dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 29, 2016 2:22:37 GMT -5
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,768
|
Post by atp on Aug 29, 2016 3:54:03 GMT -5
Well, I guess she'll be excluded from the facebook group too.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 29, 2016 7:37:50 GMT -5
Well, I guess she'll be excluded from the facebook group too. You can add Richard Donner,Sarah Douglas,Valerie Perrine,Terence Stamp and Ilya Salkind to that "Exclusion Group".......all pure MOS bashers...each and everyone of em'
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 29, 2016 8:44:00 GMT -5
Thanks for this Dejan. What I've always liked about Kidder is she shares Lois Lanes attitude. She's never afraid to share her honest opinion and doesn't give a damm if she pisses off anyone in the movie business. Lois Lanes roles in these movies have stunk. They're underwritten and cliched and yes I include all three of the last Superman movies including Superman Returns.
Also I LOLed at how honest she was about her...uh...romantic exploits. She's a lot like Carrie Fisher. I'd love to drop Kidder and Fisher in their primes right in the middle of 1980s New York with nothing but a big bowl of cocaine and see what happens.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 29, 2016 9:48:45 GMT -5
Thanks for this Dejan. What I've always liked about Kidder is she shares Lois Lanes attitude. She's never afraid to share her honest opinion and doesn't give a damm if she pisses off anyone in the movie business. Lois Lanes roles in these movies have stunk. They're underwritten and cliched and yes I include all three of the last Superman movies including Superman Returns. Also I LOLed at how honest she was about her...uh...romantic exploits. She's a lot like Carrie Fisher. I'd love to drop Kidder and Fisher in their primes right in the middle of 1980s New York with nothing but a big bowl of cocaine and see what happens. lol. To be honest it seems like much of the original cast from STM just had more interesting life stories. Chris Reeve had already partaken in anti Vietnam protests,flown the atlantic + all the theater stuff (with Katherine Hepburn). Marlon Brando.....well he was Marlon F****g Brando...he did loads of stuff....campaigning for Martin Luther King,sticking up for the native Indians ect. Gene Hackman served in the US military. Terence Stamp lived in India ect O' Halloran was a boxer. ect ect So these folks just had a wider variety of life experiences which they used to punctuate their onscreen performances. I think Cavill said he was busy playing a computer game when he got the call from Snyder. That says it all. To be fair I think Cavill did some road trip in Mongolia and stuff so he may have a more interesting personal resume'. But in general the contemporary SR and MOS/DOJ cast just seem more bland.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 29, 2016 10:14:56 GMT -5
Thanks for this Dejan. What I've always liked about Kidder is she shares Lois Lanes attitude. She's never afraid to share her honest opinion and doesn't give a damm if she pisses off anyone in the movie business. Lois Lanes roles in these movies have stunk. They're underwritten and cliched and yes I include all three of the last Superman movies including Superman Returns. Also I LOLed at how honest she was about her...uh...romantic exploits. She's a lot like Carrie Fisher. I'd love to drop Kidder and Fisher in their primes right in the middle of 1980s New York with nothing but a big bowl of cocaine and see what happens. lol. To be honest it seems like much of the original cast from STM just had more interesting life stories. Chris Reeve had already partaken in anti Vietnam protests,flown the atlantic + all the theater stuff (with Katherine Hepburn). Marlon Brando.....well he was Marlon F****g Brando...he did loads of stuff....campaigning for Martin Luther King,sticking up for the native Indians ect. Gene Hackman served in the US military. Terence Stamp lived in India ect O' Halloran was a boxer. ect ect So these folks just had a wider variety of life experiences which they used to punctuate their onscreen performances. I think Cavill said he was busy playing a computer game when he got the call from Snyder. That says it all. To be fair I think Cavill did some road trip in Mongolia and stuff so he may have a more interesting personal resume'. But in general the contemporary SR and MOS/DOJ cast just seem more bland. Well...for one thing look who is assembling these casts. Donner had more experience and personality than Snyder too. I think it's a combination of a generational drop off in the talents that are getting the big opportunities in Hollywood and the big shots just not giving them good material. Good actors are out there but it's more about looks than ever. you have writers director and casting agents either towing the studio line by picking cardboard performers or them genuinely not knowing great talent if it kicked them in the @ss. Fant4stic had a solid cast who were all talented but Trank is some entitled cokehead weirdo little sh!t who wanted his actors to act as socially awkward as he is in real life. Snyders the same way. Some wannabe aging gym rat who wishes he was cool and good looking so he plays out his manchild fantasies vicariously through his vapid power trip superheroes.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Aug 29, 2016 13:13:24 GMT -5
Well, I guess she'll be excluded from the facebook group too. That's ok. She seems to be very much at home here, Mr. ATP.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 29, 2016 13:49:20 GMT -5
lol. To be honest it seems like much of the original cast from STM just had more interesting life stories. Chris Reeve had already partaken in anti Vietnam protests,flown the atlantic + all the theater stuff (with Katherine Hepburn). Marlon Brando.....well he was Marlon F****g Brando...he did loads of stuff....campaigning for Martin Luther King,sticking up for the native Indians ect. Gene Hackman served in the US military. Terence Stamp lived in India ect O' Halloran was a boxer. ect ect So these folks just had a wider variety of life experiences which they used to punctuate their onscreen performances. I think Cavill said he was busy playing a computer game when he got the call from Snyder. That says it all. To be fair I think Cavill did some road trip in Mongolia and stuff so he may have a more interesting personal resume'. But in general the contemporary SR and MOS/DOJ cast just seem more bland. Well...for one thing look who is assembling these casts. Donner had more experience and personality than Snyder too. I think it's a combination of a generational drop off in the talents that are getting the big opportunities in Hollywood and the big shots just not giving them good material. Good actors are out there but it's more about looks than ever. you have writers director and casting agents either towing the studio line by picking cardboard performers or them genuinely not knowing great talent if it kicked them in the @ss. Fant4stic had a solid cast who were all talented but Trank is some entitled cokehead weirdo little sh!t who wanted his actors to act as socially awkward as he is in real life. Snyders the same way. Some wannabe aging gym rat who wishes he was cool and good looking so he plays out his manchild fantasies vicariously through his vapid power trip superheroes. lol(wannabe aging gym rat-superb) But bang on the button as usual in terms of your analysis. It frustrates me that Donner got fired for making a classic and Snyder keeps going despite missing the marks artistically (if not financially).
