New Superman DVDs: good news and bad news [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : New Superman DVDs: good news and bad news



Woochifer
11-28-2006, 03:54 PM
Picked up the new Superman Ultimate Collector's Edition DVD set today. I will say that it's quite a hefty package with a total of 14 discs, including the theatrical cuts for all five Superman movies, plus the previously released "director's cut" of the first movie and most importantly, the new Richard Donner cut of Superman II. It also includes the bonus features discs for I, II, and Superman Returns, two documentary features, and Bryan Singer's journal entries for Superman Returns. And the metal tin that houses the whole collection is really cool. Needless to say, it will take quite a while to mine through all the features that come with this set!

Given the many flaws with Warner's 2001 Superman DVD releases (lower res 384k DD track on Superman The Movie; 2.0 audio tracks on II, III, and IV; no supplementals on II, III, and IV; snapper cases on all; etc.), I hoped that this new set corrected them in much the same way that last year's excellent Batman movie collection corrected the problems with the earlier editions while setting a new standard for boxed sets IMO. While the new Superman DVD release definitely improves upon the original releases, they fall somewhat short of what the Batman set delivered.

Keep in mind that I have not played these discs on my home system yet. I've only pulled the media tag information from the discs to see the video and audio bitrates.

So far, here's the initial rundown from what I've seen so far.

The Sublime
- The long-awaited Richard Donner cut of Superman II finally gets an audience

The Good
- Theatrical cut of Superman The Movie finally makes it to DVD
- 5.1 audio finally available on DVD for II, III, and IV
- 448k Dolby Digital resolution on Superman The Movie (theatrical cut only) and II, III, IV, and Superman Returns
- classic Max Fleischer Superman cartoons included with four-disc Superman The Movie DVD set
- brand new documentary that spans the entire Superman movie saga (looks similar to last year's Shadows of the Bat documentary, except that it's on a separate disc, rather than spanned across multiple DVD sets like it was with the Batman edition)
- includes the A&E documentary on the story of Superman (narrated by Kevin Spacey)
- very reasonable price for Ultimate Collector's Edition set (got mine for $65)

The Bad
- 2000 "director's cut" of Superman The Movie recycles the same 384k DD tracks used in the original DVD release
- no DTS tracks
- packaging on Ultimate Collector's Edition does not include separate cases for each movie (it's all thrown together into a somewhat flimsy page-fold case)

The Inexcusable
- MAJOR errors on two of the discs included in the Ultimate Collector's Edition -- 1) 2.0 theatrical soundtrack not included on Superman The Movie (the original theatrical cut), and 2) previous Superman III DVD rather than the new edition is included by mistake.

Warner has already announced a disc exchange program for the defective discs. (From The Digital Bits (http://www.thedigitalbits.com/))

Bonus content was omitted from the Superman III Deluxe Edition in the 14-disc Superman Ultimate Collector's Edition. Furthermore, disc one of Superman: The Movie Four Disc Special Edition did not include the Dolby Digital 2.0 mix. Neither disc is known to be physically defective in any way.

Warner Home Video wants to extend apologies to all of our loyal Superman fans who've waited so patiently for these great collections and has taken immediate steps to correct these errors with the intention of standing behind our product 100%.

Replacement discs can be obtained by calling: 800-553-6937. The exchange program applies only to purchases of the Superman III Deluxe Edition in the Superman Ultimate Collector's Edition and to disc one of Superman: The Movie Four Disc Special Edition, available as a single title, as well as in The Christopher Reeve Superman Collection and in the Superman Ultimate Collector's Edition.

icarus
11-28-2006, 06:47 PM
wow...what did you end up paying for the superman ulitmate collectors edition???

ericl
11-28-2006, 06:50 PM
cool, what do you think of the Richard Donner version of Superman 2? Is it much different? better? Don't give too much away. I wonder if this will be availabe on Netflix. I'd like to check it out without buying the whole shebang.

markw
11-28-2006, 07:24 PM
I could easily do without the last two of the four movies. The first two were, IMNSHO, excellent but the last two were simply exploitative, contrived and degraded the series. I truly believe that those last two killed the franchise, sort of like what happened to the Batman franchise after the first two movies.

