dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Dec 23, 2015 19:43:01 GMT -5
The limits of the technology forced yesteryears filmmakers to become more inventive and more creative with their solutions. To directors of big budget films that isn't even an issue now. You've got a generation of filmmakers that haven't had that kind of trial by fire so they've never been forced to think outside the box. Take Ghostbusters...I think the limits made that for on better than Ackroyd's original idea. Lewis getting taken by the devil dog wouldn't be nearly as good if we'd seen it. Limiting what we saw of the Werewolf in American Werewolf in London made it far creepier. That overhead shot of it in the subway near the end is pretty freaky. It's massive but you just get glimpses of it most of the time. The Kryptonians brawl on Superman II is better on an emotional level because they understood these guys can't hurt each other. Superman knew the city would just be totaled. Zod knee the one way to beat him was put innocents in danger throughout the battle. That's where the drama comes from. Exactly. Its amazing to think that a generation of filmakers who were inspired by filmakers(or films) who thought outside of the box........think so passively within the box(CGI)! Yes that american Warewolf in london scene is a classic example of where less is more.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Dec 23, 2015 22:30:14 GMT -5
They never took as much time or effort to learn to be as good as the generation before them. That's why. That and standards have changed.
|
|
|
Post by stargazer0118 on Jan 7, 2016 1:30:37 GMT -5
Saw the newest trailer after Christmas. Looked ok.. Doomsday looks pretty generic though. Can't say I'm really excited, just a bit curious, that's all.
Star Wars was fun, though! But it's kind of sad I can't feel that with this. :/
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Jan 7, 2016 19:17:49 GMT -5
An interesting quote from Henry Cavill:
I actually believe Reeve's Clark was incredibly well layered(although this did span several films) The "Clumsy Clark" was really only evident in STM. In SII you had Clark in the Diner getting smashed up and the resolution with Lois resulting in the amnesia kiss. I thought Reeve's performance in both those scenes was superb.
In the diner scene: Reeve expresses Clark's naivety(for daring to challenge Rocky),Clark's being shocked(and being punched through the glass door) and vulnerability("my blood!"). Even as a 6 Year old I remember the hush that came over the cinema when Clark says "excuse me sir.....would you care to step outside"....you kinda knew Clark was out of his depth and that he was in for a beating(credit to Reeve for emphasizing this) ......and then the gasps in the audience as he goes crashing through the glass. Also to note that Clark struggling to even get up with Lois helping: "go slow...go slow....I'm alright!"...adding further sympathy to the character(credit to Donner for nailing this scene too)
In the Daily Planet kissing "memory wipe "scene: Very mournful and contemplative...almost playing Supes and Clark at the same time without being either.....unusual and unique....credit to Lester here too.
And what about the SIII fight between Clark and Supes! Definitely not clumsy Clark here.......as well as the scenes with Lana.
So I think it is simplistic to define Reeve's portrayal as just the clumsy Clark. It was an element....but not the only element.
It is also something that is missing from practically all contemporary comic book hero flicks at the moment......the contrast between the Superhero and his/her disguise.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 7, 2016 19:50:01 GMT -5
Yeah I agree. It's a pretty simplistic observation of what Reeve did. Like you said it was more than that. The different voice, occasional timidity and stuttering, the physical transformation. All that is conveniently ignored. Cavill doesn't even mention the elements of the disguise. True Kent might draw attention to himself but the point is no one would ever buy this guy (Reeve's Kent) as Superman. Nobody takes him seriously. Just seems like Cavills backhanded way of criticizing Reeve to defend what he's doing when he should have the confidence to do his own thing and not even mention Reeve's take. Just seems to be in bad form. You don't hear Affleck saying anything like that about the previous Batmen/Bruce Waynes.
And as for Cavill yeah I agree that staying invisible is a good way to not get noticed but he's playing it with not much difference that I could see. In such a realistic world anyone who knows Clark should instantly figure out he's Superman. Is Perry White a dimwit or something?
