crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Aug 27, 2016 4:56:53 GMT -5
I think we have to be honest with ourselves about the Donner Cut.
We've scapegoated Thau for far too long.
The problem wasn't the editing of the Donner Cut... it was that there wasn't NEAR enough Donner footage to make a satisfying experience.
We all thought (and were repeatedly told) that there would be loads more new Donner footage than there actually was... we all thought the Blank Bullets, Souflee, and Home Movies WERE shot by Donner when they in fact were not. Also we had no idea that the useless in hindsight scene of Clark returning to the daily planet post time travel was unfortunately shot by Donner and counted toward his 70% completion figure.
The reason why the middle of the film was so choppy was and the time travel gag was reused was that we (as fans) were COMPLETELY wrong about what was really shot by Donner in 1977.
The problem wasn't Thau.. the problem was us and our ideas about some magical movie that was sealed in the vaults of Europe. The vault was opened and there was nothing there but a couple of Brando shots and 1/2 a scene of Lois jumping out a window.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 27, 2016 11:16:15 GMT -5
I think we have to be honest with ourselves about the Donner Cut. We've scapegoated Thau for far too long. The problem wasn't the editing of the Donner Cut... it was that there wasn't NEAR enough Donner footage to make a satisfying experience. We all thought (and were repeatedly told) that there would be loads more new Donner footage than there actually was... we all thought the Blank Bullets, Souflee, and Home Movies WERE shot by Donner when they in fact were not. Also we had no idea that the useless in hindsight scene of Clark returning to the daily planet post time travel was unfortunately shot by Donner and counted toward his 70% completion figure. The reason why the middle of the film was so choppy was and the time travel gag was reused was that we (as fans) were COMPLETELY wrong about what was really shot by Donner in 1977. The problem wasn't Thau.. the problem was us and our ideas about some magical movie that was sealed in the vaults of Europe. The vault was opened and there was nothing there but a couple of Brando shots and 1/2 a scene of Lois jumping out a window. If the IRC didn't exist, then I might agree... but I always thought: "Ok, if there really isn't that much footage by Donner, AT LEAST it should be the quality of the IRC". That, plus seeing fan edits prove to me- sorry, it is Thau.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Aug 27, 2016 16:07:57 GMT -5
I think we have to be honest with ourselves about the Donner Cut. We've scapegoated Thau for far too long. The problem wasn't the editing of the Donner Cut... it was that there wasn't NEAR enough Donner footage to make a satisfying experience. We all thought (and were repeatedly told) that there would be loads more new Donner footage than there actually was... we all thought the Blank Bullets, Souflee, and Home Movies WERE shot by Donner when they in fact were not. Also we had no idea that the useless in hindsight scene of Clark returning to the daily planet post time travel was unfortunately shot by Donner and counted toward his 70% completion figure. The reason why the middle of the film was so choppy was and the time travel gag was reused was that we (as fans) were COMPLETELY wrong about what was really shot by Donner in 1977. The problem wasn't Thau.. the problem was us and our ideas about some magical movie that was sealed in the vaults of Europe. The vault was opened and there was nothing there but a couple of Brando shots and 1/2 a scene of Lois jumping out a window. If the IRC didn't exist, then I might agree... but I always thought: "Ok, if there really isn't that much footage by Donner, AT LEAST it should be the quality of the IRC". That, plus seeing fan edits prove to me- sorry, it is Thau. Could the Donner cut have been improved by better editing? Sure! But editing wasn't the real problem. Picture this: The Donner Cut as it exists now but add in a COMPLETED blank bullets scene, the souflee scene and the home movies scene as directed by Donner, and get rid of the turning back time ending. This is exactly what we expected the Donner cut based on the footage we incorrectly believed was shot by Donner and not used. Now, what would you rather have: the previously mentioned Thau cut of SII with the extra Donner footage we believed to have existed....OR a SII edit by Selutron using only the Donner footage that he ACTUALLY shot??