I mean, c'mon. Richard Pryor mugging his way through the movie and Richard Vaughn playing Napoleon Solo gone to the dark side??? And, what's with #4? Superman vs. the Atomic Avenger"

If they reissue this with just the first two, then perhaps I'll buy into it but those last two are a waste of time, effort and $$, IMNSHO.

L.J.
11-28-2006, 07:24 PM
Cool Wooch, thanks for the detailed info. I picked it up today also but didn't bother opening yet.

Defshep
11-29-2006, 02:23 AM
cool, what do you think of the Richard Donner version of Superman 2? Is it much different? better? Don't give too much away. I wonder if this will be availabe on Netflix. I'd like to check it out without buying the whole shebang.

I've enjoyed what I've seen so far. Watched about half of it. I'm probably speaking from a fanboy point of view, but it's better than the Lester version, imo. I never considered Superman II to be a bad movie, just inferior to Superman: The Movie. Well, it still is. But the added scenes are truly effective. Don't listen to some of the negative reviews slamming the use of poor cgi and obvious hairstyle changes by Chris Reeve. There was some screen test footage used, which is brilliantly put together in a warm scene between Lois and Clark. It's true, they had great chemistry, but Donner really brought out the best in both actors. The documentary included on the search for and restoration of old film footage is short, but fascinating. The editor explains that the sfx touch ups were not meant to be as state of the art as modern film, but to fit in to the time period in which the film was released. Donner is obviously still pissed about how things went down with the Salkinds, and he won't even mention Lester's name. It's a little childish to carry that baggage all these years, but understandable. I know that the ending is recycled from the first, but I'm sure you've heard that by now. The doc also explains why. I can't wait to sit down and enjoy the whole thing!
The audio is quite good, and my subwoofer got to flex a little. I only bought S2: The Donner Cut, as I have the previous editions of all four films. Hope this helped, Eric.

Woochifer
11-29-2006, 09:54 AM
wow...what did you end up paying for the superman ulitmate collectors edition???

I paid $65 at Fry's Electronics. Best Buy has the set for $70. I've seen it online for $60.


cool, what do you think of the Richard Donner version of Superman 2? Is it much different? better? Don't give too much away. I wonder if this will be availabe on Netflix. I'd like to check it out without buying the whole shebang.

After watching it last night and the first half of the Richard Lester theatrical version, I have to say that the Donner version is a definite improvement overall. A lot of the scenes are almost identical between the two versions, but different takes were used. The most significant change (and IMO improvement) is the additional scenes with Marlon Brando. They add a lot of weight and impact to Superman's decision to become a mortal.

The Donner is not nearly as polished as the Lester version, for obvious reasons. The visual effects are not as polished, and you have some lapses in continuity because Donner still had about 25% of the film left to finish when he was fired. But, a lot of the storyline makes more sense with the new footage.

Other big changes:
- new beginning and new ending
- more of the original John Williams cues
- new opening montage (looks like cheap CGI work, rather than the original opticals)


I could easily do without the last two of the four movies. The first two were, IMNSHO, excellent but the last two were simply exploitative, contrived and degraded the series. I truly believe that those last two killed the franchise, sort of like what happened to the Batman franchise after the first two movies.

I mean, c'mon. Richard Pryor mugging his way through the movie and Richard Vaughn playing Napoleon Solo gone to the dark side??? And, what's with #4? Superman vs. the Atomic Avenger"

If they reissue this with just the first two, then perhaps I'll buy into it but those last two are a waste of time, effort and $$, IMNSHO.

Actually, if you tally up the costs for the individual discs, the collector's boxed set is a pretty good bargain, even if III and IV indeed stink up the joint! I bought the set for $65, while the cost for the new versions of Superman The Movie ($25), Superman II ($17), and Superman II: The Donner Cut ($17) alone total $59. Plus, the set includes the two-disc Superman Returns, which was selling for $22. Throw in a couple of documentaries and some classic Warner Bros. cartoons, and I'm willing to overlook the inclusion of III and IV!

L.J.
11-29-2006, 10:14 AM
Wooch do you have any addtional info on the exchange process? Is it pretty straight foward?

I've been callin' but I keep getting busy signals.

Woochifer
11-29-2006, 12:36 PM
Wooch do you have any addtional info on the exchange process? Is it pretty straight foward?

I've been callin' but I keep getting busy signals.

