atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823 
|
Post by atp on Mar 23, 2020 17:03:19 GMT -5
A couple of thoughts: (1) I totally agree about wishing Lester would give his side of the story. I used to 'demonize' the Salkinds, but with Ilya sharing his side of the story, even though I take everything with a grain of salt- I could also see his points, too. I might be able to give Lester more slack if he shared why he made the choices he did... or add more details to the whole story. (2) The Richard Donner cut should have been able to give his point of view.... but.... the problem is that the way it was presented, it made for a difficult way to really see what he had in mind. (I think the Mank script offers the best view of what would have been) I would have FAR rather that the missing parts be filled in with well-drawn storyboards and perhaps voice actors/whatnot.... as the approach to hack/slash the rewritten material just made it feel incomplete and 'less than' the theatrical as a cohesive piece. Right now, I think the International Release Cut is the best Donner cut- though I still wish they had cut the over-the-top Lester material. Yes agreed What's interesting with the scripts to screen process is how changes are made on the fly. Even for STM , the additional touches they added whilst they shot the Lois in helicopter jeapordy sequence(which took almost a year)......the final result ended up being quite different from what was originally scripted. So even with Donner helming SII....there is no guarantee that changes would not have been made. Obviously Donner would have been without Brando.....so I could envisage Donner having done something not too dissimilar to what Lester did with the fortress of solitude sequences in the theatrical SII. In terms of the Villains taking over the world, that is more difficult to answer. I think for 1980, what was scripted by Mank would have looked incredible......and it would also have been unprecedented because nothing like it would been seen on screen before. I do think that the sequence(as scripted) is a touch too quick though( montages of Moscow, Tokyo and Paris being decimated as Zod performs his speech).....although of course it is difficult to gage as one has to interpret in one's own imagination how those words in the script translate to live temporal images...….maybe they could have found a way to stretch this sequence out if they had shot it From a 1980 perspective, I do find the build up(in terms of scale) in the small town in terms of each successive super feat surpassing the preceding one to be intriguing. Let me explain 1) Ursa Arm Wrestles the first red neck.....seeing a female character do this in 1980/81 was extremely rare.....the table breaking too added to the effect....also the subconscious physical threat from the audience perspective is palpable("I think my arm is broken".....it's subtly powerful) 2)Zod chucks the 2nd red neck through barn wall.....it's a great stunt and still holds up IMHO.....in 81' it was awesome. 3)Zon levates the kid's pap......a not entirely original effect but the threat of the villains is increasing.....the first 2 super feats were physical...now they are quasi supernatural.....on my first viewing in the cinema , I was just itching for Supe's to show up and take on these douches! 4)Non laser beams the jeep.....a great stunt and also a big surprise on the first viewing as Non had been struggling to optimise his laser beams until that moment.....good story telling 5)Zod deflects the flamethrowers fire onto the barn.....for 81 it's a great effect....the look Zod gives to Ursa is classic(+the music) amps it all up even further(these guys can't be stopped) 6)3 Villains resist the Bazooka, the rockets from the chopper......and then Ursa blows said Chopper into a building + ensuing explosion. For 81' this was also unprecedented.....at least when it came to showing what looked like human beings performing exceptional and destructive feats. The only other movie showing this kinda stuff was of course STM. It also covers the best part of 10 -15 mins of screen time---beautifully intercut with the Fortess Of Solitude stuff so the audience can't wait for these opposing forces to square off. Would be interesting to hear your thoughts on how the villains destroying the big cities as originally scripted would have translated to the screen . At the time, I was definitely impressed by the villains in the small town. I just don't like the, "Let's just hold hands" line. It's too human, too much from our world. I don't think an alien superhuman would act like that. |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 23, 2020 18:20:18 GMT -5
I think this scene from the 1979 Meteor disaster film which had crowds from Hong Kong running from a scifi Tsunami mirrors what we might have gotten. www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHvUundqmRkBut- just as STM paid for unused footage from "The Swarm" and integrated it into the film.... I can imagine the same would have happened to make the scene with Tokyo affordable. If Lester had embraced what was already in the Donner footage- here are the savings as I picture it: * DP jump instead of the Paris rescue. Already shot--- just add a couple of fx shots. * Film the 'blank bullets' scene on the hotel set- instead of the costly stunt with Lois jumping into Niagara falls. While Lois in the water definitely looks more expensive than the hotel--- the location isn't exactly epic, but more touristy and campy. * The 'Washington Monument' scene might have cost a bit for a set- but with some clever location shooting- I think this would have