Originally posted by: Number20

Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

According to most of the people I know, the rubber nipples are the reason that the movie sucked.

SR is currently up to $178 million dollars.

I thought the crummy plot, obsession with neon, and too many butt shots had something to do with it as well.

As for the Superman Returns sequel, I'm sorry to hear that it may not happen. For all my dislike of many of the elements of Superman Returns, It has been years since we've seen Superman in the theatres in any form. Now it may be another 20+ years or more until someone decides to try again with Superman. As a Superman fan, I'm sorry to think that may be the case.

To quote Sidney J. Furie, who had the misfortune of directing Superman IV: The Quest For Peace - "The truth is, whether your film is about the great mythological character you have to do right, or it's a little movie that nobody ever heard of, you still approach it like it's the most important thing in the world. But failing goes with the territory. Filmmakers are like gunslingers, and you don't win every duel."

On the same note, which do you think was worse - Superman III or Superman IV? For me it's a bit of a draw as they are both pretty poor and both waste ideas that could have made for fascinating films - #3 wasted the idea of what would happen if Superman turned evil and #4 wasted the idea of what would happen if Superman decided to tackle a political issue as global as the nuclear warfare issue. #3 had the lovely Annette O'Toole, good special effects and a crappy plot, #4 had the lovely Mariel Hemmingway, a slightly better story and crappy special effects. What say you all?