User Score
6.3

Generally favorable reviews- based on 285 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 69 out of 285

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. May 8, 2014
    4
    Worse than the first and since the first is out of time now... yeah... It couldn't have the great action of course so it focused again on the humor part. Even more this time. It almost became a kids cartoon.
  2. Jun 23, 2013
    0
    I was so impressionable as a kid that I had no idea how to criticize a movie or compare it to others on special effects. To me it was one of the greatest movies from a child's perspective. I grew up and now realize it was a B movie and I'm not comparing it to today's special effects films because that's unfair, instead I'm comparing it to Star Wars which is the movie which was trulyI was so impressionable as a kid that I had no idea how to criticize a movie or compare it to others on special effects. To me it was one of the greatest movies from a child's perspective. I grew up and now realize it was a B movie and I'm not comparing it to today's special effects films because that's unfair, instead I'm comparing it to Star Wars which is the movie which was truly ahead of its time in production, acting, storyline and special effects. Star Wars has truly stood the test of time. Sorry, but Superman II is a joke and people seem endeared to Christopher Reeves out of nostalgia and patriotism but he was a terrible actor. The only actor in that film worth anything was Gene Hackman Expand
  3. May 10, 2013
    2
    Caught this on T.V. with my friend one night. Hadn't seen it since I was about 6 and it was cringe worthy to the point of not being able to look away. I wasn't expecting a timeless classic, you have to lower your standards this being a super hero movie and being a product of the 80's. But my god, I was not expecting such a hilariously unwatchable disaster. It's not the bad special fx,Caught this on T.V. with my friend one night. Hadn't seen it since I was about 6 and it was cringe worthy to the point of not being able to look away. I wasn't expecting a timeless classic, you have to lower your standards this being a super hero movie and being a product of the 80's. But my god, I was not expecting such a hilariously unwatchable disaster. It's not the bad special fx, or even the somewhat dated feel of the movie... Superman II's biggest problem is it's actors delivery and total lack of subtlety in their performance. Some of it can surely be blamed on the director for accepting the takes, but a lot of the lines are delivered so unbelievably bad you wonder how they made it past the cutting room floor. The story isn't much better, just an excuse to have an all out brawl in the middle of the city... you can see where directors like Michael Bay major influences are. Grab some popcorn and spend hour and a half re-familiarizing yourself with this movie. Even my friend who's fairly open to watching almost any mindless action flick couldn't contain his laughter re-watching this. Expand
  4. Nov 16, 2011
    2
    I'm giving this movie a 2 because I like the idea of it. The actual implementation has much to be desired. The special effects are awful in context with the times. The fight scenes are laughable. Watching equally strong (invincible) superbeings fight is much more boring than watching a regular street fight. It always amazes me that Hollywood could never put together a great SupermanI'm giving this movie a 2 because I like the idea of it. The actual implementation has much to be desired. The special effects are awful in context with the times. The fight scenes are laughable. Watching equally strong (invincible) superbeings fight is much more boring than watching a regular street fight. It always amazes me that Hollywood could never put together a great Superman movie. The original Superman movie was decent but fell apart in the second half. This movie is dumb from start to finish. Expand
  5. Oct 7, 2010
    3
    Just the thought of this film being above the Godfather part1 and 2 is unbelievably angers me.We have two masterpieces and many more(like LOTR and Patton) being rated lower than this cheesy action flick.I don't think it should even be included in the High Scores list because there are just 7 reviews.
Metascore
87

Universal acclaim - based on 11 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 11
  2. Negative: 0 out of 11
  1. Reviewed by: Gary Arnold
    Jun 4, 2013
    50
    Superman II" gets off to a fast start (in part by recapitulating the plot of the original film in the credit sequence), only to evolve into a curiously absent-minded follow-up...What seems to have been lost is the straightforward heroic exuberance of the original film, despite Reeve's gallant and endearing efforts. [19 June 1981, p.C1]
  2. Reviewed by: David Ansen
    Jun 4, 2013
    80
    Superman II is a success, a stirring sequel to the smash of '79. Whether you will prefer it to the original is like choosing between root beer and Fresca. They're both bubbly, but the flavor is different. What the follow-up doesn't have is the epic lyricism of Richard Donner's version; it's harder edged, fleeter on its feet, less reverential. [22 June 1981, p.87]
  3. Reviewed by: Chris Hewitt (1)
    Jun 4, 2013
    80
    Manages to gain classic comic book feature status through a combination of great stunts and a great human angle.