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 29, 2016 17:24:28 GMT -5
Well...for one thing look who is assembling these casts. Donner had more experience and personality than Snyder too. I think it's a combination of a generational drop off in the talents that are getting the big opportunities in Hollywood and the big shots just not giving them good material. Good actors are out there but it's more about looks than ever. you have writers director and casting agents either towing the studio line by picking cardboard performers or them genuinely not knowing great talent if it kicked them in the @ss. Fant4stic had a solid cast who were all talented but Trank is some entitled cokehead weirdo little sh!t who wanted his actors to act as socially awkward as he is in real life. Snyders the same way. Some wannabe aging gym rat who wishes he was cool and good looking so he plays out his manchild fantasies vicariously through his vapid power trip superheroes. lol(wannabe aging gym rat-superb) But bang on the button as usual in terms of your analysis. It frustrates me that Donner got fired for making a classic and Snyder keeps going despite missing the marks artistically (if not financially). I don't care so much about (for the most part) creative people's personal stuff- but mainly what appears onscreen, and if there's enough brilliance onscreen, I tend to not care if someone is an egotist or whatnot.... but if something I have great fondness for gets mucked up in the process by a creator AND they have views (on top of it) that bug the heck out of me, then its insult added to injury. (i.e. "Fun" killing off Jimmy Olsen's character. Ug.) I had frustration that Snyder keeps getting support when I felt that Singer had a much tougher job in respecting STM and updating... and got (enough) RIGHT, but got bashed by the fans and not enough support for a sequel. As far as frustration with Donner- I was frustrated with the Salkinds, but much moreso with Lester. Lester could have done a competent tv-movie like job completing SII, but with a Donner-esque tone for what was intended. If Lester had replaced Donner right at the start, before Donner finished (at least) half of the movie- there might be less resentment, but at the same time, we wouldn't have gotten all the great stuff that Donner DID shoot for SII. In another thread, I think we all talked about alternative 'replacement' directors at the time that could have finished it up properly- but I have a feeling that those who did recognize what Donner did, didn't want to step on his toes.... and if they succeeded in finishing it the way Donner might have wanted, may have felt that DOnner would get the whole credit. I wonder if they had offered Mank the job of writing AND directing (with Donner's blessing) the rest of SII (with lowered budget) if things would have been ok enough?
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 29, 2016 20:10:06 GMT -5
I think Snyder is just a favorite of someone at WB. He's one of their in house/studio boys and they like his style especially with the gaming industry being huge. He's got that kind of graphic heavy style. 300 was a big hit, got his foot in the door there, and every film he's directed or produced since has been for Warner Bros. that's not a coincidence. If he did it once with 300 they think he can do it again. That's why he keeps getting chances. Singer was more of an outsider to the studio when he first signed on for SR.
The other big difference between Singer and Snyders situations is Snyder got on board during the big trend of superhero shared unverses and crossover films. Singer didn't. WB felt they could start over after SR. I don't think they feel that way now. They want to make that Marvel money ASAP. They want to do it before they probably feel like the bubble will burst. If they started over now it would take years to get where they want to be and with Snyder being so involved with all these films I think they're afraid no one else could step into his role right now. He's just too intertwined with everything. Justice League started filming right after BVS came out. There was no time to make that kind of director change.
If the roles were reversed and Snyder came in right after Dawn of The Dead to make a Superman movie for WB in 2006 and it underperformed I think he would have been let go.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 29, 2016 22:13:38 GMT -5
I think Snyder is just a favorite of someone at WB. He's one of their in house/studio boys and they like his style especially with the gaming industry being huge. He's got that kind of graphic heavy style. 300 was a big hit, got his foot in the door there, and every film he's directed or produced since has been for Warner Bros. that's not a coincidence. If he did it once with 300 they think he can do it again. That's why he keeps getting chances. Singer was more of an outsider to the studio when he first signed on for SR. The other big difference between Singer and Snyders situations is Snyder got on board during the big trend of superhero shared unverses and crossover films. Singer didn't. WB felt they could start over after SR. I don't think they feel that way now. They want to make that Marvel money ASAP. They want to do it before they probably feel like the bubble will burst. If they started over now it would take years to get where they want to be and with Snyder being so involved with all these films I think they're afraid no one else could step into his role right now. He's just too intertwined with everything. Justice League started filming right after BVS came out. There was no time to make that kind of director change. If the roles were reversed and Snyder came in right after Dawn of The Dead to make a Superman movie for WB in 2006 and it underperformed I think he would have been let go. I agree. Thanks to Marvel, WB has been pushed out of its usual 'let's keep things in limbo' mode that they usually have taken with superhero properties.... but the ships that WB has invested in have already left the docks. I do wonder if Superman will get pushed more and more to the side.... and whether or not WB can actually do all the films that they're getting into pre-production. I saw that Cannon documentary about how they grew overconfident and expanded too fast, causing its collapse. Will see if the same thing happens here.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 1, 2016 6:10:25 GMT -5
