 |
| Christopher Reeve |
In the echelon of comic book history, there are two superheroes that almost everyone will immediately recognize: Batman and Superman. While recent years have paved the way for more recognition for other names, these two icons have been around for almost a century protecting us in many forms. It is likely why many continue to flock to their movies, hoping that the latest is going to be the best. Friday's Batman v. Superman is the first time that they've gone head to head on screen, which has left many to wonder who is actually the best. While I choose not to take sides (not until Wednesday, anyways, when I do my other piece), I will answer another question: Who is the best Superman actor? It may not seem controversial, but I still think that the answer is a resounding Christopher Reeve.
To give some clarity: I am judging solely on my experience with film and TV. I have little to no knowledge of Superman as a comic book character. Most of what I am about to say goes more towards my personal perception and cultural understanding of the character. I am aware that there are those that admire Man of Steel and Henry Cavill's take for being dark and gritty. In fact, it fits logically in the path of Batman's previous run with Christopher Nolan - even if I'd still argue that this isn't the version for me.
If I can be honest, Superman may be one of the less cinematic superheroes in history. It's not because he's necessarily a dull character or has an ugly presence. The fact is that his intrigue is in the fantastical elements that don't always translate to screen. For instance, he is a muscular figure who shoots lasers out of his eyes and hides his identity with glasses. It doesn't help that the average special effects department has also yet to make flying around look cool on screen. It is hard to feel intimidated by Superman as a cinematic character because he has arguably more limited appeal, even if he was among the first true superheroes in American culture.
It is generally why the notion is easy to make that Superman isn't a character that's fit for movies. It is why there's been long gaps between cinematic adaptations of the character and why none of them have held an impact. The best that can be said is that Tom Welling's performance on Smallville is the last one to stick for longer than a film. Even then, the WB TV series faded over time. While Supergirl on CBS has picked up some of the energy, it's still goofy and in some ways unfortunately features the Superman reject villains (though Melissa Benoist is endearing in the lead role). It takes a certain actor to pull off Superman, and I think that the only one to have gotten it right is Christopher Reeve.
The first question is: What makes a good Superman performance? It depends on what you expect from the character. For general audiences, there's something almost clean and pure about Superman, as if he's filled with that 1950's suburban enthusiasm. He is meant to be this friendly force that flies around and inspects the city below; saving cats from trees and stopping crime in the process. He is a bright and playful presence that embodies the best in American society. It could be in part that he is a metaphor for the American dream (Alien comes to Earth and makes a difference in society). While there's darker interpretations for sure, such as Man of Steel, the commonly held one is of the smiling man who definitely looks like a relic from a happier time. Unlike Batman, Superman hasn't necessarily been shown on screen to age into a dark and brooding character before Zack Snyder got hold of him.
As someone who enjoys the more traditional take, it's hard to not think of Reeve. While he wasn't the first (there's George Reeves - no relation - before him), he was an actor who embodied the All-American enthusiasm that was necessary to pull off a role that even at its best still looks pretty silly. He is someone with a 50's charm and a voice of assurance. His physical demeanor also helps to make him look natural yet still out of place. Reeve wasn't an actor with a lot of range, but he definitely could look convincing as he flew around the planet saving the day. Maybe it's because he was the first Superman to strike a chord with audiences, but he set a precedent that everyone seems to want to imitate.
This comes quick in Superman, which covers the familiar origin story in which our hero leaves his home planet. As he grows up, there's a certain something that seems peculiar about him. The film hits all of the beats, including conversations with his father (Marlon Brando) at the Fortress of Solitude and his time at the Daily Planet newspaper. While the film delves into ridiculous problems in the third act, there's no denying that Reeve does an impressive job of making you believe that he is the character and that he can save the day. You buy into his romance with Lois Lane and his boyish charm makes him, despite his muscular physique, unimposing.
True, it is hard to remember Superman and Superman II's impact solely because of the latter sequels. Superman III saw the director turn fully from Richard Donner (of the first two) to Richard Lester (who took over halfway through the second). Lester is more comical and best known as the man behind The Beatles' A Hard Day's Night. Superman III is full of the goofy and campy elements that people likely will make fun of - including Richard Pryor as the villain. In fact, Superman III and Superman IV: The Quest for Peace likely ruined the legacy entirely due to diminishing production costs and efforts. Still, there was Reeve doing his best and despite any tonal problems, Superman III at least gives the actor a chance to show an emotional range and attempt to make the character more complex.
But it's the first two films that should cement his status as the best Superman. It could just be that special effects in the 1970's allowed for clumsier flying, but there's something to hearing John Williams' iconic score as Superman saves the day over and over. There's a rush and intensity that Donner brings to it that even in the film's lesser moments, you get a sense of peril and excitement. He's a hero for the ages, and he's the prototype of what every child would look up to. While Batman would more quickly evolve into a menacing presence by 1989's Batman, Superman would still be secluded in the funner side of things for the next few decades.
It only seems easier to pick a favorite Superman because, unlike Batman, there aren't that many to choose from - and most seem to follow suit to Reeve's model. Even as the tones have gotten more complex (which is the only real disadvantage), there's a certain freshness in execution to how Reeve embodied the character. He embodied a happier and more daring version of the hero. Prior to the age of the gritty reboots, it would seem like every take would be based off of the 70's films. To some extent, Man of Steel's backlash came from how little it resembled Superman - and that's quite a compliment of how present that film is in our culture.
