|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Feb 23, 2021 12:45:20 GMT -5
Everyone here aleady knows of the great site & podcast, yes? For new visitors: www.capedwonder.com//Current episode threw me for a loop: Fantastic that Jim & Jay got Thau, but... I was kind of hoping for even more detail from Michael Thau or hoping that he would have gone into some of the sequences that felt off... but he still seems pretty happy (enough) with what he finished. Definitely worth a listen (as all of the episodes are)- But some key points: #1: shock on the vudu version NOT being an earlier cut.... if it's 'someone wild at WB'- it's a pity that they didn't go further and re-install the other deleted scenes! #2: that most of the behind the scenes footage according to Thau was all used in one fashion or another - that the 'good stuff' had been used. (I still want to see EVERYTHING though) #3: no commentary on the fan cuts by Thau... but it's possible he never saw them or had interest to. Cool that they got him, but wish that he had said that there were mistakes made & that a newer cut was possible.... |
|
|
|
Post by booshman on Feb 25, 2021 2:49:16 GMT -5
Everyone here aleady knows of the great site & podcast, yes? For new visitors: www.capedwonder.com//Current episode threw me for a loop: Fantastic that Jim & Jay got Thau, but... I was kind of hoping for even more detail from Michael Thau or hoping that he would have gone into some of the sequences that felt off... but he still seems pretty happy (enough) with what he finished. Definitely worth a listen (as all of the episodes are)- But some key points: #1: shock on the vudu version NOT being an earlier cut.... if it's 'someone wild at WB'- it's a pity that they didn't go further and re-install the other deleted scenes! #2: that most of the behind the scenes footage according to Thau was all used in one fashion or another - that the 'good stuff' had been used. (I still want to see EVERYTHING though) #3: no commentary on the fan cuts by Thau... but it's possible he never saw them or had interest to. Cool that they got him, but wish that he had said that there were mistakes made & that a newer cut was possible.... This was an interesting listen. Good to get clarification on some stuff and a few new tid bits. It's very frustrating to not be the one asking the questions though, so many things I'd have like to hear his take on or press him for more detail. We know from the TV cut that there are better takes available for scenes he re-edited, like Lex in the fotress. A bunch of Hackman's stuff sounds like a run through with bad line readings and incorrect word order in his delivery. That being the case, were the best takes used int he final version of the Donner Cut? Was Clark's talk with Jor-El really the best takes they had from that part of the shoot, some of it is pretty stiff. Sad to hear they would have had more time to refine the effects but didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Feb 25, 2021 7:13:44 GMT -5
Thau is sorely mistaken when it comes to the longer streaming version. Donner said in his commentary with Mankiewicz that he was shown an initial cut of the movie that included the scene where the boy is killed by the police siren and the soufflé scene, but requested them to be deleted because he didn’t like the way they were shot and the tone. It’s pretty cut and dry that there was a mixup and his first attempt was posted instead of the final cut. Leaks like this happen. That’s how the narration-less cut of Blade Runner got released.
I’ve also heard that Thau apparently doesn’t work at Warners anymore due to sexual-harassment claims.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823 
|
Post by atp on Feb 27, 2021 4:38:42 GMT -5
I wish the interview had asked more about the lost footage of the CGI villains
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Feb 27, 2021 14:37:09 GMT -5
Thau is sorely mistaken when it comes to the longer streaming version. Donner said in his commentary with Mankiewicz that he was shown an initial cut of the movie that included the scene where the boy is killed by the police siren and the soufflé scene, but requested them to be deleted because he didn’t like the way they were shot and the tone. It’s pretty cut and dry that there was a mixup and his first attempt was posted instead of the final cut... That's what I was thinking... that it was an earlier draft. The deleted souffle scene IS going by the Mank script, but misinterpreted/shot by Lester. And the scene (agreeably in poor taste) of the boy being killed by Non was nixed by Donner. But- at least the cut is more comprehensible than the shorter cut. He's right in that if it didn't have Donner's signoff- even if it was an earlier draft- it would be upsetting to have that out there with Donner's name on it. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Feb 27, 2021 14:55:00 GMT -5
Everyone here aleady knows of the great site & podcast, yes? For new visitors: www.capedwonder.com//Current episode threw me for a loop: Fantastic that Jim & Jay got Thau, but... I was kind of hoping for even more detail from Michael Thau or hoping that he would have gone into some of the sequences that felt off... but he still seems pretty happy (enough) with what he finished. Definitely worth a listen (as all of the episodes are)- But some key points: #1: shock on the vudu version NOT being an earlier cut.... if it's 'someone wild at WB'- it's a pity that they didn't go further and re-install the other deleted scenes! #2: that most of the behind the scenes footage according to Thau was all used in one fashion or another - that the 'good stuff' had been used. (I still want to see EVERYTHING though) #3: no commentary on the fan cuts by Thau... but it's possible he never saw them or had interest to. Cool that they got him, but wish that he had said that there were mistakes made & that a newer cut was possible.... This was an interesting listen. Good to get clarification on some stuff and a few new tid bits. It's very frustrating to not be the one asking the questions though, so many things I'd have like to hear his take on or press him for more detail. We know from the TV cut that there are better takes available for scenes he re-edited, like Lex in the fotress. A bunch of Hackman's stuff sounds like a run through with bad line readings and incorrect word order in his delivery. That being the case, were the best takes used int he final version of the Donner Cut? Was Clark's talk with Jor-El really the best takes they had from that part of the shoot, some of it is pretty stiff. Sad to hear they would have had more time to refine the effects but didn't. I agree.... though he did seem pretty comfortable with his final choices, which (if I were the one interviewing and wanting to be polite) makes it hard to be repsectful and at the same time ask him 'WHHHHY did you make some of these choices that drove me crazy???'  ( I have those same feelings when seeing friends' films who edit things in a manner that I don't agree with- but then again, I don't have the same attachment to those as I do to what I feel could have/should have been a pop masterpiece with the Donner cut.) I know it's totally unfeasible, but if he were able to show on a movie editing program why he did this or that and compare scenes before and after for the questionable scenes- then I think I'd feel more relieved that this was the best cut possible...(well, probably not, because we've seen better fan cut choices, but just saying)- in a previous interview he'd said that in some cases, some film was in bad conditon, so that he'd use an alternate take, but.... I don't know... I think I would have been happier for him to say, "You know, I looked at the fan cuts that came out, realized I made a lot of errors, and have gotten the greenlight to do a new cut with reinserting the deleted scenes, extending the balcony and FOS scenes with Supes and Lois and restoring some of the Ken Thorn music editing". But, at least we know how he feels about the whole project and the tidbits on most all of the good behind the scnees footage being used. Good to know, but sad if there's not much more else out there.... (Video or audio recordings of table reads of the Phantom Zone criminals' scenes or the other Niagara scene would have been great) |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Feb 27, 2021 21:32:18 GMT -5
Jack Kroll ,in his original review for STM on Jan 1st , 1979 said in his closing paragraph that "SII is more than half shot".
And I think that is the most accurate contemporary statement that we ever got with regards to Donner's SII!
If you really break Mank's SII down into it's core constituents(ok--what i believe are the core constituents!):
1)Clark Lois bullet/reveal scene.
2)Clark Lois love scene(be it implied or moderately graphic).
3)Supes depowering scene.
4)Supes repowering scene.
5)Fight in Metropolis
6)Clark-Lois resolution(whatever Donner-Mank would have come up with in 79' if they had been allowed to finish).
Only points 3 & 4 were shot and even then not in their entirety.
Points 1,2,5, & 6 were not shot at all(for totally understandable reasons).
Screen tests definitely don't count and Supes clocking Non into the Empire State and Zod kicking Supes into the Statue Of Liberty are marginal fractions of that climactic fight.
It's the main reason why Lester says it's his film---because all those key scenes were shot by him.
As I said before, Lester's true deceitful behavior was to halt Donner from filming the remaining parts of SII at precisely the point that he did.
It just means that there is not much more to work with(better takes aside).
As Thau admits, the main reason behind the Donner cut was Brando's footage.....which was fantastic to see .....but it ultimately was only partially pivotal to the overall arc of the story.
To prove the point....one has only to look at STM.
The love story is at it's core.....Brando's stuff is essential but still not central.....heck Baird even cut out Brando's advice to Supes ("you are revealed to the world") from the theatrical in 78'!.
The same applies to SII.....only this time , unfortunately ,Donner did not have those key love scenes in the can(through no fault of his own of course).