My understanding is that Warner does not have the exchange program set up yet. They were alerted to these problems by some of the early DVD reviews and got the phone number up and running before the DVDs got released. For now, that phone number will supposedly just take down your information, and they'll contact you later on with further instructions.

Leaving out the Dolby Surround 2.0 track on the theatrical version of Superman The Movie is not a major screw up, since most people play the 5.1 track by default, regardless of whether or not their system does a two-channel mixdown. Plus, the DVD set includes the director's cut, which also has a 2.0 track available. But, some people do prefer the 2.0 track, since that was the original theatrical version (except for the 70mm screenings) and not reworked like the 5.1 track was.

But, transferring the wrong version of Superman III for the collector's set is a big-time foul up. I mean, just insert the disc and it's apparent that you got the old 2001 DVD by looking at the menu.

I remember when Universal screwed up the aspect ratio framing on the Back To The Future trilogy DVD set, that exchange program entailed contacting Universal first. Then they would send you a return authorization and a disc mailer. Once they received the defective discs, they would send you the corrected DVDs.

Now if only Lucasfilm would do the same for the screwed up Star Wars DVD with the flipped soundtrack in the surround channels! :incazzato:

L.J.
11-29-2006, 01:08 PM
My understanding is that Warner does not have the exchange program set up yet. They were alerted to these problems by some of the early DVD reviews and got the phone number up and running before the DVDs got released. For now, that phone number will supposedly just take down your information, and they'll contact you later on with further instructions.

Leaving out the Dolby Surround 2.0 track on the theatrical version of Superman The Movie is not a major screw up, since most people play the 5.1 track by default, regardless of whether or not their system does a two-channel mixdown. Plus, the DVD set includes the director's cut, which also has a 2.0 track available. But, some people do prefer the 2.0 track, since that was the original theatrical version (except for the 70mm screenings) and not reworked like the 5.1 track was.

But, transferring the wrong version of Superman III for the collector's set is a big-time foul up. I mean, just insert the disc and it's apparent that you got the old 2001 DVD by looking at the menu.

I remember when Universal screwed up the aspect ratio framing on the Back To The Future trilogy DVD set, that exchange program entailed contacting Universal first. Then they would send you a return authorization and a disc mailer. Once they received the defective discs, they would send you the corrected DVDs.

Now if only Lucasfilm would do the same for the screwed up Star Wars DVD with the flipped soundtrack in the surround channels! :incazzato:

Thanks Wooch. I'm still wondering if I even want to bother with the exchange. Do you know whats the diff between the 2001 and 2006 versions of Superman III? I do not own the previous version.

Woochifer
11-29-2006, 05:39 PM
Thanks Wooch. I'm still wondering if I even want to bother with the exchange. Do you know whats the diff between the 2001 and 2006 versions of Superman III? I do not own the previous version.

The 2001 DVD release was a movie-only release with a 2.0 Dolby Surround soundtrack (only supplemental feature is the theatrical trailer). The new release adds 5.1 DD, a new commentary track, and a making-of TV special.

I purposely avoided the DVDs for Superman II, III, and IV because they were all similarly stripped down with no extras or 5.1 audio. With Superman II and III, this was inexcusable IMO because both of those films had 70mm six-track theatrical releases, so a 5.1 master already existed somewhere in Warner's archives. Yet, the studio chose not to do the transfer. Superman The Movie was the only Reeve movie to get an audio restoration and new 5.1 mix.

L.J.
11-30-2006, 08:29 AM
The 2001 DVD release was a movie-only release with a 2.0 Dolby Surround soundtrack (only supplemental feature is the theatrical trailer). The new release adds 5.1 DD, a new commentary track, and a making-of TV special.

I purposely avoided the DVDs for Superman II, III, and IV because they were all similarly stripped down with no extras or 5.1 audio. With Superman II and III, this was inexcusable IMO because both of those films had 70mm six-track theatrical releases, so a 5.1 master already existed somewhere in Warner's archives. Yet, the studio chose not to do the transfer. Superman The Movie was the only Reeve movie to get an audio restoration and new 5.1 mix.

Thanks Wooch. I called this morning and gave a CSR my info. She said a envelope will be sent to me and after they receive the bad discs the replacements will be sent out. I'm not too happy about that approach. I'm only sending in Superman III for replacement.

