crown
New Member
Posts: 1,226
|
Post by crown on Jun 15, 2020 22:22:07 GMT -5
www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KL_p6c4SxEHis modem is evidently working now...funny thing..he keeps saying Donner's Superman II was better but also says that he wanted to play Non as a child... that was Lester's idea! 
|
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Jun 17, 2020 4:41:38 GMT -5
Agreed. There’s nothing in the Donner footage or even the Mankiewicz script that suggests that Non be childlike in anyway. He was the tough brute member of the trio that stood around with his arms crossed. Lester deserves credit for shaping up the characters to be more than the brooding and sinister types Donner had them portray.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,226
|
Post by crown on Jun 17, 2020 22:16:24 GMT -5
Agreed. There’s nothing in the Donner footage or even the Mankiewicz script that suggests that Non be childlike in anyway. He was the tough brute member of the trio that stood around with his arms crossed. Lester deserves credit for shaping up the characters to be more than the brooding and sinister types Donner had them portray. Lester turned Non, a mindless destructive force into an innocent child, Ursa from an asexual man-hating cruel bitch into a feminine sycophant with a crush on Zod, and Zod from a Nazi general into a parody of himself. Lester ruined Superman II! I can't believe Jack'O doesn't realize that he attempts to praise Donner but actually praises Lester (undeservedly so). Also did Lester ever apologize for SII? Like how Joel Schumacher apologized for Batman & Robin? |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 18, 2020 2:25:28 GMT -5
Agreed. There’s nothing in the Donner footage or even the Mankiewicz script that suggests that Non be childlike in anyway. He was the tough brute member of the trio that stood around with his arms crossed. Lester deserves credit for shaping up the characters to be more than the brooding and sinister types Donner had them portray. I suppose it's all preference- but I felt Lester deserved the opposite of credit for making the characters caricatures rather than quiet and scary as originally in the script. At least Donner's scenes on the moon and in the White House showed how menacing they could have been in a masterful way. I can only imagine the kind of magic Donner would have given us had been able to do the Metro battle as well... But- again, it's all preference. Lester's approach worked to soften it, but I felt the contrast with Gene Hackman's self-absorbed Luthor and the fragile romance of Lois and Supes would have been even more gripping if the villains stayed scary as originally intended. |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Jun 19, 2020 8:48:19 GMT -5
The problem with Donner’s characterization is that it makes the villains very one dimensional. Donner described them as the Martians from War of the Worlds, which are just the destructive force leading the main characters we’re supposed to care about. The villains aren’t alien in appearance and the actors need more to work off of instead of just “be mean and sinister.”
I remember looking forward to seeing the Phantom Zone prisoners showing up in Smallville, but was quickly disappointed in their one note and non-interesting characterizations. You can blame it on the actors but they’re just working with what they got.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 19, 2020 15:14:58 GMT -5
The problem with Donner’s characterization is that it makes the villains very one dimensional. Donner described them as the Martians from War of the Worlds, which are just the destructive force leading the main characters we’re supposed to care about. The villains aren’t alien in appearance and the actors need more to work off of instead of just “be mean and sinister.” I remember looking forward to seeing the Phantom Zone prisoners showing up in Smallville, but was quickly disappointed in their one note and non-interesting characterizations. You can blame it on the actors but they’re just working with what they got. It is preference, so with all due respect- I'm glad that it worked for you, but for me, I completely disagree... the detail to their level of cruelty - and their physicality (Ursa Douglass said on the first one, Terence Stamp thought that they should all walk and move alike in unison so that they seemed slightly alien- Lester loosened it up as you can see how specific their movements are in the Donner footage versus the Lester one) I thought made them scarier with going the opposite direction--- rather than going 'loud' (Lester) with nowhere to go, Donner had Stamp (or perhaps Stamp chose to and Donner allowed)-- play it as the opposite of what was expected and be quieter and whispery..... with moments of explosion- ("Kneel, Son of Jor-el! Kneel before Zod!!!). Ursa was expressionless, except for the moments of a small restrained smile-- that I thought was brilliant-- instead of the 'giant smile