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Feb 28, 2021 0:34:12 GMT -5
Jack Kroll ,in his original review for STM on Jan 1st , 1979 said in his closing paragraph that "SII is more than half shot". And I think that is the most accurate contemporary statement that we ever got with regards to Donner's SII! If you really break Mank's SII down into it's core constituents(ok--what i believe are the core constituents!): 1)Clark Lois bullet/reveal scene. 2)Clark Lois love scene(be it implied or moderately graphic). 3)Supes depowering scene. 4)Supes repowering scene. 5)Fight in Metropolis 6)Clark-Lois resolution(whatever Donner-Mank would have come up with in 79' if they had been allowed to finish). Only points 3 & 4 were shot and even then not in their entirety. Points 1,2,5, & 6 were not shot at all(for totally understandable reasons). Screen tests definitely don't count and Supes clocking Non into the Empire State and Zod kicking Supes into the Statue Of Liberty are marginal fractions of that climactic fight. It's the main reason why Lester says it's his film---because all those key scenes were shot by him. As I said before, Lester's true deceitful behavior was to halt Donner from filming the remaining parts of SII at precisely the point that he did. It just means that there is not much more to work with(better takes aside). As Thau admits, the main reason behind the Donner cut was Brando's footage.....which was fantastic to see .....but it ultimately was only partially pivotal to the overall arc of the story. To prove the point....one has only to look at STM. The love story is at it's core.....Brando's stuff is essential but still not central.....heck Baird even cut out Brando's advice to Supes ("you are revealed to the world") from the theatrical in 78'!. The same applies to SII.....only this time , unfortunately ,Donner did not have those key love scenes in the can(through no fault of his own of course). Good points- Donner openly embraces sentimentality- but he can make it work (much of the time). Some of the stiffer parts of SII are Lester's handling of the love story... particularly in the Fortress of Solitude once Supes and Lois are there. Kidder once said that right before every scene, Donner would make her laugh- and that joy may have freed her up to seem happier while being in a scene with Reeve (who we know had a bit of a combative relationship). In looking at DOnner's wide range of films, he's aces with romantic aspects of films. The emotion in the balcony scene and the talk with them breaking up outside the FOS is powerful by Donner. If we had to have a lame as heck Metro battle, it would have been great if the romance scenes had been better. |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 3, 2021 4:12:09 GMT -5
Jack Kroll ,in his original review for STM on Jan 1st , 1979 said in his closing paragraph that "SII is more than half shot". And I think that is the most accurate contemporary statement that we ever got with regards to Donner's SII! If you really break Mank's SII down into it's core constituents(ok--what i believe are the core constituents!): 1)Clark Lois bullet/reveal scene. 2)Clark Lois love scene(be it implied or moderately graphic). 3)Supes depowering scene. 4)Supes repowering scene. 5)Fight in Metropolis 6)Clark-Lois resolution(whatever Donner-Mank would have come up with in 79' if they had been allowed to finish). Only points 3 & 4 were shot and even then not in their entirety. Points 1,2,5, & 6 were not shot at all(for totally understandable reasons). Screen tests definitely don't count and Supes clocking Non into the Empire State and Zod kicking Supes into the Statue Of Liberty are marginal fractions of that climactic fight. It's the main reason why Lester says it's his film---because all those key scenes were shot by him. As I said before, Lester's true deceitful behavior was to halt Donner from filming the remaining parts of SII at precisely the point that he did. It just means that there is not much more to work with(better takes aside). As Thau admits, the main reason behind the Donner cut was Brando's footage.....which was fantastic to see .....but it ultimately was only partially pivotal to the overall arc of the story. To prove the point....one has only to look at STM. The love story is at it's core.....Brando's stuff is essential but still not central.....heck Baird even cut out Brando's advice to Supes ("you are revealed to the world") from the theatrical in 78'!. The same applies to SII.....only this time , unfortunately ,Donner did not have those key love scenes in the can(through no fault of his own of course). Good points- Donner openly embraces sentimentality- but he can make it work (much of the time). Some of the stiffer parts of SII are Lester's handling of the love story... particularly in the Fortress of Solitude once Supes and Lois are there. Kidder once said that right before every scene, Donner would make her laugh- and that joy may have freed her up to seem happier while being in a scene with Reeve (who we know had a bit of a combative relationship). In looking at DOnner's wide range of films, he's aces with romantic aspects of films. The emotion in the balcony scene and the talk with them breaking up outside the FOS is powerful by Donner. If we had to have a lame as heck Metro battle, it would have been great if the romance scenes had been better IMHO-the apex of Reeve's and Kidder's acting chemistry is that memory wipe scene. It is measured , intimate and has resonance that is commensurate with the relationship evolution precisely up until that point. It's the reason why critics and the majority of fans alike bought it back in 81'. Donner's "just don't ever forget" outside the FOS and the subsequent "same old Clark and same old Lois" on the balcony are beautifully shot and still strongly recited but IMHO, they lack resolution(this is due to the script and not the acting). In fact ,these 2 scenes could only work if the turning back the world stuff occurs immediately afterwards (as originally scripted ).......and indeed, this is how the Donner cut plays out. But I for one, would have been very disappointed if I had sat in a theater in 1980/81, to watch a Donner SII concluding with yet another turning back the world scene! In other words Donner would have had to retool or reshoot those closing FOS and balcony scenes had he been allowed to finish in 79'.....because in isolation they are simply incomplete from an emotional and thematic viewpoint. Lester's memory wipe provides that emotional closure to essentially 4 and a half hours of movie time(i.e STM & SII and not just SII alone!). Donner's SII climax partially works within the context of watching his SII in isolation......but when appended to STM it simply falls apart! It would have been very easy for the Lester team in 1979 to do another turning back the world scene to conclude SII........but they were wise enough to go for something different. And Thau actually exhibits his own limitations as a story teller in this caped wonder interview , when he says that he wanted to cut out the "can you read my mind" stuff from STM! Hypothetically, if you gave me the choice between cutting out the Supes/Lois flight over NYC and the Brando stuff in STM......I would go for excising Brando every time......simply because STM it is not about Jorel or Brando! Cut out that flight/romantic interlude over Metropolis .....and the turning back the world scene would simply fall flat. An there in lies the problem with the Donner cut....not enough key material(through no fault of Donner) and an editor who is simply not in the same league as Baird(or indeed Victor Smith). |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 4, 2021 20:57:32 GMT -5
Good points- Donner openly embraces sentimentality- but he can make it work (much of the time). Some of the stiffer parts of SII are Lester's handling of the love story... particularly in the Fortress of Solitude once Supes and Lois are there. Kidder once said that right before every scene, Donner would make her laugh- and that joy may have freed her up to seem happier while being in a scene with Reeve (who we know had a bit of a combative relationship). In looking at DOnner's wide range of films, he's aces with romantic aspects of films. The emotion in the balcony scene and the talk with them breaking up outside the FOS is powerful by Donner. If we had to have a lame as heck Metro battle, it would have been great if the romance scenes had been better IMHO-the apex of Reeve's and Kidder's acting chemistry is that memory wipe scene. It is measured , intimate and has resonance that is commensurate with the relationship evolution precisely up until that point. It's the reason why critics and the majority of fans alike bought it back in 81'. Donner's "just don't ever forget" outside the FOS and the subsequent "same old Clark and same old Lois" on the balcony are beautifully shot and still strongly recited but IMHO, they lack resolution(this is due to the script and not the acting). In fact ,these 2 scenes could only work if the turning back the world stuff occurs immediately afterwards (as originally scripted ).......and indeed, this is how the Donner cut plays out. But I for one, would have been very disappointed if I had sat in a theater in 1980/81, to watch a Donner SII concluding with yet another turning back the world scene! In other words Donner would have had to retool or reshoot those closing FOS and balcony scenes had he been allowed to finish in 79'.....because in isolation they are simply incomplete from an emotional and thematic viewpoint. Lester's memory wipe provides that emotional closure to essentially 4 and a half hours of movie time(i.e STM & SII and not just SII alone!). Donner's SII climax partially works within the context of watching his SII in isolation......but when appended to STM it simply falls apart! It would have been very easy for the Lester team in 1979 to do another turning back the world scene to conclude SII........but they were wise enough to go for something different. And Thau actually exhibits his own limitations as a story teller in this caped wonder interview , when he says that he wanted to cut out the "can you read my mind" stuff from STM! Hypothetically, if you gave me the choice between cutting out the Supes/Lois flight over NYC and the Brando stuff in STM......I would go for excising Brando every time......simply because STM it is not about Jorel or Brando! Cut out that flight/romantic interlude over Metropolis .....and the turning back the world scene would simply fall flat. An there in lies the problem with the Donner cut....not enough key material(through no fault of Donner) and an editor who is simply not in the same league as Baird(or indeed Victor Smith). The Love Story I agree is first, the Father/Son I feel was SUPPOSED to be second, and the villains third. The tone of the love story is definitely different in comparing the script and the rewrite- Lois is more innocent and goofy (One thing shown by the screen test) and less whiny and bitter in the rewritten Lester version. The memory wipe scene is definitely well acted- I agree.... but it's the stuff leading to it that feels stitled to me under Lester's direction. STM was extremely sentimental - (as is/was Ladyhawke and many of Donner's other films at the time)- and arguably Lester does fine with the comedy when Lois is pushing Clark around- but once the secret is revealed, I felt a little uncomortable for both characters- and does taint (for me) the final scenes. When I saw the tv version with the added Donner scenes, it did feel more romantic to me... but it's all subjective in the end... Also, I maintain that (my own preference) would have been storyboards/still photos with audio recordings for the missing Donner material if/when needed.... much like the restored Fritz Lang "Metropolis" movie that couldn't find all the old footage... that might have been a much better representative of how the Donner film should have 'felt' rather than overcutting Lester footage! |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 5, 2021 9:40:45 GMT -5
