Superman: The Movie 4K UHD (1978)

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by danny_boy

Let's think about it for a second-as scripted for SII and shown in the 2006 Donner cut-it makes no sense for Lois to think that Clark could be Superman(even as a fleeting thought) after the California earthquake(and as is ,in STM), then(in SII) go back to the Daily Planet the next day-and after subsequentely seeing a Photo of Superman in the newspaper,notice the similarity between Supes and Clark-as if she had never entertained the thought before!?-lol!

Just seemed to me like a continuation of that thought, even though she had previously scolded herself for it, rather than her thinking about it for the first time.

She wouldn't normally give Clark a second look. But now the seed of wondering about Clark's absence when Superman is near has been planted, she's really looking at Clark for the first time.

Originally Posted by danny_boy

In fact Lester, after taking over the project and altering the script in a drastic fashion, addressed this by first having Lois remove Clark's glasses at Niagra Falls-and then have Lois express her doubts:

".......Happen to be at Niagra Falls......and Clark......Clark is not around AS USUAL"!

The "not around as usual " part is a clear bridge between that ending from STM(Lois's fleeting thought) and Lane's evolving suspicion of Clark's convenient absences.

Lester deserves some credit for that IMHO!

Lester didn't come up with that idea. Lois was always going begin to suspect Clark again at Niagra falls due to him disappearing right before Superman appeared to save the boy. And then, in the Donner script, realises that she needs to risk Clark's life, rather than her own like she did on the first attempt, to reveal the truth. (the implication being, Superman is so Super he can always appear to save someone else without revealing his identity. Unless that someone is Clark Kent.)

Lester has Lois risk herself at Niagra falls in order to get Clark to reveal himself. Which fails. Then has Superman clumsily trip on a rug and accidentally give the game away..... Whoops! Even if you imagine that deep down Superman wants to tell Lois (we know that he does), he's supposedly mad at her for risking her life just moments ago, where he successfully saved her without revealing his identity and he's managed to disabuse her of her theory that Clark is Superman. So it makes no sense that he'd even subconsciously "trip" on purpose in order to undo all that work.

At best you can say that Lester makes a direct call back to the final Lois scene dialogue in the first movie which Donner's script and material shot for SII did not (obviously since they were shot before the rewrite of the end of the first movie). But that doesn't mean they are incompatible or incongruent. And the callback in Lester's version is purely for the audience's benefit. It too can be interpreted as Lois acting like she's never considered it before.

The scene at the end of Superman with Lois questioning why Clark isn't around was intended as a joke anyway. (Why would they have expected Clark to be there? Clark was in Metropolis while Jimmy and Lois were in the middle of nowhere.)

I reckon they would have rewrote and reshot some stuff anyway. After the first one being so successful it would have been cynical, miserly and lazy to not go in and tighten things up and make sure it lands as well as things in the first movie did....

A simple thing that Thau and Donner could have done for the 2006 version is replay Jimmy and Lois's dialogue as a voice-over flash-back while she reads the paper in the Planet offices at the beginning and then ends right as she looks up at Clark. Showing that she's beginning to think it actually isn't the silliest idea ever.

[david_blu]

But Jimmy does moreless repeat that at the start of the scene when he is talking to Lois before he walks over to Clark and Lois starts looking at the paper.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by david_blu

But Jimmy does moreless repeat that at the start of the scene when he is talking to Lois before he walks over to Clark and Lois starts looking at the paper.

Yeah but it's almost the exact same dialogue. Showing that they just moved it from the opening scene of Donner's II to end of the first movie. And not intended as a call back.

I think the idea still rattling around in Lois's head works better than Jimmy just making the exact same casual observation again and Lois casually acknowledging it again, until she sees the photograph of Superman.

I am certain they would have rewritten and reshot this to make it stronger anyway. When that scene was shot for Superman II, it wasn't known that Lois would have died and Superman would have had to turn the world back in order to save her already. If they had known that at the time it wouldn't have been handled so lightly. (Or maybe that's just an effect of the kind of limited amount of time and available material they had to construct the scenes in the Donner Cut which always look like they are missing a ton of coverage and lack the punch of similar scenes in the first movie.)

In fact I am certain that Donner would have reshot as much of Superman II as he could have gotten away with. Maybe if they did leave this scene in the way it is, the could have acknowledged the repeated dialogue with a voice over of Lois saying. "Yeah you said that exact same thing yesterday, Jimmy." Since this is supposed to be the following day after the last scene of the first movie.

[Mick B]

Another thing that bothered me about the Donner version of Ii was the timeline between II and STM.