lol(wannabe aging gym rat-superb) But bang on the button as usual in terms of your analysis. It frustrates me that Donner got fired for making a classic and Snyder keeps going despite missing the marks artistically (if not financially). I don't care so much about (for the most part) creative people's personal stuff- but mainly what appears onscreen, and if there's enough brilliance onscreen, I tend to not care if someone is an egotist or whatnot.... but if something I have great fondness for gets mucked up in the process by a creator AND they have views (on top of it) that bug the heck out of me, then its insult added to injury. (i.e. "Fun" killing off Jimmy Olsen's character. Ug.) I had frustration that Snyder keeps getting support when I felt that Singer had a much tougher job in respecting STM and updating... and got (enough) RIGHT, but got bashed by the fans and not enough support for a sequel. As far as frustration with Donner- I was frustrated with the Salkinds, but much moreso with Lester. Lester could have done a competent tv-movie like job completing SII, but with a Donner-esque tone for what was intended. If Lester had replaced Donner right at the start, before Donner finished (at least) half of the movie- there might be less resentment, but at the same time, we wouldn't have gotten all the great stuff that Donner DID shoot for SII. In another thread, I think we all talked about alternative 'replacement' directors at the time that could have finished it up properly- but I have a feeling that those who did recognize what Donner did, didn't want to step on his toes.... and if they succeeded in finishing it the way Donner might have wanted, may have felt that DOnner would get the whole credit. I wonder if they had offered Mank the job of writing AND directing (with Donner's blessing) the rest of SII (with lowered budget) if things would have been ok enough? I don't think Mank had the directing expertise(as of 1979 ) to take on the job. SII was a massive production(both under Donner and Lester). Dragnet and Delirious which were made 8-9 years after SII revealed Mank to be ok as a director but he would have lacked the flair that either Donner or Lester could bring to the project. As a writer ....no probs. Mank was perfect as a script doctor. As a script creator....again I am not so sure. My frustration is with all concerned. The Salkinds ,Lester AND Donner too. It was a big mistake(no matter how justified) to tell Spengler to get off the project. Spengler was Donner's boss. If you tell your boss to go to heck.......you will get fired. So Donner's own behavior is far from commendable. It could be that Donner thought that because so much of SII was in the can by 1978.....that there was no way they could fire him. Maybe Donner thought that the Salkinds would not run the risk and expense of re-shooting so much material with a new director. In effect Donner could have been using that SII footage in 1979 as leverage against Spengler. Hmmmm.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 1, 2016 10:51:53 GMT -5
I don't care so much about (for the most part) creative people's personal stuff- but mainly what appears onscreen, and if there's enough brilliance onscreen, I tend to not care if someone is an egotist or whatnot.... but if something I have great fondness for gets mucked up in the process by a creator AND they have views (on top of it) that bug the heck out of me, then its insult added to injury. (i.e. "Fun" killing off Jimmy Olsen's character. Ug.) I had frustration that Snyder keeps getting support when I felt that Singer had a much tougher job in respecting STM and updating... and got (enough) RIGHT, but got bashed by the fans and not enough support for a sequel. As far as frustration with Donner- I was frustrated with the Salkinds, but much moreso with Lester. Lester could have done a competent tv-movie like job completing SII, but with a Donner-esque tone for what was intended. If Lester had replaced Donner right at the start, before Donner finished (at least) half of the movie- there might be less resentment, but at the same time, we wouldn't have gotten all the great stuff that Donner DID shoot for SII. In another thread, I think we all talked about alternative 'replacement' directors at the time that could have finished it up properly- but I have a feeling that those who did recognize what Donner did, didn't want to step on his toes.... and if they succeeded in finishing it the way Donner might have wanted, may have felt that DOnner would get the whole credit. I wonder if they had offered Mank the job of writing AND directing (with Donner's blessing) the rest of SII (with lowered budget) if things would have been ok enough? I don't think Mank had the directing expertise(as of 1979 ) to take on the job. SII was a massive production(both under Donner and Lester). Dragnet and Delirious which were made 8-9 years after SII revealed Mank to be ok as a director but he would have lacked the flair that either Donner or Lester could bring to the project. As a writer ....no probs. Mank was perfect as a script doctor. As a script creator....again I am not so sure. My frustration is with all concerned. The Salkinds ,Lester AND Donner too. It was a big mistake(no matter how justified) to tell Spengler to get off the project. Spengler was Donner's boss. If you tell your boss to go to heck.......you will get fired. So Donner's own behavior is far from commendable. It could be that Donner thought that because so much of SII was in the can by 1978.....that there was no way they could fire him. Maybe Donner thought that the Salkinds would not run the risk and expense of re-shooting so much material with a new director. In effect Donner could have been using that SII footage in 1979 as leverage against Spengler. Hmmmm. Mank would have kept the integrity (or at least the intentions) of the draft of the script Donner was set to direct, I would think- even if he had to scale down the action to save $... plus, I imagine Reeve and Kidder (and the other actors) would have given Mank the trust knowing that Mank and Donner were good pals (plus, Mank's name was on all their scripts). The 'visual flair' imo that Lester provided was primarily two shots: (1) the shirt-rip, and maybe one single shot that's a reshoot of 'General, would you care to step outside?'. The damage Lester did outweighed any pluses on SII imo. I do agree that what Donner did was incredibly foolish. Egos run Hollywood it seems far more than even money. Don't criticize the boss or the boss's #1 guy.... agreed. Donner probably felt safe with STM being a giant success that he wouldn't be let go (especially with half shot already for SII)- but the suspicions about Lester waiting to take over (and take full credit) turned out to be true. If history had even been slightly different - if, for example, Donner hadn't said what he did--- would Donner have dug in his heels to keep Brando? Or were the Salkinds waiting for an excuse and might have let Donner go and let sneaky Lester take over anyhow? It's nice that Singer was interested in bringing back interest in the Donner Superman films- if SR had been a giant boxoffice success, I wonder if WB would have continued to go back to the vaults to try to cash in on more Donner material afterwards. Ah well.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 1, 2016 15:42:23 GMT -5
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 1, 2016 16:07:45 GMT -5