IMHO-the apex of Reeve's and Kidder's acting chemistry is that memory wipe scene. It is measured , intimate and has resonance that is commensurate with the relationship evolution precisely up until that point. It's the reason why critics and the majority of fans alike bought it back in 81'. Donner's "just don't ever forget" outside the FOS and the subsequent "same old Clark and same old Lois" on the balcony are beautifully shot and still strongly recited but IMHO, they lack resolution(this is due to the script and not the acting). In fact ,these 2 scenes could only work if the turning back the world stuff occurs immediately afterwards (as originally scripted ).......and indeed, this is how the Donner cut plays out. But I for one, would have been very disappointed if I had sat in a theater in 1980/81, to watch a Donner SII concluding with yet another turning back the world scene! In other words Donner would have had to retool or reshoot those closing FOS and balcony scenes had he been allowed to finish in 79'.....because in isolation they are simply incomplete from an emotional and thematic viewpoint. Lester's memory wipe provides that emotional closure to essentially 4 and a half hours of movie time(i.e STM & SII and not just SII alone!). Donner's SII climax partially works within the context of watching his SII in isolation......but when appended to STM it simply falls apart! It would have been very easy for the Lester team in 1979 to do another turning back the world scene to conclude SII........but they were wise enough to go for something different. And Thau actually exhibits his own limitations as a story teller in this caped wonder interview , when he says that he wanted to cut out the "can you read my mind" stuff from STM! Hypothetically, if you gave me the choice between cutting out the Supes/Lois flight over NYC and the Brando stuff in STM......I would go for excising Brando every time......simply because STM it is not about Jorel or Brando! Cut out that flight/romantic interlude over Metropolis .....and the turning back the world scene would simply fall flat. An there in lies the problem with the Donner cut....not enough key material(through no fault of Donner) and an editor who is simply not in the same league as Baird(or indeed Victor Smith). The Love Story I agree is first, the Father/Son I feel was SUPPOSED to be second, and the villains third. The tone of the love story is definitely different in comparing the script and the rewrite- Lois is more innocent and goofy (One thing shown by the screen test) and less whiny and bitter in the rewritten Lester version. The memory wipe scene is definitely well acted- I agree.... but it's the stuff leading to it that feels stitled to me under Lester's direction. STM was extremely sentimental - (as is/was Ladyhawke and many of Donner's other films at the time)- and arguably Lester does fine with the comedy when Lois is pushing Clark around- but once the secret is revealed, I felt a little uncomortable for both characters- and does taint (for me) the final scenes. When I saw the tv version with the added Donner scenes, it did feel more romantic to me... but it's all subjective in the end... Also, I maintain that (my own preference) would have been storyboards/still photos with audio recordings for the missing Donner material if/when needed.... much like the restored Fritz Lang "Metropolis" movie that couldn't find all the old footage... that might have been a much better representative of how the Donner film should have 'felt' rather than overcutting Lester footage! IMHO--I never found Kidder to be whiny or bitter---in fact she actually has a bit more empathy for Clark which I think was nice to see("that's what friends are for").  In fact when you break STM down there are only 3-4 scenes between Lois and Clark- 1)The opening Daily Planet introduction 2)Walking through the foyer(" what word---swell") 3)Walking through NYC("I think we better do what he says Lois") 4)The hand bag robber In all those scenes Lois is mostly dismissive of Clark.......apart from when she thinks that he has been shot by the robber.....it's a great scene and I personally remember people in the theater laughing when Lois looks down and screams "Clark!!!"---proving that she does care(but is obviously oblivious to the fact that she has just been saved!). Of course the beauty of STM as that we the audience see the contrast between the way Lois reacts to Clark--and the way she reacts to Supes. SII is different in that sense(be it Donner or Lester)---Lois is on a journey of discovery and personally speaking----I found that aspect of Lois finally breaking Supe's secret identity to be one of the most memorable moments in the film. Of course the fact that I was watching STM and SII(in 1981) back to back for the first time probably accentuated this factor. Someone else who was coming back to the theater in 1981 after nearly a 3 year break from 1978 may not have felt that same romantic arc simply because of the passage of time. Having said that, I dug out some of the original reviews from 1981 , specifically with regards to what the critics thought of the love story(and where possible how they reacted to Kidder's portrayal): Martin Gould: "Kidder is always funny, real and very attractive in the role"
Janet Maslin: "SII may not sound like much of an actor's movie, what with all the brouha. But it is. There are some unexpectedly well developed characters here, and some beautifully effective performances. The Superman-Lois romance is enchanting from their first flirtation to Lois's sighing "I guess it's sort of being married to a doctor".Don Case: "Reeve and Kidder are picture perfect , and they have a remarkable chemistry between them".
David Ansen: "Kidder has grown into the part of Lois. She is still spunky, but there is more heart here".
Rolling Stone: "With more character this time. Kidder relies less on her curling lips and throaty innuendos. She has got her own gravelly charm-perhaps a little too down to earth for this space fantasy"Richard Schickel: "Kidder is a perfect Lois Lane-She makes one believe that inside that ambitious reporter there may just be a lady who reads poetry on her night off. The pair(Reeve/Kidder) were the best thing about Superman I and they are even better here "
David Baron: "For one thing, though the script is not exactly bursting with wit, both Reeve and Kidder largely manage to retain in their roles the grace and gentle humor which made STM such a pleasant surprise. Kidder ,it's true, is occasionally a bit much here"Don't get me wrong I love Reeve's portrayal of Supes through and through ----but one should not underestimate the perfect foil that Kidder provided to Reeve(as both Clark and Supes----and be it with Donner or Lester)---which helped elevate the effect of the movies as a whole. SIII suffered as a direct consequence due to the lack of that foil. And even if Donner had continued with SII and subsequent sequels.........how would he have handled making a Supes film without Kidder(or with Kidder but in a diminished role)??!! It really can be about yin and yang |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Mar 5, 2021 10:21:00 GMT -5
The Love Story I agree is first, the Father/Son I feel was SUPPOSED to be second, and the villains third. The tone of the love story is definitely different in comparing the script and the rewrite- Lois is more innocent and goofy (One thing shown by the screen test) and less whiny and bitter in the rewritten Lester version. The memory wipe scene is definitely well acted- I agree.... but it's the stuff leading to it that feels stitled to me under Lester's direction. STM was extremely sentimental - (as is/was Ladyhawke and many of Donner's other films at the time)- and arguably Lester does fine with the comedy when Lois is pushing Clark around- but once the secret is revealed, I felt a little uncomortable for both characters- and does taint (for me) the final scenes. When I saw the tv version with the added Donner scenes, it did feel more romantic to me... but it's all subjective in the end... Also, I maintain that (my own preference) would have been storyboards/still photos with audio recordings for the missing Donner material if/when needed.... much like the restored Fritz Lang "Metropolis" movie that couldn't find all the old footage... that might have been a much better representative of how the Donner film should have 'felt' rather than overcutting Lester footage! IMHO--I never found Kidder to be whiny or bitter---in fact she actually has a bit more empathy for Clark which I think was nice to see("that's what friends are for"). In fact when you break STM down there are only 3-4 scenes between Lois and Clark- 1)The opening Daily Planet introduction 2)Walking through the foyer(" what word---swell") 3)Walking through NYC("I think we better do what he says Lois") 4)The hand bag robber In all those scenes Lois is mostly dismissive of Clark.......apart from when she thinks that he has been shot by the robber.....it's a great scene and I personally remember people in the theater laughing when Lois looks down and screams "Clark!!!"---proving that she does care(but is obviously oblivious to the fact that she has just been saved!). Of course the beauty of STM as that we the audience see the contrast between the way Lois reacts to Clark--and the way she reacts to Supes. SII is different in that sense(be it Donner or Lester)---Lois is on a journey of discovery and personally speaking----I found that aspect of Lois finally breaking Supe's secret identity to be one of the most memorable moments in the film. Of course the fact that I was watching STM and SII(in 1981) back to back for the first time probably accentuated this factor. Someone else who was coming back to the theater in 1981 after nearly a 3 year break from 1978 may not have felt that same romantic arc simply because of the passage of time. Having said that, I dug out some of the original reviews from 1981 , specifically with regards to what the critics thought of the love story(and where possible how they reacted to Kidder's portrayal): Martin Gould: "Kidder is always funny, real and very attractive in the role"
Janet Maslin: "SII may not sound like much of an actor's movie, what with all the brouha. But it is. There are some unexpectedly well developed characters here, and some beautifully effective performances. The Superman-Lois romance is enchanting from their first flirtation to Lois's sighing "I guess it's sort of being married to a doctor".Don Case: "Reeve and Kidder are picture perfect , and they have a remarkable chemistry between them".