and giant glee' when destroying things. The quiet rage that i felt Donner put into the characters I felt got tossed out the window when Lester wanted things more 'over the top'- There's the scary loud bully that is always ranting and boasting- and there's the scary quiet in the corner that's unpredictable--- the first is what I felt Lester did, the second is what I felt Donner did. Different types of performing.... one is more on the surface, another is more internal. I saw a friend's film once where the actor was supposed to be scary and quiet- but the actor was just bored. And you could DEFINITELY tell the difference, even though no words were required. (I won't say that you might not be able to tell all the time when effort is put in, but that there are performances that are weak and strong even when nothing is said. Holly Hunter if I recall got an Academy Award for playing someone who was mute. So, anyhow) But- anyhow- I do think the loud PZ prisoners are fun in their way, but when I was watching SII- I wanted an extension of what I was promised in the first one. We half-got what was promised.... |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Jun 19, 2020 17:33:15 GMT -5
Lester delivered full on what was promised in the first movie. Zod went from that quiet rage to full on LOUD when he yells at Jor-El. I’m still not quite convinced that Zod would have been so firmly ingrained in popular culture had there not been a balance of his malice in the Donner footage and his vanity that Lester brought to it. Mankiewicz didn’t have moments for them to be characters like what we had in the final film and so much of the appeal of Superman II shines through in their scenes where they use their powers in East a Houston, which are lighter in nature, but when they are needed to be menaces, they still deliver, like hurling the bus full of citizens at Superman or the cut scene that was the pay off to the police siren that apparently was too much for Donner to include in his cut.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 19, 2020 17:56:20 GMT -5
Lester delivered full on what was promised in the first movie. Zod went from that quiet rage to full on LOUD when he yells at Jor-El. I’m still not quite convinced that Zod would have been so firmly ingrained in popular culture had there not been a balance of his malice in the Donner footage and his vanity that Lester brought to it. Mankiewicz didn’t have moments for them to be characters like what we had in the final film and so much of the appeal of Superman II shines through in their scenes where they use their powers in East a Houston, which are lighter in nature, but when they are needed to be menaces, they still deliver, like hurling the bus full of citizens at Superman or the cut scene that was the pay off to the police siren that apparently was too much for Donner to include in his cut. I don't really agree that Lester delivered what was promised, but that's cool--- it's all preference anyhow. We can agree to disagree, all good..  The default of quiet reason to exploding in rage in the trial sequence of STM to me had a lot of layers to it, though a short scene. Lester's version is different and noticeable because it's so showy, but not SO different from Donner's that a mainstream viewer would notice the bridge. The actors had to be okay with it (or maybe they weren't but respected the role of the director, who knows?) Whether or not Lester's changes made Zod more memorable in culture or pleased other folks - I shrug as I only care what I wanted in the sequel... but, sure, if it didn't hurt anyone and made people happy.... I still think an artist who planned two canvases to be a certain way should have those canvases preserved the way intended for future generations to decide, but--- since Donner only shot a portion, realizing Donner's full version of SII will sadly never be possible. At least the RDC and tv cut restored part of it. The Lester version is always available (though if it were up to me, all future copies should be forced to have Donner's co-credit as director in the beginning). When the original vocal performance was restored (partially) in the RDC, where it was creepily soft-spoken gave the performance range to me. If the changes worked for many, so be it. If the Lester version had/has to exist, I just wish that the full Donner version had been shot and available. In the meantime, hopefully there will be another official cut with all the footage available and tech available. Most likely a daydream, but I think we can all agree more versions can't hurt...  |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Jun 19, 2020 22:33:51 GMT -5
Back in the Superman Cinema days, it seemed that everyone was in agreement that Donner would have turned in a better Superman II and I was definitely in that crowd. As time went on and we got the Thau version of Donner’s Superman II, it just made me appreciate what Lester had done in terms of handling the three villains and their personalities.
