SUPERMAN II Donner Cut: Has Arrived!!

[mrsbrody]

I don't think they were out to fool anyone with this product. What are they supposed to do, put "Beware-Not an actual film!" on the box? What's amazing is that even in this incomplete form and with an ending that makes no sense, Donner's version feels like a more complete movie than the Lester's.

[AndyDursin]

I don't think they were out to fool anyone with this product. What are they supposed to do, put "Beware-Not an actual film!" on the box? What's amazing is that even in this incomplete form and with an ending that makes no sense, Donner's version feels like a more complete movie than the Lester's.

The Donner cut is missing all of Lester's best scenes -- including the end where Superman returns to the White House, which concludes the movie on an emotional note that is totally absent from anything in Donner's version.

I find it curious -- what is it, in fact, that makes Donner's cut more "complete"? For me the very soul of SUPERMAN II is absent from Donner's cut, from the scene where Lois discovers Clark's true identity, to the whole opening in Paris, to the very end. It's a great curiosity but I could never recommend it in any circumstance as a "better" or more cohesive dramatic experience than the released film, in any way, shape or form.

To me the same fanboys who demanded this version are the same ones trying to defend it -- when as a "movie" (and you have to review it as such since it was marketed and produced to function that way) it's a mess.

[Carlson2005]

Although I haven't seen the Donner cut yet, I have to say I think Lester's version is a total mess that all too often looks like it's just been slapped together in a hurry. Custard pie gags just don't belong in superhero movies and there's a constant conflict between the story and the all-out comedy Lester clearly wants to make. It pretty much marks the end of Lester as a good and interesting director in the same way that North deep sixed Rob Reiner's career.

[AndyDursin]

Although I haven't seen the Donner cut yet, I have to say I think Lester's version is a total mess that all too often looks like it's just been slapped together in a hurry. Custard pie gags just don't belong in superhero movies and there's a constant conflict between the story and the all-out comedy Lester clearly wants to make. It pretty much marks the end of Lester as a good and interesting director in the same way that North deep sixed Rob Reiner's career.

Well we obviously agree to disagree there, but yet, how ironic is it that the scenes Donner shot of Lois finding out about Clark's identity are played for laughs and are MUCH more cartoonish in the "Donner Cut". Go back and see the Lester version and those moments are tender and more serious by comparison.

And speaking of being "slapped together," you haven't seen anything until hearing a guy who sounds nothing like Christopher Reeve dubbing one of his lines and have a screen test substituting for the film's biggest scene! Not to mention the all-out disaster of the film's ending.

[Eric Paddon]

Well I think in terms of "completeness", its the Brando scenes that matter most as far as the Donner cut is concerned and I do think the fight scenes in Metropolis play better and more seriously overall. I think the moment of identity revelation came off well given the limits of what they had, but Donner and Mankiewicz were always adamant that the scripted way they did the identity thing with Lois jumping out of the window and then firing a bullet at Clark, worked better from their standpoint and was something they felt strongly about so there was no way that was going to be left out if it could be worked in.

I won't argue on the ending. That was just wrong what they did, and the reasoning from Mankiewicz that Clark should never kiss Lois was lame. Neither of them realized the hornets nest they opened up plotwise, but from my standpoint if you tack on the Lester ending to the entire Donner cut beforehand, the movie works better overall.

[mrsbrody]

For me the soul of Superman 2 is very clearly in the new Brando scenes, so I really don't miss Lois Lane blurting out "I love you." That's something that's best left understated. Superman tripping and sticking his hand in the fire place (intentionally or not) is stupid and I much prefer the way it is in Donner's.

I always found the opening in Paris to take forever and be completely lacking in suspense. I can't believe they would bother to re-shoot that when the missile from the first film was such a clever way to tie the two films together. It's also amazing how much tighter the Time Square fight is.

Donner's is an unbelievable improvement even in this raw form. Again, it's not finished, but there's more than enough there to see the potential for what could have been.

I don't know if I'm "defending it as a movie," I'm just responding to what I see. I think the fanboys who are defending the Lester cut fell in love with something they saw when they were 8 years old and can't bear to see it altered in any way, even if it's to remove the parts that don't work and are terrible.

[AndyDursin]

I think the fanboys who are defending the Lester cut fell in love with something they saw when they were 8 years old and can't bear to see it altered in any way, even if it's to remove the parts that don't work and are terrible.

So everyone who reviewed the movie and praised it to no end in 1981 -- and who WEREN'T eight years old -- are now "fanboys"? That's a lot of critics there!

