| Author |
Topic:
Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
JohnWesleyDowney
Registered:
Jan '04
|
Date Posted:
2/17 12:21am
Subject:
Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
- Date Edited:
2/17 12:35am (3 edits total)
Edited By:
JohnWesleyDowney
|
Well, at this point you may have seen it, because in 2006 Warner Brothers released the version that had never been seen before. Basically, it's the version of Superman II that director Richard Donner WANTED on screen to follow his first Superman film which released to great commercial and critical success in December 1978.
Fans familiar with the series are generally aware of the long and storied saga of the battle between director Donner and producers Alexander and Ilya Salkind who were the definitive version of slimey film producers extraordinaire. During the production, the filming expenses were astronomical for the times, one of the biggest budgets ever. The Salkinds were constantly pressuring Donner to make the most spectacular film ever, but constantly breathing down his neck over the cost overruns.
Part of the reason for the massive costs was that nobody had bothered to figure out (in the much the same way it never occured to the people that made Jaws that the shark would be a problem) how, given the technology of the time, to make an audience believe a man could fly. Particularly since some idiot had built the ad campaign around the slogan: YOU WILL BELIEVE A MAN CAN FLY. Talk about pressure on the director! So Donner had to spend a huge amount of his time, energy and the Salkind's money, using the best people of the time, to make the flying sequences work. You may disagree with whether he accomplished the goal, but you can't fault him for the staggering amount of effort that went into it.
Donner was hired to shoot two films, Superman I and II. And they were shot not back to back, but simultaneously, much as Peter Jackson shot the Lord of the Rings trilogy. For example, all of the Superman I scenes in the Daily Planet newsroom were shot, and they would continue on the same set to shoot all of the scenes in Superman II that were on that same set.
Part of Donner's challenge on the project was that Gene Hackman and Marlon Brando were already hired when he was signed to the project. He was immediately told, ok, we've hired Marlon Brando for ten days starting such and such date. Then he was told, we've hired Gene Hackman for X number of days and that starts on THIS date. So whether those scenes were ready, or the sets were built, or anything, he was up against the wall, the rest of the movie could wait. And to get ready on time for Brando and Hackman, THAT cost a lot of money in overtime and stuff to build sets and do various things. So the schedule obeyed the star's schedules instead of the movie's schedule. It was a gigantic logistical headache. And their contracts had stop dates, so he had to be completely finished with Brando and Hackman on time, or they'd have to be paid major penalty money.
After shooting all footage for Superman I and most of the footage for Superman II, Richard Donner was ordered to stop filming and complete the post-production work (editing, sound fx, film score etc.) so that Superman I could be finished in time to meet it's release date. He did so, and never worked on Superman II again. He hated the producers and the producers hated him.
The producers then hired Director Richard Lester (with whom they had worked on other projects.) Even though all of the scenes with Marlon Brando and Superman that occur in the Fortress of Solitude that were written for Superman II had been filmed by Donner, those scenes were scrapped! Why? Brando would have to be paid additional money, because II was a separate film release. Instead, Lester had to rewrite scenes with Superman's mother to take their place!!! (Marlon Brando's estate allowed his footage to be used in the 2006 Donner version, after lengthy negotiations.)
So we've completely established in I that Brando teaches Superkid in the spaceship on the way to Earth, and talks to him in the Fortress of Solitude, etc., but for budgetary reasons they hired Susannah York to reprise her role as the mother and do Brando's dialogue. Great continuity guys!
So the producers dump the actor of the ages, already established in I, to save a few bucks, even though his presence was important for the series. He gave it gravitas. (When Superman Returns director Bryan Singer found out about this footage still existed, he recommended, among others, to Warner Brothers that they resurrect the Donner version of II.)
So it was the Richard LESTER version of Superman II that was released back then, which was a patchwork of material shot by Donner and Lester. And while that film was fun, and successful, it was a crushing blow to Donner who had labored spectacularly on the project. For him, his version of Superman II was an orphan child, never to see the light of day. Or so he thought.
CUT TO: TWENTY FIVE YEARS LATER
Producer/Editor Michael Thau finds out that ALL of the material Donner directed for Superman II is still stored in the vaults of Technicolor London. Bryan Singer's Superman Returns is coming out, the studio is abuzz over the Superman character. Thau asks Warners for the money to attempt to recreate the version of Superman II that Donner had worked on all those years ago. Warners becomes quite enthused and for a very good reason. They can, for a comparatively small amount of money, release a film on DVD that is quite famous, has a fan base, has never been seen and best of all, has already been filmed!