I wasn’t impressed with Donner’s Fortress of Solitude climax with Zod just standing in one place and the weird direction of making Superman and Non point fingers at each other. Selutron’s edit of the villains taking over Washington instead of East Houston was a step in the right direction and the material with Ursa blowing a kiss to the helicopter and Zod lamenting how easy it is to conquer Earth without anyone to challenge him are all under Lester’s direction. Thau just cut back on the comedy and it still played well.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 20, 2020 2:46:25 GMT -5
Back in the Superman Cinema days, it seemed that everyone was in agreement that Donner would have turned in a better Superman II and I was definitely in that crowd. As time went on and we got the Thau version of Donner’s Superman II, it just made me appreciate what Lester had done in terms of handling the three villains and their personalities. I wasn’t impressed with Donner’s Fortress of Solitude climax with Zod just standing in one place and the weird direction of making Superman and Non point fingers at each other. Selutron’s edit of the villains taking over Washington instead of East Houston was a step in the right direction and the material with Ursa blowing a kiss to the helicopter and Zod lamenting how easy it is to conquer Earth without anyone to challenge him are all under Lester’s direction. Thau just cut back on the comedy and it still played well. The Thau version of Superman II with screen test, missing footage, stuff that was not able to be reshot, and poor editing choices on Thau's part I don't feel is a good indicator at all of what we would have gotten if Donner had been able to stay on. If Donner's other action and fantasy films with Stuart Baird editing around the same time (Ladyhawke, Lethal Weapon 1 & 2) had been on the same frustrating level as the Thau/Donner cut--- then I might agree--- but imo- those action/fantasy films were just as good as STM imo- whereas with Lester in full control, we got Superman III. Initially back when the movie news I got was in the 'movies' section of the local paper and I'd read that Donner was replaced by Richard Lester who did the excellent Three Musketeers, I was initially thrilled because I thought (and still think) Lester's Three Musketeers was excellent, and so while I loved Donner's STM, I had no problem with SII under Lester or any other director as long as it kept the high quality I felt STM had. To hear that it was the director of Three Musketeers, I felt it was in good hands assuming it was 3 Musketeers quality. But when I watched SII for the first time- * Some scenes were 'ok' but passable to me- that turned out to be Lester scenes * Other scenes were HORRIBLE to me- that I suspected (and then confirmed by the original Mank script years later) to be Lester- directed and approved. There's no arguing preferences... that's all subjective. I didn't set out to dislike the Lester scenes- but certain things even before reading the Mank script just felt 'wrong' to me as a comic book fan- and then to add to that, the quality of how some things were shot down to bad wigs just grew more irritating the more I saw them. Does the film work as is? Sure, of course.... but does evidence exist that we probably would have gotten a superior SII under Donner? It's subjective but I definitely prefer the Mank script to the rewrite- and I look at the level of quality of STM from the cinematography down to the small details... plus the quality of Donner's other work during those years, versus Lester's other works beyond Superman. Personally, I thought the pointing scene had more intensity and seriousness in a few seconds than much of the metro battle that Lester mostly used for (unfunny to me) laughs. Lester had moments (the shirtrip run in the beginning) that I liked and a couple of scenes that I felt were okay- (the Niagara scenes)- but the scripting to me showed a better version of the story imo. Anyhow- again- it's subjective. Personally, I prefer the extended tv cut of Donner's footage for SII to the RDC, which I imagine retained more of Baird's editing over Thau's. In any case- I know I had no bias and actually felt relieved initially that the director of Three Musketeers was completing the film. If he had kept to the original script, I would probably be far more accepting of the cheaper way a number of the things had been shot in certain scenes. But it is all subjective and certain things I'm pickier about or feel should be a certain way is of course different from what another person might feel. I just know the RDC was a giant disappointment but with so many elements unshot by Donner and the poor editing choices I just don't feel like it's a good example of what we would have gotten. (My own preference would have been storyboards and maybe actors voiceover for missing scenes in the original script.) In any case- that's my feeling on it... but then again, we're talking art and preferences. I do hope that there ends up being a better official recut in the future, but with dvd sales so low.... probably unlikely & so I'm just going to be satisfied (if I have to) with a bluray letterbox tv extended of SII.... |
|
