THE REEL TRUTH this week:

by Chris Vessey

Superman is an “Amer- ican” tradition. We've all seen the previous Su- perman movies and I will agree, most of them didn’t have the greatest. of plots, but the special effects were usually pretty neat. And they did attract large num- bers of people, both young and mature. I had expected this to be no exception.

I can only say one thing about this movie, but it doesn’t deserve even that. This is the worst Superman movie ever.

The basic premise of the story is pretty easy — Superman is the great hero he always was. We see him do a few of his good deeds

at the open of the flick. We »

also get to see the action around the Daily Planet, as it faces a makeover by the radical daughter of the ma- jor shareholder in the pa- per. The Planet, the Pillar of Metropolis, is reduced to little more than a cheap scandal rag.

But amongst all this a small, worried class of pri- mary schoolers assembles in their class, and they discuss their fears of the dreaded nuclear war. One little fel- low decides that the thing to do is to ask Superman to

rid the world of all nuclear weapons, and that will fix everything.

Of course, Superman refuses (he isn’t supposed to “interfere” with Earth culture). So the new Planet blows it out of proportion, basically making a baddie out of Superman (some- thing like “Superman tells kid to Take a Hike”). Of course, the big S has to save face by flying down to the press conference that this little kid has been invited to and pledge to rid the world of nuclear weapons.

And so he starts. Col- lecting missiles as they are launched. This is interest- ing, because if he does this then he is not actually get- ting any nuclear weapons. The majority of the tested rockets are merely dummy vehicles, and are not armed (most of the warhead tests take place underground). Anyhow, he does take from both the Americans and So- viets. He puts them into a big metal net (that’s right, a net), and does your basic spin-throw of large objects and sends them into the Sun (where, miraculously, the live to impact its sur- face and burst out a neat yellow prominence).

In comes Lex Luthor.

Hackman does a neat job on this, as he is about the only really good actor in the movie. His nephew Lenny has since sprung him from prison, and now he has stolen a museum exhilsit - Superman’s hair that can hold a ton. He plans to clone himself a Superman. Just mix some chemicals, make a ‘protoplasm’ that looks gross, and attach it to a nuclear missile. Su- perman will chuck it and the missile into the Sun and *POOF* instant Nu- clear Man.

Now this guy is the dumbest yet. He badly needs a manicure and a vocabulary. He’s a so- lar powered Superman, all right. The rest of the movie is the big chase between the big S and Nukie. Boy. But, it turns out that when the lights go down, Nuclear Man is just a big softie. That’s his only weakness.

I did

movie very

I will be frank. not like this much. I had expected at least some good effects, but was disappointed even at this prospect. The flight sequences were tacky, and there was little-to-no nifty graphic effects. The only actor that really had to

Your Chaplains for 1987-88 are:

1. Roman Catholic — Father Frank Jay 2. Sister Alma MacLellan

3. Protestant. United Church — Reverend Leslie Jay Services of Worship

Mass: Monday to Friday — 12:00 noon Sunday — 6:30 p.m.

aa =

Sp lhursday, September 17,1987

do any acting was Hack- man - Hemingway and Kid- der were almost like Bar- bie dolls. And you have

the usual playup of Clark Kent’s (Reeve’s) geekiness, and the little ‘slip’ of his ac- tual power.

this was a quick attempt at keeping up with the other “Big IV” movies, to try to maintain some of decency.

Perhaps

semblance Or maybe it is just another Superman movie, except this happens to be particularly poorly made. Either way, I am very disappointed. For the life of me, I can’t figure out why they’d do this

to themselves, considering their previous successes.

I don’t think this is a movie value, even on cheap seat night. I think that if you are a Superman fan, this will severely tarnish your interest. I can only hope that the words I write will assist you in not wast- ing a maximum of $5.50 this week. I will use the old rating system of last year: *

It wasn’t a complete BOMB, but very, very close to it. See you next week.

i The GEM FILM PROJECTIONS

GEM film rating guide:

BOMB .- Self explana- tory.

‘* . Extremely bad. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll kiss five fifty good- bye. ;

‘ *4 _ Not much better. ' Only if you have lots and lots of money to waste.

** - Mediocre. Your , ' money can be better spent. ; | **4 _- You've already -

, seen it. The material is . - overworked, but if you like , ; remakes... . *** _ Average. It’s OK, : but definitely not a block- } buster. ; ***4-- Not bad. The film has some decent (or in- : | decent, according to prefer- © ence) parts. KK - Pretty good. Relatively } new material, good theme : and coherency. Show deliv- ‘ ers what it promises. ; **** 1° _ Exceptionally ; good. Quality matched by : few. You need not feel guilt . blowing $5.50 on this one.

Pet Totally awe-

some. Absolutely colos- | sal. Mega-cosmic (look, |

poeraeeen

you think up some valley- ! girl expressions for this, 1 willya?) i

Effective reading

An intensive 6-week reading laboratory course designed to increase the speed of reading while im- proving the level of compre- hension. The course con- sists of 14 hours of instruc- tion, much of it on a flexible schedule.

Instructor: Susanne

Manovill Fee: Student — $45

For registration or in- formation, contact: Su- sanne Manovill. Robert- son Library or Dept. of Student Services by Friday,

' Sept. 18th.

When you look up from treading this the world will have been replaced by a joke, Warning.

Do not be deceived.