Caped Wonder's Awesome podcast:current episode- Michael Thau

[atp]

This may be giving Lester too much credit, but perhaps he saw where the tide was heading and deliberately made S2 into more of an 80s movie than a 70s one.

The 1970s was the decade for timeless classics: The Godfather, Jaws, One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, Rocky, Close Encounters of the Third Kind... and STM!

The 1980s was different. Compare Rocky 3 with the original Rocky. Or E.T. with Close Encounters of the Third Kind.

Viewed through this lens, the shift between STM and S2 does seem kind of consistent with the times.

But like I said, perhaps I am crediting Lester with far too much insight and prescience!

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 17, 2021 11:56:48 GMT -5 atp said:

This may be giving Lester too much credit, but perhaps he saw where the tide was heading and deliberately made S2 into more of an 80s movie than a 70s one.

The 1970s was the decade for timeless classics: The Godfather, Jaws, One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, Rocky, Close Encounters of the Third Kind... and STM!

The 1980s was different. Compare Rocky 3 with the original Rocky. Or E.T. with Close Encounters of the Third Kind.

Viewed through this lens, the shift between STM and S2 does seem kind of consistent with the times.

But like I said, perhaps I am crediting Lester with far too much insight and prescience!

I feel like MANY give Lester way too much credit.

But seriously, the Mank script/Donner's approach was similar to me to what Lucas' first two Star Wars were:

#1: Darth Vader- Always taken seriously and scary (well, until ROTJ)
#2: C3po/R2d2- Always comical but sad at the same time- but true to their characters
#3: The friendships and humanity of the lead heroes- Luke/Leia/Han's characters were taken seriously, but there were beats of immaturity that made them endearing.

ROTJ- though...
#1: The Ewoks were incredibly silly and at times dominated/ruined the tone of the movie. Instead of lightening it up, it just interrupted the film and undermined the action imo.

In comparison to Donner and Lester's approach:
FOR DONNER:

#1: The Villains in STM/SII under Donner were taken seriously and scary up to the end in the Mank script.
#2: Lois/Clark was comical but sad at the same tie- true to their characters - just as Lex/Otis was comical (though to me, also a tad too much in STM)
#3: The friendships and humanity of Supes and the DP crew were taken seriously, but there were beats of immaturity that made them endearing.

FOR LESTER:
#1: The Villains in Lester's version were shot incredibly silly and at times dominated/ruined the tone of the movie. Instead of lightening it up, it just interrupted the film (particularly the Metro battle and the sight gags) and undermined the action imo.

Did he keep the (best) Donner parts? Yes, but not enough imo.

The best comparisons I think would be the scripted versions because the scripts are complete. Comparing the RDC and SII theatrical has too many advantages because Donner never got the equal chance to shoot all of his material nor refine it, whereas Lester did have time.

Again, differing opinions... all good!

[dejan]

Apr 17, 2021 11:56:48 GMT -5 atp said:

This may be giving Lester too much credit, but perhaps he saw where the tide was heading and deliberately made S2 into more of an 80s movie than a 70s one.

The 1970s was the decade for timeless classics: The Godfather, Jaws, One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, Rocky, Close Encounters of the Third Kind... and STM!

The 1980s was different. Compare Rocky 3 with the original Rocky. Or E.T. with Close Encounters of the Third Kind.

Viewed through this lens, the shift between STM and S2 does seem kind of consistent with the times.

But like I said, perhaps I am crediting Lester with far too much insight and prescience!

That's a very interesting angle I had never personally considered before.

The quality that the 70s ascertained cannot be repeated. Cinema is an evolving art form and there was a nexus towards the end of the 70s(with regards to fantasy/sci-fi) where artistic creativity and practical reality aligned perfectly to create Star Wars, Close Encounters and Superman The Movie.
Of course you also had Alien, Star Trek and even relative flops like The Black Hole and Moonraker ; all these flicks  pushed the boundaries of what was possible.

