Richard Donner Cut?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Superman II
andrewrrrr — 10 years ago(November 04, 2015 01:00 PM)
I'm interested in tracking down these movies and watching through the series but can anyone tell me which version of superman 2 is better? I'm not entirely sure what the difference is between the original and the Richard Donner cut but the RDC is the only version I can find. Would I miss anything by watching that instead of the original?
-
voiceofsilence — 10 years ago(March 05, 2016 06:13 PM)
I saw Donners cut. I can see why they decided to go with Lester. Some scenes were not so good. Perhaps if Lester and Donner made the movie together, it wouldn't have be spectacular. Lester has some bad and good points while Donner had good points and bad. They could have both figured out how to extract the bad parts together. I wish I could edit this movie myself lol.
-
Times_Up — 10 years ago(March 18, 2016 08:07 AM)
It's a toss up. The Donner cut is really what could have been, or what might have been. It removes some camp moments like Clark getting hit by the car and the Niagra scene, some of Non's grunts and some of Stamp's excess. Some lines were changed like Superman's "care to step outside" to Zod becomes "haven't you ever heard of freedom of the press." Not huge, but I think the later doesn't have the same affect. While Donner's opening for Lois is perhaps even more over the top (Lois jumps out of the Daily Planet window) it does seem more realistic in that she suggests she knew he was Superman all along rather than it just dons on her in Lester's.
The terrorist scene is removed, you'll miss that. You'll miss the fireplace reveal in place of a Lois shooting him (taken from a test shoot). You'll miss his Mother rather than his father at the Fortress of Solitude. The ending to Lester's is much better IMO. Donner's was rehashed from his part 1 b/c he didn't even conceive of an ending yet let alone shoot one.
If I didnt talk the way I talk I wouldnt know who the hell I am, Sean Connery on his accent -
mcdemuth — 9 years ago(May 11, 2016 01:25 AM)
Donner's was rehashed from his part 1 b/c he didn't even conceive of an ending yet let alone shoot one.
Actually, that is not technically correct
Superman I & II were written at the same time, and Superman II was being filmed at the same time as Superman I.
Originally, Superman I was going to end in a cliffhanger with the Kryptonians being released from the Phantom Zone with a missile,
and Lois was NOT originally going to die. Superman DOES save her. There was NO Time Travel in the original script for Superman I
. The Time Travel ending was only going to happen in Superman II.
The scenes with Perry White and his tube of Toothpaste were shot in 1978.
When the budget went out of control, the filming schedule kept increasing, and the feuding between Richard Donner and the Salkins reached the climax of practically not speaking to each other
It was decided that filming on Superman II would stop, and all the focus would be on finishing Superman I
Since finishing Superman II was now in question, it was decided to actually END the film, and not give it a cliffhanger.
The Time Travel ending of Superman II was then "MOVED" to Superman I.
At the time, it was thought that if and when Superman II started shooting again, Richard Donner might create a new ending for Superman II. What that new ending might have been in 1978-1980 is unknown But that would only be dealt with if Superman I was a success, and Superman II was given the go ahead for being finished.
When Richard Lester replaced Richard Donner, the Superman Memory Erase Kiss was added. (I have no idea where that came from)
At the time, when the Richard Donner Cut of Superman II was being created for Home Video Release on DVD Richard Donner has said that he did not know what would have been the new ending if he shot it He speculated that either the Time Travel ending would have been done, or something like the Superman Memory Erase Kiss would have been done instead, however, he only talked about the Superman Memory Erase Kiss, because he knows that is what Richard Lester did.
When the Richard Donner Cut of Superman II was being created, they only had two endings that they could produce for that cut. The Time Travel ending or the Superman Memory Erase Kiss ending.
Since the (Richard Lester) Theatrical Cut had the Superman Memory Erase Kiss ending
They decided to try to create the original scripted Time Travel ending instead. While the special effects quality is not great, it does work as the script suggested
HOWEVER,
The "Clark Kent Seeks Revenge On The Bully Sequence", Totally Fails in the Richard Donner cut, because Superman has gone back in time to BEFORE the Bully Beats Up Clark, and that event now never happens. The bully does not beat up Clark! When Clark returns to the Diner, the Bully should have no idea who Clark is. And it is now Clark who becomes the bully!
And of course, Since the villains were never freed, and did not damage the White House, we now lose the scene with Superman flying the USA Flag to the White House.
"
Put A Little Love In Your Heart
, and then
Make Your Own Kind Of Music
, on the road to
Shambala
!