Depending where you were STM came out late 78 and the early half of 79.
SII came out late 1980 and first half of 1981.

So there was basically a 2 year gap between them. Superman drops Lex and Otis off at the end of STM to prison to await a fair trial.
2 years later in SII that trial has taken place and Lex is given life plus 25 according to the guard and this sounds fairly plausible.

Now in the Donner cut it is a few days later and no villain would have been tried and convicted so quick.
Also this means that Superman had spent 30 years becoming Superman just to give it all up a week or so after first showing up to be with Lois.

At least with the Lester version of II there is a big enough time gap that these issues don't arise.
I am split because I like the work of both directors and I do wonder what Donner could have done with II, and how much he would have re-filmed due to the changes made with the first one.

Mick.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by Mick B

Another thing that bothered me about the Donner version of Ii was the timeline between II and STM.

Depending where you were STM came out late 78 and the early half of 79.
SII came out late 1980 and first half of 1981.

So there was basically a 2 year gap between them. Superman drops Lex and Otis off at the end of STM to prison to await a fair trial.
2 years later in SII that trial has taken place and Lex is given life plus 25 according to the guard and this sounds fairly plausible.

Now in the Donner cut it is a few days later and no villain would have been tried and convicted so quick.
Also this means that Superman had spent 30 years becoming Superman just to give it all up a week or so after first showing up to be with Lois.

At least with the Lester version of II there is a big enough time gap that these issues don't arise.
I am split because I like the work of both directors and I do wonder what Donner could have done with II, and how much he would have re-filmed due to the changes made with the first one.

Mick.

Luthor was probably an escaped con.

[Buckster666]

Originally Posted by Mick B

Another thing that bothered me about the Donner version of Ii was the timeline between II and STM.

Depending where you were STM came out late 78 and the early half of 79.
SII came out late 1980 and first half of 1981.

So there was basically a 2 year gap between them. Superman drops Lex and Otis off at the end of STM to prison to await a fair trial.
2 years later in SII that trial has taken place and Lex is given life plus 25 according to the guard and this sounds fairly plausible.

Now in the Donner cut it is a few days later and no villain would have been tried and convicted so quick.
Also this means that Superman had spent 30 years becoming Superman just to give it all up a week or so after first showing up to be with Lois.

At least with the Lester version of II there is a big enough time gap that these issues don't arise.
I am split because I like the work of both directors and I do wonder what Donner could have done with II, and how much he would have re-filmed due to the changes made with the first one.

Mick.

This is why we need a new cut of Superman 2 to have the structure of the Donner cut, but incorporate Lester footage to make the best version possible.

[Martoto]

Why would Luthor wait 2 years to escape from prison? It's academic since the escape in a hot air balloon is absurd whenever it takes place.

[TylerDurden389]

Originally Posted by Martoto

A simple thing that Thau and Donner could have done for the 2006 version is replay Jimmy and Lois's dialogue as a voice-over flash-back while she reads the paper in the Planet offices at the beginning and then ends right as she looks up at Clark. Showing that she's beginning to think it actually isn't the silliest idea ever.

Ya know, all the discussions I've had and read back in the day when I was obsessed with fan edits of Superman 2, as well as how many completed fan edits I've seen, and how much time I've spent editing it myself, NO ONE EVER thought of this idea, and yet it's so simple and brilliant. Funny you say that after what I said yesterday about a flashback v.o narration for my proposed idea. I think too many editors back then were just way too "Pro-Donner" since this was all during like the first 5 or 6 years after the DC was released, and thus was fresh in everyone's mind.

Over time, I've realized that sometimes the Lester/theatrical stuff just works better due to the scenes or shots "feeling" like a finished production. Though truth (and justice) be it told, the tv broadcast always had the most "finished" look and feel to me (plus it had the longest runtime, a few minutes longer than S1, so it was great to have a bigger, grander Superman sequel). Even the so-called "never before seen" stuff in the Donner Cut (as it was advertised back then) that was already in the tv broadcast, always worked better than how the DC was edited. Be it the cuts, the line reasdings, and of course, the background music.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by TylerDurden389

Ya know, all the discussions I've had and read back in the day when I was obsessed with fan edits of Superman 2, as well as how many completed fan edits I've seen, and how much time I've spent editing it myself, NO ONE EVER thought of this idea, and yet it's so simple and brilliant. Funny you say that after what I said yesterday about a flashback v.o narration for my proposed idea. I think too many editors back then were just way too "Pro-Donner" since this was all during like the first 5 or 6 years after the DC was released, and thus was fresh in everyone's mind.