In terms of aesthetics, Superman II was really a combination of elements that were partially derived from disaster movies(i.e Earthquake,Towering Inferno) , sci-fi films(Non's and Ursa's lasers are practically identical to the rays that the Stormtroopers fire in Star Wars) and the romance and heroics that constituted Supes The Movie.

I think this is applicable to both the Lester and  Donner version(had it been made as planned). 

Maybe Superman III really fits into that early 80s vibe.
Even as a 9 year old(in 83') I felt that the aesthetics of SIII were not as classically delineated as STM.


 

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 17, 2021 11:56:48 GMT -5 atp said:

This may be giving Lester too much credit, but perhaps he saw where the tide was heading and deliberately made S2 into more of an 80s movie than a 70s one.

The 1970s was the decade for timeless classics: The Godfather, Jaws, One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, Rocky, Close Encounters of the Third Kind... and STM!

The 1980s was different. Compare Rocky 3 with the original Rocky. Or E.T. with Close Encounters of the Third Kind.

Viewed through this lens, the shift between STM and S2 does seem kind of consistent with the times.

But like I said, perhaps I am crediting Lester with far too much insight and prescience!

Also... at the time of filmmaking- it does seem like they were under the gun to complete things fast- (though this could not have been the case with Superman III if STM/SII were a big success boxoffice wise and there was no pressure to worry about the aging between footage)- so in that regard Lester gets credit for shooting fast and under-budget... but then again so does Robert Rodriguez who arguably put out films far more visually interesting than Lester.

From the majority of output by Lester, it does seem like he enjoys broad comedy. Some of that worked for parts of SII- (the Niagara falls water jump is hilarious I'll admit) but trying to force obvious jokes into other parts (making the Villains comedic and- again- the sight gags that didn't further plot nor character during the Metro battle that look suspiciously similar in tone to the beginning of SIII)... undermined what the original story was about, imo.

In comparing Rocky 3 to Rocky--- it is different and had a more mtv feel to it- but it was appropriate to the story about excesses. I don't think Stallone got enough credit for directing 2 and 3 (suprisingly Siskel and Ebert both gave it a 'thumbs down')- With E.T. versus Close Encounters- I thought it was mainly a different story and Speilberg having more time/money available and getting his act down with his production team.

You might be right on the aesthetics changing due to the times, and it's not impossible, but in the cases you cite, I feel it was more at play in those instances...

[atp]

Dejan,Cam, you both make excellent points. I agree, I am probably ascribing too much credit to Lester!

For the record, I loved S2 as a child, but now I can see its shortcomings. I wish S2 had been released in 1979, with Donner being able to complete both films.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 18, 2021 13:47:49 GMT -5 atp said:

Dejan,Cam, you both make excellent points. I agree, I am probably ascribing too much credit to Lester!

For the record, I loved S2 as a child, but now I can see its shortcomings. I wish S2 had been released in 1979, with Donner being able to complete both films.

I think it would have been amazing- even if Donner ended up having to compromise and recast Brando (which I do think would have eventually happened) and work within a stricter budget. The loss wasn't just on the spectacle end but the drama end imo.

I felt that at least with the international cut, one is able to get a smidge of what it might have been like if Donner stayed.
The RDC a touch more, but the sloppiness of the chopping/editing/finishing takes away more than it gives, sadly.

On another note.

Honestly, SIII was underwhelming on many fronts, but I never held that big a grudge against it, because it wasn't like taking someone else's painting and painting over half of it in a way to make it worse.

[dejan]

Apr 20, 2021 17:00:06 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

Apr 18, 2021 13:47:49 GMT -5 atp said:

Dejan,Cam, you both make excellent points. I agree, I am probably ascribing too much credit to Lester!

For the record, I loved S2 as a child, but now I can see its shortcomings. I wish S2 had been released in 1979, with Donner being able to complete both films.