Reeve's Clark had a lot of sides so what Cavill is saying is a generalization at best. Like you said by 3 and 4 he'd toned down the clumsiness. At least when he was around people he knew well. Reeve's Kent also had something of a personality when not doing that other stuff. There was a Clark when not doing his "act." Cavill seems to be doing the same monotone performance in the trailers. I hope he shows up with some actual emotional range in the movie. That's where Reeve and all the other great Supermen distinguished themselves. That's what made those guys likable and relatable. Not just brooding depression and misery.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Jan 8, 2016 6:01:52 GMT -5
Yeah I agree. It's a pretty simplistic observation of what Reeve did. Like you said it was more than that. The different voice, occasional timidity and stuttering, the physical transformation. All that is conveniently ignored. Cavill doesn't even mention the elements of the disguise. True Kent might draw attention to himself but the point is no one would ever buy this guy (Reeve's Kent) as Superman. Nobody takes him seriously. Just seems like Cavills backhanded way of criticizing Reeve to defend what he's doing when he should have the confidence to do his own thing and not even mention Reeve's take. Just seems to be in bad form. You don't hear Affleck saying anything like that about the previous Batmen/Bruce Waynes. And as for Cavill yeah I agree that staying invisible is a good way to not get noticed but he's playing it with not much difference that I could see. In such a realistic world anyone who knows Clark should instantly figure out he's Superman. Is Perry White a dimwit or something? Reeve's Clark had a lot of sides so what Cavill is saying is a generalization at best. Like you said by 3 and 4 he'd toned down the clumsiness. At least when he was around people he knew well. Reeve's Kent also had something of a personality when not doing that other stuff. There was a Clark when not doing his "act." Cavill seems to be doing the same monotone performance in the trailers. I hope he shows up with some actual emotional range in the movie. That's where Reeve and all the other great Supermen distinguished themselves. That's what made those guys likable and relatable. Not just brooding depression and misery. Totally agreed on why Cavill maybe saying the things he is saying. I am not sure if Cavill's limitations with his representation of Clark is his own making....or that of Snyder's....or a combination of both chap's deficiencies with understanding the soul of the Supes/Clark dynamic. Agreed on the Perry White not recognizing Supes dilemma.....especially given the way Cavill seems to be portraying it. This will be one of the things I will be observing closely when I watch DOJ......just how cleverly Cavill portrays the "invisible" Clark. ......but knowing Snyder.....I am sure there will be more emphasis on the crash, bangs, and wallops than character portrayals.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 10, 2016 0:42:54 GMT -5
I think it is a tricky thing when a creative team tries to do a 'realistic' take on a superhero character- since there are so many elements that you might WANT over the top, and/or WANT to be ignored.
Perfect example I think is Nolan's "The Dark Knight"- done right, imo.
Sadly, he turned around and did everything WRONG with "The Dark Knight Returns". He put in too much realism where you didn't really want there to be so much realism (i.e. Bruce's declining health thru injuries), but then went fantastic when it didn't feel truthful (Catwoman's unexplained kung fu abilities that are apparently as good as Batman's. wth?)
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 10, 2016 13:39:20 GMT -5
I agree, CAM. TDKRises is flawed for the reasons you state and more. I like it but too much in it is half baked. Felt like Nolan did it just cause he had to whereas the other two felt like they were what he'd wanted to do for years and he'd said what he wanted two with them. I never had a problem with Wayne becoming old Howard Hughes but stuff like the magic knee brace seems absurd. What Bane did to Gotham was pretty far fetched. The way Blake figured out Bruce was Batman was half assed. The great parts of the film really are a joy to watch but the flaws are so obvious.
Anyone else see the new BvS tv spot? Weak. WB is really dropping the ball after the first teaser and first full trailer which were pretty impressive. It was so dark it was hard to make out what was going on. Dig Batman try to ram superman or veer away and crash? I'd been impressed with Affleck in the suit so far but that one close up of him asking if Superman bleeds looked pretty derpy. And the "do you bleed" line was so much cooler when it seemed like it was coming from armored Batman.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 11, 2016 21:42:51 GMT -5
My suspicions on why TDKR went south- imo, might be the OVER-attention to secrecy, in which they didn't allow anyone to have a script, but sit there and read it all in one sitting.