Over time, I've realized that sometimes the Lester/theatrical stuff just works better due to the scenes or shots "feeling" like a finished production. Though truth (and justice) be it told, the tv broadcast always had the most "finished" look and feel to me (plus it had the longest runtime, a few minutes longer than S1, so it was great to have a bigger, grander Superman sequel). Even the so-called "never before seen" stuff in the Donner Cut (as it was advertised back then) that was already in the tv broadcast, always worked better than how the DC was edited. Be it the cuts, the line reasdings, and of course, the background music.

Thanks man.

The Donner Cut shows the potentialand tantalises with far more than it actually delivers. And it's just inherently unsafe to predict that another almost perfect movie was guaranteed based on what was put together with the material they had Which, with the best will in the word, doesn't amount to a movie.

The theatrical cut is still the way to watch Superman II. No matter how much the Lester material chafes like a cheap polyester shirt under a nice tailored suit.

[david_blu]

Originally Posted by Martoto

The theatrical cut is still the way to watch Superman II. No matter how much the Lester material chafes like a cheap polyester shirt under a nice tailored suit.

no dont be silly now, I find it quite irritating and I can see why Donner never got passed watching the Paris scene. It just looks so grey and horrible, couldnt they have picked a day when the sky was blue?

If it was grey just to hide wires etc its pretty lame, its just terrible to look at it.

[Kamdan]

Originally Posted by david_blu

no dont be silly now, I find it quite irritating and I can see why Donner never got passed watching the Paris scene. It just looks so grey and horrible, couldnt they have picked a day when the sky was blue?

If it was grey just to hide wires etc its pretty lame, its just terrible to look at it.

Donner blew off whole shooting days in Canada due to the weather. That sets back the production as well. Lester didn’t have that luxury or desired it when it came to completing Superman II.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by Kamdan

Donner blew off whole shooting days in Canada due to the weather. That sets back the production as well. Lester didn’t have that luxury or desired it when it came to completing Superman II.

What did he do instead when the weather was too bad?

[david_blu]

Originally Posted by Kamdan

Donner blew off whole shooting days in Canada due to the weather. That sets back the production as well. Lester didn’t have that luxury or desired it when it came to completing Superman II.

And that's why the Canada stuff looks great and Paris looks crap. He knew it would look crap on film if the weather was bad, how Paris looks as dull as it does is beyond me.

However, if you wack up the colour on Lester's Superman II on blu, some amazing colour comes back to that scene and the rest of the film for that matter and it actually looks really great with the colour added back.

[danny_boy]

Originally Posted by Martoto

Just seemed to me like a continuation of that thought, even though she had previously scolded herself for it, rather than her thinking about it for the first time.

She wouldn't normally give Clark a second look. But now the seed of wondering about Clark's absence when Superman is near has been planted, she's really looking at Clark for the first time.

A fair observation....but the way Donner shot that scene in the summer of 1977 for his original SII-it's definitely a first time thought-otherwise she wouldn't say to Jimmy:

"Clark-he's never around when Superman is near"

It surely would have been something along the lines of:

"Like I said to you yesterday Jimmy-it's funny that Clark is never around when Superman is near"

Hypothetically-of course-lol!

ON EDIT:
Just noticed you already pointed this out to another member-lol!

Lester didn't come up with that idea. Lois was always going begin to suspect Clark again at Niagra falls due to him disappearing right before Superman appeared to save the boy. And then, in the Donner script, realises that she needs to risk Clark's life, rather than her own like she did on the first attempt, to reveal the truth. (the implication being, Superman is so Super he can always appear to save someone else without revealing his identity. Unless that someone is Clark Kent.)

Thanks for the correction.
Just checked the original SII script and sure enough it's there right as rain!

Then I would say that Lester did very well to keep that line in and unaltered(lol!):
"And Clark is not around as usual.....hmmmm"!

Having said that, the removal of Clark's glasses by Lois and the quick look she gives of suspicion but subsequentely dismisses, is a Lester addition, which I think also adds a touch more weight to her overall sceptisism, once Supes has flown away after saving the kid.

Lester has Lois risk herself at Niagra falls in order to get Clark to reveal himself. Which fails. Then has Superman clumsily trip on a rug and accidentally give the game away..... Whoops! Even if you imagine that deep down Superman wants to tell Lois (we know that he does), he's supposedly mad at her for risking her life just moments ago, where he successfully saved her without revealing his identity and he's managed to disabuse her of her theory that Clark is Superman. So it makes no sense that he'd even subconsciously "trip" on purpose in order to undo all that work.

