Good for the time, but it has not aged well

I saw it when it came out. I loved it. It's the standard I hold other comic book movies to. If I don't feel like a child at some point, I probably won't like the movie. Just a positive movie. I get why it might be corny to many. That's what Superman was back then.

Am watching this for the first time in about 20 years, as it's on Netflix. You're right about some things: Lex Luthor is way too comical and not nearly menacing enough.

However, the music score is great and some of the scenes are really well shot, even with primitive special effects. For example, the helicopter scene is terrifying and seeing Superman fly up for the first time to save the day is spectacular. I liked when Superman as Clark Kent saved Lois Lane by catching the bullet fired by the mugger. You really aren't sure what happened until you see Clark hold the bullet in his hand. Nowadays, that scene would be shot in "bullet time" and you would see the bullet fly towards Lois from multiple angles before Superman caught it.

All of Brando's scenes are fun to watch as well.

Those things are not plot holes, a plot hole is when something doesn't make sense in relation to the plot of the film. Also he doesn't turn the world back, he goes back in time by flying so fast, the world just looks like it goes backwards because he is going faster than it is turning. Fixing the fault line seems fine to me too.

I agree about Lex Luthor though. It is like they used him for some comic relief in the film but they already had Otis for that, I think Lex should have been more serious.

I disagree. And while I can certainly understand your assessment, for me the only part of the movie that hasn't aged well are the special effects, which obviously can't hold a candle to those of more recent superhero movies. I think this film has aged far, far better than the Michael Keaton Batman movies. I think this movie is hands down THE best origin story of any superhero yet seen on film. The music, the acting, the setting, it gives it all an epic, almost mythic quality that's entirely appropriate for an iconic hero who has basically become an integral part of America's mythology.

Others have addressed the alleged plot holes, so there's no need for me to go over that again; I basically agree with what's been said. As for Luthor being too comical, I kind of agree, but you have to remember when this movie was made, and what had come before it. This was the first time a comic book superhero had been the subject of a feature film. Prior to that comic book superheroes had only been adapted in TV and movie serials (which were the pre-television equivalent of TV, and had a cast and a budget to reflect this fact). It may be difficult to keep in mind today, when A list actors are lining up to take parts in movies in this genre, but this film was made when comic book superheroes were not that "respectable" as a subject matter for movies. (The success of this film is the major reason that began to change.) In 1978 there was still the feeling that a superhero in tights was rather silly, and a fear that if the movie appeared totally serious in tone, it would be too hard to swallow, given the "kid-stuff" subject matter. So they made a creative decision to balance Reeve's completely serious portrayal with a lighter, more comedic performance from Hackman. It probably was the right decision in the context of 1978, though it hurts the film with some viewers today.

I disagree, except regarding the special effects. I still love the film, and firmly believe that great adventures, genuine humor, truly admirable heroes, great chemistry between leading actors, and hot beefcake never go out of style.

If my feelings towards this film and it's successor gave changed over the years, it's because intervening real life has added a layer of sadness to my perceptions. Sometimes it can be heartbreaking to see someone in a prime that was over too soon.

I'll agree about Luthor. He really wasn't anything like the character from comics.

I see your problem here. You mean that the one and only good Superman movie hasnt aged well. Means hanst aged well, that its not dark and stupid enough for you? Like the braindead Men Of Stelle or Superman Returns?

This is, without the smallest doubt, the best Superman movie ever done.

And BTW This is a movie. Noone gives a sh*t about how exactly it is at the comic characters if the change is well done. Gene Hackman is, by far, the best Lex Luthor ever done.