I have a hunch that the original script idea with Heath Ledger's Joker probably would have helped the movie avoid some problems.... but I'm shocked at just how many problems I had with that film. I was hoping there would be a 4th Bale Batman movie by someone else, even (sigh) Snyder, as TDKR really left on a sour note to me.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 11, 2016 22:27:07 GMT -5
I think Joker probably would have had the Scarecrow role in Rises if he'd appeared at all. Another movie with a ton of Joker just seems like a wasted opportunity IMO. I know people think it was a lock that Joker would have been in the film but I never felt it was a sure thing or that even if Nolan had considered it it wouldn't have changed. I just feel like Nolan said most of what he wanted to say about Batman in the first two films and he did Rises because he felt obligated to finish the trilogy not because of a burning desire or because he had a great idea for a film.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 15, 2016 2:40:03 GMT -5
Actually, much like the new Star Wars, I thought there were some good ideas here and there in Rises, but the execution botched. Oh well.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 15, 2016 11:56:02 GMT -5
True. I felt the same way but even with four years to work on it I felt like their heart wasn't in it as much as it was with Begins and Dark Knight. Rises as a whole just never totally gelled. It's an ok movie but not a great one. There's some great things in it though. I had some of the best fight scenes in the trilogy.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Jan 15, 2016 13:12:49 GMT -5
Agree with both of you that Rises was a bloated mess. However I thought the bashing Batman got from Bane was superb. Very rare that you see the hero get totally stuffed(was so disappointed when Iron Man beats Ultron with barely 30 mins of the film gone in Avengers 2) So Batman taking a beating was bold story telling from Nolan .....too bad the stuff that preceded that beating....and the stuff that came after it did not hold up.
Contrast that with SII(either Lester or Donner)......Clark taking a hiding in the Diner was surrounded by great storytelling both before and after that scene.
On Edit: When Gordon lights that candle to reveal Batman on that frozen ice...it is almost anticlimatic. Contrast that with Supes flying onto the Daily Planet Pole to confront Zod in SII...saw it in the cinema twice(in 1981 and 1982)...people clapped and cheered on both occasions. That is the difference in quality storytelling(among other things!)
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 15, 2016 18:15:52 GMT -5
Agree with both of you that Rises was a bloated mess. However I thought the bashing Batman got from Bane was superb. Very rare that you see the hero get totally stuffed(was so disappointed when Iron Man beats Ultron with barely 30 mins of the film gone in Avengers 2) So Batman taking a beating was bold story telling from Nolan .....too bad the stuff that preceded that beating....and the stuff that came after it did not hold up. Contrast that with SII(either Lester or Donner)......Clark taking a hiding in the Diner was surrounded by great storytelling both before and after that scene. On Edit: When Gordon lights that candle to reveal Batman on that frozen ice...it is almost anticlimatic. Contrast that with Supes flying onto the Daily Planet Pole to confront Zod in SII...saw it in the cinema twice(in 1981 and 1982)...people clapped and cheered on both occasions. That is the difference in quality storytelling(among other things!) Yeah the first fight with Bane was very good. Much like the final battle between Iron Man and Iron Monger I was sitting there wondering how close they'd stick to the comics and in both cases I think they delivered. It was the first time we've really seen the cinematic Batman really throw down in a physical contest. The Marvel movies have been mixed on delivering on that kind of thing. You mentioned Avengers 2 and I agree. I enjoyed Hulk vs Hulkbuster but I was really looking forward to seeing Iron Man and Ultron engage in a spectacular battle and they never delivered on that. The story up to the ending was begging for it too. Captain America: Winter Soldier on the other hand did deliver with Cap and Bucky's final fight. Even some of the best comic book movies fall short with the fight choreography and action sequences. Even though I think Rises was a drop in quality in some areas Nolan really stepped up to the plate with the fights. I liked the visual of the burning bat symbol on the bridge but was annoyed by the whole concept and the execution. It didn't make sense. Did Wayne hang up there the whole time and spray on some flammable liquid? Did he use The Bat? Nobody saw him? I assume he did it at night and maybe it was something like a flammable gel but thinking about it too much just shows its kinda silly. Your brain has to fill in a lot of holes. Maybe too many and that just seems like lazy writing. A bunch of comic book movies over the last 20 years have tried to rip off the idea but none of them have done it as well as The Crow.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Jan 16, 2016 10:03:27 GMT -5
Ahh yes..... I forgot about the lighting up of the Bat symbol.......that was intended to deliver the emotional "thump".....and it did to a degree(credit to Zimmer's score) The problem was that they introduced Wayne coming back at least several times albeit in the space of a few minutes......thereby detracting from the emotional impact of his return. 1)When Wayne encounters Selina after she saves that kid from getting beaten up. 2)Lucius taking Wayne to the underground shelter to retrieve the suit and other gadgets. 3)When Gordon reveals Batman by lighting up that firestick thing. 4)With the illumination of the symbol 5)Batman saving Blake/Robin from getting killed.
