comment #1

JWEgo says ...

Not only do you not know shit (Supermnan II is best Superman film EVAH) but you are determined to get yourself banned at other studios.

The film stars Terence Stamp.

I am Your Ego and I say STFU

comment #2

GeeseOPlenty says ...

Well, I like the film more than Jefrrey too--and c'mon, comparing it to Empire isn't playing fair; that was the gold standard for fantasy films at the time--but I'm still giving the re-edit a miss. When I heard that they were splicing scenes together using test footage, I concluded they were releasing the thing just to make a quick buck. It's just not worth it.

comment #3

Steve says ...

I watched the DONNER CUT the other night with a group of friends, and we all agreed that this version marks a significant improvement over the original. Not that that's too difficult; the Lester cut is pretty awful.

If you watch the two versions back-to-back, as we did, it's easy to pick out the literally hundreds of changes in the Donner Cut, large and small, that add up to a much tighter and more dramatically interesting movie.

SPOILERS follow...

Gone is the silly Eiffel Tower sequence at the beginning, and we see that it was actually one of Lex Luthor's reprogrammed missiles that frees the Kryptonian supervillains, thanks to Superman deflecting it into space. Gone is the goofy Niagara Falls Honeymoon Suite scene where Clark stumbles into the fireplace, leading Lois to realize that he's Superman (now Lois uses her simple powers of observation to figure out that Clark is Superman in practically the first scene after the credits!). Gone are dozens of lame jokes (like the Mount Rushmore gag where the villains zap their likenesses over the Presidents; now they just smash the Washington Monument on their way to a much more violent attack on the White House).

Restored to the film are several new bits with Gene Hackman, and three scenes with Marlon Brando (Jor El). Some of the chronology is changed as well; now Superman gives up his powers AFTER he sleeps with Lois, and Jor El gives him a really hard time about it (and he shoots Lois an absolutely withering look). When Clark returns to try to regain his powers, the price is a steep one: he will never again be able to see or communicate with his father again. It's as if he dies a second time. Those scenes actually have some power now. And the scene where Lois discovers that Clark is Superman, taken from the original screen test, is infinitely superior to the one in the final movie. Who the hell cares if the actors look a little different? Use your imagination, look at the INTENT of the scene, not the surface flaws.

Yes, many of the new visual effects are terrible, but you can only blame the tightfisted studio for that. Again, try to look at the INTENT.

That said, the last five minutes are a mess. But you must consider that Donner shot SUPERMAN and SUPERMAN II at the same time (not back-to-back, but simultaneously, until he was fired, and Hackman left with him). As I understand it, the turning-the-world-backward thing was always intended to end SUPERMAN II, not the first movie. Unfortunately, it just plain doesn't work. I wish they had just ended the film with the final "balcony" scene, where Lois promises to keep Superman's identity a secret.

Jeffrey, I think you are being WAY too hard on this movie. I get the sense that you're being dismissive because you simply don't like these kinds of films. SUPERMAN II has not aged well; it's really goofy and juvenile. But the DONNER CUT takes it from a "C" movie at best, and makes it a solid "B." It's watchable now, as more than just a guilty pleasure or a nostalgia trip.

comment #4

Ponderer says ...

While Jeff is hard on this sort of film, I think it's not fair to say he's bashing it because he doesn't like this sort of film. Jeff went way, way above and beyond in praising and defending Superman Returns.

The biggest issue here is that it's simply an unfinished film. The real Donner version would not have had the time-turning back conceit after it was lifted for Supes I, and a new ending was to be written later -- but huge chunks of the film that were to be filmed were simply never shot. This version of the film will never be more than totally hypothetical, even with this partial reconstruction.

Besides the missing footage, the other gaping hole is not having Stuart Baird on board (I'm assuming that's the case). I respect Michael Thau's instincts, but in the Superman: The Movie supplements, it's very clear that Donner and Baird fought each other every step of the way, to the benefit of the film. Even with the massively uncompleted state of this cut, a little massaging from a master craftsman could've contributed immensely towards a more polished feel.

Still, extremely curious to see it.

comment #5

jeffmcm says ...

Yeah, it's hard to take Wells seriously when he bashes yet another superhero movie when he clearly just doesn't care for the genre. I like the Lester version and think it's quite good as a popcorn film, most of the changes I'm reading about sound like bad ideas and flawed execution.

What does Invaders from Mars, a 53-year-old set-bound pulp sci-fi movie, have to do with this movie, a decades-younger big-studio production?

comment #6

The Movie Man says ...

I agree that Jeff either just plain loathes or doesn't get the majority of fantasy films, but I have to back him up here. Superman 2 has also been (even by the days standards) painfully stilted and amateurish and I think most people who love the film probably do so because they were at a certain age when they caught it. (I also nominate "The Goonies" for the bad movie that's revered because it hits kids at a certain age status.) Not that there's anything wrong with that. I love plenty of crappy movies for the same reason, but let's at least acknowledge that, with the exception of the first half of the first film, the Superman movies suck and I'm including Singer's attempt, which seemed to be trying to be Kramer vs. Kramer in a cape. At least the Donner and Lester movies more or less knew what they were.

comment #7

Larry says ...

