|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 31, 2016 11:14:57 GMT -5
Donner and Mank were asked to work on SIV but declined. (Also earlier by WB when SIII tanked)
If they said, 'yes', I wonder how much things would have changed? Presumably, WB might have wanted to come onboard- increasing/saving the budget.
But- if the basic story stayed the same: Still some problems-
#1: Tech-wise, sfx still weren't that advanced. Nuclear Man was originally was supposed to be an effect (probably CGI nowadays)- but there was no way back then. Given Donner's perfectionism, maybe Donner would have consulted Stan Winston and have done something closer to the Terminator robot (or something like that) given the time in constructing Nuclear Man?
#2: Age-wise, the actors all looked as good as they were going to. Can't do much about that, but I think the performances would have been smoother in the spots where they're kind of rough in SIV.
#3: Edit-wise, yeah, I doubt half of the film would have been chopped out like the theatrical.... but hopefully the screening would have had a better response to begin with.
Other thoughts?
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,138
|
Post by crown on Aug 31, 2016 18:42:24 GMT -5
Donner and Mank were asked to work on SIV but declined. (Also earlier by WB when SIII tanked) If they said, 'yes', I wonder how much things would have changed? Presumably, WB might have wanted to come onboard- increasing/saving the budget. But- if the basic story stayed the same: Still some problems- #1: Tech-wise, sfx still weren't that advanced. Nuclear Man was originally was supposed to be an effect (probably CGI nowadays)- but there was no way back then. Given Donner's perfectionism, maybe Donner would have consulted Stan Winston and have done something closer to the Terminator robot (or something like that) given the time in constructing Nuclear Man? #2: Age-wise, the actors all looked as good as they were going to. Can't do much about that, but I think the performances would have been smoother in the spots where they're kind of rough in SIV. #3: Edit-wise, yeah, I doubt half of the film would have been chopped out like the theatrical.... but hopefully the screening would have had a better response to begin with. Other thoughts? Maybe Donner can authorize a re-edit of Superman IV as it was originally concieved and intended by him and Mankewicz? Michael Thau can do the editing. Maybe cut out about 10 minutes of the movie.... The film needs more energy and the audience should be dazzled with footwork and not be able to study SIV soo much so a lean 79 min runtime ought to move the picture along better. Also they should re-use John Williams score from some other movie to make it more epic! SIV the vaginaie Donner cut! Who's for this magnificent enterprise? ??
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,138
|
Post by crown on Aug 31, 2016 23:22:00 GMT -5
I just wish Donner woulda said yes. I JUST SAID I WISH DONNER WOULDA SAID YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 1, 2016 0:53:05 GMT -5
I just wish Donner woulda said yes. I JUST SAID I WISH DONNER WOULDA SAID YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,138
|
Post by crown on Sept 1, 2016 22:08:39 GMT -5
Donner and Mank were asked to work on SIV but declined. (Also earlier by WB when SIII tanked) If they said, 'yes', I wonder how much things would have changed? Presumably, WB might have wanted to come onboard- increasing/saving the budget. But- if the basic story stayed the same: Still some problems- #1: Tech-wise, sfx still weren't that advanced. Nuclear Man was originally was supposed to be an effect (probably CGI nowadays)- but there was no way back then. Given Donner's perfectionism, maybe Donner would have consulted Stan Winston and have done something closer to the Terminator robot (or something like that) given the time in constructing Nuclear Man? #2: Age-wise, the actors all looked as good as they were going to. Can't do much about that, but I think the performances would have been smoother in the spots where they're kind of rough in SIV. #3: Edit-wise, yeah, I doubt half of the film would have been chopped out like the theatrical.... but hopefully the screening would have had a better response to begin with. Other thoughts? I disagree about the age this. Margo Kidder looked way younger in Smalleville than she did in SIV. Donner could made her good looking again like in STM
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,872
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 2, 2016 18:44:00 GMT -5
Donner and Mank were asked to work on SIV but declined. (Also earlier by WB when SIII tanked) If they said, 'yes', I wonder how much things would have changed? Presumably, WB might have wanted to come onboard- increasing/saving the budget. But- if the basic story stayed the same: Still some problems- #1: Tech-wise, sfx still weren't that advanced. Nuclear Man was originally was supposed to be an effect (probably CGI nowadays)- but there was no way back then. Given Donner's perfectionism, maybe Donner would have consulted Stan Winston and have done something closer to the Terminator robot (or something like that) given the time in constructing Nuclear Man? #2: Age-wise, the actors all looked as good as they were going to. Can't do much about that, but I think the performances would have been smoother in the spots where they're kind of rough in SIV. #3: Edit-wise, yeah, I doubt half of the film would have been chopped out like the theatrical.... but hopefully the screening would have had a better response to begin with. Other thoughts? I still think it would have been a disaster. Golan and Globus just didn't get it. They didn't even understand what Tobey Hooper was doing on TCM 2 and got angry over it. They were just notorious cheapskates who usually wouldn't put the money in where it was needed. For IV to have worked out cannon had to leave the budget in tact and not screw over WB. I figure Donner and Mank declined on cannons reputation alone and wanting to do other stuff. Even if they didn't feel SIII and SG had damaged the series.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 3, 2016 0:36:36 GMT -5