I guess Nolan had to figure out within the context of the story how to hit the emotional/dramatic notes.....and it was hit and miss.
The original Lester version of SII worked quite well in terms of Clark discovering the green crystal and then cutting away.......for Supes to fly back onto the Daily Planet pole a couple of scenes later. The 2 greatest factors here were: 1)Clark being absolutely down and out and the audience not knowing whether he would regain his powers(ironically the abscence of Brando's stuff actually favoured the storytelling) . 2)The 3 criminals marching on imperiously until that critically /emotionally important moment that Supes shows up to challenge them(the audience had been waiting for this moment for nearly 1.5 hrs...or even 3.5 hrs if you watched it back to back with STM like i did:) ) For me this added to the quality of the drama(especially on a first time viewing).
Yes the choreography for both fights between Buck and Cap was very good.....could have done with some of that quality in Avengers 2. I felt the Hulkbuster stuff was too easy for IronMan.....DowneyJr's interjecting remarks:"vagina move Banner!" kind of diminished the effort needed to defeat the Hulk. Sacrificing substance for some style....which is too prominent these days.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 16, 2016 13:08:12 GMT -5
My only problem with the Hulk vs Hulkbuster fight is it was too short and too easy for Iron Man like you said. Hard to imagine anyone knocking the Hulk out. Not only that but this was a Hulk that was pure rage and no conscience being influenced by Scarlet Witch.
Yeah as cool as it was seeing Jor-El giving Clark his powers back I may prefer the Lester version. Like you said it's more dramatic while the Donner repowering is more emotional. I think Reeve's performance is better in the Lester footage version of the lead up to him finding the crystal.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 18, 2016 12:46:42 GMT -5
In the commentary, originally the Hulk created by the Scarlet Witch was going to be GRAY Hulk- which I thought would have been an awesome touch, but Marvel decided it would have been too confusing for audiences not that familiar with the comix. (I reluctantly agree)
With the beatdown by Bane- I think it would have had a far stronger impact if it were Bane vs. Batman in his prime--- the 'all over the place' credibility on what Bruce's health condition is like, didn't make for more realism, just more confusion (add to that Catwoman's bizzare and unexplained equal ability to kickass with a guy that supposedly was trained in all martial arts disciplines and was a ninja at one point).
There are bits and pieces of the Donner repowering that are really nice, and I know all were confused/disappointed with the RDC-
But: 1- We know Donner wasn't a 'one take wonder'- he was a perfectionist, that drove the Salkinds crazy for multiple takes.