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 27, 2016 19:21:06 GMT -5
If the IRC didn't exist, then I might agree... but I always thought: "Ok, if there really isn't that much footage by Donner, AT LEAST it should be the quality of the IRC". That, plus seeing fan edits prove to me- sorry, it is Thau. Could the Donner cut have been improved by better editing? Sure! But editing wasn't the real problem. Picture this: The Donner Cut as it exists now but add in a COMPLETED blank bullets scene, the souflee scene and the home movies scene as directed by Donner, and get rid of the turning back time ending. This is exactly what we expected the Donner cut based on the footage we incorrectly believed was shot by Donner and not used. Now, what would you rather have: the previously mentioned Thau cut of SII with the extra Donner footage we believed to have existed....OR a SII edit by Selutron using only the Donner footage that he ACTUALLY shot?? I think that's the thing: I didn't have those expectations that those sequences you mentioned were shot.... I kept expectations super-low, just in case- I was HOPING Donner had shot those other scenes, but if they weren't, then I (at the very least) wanted those extended Donner bits and scenes in dvd letterbox quality (i.e.- Arctic Police, entering the FOS, the balcony and the talk outside the FOS) cut as nice as the IRC. To see them not included, and then, when included, edited in a way that made it less effective and distracting, leads my disappointment towards the editing. If there was a bonus disc showing all the alternate takes of the 'new' cut material, I might be more forgiving- but there's no witnesses to back up or deny Thau's claim that the takes he used were the only ones that were in good condition, plus he even says that he swapped out some shots (almost always inferior ones) to make the experience feel different. My feeling was always: "if it's not broke, don't fix it". In too many cases, he fixed what wasn't broken- and made some mediocre scenes worse by bad audio choices/whatnot. Plus, fan cuts I've seen all feel superior to the RDC. It's hard to separate editing from the footage. If the takes in some cases really were the only usable ones, that's one thing, but we just don't know- and, sadly, may never know as it seems pretty unlikely we'll ever get another official SII cut....
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 5, 2016 23:38:51 GMT -5
Could the Donner cut have been improved by better editing? Sure! But editing wasn't the real problem. Picture this: The Donner Cut as it exists now but add in a COMPLETED blank bullets scene, the souflee scene and the home movies scene as directed by Donner, and get rid of the turning back time ending. This is exactly what we expected the Donner cut based on the footage we incorrectly believed was shot by Donner and not used. Now, what would you rather have: the previously mentioned Thau cut of SII with the extra Donner footage we believed to have existed....OR a SII edit by Selutron using only the Donner footage that he ACTUALLY shot?? I think that's the thing: I didn't have those expectations that those sequences you mentioned were shot.... I kept expectations super-low, just in case- I was HOPING Donner had shot those other scenes, but if they weren't, then I (at the very least) wanted those extended Donner bits and scenes in dvd letterbox quality (i.e.- Arctic Police, entering the FOS, the balcony and the talk outside the FOS) cut as nice as the IRC. To see them not included, and then, when included, edited in a way that made it less effective and distracting, leads my disappointment towards the editing. If there was a bonus disc showing all the alternate takes of the 'new' cut material, I might be more forgiving- but there's no witnesses to back up or deny Thau's claim that the takes he used were the only ones that were in good condition, plus he even says that he swapped out some shots (almost always inferior ones) to make the experience feel different. My feeling was always: "if it's not broke, don't fix it". In too many cases, he fixed what wasn't broken- and made some mediocre scenes worse by bad audio choices/whatnot. Plus, fan cuts I've seen all feel superior to the RDC. It's hard to separate editing from the footage. If the takes in some cases really were the only usable ones, that's one thing, but we just don't know- and, sadly, may never know as it seems pretty unlikely we'll ever get another official SII cut.... But isn't anyone mad that we were basically led on for 10 years about the missing footage and it turned out to be a fairy tale? I think when a lot of people found out there was barely any new Donner footage they al of a sudden became Lester/Salkind supporters.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 6, 2016 1:37:00 GMT -5
The real problem with the DonnerCut..........
was the poor commentary from Mank and Donner.
I am serious.
A good in depth ,technical and concise breakdown of each new(or reconfigured) scene as it is playing was essential in this particular instance.
This was no ordinary, conventional flick remember.
Mank and Donner needed to describe exactly why they made the artistic and technical choices they did(both 1977 and 2006)......and how Lester's footage either compromised or added to their decision making process.
It would have allayed much of the speculation that we are attributing to this flick now.
Instead all we got was a poor rehash of the commentary they provided for the STM DVD in 2000........punctuated by long periods of silence which is unforgivable given the amount of exposition that was required for this particular project.
This indicates to me that Donner was not as interested or passionate about this restoration as we make him out to be. The fact is that it was easy in the early 1980s to blow his trumpet about his superior version of SII that no one could see.
