Highly Overrated But Still Good

Expected more

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

I'm convinced there's never been a more perfect superhero casting than Reeve as Superman. This sequel picks up tonally & narratively right where the first left off, only better capturing the childlike silliness yet warranted sincerity of the Superman mythos. Yes, the relationship arc between Clark & Lois is rushed, & the final fight is almost comically leisurely paced. But Niagara Falls is great, the moon is impressive, and the politics are wonderful.

(Flash Review)This was shot at the same time as Superman but had directorial turmoil. Thus as the first director left, Gene Hackman quit the film! Anyway, in this movie, three criminals escape and flee to Earth. At the same time Superman has fallen in love with Lois and is learning to be equal/human with her, he must give up his Superman powers. Will he sacrifice so much to be with Lois? How will the villains be stopped if he doesn't have his powers? How will Lex Luthor jockey the villain hierarchy? Those are the core tension plot points. The three villains are great. So many memorable scenes and they have such peculiar 80's styles. The story was a good way to showcase superpowers and fun battles. Very good effects for its time. Another classic movie.

After viewing "Superman: The Movie", it is difficult to believe that any sequel could top the story, effects, and just the overall aura of that masterful film. Well, Superman II is at least as good, and some would argue better, for two main reasons:First, the special effects (many of them filmed at the same time as scenes from Superman I) are still incredible (at least by early 1980s standards). The action scenes, where as many as four beings are flying through the air simultaneously, are even more exciting than those from the first film. Also, the comedic and heroic tone of the first film remains intact for this effort (likely because parts of both were filmed together). Thus, Christopher Reeve is still the same old bumbling, stumbling Clark Kent but wholesomely heroic Superman, Lois Lane is just as rambunctious, and Lex Luthor is just as comically maniacal. In essence, it wasn't as if there was a big break in shooting and the actors had to rediscover their roles again...and that stability is very refreshing.Of course, the second reason the film succeeds so well is that it introduces enough change to not become old hat. Instead of thwarting Luthor, Superman dukes it out with three Kryptonian baddies (led by the merciless General Zod). Instead of fooling Lois, Clark reveals his deepest secret to her (and, ultimately, puts the world in grave danger for doing so).I have always felt that most sequels fail due to one of two (or maybe both!) issues: Either the film is too repetitive, or the actors can no longer fully regain the passion for the roles as they once had. However, with the combination of a fresh plot and the fact that both the first two Superman films were mostly filmed together, this film was able to avoid those traps.So, if you were enthralled by Superman: The Movie, Superman II will not let you down in any way. The visuals are still stunning, the drama is still palpable, the humor is still funny, and I can guarantee that the closing scene will have you on your feet and cheering at your television!

Superman II is bigger in everything but that doesn't mean that is better than the first film. What bagged me the most about the film is the humor which it was kinda weak at times and this whole thing of Superman sacrificing his powers in order to be with Lois Lane what the hell was that? Sure Clark deserves a little bit happiness in his life but getting his ass kicked by a mortal was kinda stupid. Also the 3 villains could be better if they didn't acted as cartoons of themselves i think Man of Steel gave Zod a much better story. Gene Hackman reprises his role as Lex Luthor but he doesn't have enough screen time. What i loved about the first film was that it was serious but also the humor was great in it and Richard Donner was all by himself in directing and not Richard Lester and him teaming up. Christopher Reeve remains a badass and an amazing Superman/ Clark Kent tho as always. I give the film a 9 out of 10 it's basically the Batman Returns of the Superman Series it's entertaining but not better than the first movie.