Obviously you are entitled to your opinion, but there is no question this Donner-Is-God movement (in spite of having made flops and/or reviled junk like THE TOY, RADIO FLYER, LADYHAWKE, TIMELINE, ASSASSINS, the last two LETHAL WEAPON movies and MAVERICK) started on the internet with "fanboys" -- particularly on the Home Theater Forum, with the hilarious, 5000 page thread that bashes Richard Lester and SUPERMAN II to the point where they convinced the world that Lester is the Anti-Christ.

I think the Donner Cut -- fascinating as it is to watch and as much as I like the Brando scenes -- speaks volumes for itself as a total failure as a movie, but the fanboys who spent years demanding it will see anything they want to see, apparently...

It's a curio, not a dramatic, functioning movie in any way shape or form. I can't even believe that you're arguing that it's a "Movie" in the traditional sense -- with its ridiculous-beyond-description re-use of the SUPERMAN THE MOVIE ending to the screen test in the middle of the film's biggest sequence. C'mon, I know you love Donner, but this thing is an abomination in terms of a cohesive FILM. It's not even a movie, and saying it's an "unbelievable improvement" is simply beyond all comprehension in my book.

[mrsbrody]

They had to make due with what they had. I honestly don't know what the label on the dvd should read. I'm fine with "The Richard Donner Cut." If Donner had finished the movie, there would not be test screen footage, there would be new music and Superman would not have turned back the world at the end, so I don't understand the point of continually harping on that. If I have to judge it as a movie because that's how they're selling it, then it's still a better movie than Lester's, even as a glorified rough-cut.

Growing up I didn't know that Donner was fired and I don't think I'm the rabid fan of his you're trying to poke fun at. I think he's made four excellent movies: Superman, The Omen and Lethal Weapon 1 and 2. It would have been five if he'd finished Superman 2.

Sincerely,
Mrs. Brody

[mkaroly]

I just watched both the original and Donner cut versions (finally)! I think everything has pretty much been said, but here's a couple of things I will say:

Whether you use it in I or II, the "turning back the world" thing has always left a sour taste in my mouth. I liked the "super kiss" (even though I don't understand how it wipes away someone's memory), and the ideas in the Donner cut were fine. I preferred the idea that the missile Superman sends into space was responsible for releasing Zod et. al. from their captivity. I also prefer a more "upbeat" and curious Lois Lane as opposed to the silly idiot she comes across as (to me) in the Lester film (focusing on the squeezed orange juice, her need to get the story in Paris, etc.). Donner's ideas are intersting but let's face it: despite what he says on the DVD (which is really kind of hostile) his version isn't THAT much better than Lester's realized cut. Two directors had two visions and Lester's is the one that got released.

Personally, if you take the best elements form each cut and assemble them together with the elements that "agree" between films, I think you would have a more complete, less "jumpy" "final cut". While I think the mother-son discussion int he Lester version is sweet, I think the father-son discussion also has its merits (despite Brando's typical dead-pan delivery). I think I slightly prefer the Brando stuff (being male and having a not-so-close relationship with my father or grandfather), but I could take either one.

I'm just amazed that Donner has held on to his hostility for so long. Still, quite interesting.

[Carlson2005]

For me the very soul of SUPERMAN II is absent from Donner's cut, from the scene where Lois discovers Clark's true identity, to the whole opening in Paris, to the very end. It's a great curiosity but I could never recommend it in any circumstance as a "better" or more cohesive dramatic experience than the released film, in any way, shape or form.

To me the same fanboys who demanded this version are the same ones trying to defend it -- when as a "movie" (and you have to review it as such since it was marketed and produced to function that way) it's a mess.

Well, having finally seen it today, I have to say I do think it's a vast improvement over Lester's cut, which I found completely lacking in soul - indeed, Lester's determination to turn the whole thing into a cheap custard pie comedy showed how little he cared for the material. As with SIII, where he had more of a free hand, he was more interested in an Adam West-style slapstick spoof than anything else.

Firstly, the reconstruction. Aside from the awkward 'Last week on Superman' opening which goes on forever, I don't think it looks bad at all - even the screen test is shot in full costume on a fully dressed set, and is more competent than many of Lester's scenes. The turning back the Earth is awkward and the effects reintegrating Brando aren't always as smooth as they might be, but I certainly wouldn't say it looks particularly unfinished: I think that's just your resentment at it losing the Lester scenes you liked showing (yep, I guess that makes you a Lester fanboy, Andy! ). If anything I found the editing much more disjointed in Lester's cut, where the additions were painfully noticeable - not just the different filmstock or change in tone but the fact that everyone suddenly looked so much older! Interesting too that you point out Reeve’s redubbing (which I didn’t notice) when the redubbing and doubling of Hackman and Beatty in Lester’s cut are so much more painfully obvious.