The reality is that he became aware of the limitations of what was actually shot(both in terms of quality and volume) as it was being compiled together in 2005/06.
heck i would have taken a commentary from Thau himself. It would have gone a long way to explaining the overall quality of the RDC
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 6, 2016 2:25:17 GMT -5
crown A lot of the polarization with regards to the Superman franchise(and the Lester/Donner split) unfortunately does come from Donner himself. And I actually think it is disrespectful to all those involved (from Reeve himself onwards) for Donner to keep reiterating how the Superman franchise would have been wonderful had he(and Mank) been allowed to continue. A lot of the folks that made STM special were still involved with SII & SIII(Chilvers,Perisic,Reynolds,Fields,Blake,Freeborn,Meddings,Coop ect ect). Reeve at the time(1981) explicitly said that SII was neither better nor worse than STM. Nothing would have stopped him from dissing it completely because in the same interview(Timeout-April 1981) Reeve succinctly says: "The producers are devious and untrustworthy" "The way Superman II is produced is the lowest you can go without actually cheating.....I am talking of the production .... not the film" And the cast and crew all testify that they respected Lester for coming in and helming SII, given the conditions ,which are almost unique in commercial film history. If Reeve had been alive I think Donner would have been far more respectful of SII & SIII when it came to the 2006 release of the RDC. Just imagine Routh or Cavill saying: "The way Superman Returns /Dawn Of Justice is produced is the lowest you can go without actually cheating" ...and you realize just what how pissed off Reeve was.....and the commercial gamble he took in making these claims. If Reeve had wanted to completely denigrate SII in 1981 he would have done. That that he did not(and never did) is testimony to the fact this it is exceptionally good(especially given the troubles behind the scenes and in the pre-digital age) and was received as such by contemporary reviews and the public.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 6, 2016 3:24:53 GMT -5
crown A lot of the polarization with regards to the Superman franchise(and the Lester/Donner split) unfortunately does come from Donner himself. And I actually think it is disrespectful to all those involved (from Reeve himself onwards) for Donner to keep reiterating how the Superman franchise would have been wonderful had he(and Mank) been allowed to continue. A lot of the folks that made STM special were still involved with SII & SIII(Chilvers,Perisic,Reynolds,Fields,Blake,Freeborn,Meddings,Coop ect ect). Reeve at the time(1981) explicitly said that SII was neither better nor worse than STM. Nothing would have stopped him from dissing it completely because in the same interview(Timeout-April 1981) Reeve succinctly says: "The producers are devious and untrustworthy" "The way Superman II is produced is the lowest you can go without actually cheating.....I am talking of the production .... not the film" And the cast and crew all testify that they respected Lester for coming in and helming SII, given the conditions ,which are almost unique in commercial film history. If Reeve had been alive I think Donner would have been far more respectful of SII & SIII when it came to the 2006 release of the RDC. Just imagine Routh or Cavill saying: "The way Superman Returns /Dawn Of Justice is produced is the lowest you can go without actually cheating" ...and you realize just what how pissed off Reeve was.....and the commercial gamble he took in making these claims. If Reeve had wanted to completely denigrate SII in 1981 he would have done. That that he did not(and never did) is testimony to the fact this it is exceptionally good(especially given the troubles behind the scenes and in the pre-digital age) and was received as such by contemporary reviews and the public. Dejan, there is no debate that SII turned out to be an inferior film than it would have been had Donner completed it. Also there is no debate that if Donner and Mank had completed further Superman installments, they would have been better than SIII and SIV. As far as Reeve's comments about SII at the time of release....it was pretty harsh considering he was trying to promote the film at the time. Saying SII wasn't better or worse than STM? Reeve knew it was a worse film just like he knew SIV was crap while he was telling everyone how good it was going to be.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 6, 2016 5:45:01 GMT -5
You're absolutely right btw about the crap commentary on TRDC.
I know that the production of STM and SII was essentially one single big event... but they could really have gone more in depth about what they shot, what was used, what could't be used, what they thought of Lester's scenes, how they would have completed II, the list goes on.
A missed opportunity.