David Ansen: "Kidder has grown into the part of Lois. She is still spunky, but there is more heart here".
Rolling Stone: "With more character this time. Kidder relies less on her curling lips and throaty innuendos. She has got her own gravelly charm-perhaps a little too down to earth for this space fantasy"Richard Schickel: "Kidder is a perfect Lois Lane-She makes one believe that inside that ambitious reporter there may just be a lady who reads poetry on her night off. The pair(Reeve/Kidder) were the best thing about Superman I and they are even better here "
David Baron: "For one thing, though the script is not exactly bursting with wit, both Reeve and Kidder largely manage to retain in their roles the grace and gentle humor which made STM such a pleasant surprise. Kidder ,it's true, is occasionally a bit much here"Don't get me wrong I love Reeve's portrayal of Supes through and through ----but one should not underestimate the perfect foil that Kidder provided to Reeve(as both Clark and Supes----and be it with Donner or Lester)---which helped elevate the effect of the movies as a whole. SIII suffered as a direct consequence due to the lack of that foil. And even if Donner had continued with SII and subsequent sequels.........how would he have handled making a Supes film without Kidder(or with Kidder but in a diminished role)??!! It really can be about yin and yang You forgot about scene 5) which was Clark arriving at Lois' apartment just after the flying scene! I love both their acting there. Especially the part where Clark takes off his glasses and then reconsiders. By the way, have you counted how many times Lois has her life saved by Superman in STM? First the mugger. Then the helicopter. Then she falls while they are flying. And of course he turns the world back at the end to save her yet again. The woman is certainly accident prone! |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 5, 2021 11:17:54 GMT -5
atpAbsolutely!!!!--apologies because that may be arguably the best scene of the lot! Damn, not sure how I forgot that one! Lois is still dismissive of Clark though-lol! Yes Lois is definitely error prone. But on that first view(in 1981 for me) the fact that Supes could not quite save Lois(whilst she is being crushed in the car) was an amazing and devastating sequence.......precisely because of all the other times that he had already saved her in the movie by that point(the robber, the helicopter, dropping her by accident during the romantic flight). That's great story telling. You have to build something up before you knock it down.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 5, 2021 18:24:56 GMT -5
The Love Story I agree is first, the Father/Son I feel was SUPPOSED to be second, and the villains third. The tone of the love story is definitely different in comparing the script and the rewrite- Lois is more innocent and goofy (One thing shown by the screen test) and less whiny and bitter in the rewritten Lester version. The memory wipe scene is definitely well acted- I agree.... but it's the stuff leading to it that feels stitled to me under Lester's direction. STM was extremely sentimental - (as is/was Ladyhawke and many of Donner's other films at the time)- and arguably Lester does fine with the comedy when Lois is pushing Clark around- but once the secret is revealed, I felt a little uncomortable for both characters- and does taint (for me) the final scenes. When I saw the tv version with the added Donner scenes, it did feel more romantic to me... but it's all subjective in the end... Also, I maintain that (my own preference) would have been storyboards/still photos with audio recordings for the missing Donner material if/when needed.... much like the restored Fritz Lang "Metropolis" movie that couldn't find all the old footage... that might have been a much better representative of how the Donner film should have 'felt' rather than overcutting Lester footage! IMHO--I never found Kidder to be whiny or bitter---in fact she actually has a bit more empathy for Clark which I think was nice to see("that's what friends are for"). In fact when you break STM down there are only 3-4 scenes between Lois and Clark- 1)The opening Daily Planet introduction 2)Walking through the foyer(" what word---swell") 3)Walking through NYC("I think we better do what he says Lois") 4)The hand bag robber In all those scenes Lois is mostly dismissive of Clark.......apart from when she thinks that he has been shot by the robber.....it's a great scene and I personally remember people in the theater laughing when Lois looks down and screams "Clark!!!"---proving that she does care(but is obviously oblivious to the fact that she has just been saved!). Of course the beauty of STM as that we the audience see the contrast between the way Lois reacts to Clark--and the way she reacts to Supes. SII is different in that sense(be it Donner or Lester)---Lois is on a journey of discovery and personally speaking----I found that aspect of Lois finally breaking Supe's secret identity to be one of the most memorable moments in the film. Of course the fact that I was watching STM and SII(in 1981) back to back for the first time probably accentuated this factor. Someone else who was coming back to the theater in 1981 after nearly a 3 year break from 1978 may not have felt that same romantic arc simply because of the passage of time. Having said that, I dug out some of the original reviews from 1981 , specifically with regards to what the critics thought of the love story(and where possible how they reacted to Kidder's portrayal): Martin Gould: "Kidder is always funny, real and very attractive in the role"
Janet Maslin: "SII may not sound like much of an actor's movie, what with all the brouha. But it is. There are some unexpectedly well developed characters here, and some beautifully effective performances. The Superman-Lois romance is enchanting from their first flirtation to Lois's sighing "I guess it's sort of being married to a doctor".Don Case: "Reeve and Kidder are picture perfect , and they have a remarkable chemistry between them".
David Ansen: "Kidder has grown into the part of Lois. She is still spunky, but there is more heart here".