@cam Lester maintains that Guy Hamilton took the reigns of SII after Donner was sent the famous telegram telling him he was fired. But according to Wiki Hamilton directed a film called "The Mirror Cracked" which was released in late 1980.......so it seems unlikely that he could have tackled SII in mid 1979 as he surely would have been preoccupied shooting/doing pre-production on the The Mirror Cracked. Thinking about it more it definitely seems like Donner thought that because so much of SII was in the can that there was no way the Salkinds would gamble on firing him. In the commentary Ilya says that they took a tremendous risk in firing Donner and going back to the drawing board. Something obviously bad happened between Spengler and Donner and only those two chaps can clarify exactly what went down. Going back to Mank......i dunno ....maybe he could have pulled it off. Donner only had(in terms of films--not TV) the Omen behind him when he took on Superman. Which is still more than Mank at that point(late 1978). Lester by that point had already amassed a huge litany of films so was by far the more experienced director. In terms of flair.....I think he had it. The Eiffel Tower Sequence,Niagra falls,HoneyMoon Haven,The FOS reshoots and the Metroplis climax are all incredibly well done from a technical stand point. For 1978/79 I don't think it could have been executed better(no matter which Director was in charge) I used to believe Donner's "the best parts of SII are mine meme" before the rest of Donner's SII footage was released in the RDC. But looking at it objectively IMHO Lester's imprint is the strongest with regards to SII But obviously Donner had some great stuff there too which Lester used judiciously to augment the film from a storytelling point of view. It's amazing SII turned out to be a smash given the huge troubles behind it......and in the pre CGI era. Now anything can fixed digitally. And let's be honest all the contemporary reviews had no qualms with SII at the time of it's release. Timeout did a massive article on went down behind the scenes of SII in April 1981. And that remained the definitive break down for the best part of 20 years before Supermancinema took the matter into their own hands.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 1, 2016 19:09:16 GMT -5
@cam Lester maintains that Guy Hamilton took the reigns of SII after Donner was sent the famous telegram telling him he was fired. But according to Wiki Hamilton directed a film called "The Mirror Cracked" which was released in late 1980.......so it seems unlikely that he could have tackled SII in mid 1979 as he surely would have been preoccupied shooting/doing pre-production on the The Mirror Cracked. Thinking about it more it definitely seems like Donner thought that because so much of SII was in the can that there was no way the Salkinds would gamble on firing him. In the commentary Ilya says that they took a tremendous risk in firing Donner and going back to the drawing board. Something obviously bad happened between Spengler and Donner and only those two chaps can clarify exactly what went down. Going back to Mank......i dunno ....maybe he could have pulled it off. Donner only had(in terms of films--not TV) the Omen behind him when he took on Superman. Which is still more than Mank at that point(late 1978). Lester by that point had already amassed a huge litany of films so was by far the more experienced director. In terms of flair.....I think he had it. The Eiffel Tower Sequence,Niagra falls,HoneyMoon Haven,The FOS reshoots and the Metroplis climax are all incredibly well done from a technical stand point. For 1978/79 I don't think it could have been executed better(no matter which Director was in charge) I used to believe Donner's "the best parts of SII are mine meme" before the rest of Donner's SII footage was released in the RDC. But looking at it objectively IMHO Lester's imprint is the strongest with regards to SII But obviously Donner had some great stuff there too which Lester used judiciously to augment the film from a storytelling point of view. It's amazing SII turned out to be a smash given the huge troubles behind it......and in the pre CGI era. Now anything can fixed digitally. And let's be honest all the contemporary reviews had no qualms with SII at the time of it's release. Timeout did a massive article on went down behind the scenes of SII in April 1981. And that remained the definitive break down for the best part of 20 years before Supermancinema took the matter into their own hands. Lester was more experienced.... which is why he should have known what a stab in the back it was/is to throw out the original director's footage, change it greatly in a way not intended by him, and then not correct people when critics gave Lester credit for all the great Donner sequences for years! My own distaste of Lester and SII didn't come from an expose- or even the fact that he was taking over (I read it in the newspaper at the time and was curious/excited as I loved The Three Musketeers movie he did) it was from watching the movie the first time.... changing the Pzone criminals into comedic schtick halfway through the movie wasn't as totally offensive (to me) as the Metro battle hijinx. If you're getting paid to complete an artist's work- unless you totally want to disrespect him or her- then you do it in the way that the original artist intended. The Mank script and STM was there to study. The reshoots could have been better if they stuck to the script (particularly Honeymoon Haven/Niagara which actually would have been CHEAPER ironically!)--- the dynamic between Clark and Lois is greatly different. Clark is the whiner in the Mank version, Lois is the perky funny one. Reviews I acknowledge, but I'm going by my own judgement from the first time I saw SII and was incredibly let down. (All the reviews were raves without knowing 1/2 was Donner at the time). If the tone originally intended had been the same, I really feel that SII would have made more money than it did. Being in the theatres when it was on, I remembered the cheers when Supes appears in front of the Daily Planet.... and the silence that came up pretty soon after the first hit by Non. No laughs whatsoever during the 'blowing' scene. It's a pity that Ilya (according to his own commentary) was too distracted to put more control on Lester to keep it more in line. I always thought it a credit to Ilya that he's always said (even during the SII release time) that he preferred the final product of STM to SII. As far as what Donner could have done- either with reshoots at the time or not, I think there IS a good way to tell--- the quality of Donner's movies around the same time frame and Lester's quality of movies. (Donner's dramas are/were great: "Inside Moves", "Ladyhawke", the first couple of Lethal Weapon movies--- the comedies not so much: "The Toy", "Lethal Weapon 4".... Lester had "Superman III" and "Five Musketeers"- both pretty darn weak). It's not a knee-jerk response. I was HOPING that Lester would have brought something even better to the Donner Superman films- not make it worse, as he did. (Outside of a few nice shots) In the end, SII is a 'good' movie with great parts but more mediocre ones with Lester finishing it. If any 'ok' director finished it with the same Mank script or kept it serious, I can't see them going as wrong as Lester did - but Lester wanted to show off his comedic genius (wasn't the blowing stuff just hilarious? Ugh!) and take full credit of DOnner's work. If Lester hadn't had such a big ego and if he hadn't been in such desperate need to relaunch his career, I think he would have done the job of just completing another artists's work the way it was intended. Oh well..... I know many disagree, (and of course, everyone has a right to their own experience) but this is my own feeling on it.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,134
|
Post by crown on Sept 2, 2016 2:34:08 GMT -5