Hopefully, if and when there is a definitive SII cut, we'll get some real special features and an in-depth analysis.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 6, 2016 8:03:49 GMT -5
crown A lot of the polarization with regards to the Superman franchise(and the Lester/Donner split) unfortunately does come from Donner himself. And I actually think it is disrespectful to all those involved (from Reeve himself onwards) for Donner to keep reiterating how the Superman franchise would have been wonderful had he(and Mank) been allowed to continue. A lot of the folks that made STM special were still involved with SII & SIII(Chilvers,Perisic,Reynolds,Fields,Blake,Freeborn,Meddings,Coop ect ect). Reeve at the time(1981) explicitly said that SII was neither better nor worse than STM. Nothing would have stopped him from dissing it completely because in the same interview(Timeout-April 1981) Reeve succinctly says: "The producers are devious and untrustworthy" "The way Superman II is produced is the lowest you can go without actually cheating.....I am talking of the production .... not the film" And the cast and crew all testify that they respected Lester for coming in and helming SII, given the conditions ,which are almost unique in commercial film history. If Reeve had been alive I think Donner would have been far more respectful of SII & SIII when it came to the 2006 release of the RDC. Just imagine Routh or Cavill saying: "The way Superman Returns /Dawn Of Justice is produced is the lowest you can go without actually cheating" ...and you realize just what how pissed off Reeve was.....and the commercial gamble he took in making these claims. If Reeve had wanted to completely denigrate SII in 1981 he would have done. That that he did not(and never did) is testimony to the fact this it is exceptionally good(especially given the troubles behind the scenes and in the pre-digital age) and was received as such by contemporary reviews and the public. Dejan, there is no debate that SII turned out to be an inferior film than it would have been had Donner completed it. Also there is no debate that if Donner and Mank had completed further Superman installments, they would have been better than SIII and SIV. As far as Reeve's comments about SII at the time of release....it was pretty harsh considering he was trying to promote the film at the time. Saying SII wasn't better or worse than STM? Reeve knew it was a worse film just like he knew SIV was crap while he was telling everyone how good it was going to be. It's ok bud....I know where you are coming from. In 1981 terms (for me personally) both STM and SII were exceptional(rivaled only by Star Wars and Empire). At the time SII was just that bit more wonderful than the already wonderful STM. It's a difficult thing to quantify. But obviously CAM (who was a little bit older---no offense CAM )saw it in a different light which is absolutely fine and exceedingly interesting because it went against the contemporary grain of thought......which is never easy to do. And it's a shame Donner has gone on a spree saying "my stuff is great" and "everything Lester did is crap" for the last 20 years. It is being disrespectful to a lot of his own cast and crew who stayed on with Lester......Christopher Reeve being the most prominent one. In 2016 terms with everything that has transpired STM is my personal favorite. But Lester's SII stays strong for me.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 6, 2016 10:31:10 GMT -5
Dejan, there is no debate that SII turned out to be an inferior film than it would have been had Donner completed it. Also there is no debate that if Donner and Mank had completed further Superman installments, they would have been better than SIII and SIV. As far as Reeve's comments about SII at the time of release....it was pretty harsh considering he was trying to promote the film at the time. Saying SII wasn't better or worse than STM? Reeve knew it was a worse film just like he knew SIV was crap while he was telling everyone how good it was going to be. It's ok bud....I know where you are coming from. In 1981 terms (for me personally) both STM and SII were exceptional(rivaled only by Star Wars and Empire). At the time SII was just that bit more wonderful than the already wonderful STM. It's a difficult thing to quantify. But obviously CAM (who was a little bit older---no offense CAM )saw it in a different light which is absolutely fine and exceedingly interesting because it went against the contemporary grain of thought......which is never easy to do. And it's a shame Donner has gone on a spree saying "my stuff is great" and "everything Lester did is crap" for the last 20 years. It is being disrespectful to a lot of his own cast and crew who stayed on with Lester......Christopher Reeve being the most prominent one. In 2016 terms with everything that has transpired STM is my personal favorite. But Lester's SII stays strong for me. I think Donner has earned the right to be outraged (still) over it. If Lester reshot EVERYTHING from the ground up, and it was 100%'s Lester, putting myself in Donner's shoes, I think I would be far less upset about Lester taking 100% credit on it. If Lester gave a phone call to Donner personally before taking it over (even if Lester professionally wasn't obligated to), I have a hunch that Donner wouldn't have been so outraged now, either. If Lester tried to keep the same script (which he might as well have), then it wouldn't be so