As Thau points out, this is unique in film history. Never before has a major major picture, a BIG studio film, Superman II, had so much footage filmed and stored that was never released or seen the light of day. True, Lester's Superman II had been released, but it did not quite match up in continuity to Superman I the way Donner and his writer Tom Mankiewicz intended. Parts of what they had done were scrapped, altered and rewritten and definitely not in sync with the "tone" of Superman I.
So Warners approved the project and SIX TONS of film negative and audio recordings of Superman II were shipped from London to Los Angeles. A team of experts was hired to catalogue tens of thousands of pieces of film and audio so that the restoration process could occur. After they found EVERYTHING that had been shot all those years ago, they began work on fitting all the pieces together, and to the extent they reasonably could, get Superman II into good shape for a DVD release. Particularly awesome is Sir Geoffrey Unsworth's photography and John Barry's production design. Barry was also the production designer on the original Star Wars film, and he's the one that came up with the concept of Krypton as a crystal planet.
The technical challenges for the restoration were monumental. I'm completely amazed they were able to accomplish what they did.
The result: a good film and an interesting look back in time at what could have been. I don't want to oversell the film. Donner's version of Superman II is not the cinematic masterpiece of all time - not by any means. But it does very smoothly continue what he started in Superman I in a way that Lester's version does not.
If you're a Superman film fan, I'd recommend you rent the Donner version for fun. Lots of it is already familiar, but it is also different in many ways. I highly recommend you view the Richard Donner introduction and the documentary: Superman II: Restoring the Vision on the DVD. The audio commentary is interesting as well.
Here's how Donner insisted this version begin:
THIS PICTURE IS DEDICATED IN LOVING MEMORY TO CHRISTOPHER REEVE
If anyone has had the chance to see it, and compare it to Lester's Superman II, or to
view it after a viewing of Superman I, we can discuss this unusual movie.
-----signature-----
1234567890-=qwertyuiop[]\asdfghjkl;'zxcvbnm,./
Bigger, Longer, Uncut
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
solojones
Registered:
Sep '00
|
Date Posted:
2/17 12:45am
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
I'll have to get to this tomorrow because I'm going to bed, but I definitely want to read your comments and get into a discussion of this 
-sj loves kevin spacey
-----signature-----
6 x 9 = 42 Proud member of the Colbert Nation  Obi-Wan Kenobi and Obi-Wan Kenobi in Ghost Ship Executor All Hail Cliegg's Blue Leg!
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
wild_karrde
Registered:
Oct '99
|
Date Posted:
2/17 6:03am
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
|
Uh yeah, the Donner cut's been out for a couple of years now and most fans have already seen it ...
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Django211
Registered:
Mar '99
|
Date Posted:
2/17 7:27am
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
The Donner cut is strange to watch because you have to re-imagine the original Superman for this one to work. After Donner was fired the turning back of the world, which was supposed to be the end of part II, was used for part I. You have to forget about the ending of part I in order for the Donner cut to make sense. If I remember correctly the original end of part I was supposed to have Superman sending one of the nuclear bombs into space & the explosion is what releases the three from the phantom zone, making for a nice segue into part II.
The biggest improvement is the inclusion of Marlon Brando. The relationship of father & son is what drove the original. Now when Superman gives up his powers for Lois, he gets them back at a costly price. In the Lester cut there is no emotional weight to that choice. Superman gets his powers back offscreen. In Donner's, Jor-El once again sacrifices for his son, and the "father-son" line finally makes sense. There is a sense of power that the mother-son dynamic never had since it wasn't really alluded to in part I.
The Donner cut is an interesting attempt to show what might have been but not a complete success. It's a shame that the screen test was never actually filmed by Donner. You can see that Reeve & Kidder don't quite have their characters down yet, of course that's understandable since they weren't even sure they had the jobs at the time. I still like it better than the lousy Nigara Falls scene. Gone is a lot of Lester's campy bits that always felt out of place to me since it didn't match up to the same humor as the first film.
The DVD does a nice job of presenting the question "what if?"
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
severian28
Registered:
Apr '04
|
Date Posted:
2/17 10:52am
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
|
one of the three networks had the unrated cut or Donner cut or whatever its called, for years - minus the Brando stuff. its even more violent then the already violent film ( the scene with kid in the small town trying to get away on the horse was kinda shocking, i remember ). Superman II had a high body count for these types of films as it was.