@cam Lester maintains that Guy Hamilton took the reigns of SII after Donner was sent the famous telegram telling him he was fired. But according to Wiki Hamilton directed a film called "The Mirror Cracked" which was released in late 1980.......so it seems unlikely that he could have tackled SII in mid 1979 as he surely would have been preoccupied shooting/doing pre-production on the The Mirror Cracked. Thinking about it more it definitely seems like Donner thought that because so much of SII was in the can that there was no way the Salkinds would gamble on firing him. In the commentary Ilya says that they took a tremendous risk in firing Donner and going back to the drawing board. Something obviously bad happened between Spengler and Donner and only those two chaps can clarify exactly what went down. Going back to Mank......i dunno ....maybe he could have pulled it off. Donner only had(in terms of films--not TV) the Omen behind him when he took on Superman. Which is still more than Mank at that point(late 1978). Lester by that point had already amassed a huge litany of films so was by far the more experienced director. In terms of flair.....I think he had it. The Eiffel Tower Sequence,Niagra falls,HoneyMoon Haven,The FOS reshoots and the Metroplis climax are all incredibly well done from a technical stand point. For 1978/79 I don't think it could have been executed better(no matter which Director was in charge) I used to believe Donner's "the best parts of SII are mine meme" before the rest of Donner's SII footage was released in the RDC. But looking at it objectively IMHO Lester's imprint is the strongest with regards to SII But obviously Donner had some great stuff there too which Lester used judiciously to augment the film from a storytelling point of view. It's amazing SII turned out to be a smash given the huge troubles behind it......and in the pre CGI era. Now anything can fixed digitally. And let's be honest all the contemporary reviews had no qualms with SII at the time of it's release. Timeout did a massive article on went down behind the scenes of SII in April 1981. And that remained the definitive break down for the best part of 20 years before Supermancinema took the matter into their own hands. I think it's still true that all the Donner footage is superior to all the Lester footage. The new stuff in the Donner cut is compromised by being unfinished, poorly edited and not having a professional score. Even so it still beats out Lester's stuff. Also I never understood this unsupported theory of wild imagination that Guy Hamilton initially took over for Donner. Did Hamilton suddenly decide to start paying his England taxes or something?
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 2, 2016 17:54:29 GMT -5
I don't care so much about (for the most part) creative people's personal stuff- but mainly what appears onscreen, and if there's enough brilliance onscreen, I tend to not care if someone is an egotist or whatnot.... but if something I have great fondness for gets mucked up in the process by a creator AND they have views (on top of it) that bug the heck out of me, then its insult added to injury. (i.e. "Fun" killing off Jimmy Olsen's character. Ug.) I had frustration that Snyder keeps getting support when I felt that Singer had a much tougher job in respecting STM and updating... and got (enough) RIGHT, but got bashed by the fans and not enough support for a sequel. As far as frustration with Donner- I was frustrated with the Salkinds, but much moreso with Lester. Lester could have done a competent tv-movie like job completing SII, but with a Donner-esque tone for what was intended. If Lester had replaced Donner right at the start, before Donner finished (at least) half of the movie- there might be less resentment, but at the same time, we wouldn't have gotten all the great stuff that Donner DID shoot for SII. In another thread, I think we all talked about alternative 'replacement' directors at the time that could have finished it up properly- but I have a feeling that those who did recognize what Donner did, didn't want to step on his toes.... and if they succeeded in finishing it the way Donner might have wanted, may have felt that DOnner would get the whole credit. I wonder if they had offered Mank the job of writing AND directing (with Donner's blessing) the rest of SII (with lowered budget) if things would have been ok enough? I don't think Mank had the directing expertise(as of 1979 ) to take on the job. SII was a massive production(both under Donner and Lester). Dragnet and Delirious which were made 8-9 years after SII revealed Mank to be ok as a director but he would have lacked the flair that either Donner or Lester could bring to the project. As a writer ....no probs. Mank was perfect as a script doctor. As a script creator....again I am not so sure. My frustration is with all concerned. The Salkinds ,Lester AND Donner too. It was a big mistake(no matter how justified) to tell Spengler to get off the project. Spengler was Donner's boss. If you tell your boss to go to heck.......you will get fired. So Donner's own behavior is far from commendable. It could be that Donner thought that because so much of SII was in the can by 1978.....that there was no way they could fire him. Maybe Donner thought that the Salkinds would not run the risk and expense of re-shooting so much material with a new director. In effect Donner could have been using that SII footage in 1979 as leverage against Spengler. Hmmmm. I agree with you. There is blame to go around. Donners not always right. Bill Murray was rumored to have hated working with him and there was some tension but in that interview you posted recently Donner had nothing but nice things to say about Murruy (who can be a d!ck himself). I wonder what the story is there? Donner taking the high road/politicking or were the rumors bs? Or was Murray just throwing his ego fits? Manks work on his Bond movies would seem to support your opinion. He also worked on Hart to Hart as sort of consultant and that show was very sucessful. As a director I'd put Mank right on Stuart Bairds level. Competent but not special like someone directing a superman movie should be. If we're talking STM writers I think Robert Benton was a better director than Mank.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 2, 2016 17:58:42 GMT -5
Her opinion on DOJ is getting picked up by other sites. Dark Horizons reported it too.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 2, 2016 18:12:08 GMT -5
@cam Lester maintains that Guy Hamilton took the reigns of SII after Donner was sent the famous telegram telling him he was fired. But according to Wiki Hamilton directed a film called "The Mirror Cracked" which was released in late 1980.......so it seems unlikely that he could have tackled SII in mid 1979 as he surely would have been preoccupied shooting/doing pre-production on the The Mirror Cracked. Thinking about it more it definitely seems like Donner thought that because so much of SII was in the can that there was no way the Salkinds would gamble on firing him. In the commentary Ilya says that they took a tremendous risk in firing Donner and going back to the drawing board. Something obviously bad happened between Spengler and Donner and only those two chaps can clarify exactly what went down. Going back to Mank......i dunno ....maybe he could have pulled it off. Donner only had(in terms of films--not TV) the Omen behind him when he took on Superman. Which is still more than Mank at that point(late 1978). Lester by that point had already amassed a huge litany of films so was by far the more experienced director. In terms of flair.....I think he had it. The Eiffel Tower Sequence,Niagra falls,HoneyMoon Haven,The FOS reshoots and the Metroplis climax are all incredibly well done