sign in
register
Watch
Max Amazon Channel Max Apple TV
+7
Superman IV: The Quest for Peace
Superman IV: The Quest for Peace
+7
JustWatch
Your probable score
?
Superman IV: The Quest for Peace

Superman IV: The Quest for Peace

1987
Sci-fi, Family/Kids
1h 30m
The Man of Steel crusades for nuclear disarmament and meets Lex Luthor's latest creation, Nuclear Man. (imdb)

Directed by:

Sidney J. Furie

Screenwriter:

Christopher Reeve, Lawrence Konner, Mark Rosenthal

Starring:

Gene Hackman, Margot Kidder, Jim Broadbent, Mariel Hemingway, Jon Cryer, Christopher Reeve, Jackie Cooper, Sam Wanamaker, Esmond Knight, Marc McClure, William Hootkins, Mark Pillow

Franchises:

Superman, Superman (Christopher Reeve)

Genres:

Sci-fi, Family/Kids, Action, Adventure

AKA:

Superman 4

Country:

UK

Languages:

English, French, Italian, Russian
imdb IMDb
Update history
Suggest edit

Superman IV: The Quest for Peace

1987
Sci-fi, Family/Kids
1h 30m
Your probable score
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer
Avg Percentile 14.65% from 1418 total ratings
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer

