Superman IV: The Quest for Peace - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Superman IV: The Quest for Peace Reviews

Page 1 of 114
½ December 25, 2016
I actually originally saw this in the theatre. Definitely a lower budget movie (Canon Films produced this as they were falling apart as a company), but has all the prominent actors once again returning. This, the fourth entry features a much more convoluted story often lacking continuity; it is much goofier than any of the others. Superman shows his hippie side as Gene Hackman is a black market nuclear arms dealer who creates a nuclear-powered anti-Superman. The Hackman's nephew must have inspired Scott Evil. I wanted to like this more, but the penny-pinching was obvious in all aspects of the movie.
½ November 19, 2016
One of the worst movies ever made.
½ November 9, 2016
wow this movie was an embarrassing just for its dumb villain.
October 19, 2016
As if "Superman III" wasn't terrible enough, now they give us this nightmare.

2/10 - Garbage
½ October 4, 2016
Oh my god this movie was awful and just terrible
September 25, 2016
September 23, 2016
DC just loves embarrassing themselves.
September 17, 2016
Best villain out of all 4 of the Reeve films, but seriously a human woman can be in space untouchable... Rlly Warner bros... Rlly... What the heck DC! Best villain but this movie sucks hard (2/5)
September 11, 2016
So I recently re-watched "Superman III" and was taken aback by how bad it was, to the point where I wondered if this famously bad fourth Superman film, where Superman crusades for nuclear disarmament, was actually better than the terrible third film. Well, this film is actually worse. After Superman gets rid of all the world's nukes, Lex Luthor makes a Nuclear Man powered by the sun (shouldn't he be solar powered then?) who the Man of Steel must battle. This film was make even more interesting after having recently watched the documentary "Electric Boogaloo: The Wild, Untold Story of Cannon Films" in which this film was featured prominently in the decline of Canon when they abandoned their successful formula of churning out reliable low budget genre pictures and then unsuccessfully tried to branch out into bigger projects like this (which in the end looked very cheap in comparison to earlier films in the series). Cheap, uninteresting, and really an embarrassment for all the talent involved in this film. Oh, and this film seems to feature Pepsi just about everywhere!
½ July 25, 2016
I Fast Forward all the way to the end and couldn't wait for the movie to finish!!!
Superman 4: The Quest For Piece Deserves a Razzie for the late 80's.