from a technical stand point. For 1978/79 I don't think it could have been executed better(no matter which Director was in charge) I used to believe Donner's "the best parts of SII are mine meme" before the rest of Donner's SII footage was released in the RDC. But looking at it objectively IMHO Lester's imprint is the strongest with regards to SII But obviously Donner had some great stuff there too which Lester used judiciously to augment the film from a storytelling point of view. It's amazing SII turned out to be a smash given the huge troubles behind it......and in the pre CGI era. Now anything can fixed digitally. And let's be honest all the contemporary reviews had no qualms with SII at the time of it's release. Timeout did a massive article on went down behind the scenes of SII in April 1981. And that remained the definitive break down for the best part of 20 years before Supermancinema took the matter into their own hands. Some of the performances in Lesters footage are better. Stylistically sometimes Donners stuff looks better sometimes Lesters looks better. I think they both contributed strongly and it's hard to say that most of the good stuff was one of the others. I think Lesters reshoot of a bloody powerless Clark in the powered down FOS LOOKS far better than Donners so you're right Lester has his own level of flare. Donners strength was doing better stuff with camera movement and framing especially during the flying scenes. His flying shots looked more complex although I think Lester really did some of his best flying stuff on SIII. To be fair he had the time to do it better.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 6, 2016 4:05:19 GMT -5
@cam Lester maintains that Guy Hamilton took the reigns of SII after Donner was sent the famous telegram telling him he was fired. But according to Wiki Hamilton directed a film called "The Mirror Cracked" which was released in late 1980.......so it seems unlikely that he could have tackled SII in mid 1979 as he surely would have been preoccupied shooting/doing pre-production on the The Mirror Cracked. Thinking about it more it definitely seems like Donner thought that because so much of SII was in the can that there was no way the Salkinds would gamble on firing him. In the commentary Ilya says that they took a tremendous risk in firing Donner and going back to the drawing board. Something obviously bad happened between Spengler and Donner and only those two chaps can clarify exactly what went down. Going back to Mank......i dunno ....maybe he could have pulled it off. Donner only had(in terms of films--not TV) the Omen behind him when he took on Superman. Which is still more than Mank at that point(late 1978). Lester by that point had already amassed a huge litany of films so was by far the more experienced director. In terms of flair.....I think he had it. The Eiffel Tower Sequence,Niagra falls,HoneyMoon Haven,The FOS reshoots and the Metroplis climax are all incredibly well done from a technical stand point. For 1978/79 I don't think it could have been executed better(no matter which Director was in charge) I used to believe Donner's "the best parts of SII are mine meme" before the rest of Donner's SII footage was released in the RDC. But looking at it objectively IMHO Lester's imprint is the strongest with regards to SII But obviously Donner had some great stuff there too which Lester used judiciously to augment the film from a storytelling point of view. It's amazing SII turned out to be a smash given the huge troubles behind it......and in the pre CGI era. Now anything can fixed digitally. And let's be honest all the contemporary reviews had no qualms with SII at the time of it's release. Timeout did a massive article on went down behind the scenes of SII in April 1981. And that remained the definitive break down for the best part of 20 years before Supermancinema took the matter into their own hands. Lester was more experienced.... which is why he should have known what a stab in the back it was/is to throw out the original director's footage, change it greatly in a way not intended by him, and then not correct people when critics gave Lester credit for all the great Donner sequences for years! My own distaste of Lester and SII didn't come from an expose- or even the fact that he was taking over (I read it in the newspaper at the time and was curious/excited as I loved The Three Musketeers movie he did) it was from watching the movie the first time.... changing the Pzone criminals into comedic schtick halfway through the movie wasn't as totally offensive (to me) as the Metro battle hijinx. If you're getting paid to complete an artist's work- unless you totally want to disrespect him or her- then you do it in the way that the original artist intended. The Mank script and STM was there to study. The reshoots could have been better if they stuck to the script (particularly Honeymoon Haven/Niagara which actually would have been CHEAPER ironically!)--- the dynamic between Clark and Lois is greatly different. Clark is the whiner in the Mank version, Lois is the perky funny one. Reviews I acknowledge, but I'm going by my own judgement from the first time I saw SII and was incredibly let down. (All the reviews were raves without knowing 1/2 was Donner at the time). If the tone originally intended had been the same, I really feel that SII would have made more money than it did. Being in the theatres when it was on, I remembered the cheers when Supes appears in front of the Daily Planet.... and the silence that came up pretty soon after the first hit by Non. No laughs whatsoever during the 'blowing' scene. It's a pity that Ilya (according to his own commentary) was too distracted to put more control on Lester to keep it more in line. I always thought it a credit to Ilya that he's always said (even during the SII release time) that he preferred the final product of STM to SII. As far as what Donner could have done- either with reshoots at the time or not, I think there IS a good way to tell--- the quality of Donner's movies around the same time frame and Lester's quality of movies. (Donner's dramas are/were great: "Inside Moves", "Ladyhawke", the first couple of Lethal Weapon movies--- the comedies not so much: "The Toy", "Lethal Weapon 4".... Lester had "Superman III" and "Five Musketeers"- both pretty darn weak). It's not a knee-jerk response. I was HOPING that Lester would have brought something even better to the Donner Superman films- not make it worse, as he did. (Outside of a few nice shots) In the end, SII is a 'good' movie with great parts but more mediocre ones with Lester finishing it. If any 'ok' director finished it with the same Mank script or kept it serious, I can't see them going as wrong as Lester did - but Lester wanted to show off his comedic genius (wasn't the blowing stuff just hilarious? Ugh!) and take full credit of DOnner's work. If Lester hadn't had such a big ego and if he hadn't been in such desperate need to relaunch his career, I think he would have done the job of just completing another artists's work the way it was intended. Oh well..... I know many disagree, (and of course, everyone has a right to their own experience) but this is my own feeling on it. Hi CAM Maybe I have my own nostalgic blinkers on with regards to the "contemporary" experience of SII....at 7 years old maybe I just accepted the slapstick and never comprehended the