have Superman matching up against villians of his equal strength. Not only were the battles epical but it also gets a glimpse of Clark Kent losing his powers and becoming human for once. Between Spiderman 2 and Superman 2 you will see alot of similarites between both

A+
9.7/10

I saw the movie again a couple of nights ago. I still find it to be one of the best sequels out there, but it doesn't hold up anywhere near as well as the first movie. And I hate what Ken Thorne did to Williams' score. I don't mind the fact that he uses the same score and doesn't add any of his own cues, it's just that he made Williams' sound very cheap.

I'm also not a big fan of what Lester did with the scene where the three baddies fight Superman. Don't get me wrong, when the four are actually going at it, it's well done. I don't like however the added stuff where people are being flown around by the wind, and having wigs and KFC buckets flying around left and right. The same goes for that guy in the telephone booth who gets knocked over and yet keeps talking. The rest of the film is completely serious so why throw that in there?

Still, credit is due to the editors. To combine both Lester's and Donner's footage into a film that makes more than a bit of sense is a big achievement, and to barely notice the difference is an even bigger achievement.

A-/A

Thats true, I've always noticed that Spiderman takes a lot moments from other films, particularly Superman 2 and weird enough Batman Forever.

Anyway, I loved Superman II Its a solid A. I still can't wait for the Donner cut, cause that has made despise the fact that I like it. But its still a great superhero film.

It suffers, despite some great stuff, because Lester gives in to some of his worst instincts. Too jokey, too many right turns into camp. Lester was a great director with the right material (See: The Three/Four Musketeers), but Superman was not right for his sensibilities. For further evidence, see Superman 3, where he alone held the reins.

Still, pretty good.

The best superhero movie, imo. A well made and well everything film.

A+

A

Excellent superhero movie, and better than the original. Zod is just such a cool villian for the piece, and the way the whole turning human things plays out is great. As Superman Returns displayed, it's not easy to make a flawless being exciting to watch, but it's done amazingly in here. Great.

Does anybody notice that the Spider-Man films are generally following the Superman plot points?

Powers go away in second film, in the third film Superman is given some weird kryptonite that splits his personality in two, his suit turns dark, etc.

Anyway, Superman II is great in sections. Once Zod and the kids get to the Moon and work their way down to "Houston" it really picks up speed. The introduction is garbage.

I read a little bit about this last weekend and apparently, in the script, the celophane S was never part of Superman's uniform but it was a weapon he picked up while in the fortress.

Looking forward to the director's cut, but Reeve and Stamp really carry this film from start to finish. It's still inferior to the main Superman film, but great nontheless.

Way too campy for my tastes and a far cry from the original. While that one wasn't afraid of taking itself seriously and presenting Superman as a straight drama, this one attempts to take the campy route and it ultimately fails. It's painfully clear that there were two directors on this film, as Donner's scenes are very similar to the original and Lester's are the ones that veer into camp. It's also very clear which ones are better, and makes me wonder why they fired Donner at all. It'll be interesting to see his cut of the film. Overall, a very disappointing sequel.

The story itself is very interesting, though unfortunately executed rather poorly. Again, it is obvious that the editors did a big hack job on the film, as characters disappear for long stretches of time (e.g. Lex Luthor) and there is never any sense of danger present, like in the first one. The romantic scenes with Superman and Lois Lane drag on to the point of boredom, and the only thing that saves the film from being a complete waste is the three supervillains who begin ruling the planet, especially General Zod. His cold evil is a nice contrast to Lex's dark sense of humour. The final battle is okay, but ultimately ruined by some poorly placed comedy that just doesn't work. And the climax is rushed and makes no sense. Very poorly plotted.

As expected with a film as campy as this, the acting isn't that good. Reeve does his best, but it's obvious that he know the dialogue is terrible - especially when he almost starts laughing during a dramatic moment. Hackman apparently didn't even shoot this film, so his scenes are stock footage combined with a stand-in and a (terrible) impersonator. It's actually hilarious to hear half of Luthor's lines spoken by a voice that sounds nothing like Hackman's. Stamp is great as Zod, and his two sidekicks are decent, but that's about it. Kidder is slightly less annoying but still terrible, and no one else even has enough screen time to make an impact.

The special effects are a slight improvement over the first, but nothing spectacular; the editing is absolutely terrible; the music is a poor rendition of Williams' original; and the production design is poor. All in all, an unworthy sequel to the fantastic original, and just not a very good film all-around. Disappointing.

BJs Grade:

A

Superman II is a classic, best of the franchise easily, exceptionaly awesome.

Upon viewing of both recently...sorry bb.

superman 2s my favorite comic book film ever; even if I can say it technically isnt the best (BB), I find superman 2 to be my fav. and the most entertaining.

A+

Exactly what we need in a superman movie..a crowd pleaser with collosal fights and effective romantic drama but with almost a tongue in cheek, playful way of doing it.