 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I hadn't seen the original 'Superman' film, since my video cassette days, so I got the Blu-ray from Netflix. Really enjoyed it all over again. THAT, was the extent of my Superman film knowledge, I didn't know there were sequels and never saw them. Netflix has TWO films that are 'the same film', (I think), but it's extremely confusing to me because of how they, (and the members who reviewed it), describe it. There is 'SUPERMAN II' 1980, 2hrs. 7min, that lists Richard Lester as the Director. Then there is 'SUPERMAN II' 1980, 1hr. 56mins- THE RICHARD DONNER CUT'.
Here's where it gets confusing to me. In the longer version, members claim that Director Donner was fired midway after filming 75% of the film, and Richard Lester replaced him, re-filming, and leaving only 25% of Donner's work in the film, and making 75% of the film 'his', and getting the screen credit for Directing. The Richard Donner Cut, is (according to the Netflix reviewers) retains the original 75% he completed, but makes 'little or no sense' with Director Lester's additions. (?) WHICH version please, is the one most people enjoyed? This is very confusing to me because 'The Richard Donner Cut' still lists Director Richard Lester as the Director! Granted, I should have seen this back in 1980, but I didn't. Oh, 'Superman II' (2hrs.7mins.) is regular DVD. 'The RICHARD DONNER CUT' (1hr. 56mins.) is Blu-ray, I don't know if that would make any difference in deciding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lester Cut: 6/10
Donner Cut: 5/10
In Donner's cut, the Battle of Metropolis is given less weight, similar line readings have far less pinache (they feel like first takes), Clark's reveal was too nonchalant, and Lois is a giant flaming dick. On the plus side, it helps to clearly explain how Clark got his powers back. If only that scene was in Lester's cut, I might give that 7/10.
I saw II in a theater in the waywayback and there was no Donner cut even then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
dp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jul 5, 2018 - 7:18 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
mastadge
(Member)
|
The theatrical version is an actual movie. It's tonally bizarre, with some really wtf moments, but it's a movie.
The Donner version is a glimpse at what could have been, but (1) he never completed his cut, and (2) when he was working on his cut, the ending they had planned was the ending that ended up being used for Superman: The Movie.
Had Donner completed Superman II, I think I would have liked it more than the Superman II that is. But he didn't. So if you're looking for an actual sequel to Superman, check out the theatrical, and if you're curious at what might have been, also check out the Donner cut.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The whole saga of how the Donner Cut came to be is fascinating and well worth the time to seek out and read.
Back when it was released I rented it and I thought it was interesting on its own merits, with the exception of the ending:
For reasons I am not very clear on, Donner wanted to use the plot device of turning back time by reversing the spin of the earth. I thought once was enough. So I was/am glad Lester tossed out that whole idea once it had been used in the 1st film. The idea of going along with a kiss that would wipe out parts of Lois's memory was daft in itself, but at least it wasn't just a hacky retread of the earlier time-trick.
Another aspect of the turning back time idea was that using it again would have created a huge flaw in the premise of what kind of a man Clark is:
If Superman did it, then he never would have been beaten up in the diner, therefore there would have been no reason to go back and teach the trucker "a lesson". But in Donner's version Clark still did it. This implies that Clark would seek revenge for something that never actually happened in the altered timeline. To me that is a pretty bad perversion of Clark's character. So even though Lester's version has cheesier humor in it, I'm happy that he made those changes and that it is the "official" one.
All things considered, though, I am happy that the Donner Cut is available. It gives people a choice.
The reason Donner used the plot device of turning back time by reversing the spin of the earth in SUPERMAN II was that it was not supposed to be the ending in SUPERMAN I. When Donner was set to no longer work on SUPERMAN II, he took and altered the ending from SUPERMAN II for SUPERMAN I. That is the reason why it feels strange that the ending is almost the same in both movies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jul 11, 2018 - 12:05 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Cmdr. Bond
(Member)
|
When we finally got to see "The Donner Cut," I was amazed by how much better I thought that "The Lester Cut" was. In particular, I was amazed by how much better the Fortress of Solitude scenes were with Susannah York than they were with Brando. Unlike the interplay between Reeve and Brando in the first film, the interplay in the sequel was talky and philosophically inept. Furthermore, I loved how, in the Lester version, we didn't see how Superman got his powers back. The powerful imagery of the green crystal, accompanied by the swelling score, was worth far more than a clunkier, belabored alternative.
All of the foregoing thoughts notwithstanding, Superman: The Movie is a far better picture than either version of the sequel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I practically worship the first, but I really like the second...both of them. That's why I have all of them. Even Superman 3 wasn't completely awful imo (I'd watch that before I ever watched Batman vs Superman again).
|
|
|
|
|
|
I practically worship the first, but I really like the second...both of them. That's why I have all of them. Even Superman 3 wasn't completely awful imo (I'd watch that before I ever watched Batman vs Superman again).
Actually, I'm up to watch Batman v Superman in the director's cut (which is supposed to be better). I saw the movie in the theater and liked some parts about it, others I disliked. But in retrospect, I admit it is growing on me. So I'm gonna watch it again some day.
The film may have had its flaws, but Ben Affleck as Batman was excellent (it was the kind of ultra-grim Frank Miller Batman), and I am actually starting to appreciate Man of Steel more now that some time has passed. It is was definitely the first movie that convincingly put on screen the power of Superman.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I practically worship the first, but I really like the second...both of them. That's why I have all of them. Even Superman 3 wasn't completely awful imo (I'd watch that before I ever watched Batman vs Superman again).
Actually, I'm up to watch Batman v Superman in the director's cut (which is supposed to be better). I saw the movie in the theater and liked some parts about it, others I disliked. But in retrospect, I admit it is growing on me. So I'm gonna watch it again some day.
The film may have had its flaws, but Ben Affleck as Batman was excellent (it was the kind of ultra-grim Frank Miller Batman), and I am actually starting to appreciate Man of Steel more now that some time has passed. It is was definitely the first movie that convincingly put on screen the power of Superman.
If you liked the original B vs S, then you'll probably like the Director's. I just thought it was a huge disappointment after one of my favorite movies, Man of Steel. Justice League was better than BS, but mostly for the man of steel (plus, a fun cameo by a Green Lantern!).
I far prefer West and Bale to Affleck, but I have a distaste for the latter actor in general, not a fan. Just me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I far prefer West and Bale to Affleck, but I have a distaste for the latter actor in general, not a fan. Just me.
Affleck was terrific as Batman. I consider the Nolan Batman trilogy the first time anybody ever nailed the Batman character right, but Affleck's even darker turn on the already dark knight was something that I really enjoyed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I far prefer West and Bale to Affleck, but I have a distaste for the latter actor in general, not a fan. Just me.
Affleck was terrific as Batman. I consider the Nolan Batman trilogy the first time anybody ever nailed the Batman character right, but Affleck's even darker turn on the already dark knight was something that I really enjoyed.
I respect your opinion completely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