Although the film is now a lot tighter, the first half is still awkward - too much Gene Hackman, too little conquering the Earth (gee but the Pres rolls over easy: fry a few rednecks and knock over a single monument and he'll give you the keys to the planet). It still has too much of that atrocious audio manipulation of Terence Stamp's voice that makes him sound like a bad drag act as well. But once the second half hits its stride, it's a massive improvement. While the early Brando scenes are purely functional, his last scene is very powerful, and with all the infantile cutaways to badly-executed slapstick Lester added removed, the battle in Metropolis finally works and even takes on an apocalyptic dimension entirely absent in Lester’s isn’t-this-childish-crap-really? approach to the scene.

The end is a little disappointing, but still perhaps more convincing than the kiss ending. Most importantly the film finally has the soul that Lester chewed out and threw away. It still would have been a disappointing sequel had Donner been able to finish and tighten it, but compared to the piece of utter junk Lester delivered (and I really do think his version is an appallingly disjointed mess and was horrendously disappointed when it opened) it’s a much more satisfying number. I'm glad to see something finally approaching a decent film.

[Eric W.]

I still like Lester's better myself.

Seeing Donner's version was interesting for a one time "academic" excercise, to satisfy curiosity, but I couldn't care less if I ever see it again.

In a perfect world, I would take the best elements of both versions and have a top flight, objective, hard ass editor make it a unified, coherent piece.

[Carlson2005]

I think that could work, although I still think with that very slack first hour to SII, a composite cut of the two films around the four hour mark would be more satisfying and get rid of all the padding from the second.

[Eric W.]

I think that could work, although I still think with that very slack first hour to SII, a composite cut of the two films around the four hour mark would be more satisfying and get rid of all the padding from the second.

That would be an awesome setup. I'd buy that in a heartbeat.

[Bill Williams]

Well, after what seems to be a long time, I'm finally back on! Of course, there's lots to talk about, and much to catch up on, so one topic at a time, and the rest I'll just go with the flow...

I wanted to let you know that I posted my thoughts on the Donner Cut on CapedWonder.com. Granted, "Superman II" is not, and never will be, a perfect film, no thanks to the Salkinds. And there are elements of Lester's cut that I actually like that I'm glad made it to life (Clark changing to Superman in the alley, the start-up of the battle as Superman returns to Metropolis, Chris' line "General, would you care to step outside?", the sensitive handling of the big reveal, and the patriotic ending). On the other hand, Donner's version has a lot of great things going for it as well - the Brando scenes, among them. Of course, there's nothing that time or death or anyone can do to change what happened 30 years ago to give us a "complete" Donner version.

Granted, the whole thing with the reuse of the "turning back the world" ending was to conform the film to Mank's script, though it would have been interesting had Donner and Mank been allowed to create a new ending for II.

The one thing I disagree with Donner about is that throughout the commentaries he always refers to Lester as "the other director", and in the opening to the BTS feature he states to the effect of, "The rest of the film was taken over by another director, I forget who, though." (Sorry for getting the dialog wrong, but hey, when you don't have the DVD on hand at the moment, you go with what you can remember best! ) Of course Donner knows who it is! My question is, though he may have forgiven the Salkinds, has he forgiven Lester? It seems to me, based on his comments, that he hasn't, and that's a shame.

One reason why I think it was necessary to release the Donner Cut on its own and not as Disc 3 of the SII Special Edition has to do with marketing. Look at it this way - a few years ago we got Paul Schraeder's original cut of the "Exorcist" prequel as a follow-up to Renny Harlin's recut and refilmed version. Now we have the same with both versions of SII. It makes for interesting debates, as I've seen here, and we can agree to disagree, but whichever version you prefer, everyone has to agree it's an excellent study of problematic filmmaking at its best and worst.

[Carlson2005]

He says he forgot the name on purpose in the intro. Where Lester really earned his enmity (and Donner's generally one of the best-liked directors around) was in not telling him personally that he was taking over the picture, which was the done thing then (although less so now). Instead, after having had Lester on set for months assuring him he wasn't after his job but merely one of the uncredited producers (largely because by then Donner and the producers could barely stand to talk to each other, to be fair), Donner apparently learned that Lester had indeed taken his job when a reporter phoned him and asked him for a comment. Had Lester broken the news he'd possibly have been a bit more forgiving, even though it was hugely damaging for his career at the time, especially with the Salkinds blaming all of the cost overruns on him.