Score: 0.5/10
July 15, 2016
You know that feeling when you watch a film so fundamentally broken, where even the sound editing is terrible, well this film is a perfect example of this. It's odd that a film based on a comic about the cold war could be so good, seeing the way that comics have been one of the few mediums to core nothing but gold in that field. It's very obvious that this film is made from several different stories, as each act holds a story that is never fully developed and never fully resolved. Lex Luthor is the most boring he's ever been. To improve, stop being so lazy, and actually make new footage!
½ July 12, 2016
I can't even bear to give this movie 1 whole star. This movie is a perfect example of why you should never make super hero movies on a low budget.
Super Reviewer
June 21, 2016
The franchise dumped Lester and brought back Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor in this film that Christopher Reeve submitted the story for. This was one of those films that wanted to send a message by using its characters. This time it was for global nuclear disarmament. It has Superman going to the United Nations to convince the world to rid itself of its nuclear arsenals. Lex Luthor, however, attaches a kit with a piece of Superman's DNA to a nuclear rocket that Superman throws into the sun and it creates Nuclear Man that Superman must battle. While this film didn't even closely stand up to the greatness of the first 2 films, it was still better than Superman III. Bringing back Luthor was a wise idea for this one and is probably what saved this film from an even worse score.
½ June 10, 2016
Last of the Superman movies that feature Christopher Reeve. In this film Superman tries to bring about world peace by eliminating all nuclear weapons but his archenemy Lex Luthor tries to thwart him. Reeve is very good in his role as Superman but I found that even he couldn't make it interesting. I found this movie quite dull. It's not as bad as the third but not as good as the first.
½ May 27, 2016
It's total garbage????
May 26, 2016
This is tied for worst superhero movie along with Batman & Robin
April 20, 2016
It's a little amazing, really, how quickly the original Superman franchise eroded into bad comedy. This being the ground floor of that descent, it bears little similarity to the original film beyond several key casting choices and a spit curl. Christopher Reeve returns as the title character, of course, with Margot Kidder suffering an expanded role and Gene Hackman back from a one-film exile to ham it up once again as a clueless, underwhelming Lex Luthor. Filling the Richard Pryor "why?!" role from the previous film is Jon Cryer, better known as Duckie in Pretty in Pink, who plays some sort of pointless, meandering male twist on the Valley Girl stereotype that was rolling through culture at the time. I'm still not entirely sure why he was elbowed into the plot. This isn't aggressively bad like Superman III, it's just hopelessly inept. In fact, the core of the story has a lot of potential: Superman, inspired by a letter from a young boy, destroys the world's nuclear armaments and discovers that some problems can't be solved quite so easily. It sputters and fails right on the launchpad, though, and soon falls back on a muscle-flexing brawl with some generic evil menace to solve the problem. Its grasp on physics, and reality as a whole, is so loose it's almost adorable. I'd pat my four-year-old son on the head and smile if he suggested we move the moon around to keep the sun out of his eyes, but for this film that's a legitimate solution. To say its answers make any sense would be an insult to sense itself. The whole thing plays like an easy answer to a complex problem, from the story to the editing to the acting to the effects work. These older superhero movies don't hold up to the rigors of time as a whole, but Superman IV looks particularly bad in a modern setting. Even the hero's indistinguishable costume seems cut-rate and fake, like they'd forgotten to commission a wardrobe department until the night before production. Head-shakingly pointless and dull, this film only seems to exist to kill time. Which, thankfully, it doesn't demand in great quantities. While the original cut came in at over two hours, some greedy last-minute cuts trimmed it down to a slim ninety minutes. Why the late edits? To ensure a few more showings each day at theaters nationwide. Of course.
½ April 9, 2016
Worst superman movie of all time even though I hate Henry Cavill as superman this movie just flat out sucks and terrible. It's pretty much the same movie, the first one but with the same terrible effects but this time star wars has come out, the first one and that had the best effects at the time. This movie has the worst effects of all time for a superman movie. This is pretty much a remake of the first movie but with the same people but lex luthor breaks out of jail but wait that happened in this movie. Fine the only thing is that superman is into politics and theirs a new hot girl but wait a minute their was one in the last movie Lana. Fudge this movie, it sucks because it's the same superman movie over and over again.
Super Reviewer
April 7, 2016
Somehow more childish than the 1940s Fleischer & Famous Superman cartoons that were aimed squarely at kids, the horribly miscalculated bomb The Quest for Peace created a cancer-causing fallout so tenacious that it wouldn't dissipate for nearly 20 years. It plays even poorer today. George Reeves' '50s iteration of the Man of Steel might prove to be classic television, but the staid silliness of the series hasn't aged well. That said, the entire run of that program looks positively naturalistic and ripped-from-the-headlines when compared with the insultingly over-the-top goings-on of Superman IV. With a villain so laughable that his appearance single-handedly turns the production into an outright comedy, Superman IV is riff-worthy from the word 'no.'

In this painfully bad PG-rated sequel, the Man of Steel (Reeve) crusades for nuclear disarmament and meets Lex Luthor's (Hackman) latest creation, Nuclear Man.

Alexander and Ilya Salkind, the producers of the first three go-rounds, smartly chose to sit this one out. Gene Hackman, however, returns to cash a sizable paycheck and create a Solar-powered Superman clone with a perfectly coiffed mullet. That Superman creators Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel lived to see this dreck put the nail in coffin of a once-decent franchise is appalling...though certainly not as appalling as Warner Bros. not compensating them for creating an American icon...but a close second.

Bottom line: Nuclear Waste
½ April 2, 2016
i would rather watch the 17 million dollars used to make this movie burn in an incinerator, because i wouldn't be surprised if that is what the people who made this movie di with all that money!! usage of the same effects 10 times!! ripping off classic scens from the first movie, and a plot so convoluted and stupid that this is my new worst movie ever. But it does have its so bad it's good moments, but everything else is so bad and dumb that it does not save this movie in any way.
Page 1 of 114