Here I would respectfully disagree although I appreciate your points.

At the beginning of the Niagra Hotel scene where the reveal is made,it's beautiful the way Lester actually has Clark pace up and down in the corner almost off camera(he even stares out of the window at one point!)-seemingly oblivious to Lois's rant:
"Boy I sure musta looked like an idiot......"

I always took that contemplation by Clark as having been conflicted about what he had just done in saving Lois whilst still in disguise.....that maybe, he had spurned an excellent opportunity to reveal who he was....

And the pay off(after the trip and reveal) is in the following exchange:

Clark:
"I don't know why I did that"?

Lois:
"Maybe you wanted to"

Clark:
"I don't think I did"?

Lois:
"Maybe you didn't wanna do it with your mind.....may be you wanted to do it with your heart"

Clark's internal conflict exemplified perfectly IMHO!

4 expertly delivered lines.
Great acting by the 2 leads and superb directing by Lester with fine close ups for extra emphasis-leagues ahead of anything from the Donner SII screen tests(which to be fair-were never meant for public consumption anyway).

As I said ,that's my opinion but totally respect your take on the Supe's reveal dilemma.

I reckon they would have rewrote and reshot some stuff anyway. After the first one being so successful it would have been cynical, miserly and lazy to not go in and tighten things up and make sure it lands as well as things in the first movie did....

A simple thing that Thau and Donner could have done for the 2006 version is replay Jimmy and Lois's dialogue as a voice-over flash-back while she reads the paper in the Planet offices at the beginning and then ends right as she looks up at Clark. Showing that she's beginning to think it actually isn't the silliest idea ever.

That's an excellent idea and something that maybe Donner or Baird could have done in 1979 if they had been allowed to complete it back then.

But unfortunately, It also accentuates how limited Thau was as an editor-sure the guy was a friend of Donner and made some great behind the scenes docus-but was ill equiped to deal with the complex narrative of a full blown movie(no matter how fragmented or incomplete it's intrinsic footage/material was/is).

[Kamdan]

Originally Posted by Martoto

What did he do instead when the weather was too bad?

What anyone else would do on your days off: get to know the locals, score some weed and relax.

Originally Posted by david_blu

And that's why the Canada stuff looks great and Paris looks crap. He knew it would look crap on film if the weather was bad, how Paris looks as dull as it does is beyond me.

There’s no sure way of knowing just how bad it was in Canada. Could have been heavy rains that prevented transportation as well. Sure, everyone wants clear blue skies when filming but you’re at the constant mercy of Mother Nature. If you look closely there’s inconsistent weather in the goodbye scene with Clark and Martha. Those days were probably down to a crutch and they had to film those days, which adds up to how your movie scheduled for the summer ends up coming in the winter instead.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by Kamdan

What anyone else would do on your days off: get to know the locals, score some weed and relax.

And the Salkinds paid for it.


There's a comparison to be made between how the Superman movies were made and the original Star Wars movies.

The Empire Strikes Back went way over budget and over schedule. But that movie, to this day, looks as good as any Star Wars movie ever could and likely ever will. Lucas tried to avoid the overages on Return Of The Jedi. But when he saw the footage of the location shoots in the desert and forest scenes, he was shocked at how impoverished it looked compared with Empire and made some adjustments to ensure that the studio shot material did not look like it had been cheaped out on. The irony is that it wound up costing as much to make Return Of The Jedi. And more so, due to Lucas changing his mind mid production on things that he assumed would cheap to alter.

Lucas would later lament that Empire was a better movie than it ought to have been.

[Ben_UK]

I know its been said before, but would love to see an officially WB sanctioned SII "Final Cut" or something with all the Brando scenes put back in and whatever Lester scenes needed to be added in to make a complete coherent film. Its always going to be a compromise since Donner never completed it but the Donner Cut threw out too much and much of what was inserted, looks amateurish and cheap.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

I know its been said before, but would love to see an officially WB sanctioned SII "Final Cut" or something with all the Brando scenes put back in and whatever Lester scenes needed to be added in to make a complete coherent film. Its always going to be a compromise since Donner never completed it but the Donner Cut threw out too much and much of what was inserted, looks amateurish and cheap.

I doubt there can be a WB sanctioned cut, because too many of the people involved, including Donner and Ilya Salkind might object to it (I expect Lester is too cool to make a fuss).

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by ravenus

I doubt there can be a WB sanctioned cut, because too many of the people involved, including Donner and Ilya Salkind might object to it (I expect Lester is too cool to make a fuss).

Donner is past objecting.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by Martoto

Donner is past objecting.

Whoops, my bad.