Superman IV isn't exactly the finest moment in the Superman franchise. The effects are poor, the sets are cheap, the editing is choppy and the script doesn't make much sense. There is, however, some good stuff within this 1987 sequel that makes it better than other bad sequels. The Alexander Courage score is wonderful, dramatic and sweeping and really lifts the movie during the action sequences. Mariel Hemingway's character, the lovely Lacy Warfield is a fresh character that adds much to the production. She's very pretty too. Gene Hackman makes a welcome return as the camp Lex Luthor and he has some funny moments with his nephew, Lenny Luthor. The story has some good themes and messages but they seem to get lost within the incoherent nature of the structure. It's nowhere near as entertaining as the first, second or even third Superman flicks but it's still a charming little flick that could have been so much more. 6/10 from me.

(Flash Review)This has a 3.6 IMDb score. That is very low. This movie wasn't that bad. Much better that Superman III. Sure the effects are below standards even for '87 but it was amusing and had all the components for a complete comic book story. Lois and Lex Luthor are back for the full movie and there is a corny and stereotypical villain with superpowers. There are some cheesy battles in the city and Superman, as a public service announcement storyline, declares he will rid the world of nuclear weapons. It was fun and I got what I expected, perhaps a notch below but it certainly wasn't terrible. And I finally finished off the Reeves Superman era!

I just got done watching the best Superman movie and now I have to deal with the worst Superman movie. It's amazing how disillusioned I was while watching this. I'm just glad to be done with all the movies in this series. These were films that got worse with every installment until we finally tanked with the most painful of all. I was surprised at how this movie was only 90 minutes long. It felt more like hours because of how bad it was! Maybe it would have worked better if it actually was longer. Then again, I have seen deleted scenes that are incredibly stupid.Anyway, there are so many of these scenes that are entirely pointless. We get some parts in the beginning that show Clark Kent trying to sell his house. This adds up to nothing and is stupid. Then there's really big subplot where this new woman falls in love with Clark Kent. We later get scenes of him changing personas while getting an interview with Lois Lane. Again, all of this means nothing. It seems like every scene is just taken from the other movies. We see Lois find out his true identity and then he erases her memory. This is lifted directly from "Superman II" and has no meaning. We see Lex Luthor communicate directly to Superman in the same way as the first movie.The plot is that Superman is trying to get rid of the world's nuclear weapons, but Lex Luthor creates a villain named Nuclear Man. We literally see him being born as in we actually briefly see this guy as a fetus that turns into a grown man. What? There's another scene where Luthor is with this woman in a dress from the French Revolution. What does any of this mean?! The special effects are downright terrible. They literally had nine years to improve and the blue screen effects are among the worst I've ever seen.The pacing in the film is terrible. So many pointless scenes and then a bunch of dragged out action scenes. Nuclear Man kidnaps a woman and takes her into space even though she can't breathe in space. Were the people working on this even trying? This movie was so awful there wasn't another Superman film released in theaters until 19 years later with "Superman Returns". Watching the movie, you can see why the production on these films went through so much trouble. While I didn't like "Batman Vs. Superman", I'd still take it over this! *

This film is a contender with Batman & Robin, claiming the title for the worst comic book movie of all time. Batman & Robin arguably did significantly more damage to the source material, ruining the legacy of Batman for 8 years. However Batman was gradually redeemed with The Dark Knight trilogy, the Superman franchise has been unable to recover from all previous bad instalments. Superman Returns was abysmal, Man of Steel was incoherent and unstructured and from a recent viewing of Batman v Superman, I can honestly say it wasn't a particularly good film, inheriting the same problems that made Man of Steel dull.The elaborate production phase and budget constraints are what made this movie to the gradual process of a colossal failure. The first 3 films, with the third instalment being the film that took the franchise downhill, featured revolutionary visual effects that were outstanding for its time period. This film however, the reduced budget is so evident with a notable deterioration in quality with the effects, as they look absolutely appalling. The same archive footage of Superman flying is recycled with every shot and flying sequences are in a straight line as opposed to the cinematography they were able to achieve in the first 3 films. Christopher Reeve continues to give a good performance as Superman, arguably being the only positive aspect of the film. With 40 minutes deleted from the theatrical version, the movie feels choppy, poorly edited and nonsensical. There were attempts to make a good film, but the premise did not pay off, and the film is devoid of any redeeming qualities. Final verdict, even rating it based on its genre, in general it is one of the worst movies ever made.