Considering the era, the technology they had back then and the goofy treatment of the genre, it's somewhat watchable. Also, as much as I remember, it was the first ever DC film and second superhero film. So, in a way, it also showed the possibility of a whole new genre. You might loathe it for many genuine reasons but you must acknowledge the objective reality that if these movies were never made, none of the great films in the genre would have ever existed (probably).
Now, coming to the story. It is an era specific movie. It's really cheesy and goofy. I don't if Mole Men were there in DC material, and I don't even know whether Lex Luthor was there in the sources during the time, and I could care less. But had they had Lex Luthor, he could've been used as a villain. But probably that would've never served the purpose since they had to make it goofy back then. And the mole men served all the purpose of goofiness.
Superman, in this movie, does what he does. He cares about people, he helps them, he saves them .... but why? Only he knows. And he doesn't feel like a humane character like that from Man of Steel or Superman/Doomsday. He is just a fish out of water who is super strong and shows his abilities. He is completely generic. The special effects are hilarious and awful, if you see them now. But it was in the 50s. So, I must say it was amazing that they even bothered using one. The direction it takes is really childish and kids are more likely enjoy it if they can turn their brains off.
Surprisingly, it is coherent and insanely better than Superman 3, Superman 4 and the two mockeries of Batman by Joel Schumacher. It doesn't aim to be the greatest film but does hit some level, though not to high. George Reeves is okay as Superman. At least people remember him as Superman. The acting was below par and over the top to say the least.
I am not going to bash it because it's an age old movie. At the same time, during the 40s and 50s, Hollywood had given a LOT of excellent films. So, it's not that it can get away with all the excuses of being an age old movie.
Rating : 5.2/10, Grade : C-
Now, coming to the story. It is an era specific movie. It's really cheesy and goofy. I don't if Mole Men were there in DC material, and I don't even know whether Lex Luthor was there in the sources during the time, and I could care less. But had they had Lex Luthor, he could've been used as a villain. But probably that would've never served the purpose since they had to make it goofy back then. And the mole men served all the purpose of goofiness.
Superman, in this movie, does what he does. He cares about people, he helps them, he saves them .... but why? Only he knows. And he doesn't feel like a humane character like that from Man of Steel or Superman/Doomsday. He is just a fish out of water who is super strong and shows his abilities. He is completely generic. The special effects are hilarious and awful, if you see them now. But it was in the 50s. So, I must say it was amazing that they even bothered using one. The direction it takes is really childish and kids are more likely enjoy it if they can turn their brains off.
Surprisingly, it is coherent and insanely better than Superman 3, Superman 4 and the two mockeries of Batman by Joel Schumacher. It doesn't aim to be the greatest film but does hit some level, though not to high. George Reeves is okay as Superman. At least people remember him as Superman. The acting was below par and over the top to say the least.
I am not going to bash it because it's an age old movie. At the same time, during the 40s and 50s, Hollywood had given a LOT of excellent films. So, it's not that it can get away with all the excuses of being an age old movie.
Rating : 5.2/10, Grade : C-