-----signature-----
" Bring the sled " - Al Swearengen
" Dying all the time. Lose your dreams and you will lose your mind. Aint life unkind? " - The Rolling Stones
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
JohnWesleyDowney
Registered:
Jan '04
|
Date Posted:
2/17 2:08pm
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
I learned a lot from the DVD commentaries/extras features. For example, it's important that Clark Kent NEVER kiss Lois Lane. Only Superman can kiss Lois.
-----signature-----
1234567890-=qwertyuiop[]\asdfghjkl;'zxcvbnm,./
Bigger, Longer, Uncut
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Zaz
Title: Manager:
The Amphitheatre
Registered:
Oct '98
|
Date Posted:
2/27 8:35pm
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
|
So why is this? I like Clark Kent better.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
JohnWesleyDowney
Registered:
Jan '04
|
Date Posted:
2/27 10:00pm
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
- Date Edited:
2/27 10:22pm (4 edits total)
Edited By:
JohnWesleyDowney
|
Several reasons. Clark Kent is not who he is, Clark Kent is a character that Kal-el "plays" to blend in with earthlings. She's never in love with Clark Kent, she's in love with Superman. Superman, Kal-el, is his true identity, not the facade of Kent. She shouldn't be seen kissing a facade that holds very little attraction for her.
Richard Donner's right hand man on the Superman movies was Tom Mankiewicz. He's listed as "creative consultant" on the films, but he actually wrote the final screenplays for Superman I and II and was constantly at Donner's side throughout the production as a creative partner and adviser. Mankiewicz grew up in a Hollywood family, his father was director Joseph Mankiewicz, his uncle co-wrote Citizen Kane. Prior to Superman Mankiewicz had written three James Bond films and lots of other movies. He's sharp and he did a good job of familiarizing himself with the Superman mythos before his work on the movies. Donner didn't really use that much of the scripts that the producers had commissioned prior his joining the Superman project, but the other writers got credits anyway, I guess because they were paid so much money. I was impressed with Mankiewicz's in-depth understanding of the characters, what Superman should and should not do on screen, and with his overall insight into movie writing. He was invaluable to Donner.
As an aside, if you watch closely (this had to be pointed out to me) Christopher Reeve plays Superman playing Clark Kent BADLY, on purpose. Superman is the man of steel, not an actor. Reeve plays Superman playing his inept alter ego, Kent, ineptly, to great comedic effect. It's well thought out, but it had never occured to me. It's all reflected in Kent's body language, voice, etc.
-----signature-----
1234567890-=qwertyuiop[]\asdfghjkl;'zxcvbnm,./
Bigger, Longer, Uncut
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Django211
Registered:
Mar '99
|
Date Posted:
2/28 7:15am
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
According to the commentaries Christopher Reeve loved playing Clark Kent because it was an actor within an actor role. It wasn't until that was explained to him that the role finally clicked for him. He is intentionally bumbling as the "mild mannered reporter" because it is a facade. The Metropolis Clark Kent is a lot different than the Smallville Clark Kent. Lois has no interest in Clark and is often cruel to him on purpose, she even says she will be nicer to Clark after she knows his secret.
The commentaries are great and you can see how much Donner & Mankiewicz invested in the film. It's too bad that they didn't get a chance to continue the series. They said they had more stories lined up and eventually Mankiewicz would direct with Donner serving as producer.
That reminds me of the biggest problem for me with the Donner cut. I think Clark Kent's revenge scene should have occurred before he spins the world back. Since Superman altered time none of the events took place so he wasn't beaten up by the bully & the diner trashed. Now Superman beats up a man who did him wrong in an alternate timeline. If the scene takes place right before there is no conflict. Mankiewicz also didn't like the scene but Donner knew it would be a crowd pleaser.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
JohnWesleyDowney
Registered:
Jan '04
|
Date Posted:
2/28 12:57pm
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
That reminds me of the biggest problem for me with the Donner cut. I think Clark Kent's revenge scene should have occurred before he spins the world back. Since Superman altered time none of the events took place so he wasn't beaten up by the bully & the diner trashed. Now Superman beats up a man who did him wrong in an alternate timeline. If the scene takes place right before there is no conflict. Mankiewicz also didn't like the scene but Donner knew it would be a crowd pleaser.
You make an excellent point. When I watched the Donner cut, that didn't occur to me. But I love that scene, and I remember it got GREAT crowd reaction. That line "I've been working out" is just inherently funny. And of course Reeve HAD been working out to play the role which gives it another funny subtext. That brings me to the inclusion of the screen test within the Donner cut.