insulting. In any case, there's the personal insult and the quality of the movie. If Lester kept the darkness of how the villains were supposed to be in Mank's script (with the tv quality angles/etc.) and not added all the silliness at the end, I'd probably have been fine with the final result. On a technical level, the footage matches pretty good for a single viewing- so I give Lester that, but on a creative level, I feel insulted as an audience member when something much better was already written and passed over because Lester wanted a career resuscitation over Donner's footage. Prior to STM, there was the campy "Batman" and superhero live-action was relegated to being laughable kids' material. STM gave it dignity and seriousness (for most of it), but then Lester took it away again by insisting on making SII mostly cheap laughs. Hollywood was FINALLY giving superheroes some credibility with STM- but Lester took it back. (Note how Burton's Batman didn't come until much later- and after Batman, superheroes weren't considered a giantly profitable property until Raimi's Spiderman and Singer's X-men came along) So, my beef with Lester wasn't just ruining Donner's vision of SII. It was also that Lester took what looked like (at the time) the only comics/superhero film that might ever be made on a big scale in my lifetime and made it a joke. The tide could have went the other way. If SII was treated seriously and made more money than it even made- then MAYBE (though it's a big 'if') the superhero 'boom' might have come much earlier. Still turned out ok in the end I suppose (more or less) for superhero films, now that it's a legitimate film genre, but.... eh.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 8, 2016 17:11:21 GMT -5
It's ok bud....I know where you are coming from. In 1981 terms (for me personally) both STM and SII were exceptional(rivaled only by Star Wars and Empire). At the time SII was just that bit more wonderful than the already wonderful STM. It's a difficult thing to quantify. But obviously CAM (who was a little bit older---no offense CAM )saw it in a different light which is absolutely fine and exceedingly interesting because it went against the contemporary grain of thought......which is never easy to do. And it's a shame Donner has gone on a spree saying "my stuff is great" and "everything Lester did is crap" for the last 20 years. It is being disrespectful to a lot of his own cast and crew who stayed on with Lester......Christopher Reeve being the most prominent one. In 2016 terms with everything that has transpired STM is my personal favorite. But Lester's SII stays strong for me. I think Donner has earned the right to be outraged (still) over it. If Lester reshot EVERYTHING from the ground up, and it was 100%'s Lester, putting myself in Donner's shoes, I think I would be far less upset about Lester taking 100% credit on it. If Lester gave a phone call to Donner personally before taking it over (even if Lester professionally wasn't obligated to), I have a hunch that Donner wouldn't have been so outraged now, either. If Lester tried to keep the same script (which he might as well have), then it wouldn't be so insulting. In any case, there's the personal insult and the quality of the movie. If Lester kept the darkness of how the villains were supposed to be in Mank's script (with the tv quality angles/etc.) and not added all the silliness at the end, I'd probably have been fine with the final result. On a technical level, the footage matches pretty good for a single viewing- so I give Lester that, but on a creative level, I feel insulted as an audience member when something much better was already written and passed over because Lester wanted a career resuscitation over Donner's footage. Prior to STM, there was the campy "Batman" and superhero live-action was relegated to being laughable kids' material. STM gave it dignity and seriousness (for most of it), but then Lester took it away again by insisting on making SII mostly cheap laughs. Hollywood was FINALLY giving superheroes some credibility with STM- but Lester took it back. (Note how Burton's Batman didn't come until much later- and after Batman, superheroes weren't considered a giantly profitable property until Raimi's Spiderman and Singer's X-men came along) So, my beef with Lester wasn't just ruining Donner's vision of SII. It was also that Lester took what looked like (at the time) the only comics/superhero film that might ever be made on a big scale in my lifetime and made it a joke. The tide could have went the other way. If SII was treated seriously and made more money than it even made- then MAYBE (though it's a big 'if') the superhero 'boom' might have come much earlier. Still turned out ok in the end I suppose (more or less) for superhero films, now that it's a legitimate film genre, but.... eh. Hi CAM Just re-read that Timeout Article from April 1981. Reeve admits that : "I was really apprehensive because suddenly there was this script that I didn't feel was anywhere near as good as what Donner worked on for Part II" But he goes onto say: "Part of the reason that SII is such a good movie is due to Lester's enormous skill as a director. If it it hadn't been for that and the major legacy left behind by Donner and his footage, which I estimate at around 25% including all the material with Gene Hackman ,who never came back to shoot with Lester- it would have been a joke." Note Reeve said that SII could have been a joke......not