Ratings & Reviews

(1427)
Compact view
clear
Compact view
Show
Sort
beedubBeeDub
Rated 28 Sep 2015
62
5th
Embarassingly awful. Makes Part 3 look like Part 2.
Rated 28 Sep 2015
indyatmnINDYATMN
Rated 24 Jul 2018
10
0th
Absolutely awful. The only good thing about it other than some performances is that it could serve as an example of the importance of pacing & letting scenes breathe a little. To be fair, leaving scenes this inane; comedy this groan-worthy; & efx this cheesy on the screen for any longer than it takes to convey the necessary info would also be a crime, but neither does it allow the viewer to ever FEEL anything other than rushed. By the end a new plot turn is missing every scene that develops it!
Rated 24 Jul 2018
aaaaaaarrgggaaaaaaarrggg
Rated 18 May 2011
57
46th
It took a while, but this fourth installment finally came out to poor reviews and indifferent box office. Yet, it's better than III and is actually improved by its padded TV version, where some vital footage is restored. The FX aren't especially good (lots of bleeding matte lines) but the actors carry the ball in high style -- especially Kidder in the heartbreaking scene where she tells Clark Kent how much Superman means to her.
Rated 18 May 2011
miss_jesusmiss jesus
Rated 19 Oct 2010
18
3rd
Amazingly dumb. The beginning is nothing but grandstanding on the subject of nuclear disarmament and whether Superman should do something about it. Then everyone forgets all about the failed nuclear summit and Superman instead fights a dumb villain who gets his strength from the sun for the rest of the film. Breaks rules from previous films and many laws of physics. Superman misses many opportunities to avoid disaster by turning back time or dropping off the bad guy on the dark side of the moon.
Rated 19 Oct 2010
davidblastDavidBlast
Rated 29 Sep 2010
15
5th
I'm fairly impressed by this movie: Even after the "straight from video hell" titles, it still manages to be all downhill from there, including, but not limited to the fact that Hackman has a double act as Luther and the voice of Nuclear Man.
Rated 29 Sep 2010
haileyHailey
Rated 19 Jun 2010
20
6th
It's "Batman and Robin" a decade before "Batman and Robin"
Rated 19 Jun 2010
caocaocaocao
Rated 10 Nov 2009
26
4th
Why are countries firing nuclear missiles into space on a regular basis? Nuclear Man? Superman doesn't understand that you can't move the moon for fun? Also, he moved the moon? Mariel Hemingway apparently has super powers because she doesn't seem to mind breathing in space or being flown at super speeds back to earth. My goodness, what a mess.
Rated 10 Nov 2009
cinematicespCinematicESP
Rated 09 Jul 2009
36
1st
Despite the decrease in quality of the Superman films, Christopher Reeves' performance remained consistently great. His portrayal of Clark Kent is especially spot on. But like the last film, the filmmakers just didn't know what to do with the Superman character. Apparently he now has telekinesis. And Lex Luthor's 80s punk nephew is laughable.
Rated 09 Jul 2009
evan_watersEvan Waters
Rated 28 Apr 2009
50
1st
A truly pathetic con of a movie, shoddy and half-done.
Rated 28 Apr 2009
billyshearsBillyShears
Rated 29 May 2023
50
21st
There's a very ehhhhhn Superman movie buried somewhere in here. Kinda fun how shitty it is even though they brought back the Hack Man, but we have to suffer through Jon Cryer. It is up there though with one of the worst moments in Christopher Reeve's career - this isn't a horse riding accident joke!!!
Rated 29 May 2023
spikycactusSpikyCactus
Rated 04 Sep 2022
40
2nd
Top badass moment? The London Underground masquerading as the Metropolis subway; frighteningly the most convincing thing in the whole film. There’s stretching logic and having a poetic licence... and then there’s Superman IV. By this point CR basically WAS The Man of Steel and I felt the latter had finally earned some respect from me. Sadly, even he can’t hold back a tsunami of septic tank plot, script and production shit that engulfs everything in its path. No cats, chainsaws or decapitations.
Rated 04 Sep 2022
pyrosexualpyrosexual
Rated 28 Feb 2021
69
23rd
Still better than modern superhero movies
Rated 28 Feb 2021
mwestcottmwestcott
Rated 18 May 2018
10
1st
Quest for Peace is an insult to a great icon. The film is cheap, boring, pointless, cheesy and Even manages to downplay another possible terrific Christopher Reeve performance.
Rated 18 May 2018
petrostserPetrosTser
Rated 19 Jul 2017
20
3rd
