“Superman III” does not work as a movie about the character known as Superman. It works incredibly well, however, as two things that one would not normally find in a “Superman” film:
- One is a sweet Richard Pryor comedy about an archetype that will always have resonance in our world, the lonely and hapless (but clever) ordinary man.
- The other is a light satire — nothing particularly controversial, but sharp enough to be relevant.
First, though, a word on Pryor. “Superman III” is worth seeing entirely because of Pryor’s gifted performance. He plays an intelligent and awkward Metropolis resident named Gus Gorman, constantly down on his luck but talented enough with computers that he attracts the attention of super-billionaire Ross Webster (Robert Vaughn). Pryor often identified with gifted underdogs, both in his stand up and in his movies, for the obvious reason that he was one in real life.
Like any proper “Superman” movie, “Superman III” is meant for kids, but that actually works well for Pryor. He channels classic characters like Charlie Chaplin’s The Tramp or The Three Stooges, working class and relatable. The laughs are mined as he is placed in wacky situations by forces beyond his control. In his case, those forces want him to oppose Superman, so there are “Superman” jokes and a “Superman” plot. Yet he doesn’t even interact with Superman himself until the last set piece, and they don’t share screen time in any meaningful way until Gorman’s final scene.
This makes the stuff with Superman feel incidental. The more interesting material is reflected in the themes of class conflict as Gorman works for Webster, who in turn controls and abuses those around him. Webster actually seems to like Gorman, but in the end Gorman must side with Superman. Webster is evil because his money has corrupted him (a sly anti-capitalist message), and Superman stands for the belief that all bad guys should be held accountable. Gorman is a criminal too, but not a bad guy, and he naturally sides with the Big Blue Boy Scout when forced to make a choice.
I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the scene in which Gorman comes up with an ingenuous concept known as salami slicing, where you steal from your employer by pocketing the fractions of a cent that are left over from ordinary financial transactions. Webster notices Gorman’s potential because of this, as do the characters in another satirical comedy (albeit a much edgier one), the 1999 Mike Judge cult classic “Office Space.” Little details like that make the Gorman subplot work.
Personally I identified with Gorman because the specific mix of intellect and social awkwardness that he manifests frequently signifies autism. I do not pretend that this is what Pryor, director Richard Lester or screenwriters David and Leslie Newman intended. It is worth bringing up, though, because the fact that a viewer can find a personal way of connecting with a character is a sign that there is something worthwhile there.
Pryor stands out even more because all of the Superman stuff sucks. The love subplot with Lara Lang (Annette O’Toole) is boring and at times cringe-y, which can also be said when Superman/Clark Kent (the iconic Christopher Reeve) breaks bad in a plot strand that mixes camp and broodiness as ineffectively as the 2007 Sam Raimi/Tobey Maguire superhero flick “Spider-Man 3.” All of the non-Pryor jokes are corny and lame, the Daily Planet is basically a non-entity, and even the special effects-driven action scenes are unconvincing.
See this movie for Richard Pryor. Play on your cell phone during the rest. Frankly it’s what Gus Gorman would want you to do.