that it was a joke. And that is a big distinction. If SII was a joke......I think Reeve and Kidder would have said it there and then. Reading this now i am surprised at just how candid these interviews are. Honestly......I think Donner is peeved that Lester managed to exact better performances during the crucial new/re-shoots of the Reeve/Kidder scenes(for SII) which exuded just the right balance of emotion and chemistry which was commensurate with that stage of their relationship(i.e ---they were already familiar with each other.) You say find Lester's Lois's unfriendly. I actually find her to be more contemplative,rational and understanding towards Clark(and eventually Supes when he reveals his ID) in SII......that is a tribute to both Kidder and Lester. If anything her outright dismissal of Clark in STM is more "unfriendly".....of course this was counterbalanced by her affection for Supes which made Kidder's portrayal so enjoyable. IMHO.....her performance is more mature in SII....but just as enjoyable. She admits as much in the interview with Timeout: "Lester was under tremendous pressure(because of the crew's affection for Donner)arriving on set and he did a good job" Even Donner admits in the same Timeout interview: "I wish Superman II well.... .I think it's going to do big business" He knew it was pretty darn good.......no matter how much bad feelings he had. I believe the real reason why Superhero flicks did not take off after Superman was because the tech was just not there to make these type of flicks in an economical way. Superman I & II proved how difficult the production could be to pull off these movies.....it was a gamble studios just did not want to take given the time and expense. Listening to the commentary track , I was staggered to find that the Russos did not even have a script for Civil War when the Winter Soldier came out in 2014!! The tech is now there to knock these films off in double quick time. Script preps for STM & SII began in 1975......nearly 4 years before STM hit theaters. That says it all.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 13, 2016 3:21:08 GMT -5
I think Donner has earned the right to be outraged (still) over it. If Lester reshot EVERYTHING from the ground up, and it was 100%'s Lester, putting myself in Donner's shoes, I think I would be far less upset about Lester taking 100% credit on it. If Lester gave a phone call to Donner personally before taking it over (even if Lester professionally wasn't obligated to), I have a hunch that Donner wouldn't have been so outraged now, either. If Lester tried to keep the same script (which he might as well have), then it wouldn't be so insulting. In any case, there's the personal insult and the quality of the movie. If Lester kept the darkness of how the villains were supposed to be in Mank's script (with the tv quality angles/etc.) and not added all the silliness at the end, I'd probably have been fine with the final result. On a technical level, the footage matches pretty good for a single viewing- so I give Lester that, but on a creative level, I feel insulted as an audience member when something much better was already written and passed over because Lester wanted a career resuscitation over Donner's footage. Prior to STM, there was the campy "Batman" and superhero live-action was relegated to being laughable kids' material. STM gave it dignity and seriousness (for most of it), but then Lester took it away again by insisting on making SII mostly cheap laughs. Hollywood was FINALLY giving superheroes some credibility with STM- but Lester took it back. (Note how Burton's Batman didn't come until much later- and after Batman, superheroes weren't considered a giantly profitable property until Raimi's Spiderman and Singer's X-men came along) So, my beef with Lester wasn't just ruining Donner's vision of SII. It was also that Lester took what looked like (at the time) the only comics/superhero film that might ever be made on a big scale in my lifetime and made it a joke. The tide could have went the other way. If SII was treated seriously and made more money than it even made- then MAYBE (though it's a big 'if') the superhero 'boom' might have come much earlier. Still turned out ok in the end I suppose (more or less) for superhero films, now that it's a legitimate film genre, but.... eh. Hi CAM Just re-read that Timeout Article from April 1981. Reeve admits that : "I was really apprehensive because suddenly there was this script that I didn't feel was anywhere near as good as what Donner worked on for Part II" But he goes onto say: "Part of the reason that SII is such a good movie is due to Lester's enormous skill as a director. If it it hadn't been for that and the major legacy left behind by Donner and his footage, which I estimate at around 25% including all the material with Gene Hackman ,who never came back to shoot with Lester- it would have been a joke." Note Reeve said that SII could have been a joke......not that it was a joke. And that is a big distinction. If SII was a joke......I think Reeve and Kidder would have said it there and then. Reading this now i am surprised at just how candid these interviews are. Honestly......I think Donner is peeved that Lester managed to exact better performances during the crucial new/re-shoots of the Reeve/Kidder scenes(for SII) which exuded just the right balance of emotion and chemistry which was commensurate with that stage of their relationship(i.e ---they were