The Superman films were never going for subtlety and yet they still more or less hold up even today, their kitsch 80s aesthetics making them a fun blast from the past. This is definitely not the case here. The effects are awful, the action totally underwhelming and half-arsed and the script uninteresting and often full-on idiotic (the hair triggering the plot, Superman moving the moon, Lacy breathing in space etc.). The only positive thing I can think of is Jon Cryer's performance and that's it.
Rated 19 Jul 2017
dudeabidesDudeAbides
Rated 09 Nov 2015
15
1st
Few, if any redeeming factors. A movie that should never have been made with a tiny, ugly budget producing a tiny, ugly, incomprehensible film.
Rated 09 Nov 2015
bionicninjasBionicNinjas
Rated 23 Apr 2015
10
4th
So bad it's terrible.
Rated 23 Apr 2015
htimanhtiman
Rated 14 Apr 2015
49
11th
Christopher Reeve and Gene Hackman put in good performances, but that's really the only good thing the movie has going for it.
Rated 14 Apr 2015
antidood1antidood1
Rated 07 Nov 2014
40
8th
First off, it's a boring Superman movie. That's a crime in and of itself. Apart from that, the story is silly, the dialogue is stupid, the script is afwul, and the editing made my eyes bleed. Would be a solid 2 if it came out today, but it's still the 80's and that makes it kinda cute. Kinda. It still sucks though.
Rated 07 Nov 2014
zipsterZipster
Rated 11 Aug 2014
75
30th
If this were the only Superman movie, and Jaws: The Revenge were the only Jaws film, you'd despise Jaws, but would still like Superman. Our hero is represented as the progressive antithesis of the fogyish Rambos and Norrises of the era, not to mention Clark's previously very marginalized journalist peers, who fight the corporate takeover of news that few to no journalists have the accountability or even hope of battling today. Think of it as the live-action Captain Planet.
Rated 11 Aug 2014
glumpy99glumpy_99
Rated 21 Jun 2014
65
28th
A great shame that budgetary issues and hacksaw editing and continuity destroy what could have been an interesting and humanist take on the Superman character (though perhaps any film promoting world peace in the wake of ROCKY IV would have looked goofy). Still worthy of some merit for having its heart in the right place; Reeve's performance is typically fine, and Hackman has as much fun as possible as Luthor, even if the film does its level best to rob the character of any credibility.
Rated 21 Jun 2014
spleenspleen
Rated 10 Mar 2014
23
10th
I'm confused; was this a stupid kid's movie or a moronic adult's movie?
Rated 10 Mar 2014
lookjabbaLookJabba...
Rated 11 Sep 2013
2
7th
Superman IV is the franchise hitting absolute rock bottom. It's an insult to the franchise that Cannon acquired the rights and made this sequel on a slashed budget. Bringing back Gene Hackman was a desperate move. The only saving grace is the sentiment that it was the last performance from the great Christopher Reeve as Superman. The franchise has sadly spiralled out of control and has no resemblance of the original Richard Donner films. But we will never forget the brilliant Christopher Reeve.
Rated 11 Sep 2013
matthew_parkinsonMatthew Parkinson
Rated 12 Jun 2013
20
7th
Superman IV: The Quest for Peace is an awful film. You are better off re-watching any of the previous Superman installments. Even the third one is significantly better than this chapter in the Man of Steel's film franchise. Nothing about this movie works. The script is awful, the acting is poor, the special effects are worse than they've been in any of the previous episode, and the whole thing is just so boring and uninteresting.
Rated 12 Jun 2013
xacviantxacviant
Rated 12 May 2013
6
1st
I'd heard this sucked, but...Jesus. One of the laziest, most inept entries in a major franchise I've ever seen. The special effects are pitifully bad, not helped by severe budgetary cutbacks. The writing is offensively indifferent, slapping an anti-nuke message on a throwaway story that disregards basic physics and invents a new villain--Nuclear Man--who couldn't be less menacing. (Heavy last minute recutting only makes it worse.) The cast '(and crew) seem to have wasted little energy on it.
Rated 12 May 2013
brandonsbrandons
Rated 10 Jul 2012
19
2nd
The Superman series bottoms out here: the action is boring, the special effects look cheaper, and none of the actors appear interested in where the plot's going.
Rated 10 Jul 2012
actionbergActionberg
Rated 16 Dec 2011
20
2nd
Dear lord, what a thoroughly stupid and insultingly incomplete film. Nothing is even amusingly campy. All you see on screen for 90 minutes is a dead horse being flogged by a crowd of disinterested investors. Even Gene Hackman mails in the cheap dialogue, clearly fed up with this franchise a long time ago like the rest of the world. That anyone had to pay full price in a theater to see this is a travesty.
