Superman and the Mole-Men (1951)

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

People are voting emotionally.

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Review - Superman and the Mole-Men 10 A condensed summary of events would include the actual creature sightings to be real, the reaction of the townsfolk to the creatures by hunting them, the revenge of the creatures when one of them is shot and hospitalized, the release of the wounded creature by Superman to the others and the walk back to the well for their return. The conclusion shows Superman, Lois Lane, Bill Corrigan and John Craig watching the derrick burn, set by the creatures, destroying access to the well simultaneously. The subtle differences between the this movie and the two-part episodes on television are just that, subtle, but a couple worth mentioning. The longer scenes missing from the television were those of the creatures first appearance walking around before and including looking at Pop, their watching Clark and Corrigan drive away heading to town, the escaping path from the dam encountering the individual sipping water from his bucket fleeing at the sight of the creature, the barbed wire fence met running from the dogs, Superman telling Lois not to call the story in to avoid panic away from the area and the Craig asking the Sheriff not to call the state police for help. This featured fifty-eight minute movie was released on November 23, 1951 and was met with rave reviews There was the Superman series on the radio and Superman comics, but this is the first time Superman was offered in the movie show houses across the country. The movie was made in 1951 and released originally only as a last resort "to recoup the production budget if the networks passed on the project" of bringing Superman to television. The actual movie was released to television in August 1953 and shown as two-part episodes #25 and #26 at the end of season one of the television series. There were some scenes appearing in this movie edited from the television episodes, none of which detracted from the episodes shown, it is fun to note the minor differences watching both the movie and the TV episodes. This movie is rated high not because it is the only one of its kind but for 1951 science fiction drama it was a good production with a number of experienced actors.

'Superman & the Mole Men,' was filmed immediately prior to 'The Adventures of Superman' TAS) weekly TV series. This film was then released into theaters so as to insure that the producers recouped at least some of their investment in the TV show: at the time season 1 was filmed, there wasn't a sponsor yet, and in fact it took 2 years before Kellogs Cereal Co. took on the role and the show was finally broadcast.'Mole Men' was filmed just 1 year after the movie serial 'Atom Man Vs. Superman,' but 'Atom Man' is so primitive by comparison that it could have been made 30 years prior.Besides being enjoyable as an atmospheric and suspenseful B/W cold war scifi/horror pic (a la the original 'The Thing'), this little film is interesting since it engages in a little social commentary. Almost without exception, TAS never touched any of the burning social issues (bigotry, war, pollution, etc.), but 'Superman & the Mole Men' is, very obviously an allegory about prejudice. This makes 'Mole Men' a kind of bridge between the Superman radio show, which, starting after WWII, did a long series of award-winning social message programs, directly addressing issues such as race prejudice, war-mongering, and social welfare, and TAS, which stayed completely clear of social relevancy. (The Superman radio show, which ended in 1950, was produced by Bob Maxwell, who also produced the 1st season of TAS. I've never read anything that explained why TAS dropped the social relevancy of the radio show, but one could speculate it had something to do with the impact of various 'witch hunts' on the political and media spheres...) 'Superman & the Mole Men,' is the story of about some funny-looking little men who emerge into view after the world's deepest oil well is dug. The funny-looking men, who are not evil and whose world has been invaded by oil exploration, become victims of prejudice and eventually a mob forms with the intent of killing the funny-looking men. If you think about it, this might remind you of a contemporary real-life situation.