already familiar with each other.) You say find Lester's Lois's unfriendly. I actually find her to be more contemplative,rational and understanding towards Clark(and eventually Supes when he reveals his ID) in SII......that is a tribute to both Kidder and Lester. If anything her outright dismissal of Clark in STM is more "unfriendly".....of course this was counterbalanced by her affection for Supes which made Kidder's portrayal so enjoyable. IMHO.....her performance is more mature in SII....but just as enjoyable. She admits as much in the interview with Timeout: "Lester was under tremendous pressure(because of the crew's affection for Donner)arriving on set and he did a good job" Even Donner admits in the same Timeout interview: "I wish Superman II well.... .I think it's going to do big business" He knew it was pretty darn good.......no matter how much bad feelings he had. I believe the real reason why Superhero flicks did not take off after Superman was because the tech was just not there to make these type of flicks in an economical way. Superman I & II proved how difficult the production could be to pull off these movies.....it was a gamble studios just did not want to take given the time and expense. Listening to the commentary track , I was staggered to find that the Russos did not even have a script for Civil War when the Winter Soldier came out in 2014!! The tech is now there to knock these films off in double quick time. Script preps for STM & SII began in 1975......nearly 4 years before STM hit theaters. That says it all. I completely disagree about your assessment of Lester's Lois. I'd say THE biggest loss Superman II suffered under Lester was the absolute destruction of Lois's character. Donner's Lois was pretty, smart, and a go-getter. And she had a GOAL in the film... she "got the man I love to love me" Under Lester, Lois was ugly.. looked anorexic was a chain smoker and was cynical. She didn't even get Superman to reveal his identity.. she just sat there like a depressed lump doing nothing wallowing in her self pity until Clark felt bad. Lois was supposed to be the perky upbeat vivacious character and Clark was the shy guy repressed guy.. but Lester SWITCHED their characters! Why would CLARK be excited to be in Niagra Falls but Lois be complaining about it? Lois was so appealing in Donner's SII and so UNAPPEALING in Lester's SII that it's not even funny. No one could believe Superman would give up his powers for Lester's rat Lois and the love story was destroyed. The only reason the magic kiss scene works dramatically is because Lois is SUPPOSED to be a wrecked mess.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 13, 2016 14:23:56 GMT -5
crownI respect your opinion Turns out Kidder was going through a divorce during the completion of SII with Lester. She gave an interview for the main feature of Rolling Stone(July 1981)......massive photo on the cover. Regarding SII Kidder says: "I went on set and every so often I said ""oh Superman,oh Superman"". At one point I said ""this is sick.I felt like the most immoral human being whoever walked the face of this earth.I mean, here i was making a ridiculous amount of money for doing absolutely piss fracking all"
However she does go on to say: "I like the second one a lot ,It's definitely funnier and faster but it is hard for me to compare II with I because they are separate movies and they will have separate appeal."
Only thing is that in Lester's SII....at no point does she say "oh Superman"! She did in the Donner version though(according to the screen play) which raises an interesting question.......was that love scene with Donner filmed and subsequently lost. Or are there parts of the Lester shoot that were left on the cutting room floor.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 14, 2016 0:22:33 GMT -5
crownI respect your opinion Turns out Kidder was going through a divorce during the completion of SII with Lester. She gave an interview for the main feature of Rolling Stone(July 1981)......massive photo on the cover. Regarding SII Kidder says: "I went on set and every so often I said ""oh Superman,oh Superman"". At one point I said ""this is sick.I felt like the most immoral human being whoever walked the face of this earth.I mean, here i was making a ridiculous amount of money for doing absolutely piss fracking all"
However she does go on to say: "I like the second one a lot ,It's definitely funnier and faster but it is hard for me to compare II with I because they are separate movies and they will have separate appeal."
Only thing is that in Lester's SII....at no point does she say "oh Superman"! She did in the Donner version though(according to the screen play) which raises an interesting question.......was that love scene with Donner filmed and subsequently lost. Or are there parts of the Lester shoot that were left on the cutting room floor. Kidder also referred to that scene in talking with Chevy Chase during her stint on Saturday Night Live. What's so bizzare is how it sounded like everything was highly organized during the 'search' for all the missing STM/SII pieces, but still pieces like the death of the Kryptonian guard was available for the IRC in STM, but somehow impossible to find. I'm curious about that Rolling Stone interview. I assume it was AFTER Lester's version came out? Or was Kidder interviewed before the reshoots with Lester began, and she's referring to only the script and what was already shot up to this point?