Rated 16 Dec 2011
demorestDemorest
Rated 27 Jun 2011
1
6th
"Turning and turning in the widening gyre / The falcon cannot hear the falconer / Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold / Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world" -William Butler Yeats
Rated 27 Jun 2011
derekstarDerekstar
Rated 22 Dec 2010
30
12th
This is controversial. At least it was better than Superman III. At least it was about SOMETHING.
Rated 22 Dec 2010
mechatiggerMechatigger
Rated 28 Sep 2010
14
2nd
Easily the worst of the series; whole chunks of the plot seem to have been cut prior to release, and the special effects are cheap-looking.
Rated 28 Sep 2010
hellboy76hellboy76
Rated 24 Sep 2010
6
1st
Should have quested for a better script. This franchise should have ended after the second film.
Rated 24 Sep 2010
okkervilOkkervil
Rated 01 Aug 2009
5
4th
A masterclass in bad film making.
Rated 01 Aug 2009
phantomzonePhantomZone
Rated 23 Dec 2008
10
2nd
Sigh. I love Superman: The Movie. After Superman III was made by Richard Lester with his 'Lester-Vision', ie shitty slapstick humor that showed no respect for the character, Superman was shelved until Christopher Reeve was lured back by his own story idea. Sadly, from there on, the film wasn't well written, had its budget cut from $35,000,000 to $17,000,000 and then got hacked to death by the editors (40 minutes cut, leaving giant plot holes). The end result is so bad its a crime and a shame.
Rated 23 Dec 2008
cagedwisdomcagedwisdom
Rated 14 Jun 2008
25
17th
I actually liked this much more than Superman III.. It's bad, sure, but it doesnt come near the awfulness of Superman III. At least this is short, and actually pretty good up to.. well.. Nuclear Man. Nuclear Man? Gotta wonder what the hell they were thinking.
Rated 14 Jun 2008
ubermenschubermensch
Rated 13 May 2008
40
2nd
sucks very badly.
Rated 13 May 2008
frederFreder
Rated 02 Feb 2008
30
24th
Not nearly as bad as you'd expect; in fact it's nominally better than III -- but this is a Cannon film from the Golan/Globus group, and so considerably downmarket from the earlier entries in the series. Given Reeve's real-life fate, the things that happen to Clark in this movie are hard to watch. But for me this was a chance to see a "new" Reeve turn as Superman, and he remains totally committed to the character, giving it his all -- reason enough to watch this at least once.
Rated 02 Feb 2008
shephardShephard
Rated 29 Oct 2007
12
1st
Awful.
Rated 29 Oct 2007
joshk84joshk84
Rated 22 Oct 2007
19
7th
I really thought they should never have made three, but four was even worse. I will never understand why I agreed to go watch this junk.
Rated 22 Oct 2007
reagureagu
Rated 19 Oct 2007
5
2nd
Don't even think about it.
Rated 19 Oct 2007
stflyst_fly
Rated 23 Aug 2007
3
10th
crap
Rated 23 Aug 2007
juicejuice
Rated 26 May 2007
50
36th
Why god why?
Rated 26 May 2007
roigroigroigroigroigroig
Rated 29 Apr 2007
30
14th
probably a lot higher with a case of beer.
Rated 29 Apr 2007
nilkynarfynilkynarfy
Rated 20 Mar 2007
1
1st
If anybody had seen it, it would have ruined the careers of all involved.
Rated 20 Mar 2007
eatbeanseatbeans
Rated 06 Aug 2024
4
37th
I liked it as a kid...
Rated 06 Aug 2024
myfavchordsmyfavchords
Rated 20 Mar 2024
47
4th
This is certainly the worst of the films that Reeve starred in as Superman. The script is bad and the special effects look cheap. The villain Nuclear Man is laughable and makes for a really weak bad guy. Overall this film is a big disappointment.
Rated 20 Mar 2024
yiannosYiannos
Rated 05 Jul 2023
40
7th
Golan/Globus took over Superman and drove the franchise right into the ground, further damaging Reeves' career, who was actively involved behind the scenes. As others have noted, the effects are laughable, the same flying shots are repeated throughout, and the villain is beyond silly. Yet somehow it is a watchable car crash that paradoxically captures the camp comic book spirit more accurately than any of the previous installments. A guilty pleasure.
Rated 05 Jul 2023
jarobmuljarobmul
Rated 20 Feb 2023
23
4th
The shortest one but somehow feels the longest
Rated 20 Feb 2023
lonewolf2003Lonewolf2003
Rated 18 Feb 2023
60
20th
Doesn't hold a candle to the first two, but better than the third one. Cause at least this one seems to know it's cheesy. It's watchable despite it containing a lot of nonsensical moments.
Rated 18 Feb 2023
slaterman2slaterman2
Rated 12 Dec 2021
34
2nd
In one scene, the bad guy tries to wreak havoc on New York City by picking up the Statue of Liberty and throwing it at the city. Watch only while drunk.
Rated 12 Dec 2021
war_machineWar Machine
Rated 28 Sep 2021
60
26th