Rolling Stone: "With more character this time. Kidder relies less on her curling lips and throaty innuendos. She has got her own gravelly charm-perhaps a little too down to earth for this space fantasy"Richard Schickel: "Kidder is a perfect Lois Lane-She makes one believe that inside that ambitious reporter there may just be a lady who reads poetry on her night off. The pair(Reeve/Kidder) were the best thing about Superman I and they are even better here "
David Baron: "For one thing, though the script is not exactly bursting with wit, both Reeve and Kidder largely manage to retain in their roles the grace and gentle humor which made STM such a pleasant surprise. Kidder ,it's true, is occasionally a bit much here"Don't get me wrong I love Reeve's portrayal of Supes through and through ----but one should not underestimate the perfect foil that Kidder provided to Reeve(as both Clark and Supes----and be it with Donner or Lester)---which helped elevate the effect of the movies as a whole. SIII suffered as a direct consequence due to the lack of that foil. And even if Donner had continued with SII and subsequent sequels.........how would he have handled making a Supes film without Kidder(or with Kidder but in a diminished role)??!! It really can be about yin and yang To me, it's the many tiny nonverbal moments that Donner/Stuart Baird/Kidder & Reeve brought to STM that just are big wins. If you look at ALL of Donners films, the love story is always the biggest thing and his biggest strength. (Well, except for a few of his duds- Assassins, Timeline, and the Toy)- If Donner had continued, based on his resume, I have complete confidence and curiosity how he and Mank would have shifted and changed the romance to be with Lana and Clark. At the very least, I would have rather Lester have made the breakup scene LOOK NICE.... given the visual beauty of all of STM and half of SII. Lester has his strengths, but he's not a sentimentalist. Can you imagine someone who was more sentimental doing SII with Mank's script? Supergirl had a terrible script, but it looked beautiful in many scenes. Somewhere in Time is a cult romantic classic by Swarc, too... I would have preferred Jeannot Swarc to have been chosen to finish SII, if I had my way (and a time machine)... |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Mar 6, 2021 2:49:46 GMT -5
IMHO--I never found Kidder to be whiny or bitter---in fact she actually has a bit more empathy for Clark which I think was nice to see("that's what friends are for"). In fact when you break STM down there are only 3-4 scenes between Lois and Clark- 1)The opening Daily Planet introduction 2)Walking through the foyer(" what word---swell") 3)Walking through NYC("I think we better do what he says Lois") 4)The hand bag robber In all those scenes Lois is mostly dismissive of Clark.......apart from when she thinks that he has been shot by the robber.....it's a great scene and I personally remember people in the theater laughing when Lois looks down and screams "Clark!!!"---proving that she does care(but is obviously oblivious to the fact that she has just been saved!). Of course the beauty of STM as that we the audience see the contrast between the way Lois reacts to Clark--and the way she reacts to Supes. SII is different in that sense(be it Donner or Lester)---Lois is on a journey of discovery and personally speaking----I found that aspect of Lois finally breaking Supe's secret identity to be one of the most memorable moments in the film. Of course the fact that I was watching STM and SII(in 1981) back to back for the first time probably accentuated this factor. Someone else who was coming back to the theater in 1981 after nearly a 3 year break from 1978 may not have felt that same romantic arc simply because of the passage of time. Having said that, I dug out some of the original reviews from 1981 , specifically with regards to what the critics thought of the love story(and where possible how they reacted to Kidder's portrayal): Martin Gould: "Kidder is always funny, real and very attractive in the role"
Janet Maslin: "SII may not sound like much of an actor's movie, what with all the brouha. But it is. There are some unexpectedly well developed characters here, and some beautifully effective performances. The Superman-Lois romance is enchanting from their first flirtation to Lois's sighing "I guess it's sort of being married to a doctor".Don Case: "Reeve and Kidder are picture perfect , and they have a remarkable chemistry between them".
David Ansen: "Kidder has grown into the part of Lois. She is still spunky, but there is more heart here".
Rolling Stone: "With more character this time. Kidder relies less on her curling lips and throaty innuendos. She has got her own gravelly charm-perhaps a little too down to earth for this space fantasy"Richard Schickel: "Kidder is a perfect Lois Lane-She makes one believe that inside that ambitious reporter there may just be a lady who reads poetry on her night off. The pair(Reeve/Kidder) were the best thing about Superman I and they are even better here "
David Baron: "For one thing, though the script is not exactly bursting with wit, both Reeve and Kidder largely manage to retain in their roles the grace and gentle humor which made STM such a pleasant surprise. Kidder ,it's true, is occasionally a bit much here"Don't get me wrong I love Reeve's portrayal of Supes through and through ----but one should not underestimate the perfect foil that Kidder provided to Reeve(as both Clark and Supes----and be it with Donner or Lester)---which helped elevate the effect of the movies as a whole. SIII suffered as a direct consequence due to the lack of that foil. And even if Donner had continued with SII and subsequent sequels.........how would he have handled making a Supes film without Kidder(or with Kidder but in a diminished role)??!! It really can be about yin and yang To me, it's the many tiny nonverbal moments that Donner/Stuart Baird/Kidder & Reeve brought to STM that just are big wins. If you look at ALL of Donners films, the love story is always the biggest thing and his biggest strength. (Well, except for a few of his duds- Assassins, Timeline, and the Toy)- If Donner had continued, based on his resume, I have complete confidence and curiosity how he and Mank would have shifted and changed the romance to be with Lana and Clark. At the very least, I would have rather Lester have made the breakup scene LOOK NICE.... given the visual beauty of all of STM and half of SII. Lester has his strengths, but he's not a sentimentalist. Can you imagine someone who was more sentimental doing SII with Mank's script? Supergirl had a terrible script, but it looked beautiful in many scenes. Somewhere in Time is a cult romantic classic by Swarc, too... I would have preferred Jeannot Swarc to have been chosen to finish SII, if I had my way (and a time machine)... Interesting you mention Jeannot Szwarc. He would have been good to finish S2. He did a good job with Jaws 2. Not in the same league as Spielberg's original Jaws, but still a good sequel with the same look and feel as the first. Plus, he had worked with Reeve for S.I.T. and got an amazing performance from him. Finally, he understood how to make scenes look hazy and romantic along with cinematographer Isadore Mankofsky. Looking at the 1912 scenes in S.I.T., I am convinced they could have emulated Geoffrey Unsworth's work. Wasted opportunity for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 6, 2021 15:14:21 GMT -5
Thanks- yeah, Jeannot Swarc does not seem to be a great story-guy... but the five minutes (not counting the Jerry Goldsmith credits) of Supergirl that are great, (the flying ballet scene and the flying scenes basically)- look great and there's no way someone could direct a movie like Somewhere in Time without having a romantic spirit of sorts.
Richard Lester would have been perhaps great with a character like Plastic Man or Ambush Bug. In looking at Superman III, it would have fit his aesthetics more.
And- again- his Three Musketeers is a masterpiece. Four is a bit imbalanced.... the other ones I've heard that he directed after that were supposed to be horrendous, but one day I want to check them out...
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 6, 2021 15:54:43 GMT -5
Thanks- yeah, Jeannot Swarc does not seem to be a great story-guy... but the five minutes (not counting the Jerry Goldsmith credits) of Supergirl that are great, (the flying ballet scene and the flying scenes basically)- look great and there's no way someone could direct a movie like Somewhere in Time without having a romantic spirit of sorts. Richard Lester would have been perhaps great with a character like Plastic Man or Ambush Bug. In looking at Superman III, it would have fit his aesthetics more. And- again- his Three Musketeers is a masterpiece. Four is a bit imbalanced.... the other ones I've heard that he directed after that were supposed to be horrendous, but one day I want to check them out... Actually there is an interview with Lester at the UK premiere of SIII where he is asked specifically about superheroes. And his response is revealing: "I am more inclined to look behind the heroes ....like Robin and Marian.....I have always said that if there is a love scene in a movie I am always more interested in seeing where the sheets are being taken out to the laundry!" www.supermaniii.com/siiiweb/S3_Videos/Superman_III_ITV_Royal_Premiere.html Can't say much more than that |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 6, 2021 16:38:00 GMT -5
Thanks- yeah, Jeannot Swarc does not seem to be a great story-guy... but the five minutes (not counting the Jerry Goldsmith credits) of Supergirl that are great, (the flying ballet scene and the flying scenes basically)- look great and there's no way someone could direct a movie like Somewhere in Time without having a romantic spirit of sorts. Richard Lester would have been perhaps great with a character like Plastic Man or Ambush Bug. In looking at Superman III, it would have fit his aesthetics more. And- again- his Three Musketeers is a masterpiece. Four is a bit imbalanced.... the other ones I've heard that he directed after that were supposed to be horrendous, but one day I want to check them out... Actually there is an interview with Lester at the UK premiere of SIII where he is asked specifically about superheroes. And his response is revealing: "I am more inclined to look behind the heroes ....like Robin and Marian.....I have always said that if there is a love scene in a movie I am always more interested in seeing where the sheets are being taken out to the laundry!" www.supermaniii.com/siiiweb/S3_Videos/Superman_III_ITV_Royal_Premiere.html Can't say much more than that Yeah.... that's why he was NOT the right guy to finish Superman II imo as a continuation of Donner's guided love story .... there are scenes that work anyways with Reeve and Kidder, but the tone and the shift in Lois' character is noticeable to me. It's not a 'off the cliff' shift- but the charming slightly off, self-involved, and dopey Donner Lois I could fall for. I don't know if it's the real anger behind the scenes that make her seem a bit more unlikable but I do think it's the shift in the scripting and directing too that makes me feel less for her in the Lester version. For sure, the Donner/Mank scenes are VERY much in a sentimental fashion. But Donner was not embarrassed by sentiment. (Hence the 'poem/song' during the flying ballet scene) Lester has a sensibility that looked like it could go there, but not in love with it, for sure.... (nitpicking: look at the scene where Supes is explaining the crystal when it called for him, and rather than being fascinated, Lois is giving off a vibe where she seems a little freaked by it.) |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Mar 27, 2021 10:24:48 GMT -5