I don't think that anyone who cares about such things would deny that George Reeves brought a certain dignity and gravitas to the "Superman" role, or that the series (or this movie) wouldn't have been nearly as good without him. So let's get that issue out of the way early - yes, I am a fan of Reeves. He provided the standard that all other wearers of the tights have to be measured against. I am also aware that the crews that put these things together back in the 50's had extremely limited budgets and shooting schedules. Given the expanded SFX capabilities, materials and budgets (and personal trainers) of the modern era, I am willing to bet that those directors and film crews could come up with products that compare favorably to any of the modern superhero movies that we laud. Originally I thought this movie was "Superman Versus The Mole Men", so I was kind of surprised ***spoiler warning***when the Mole Men turned out to be timid, harmless midgets who were the victims of a misunderstanding, so Superman spends most of the movie trying to save them, instead of fighting them.***spoiler ends*** But that's OK - the plot had a flavor of seriousness and sincerity that has aged well; there was a strong message of tolerance and understanding between different cultures, which was pretty good writing for the 50s. Any battle scenes they could afford to stage back then would have been pretty lame anyway. So actually, my main beef with "Superman and the Mole Men" is that it doesn't have enough of Superman in it. Whenever Reeves is on the screen, either in the tights or in his "Clark Kent" sack suit, the eight year old inside me is still tickled silly. But there are long, draggy stretches of the movie where the movie makers try to advance the plot, but actually just pad things out. ****mild spoiler**** Especially useless is a long, extended chase scene where the townspeople chase one of the Mole Men cross country with bloodhounds for at least 10 minutes, until they finally trap him in a small shack and set it on fire (the Mole Man escapes by going through the floorboards). I believe this extended scene was deleted in the two part "adaptation" of this movie to television, which shows that the editors basically agreed with me. ***end of spoiler*** The other problem with the screenplay lies with the way some of the townspeople are depicted: an older guys, "Pops", dies of a heart attack at the sight of, well, munchkins. The oil well boss doesn't warn the crews of the danger they face drilling through radioactive rocks, he just hides the drills. The leader of the lynch mob is not only a xenophobe, and by implication a racist, he's an idiot. How else can you explain the way he takes a swing at the flying bulletproof man who can bend steel in his bare hands - and who knocks him out with one punch -...and then repeatedly tries to shoot the guy in later scenes? Also, no one ever seems to notice that for a "mild mannered reporter", Clark Kent is a very decisive, take-charge kind of guy. He is, in fact, larger than life even in his secret identity, and it defies belief that no one in this movie, or over the years of the series, ever gives "Clark Kent" credit for his deeds and pivotal roles as a reporter. They really did add up. The character of "Superman" requires a suspension of disbelief in the laws of biology and physics, but the character of "Clark Kent" requires a weird kind of suspension of disbelief in human character and motivation. Lois Lane (no matter who played her), for all her charms, must have actually been dumber than a bag of hammers.Anyway; Reeves is the only reason to watch the movie, and there isn't enough Reeves in it. That's why only six stars.

It must have been several years after it was released, so don't know why it was at the movies. But as a kid I enjoyed it. I just found a VHS tape of Superman and the Mole Men at the flea market and decided to watch it again (it's been a lot of years). I wasn't expecting much, now knowing how the B movies were made at that time. But I was pleasantly surprised to find the movie very watchable and the acting by all outstanding. Usual acting in these type movies leaves a lot to be desired. Surprisingly, the writing wasn't bad either. Forget the fact that Superman went from sequence to sequence and could have kicked all their butts in the beginning, because then the story would have ended, right?! OK, the mole men costumes were hokey and not very scary (they didn't even scare me as a kid). However, making allowances for the probable low budget for background and costumes, it was a job well done by all. I recognized the sheriff right away as The Old Ranger from Death Valley Days and plenty of supporting roles in TV westerns. J. Farrell MacDonald played old Pop and was always a great supporting actor in more movies than I can count. Walter Reed and Jeff Corey were familiar faces as well from other movies. Did you recognize the old doctor as the captain of the ship that went to get King Kong? Did you recognize the little girl rolling the ball to the mole men as Lisbeth Searcy in Old Yeller? Some of the mole men were famous too. Jerry Maren has played Mayor McCheese for McDonalds, Little Oscar Mayer, was the Munchkin that handed Dorothy the lollipop, was on a Seifeld episode and a wealth of other work. Billy Curtis played an unforgettable part with Clint Eastwood in High Plains Drifter, was one of the friends met by the star in Incredible Shrinking Man, he had a part in a movie I just luckily grabbed at a flea market titled My Gal Sal with Rita Hayworth, Wizard of Oz and plenty of other parts - great actor. John Brambury was also a Munchkin. Phillis Coates, who played Lois Lane in this movie, was without question wonderful in the part and George Reeves as Superman/Clark Kent WAS Superman. He did a great job of playing the strong man. Bottom line to all I've said is that this movie is worth watching because of the cast and writing in dealing with a pretty flimsy idea for a movie. But it was the 50's and anything was possible from intruders from outer space to mole men from inner space. It is definitely worth seeing, there isn't a bad actor in the group. Whomever put the cast together was very, very fortunate to get so many gifted actors into a B type film. Some already had a wealth of experience and some were about to obtain a wealth of experience - but all were gifted. So if you get a chance to see the film, forget the dopey costumes and just enjoy the excitement and acting. Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, just a good, old fashioned movie to enjoy!