RevealstoLois-wipesmemoryagainlol+ridofnuclearweapons-lolspacenet+Lexmakesnuclearman+doubledateasbothlol+scratchmakessick
Rated 28 Sep 2021
antonio_pAntonio P
Rated 16 Jun 2021
60
72nd
Superman responds to a kid about getting rid of all the nuclear War heads. He gets rid of them only to have Lex Luthor who escaped prison from the help of his nephew to put something on the nuclear ward head and creates a Super Villian from the Sun. His weakness is no sun. Superman defeats him by covering the sun with the moon. Defeats him. Puts Lex Luthor back in jail where he's chained there to hammer rocks. Perry white buys up the Daily planet from a rich guy who wanted to ruin it.
Rated 16 Jun 2021
hakkanarejohakkanarejo
Rated 15 Apr 2021
87
34th
"Nuclear Power. In the best hands, it is dangerous. In the hands of Lex Luthor, it is pure evil. This is Superman's greatest battle. And it is for all of us." Tired of being defeated by Superman (Reeve) all time, Lex Luthor (Hackman) takes his chance when world leaders decide to destroy all nuclear weapons. He uses Superman's hair to make his own Superman. Superman finds out that this 'Nuclear Man' is at least as strong as he is and has his hands full to fix the havoc Nuclear Man is causing.
Rated 15 Apr 2021
iamdwgIamdwg
Rated 27 Mar 2021
67
28th
My score for this film upon rewatch improved about 20%. Is it a great movie? NOPE. But it is better than I remembered it being, and had (in my opinion) Christopher Reeve's best speech as Superman at the United Nations. Also, after his absence in Superman III, it was nice to see Gene Hackman come back. Oh yeah, and the plot - as absurd as it got, contained a standard narrative
Rated 27 Mar 2021
rudakerRudaker
Rated 06 Jun 2020
20
7th
Bad
Rated 06 Jun 2020
vaudevillianVaudevillian
Rated 15 May 2020
50
10th
Did you see Nuclear Man's coke nails?
Rated 15 May 2020
cetincelikcetincelik
Rated 01 Jan 2019
50
21st
Film gerçekten kötü ama içinde C.Reeve olan filme düşük not vermeye insan kıyamıyor. TV de karşıma ne zaman çıksa yine de izlerim.
Rated 01 Jan 2019
adornmentadornment
Rated 09 Dec 2018
24
1st
No effort here from the special effects team, and the plot seems preposterous even for a Superman movie. It sort of takes Superman back to the days when he was still a beacon of hope for the whole world, which is respectable. The characters and action sequences are getting ridiculous, though, and at this point I'm starting to question if I actually want the world to be saved. Also, why is Lex Luthor still here?
Rated 09 Dec 2018
vv238vv238
Rated 30 Sep 2018
10
5th
The most amazing thing is how you can see Cannon Films running out of money as the film goes on. Without enough money for the effects, the talent (or rather lack thereof) of the studio is badly exposed.
Rated 30 Sep 2018
ununniliumUnunnilium
Rated 16 Apr 2017
63
44th
There's a lot of ways this avoids the flaws of the first three. It has less terrible humor, more Superman-ish optimism (even if it does get a over the top). It's got a workable story, with an A-plot enemy that Superman has to get smart to win, and a B-plot about how the world's problems can't be punched away. But it's just... kind of boring. The interesting stuff about the B-plot goes away after the A-plot starts, and the rest is basically two really long fights, made of generic midair punching.
Rated 16 Apr 2017
evilmangoesEvilMangoes
Rated 12 Nov 2016
8
6th
D-
Rated 12 Nov 2016
tuerdatuerda
Rated 02 Jul 2016
3
2nd
This would be good for a bad movie night. The gigantic plot holes, the airborne pro wrestling match, the glowing bad guy, the kritponite scratches: There is quite a lot to laugh at here. Always hard to really rate this kind of thing because it is an abysmally bad movie but it has great value for the unintended comedy.
Rated 02 Jul 2016
gogokaingogokain
Rated 23 Mar 2016
10
19th
Better than Superman III just because it's so much shorter.
Rated 23 Mar 2016
boesballboesball
Rated 14 Feb 2016
6
4th
The worst superman film. At least number 3 was aware that it sucked.
Rated 14 Feb 2016
evolutionEvolution
Rated 08 Jul 2013
10
2nd
My PSI was 0, but I'll give a few points here for making me laugh at how bad it was.
Rated 08 Jul 2013
braddad68braddad68
Rated 23 Jan 2013
88
36th
Goofy but still had Christopher Reeve as the best Superman.
Rated 23 Jan 2013
bentienbentien
Rated 02 Aug 2012
33
9th
Okay, so it's a bad Superman film. But it has some sentimental value for me which keeps it from a really low score.
Rated 02 Aug 2012
ebelcEbelC
Rated 02 Aug 2012
10
4th
I was expecting something quite worse than this really, after the 3rd one and everyone saying this one was the worst. Anyway it's not even a decent movie.
Rated 02 Aug 2012
mervtaylorMerv_Taylor