" -
TheDuke007-1 — 9 years ago(September 10, 2016 09:31 PM)
It's not even remotely close. The theatrical version is 100% better than the Richard Donner cut which was just released simply to make money. Whenever you get a DVD, don't you go to the "deleted scenes" expecting to see something great, but instead, it's a major disappointment where you understand why 90% of those scenes were cut? In the Richard Donner cut, you are basically watching a movie of deleted scenes. There's maybe one or two jokes which might be entertaining, but over 90% of it is complete junk. It's scenes that are extended far too long with needless dialogue. It's scenes that are poorly acted. It's scenes that are completely misplayed or don't fit the story. Some of the special effects are so completely fake that I found myself laughing out loud at them! The bottom line is the Richard Donner version absolutely sucks.
-
mcdemuth — 9 years ago(September 22, 2016 08:26 PM)
In the Richard Donner cut, you are basically watching a movie of deleted scenes.
NO.
The Richard Donner cut is what Superman II would have been, if Richard Donner had finished the movie, as it was originally scripted. These were not "Deleted Scenes".
When Richard Lester took over as Director and finished the movie,
he had to shoot 51% of the movie, in order to receive Director credit for the film.
A huge portion of what Richard Donner shot, something like 25%, had to be scrappedNOT DELETED
The whole Lois jumping out of the Daily Planet building was filmed by Richard Donner, and was an easy part to scrap. I think, Marlon Brando's scenes were scrapped, because, the Salkins did not want to pay Brando's huge salary for his work in a "Finished" film.
Some scenes were re-written or added, like the Paris Terrorists. This also allowed for a way to crack the Phantom Zone and other scenes that Richard Donner did not get to shoot, were finally shot by Richard Lester, like all of the Niagara Falls scenes.
I love the scene where Superman saves the boy, and Lois says: "Way To Go Superman!" Then the boy asks for another ride, and Superman says: "I'm Sorry, only one ride per customer!" Richard Lester may have his issues, but that was perfection!
The bottom line is the Richard Donner version absolutely sucks.
Half of Richard Donner's Superman II and Half of Richard Lester's Superman II, are two completely different films. I think using "Sucks" to describe Richard Donner's version is a bit strong, but I do prefer what Richard Lester did for the most part. I like the Paris Terrorist sequence, and Lois jumping into Niagara Falls. It is far better than Lois jumping out of the daily planet window, and shooting a gun at Clark.
Although, I could have done without that pink bear and Clark tripping over it and all that comedy Richard Lester tried to put into the film when the Small Town was terrorized by Zod, and all the wind gags that were featured when the villains fought the citizens in metropolis.
Those scenes (or lack of them) were better in the "Richard Donner Cut".
Some of the special effects are so completely fake that I found myself laughing out loud at them!
Umm, you do realize that the Richard Donner cut was created, essentially by some "fan", who had a very small budget given to him by the studio to work with Right?
The Richard Donner cut was not meant to look like a theatrical presentation. Fans had been pressuring Warner Brothers for years to release Richard Donner's footage, and so they did. There was so much footage that Richard Donner Shot, it was enough to create a "Movie" of it, instead of just releasing Deleted Scenes, so that is what the studio authorized.
Does the "movie" look good? No, I don't think so either. But it it doesn't look any worse than any other fan production, or some "movies of the week" made for TV that air on the SyFy channel.
I think you took the "Richard Donner Cut" too seriously
Personally, I am glad the Richard Donner did not finish Superman II. I just don't think it works. But it is interesting to see, what we almost got to see in theaters in 1980. -
Wombstar — 9 years ago(October 23, 2016 01:17 PM)
it doesn't seem to be any big differences.
Quite a few differences, it's pretty much a different movie.
Zod and gang are released from the phantom zone differently.
No France tower scene
No Mother.
Superman's reveal is completely different and stupid.
Completely different ending.
And some smaller changers here and there. -
That_Seventies_Guy — 9 years ago(November 14, 2016 06:51 AM)
Personally, I am glad the Richard Donner did not finish Superman II. I just don't think it works. But it is interesting to see, what we almost got to see in theaters in 1980.
A little too unkind.
Donner's version would have been the end all, be all of epic movie sequels for that time, and certainly would have set a high standard in trend of them, as the first did for Superhero pictures in general.
Donner was NOT allowed to finish Superman II. Had he done so, not only would he have PERFECTED all the footage he shot, but by his own admission, would have gone back and re-shot some scenes that would have needed it (the scene with Christopher Reeve and Marlon Brando, he has admitted, he would have re-shot at the end of Principal photography).