2- We know that Thau was advised by Donner to keep 'faster faster' takes in 2006- to cover up the Lester stuff, including removing some really nice deleted scenes (Arctic Police for one)- so that may have been a giant mistake, particularly for how this scene was setup in the transitions. (It does feel really weird that we see him slowly trudge over miles and miles of land, then suddenly run in, quickly look for the crystals, then shout out.) and-
As is, the performance is odd in that he seems like he does expect an answer in the beginning.... versus the Lester take, where it's clear throughout that there's nobody listening. Without seeing the other takes, it's really hard to know if it was the edit choices or if the redo really was better at the end.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Jan 23, 2016 2:22:13 GMT -5
In the commentary, originally the Hulk created by the Scarlet Witch was going to be GRAY Hulk- which I thought would have been an awesome touch, but Marvel decided it would have been too confusing for audiences not that familiar with the comix. (I reluctantly agree) With the beatdown by Bane- I think it would have had a far stronger impact if it were Bane vs. Batman in his prime--- the 'all over the place' credibility on what Bruce's health condition is like, didn't make for more realism, just more confusion (add to that Catwoman's bizzare and unexplained equal ability to kickass with a guy that supposedly was trained in all martial arts disciplines and was a ninja at one point). There are bits and pieces of the Donner repowering that are really nice, and I know all were confused/disappointed with the RDC- But: 1- We know Donner wasn't a 'one take wonder'- he was a perfectionist, that drove the Salkinds crazy for multiple takes. 2- We know that Thau was advised by Donner to keep 'faster faster' takes in 2006- to cover up the Lester stuff, including removing some really nice deleted scenes (Arctic Police for one)- so that may have been a giant mistake, particularly for how this scene was setup in the transitions. (It does feel really weird that we see him slowly trudge over miles and miles of land, then suddenly run in, quickly look for the crystals, then shout out.) and- As is, the performance is odd in that he seems like he does expect an answer in the beginning.... versus the Lester take, where it's clear throughout that there's nobody listening. Without seeing the other takes, it's really hard to know if it was the edit choices or if the redo really was better at the end. Personally.....the only beef I had with the Donner cut..... was with Donner himself...for not having been accurate with his estimate of how much was shot for SII. The claim made by Donner (made in Starlog 1979) used to be that about 75% was completed. The fact is that only 50% was done if even that. Back in the 1980s(and into the 90s) as the fans started to become aware of SII's production woes, Donner kept playing up "his unseen version"in interviews. I guess that was easy to do at the time(prior to the internet) because the reality was that Donner's footage would never see the light of day......therefore both Donner and Manck could mythologize the unseen footage and exaggerate both it's quality....and the amount that was actually completed. It was not the fan's fault...they were only going on the info that was available...so when the internet push came in the late 90's/ early 2000's for a Donner cut.....it was done on the basis that a nearly completed film could be formed. Had the fans known just how little was completed back in 77/78, I think that internet campaign would have been more geared to a "lets just see the footage in a deleted scenes section" which would have lowered expectations to a more realistic level. I guess that is the reason why Lester was always comfortable in keeping SII's history under wraps...and claiming the film as his own. Ilya himself says in the commentary that some of Donner's footage "just was not a 100%"...and in my opinion he is right. Whatever the controversy about the amnesia kiss.....the fact is that the acting and direction in that scene is in a different league to the corresponding "next day at the Daily planet stuff" ........after Supes turns the world back lensed by Donner. Also there is no way of knowing if Donner would have been able to rise to the same level of quality even if he had been allowed to return to complete SII in late 1979. Zemekis and the Wachowskis struggled to maintain the integrity and quality of their material with the Back To The Future and The Matrix sequels respectively after sojourns. It is all just conjecture now(as it has always been).
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 23, 2016 12:38:40 GMT -5
In the commentary, originally the Hulk created by the Scarlet Witch was going to be GRAY Hulk- which I thought would have been an awesome touch, but Marvel decided it would have been too confusing for audiences not that familiar with the comix. (I reluctantly agree) With the beatdown by Bane- I think it would have had a far stronger impact if it were Bane vs. Batman in his prime--- the 'all over the place' credibility on what Bruce's health condition is like, didn't make for more realism, just more confusion (add to that Catwoman's bizzare and unexplained equal ability to kickass with a guy that supposedly was trained in all martial arts disciplines and was a ninja at one point). There are bits and pieces of the Donner repowering that are really nice, and I know all were confused/disappointed with the RDC- But: 1- We know Donner wasn't a 'one take wonder'- he was a perfectionist, that drove the Salkinds crazy for multiple takes. 