cost far less than building that whole section of small town East Houston... plus the helicopter attack fx- which were impressive- but the location hardly as iconic a location as where the Washington monument is/ would have been. * The ending 'battle' with the huge sort-of Time Square was SO wasted imo. if this was the way to go, then I just wish this had been not dominated by crowd sight-gags. I give credit for the Salkinds for putting the money into having that huge city set- but staging it in a way that (1) most of the time looked unreal outside of the bus toss and how they driected the extras - and- (2) didn't take advantage of all the things that could have been done with a closed set as far as action. I have to say I was pretty open to any director at the time (not knowing any better) to finish off SII--- but when I watched SII--- It was the first time I really understood what a difference a different director made. Hi CAM Not bad regarding the Meteor sequence  ....never seen that film before-will check it out. Actually the water flooding Hong Kong in that sequence you linked to reminds me of the flooding of Argos in Clash Of The Titans: www.youtube.com/watch?v=He7E4aE-1aoFor 1981's Clash Of The Titans, Ray Harryhausen used crumbling models and miniatures of the ancient Greek City....and then superimposed live action people from blue screen composites to depict the crushing/ fleeing aspect. Something similar could have been done for Donner's 79' SII.....miniatures falling apart of Tokyo, Paris and Moscow intercut with blue screen compositing of people fleeing/running away. Plus some matte drawings intercut with flames to show the final destruction of said cities similar to what was seen in Earthquake. These scenes seems like they would have been very quick though given the fact they were effectively transpiring under the narration of Zod's " I am General Zod! Listen to me, people of the Earth!" rhetoric.....but as I said before, maybe they could have found a way to elongate the sequence so the audience could bath in the destruction for a little longer. Regarding SII's metrobattle under Lester......I think if Donner had helmed this back in 79' it still would have been at Pinewood. Could Donner have shot it in a different way to make it look more realistic(and without Unsworth)....maybe....but I don't think it's a given. And also have to say comparing Lester's 1981 SII metropolis destruction to 1974 Earthquake's reduced to rubble Los Angeles.....I would have to go for SII by some distance in terms of how many different angles and avenues were explored on the back lot reconstruction to convey said destruction. SII was a pioneer in that regard(of course the Donner/Mank/Puzo team still deserves credit for having an exceptionally original idea in the first place). |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 23, 2020 19:39:02 GMT -5
Sarah Douglass once said that she liked how Lester's changes gave her more to do.... and I could understand why she would feel that way.
Donner's version of the villains were REALLY cold and scary.
Rather than the somewhat fun/bombastic caricature of Zod, the mostly soft-spoken Zod was chilling.
Is that better to have the villains be caricatures and less dangerous? I guess it depends on what kind of film the producers wanted.
Even the few seconds that were re-instated with Supes charging after Luthor & being grabbed by Zod had more intensity I thought than the Lester metro battle that had shots from a distance and didn't really emphasize the emotions going on.
I don't know if the Donner version as intended might have been a touch too scary or not. We got a few seconds here and there- but that's it.
Oh well. Better than never seeing anything- but I don't know if the storyboards are in vaults anywhere or sold off/ thrown away (what I would have loved was for someone to have found the Donner SII script with his handwritten notes on it- can you imagine??)
but again a presentation with the boards and script might hve been a better display to see what would've been.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Mar 23, 2020 21:55:15 GMT -5
I was more annoyed that she compared tearing “metal fibers like paper,” coming from a crystalline world. Can’t blame Lester for that one.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 24, 2020 0:21:52 GMT -5
I was more annoyed that she compared tearing “metal fibers like paper,” coming from a crystalline world. Can’t blame Lester for that one. Good point! There's definitely things that could be poked at for reality on the criminals- why do they speak English right off the bat? But the tone and approach definitely were NOT the same under Donner and Lester for the criminals. Sometimes the blend was okay enough for me in the theatrical... but even then- the comedy bits Lester added mostly worked under Lois & Clark... (The water jump thing is actually pretty funny)- but on the flip side, the romance portion always felt insincere versus the sentimental Donner romance material. (Donner wore his heart on his sleeve) When Lester overlayed making the comedy layer to the villains, it took away from the story than I felt it gave. The Mank scenes are actually shorter than the Lester scenes of the villains building up their appraoch to the White house. Anyhow- I have this weird feeling more Donner footage was kept in the vaults. Particularly the Rushmore scene which Ilya Salkind said was already shot. Would have liked to have seen that.... |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Mar 24, 2020 1:39:38 GMT -5
Has anyone ever thought about recreating the missing scenes using CGI villains?