L.J.
12-01-2006, 09:06 AM
Latest announcement at Digital Bits says new version should be in stores in about 2-3 weeks. I never opened mine in hopes of this so I'm just gonna wait and pick up the corrected set. I never really liked the idea of shipping out the old and having to wait for the corrected copies. I'm still waiting for the Click I ordered from Columbia House months ago. Should have been delivered on 10/14 but never showed up.

RGA
12-01-2006, 09:23 AM
Okay I just downloaded Superman II the Donner Cut and to be frank I have mixed feelings about his vision and the initial release. Overall I think the original release is better.

The good in the new version:

1) More background provided with father and son - all of this was an improvement
2) The removal of a scene (which may have only been on the TV release - where Ursa throws the police light and kills the kid. Unecessary violence for such a film.
3) taking out the dumb scene of putting the flag on the White House.

Mixed feelings on.

The scene in Paris with the terrorists -- This part was always problematic but the replacement scene is not exactly great.


The Bad.

Okay Donner took out much of the levity which is problematic in my view. Lois discovers Clark is Superman during the fireplace scene (after clark saves her in the river) -- this was FAR better than the two separated scenes falling out the window and then the stilted conversation to shooting him with a blank. That was truly painful to watch.

Several scenes involving our three baddies where the big guy can't manage the heat from the eye's thing or throw away lines from Lex like "when will these guys learn to use the door. The showdown near the end was taken out which left this anti-climactic.

I also much prefered the version of Lois knowing Superman's identity and not feeling able to say anything and Superman using a super kiss to wipe her memory. It simply was more touching. Yes it had problems but the replacement scene is what follows:

The Ugly: SPOILER FOLLOWS

The idiotic ending of Superman spinning aorund the planet AGAIN and turning back time so lois does not remember -- what a cheesey cop-out ending. That lame duck device was used int he first film which is one huge reason Superman II was always the better movie -- and to see it here again is such a brain dead device. oooh so now Zod is alive again to presumably come back in a later movie?

Superman II directed by Lester ****/*****
Superman II directed by Donner **/*****

I like Donner -- but umm for once the firing was completely deserved.

Woochifer
12-01-2006, 05:28 PM
Okay I just downloaded Superman II the Donner Cut and to be frank I have mixed feelings about his vision and the initial release. Overall I think the original release is better.

Cannot disagree with you more. My take on the Lester version of Superman II is that it did not wear well with repeat viewings, whereas Superman The Movie has held up much better over time. The Donner cut is a more representative continuation of the first movie, even with its rough edges.

The thing to keep in mind with the Donner Cut is that it is more of a rough cut than a finished product. But, overall I think that Donner's vision for Superman II is much more in line with the Superman mythology, and doesn't include a lot of the more farcical elements that Lester included in the theatrical version. I like that the three super villians are more menacing, and that Lex Luthor is somewhat less of a buffoon serving as comic relief window dressing.

For me, the Marlon Brando/Jor-El footage alone greatly improved the movie. It lent a lot more gravity to Superman's decision to become a mortal, and connected him a lot closer to the father figure. The restoration of his powers was also a much more powerful scene with Jor-El present. Your reaction to the time reversal ending is the same reaction that I have to cutting Brando (or the Jor-El character in general) out of the theatrical version.


Several scenes involving our three baddies where the big guy can't manage the heat from the eye's thing or throw away lines from Lex like "when will these guys learn to use the door. The showdown near the end was taken out which left this anti-climactic.

If you're referring to the Fortress of Solitude scene, much of that showdown was taken out because it was ridiculous to most hardcore Superman fans. For years, fans had been complaining about Lester's ad hoc introduction of new super powers like the levitating finger ray, the disappearing/reappearing powers, the multiplying powers, the super cellophane wrap, etc. That showed disrespect to the entire continuity of the Superman storyline, and didn't add much to the climax to begin with.


The Ugly: SPOILER FOLLOWS

The idiotic ending of Superman spinning aorund the planet AGAIN and turning back time so lois does not remember -- what a cheesey cop-out ending. That lame duck device was used int he first film which is one huge reason Superman II was always the better movie -- and to see it here again is such a brain dead device. oooh so now Zod is alive again to presumably come back in a later movie?