I am sure that one could make arguments for the other Superman actors, sadly all of whom have had a cursed career in some way (watch out, Cavill), but there's something to being the iconic and most definitive take of the character on screen. While you can fault those four Superman movies for being dated or campy, they have an effectiveness to performance and story that is greatly missing from later takes. It isn't about the best effects. It's about believing the performance and believing that Superman is saving the day. Despite the presence of Superman being somewhat ridiculous, Reeve manages to take it seriously enough that you forget that he's a man in a strange outfit. For that alone, he deserves some credit.
It is generally why the notion is easy to make that Superman isn't a character that's fit for movies. It is why there's been long gaps between cinematic adaptations of the character and why none of them have held an impact. The best that can be said is that Tom Welling's performance on Smallville is the last one to stick for longer than a film. Even then, the WB TV series faded over time. While Supergirl on CBS has picked up some of the energy, it's still goofy and in some ways unfortunately features the Superman reject villains (though Melissa Benoist is endearing in the lead role). It takes a certain actor to pull off Superman, and I think that the only one to have gotten it right is Christopher Reeve.
The first question is: What makes a good Superman performance? It depends on what you expect from the character. For general audiences, there's something almost clean and pure about Superman, as if he's filled with that 1950's suburban enthusiasm. He is meant to be this friendly force that flies around and inspects the city below; saving cats from trees and stopping crime in the process. He is a bright and playful presence that embodies the best in American society. It could be in part that he is a metaphor for the American dream (Alien comes to Earth and makes a difference in society). While there's darker interpretations for sure, such as Man of Steel, the commonly held one is of the smiling man who definitely looks like a relic from a happier time. Unlike Batman, Superman hasn't necessarily been shown on screen to age into a dark and brooding character before Zack Snyder got hold of him.
As someone who enjoys the more traditional take, it's hard to not think of Reeve. While he wasn't the first (there's George Reeves - no relation - before him), he was an actor who embodied the All-American enthusiasm that was necessary to pull off a role that even at its best still looks pretty silly. He is someone with a 50's charm and a voice of assurance. His physical demeanor also helps to make him look natural yet still out of place. Reeve wasn't an actor with a lot of range, but he definitely could look convincing as he flew around the planet saving the day. Maybe it's because he was the first Superman to strike a chord with audiences, but he set a precedent that everyone seems to want to imitate.
This comes quick in Superman, which covers the familiar origin story in which our hero leaves his home planet. As he grows up, there's a certain something that seems peculiar about him. The film hits all of the beats, including conversations with his father (Marlon Brando) at the Fortress of Solitude and his time at the Daily Planet newspaper. While the film delves into ridiculous problems in the third act, there's no denying that Reeve does an impressive job of making you believe that he is the character and that he can save the day. You buy into his romance with Lois Lane and his boyish charm makes him, despite his muscular physique, unimposing.
True, it is hard to remember Superman and Superman II's impact solely because of the latter sequels. Superman III saw the director turn fully from Richard Donner (of the first two) to Richard Lester (who took over halfway through the second). Lester is more comical and best known as the man behind The Beatles' A Hard Day's Night. Superman III is full of the goofy and campy elements that people likely will make fun of - including Richard Pryor as the villain. In fact, Superman III and Superman IV: The Quest for Peace likely ruined the legacy entirely due to diminishing production costs and efforts. Still, there was Reeve doing his best and despite any tonal problems, Superman III at least gives the actor a chance to show an emotional range and attempt to make the character more complex.
But it's the first two films that should cement his status as the best Superman. It could just be that special effects in the 1970's allowed for clumsier flying, but there's something to hearing John Williams' iconic score as Superman saves the day over and over. There's a rush and intensity that Donner brings to it that even in the film's lesser moments, you get a sense of peril and excitement. He's a hero for the ages, and he's the prototype of what every child would look up to. While Batman would more quickly evolve into a menacing presence by 1989's Batman, Superman would still be secluded in the funner side of things for the next few decades.
It only seems easier to pick a favorite Superman because, unlike Batman, there aren't that many to choose from - and most seem to follow suit to Reeve's model. Even as the tones have gotten more complex (which is the only real disadvantage), there's a certain freshness in execution to how Reeve embodied the character. He embodied a happier and more daring version of the hero. Prior to the age of the gritty reboots, it would seem like every take would be based off of the 70's films. To some extent, Man of Steel's backlash came from how little it resembled Superman - and that's quite a compliment of how present that film is in our culture.
I am sure that one could make arguments for the other Superman actors, sadly all of whom have had a cursed career in some way (watch out, Cavill), but there's something to being the iconic and most definitive take of the character on screen. While you can fault those four Superman movies for being dated or campy, they have an effectiveness to performance and story that is greatly missing from later takes. It isn't about the best effects. It's about believing the performance and believing that Superman is saving the day. Despite the presence of Superman being somewhat ridiculous, Reeve manages to take it seriously enough that you forget that he's a man in a strange outfit. For that alone, he deserves some credit.
Comments
Post a Comment