I'll take Superman II over I. The first is all over the place, with every great moments followed by a weak one. The second (Lester's cut) is more of a piece, an action film with a solid romance at the core. Also, the humor is better.

comment #8

D.Z. says ...

MovieMan: "(I also nominate "The Goonies" for the bad movie that's revered because it hits kids at a certain age status.)"

I nominate Crybaby.

comment #9

breadlymoore says ...

I nominate THE SANDLOT

comment #10

Sean says ...

Superman II lives by moments like when Superman flies up and says "General, would you care to step outside." And it dies by moments like Superman beating up the guy in the diner.

The good moments are really good, but the bad moments are really bad.

comment #11

Sean says ...

PS: I nominate 'Dead Poets Society'.

comment #12

DarthCorleone says ...

I know all about Superman II's troubled history, and I'm interested in this Donner version if only because we've heard tales of this footage for years and years.

But - what can I say? - I love the Lester cut of Superman II.

comment #13

Dixon Steele says ...

The first SUPERMAN was a classic. Obviously, Bryan Singer thought so as S. Returns was an homage, remake, etc.

The second one was, well, a sequel, and like most, not as good. It was thoroughly decent and definitely had its moments, but still decidedly inferior to the original.

Hell, the new cut is all about Warners squeezing out what they can on the DVD, continuing the franchise revenue, etc.

But let's not pretend this is about restoring a film to its greatness. Because it never was great to begin with.

comment #14

D.Z. says ...

I'm just renting it for now. I'm sort of bored with that franchise, thanks to Superman Returns. There really needs to be more action in the sequel.

comment #15

Rich S. says ...

Since the DVD will not be "officially" released until tomorrow, I have not seen it. But according to the reviews I've read, a key part of the Donner version was restoration of the Brando scenes deleted from the Lester version because of a contract dispute. I believe that release of the Donner version, in addition to allowing Warner's another dip, was likely a bone thrown to Bryan Singer.

In the Donner version, as I understand it, the key relationship is between Superman and Jor-El. In the Donner version, as Jeffrey notes, Superman gives up his powers AFTER sleeping with Lois. The major sacrifice is that he is cutting ties with his father, since he clearly could have retained his powers to be with Lois. This reflects the father/son theme central to Singer's Return.

In the Lester version, on the other hand, it is clear that the central focus of Superman's sacrifice is the loss of his powers to be with the one he loves. Quite a difference, but now Singer's version ties directly into Superman II. And Donner was at some of the press conferences for Returns.

I'm glad they restored the part about Luthor's errant missile releasing the Phantom Zone criminals. I agree that Donner would have changed the ending had he been able to finish II, but it still seems silly and repetitive as it is. On the whole, not the "must have" disc that I had anticipated when announced.

comment #16

MathewM says ...

Maybe I'm in the minority but I always really enjoyed the "amnesia kiss" that Superman gives Lois at the end. It was a wonderfully acted scene especially by Kidder and had that whimsical quality that was lacking from Superman Returns. Anyway, Donner should of left that scene instead of the stupid decision to recycle the turning back time sequence.

comment #17

hatchetface says ...

D.Z: I nominate Crybaby.

Go to hell and DIE.

comment #18

Idlewild says ...

I am by no means an expert, but I believe the visible wires are actually a result of the dvd transfer- not something that needed to be "fixed".

By remastering the footage, they are actually changing the original color/lighting which negates the trickery which was used to create the effect back in the early 80's.

This is also a problem with the Superman III dvd. Everyone assumes it is just shoddy filmmaking, when in fact, the f/x crew did their jobs.

comment #19

Hopscotch says ...

I feel that movieman brings up a very good point that many of these remade movies are done by those who watched the originals at an impressionable age, and they refuse to admit that the movies don't age well. Next up on the list has got be Transformers. I watched the cartoons, the movies, and my parents bought me many, many of the toys. But who would gives a shit about a live action movie??

comment #20

MathewM says ...

It should be pretty easy to digitally erase wires regardless of the transfer. What they really should of done is digitally re-create the earthquake sequence from Superman. The dam bursting sequence looks like a model train set. Otherwise the flying sequences in the first one look pretty good to me. Some shots even look better than the CGI stuff in Superman Returns because you're physically looking at a real person "flying" even if there are wires attached. The bluescreen work is pretty bad though in Superman 2 especially during the air battle sequence.

comment #21

D.Z. says ...

Hopscotch: I don't feel the Transformers cartoon movie aged poorly, at least compared to many cartoon flicks of that era. The fact that Marky Mark sings one of the film's songs in Boogie Nights proves its legacy. But yeah, the Bay movie looks like it's gonna be another Robot Jox.

comment #22

Idlewild says ...

Yes, they should digitally erase the wires, but I'm not a big fan of "improving" things like model f/x or matte paintings. The older f/x techniques are part of the charm.

Not to mention, the digital work usually looks just as dated in a few years time anyway.

comment #23

JHLECHNER says ...

I know this is puerile, but I have to add a tidbit from David Michael Petrou's book "The Making of Superman." Petrou was the unit publicist on SUPERMAN and SUPERMAN II. When Richard Lester replaced Richard Donner, there was a period of overlap -- so Petrou proposed putting out a press release headlined, "Only Superman Has Two Dicks!"