I understand why they used it since it was the only existing footage of that scene. And it's certainly a GREAT scene. But since it was clearly a screen test shot long before actual production and Christopher Reeve had not yet gotten in "super" shape for the film, he just looks ODD. He's so skinny, he looks like he's been ill! But his acting is superb and I guess that screen test (along with one other one, I believe), got him the gig.
-----signature-----
1234567890-=qwertyuiop[]\asdfghjkl;'zxcvbnm,./
Bigger, Longer, Uncut
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Princess_Tina
Registered:
May '01
|
Date Posted:
2/28 2:42pm
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
|
The Donner cut is a 1,000 times better. They should have never kicked him from his movie. The whole franchise started going down from the moment they got rid of him.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Palpateen
Registered:
Apr '00
|
Date Posted:
3/3 11:22pm
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
- Date Edited:
3/3 11:22pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Palpateen
|
I watched this and it was one of the weirdest movie experiences I've had. I remember the original Superman II version pretty well, I saw it a few times. But then to watch the same movie, sort of, with a lot of things the same, but major things quite different, such as the addition of Marlon frigging Brando, and a different ending, it was unique. definitely prefer the Donner version though. By far!
-----signature-----
"What's a dazzling urbanite like you doing in a rustic setting like this?"
-Gene Wilder in BLAZING SADDLES
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
JohnWesleyDowney
Registered:
Jan '04
|
Date Posted:
4/8 11:46pm
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
anyone else been able to watch the film and make the comparison?
-----signature-----
1234567890-=qwertyuiop[]\asdfghjkl;'zxcvbnm,./
Bigger, Longer, Uncut
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
JohnWesleyDowney
Registered:
Jan '04
|
Date Posted:
7/6 4:31pm
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
I'll try again...who's watched both versions and made the comparison?
I was inspired to up this thread, after the SEQUELS THAT SURPASS THE ORIGINALS thread
presented the idea that Superman II bested Superman I. That's an idea I find ludicrous.
-----signature-----
1234567890-=qwertyuiop[]\asdfghjkl;'zxcvbnm,./
Bigger, Longer, Uncut
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Zaz
Title: Manager:
The Amphitheatre
Registered:
Oct '98
|
Date Posted:
7/6 4:40pm
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
- Date Edited:
7/6 4:47pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Zaz
|
|
Donner's version of Superman II may well be better than Lester's, but frankly, I don't care enough to watch both. Superman I found to be a frankly rather clunky movie. I remember Superman II as being more entertaining, but it's been awhile since I've seen either. And...it's Superman, the squarest superhero ever. It's not as though Donner's a particularly good director, either, despite his posturing re this film. I haven't seen the new version starring whateverhisnameis, and I don't plan to.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
darthdrago
Registered:
Dec '03
|
Date Posted:
7/6 6:50pm
Subject:
RE: Superman II: The Version You've Never Seen
|
Seen 'em both, own 'em both.
While I should have written this in the other thread, I find 'I' to be the better film overall.
That said, I see plenty of merit in both version of 'II'. Having seen the long-discussed Donner edit finally get its release, I'm leaning toward saying his version is slightly better. The main strong point is the working Jor-El back into the film. I suspect that Donner never could have achieved this while Brando was still alive (how did Coppola do it with Apocalypse Now?).
Django already said it in the other thread, but the Donner ending for II is beyond awkward. It seems more appropriate for the first film, trying to turn back the clock on death and all. Simply reversing the Earth just to erase Lois' memory seems a little overblown. The hypnotic kiss works much better in that regard.
Lester's penchant for camp does show through though, and not in a good way. I was kind of hoping that the diner scene would get a makeover (I thought it was all Lester's idea), but nope. But the laughing in the phone booth... ugh. Ursa arm-wrestling with a local yokel... meh. 
I'll say one thing in Lester's favor: I really liked the ending with Superman returning the flag/ceiling to the White House, promising to be there when it counts next time. It's like Superman's having his "Spider Man moment", where he acknowledges that he's got greater responsibilities to all humanity. I guess this wasn't in Donner's original version.
So while I like them both, I do have to tip it in favor of Donner. The Donner version seems a bit more seamless next to his own work in 'I', hardly surprising when you think about it. But each version has its flaws. Given the time since then, I guess a "perfect" Superman II just wasn't gonna happen no matter whose name is on it.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