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 14, 2016 0:29:52 GMT -5
This view of Lois I agree with--- it took all the positive aspects of Lois in the Mank script, but was still funny. In Lester's rewrite- the dominant part of her constantly someone who was obsessed and disappointed with Superman not noticing her. It's not necessarily an incorrect interpretation from the comics, just a more unpleasant one with a weird resolution. (When she 'gets' Superman/Clark, it's incredibly awkward- look at the 'dinner' scene at the FOS... once they 'talk', it's very odd, almost anti-climactic as if she's not sure that getting Supes is what she wanted after all- versus in the Mank script- she's totally in charge, leading Supes in the romance- but the tragedy being when he steps into the chamber, when it's a 'jeez, what have I DONE' moment for Lois). Anyhow- pity things couldn't have been slightly different in history. Even if DOnner didn't stick around for the battle scenes, it would have been nice for him to have finished a couple of the Lois/Clark scenes that were (considerably) lower budget and at least satisfy that part of Donner's vision.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 14, 2016 22:39:08 GMT -5
Great analysis CAM!
Yes I agree that the dinner scene in the FOS was awkward and weird.... Superman is really the one leading Lois on instead of the other way around that Mank wrote. Again, for some reason Lester decided to switch the characters of Lois and Clark in his re-writes.
It actually makes sense that he didn't opt for the blank bullets scene... can you imagine Lester's frail meek and mousy Lois firing a gun at Clark??
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 14, 2016 23:51:31 GMT -5
Great analysis CAM! Yes I agree that the dinner scene in the FOS was awkward and weird.... Superman is really the one leading Lois on instead of the other way around that Mank wrote. Again, for some reason Lester decided to switch the characters of Lois and Clark in his re-writes. It actually makes sense that he didn't opt for the blank bullets scene... can you imagine Lester's frail meek and mousy Lois firing a gun at Clark?? Thanks Crown, again, I don't think that the Lester rewrite is a 'wrong' interpretation from the comics--- but it is one that makes her pretty unappealing to the audience. And, if you think about it, it's a pretty depressing journey for Lois that has a weird resolution. With the Donner/Mank version, the characters are more 'pure'. The complaining Clark is an act after all, and (as you mentioned) Lois is positive, a go-getter, and nobly understands why things have to end- even if it hurts. She only starts to break down with the depowering and the defeat of the criminals. I guess if the complete Donner version was never meant to happen, at least we have the screenplays and MOST of the footage to get a sense of what we would have gotten. Here's hoping any other unreleased footage from SII gets released and/or storyboards get 'unearthed' (where the heck do they go, anyways? On another note, aren't all the older screenplay drafts kept in a WB or Writer's Guild library somewhere? Or is someone just unwilling to scan and share a 400 page document?)
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 15, 2016 23:40:30 GMT -5
Evidence Donner shot the home movies sequence?
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 15, 2016 23:56:15 GMT -5
Evidence Donner shot the home movies sequence? I dunno.... Reeve looks a little heavier in that photo, like he did for the Lester reshoots. He was pretty lean during the Donner times...
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 18, 2016 2:51:25 GMT -5
Evidence Donner shot the home movies sequence? I dunno.... Reeve looks a little heavier in that photo, like he did for the Lester reshoots. He was pretty lean during the Donner times... But the spit curl screams Donner....
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 18, 2016 16:04:16 GMT -5
I dunno.... Reeve looks a little heavier in that photo, like he did for the Lester reshoots. He was pretty lean during the Donner times... But the spit curl screams Donner.... I dunno. I still think its a Lester photo shoot, just based on how much heavier he looks.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 18, 2016 18:04:46 GMT -5
Would Thau have put in the deleted scenes on the DVD if they hadn't already shown up in the RIC?
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 19, 2016 2:14:36 GMT -5
Would Thau have put in the deleted scenes on the DVD if they hadn't already shown up in the RIC? Who knows what went on in Thau's head when he was putting together the RDC? I know just that he said that he considered putting in NEW effects (gag) if he ended up using them. UGH!
|
|