I will agree with you that I don't like the time reversal motif, but this time for sure, just downloading the movie is doing you a huge disservice simply because you don't know the backstory behind the new version as told through the documentary feature and commentary track. The time reversal was the originally intended ending for the SECOND movie, NOT the first. Because they needed to rush Superman The Movie into theaters, they decided to use that ending, and write a new ending when they got back to finish production on Superman II. The Donner cut is not reusing the ending from the first movie, it's actually using the originally written ending from the original script treatment. I'm sure that Donner would prefer to have written and filmed a different ending, but refilming for this project was not an option for obvious reasons.

My primary complaint about the Donner cut ending is that they left the truck stop diner payback scene intact. In the context of the time reversal scene, Clark getting back at the trucker and the accompanying dialog makes absolutely no sense.

And while I don't like the time reversal ending, the "magic kiss" ending IMO is much worse. It made me gag the first time I saw it, and it just got worse with repeated viewings. The time reversal scene from the first movie always felt appropriate, even though I do wish that something better could have been written.


I like Donner -- but umm for once the firing was completely deserved.

I think you're being ridiculous here. Donner never had an opportunity to finish the movie! Some of the scenes that you're nitpicking are taken from Christopher Reeve and Margot Kidder's SCREEN TESTS, which are nothing more than audition films! These were obviously intended to be refilmed later on, but even as is, I think it captures the Lois/Clark dynamic a lot better than Lester's Niagara scenes did. Absent finished footage, the editors took what they had available.

IMO, it's miraculous that they actually pieced together a complete movie in the first place. The early rumors were that the Donner cut might have to use storyboard images and voiceovers to bridge some scenes. Another early rumored plan was to simply collect the Donner scenes together and include them with the bonus disc.

Also, keep in mind that most of what ended up in Richard Lester's theatrical cut was taken from Donner's footage or simply refilmed scenes that Donner had already finished. The refilming was done SOLELY to wipe Donner's name off the credits. To say he was deservedly fired, when much of the footage from the theatrical version of Superman II was either directed by Donner or refilmed almost verbatim, is short-sighted at best.

If you want to see Richard Lester's vision for the Superman series, look no further than Superman III. You want levity? That movies got levity, and then more levity for levity's sake! That project was Lester's from the get-go, and the less-than-stellar results speak for themselves.

RGA
12-01-2006, 07:56 PM
The should coulda woulda line does not sit well with me. I can only go by the film presented and what a director is saying in a documentary has ZERO pull with me when it comes to what is on screen. If it sucks then leave it the hell out of the movie -- and tell me later about intent.

I already said I liked the Jor-el scenes in the fortress of solitude -- I would have simply kept all of those scenes and put them in the Lester movie. I would love to be able to use some video software and make my own version of this film.If we're going to quible over newly invented powers (which were said to be boyhood games) then what about turning back time by spnning around the earth? And yes the plot logic in the Donner film with the guy in the diner is also silly.

Now the problem is that you want the levity taken out because Lex is cartoonish but that was already established in the first film with his choice in bumbling assistants. It is very much kept in place in part II. So if we're already down that line it may as well continue.

The menacing trio in the Donner cut are on screen less. The scenes involving their initial town appearance was greatly reduced and their evil natures cut. Now I would gladly part with the Paris Terrorist scene to make time for the Jor-el scenes and I could lose the lengthy town scenes.

I am still not convinced that having the scenes of Superman fighting the trio with his schoolboy games is so bad since presumably the multiplicity powers only work with the crytal light tricks in the fortress of solitude. I could live without the cellophane though.

I don't mind the initial Lois figuring out that Clark is Superman from the picture but I find it to be unconvincing in the worl of Superman. WHY? Firstly because the disguis is so terrible -- Clark so obviously looks like Superman and part of the deal with this character is that you should NEVER figure out that he is Superman from looking at him or pictures of him.

The Niagra scene works so much better because Lois infers through a series of convenient happenstances that gee when Superman is around Clark is never around. There is a bit of the visual when the glasses come off.

I also think the hand in the fire versus a bullit in the chest is better. He hides his hand but is found out. The blank? Superman could not feel the bullit at all? Or see it with his super eyes that nothing cam out, or hear it with his super hearing bounce of his steel chest? Bah the scene might have been better but it needed a whole series of re-writing.