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 24, 2020 5:40:27 GMT -5
I was more annoyed that she compared tearing “metal fibers like paper,” coming from a crystalline world. Can’t blame Lester for that one. Haha Yes that one is definitely a contradiction. Of course Lester could have removed that line of dialogue or even redubbed it.....I don't think he even noticed.....much like Donner |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 24, 2020 5:51:08 GMT -5
Has anyone ever thought about recreating the missing scenes using CGI villains? Even if you did it would be a case of recreating these scenes in a manner that simulated how those destructive sequences would have looked from an aesthetic viewpoint in 1979. They did something similar for Star Trek The Motion Picture in 2001. People tend to forget that Lucas recreated a new model of Mos Eisley in 1996 for the special edition of A New Hope. Only problem was that he shot it in a manner befitting the techniques used at that point (in the late 90s) as opposed to shooting it in a way that replicated how it would have been in shot in the late 70s. It's the reason why so many people find the extra sequences in the special edition to be so jarring. |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 24, 2020 6:15:59 GMT -5
I was more annoyed that she compared tearing “metal fibers like paper,” coming from a crystalline world. Can’t blame Lester for that one. Good point! There's definitely things that could be poked at for reality on the criminals- why do they speak English right off the bat? But the tone and approach definitely were NOT the same under Donner and Lester for the criminals. Sometimes the blend was okay enough for me in the theatrical... but even then- the comedy bits Lester added mostly worked under Lois & Clark... (The water jump thing is actually pretty funny)- but on the flip side, the romance portion always felt insincere versus the sentimental Donner romance material. (Donner wore his heart on his sleeve) When Lester overlayed making the comedy layer to the villains, it took away from the story than I felt it gave. The Mank scenes are actually shorter than the Lester scenes of the villains building up their appraoch to the White house. Anyhow- I have this weird feeling more Donner footage was kept in the vaults. Particularly the Rushmore scene which Ilya Salkind said was already shot. Would have liked to have seen that.... I actually think Lester did a better job with the romantic stuff between Supe's/Clark and Lois than Donner. Donner's romance reflected more of a first date kind of scenario(which it essentially was---it's the reason why it worked). Lester's romance was commensurate with the characters actually knowing each other better(which of course they did by that point in the story). But the level of acting between Reeve and Kidder is much more refined in the Niagra scenes than the corresponding shots in Donner's original SII daily planet opening. Would be curious to know if Donner shot the SII daily planet opening BEFORE he shot Clark's first day at the planet for STM("Lois Lane say hecko to Clark Kent"). As the acting seems more organic in that first day at the daily planet STM and IMHO is more forced in Donner's SII (planet)opening . |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Mar 24, 2020 7:50:00 GMT -5
It still blows my mind to think that movie scenes are not filmed in sequence!
I always just asssumed that filming followed the script. How naive I was!
Must be really hard for the actors, as they don't experience the story the way the audience does.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 24, 2020 8:56:35 GMT -5
It still blows my mind to think that movie scenes are not filmed in sequence! I always just asssumed that filming followed the script. How naive I was! Must be really hard for the actors, as they don't experience the story the way the audience does. It's actually quite obvious how much thinner Reeve is in the DP sequence when he escorts Lois to the Lady's room(a great one take shot BTW).....compared to the introductory scene when he meets Jimmy and perry for the first time...….indicating that they were shot out of order. Also Reeve says as much in the STM making of documentary about the filming out of sequence factor. But that factor is amplified when you are shooting 2 films at the same time!......and unlike Lord Of The Rings.....STM and SII did not have the benefit of CGI to mask over the cracks in said shooting process. |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Mar 24, 2020 9:00:22 GMT -5
Yes. It is noticeable for sure.
But still, amazing to think that actors are able to pretend that they have gone through all the history leading up to a scene, when in fact they have not.