Actually there is an interview with Lester at the UK premiere of SIII where he is asked specifically about superheroes. And his response is revealing: "I am more inclined to look behind the heroes ....like Robin and Marian.....I have always said that if there is a love scene in a movie I am always more interested in seeing where the sheets are being taken out to the laundry!" www.supermaniii.com/siiiweb/S3_Videos/Superman_III_ITV_Royal_Premiere.html Can't say much more than that Yeah.... that's why he was NOT the right guy to finish Superman II imo as a continuation of Donner's guided love story .... there are scenes that work anyways with Reeve and Kidder, but the tone and the shift in Lois' character is noticeable to me. It's not a 'off the cliff' shift- but the charming slightly off, self-involved, and dopey Donner Lois I could fall for. I don't know if it's the real anger behind the scenes that make her seem a bit more unlikable but I do think it's the shift in the scripting and directing too that makes me feel less for her in the Lester version. For sure, the Donner/Mank scenes are VERY much in a sentimental fashion. But Donner was not embarrassed by sentiment. (Hence the 'poem/song' during the flying ballet scene) Lester has a sensibility that looked like it could go there, but not in love with it, for sure.... (nitpicking: look at the scene where Supes is explaining the crystal when it called for him, and rather than being fascinated, Lois is giving off a vibe where she seems a little freaked by it.) I actually have Lester's 1979 flick , Cuba , in my collection. It features a rather awkward love relationship between Sean Connery(a mercenary/spy) and Brooke Adams(daughter of a wealthy Cuban tycoon).....all set within the context of the overthrow of the Battista regime in 1959. Compared to the Reeve/Kidder relationship from Lester's SII, the Cuba love scenes are stale by comparison. Quite frankly if you were to tell me that Cuba and SII were shot by the same director....I would not believe it! They are radically different in terms of cinematography, editing, acting and directing. And seeing as Cuba is the film that Lester shot directly before SII , then I think it's quite remarkable that Lester made such a massive jump in directorial style between the 2 flicks. One may argue that Donner did the same going from STM straight to Inside Moves! Again it's all opinions(and I totally respect yours as always)!. But for me, Lester somehow managed to coax more nuanced, and mature performances from Kidder and Reeve in his version of SII. There could be a few factors at play here.......the passage of time , the increase in understanding/chemistry between Reeve and Kidder and last but definitely not least.....Lester's skill as a director. One has only to look at SIV to see how the quasi pathetic direction from Furie , almost neutralized that very same organic chemistry between Reeve and Kidder. Regarding that scene in SII where Kidder looks a bit "intrigued" by the green crystal, I don't detect any sense of neglect or disinterest. It's beautifully shot and recited IMHO. Easily on par with anything Donner shot. The same applies to the scene where Supes shares a glass of wine with Lois. When Reeve says: "for the first time in my life , everything is clear " ....is in my opinion one of the best soul searching recited scenes in the entire Salkind trilogy. And IMHO, it also exceeds what Donner had shot for STM(or his version of SII).....in terms of the Lois/Supes dynamic. Of course if Donner had been allowed to finish his version of SII in 1979, then he too would have had the advantage of utilizing Reeve's and Kidder's greater depth of acting ect ect ....by that point in time. One has to remember that because Lester was on the production of STM, it may have given him an added advantage when it came to helming SII......in terms of understanding the dynamics that stimulated good performances from Reeve and Kidder. And this could be one of the reasons why Furie struggled to elicit effective performances from Reeve and Kidder(together).......because he was not familiar with the actors(on a personal level) before taking the reigns. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 27, 2021 13:16:38 GMT -5
Yeah.... that's why he was NOT the right guy to finish Superman II imo as a continuation of Donner's guided love story .... there are scenes that work anyways with Reeve and Kidder, but the tone and the shift in Lois' character is noticeable to me. It's not a 'off the cliff' shift- but the charming slightly off, self-involved, and dopey Donner Lois I could fall for. I don't know if it's the real anger behind the scenes that make her seem a bit more unlikable but I do think it's the shift in the scripting and directing too that makes me feel less for her in the Lester version. For sure, the Donner/Mank scenes are VERY much in a sentimental fashion. But Donner was not embarrassed by sentiment. (Hence the 'poem/song' during the flying ballet scene) Lester has a sensibility that looked like it could go there, but not in love with it, for sure.... (nitpicking: look at the scene where Supes is explaining the crystal when it called for him, and rather than being fascinated, Lois is giving off a vibe where she seems a little freaked by it.) I actually have Lester's 1979 flick , Cuba , in my collection. It features a rather awkward love relationship between Sean Connery(a mercenary/spy) and Brooke Adams(daughter of a wealthy Cuban tycoon).....all set within the context of the overthrow of the Battista regime in 1959. Compared to the Reeve/Kidder relationship from Lester's SII, the Cuba love scenes are stale by comparison. Quite frankly if you were to tell me that Cuba and SII were shot by the same director....I would not believe it! They are radically different in terms of cinematography, editing, acting and directing. And seeing as Cuba is the film that Lester shot directly before SII , then I think it's quite remarkable that Lester made such a massive jump in directorial style between the 2 flicks. One may argue that Donner did the same going from STM straight to Inside Moves! Again it's all opinions(and I totally respect yours as always)!. But for me, Lester somehow managed to coax more nuanced, and mature performances from Kidder and Reeve in his version of SII. There could be a few factors at play here.......the passage of time , the increase in understanding/chemistry between Reeve and Kidder and last but definitely not least.....Lester's skill as a director. One has only to look at SIV to see how the quasi pathetic direction from Furie , almost neutralized that very same organic chemistry between Reeve and Kidder. Regarding that scene in SII where Kidder looks a bit "intrigued" by the green crystal, I don't detect any sense of neglect or disinterest. It's beautifully shot and recited IMHO. Easily on par with anything Donner shot. The same applies to the scene where Supes shares a glass of wine with Lois. When Reeve says: "for the first time in my life , everything is clear " ....is in my opinion one of the best soul searching recited scenes in the entire Salkind trilogy. And IMHO, it also exceeds what Donner had shot for STM(or his version of SII).....in terms of the Lois/Supes dynamic. Of course if Donner had been allowed to finish his version of SII in 1979, then he too would have had the advantage of utilizing Reeve's and Kidder's greater depth of acting ect ect ....by that point in time. One has to remember that because Lester was on the production of STM, it may have given him an added advantage when it came to helming SII......in terms of understanding the dynamics that stimulated good performances from Reeve and Kidder. And this could be one of the reasons why Furie struggled to elicit effective performances from Reeve and Kidder(together).......because he was not familiar with the actors(on a personal level) before taking the reigns. Hey Dejan! As always, I appreciate and enjoy the back and forth with our views on Donner and Lester's approaches to the Superman series! I know I have a bias, but I'm glad that we can disagree in a respectful way. Okay... now, let's battle! (kidding!) I agree that the acting in the 'pink bears' is fantastic- I would actually agree with you on that, but the context of the peformances I would NOT compare with the 'bullets' scene- but instead the 'balcony' talk or the 'after melting the Fortress of Solitude' talk where Supes and Lois are open with one another. The reason being: from the script, Lois is still feeling like she's in the 'power' position with having tricked Superman into revealing his identity. The script is not a giant reveal of persona in the bullets scene, but a more comedic one that all leads to the suprise of Lois pulling the gun on him. With the Lester rewrite, it's not a comedic scene- it is very dramatic- and it's incredibly well acted, but it's the context of the scene that allows the layers to come out. Did Lester coax it? Or did Donner already train them to be able to do it on their own? In any case, Lester was the director on set at the time, so he gets credit regardless, to be fair. (It's no secret that Kidder was extremely unhappy that Donner wasn't there, so how much she would have been listening to Lester is questionable. It's no secret that McClure talked about the differences in director's work and felt like he was being told by Lester to go 'here and there'. Terence Stamp was perhaps more fair and diplomatic said that Lester had a difficult position because everyone loved Donner and probably empathised with Lester's position that he was in, being that he was in the situation of being the director that took his spot... and full credit later.) With Sydney Furie, I get that his heart was in the right place- but it seemed like too many factors were against him. The age of the actors for one (While I love Margot, she looked much older then which would have been fine if the script and tone adjusted to that- in parts it did, but in parts it did not, and it felt like Margot trying to be the same age as when she first played Lois)... the budget of course (while SII's budget shrunk, was nothing compared to SIV's shrinkage)... and who knows what else given the disastrous stories about working for Canon? It's highly possible that almost ANY director could have stepped into the blueprint and foundation that Donner and his production team setup and gotten good work from the A-list cast....and this may sound harsh (well, by this point, everyone knows I'm not kind to Lester's behavior on this) but possibly nobody wanted to steal credit from Donner and respected his work perhaps. To me, at the time of the sequel, I didn't care who took over as long as it was (to me) as good a movie as the first and my expectations were upheld or surpassed. When I first read in the newspapers that Richard Lester who did Three Musketeers was taking over, I remember how much I loved Three Musketeers by him (still do!) and thought it was a fantastic choice--- until seeing the result. In a slightly alternate universe, if Lester stuck to the seriousness of the full Mank script, kept more of Donner's original material, and maybe even gave Dick Donner an actual phone call saying he would respect the work - (my suspicion is that Lester never did because he knew he was fully intending to undermine the original and rewrite it to his tastes, so why bother to call if he had ill-intent to begin with? I generally like to give people the benefit of the doubt... but... look at all the resulting evidence... grrr...) Anyhow- there are good performances, but the love story as rewritten is stilted. In the Mank script, Lois is a bit delusional and perky/happy up until.... the depowering. Then she gets a GIANT wake up call, as originally in the Mank script she's in tears (not able to be filmed by Donner) by the end of the depowering... and then that gets followed by the Diner scene- another wake up call to reality. Then--- the Metro battle & the FOS scene/balcony scenes, which are pure emotion. She's not quippy there, she's broken down bit by bit inside. With the Lester rewrite.... the 'broken down' state comes sooner after 'pink bears' scene - but then, her arc is a bit more muddled. The story tries to keep up the energy and romance bit- but aside from 'changing into something more comfortable' with the closeups and Williams/Thorne music- the rewrite still hits some of the same beats, but in a very different way. Lester definitely has certain strengths, but was an imperfect fit for continuing Donner's Superman. In a couple of instances, I do feel he got it 'right', but more often than not in SII- I feel he lowered the material considerably. |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Apr 1, 2021 8:58:32 GMT -5
@cam Nice points as always I have to confess I never deciphered the double whammy that Lois experiences in the original SII script(crying at seeing a depowered Supes and then subsequently witnessing Clark's beating at the hands of Rocky). That is an excellent observation. No question that would have been a powerful sequence of scenes if filmed by Donner, as intended. Again looking at the script for the depowering: LOIS is terrified. She turns away, is suddenly faced by a
huge projection of JOR-EL's face: his eyes seem to be
staring straight at her - they flash with seething hatred.