detrimental effect it had. All I can say is that I saw it twice(in 1981 and 1982) and the atmosphere was electric both times. That cannot be a coincidence. There is no doubt that in the context of 1981.......I would defy anyone(no matter what their age) to have sat in the theater and judiciously deciphered which scenes belonged to which director as the film was playing(especially on a first time viewing). Impossible. Yes there may have been contemporary allusions(The Timeout April 1981 expose' ) which explicitly stated that any scene with Hackman was shot by Donner and with that knowledge in hand,the viewer could have deduced who was behind what. I was too young but had I been older.....only exposure to that Timeout article(a very thorough examination) would have prepped me to be analytical with regards to SII's composition. But how many people read that Timeout article back in April 1981?!.......and with no internet to amplify it's message. Lester designed SII(as Donner did with STM) to be viewed as a one time,first time experience. And in that respect, Lester delivered a great film IMHO. That is the reason why the contemporary reviews were glowing. Before the age of home video.....all film makers used this approach. Films made in the last 15 years though have, however, used the home video aspect to escalate their significance.....Lord Of The Rings comes to mind. Lucas said the same thing on the Star Wars commentary track.......that he would never have foreseen in 1977 that it would be dissected frame by frame in the ensuing years on home video. Thanks to this close scrutiny even Star Wars went into hibernation in the mid 1980s simply through the preceding 5 years of over exposure on home video. It's something that a lot of people have forgotten. SII is like a corpse that has been subjected to a heavy post mortem.....lol But before it became a corpse....it had an exceptional life. Sorry for the morbid analogy
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,134
|
Post by crown on Sept 6, 2016 6:13:06 GMT -5
Lester was more experienced.... which is why he should have known what a stab in the back it was/is to throw out the original director's footage, change it greatly in a way not intended by him, and then not correct people when critics gave Lester credit for all the great Donner sequences for years! My own distaste of Lester and SII didn't come from an expose- or even the fact that he was taking over (I read it in the newspaper at the time and was curious/excited as I loved The Three Musketeers movie he did) it was from watching the movie the first time.... changing the Pzone criminals into comedic schtick halfway through the movie wasn't as totally offensive (to me) as the Metro battle hijinx. If you're getting paid to complete an artist's work- unless you totally want to disrespect him or her- then you do it in the way that the original artist intended. The Mank script and STM was there to study. The reshoots could have been better if they stuck to the script (particularly Honeymoon Haven/Niagara which actually would have been CHEAPER ironically!)--- the dynamic between Clark and Lois is greatly different. Clark is the whiner in the Mank version, Lois is the perky funny one. Reviews I acknowledge, but I'm going by my own judgement from the first time I saw SII and was incredibly let down. (All the reviews were raves without knowing 1/2 was Donner at the time). If the tone originally intended had been the same, I really feel that SII would have made more money than it did. Being in the theatres when it was on, I remembered the cheers when Supes appears in front of the Daily Planet.... and the silence that came up pretty soon after the first hit by Non. No laughs whatsoever during the 'blowing' scene. It's a pity that Ilya (according to his own commentary) was too distracted to put more control on Lester to keep it more in line. I always thought it a credit to Ilya that he's always said (even during the SII release time) that he preferred the final product of STM to SII. As far as what Donner could have done- either with reshoots at the time or not, I think there IS a good way to tell--- the quality of Donner's movies around the same time frame and Lester's quality of movies. (Donner's dramas are/were great: "Inside Moves", "Ladyhawke", the first couple of Lethal Weapon movies--- the comedies not so much: "The Toy", "Lethal Weapon 4".... Lester had "Superman III" and "Five Musketeers"- both pretty darn weak). It's not a knee-jerk response. I was HOPING that Lester would have brought something even better to the Donner Superman films- not make it worse, as he did. (Outside of a few nice shots) In the end, SII is a 'good' movie with great parts but more mediocre ones with Lester finishing it. If any 'ok' director finished it with the same Mank script or kept it serious, I can't see them going as wrong as Lester did - but Lester wanted to show off his comedic genius (wasn't the blowing stuff just hilarious? Ugh!) and take full credit of DOnner's work. If Lester hadn't had such a big ego and if he hadn't been in such desperate need to relaunch his career, I think he would have done the job of just completing another artists's work the way it was intended. Oh well..... I know many disagree, (and of course, everyone has a right to their own experience) but this is my own feeling on it. Hi CAM Maybe I have my own nostalgic blinkers on with regards to the "contemporary" experience of SII....at 7 years old maybe I just accepted the slapstick and never comprehended the detrimental effect it had. All I can say is that I saw it twice(in 1981 and 1982) and the atmosphere was electric both times. That cannot be a coincidence. There is no doubt that in the context of 1981.......I would defy anyone(no matter what their age) to have sat in the theater and judiciously deciphered which scenes belonged to which director as the film was playing(especially on a first time viewing). Impossible. Yes there may have been contemporary allusions(The Timeout April 1981 expose' ) which explicitly stated that any scene with Hackman was shot by Donner and with that knowledge in hand,the viewer could have deduced who was behind what. I was too young but had I been older.....only exposure to that Timeout article(a very thorough examination) would have prepped me to be analytical with regards to SII's composition. But how many people read that Timeout article back in April 1981?!.......and with no internet to amplify it's message. Lester designed SII(as Donner did with STM) to be viewed as a one time,first time experience. And in that respect, Lester delivered a great film IMHO. That is the reason why the contemporary reviews were glowing. Before the age of home video.....all film makers used this approach. Films made in the last 15 years though have, however, used the home video aspect to escalate their significance.....Lord Of The Rings comes to mind. Lucas said the same thing on the Star Wars commentary track.......that he would never have foreseen in 1977 that it would be dissected frame by frame in the ensuing years on home video. Thanks to this close scrutiny even Star Wars went into hibernation in the mid 1980s simply through the preceding 5 years of over exposure on home video. It's something that a lot of people have forgotten. SII is like a corpse that has been subjected to a heavy post mortem.....lol But before it became a corpse....it had an exceptional life. Sorry for the morbid analogy I agree that SII had good reviews in it's day and I remember loving the movie myself. In fact, I never knew it had two directors until years and years later... of course once I knew a whole lot of stuff about the film started making sense (i.e. no Brando, Lois looking different, campy vs serious Zod, etc). But see.. Donner DIDN'T direct STM and his SII to be a one-time viewing thing.. he intended them to be classics that would stand the test of time. Lester basically had the attitude of watch it once and forget about it.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Sept 6, 2016 7:53:33 GMT -5