2- We know that Thau was advised by Donner to keep 'faster faster' takes in 2006- to cover up the Lester stuff, including removing some really nice deleted scenes (Arctic Police for one)- so that may have been a giant mistake, particularly for how this scene was setup in the transitions. (It does feel really weird that we see him slowly trudge over miles and miles of land, then suddenly run in, quickly look for the crystals, then shout out.) and- As is, the performance is odd in that he seems like he does expect an answer in the beginning.... versus the Lester take, where it's clear throughout that there's nobody listening. Without seeing the other takes, it's really hard to know if it was the edit choices or if the redo really was better at the end. Wow that's awesome. I agree with you though it would have been confusing for the average viewer. They didn't need it to get the point across that Hulk was dangerous. I recently rewatched the Ulfimate Avengers movie (for a couple of threads I'm thinking of starting) and one thing I loved that almost every other film or tv or animated version of the Hulk has ignored is the idea of him being a dangerous force of nature that you should avoid rather than a misunderstood monster who doesn't mean any harm but gets provoked. Age of Ultron did a great job of showing that take on the character by he was manipulated by outside forces. I'd like to see someone else play it that way. The Hulk vs Thor animated movie did but once again he was being manipulated. As for Bane you're totally right in the sense that Bane beating a Batman in his prime would have had far greater shock value and impact. It would have made a bigger statement. The thing with Bane was even in their first big physical encounter in the comics where Waynes back was broken Bane was never about a straight up one on one best vs best physical battle. Bane was a manipulator and an opportunist. He used his mind and superior strategy to defeat the Batman. He studied him, wore him down, and assaulted him psychologically as well as physically. That's the interesting thing about Bane and what made him a better character than what he appeared to be at first glance. He's more than just some big bruiser who overpowers someone with brute strength. He's a hunter. He's a guerrilla fighter. The Dark Knight Rises did a great job representing that. Where I did think the film missed with the character was it had him doing what he was doing for someone else instead of for himself. It may make him more sympathetic but the comic book Bane already had a somewhat sympathetic backstory. Some of that carried over into the movie but some of it didn't. Either way Bane never struck me as someone who was willing to subjugate himself to someone else's will and act on their whim.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 23, 2016 12:56:28 GMT -5
In the commentary, originally the Hulk created by the Scarlet Witch was going to be GRAY Hulk- which I thought would have been an awesome touch, but Marvel decided it would have been too confusing for audiences not that familiar with the comix. (I reluctantly agree) With the beatdown by Bane- I think it would have had a far stronger impact if it were Bane vs. Batman in his prime--- the 'all over the place' credibility on what Bruce's health condition is like, didn't make for more realism, just more confusion (add to that Catwoman's bizzare and unexplained equal ability to kickass with a guy that supposedly was trained in all martial arts disciplines and was a ninja at one point). There are bits and pieces of the Donner repowering that are really nice, and I know all were confused/disappointed with the RDC- But: 1- We know Donner wasn't a 'one take wonder'- he was a perfectionist, that drove the Salkinds crazy for multiple takes. 2- We know that Thau was advised by Donner to keep 'faster faster' takes in 2006- to cover up the Lester stuff, including removing some really nice deleted scenes (Arctic Police for one)- so that may have been a giant mistake, particularly for how this scene was setup in the transitions. (It does feel really weird that we see him slowly trudge over miles and miles of land, then suddenly run in, quickly look for the crystals, then shout out.) and- As is, the performance is odd in that he seems like he does expect an answer in the beginning.... versus the Lester take, where it's clear throughout that there's nobody listening. Without seeing the other takes, it's really hard to know if it was the edit choices or if the redo really was better at the end. Personally.....the only beef I had with the Donner cut..... was with Donner himself...for not having been accurate with his estimate of how much was shot for SII. The claim made by Donner (made in Starlog 1979) used to be that about 75% was completed. The fact is that only 50% was done if even that. Back in the 1980s(and into the 90s) as the fans started to become aware of SII's production woes, Donner kept playing up "his unseen version"in interviews. I guess that was easy to do at the time(prior to the internet) because the reality was that Donner's footage would never see the light of day......therefore both Donner and Manck could mythologize the unseen footage and exaggerate both it's quality....and the amount that was actually completed. It was not the fan's fault...they were only going on the info that was available...so when the internet push came in the late 90's/ early 2000's for a Donner cut.....it was done on the basis that a nearly completed film could be formed. Had the