LOIS screams, buries her face as:As expressed in the Donner cut, there are no shots of Brando seething with hatred as he turns towards Lois!!!!!----let alone any screams from Kidder!----now there is a rather skeptical look from Jorel, but it's ambiguous(and some would argue beautifully so) at best. So were these Brando "seething hatred" shots lost or deemed not good enough--or never filmed in the first place(because Brando was being uncooperative or even disinterested..... as Reeve insinuates in those 1982 Letterman and 1991 Cavett interviews) All food for thought. We may never really know the truth. Interesting that Lester chose to use a quick insert of Kidder closing her eyes after Reeve tells Yorke : "Mother, I love her". Works perfectly IMHO. Beautifully shot and recited. And it's further proof , that you cannot have an action without a reaction. I also like the optical dissolve of Lara as she places her head down in regret/sorrow as Reeve encloses himself in the chamber. IMHO-Whilst the cinematography is better under Donner for the depowering scene-the acting is better in Lester's version. York's delivery of "you can be hurt like an ordinary man" is actually better than Brando's(again IMHO). But both versions are ultimately excellent--it's unfortunate that some of Donner's insert shots of Lois are lost/not shot. And going back to Lois's crying whilst seeing a depowered Supes(as scripted): If what we got in the Donner cut in 2006 was exactly the same footage /assembly that Victor Smith and Lester reviewed in 1979, then I think they did well to add a few lines: Lois: "you did all that for me-I don't know what to say" Clark: "Just say you love me" ...and then their subsequent walk towards the fortress bed. I think these are great additions by the Lester team and a worthy substitute for potential shots of Lois crying. As to why Lester simply did not shoot Lois crying(as scripted by Mank) after seeing a derezzed Supes.....hmm....I might have an explanation: Lester has Lois crying at the end , in the office.....and it's pretty powerful precisely because she has not cried up until that point in the theatrical version. Of course Lester did include that abbreviated beautiful Donner balcony shot of Lois(seemingly crying) in the foreground with Supes taking off behind her. It's only when you see the extended TV cut(or Donner cut) that you realize that she really was crying outright! So could Lester have excised the Lois crying sequences from his version of SII simply because he wanted to wait until the end....to have the audience see her in tears. That's what it means to be creative(for good or ill). As for the Honeymoon Haven bullet sequence--agreed entirely with what you say. Definitely a multi layered scene under Donner(if shot as scripted by Mank). But to be fair Lester also included a degree of ambiguity---in fact Reeve even says it: Supes "I don't know why I did that" Lois: "maybe you did not want to do it with your mind but with your heart" Not a false note in terms of acting, directing(right down to the extreme facial close ups) as far as I am concerned. And leagues ahead of the Donner SII screen tests(as they should be). It's not a fair comparison because Donner never shot this sequence for real of course.If he had then we could do a truly side by side comparison. In terms of perceiving Lester as having lowered the quality of the material overall---- of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Many contemporary critics thought quite the opposite...and that included 7 year old me! And that cannot be by accident. SIV on the other hand was lambasted back then....and is still lambasted now. And Reeve(as much as I love the guy) has to shoulder the blame as much as anyone else. Even simple scenes that featured no effects are so poorly shot and recited(like Lacey trying to seduce Clark in the DP office) that it borders on cringy(well it is!). The worst deliveries have to be that prison worker who wails at Luther: "what is that godawful noise!" Or the chap (who plays Porkins in Star Wars) muttering "the light is hurting my eyes!" Seriously there are no excuses for how low the Furie team went. It was not just the budget---for me that's just an excuse.....what this project really lacked, was passion and that is unforgivable. So whilst SIII was a relative disappointment........SIV was effectively the nail in the coffin for the Reeve era Supes. |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Apr 1, 2021 11:44:32 GMT -5
@cam Nice points as always I have to confess I never deciphered the double whammy that Lois experiences in the original SII script(crying at seeing a depowered Supes and then subsequently witnessing Clark's beating at the hands of Rocky). That is an excellent observation. No question that would have been a powerful sequence of scenes if filmed by Donner, as intended. Again looking at the script for the depowering: LOIS is terrified. She turns away, is suddenly faced by a
huge projection of JOR-EL's face: his eyes seem to be
staring straight at her - they flash with seething hatred.