Maybe that's actually why the repowering scenes with Reeve and Brando in the Donner Cut were so crap. They were filmed too early, and the illusion of history didn't work.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 24, 2020 9:45:18 GMT -5
Yes. It is noticeable for sure. But still, amazing to think that actors are able to pretend that they have gone through all the history leading up to a scene, when in fact they have not. Maybe that's actually why the repowering scenes with Reeve and Brando in the Donner Cut were so crap. They were filmed too early, and the illusion of history didn't work. Yeah it's testimony to the quality of the actors that they can pull it off. If you deconstruct the Donner re-powering scene it seems as if Reeve filmed the actual 1st part in the fortress of solitude ….by himself as Brando had already left the production by that point. I personally think this part is well directed and acted.....considering Reeve had nothing to react to on set. The part where it falls apart is where Brando appears and touches his shoulder. Not sure if this is due to Thau not using a good take of the original Reeve with Brando blue screen composite......or Donner just not shooting that composite well in the first place. This was Reeve's very first scene on the shoot which is quite staggering when you think of how the Reeve /Superman incarnation would unfold over the next few years. I think Donner did mention in the commentary that he would have called Brando back......having said that given everything that transpired......even if Donner had directed SII in the fall of 1979....he would have had to make do without Brando too....just like Lester. |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Mar 24, 2020 13:09:09 GMT -5
In this regard, being a movie actor can be harder than being a stage actor.
Yes, you have the safety net of not being in front of a live audience. But stage actors don't have to perform out of sequence. They get to build up naturally.
On a related topic, I have been using the downtime to watch old works by Timothy Dalton. Wuthering Heights wasn't that great, but Jane Eyre is amazing. He was/is such an incredible actor. I put him in the same category as Bruce Lee and Christopher Reeve. Just mesmerising to watch and listen to.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 24, 2020 16:30:50 GMT -5
In this regard, being a movie actor can be harder than being a stage actor. Yes, you have the safety net of not being in front of a live audience. But stage actors don't have to perform out of sequence. They get to build up naturally. On a related topic, I have been using the downtime to watch old works by Timothy Dalton. Wuthering Heights wasn't that great, but Jane Eyre is amazing. He was/is such an incredible actor. I put him in the same category as Bruce Lee and Christopher Reeve. Just mesmerising to watch and listen to. That is a good point regarding the differences between the stage and the screen. Chris Reeves is on record a number of times(including the SIII London premiere) where he says he missed the immediacy of a live audience when he was shooting a movie.....and vice versa! STM was huge in terms of scope in it's own right(as one movie)…..it's amazing that they somehow found time to create a good portion of a separate movie (SII). Also to be fair....I think the intention of the Donner team was to finish both movies before even releasing STM. That is a goal that has never been attempted before or since. Back to the Future III was still being shot whilst Back To The Future II was hitting the screens. same goes for the Matrix 2 & 3 Lord Of The Rings's principal photography was completed for all 3 films before Fellowship debuted but there were still portions of re-shoots for both the Two Towers and Return Of The King that had to be shot whilst Fellowship was playing in theaters. Also the Matrix and Lord Of The Rings relied on huge CGI sequences that involved no real world trouble shooting. Even if Donner had pulled it off and got SII completed before STM was finished.....it would probably have killed him! The sheer scope of both movies was unprecedented. Regarding Dalton....yes I agree....he was basically the Craig Bond before Craig! Also seems to be a nice chap....I still have a video recording of the License To Kill Premiere on ITV(for the UK) where Dalton was rightly complaining about the British censorship of provocative material in film(License To Kill was truncated quite a bit for it's UK theatrical run compared to other countries) |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 25, 2020 17:44:19 GMT -5
It still blows my mind to think that movie scenes are not filmed in sequence! I always just asssumed that filming followed the script. How naive I was! Must be really hard for the actors, as they don't experience the story the way the audience does. It's actually quite obvious how much thinner Reeve is in the DP sequence when he escorts Lois to the Lady's room(a great one take shot BTW).....compared to the introductory scene when he meets Jimmy and perry for the first time...….indicating that they were shot out of order. Also Reeve says as much in the STM making of documentary about the filming out of sequence factor. But that factor is amplified when you are shooting 2 films at the same time!......and unlike Lord Of The Rings.....STM and SII did not have the benefit of CGI to mask over the cracks in said shooting process. The complicated 'oners' (I'd heard Joss Whedon coin that term for shooting)- to me is what makes the STM/SII feel so epic..... they could not have been easy to do, they're probably much slower to shoot, but the payoff is tremendous! (Can you imagine how many takes that had to have gotten blown in those lengthy oners?) To me in examining those shots that Donner did versus many Lester did showed the level of care and ambition. If you're required to shoot fast and effective, I guess you could say that Lester did his job.... but the rewriting and going off-track in the Metro battle is the biggest offense imo against his approach. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 25, 2020 17:49:46 GMT -5
Three Musketeers/ Four Musketeers was shot back to back and releaseed as two pictures, with a 'trailer' at the end of Three Musketeers for the sequel prior to STM...