I'd like to see another cut -- keep the Paris Terrorists in because hey we live in the time where that is still relevant, then keep the Niagra scenes in, keep all of the Jor-El stuff in that actually retains much of the story. Keep the Trimmed down stuff that Donner did in the big Metroplos fight scene (The Lester version dragged). Keep the trimmed down inital town scene but keep the longer cut with the two cops and the big dumb baddies bits with his lack of heat ray vision and his fascination with shiny lights. It's funny but more importantly it shows that brains win over braun and leads up to the finale better.

Keep the levitation power in - really why not -- I don't care either way so if the fanboys don't want it then dump it but it worked for me when he had the kid's dad in the air and drops him. I don;t care though either way and seeing as how it is not vital then dropping it is fine by me. The cellophane thing should be dumped but the multiplicity if it is explained as being only a trick of the light in the fortress of solitude is also more than fine. The beams they fire at superman from the finger -- well pehaps it should have been heat ray vision -- three versus one instead of a mysterious beam. I don't think either version really works.

The time thing whether or not it was due to filming contraints was bad -- it is a bad idea even one time which is why I said I liked part II over part I (at least part of the reason). Part I could ave been a LOT better than it was as well but that ending was hoaky -- though at least Jor El has an explanation or warning. The Donner film sorry has to follow what the first film did and it IS doing the same ending twice. The Lester cut makes more sense logically because only ONE person (LOIS) loses her memory. Changing back the entire world's time basically means there was absolutely no point to watching the whole film because nothing happened.

You're right I probably should not blame Donner because we never got to see the whole construction the way he saw it for part one and two. That said as the two films currently sit I prefer the one that got released originally. Though yes I wish theyput in the Jor-El scenes. Perhaps they were targettig more for the kids and felt the talking bits would be too slow for kids to hang in with so they extended the specia effects scenes in the town more. Bad choice but that is film industry editiing for you. Lester no doubt would have been forced to tow the line.

Part 3 was utter crap but it was bad writing (*1/2/*****), casting and premise that hurt that film. Part IV is possibly one of the 10 worst films I saw that decade along with Supergirl.

Woochifer
12-01-2006, 10:56 PM
The should coulda woulda line does not sit well with me. I can only go by the film presented and what a director is saying in a documentary has ZERO pull with me when it comes to what is on screen. If it sucks then leave it the hell out of the movie -- and tell me later about intent.

And the point that you're missing is that the Donner cut is a rather unusual and unique film by virtue of the fact that it even exists in the first place. Aside from the recent Exorcist prequel, I can't think of another situation where two directors basically put together two different interpretations of the same movie. The difference here is that Donner had already filmed the majority of the movie, and had much of it excised just because the director wanted full credit and the producers were too cheap to finish the movie properly (i.e., with Marlon Brando's scenes intact, with Gene Hackman available for the pick-ups during post-production, with John Williams and a full orchestra on board, etc.). This cut basically allows the audience to see much of what could have been in the context of an actual running movie, even though 25% of the original scenes were never filmed. Trying to judge a film of this kind without any consideration of the context is totally missing the point.

It would be like nitpicking the vintage Doctor Who adventures that were reassembled from newly discovered archival footage. Many of them still have missing scenes, but they are very much worth watching.


I already said I liked the Jor-el scenes in the fortress of solitude -- I would have simply kept all of those scenes and put them in the Lester movie. I would love to be able to use some video software and make my own version of this film.If we're going to quible over newly invented powers (which were said to be boyhood games) then what about turning back time by spnning around the earth? And yes the plot logic in the Donner film with the guy in the diner is also silly.

Part of the reason why Donner got fired was because he insisted that the Salkinds use the Brando footage, even though it would have cost more money.

There have already been amateur "Donner cuts" of Superman II floating around the net, assembled together from additional footage that originally aired on TV broadcasts (several different edits of the first two movies have aired on network TV).

Like I said, I never liked the time reversal motif, so you're preaching to the choir here.


Now the problem is that you want the levity taken out because Lex is cartoonish but that was already established in the first film with his choice in bumbling assistants. It is very much kept in place in part II. So if we're already down that line it may as well continue.

Total disagree here. Lester's scenes went very much overboard with the "levity". A lot of bad slapstick that IMO detracts from the gravity of what Superman had to confront in the movie.


The menacing trio in the Donner cut are on screen less. The scenes involving their initial town appearance was greatly reduced and their evil natures cut. Now I would gladly part with the Paris Terrorist scene to make time for the Jor-el scenes and I could lose the lengthy town scenes.