LOIS screams, buries her face as:As expressed in the Donner cut, there are no shots of Brando seething with hatred as he turns towards Lois!!!!!----let alone any screams from Kidder!----now there is a rather skeptical look from Jorel, but it's ambiguous(and some would argue beautifully so) at best. So were these Brando "seething hatred" shots lost or deemed not good enough--or never filmed in the first place(because Brando was being uncooperative or even disinterested..... as Reeve insinuates in those 1982 Letterman and 1991 Cavett interviews) All food for thought. We may never really know the truth. Interesting that Lester chose to use a quick insert of Kidder closing her eyes after Reeve tells Yorke : "Mother, I love her". Works perfectly IMHO. Beautifully shot and recited. And it's further proof , that you cannot have an action without a reaction. I also like the optical dissolve of Lara as she places her head down in regret/sorrow as Reeve encloses himself in the chamber. IMHO-Whilst the cinematography is better under Donner for the depowering scene-the acting is better in Lester's version. York's delivery of "you can be hurt like an ordinary man" is actually better than Brando's(again IMHO). But both versions are ultimately excellent--it's unfortunate that some of Donner's insert shots of Lois are lost/not shot. And going back to Lois's crying whilst seeing a depowered Supes(as scripted): If what we got in the Donner cut in 2006 was exactly the same footage /assembly that Victor Smith and Lester reviewed in 1979, then I think they did well to add a few lines: Lois: "you did all that for me-I don't know what to say" Clark: "Just say you love me" ...and then their subsequent walk towards the fortress bed. I think these are great additions by the Lester team and a worthy substitute for potential shots of Lois crying. As to why Lester simply did not shoot Lois crying(as scripted by Mank) after seeing a derezzed Supes.....hmm....I might have an explanation: Lester has Lois crying at the end , in the office.....and it's pretty powerful precisely because she has not cried up until that point in the theatrical version. Of course Lester did include that abbreviated beautiful Donner balcony shot of Lois(seemingly crying) in the foreground with Supes taking off behind her. It's only when you see the extended TV cut(or Donner cut) that you realize that she really was crying outright! So could Lester have excised the Lois crying sequences from his version of SII simply because he wanted to wait until the end....to have the audience see her in tears. That's what it means to be creative(for good or ill). As for the Honeymoon Haven bullet sequence--agreed entirely with what you say. Definitely a multi layered scene under Donner(if shot as scripted by Mank). But to be fair Lester also included a degree of ambiguity---in fact Reeve even says it: Supes "I don't know why I did that" Lois: "maybe you did not want to do it with your mind but with your heart" Not a false note in terms of acting, directing(right down to the extreme facial close ups) as far as I am concerned. And leagues ahead of the Donner SII screen tests(as they should be). It's not a fair comparison because Donner never shot this sequence for real of course.If he had then we could do a truly side by side comparison. In terms of perceiving Lester as having lowered the quality of the material overall---- of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Many contemporary critics thought quite the opposite...and that included 7 year old me! And that cannot be by accident. SIV on the other hand was lambasted back then....and is still lambasted now. And Reeve(as much as I love the guy) has to shoulder the blame as much as anyone else. Even simple scenes that featured no effects are so poorly shot and recited(like Lacey trying to seduce Clark in the DP office) that it borders on cringy(well it is!). The worst deliveries have to be that prison worker who wails at Luther: "what is that godawful noise!" Or the chap (who plays Porkins in Star Wars) muttering "the light is hurting my eyes!" Seriously there are no excuses for how low the Furie team went. It was not just the budget---for me that's just an excuse.....what this project really lacked, was passion and that is unforgivable. So whilst SIII was a relative disappointment........SIV was effectively the nail in the coffin for the Reeve era Supes. I definitely remember the consensus among critics and audiences in 1980 being that S2 was better. The catchphrase was, "If you've only seen the first part, you haven't seen the best part!" Of course, time has been kinder to STM than to S2. One is a real classic,while the other is a fun crowdpleaser. Kind of like Rocky 1 and Rocky 4. I was never a fan of Jor El looking at Lois in the fortress. It's too juvenile. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Apr 1, 2021 13:23:21 GMT -5
That had to be painful for Donner with the best parts that he shot were being fully credited by Lester!  (I still maintain that I'd give Lester the benefit of the doubt if he were to have come out in an interview and give his side of the story. I used to have pretty negative opinions on the Salkinds until Ilya told his side of the story, and though everything is a grain of salt also- I could see his point of view as well) The scene as scripted is pretty melodramatic.... but Donner excels in emotion. With missing portions never shot for the Donner cut = I imagine from the script that if Lois is screaming and weeping, that inside of the chamber Donner would have shot Reeve being in extreme pain to make the glare by Jor-el towards Lois more understandable... (maybe)
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Apr 3, 2021 10:58:24 GMT -5
That had to be painful for Donner with the best parts that he shot were being fully credited by Lester! (I still maintain that I'd give Lester the benefit of the doubt if he were to have come out in an interview and give his side of the story. I used to have pretty negative opinions on the Salkinds until Ilya told his side of the story, and though everything is a grain of salt also- I could see his point of view as well) The scene as scripted is pretty melodramatic.... but Donner excels in emotion. With missing portions never shot for the Donner cut = I imagine from the script that if Lois is screaming and weeping, that inside of the chamber Donner would have shot Reeve being in extreme pain to make the glare by Jor-el towards Lois more understandable... (maybe) But it could also have been painful for Donner to see that Lester actually exceeded his own work in certain areas. As the critics were praising the parts that Donner did not shoot! Martin Gould: "There is an emotional warmth in this film that was not in the first"
"The fight(in NYC) is the visual highlight of the film"
Janet Maslin: "The film takes a while to get going but when it devotes itself to Superman 's love affair plus his colossal battle with the three ferocious villains it picks up plenty of steam"
Don Chase: "As good as Donner was in the first film, Lester uses his unique ability to weave comedy and high adventure into a very beautiful cinematic tapestry"
"the big news , however, is the relationship between Superman and Lois Lane. Both Reeve and Kidder are picture perfect ,and they have a remarkable chemistry between them." David Asssen: "One feels a real pang at her(Kidder) impossible predicament("I am jealous of the whole world!" she tearfully explains)."Richard Schickel: "the final confrontation is a barroom brawl on a delightfully gigantic scale"David Baron: "Fortunately though, the show stopping cliffhangers staged at Niagra Falls, Paris and Metropolis are by no means all that Superman II has to offer." Roger Ebert: "Superman II catches that flavor perfectly with it's use of famous landmarks like the Eiffel Tower, The Empire State Building, Niagra Falls and the Coca Cola sign in Times Square"Archer Winsten: "Tremendous swooping battle among NYC skyscrapers with the evil triumvirate"
Gene Siskel: "Its the love story that really sizzles in this film"
"When Reeve looks Kidder in the eye and tells her that he loves her even more than his job as Superman, it's a very sweet moment" I chose the above excerpts not to disparage Donner, far from it-his unique SII sequences are fantastic. Lester knew this, and utilized them intelligently, interweaving them with his own stuff to create a greater and more effective whole(which is quite frankly, the opposite of the Donner Cut!). Sure a lot of critics praised Hackman's portrayal in 1981(believing that Lester had directed him!) But those Donner sequences are not at the central core of the piece. It's the love story and that battle at the end. And the credit has to go to Lester here. |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Apr 3, 2021 12:48:38 GMT -5
That had to be painful for Donner with the best parts that he shot were being fully credited by Lester! (I still maintain that I'd give Lester the benefit of the doubt if he were to have come out in an interview and give his side of the story. I used to have pretty negative opinions on the Salkinds until Ilya told his side of the story, and though everything is a grain of salt also- I could see his point of view as well) The scene as scripted is pretty melodramatic.... but Donner excels in emotion. With missing portions never shot for the Donner cut = I imagine from the script that if Lois is screaming and weeping, that inside of the chamber Donner would have shot Reeve being in extreme pain to make the glare by Jor-el towards Lois more understandable... (maybe) But it could also have been painful for Donner to see that Lester actually exceeded his own work in certain areas. As the critics were praising the parts that Donner did not shoot! Martin Gould: "There is an emotional warmth in this film that was not in the first"
"The fight(in NYC) is the visual highlight of the film"
Janet Maslin: "The film takes a while to get going but when it devotes itself to Superman 's love affair plus his colossal battle with the three ferocious villains it picks up plenty of steam"
Don Chase: "As good as Donner was in the first film, Lester uses his unique ability to weave comedy and high adventure into a very beautiful cinematic tapestry"
"the big news , however, is the relationship between Superman and Lois Lane. Both Reeve and Kidder are picture perfect ,and they have a remarkable chemistry between them." David Asssen: "One feels a real pang at her(Kidder) impossible predicament("I am jealous of the whole world!" she tearfully explains)."Richard Schickel: "the final confrontation is a barroom brawl on a delightfully gigantic scale"David Baron: "Fortunately though, the show stopping cliffhangers staged at Niagra Falls, Paris and Metropolis are by no means all that Superman II has to offer." Roger Ebert: "Superman II catches that flavor perfectly with it's use of famous landmarks like the Eiffel Tower, The Empire State Building, Niagra Falls and the Coca Cola sign in Times Square"Archer Winsten: "Tremendous swooping battle among NYC skyscrapers with the evil triumvirate"
Gene Siskel: "Its the love story that really sizzles in this film"
"When Reeve looks Kidder in the eye and tells her that he loves her even more than his job as Superman, it's a very sweet moment" I chose the above excerpts not to disparage Donner, far from it-his unique SII sequences are fantastic. Lester knew this, and utilized them intelligently, interweaving them with his own stuff to create a greater and more effective whole(which is quite frankly, the opposite of the Donner Cut!). Sure a lot of critics praised Hackman's portrayal in 1981(believing that Lester had directed him!) But those Donner sequences are not at the central core of the piece. It's the love story and that battle at the end. And the credit has to go to Lester here. I'm with you and the critics on this. But I do still believe that STM aged better than S2. Lester came pretty close to making a perfect sequel, but three things let it down: - The overall cheap feel in some parts, e.g. East Houston scenes - Too much comedy and gags especially during Metropolis battle - Making the villains too much like caricatures and way less scary than in STM. Zod and Non got it the worst. Ursa was pretty consistent. |
|
