Related
This is the Superman sequel that should have been, VASTLY superior to the ridiculous theatrical release.
I wo n’t be getting into much detail about the story which should be well sleep together in a 20 + year onetime film , but rather will boil down on what makes this novel version so much effective than the original .
If you ’re not conversant with the story behind the story , it ’s really quite fascinating . primitively Richard Donner was hired to shoot bothSupermanandSuperman IIsimultaneously , after which the footage would be edit into two separate movies . alas , what happened during the course of filming was that many departure start to manifest themselves between Donner and the producer , the Salkinds .
The mop up of this conflict was that although Richard Donner had filmed in all likelihood more than 80 % of the footage forSuperman II , the Salkinds decided to reasonably much firing him before pass completion of the subsequence and brought Richard Lester to film additional footage and make the film " his " .
I do n’t know how much of the incrimination should fall on Lester and how much should diminish on the Salkinds , but whoever you find fault the consequence was the same : a terrible rendition of Superman on the self-aggrandizing screen and a poor followup to the fantabulous first picture show .
Technically this is not 100 % " The Richard Donner Cut " , but it ’s as faithful as it ’ll ever get to that . Footage was meticulously tracked down , inventoried and clean up , and was then edited into as stuffy a version to what Donner had in mind as was possible . There were still Lester - directed scene that had to rest to hold back the menstruation , but for the most part this is the picture that Donner wanted done .
I ’m here to tell you that everything that was in the orginal version that had Superman fan scratch up their heads is go . There were things that were in the theatrical release that just did not make any sense and thank good they ’ve been removed . No longer do we have Kryptonians with levitating digit beams , outre Saran - wrap giant S - shield " nets " , or the magical power of Superman to wipe memory with a kiss .
In this version the three escapee from the Phantom Zone are actually more sinister and integral to the account rather of just acting as empty plot of land - devices for action sequences . Lois Lane also play tricks Clark into revealing that he is Superman in a much more effective scene than having him unintentionally put his hand in a fire .
On the down side , there is still almost all of the silly humor that was in the first Superman film and the orginal liberation ofSuperman II . On the one hand I institute it out of place since I do n’t recall much mood in the comic book version , but on the other hand my girl get a kick out of the funny scenes .
I do n’t tend to go back and listen to the commentary tracks on DVDs , but given the history I was very curious to listen what Donner and Tom Mankiewicz had to say . The commentary really reveal a luck of behind the scenes loss on and there was definitely a signified of acrimony , or at least sorrow that came across . Both Richard and Tom were pretty blunt and fair amazed ( disgusted ? ) at some of the decisions that were made regarding the theatrical vent . thing like cutting Marlon Brando out of the movie over money when the Jor - El character was so critical to the overall chronicle discharge . Also mentioned was the admirableness of studio apartment White House dumbfound their noses into the story , as it was their idea to have the " turn back time " sequence in the first picture show because it was their most amazing special upshot . Orginally this idea was to be used only at the remnant of Superman II .
In any case , this was by far a expert version than what add up out in flick theaters originally , and chip in a tantalizing vision of what might have been inSuperman IIIand IV rather of the steady sliding board into ridiculousness that those moving picture turned out to be .