Donner and Mank were asked to work on SIV but declined. (Also earlier by WB when SIII tanked) If they said, 'yes', I wonder how much things would have changed? Presumably, WB might have wanted to come onboard- increasing/saving the budget. But- if the basic story stayed the same: Still some problems- #1: Tech-wise, sfx still weren't that advanced. Nuclear Man was originally was supposed to be an effect (probably CGI nowadays)- but there was no way back then. Given Donner's perfectionism, maybe Donner would have consulted Stan Winston and have done something closer to the Terminator robot (or something like that) given the time in constructing Nuclear Man? #2: Age-wise, the actors all looked as good as they were going to. Can't do much about that, but I think the performances would have been smoother in the spots where they're kind of rough in SIV. #3: Edit-wise, yeah, I doubt half of the film would have been chopped out like the theatrical.... but hopefully the screening would have had a better response to begin with. Other thoughts? I still think it would have been a disaster. Golan and Globus just didn't get it. They didn't even understand what Tobey Hooper was doing on TCM 2 and got angry over it. They were just notorious cheapskates who usually wouldn't put the money in where it was needed. For IV to have worked out cannon had to leave the budget in tact and not screw over WB. I figure Donner and Mank declined on cannons reputation alone and wanting to do other stuff. Even if they didn't feel SIII and SG had damaged the series. Donner was riding high on the Lethal Weapon success at that time, if memory is right. Mank was doing fine- but it might have made an interesting 'experiment' to him to tackle.... unless there was just too much disaster written all over it. SOMEDAY I'd love to hear the Sydney Furie story in detail over post-SIV. Perhaps he got hit from all sides and that's why he doesn't want to talk about it? (Didn't Reeve want to direct it as well as write it? Anyhow...)
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,872
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 10, 2016 19:24:21 GMT -5
I'm curious to know how IV would have turned out if Gary Goddard had taken the directing job instead of doing MOTU. Furie had more experience directing drama but Goddars had far more visual flare.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,138
|
Post by crown on Sept 10, 2016 23:01:15 GMT -5
I'm curious to see what SIV would have been liked if Superman died in it like Reeve wanted.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 10, 2016 23:02:12 GMT -5
I'm curious to see what SIV would have been liked if Superman died in it like Reeve wanted. ? Where did you get that?
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,138
|
Post by crown on Sept 11, 2016 5:01:50 GMT -5
I'm curious to see what SIV would have been liked if Superman died in it like Reeve wanted. ? Where did you get that? www.byrnerobotics.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5399&PN=0&TPN=3 Ed Deans. wrote: Lars Johansson wrote: The Chief. Whoa! Byrne was involved with Superman IV: The Quest for Box Office Reciepts? Here's my question and JB's response from the old boards: ME: I have to say, though the movie on the whole is forgettable, the little speech Christopher Reeve gives at the end, talking about why he was wrong to think he could rid the world of its nuclear problems is really quite wonderful. It underscores how Reeve owned that character and why he casts such a long shadow in the role. It's sad that the film he had the most input into turned out to be such a disaster. Still, this was a beautiful moment in an otherwise unremarkable cinematic experience. JB: About the only thing I can take credit for -- and that obliquely -- is that speech at the end. Originally, Chris had wanted Superman to successfully rid the world of nuclear weapons, and I'd pointed out to him that it was really not a good idea to have the audience come out of the theatre into a world that was very much not the one they had just seen in the movie. So it became a "lesson for Superman" movie, instead of what was originally envisioned. (Reeve also wanted Superman to die in that movie -- but that's another story!) Beyond that, my involvement came down to meeting a couple of times with Reeve and the appointed screenwriters, batting around some ideas, and writing a couple of screen treatments, neither of which were used in any part. (One became "The Earth Stealers" graphic novel, the other I discarded.)
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 11, 2016 11:15:09 GMT -5
? Where did you get that? www.byrnerobotics.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5399&PN=0&TPN=3 Ed Deans. wrote: Lars Johansson wrote: The Chief. Whoa! Byrne was involved with Superman IV: The Quest for Box Office Reciepts? Here's my question and JB's response from the old boards: ME: I have to say, though the movie on the whole is forgettable, the little speech Christopher Reeve gives at the end, talking about why he was wrong to think he could rid the world of its nuclear problems is really quite wonderful. It underscores how Reeve owned that character and why he casts such a long shadow in the role. It's sad that the film he had the most input into turned out to be such a disaster. Still, this was a beautiful moment in an otherwise unremarkable cinematic experience. JB: About the only thing I can take credit for -- and that obliquely -- is that speech at the end. Originally, Chris had wanted Superman to successfully rid the world of nuclear weapons, and I'd pointed out to him that it was really not a good idea to have the audience come out of the theatre into a world that was very much not the one they had just seen in the movie. So it became a "lesson for Superman" movie, instead of what was originally envisioned. (Reeve also wanted Superman to die in that movie -- but that's another story!) Beyond that, my involvement came down to meeting a couple of times with Reeve and the appointed screenwriters, batting around some ideas, and writing a couple of screen treatments, neither of which were used in any part. (One became "The Earth Stealers" graphic novel, the other I discarded.) That is interesting! It's hard to believe that the screenwriters would have had Superman really rid the world of nukes as the ending- and/or have had Supes die. Pity that John Byrne didn't talk about how Reeve wanted Supes to die in SIV. Would have been a great story.
|
|