Even so, I thought that Lester's conception of the three super villians was less menacing than Donner's. The recap of their trial in the introduction, and Jor-El's depiction of their threat set the table. Lester might have given more screen time, but Donner made better use of their screen time.


I am still not convinced that having the scenes of Superman fighting the trio with his schoolboy games is so bad since presumably the multiplicity powers only work with the crytal light tricks in the fortress of solitude. I could live without the cellophane though.

Suit yourself, but for Superman fans who've read the comic books and watched the other Superman TV shows and serials, Lester's invention of new super powers is ridiculous in itself. But, it's even worse because it adds nothing to the bottomline. It was just a wasted use of artistic license.


I don't mind the initial Lois figuring out that Clark is Superman from the picture but I find it to be unconvincing in the worl of Superman. WHY? Firstly because the disguis is so terrible -- Clark so obviously looks like Superman and part of the deal with this character is that you should NEVER figure out that he is Superman from looking at him or pictures of him.

Oh c'mon, you mean to tell me that a pair of coke bottle glasses and a fedora ain't good enough to conceal someone's identity?


The Niagra scene works so much better because Lois infers through a series of convenient happenstances that gee when Superman is around Clark is never around. There is a bit of the visual when the glasses come off.

I also think the hand in the fire versus a bullit in the chest is better. He hides his hand but is found out. The blank? Superman could not feel the bullit at all? Or see it with his super eyes that nothing cam out, or hear it with his super hearing bounce of his steel chest? Bah the scene might have been better but it needed a whole series of re-writing.

I never liked the Niagara scenes because the idea of Clark/Superman tripping over a bear rug is pretty lame. The bullet scene is more believable in that context, but again, those were screen tests, made more for auditioning purposes than insertion into any kind of publicly screened film. If you look at the screen test footage from the Superman The Movie DVD and compare that to the final scenes, a lot can change between screen test and the final cut. (That DVD also had screen tests featuring Anne Archer, Stockard Channing, and Deborah Raffin auditioning for the part of Lois Lane)

I'm also somewhat biased against the Niagara scene with Lois on the water, because it reminds me that John Williams was also not brought back for Superman II so that the Salkinds could save a few bucks! That scene was one of Ken Thorne's original musical cues, and it just sounds derivative compared to Williams' orchestrations from the first movie. (This is also partly because he had to use a scaled-down orchestra that sounded like something out of a TV series.)


I'd like to see another cut -- keep the Paris Terrorists in because hey we live in the time where that is still relevant, then keep the Niagra scenes in, keep all of the Jor-El stuff in that actually retains much of the story. Keep the Trimmed down stuff that Donner did in the big Metroplos fight scene (The Lester version dragged). Keep the trimmed down inital town scene but keep the longer cut with the two cops and the big dumb baddies bits with his lack of heat ray vision and his fascination with shiny lights. It's funny but more importantly it shows that brains win over braun and leads up to the finale better.

I'm sure there will be new edits appearing all over the internet now that you got both versions. From the supplementals, it's obvious that Donner is still pretty bitter about having Superman II taken away from him. That very well might have influenced how much of the Lester footage got integrated into the Donner cut.


Keep the levitation power in - really why not -- I don't care either way so if the fanboys don't want it then dump it but it worked for me when he had the kid's dad in the air and drops him. I don;t care though either way and seeing as how it is not vital then dropping it is fine by me. The cellophane thing should be dumped but the multiplicity if it is explained as being only a trick of the light in the fortress of solitude is also more than fine. The beams they fire at superman from the finger -- well pehaps it should have been heat ray vision -- three versus one instead of a mysterious beam. I don't think either version really works.

There's always going to be some artistic license taken with any kind of movie adaptation, but some of Lester's additions were just plain bizarre in that they departed from the Superman comics and other film adaptations, yet were never a consequential part of the movie. Sam Raimi took some heat for making Spider-Man's web shooters organic rather than mechanical, but he managed to integrate that into narrative (like when Spidey lost his mojo in Spidey II).