fans known just how little was completed back in 77/78, I think that internet campaign would have been more geared to a "lets just see the footage in a deleted scenes section" which would have lowered expectations to a more realistic level. I guess that is the reason why Lester was always comfortable in keeping SII's history under wraps...and claiming the film as his own. Ilya himself says in the commentary that some of Donner's footage "just was not a 100%"...and in my opinion he is right. Whatever the controversy about the amnesia kiss.....the fact is that the acting and direction in that scene is in a different league to the corresponding "next day at the Daily planet stuff" ........after Supes turns the world back lensed by Donner. Also there is no way of knowing if Donner would have been able to rise to the same level of quality even if he had been allowed to return to complete SII in late 1979. Zemekis and the Wachowskis struggled to maintain the integrity and quality of their material with the Back To The Future and The Matrix sequels respectively after sojourns. It is all just conjecture now(as it has always been). I think your right. I think expectations were just too high (and it wasn't simply about the fans building them up too high themselves) for the Donner cut to live up to what we had in our heads and endure over time. It's nearly a decade later and we can look at it all. history has been even better judge. But let's be honest for a lot of people it didn't even take that long. The flaws were immediate. I think (a lot of us think) another problem was Donner was just too stubborn to use Lester material to fill the holes in his cut. He seemed to be more concerned with it being as close to 100 percent of being his rather than using whatever was the better material. I get wanting to use his ideas particularly when they were so radically different than Lesters (Lois jumping out the window vs jumping into the waters of Niagra Falls) but using his material when it was not only similar to Lesters but also inferior (in my opinion anyway) was a mistake. That freedom of the press line was so clunky. I also blame WB for not putting the money in that proper cut needed even if they were going to cut it the same way. Superman 2 needed the kind of treatment that films like Blade Runner or Stad Trek The Motion Picture or Highlander II got when it came to recut and restoration them. Superman II was a more overt all around success than any of those films but the new cut looked bush league compared to the money and care that went into those other films. Highlander II is a turd of a movie but it got the highest quality polish compared to the soap and water cleaning and mediocre stitch-job that Superman II got.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 25, 2016 23:04:08 GMT -5
I gotta say I'm really impressed with what we've seen of Affleck as Batman so far. He's improved a lot since Daredevil and is showing some actual range. The electronic batvoice is a bit much and the cowl gives him a smooshed up fat face at times but he's really bringing it. I think he's totally won me over.
Henry Cavill on the other hand can't emote worth a darn as Superman. His expressions range from blank face to furrowed brow. I just keep thinking darn guy show some emotional range.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 27, 2016 13:16:35 GMT -5
I think with that being the case- (as it was)- the holes should have been filled with the storyboards (if available) and other documents to prepare the viewer that it really was going to be a 'what was intended' rough cut, rather than a fleshed out restoration as it was marketed as.
It's hard to know what the politics were with the restoration, but my own guess is that in the other cases, there wasn't nearly as much missing footage by the original director.... and Donner had to have ambiguous feelings about it, given that it was going to be impossible to reshoot the scenes properly with the actors.
In the end, I think to me (and probably others) the giant disappointment of the SII is that it's so truncated that it's a rough viewing experience, and to make matters worse, the IRC extended cut showed it could (and did) incorporate some of the missing Donner footage even better than the RDC did.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 27, 2016 17:53:29 GMT -5
I didn't mind new filming for some scenes like Clark looking out the window down at Lois after she jumped and saying "what have you done" and the new scene of Lois at the typewriter before time reverses. I didn't think it integrated that well though. Budget issue I'm sure but I could forgive it because of that. I'd love to see a list of how much new stuff was shot. Has anyone ever broken that down. Inserts, stand ins/doubles, etc. CAM?
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 28, 2016 3:19:07 GMT -5
Well... for Supes, to me, I think there's only three body double shots: (1) where Clark looks down and says (through a terrible voice double)"LOis, what are you doing???"- shoulda just used a similar line from Reeve in STM.
(2) THe other shot I think is the closeup of the chest as Supes pushes himself free of debris on the bus.... though it's a useless shot imo... and
(3) the behind angle of Clark in the repowering, though it doesn't look quite like Reeve to me.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,847
|
Post by Metallo on Feb 11, 2016 11:10:23 GMT -5
Final Batman v Superman trailer.
New footage but I gotta say the last couple of trailers haven't blown me away. The Turkish airlines spots were interesting though.
|
|