So, when I read in the STM script that it ended with Zod flying towards the screen and various shots were picked for the sequel, I got chills and imagined it played out much like the tail end of Three Musketeers... which was great. (Though the Four Musketeers was pretty flat and disappointing imo)
But the flip side was that the didn't tell the actors that ahead of time- resulting in lawsuits.
When the contracts were written up for STM/SII--- it was supposed to be shot in one fell swoop. When the shooting got delayed, there was an article that said a few of the actors were able to re-negotiate and get a few more dollars because of it.
"Craig Bond"- never heard that before- hilarious!
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Mar 26, 2020 2:45:15 GMT -5
Looking back,whoever decided to cast Terence Stamp was a genius.
I really don't understand why they thought of him. But it was a brilliant choice.
At the time, he had fallen out of the public eye and his movie career was considered finished years before. And he wasn't exactly the kind of actor you would think of for a supervillain.
But yet, look at the result!
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 26, 2020 3:30:43 GMT -5
Three Musketeers/ Four Musketeers was shot back to back and releaseed as two pictures, with a 'trailer' at the end of Three Musketeers for the sequel prior to STM... So, when I read in the STM script that it ended with Zod flying towards the screen and various shots were picked for the sequel, I got chills and imagined it played out much like the tail end of Three Musketeers... which was great. (Though the Four Musketeers was pretty flat and disappointing imo) But the flip side was that the didn't tell the actors that ahead of time- resulting in lawsuits. When the contracts were written up for STM/SII--- it was supposed to be shot in one fell swoop. When the shooting got delayed, there was an article that said a few of the actors were able to re-negotiate and get a few more dollars because of it. "Craig Bond"- never heard that before- hilarious! Hey CAM It's interesting regarding the Salkind's and the Musketeers. It seems like it was one shoot and intended as one big long movie (with an intermission) At some point in the production ,the Salkinds cheekily decided that they were going to cut the movie in half and release it as 2 flicks.....but they made the decision without informing the actors! Other flicks like Lord Of The Rings, The Matrix, and back To the future were actually still shooting subsequent parts of their respective sequels whilst the first part of the trilogy(or duology) was actually in cinemas. Superman was different in the sense that it was clearly outlined from the outset that it was 2 separate films.....IMHO the biggest enterprise in movie history. Just looking at Avenger's Infinity War and Endgame....the final 3rd of both flicks is entirely green screen based. When you see the raw footage it's incredibly underwhelming: www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kG2xzqrr-kSuperman 1& 2 did not have that luxury. And hence the reason why I'll take the real live footage of Donner's or Lester's work over a lot of the fake drivel that we get now. And again..when you see STM or SII(heck even SIII) on a good projection system....they actually hold up better in terms of fine detail over the likes of Avengers or any of the modern DC stuff.....because those films were genuinely real. 5-10-15 years from now the current bunch of flicks which are essentially exaggerated video games....will just be picked apart for the fake crap that they are. |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 26, 2020 3:43:41 GMT -5
Looking back,whoever decided to cast Terence Stamp was a genius. I really don't understand why they thought of him. But it was a brilliant choice. At the time, he had fallen out of the public eye and his movie career was considered finished years before. And he wasn't exactly the kind of actor you would think of for a supervillain. But yet, look at the result! IMHO the whole of STM casting was genius. Stamp was so good that I was disappointed when watching SIII for the first time in the cinema.....that Zod did not come bursting through at some point!(hey I was 9....just did not get the idea that actors had contracts). |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 26, 2020 3:53:33 GMT -5
It's actually quite obvious how much thinner Reeve is in the DP sequence when he escorts Lois to the Lady's room(a great one take shot BTW).....compared to the introductory scene when he meets Jimmy and perry for the first time...