The time thing whether or not it was due to filming contraints was bad -- it is a bad idea even one time which is why I said I liked part II over part I (at least part of the reason). Part I could ave been a LOT better than it was as well but that ending was hoaky -- though at least Jor El has an explanation or warning. The Donner film sorry has to follow what the first film did and it IS doing the same ending twice. The Lester cut makes more sense logically because only ONE person (LOIS) loses her memory. Changing back the entire world's time basically means there was absolutely no point to watching the whole film because nothing happened.

I think you're really nitpicking on the ending here. I'll agree that something better should have been hatched, but the time reversal certainly did not ruin an otherwise superior film with the first one. Like I said, the Donner cut is basically an assemblage from the original shooting script, in which the time reversal motif was not supposed to be used with the first movie. The documentary and commentary make it abundantly clear that the ending used in the Donner cut was how Superman II was originally conceived. If Donner had stayed on, of course they would have come up with something different.


You're right I probably should not blame Donner because we never got to see the whole construction the way he saw it for part one and two. That said as the two films currently sit I prefer the one that got released originally. Though yes I wish theyput in the Jor-El scenes. Perhaps they were targettig more for the kids and felt the talking bits would be too slow for kids to hang in with so they extended the specia effects scenes in the town more. Bad choice but that is film industry editiing for you. Lester no doubt would have been forced to tow the line.

I think that's where the two films diverge. Superman The Movie had so many memorable and evocative scenes, and that film for the most part took its time to develop the story. IMO, that's why it holds up so well over time, and why now it's generally the most revered of the Superman movies. In 1981, I remember a good number of critics saying that the sequel was better than the original. The first time I saw the sequel in the theater, I too preferred it to the original. But, Superman II just hasn't held up well to repeat viewings, whereas Superman The Movie has much more of a timeless quality to it. With the Donner cut, I can see Superman II going in a similar direction as the first movie. The new scenes with Jor-El point to much of what could have been, and makes the missing 25% all the more wanting.

In many ways, I think that Richard Lester was interpreting Superman with more of a British sensibility (the humor in his scenes strikes me that way, and Lester was an American expatriate living in Britain), whereas Richard Donner sees Superman more as an Americana icon. Supposedly, the original script for the first two movies by Mario Puzo got extensively reworked by Donner and Tom Mankiewicz specifically to infuse the movie with more of a midwest/Americana sensibility. Knowing you, this might be why our opinions differ!

RGA
12-05-2006, 03:15 AM
Woochifer

Well it may be true that there is a British bent here. Personally I don't think Superman is a particularly good super hero to start with which is very likely why I felt the new movie was a piece of utter crap. It takes itself far too seriously with the Jesus concept so glaring as to be frankly laughable (intentional or not).

Part of the reason the first two films work so much better for me is becase they made Lex Luther into something dangerous but hilarious. (part of thereaosn the new tv series Smallville completely bores me).

I am amazed that people are so tied to the lore of the character that any change from a freaking "comic book" can not be changed. Doctor who has plenty of lore and there was no psycic paper but who cares - not Doctor Who fans.

I do agree that levitation does not add to the story but at the same time it depends on the cut you're watching. The long extended TV cut has Ursa arm wrestling the guy in the bar and later Zod has the dad in the air and the kid beg's him to let him down. I found this cut to be more violent than necessary for such a film.

I can't think of scenes with Hackman that were so offending that they should have been cut. I also don't see a problem with the mute baddy being too stupid to get the heat ray vision to work.

To this day I still prefer Part II to Part I though I like a lot of Part I but for the same reason I can re-watch Empire Strikes Back and I can't watch Star Wars is because these sequels ramped up the tongue in cheek and made them more endearing. Star Wars has much of this mind you. This is a reason I am in the minority on films like Lord of the Rings which for me is a 9 hour exercise in coplete tedium of continual underdeveloped characters and humourless one note story repetition.

Superman Part III was obviously an attempt to keep the laughs rolling because of the preposterous nature of the title character if we actually try and make that serious then it comes across as heavey handed preachyness.

This is after all comic book inspired so it just does not work. Batman is the character that this kind of thing can be done but it took them until this last one to get it right, And Spider-Man II IMO is the best comic book inspired film of any I've seen - and by a wide margin. Creating a believable character and a beleivable villain and to keep tension and humour and pacing and a damn good romance should have garnered it an Oscar. Only me and Roger Ebert might agree on that but for me Superman II had most of the right idea -- Donner's may in fact be closer to the comics and it may be more serious bt IMO that's not a good thing.