Hi CAM Maybe I have my own nostalgic blinkers on with regards to the "contemporary" experience of SII....at 7 years old maybe I just accepted the slapstick and never comprehended the detrimental effect it had. All I can say is that I saw it twice(in 1981 and 1982) and the atmosphere was electric both times. That cannot be a coincidence. There is no doubt that in the context of 1981.......I would defy anyone(no matter what their age) to have sat in the theater and judiciously deciphered which scenes belonged to which director as the film was playing(especially on a first time viewing). Impossible. Yes there may have been contemporary allusions(The Timeout April 1981 expose' ) which explicitly stated that any scene with Hackman was shot by Donner and with that knowledge in hand,the viewer could have deduced who was behind what. I was too young but had I been older.....only exposure to that Timeout article(a very thorough examination) would have prepped me to be analytical with regards to SII's composition. But how many people read that Timeout article back in April 1981?!.......and with no internet to amplify it's message. Lester designed SII(as Donner did with STM) to be viewed as a one time,first time experience. And in that respect, Lester delivered a great film IMHO. That is the reason why the contemporary reviews were glowing. Before the age of home video.....all film makers used this approach. Films made in the last 15 years though have, however, used the home video aspect to escalate their significance.....Lord Of The Rings comes to mind. Lucas said the same thing on the Star Wars commentary track.......that he would never have foreseen in 1977 that it would be dissected frame by frame in the ensuing years on home video. Thanks to this close scrutiny even Star Wars went into hibernation in the mid 1980s simply through the preceding 5 years of over exposure on home video. It's something that a lot of people have forgotten. SII is like a corpse that has been subjected to a heavy post mortem.....lol But before it became a corpse....it had an exceptional life. Sorry for the morbid analogy I agree that SII had good reviews in it's day and I remember loving the movie myself. In fact, I never knew it had two directors until years and years later... of course once I knew a whole lot of stuff about the film started making sense (i.e. no Brando, Lois looking different, campy vs serious Zod, etc). But see.. Donner DIDN'T direct STM and his SII to be a one-time viewing thing.. he intended them to be classics that would stand the test of time. Lester basically had the attitude of watch it once and forget about it. Speaking personally! I definitely did not forget SII and saw it as a perfect companion piece to STM(which i also did not forget ). The first viewing was in April 1981 as part of that double bill.Amazing atmosphere even though the cinema was sparsely populated.....no surprise as it was a mid week late night showing(cant remember the exact day/date----wish me and my pap had kept the ticket stump ). My second viewing was a late night matinee' at an art house theater almost a year later in the summer of 1982 and the place was rammed and the atmosphere was absolutely electric. I was probably the youngest person in there--lol I doubt if I went to watch the force Awakens at the same Art House Theater(it's still there)almost after year that has been out there would be that many people. But that is the difference. The proliferation of Home Video has taken the special "watch it once in a cinema" vibe away. But that is the cinematic culture that the first 2 Supes flicks belong too.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 6, 2016 10:39:34 GMT -5
I agree that SII had good reviews in it's day and I remember loving the movie myself. In fact, I never knew it had two directors until years and years later... of course once I knew a whole lot of stuff about the film started making sense (i.e. no Brando, Lois looking different, campy vs serious Zod, etc). But see.. Donner DIDN'T direct STM and his SII to be a one-time viewing thing.. he intended them to be classics that would stand the test of time. Lester basically had the attitude of watch it once and forget about it. Speaking personally! I definitely did not forget SII and saw it as a perfect companion piece to STM(which i also did not forget ). The first viewing was in April 1981 as part of that double bill.Amazing atmosphere even though the cinema was sparsely populated.....no surprise as it was a mid week late night showing(cant remember the exact day/date----wish me and my pap had kept the ticket stump ). My second viewing was a late night matinee' at an art house theater almost a year later in the summer of 1982 and the place was rammed and the atmosphere was absolutely electric. I was probably the youngest person in there--lol I doubt if I went to watch the force Awakens at the same Art House Theater(it's still there)almost after year that has been out there would be that many people. But that is the difference. The proliferation of Home Video has taken the special "watch it once in a cinema" vibe away. But that is the cinematic culture that the first 2 Supes flicks belong too. Hey back, Dejan! The atmosphere was electric for the theatres at SII, too.... until the Metro battle fizzled out. From that point on, the energy of the movie kind of lagged (similarly to the time reversal bit in STM- but that part came so late in the movie, that it was ok)--- or, at least, that's how it felt. Lester wasn't passionate about it, but I can imagine the more changes he made, the more he felt, 'it's MINE, dammit! It doesn't matter if Donner directed all the Hackman scenes and the best Phantom Zone criminal scenes, it's MMMMINE!'- but, since he's refusing to talk about it decades later, deep down, he must have known that he built those scenes on top of another person's work to begin with. Honestly, I wish he WOULD talk about his side of the story. Maybe he could convince me or help the fans see some other side of the story that hasn't been told yet. (Same with Sydney Furie) Who knows? Maybe Donner would even forgive him then.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 6, 2016 14:57:32 GMT -5
I think the one overarching thing people wish we'd gotten is more seiousness. Of Donner had directed we would have. When o was a kid I noticed visual differences but a lot of movies had that. I never would have known anything else was wrong at a young age. As a kid I enjoyed it. It wasn't until later when I read stuff like Starlog and eventually the Internet came along that I knew this whole story. SII as it is is flawed but entertaining. The Donner cut is an interesting curiosity or suppliment but as a film it's just not satisfying enough.
|
|