Rated 16 Jun 2012
30
11th
Hilarious
Rated 16 Jun 2012
ahamel7896ahamel7896
Rated 14 Jun 2012
2
3rd
Hilarious. The fight on the moon at the end is indescribable.
Rated 14 Jun 2012
joseywalesjoseywales
Rated 19 Mar 2012
36
13th
Better than 3
Rated 19 Mar 2012
ribcageribcage
Rated 19 Aug 2011
30
10th
It almost starts out like it will at least make the camp and just barelyv watchable quality that 3 had then nope its fluff and stupid and the last 20 minutes are utter nonsense and its no surprise this was the real death of superman
Rated 19 Aug 2011
greatscott85GreatScott85
Rated 28 Apr 2011
1
0th
If there's any comic book sequel that could give Batman and Robin a run for its money in terms of being so flat-out awful, it's this one. At least that other movie had, y'know, a budget.
Rated 28 Apr 2011
tathieltathiel
Rated 13 May 2010
10
0th
The film speaks for itself. No comment.
Rated 13 May 2010
freqflyerfreqflyer
Rated 28 Jan 2010
40
20th
My PSI for this movie was 1, and I'm sure I know why -- it's cheesy and lame and has a really dumb villain -- but what can I say? I can't hate Christopher Reeves Superman, so this is an inflated rating, to be sure.
Rated 28 Jan 2010
micahmicah
Rated 27 Jan 2010
30
4th
The cheapest and most poorly produced of the Superman films. Thanks for effing up a fun franchise, Golan/Globus.
Rated 27 Jan 2010
moribunnyMoribunny
Rated 07 Sep 2009
10
5th
Probably the worst one.
Rated 07 Sep 2009
nachtwulfnachtwulf
Rated 19 Aug 2009
15
7th
The worst of the lot
Rated 19 Aug 2009
ivytivyt
Rated 08 Apr 2009
10
4th
Peace and Marijuana fit hand in hand. And the directors, writers and producers were probably all blazing while making this peice of shit. Nuclear Man is one of the worst villains in the history of villainy, and the effects are pretty horrible also. Not terribly great.
Rated 08 Apr 2009
liltxgal98liltxgal98
Rated 11 Feb 2009
50
3rd
I hate to say it really was a bad movie
Rated 11 Feb 2009
hayden18hayden18
Rated 12 Dec 2008
65
5th
the worst of the superman movies
Rated 12 Dec 2008
antmanxmasantmanxmas
Rated 07 Dec 2008
38
0th
Easily the worst of the Superman films, they took a fairly good premise (Superman's moral dilemma of deciding if he should interfere with human history and stop nuclear proliferation) and turned it into Superman getting into a cheesy fight with an Aryan with Lex Luthor's voice.
Rated 07 Dec 2008
garlonussGarlonuss
Rated 16 Oct 2008
30
0th
Simply not good. There are clearly attempts at camp that merely become ridiculous nonsense along with the laughable special effects.
Rated 16 Oct 2008
marc_dipaoloMarc DiPaolo
Rated 15 Jun 2008
85
14th
First half is great. Then it goes completely off the rails.
Rated 15 Jun 2008
recklessmessrecklessmess
Rated 11 Feb 2008
12
7th
Christopher Reeve just mailed this one in. Sad, too, because who would have thunk it'd be his last major role?
Rated 11 Feb 2008
lookinglandLookingLand
Rated 16 Nov 2007
30
30th
just dreaful, but it's christopher reeve!
Rated 16 Nov 2007
rjgarandRJGarand
Rated 12 Nov 2007
61
17th
Disappointing end to the superman series in the 70s and 80s. Even the environmental message doesn't come across well.
Rated 12 Nov 2007
darkmandarkman
Rated 21 Sep 2007
23
1st
They should have stopped doing this movies long before.
Rated 21 Sep 2007
dustydDustyd
Rated 16 Sep 2007
30
5th
Crappy sequel.
Rated 16 Sep 2007
mojopinmojopin
Rated 11 Sep 2007
5
25th
Totally pointless
Rated 11 Sep 2007
galnigalni
Rated 10 Sep 2007
5
0th
This is why Christopher Reeve went paraplegic
Rated 10 Sep 2007
gandalfgandalf
Rated 28 Aug 2007
50
5th
bleargh. simbolic value, only.
Rated 28 Aug 2007
lrampartllrampartl
Rated 14 Aug 2007
58
41st
Uncle Lex?
Rated 14 Aug 2007
barterer2002barterer2002
Rated 14 Aug 2007
23
3rd
Nothing I hate more than a series that just lingers too long without any idea of where its going.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
irvinejumpirvinejump
Rated 14 Aug 2007
30
17th
Pretty bad, but still a step up from three. But the damage was done and they didn't make another... Until now
Rated 14 Aug 2007
bbbdBBBD
Rated 14 Aug 2007
55
21st
Come on. I mean, come on.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
x_humanx-human
Rated 14 Aug 2007
55
14th
This is a very entertaining flix even if it is the most terrible adaption of Superman ever created. I watch it in the same vein as I watch any Ed Wood flix, it makes me laugh.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
gareth_watkinsGareth Watkins
Rated 02 Jan 2007
40
2nd
The final Christopher Reeves Superman movie and the worst of the bunch.
Rated 02 Jan 2007

Collections

Loading ...

Similar Titles

Loading ...

Statistics

Loading ...

Trailer

Loading ...