….indicating that they were shot out of order. Also Reeve says as much in the STM making of documentary about the filming out of sequence factor. But that factor is amplified when you are shooting 2 films at the same time!......and unlike Lord Of The Rings.....STM and SII did not have the benefit of CGI to mask over the cracks in said shooting process. The complicated 'oners' (I'd heard Joss Whedon coin that term for shooting)- to me is what makes the STM/SII feel so epic..... they could not have been easy to do, they're probably much slower to shoot, but the payoff is tremendous! (Can you imagine how many takes that had to have gotten blown in those lengthy oners?) To me in examining those shots that Donner did versus many Lester did showed the level of care and ambition. If you're required to shoot fast and effective, I guess you could say that Lester did his job.... but the rewriting and going off-track in the Metro battle is the biggest offense imo against his approach. Totally agreed on the epic "oners" that Donner shot. Incredibly difficult to pull off. And yes Lester did not go for that style as such. Although there is a nice one in SIII when Lana and Clark are talking in the Smallville sports hall after the party. Modern oners are mostly fakes(like in the Avengers)….as they are separate segments joined together through CG masking. Would love to see the likes of Abrahams, Snyder, Bay, Whedon or even the Russos try a real in camera one take shot like what you have in the Daily Planet in STM("Olsen get this Lockness update into compositing!"). They would fail spectacularly. |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Mar 26, 2020 5:12:37 GMT -5
I like to think Donner did that to keep the schedule on track and saw the opportunity to do it. A trick learned from Orson Welles who was behind schedule directing Touch of Evil and then got ahead by making his opening sequence an oner.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Mar 26, 2020 5:55:03 GMT -5
Looking back,whoever decided to cast Terence Stamp was a genius. I really don't understand why they thought of him. But it was a brilliant choice. At the time, he had fallen out of the public eye and his movie career was considered finished years before. And he wasn't exactly the kind of actor you would think of for a supervillain. But yet, look at the result! IMHO the whole of STM casting was genius. Stamp was so good that I was disappointed when watching SIII for the first time in the cinema.....that Zod did not come bursting through at some point!(hey I was 9....just did not get the idea that actors had contracts). Yep,everyone was perfectly cast. Even Jackie Cooper, who was a last-minute replacement for Keenan Wynn, was 100% perfect. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 26, 2020 11:55:30 GMT -5
I like to think Donner did that to keep the schedule on track and saw the opportunity to do it. A trick learned from Orson Welles who was behind schedule directing Touch of Evil and then got ahead by making his opening sequence an oner. I heard it was a classic but have never seen Touch of Evil- I heard about the famous one-er.... But without having seen the shot, I wonder how many supporting players also were involved or had to be with that one-er versus the Donner ones. Some of the one-ers probably were less difficult to execute over others in STM/ SII--- but knowing how the camera folks and lighting folks also have to be all in sync during these motions, I can't imagine any 'quick' ones, without making a messy composition. The interesting thing I found is that Donner's 'one-ers' weren't like something that he'd always use... but seemed to have extreme use when possible for STM/ SII to give it an epic sense of size for all the proceedings. If Lester had shot all of STM/ SII I imagine we might have gotten something effective, but not nearly as artistic nor memorable. For Lester's "Three Musketeers" it wasn't necessary, but it couldn't have hurt. |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 26, 2020 12:10:36 GMT -5
I like to think Donner did that to keep the schedule on track and saw the opportunity to do it. A trick learned from Orson Welles who was behind schedule directing Touch of Evil and then got ahead by making his opening sequence an oner. I heard it was a classic but have never seen Touch of Evil- I heard about the famous one-er.... But without having seen the shot, I wonder how many supporting players also were involved or had to be with that one-er versus the Donner ones. Some of the one-ers probably were less difficult to execute over others in STM/ SII--- but knowing how the camera folks and lighting folks also have to be all in sync during these motions, I can't imagine any 'quick' ones, without making a messy composition. The interesting thing I found is that Donner's 'one-ers' weren't like something that he'd always use... but seemed to have extreme use when possible for STM/ SII to give it an epic sense of size for all the proceedings. If Lester had shot all of STM/ SII I imagine we might have gotten something effective, but not nearly as artistic nor memorable. For Lester's "Three Musketeers" it wasn't necessary, but it couldn't have hurt. There is a bit in the making of STM book where Petrou describes how, by accident, he strolled onto the daily planet set without realising that Donner was already shooting!.....apparently Donner was livid!....as they had to start from scratch all over again.....would like to see that outtake lol. Pertrou says that 1,250,000 feet of film was shot for STM....with only 12000 feet being used in the final cut. That means there is basically 1,238,000 feet of 35mm original negative which was most likely never made into a positive print for viewing on screen. I am sure there are a lot of golden nuggets within that 1,238,000 feet of film....it's still out there....unseen for over 40 years |
|
....never seen that film before-will check it out.