I think it would have been amazing- even if Donner ended up having to compromise and recast Brando (which I do think would have eventually happened) and work within a stricter budget. The loss wasn't just on the spectacle end but the drama end imo.

I felt that at least with the international cut, one is able to get a smidge of what it might have been like if Donner stayed.
The RDC a touch more, but the sloppiness of the chopping/editing/finishing takes away more than it gives, sadly.

On another note.

Honestly, SIII was underwhelming on many fronts, but I never held that big a grudge against it, because it wasn't like taking someone else's painting and painting over half of it in a way to make it worse.

That''s interesting regarding a potential substitution of Brando with someone else(if Donner had been allowed to finish in 79')!
I had never considered that before.

Of course Lester substituted Brando's voice and barely got away with it.
Lester's little trick was to use that quasi prequel like sequence where Non strangles the guard with the subsequent descent of those "prisoner" rings to encapsulate the 3 villains........which ended up deflecting attention away from the fact that Brando was absent.
In an era before the internet and the proliferation of home video......it kinda worked.
Heck, I saw the 2 flicks back to back and never made the association between the discrepancy of the villain trial sequences in SI & SII.

To be honest, I would rather have had what we got in the theatrical,  than another actor step into replace Brando completely. I actually think York gave a more convincing performance than Brando for the corresponding parts of SII anyhow. 
Maybe Donner would have done something  similar to Lester had he come back to finish SII in 79'.Who knows?!

I love Brando, but he could be a right royal pain in the a**e when it came to continuity! Let's not forget that Coppola had to skillfully navigate around his absence from Godfather Part II!

atp

I hear you on how your affinity for Lester's SII has changed over the years. I am the same as you.

However I just watched Tranformers , Darkside Of The Moon for the first time in 10 years the other night.
Yes it's the biggest sack of movie poop this side of the moon!!!!!

But some of Darkside's visual elements regarding the destruction of Chicago, were practically incorporated almost shot by shot for Man Of Steel, by Snyder.
There was nothing special about MOS in that regard. Ditto for Supes Returns in 2006.....or quite frankly...any of the Marvel movies.
That's not  really the fault of either Snyder Singer, Whedon(or anyone else) in this regard.
They just happened to make a Superman/superhero movie in an era when even a TV commercial features convincing digital special effects.

But back in 1981, there was no such film(either then or prior) that showed 2 human like individuals(Non and Ursa) picking up a bus and throwing it!!!!!
If there was I missed it-lol.
Of course STM , was the only other movie that existed by that point....that featured such Super feats...so to speak.

But when Non and Ursa lifted that bus....you felt the theater almost suck in it's breath. I was completely blown away.
Ditto for the fighting/flying sequences.

That's where SII was special.
 
Had Donner completed it back in 79'......maybe it would have been even better.
But what we got on the screen in 81' was still truly unique for that point in time.

And it's within that context which SII should also be viewed.

[atp]

Apr 23, 2021 11:55:42 GMT -5 dejan said:

Apr 20, 2021 17:00:06 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

I think it would have been amazing- even if Donner ended up having to compromise and recast Brando (which I do think would have eventually happened) and work within a stricter budget. The loss wasn't just on the spectacle end but the drama end imo.

I felt that at least with the international cut, one is able to get a smidge of what it might have been like if Donner stayed.
The RDC a touch more, but the sloppiness of the chopping/editing/finishing takes away more than it gives, sadly.

On another note.

Honestly, SIII was underwhelming on many fronts, but I never held that big a grudge against it, because it wasn't like taking someone else's painting and painting over half of it in a way to make it worse.

That''s interesting regarding a potential substitution of Brando with someone else(if Donner had been allowed to finish in 79')!
I had never considered that before.

Of course Lester substituted Brando's voice and barely got away with it.
Lester's little trick was to use that quasi prequel like sequence where Non strangles the guard with the subsequent descent of those "prisoner" rings to encapsulate the 3 villains........which ended up deflecting attention away from the fact that Brando was absent.
In an era before the internet and the proliferation of home video......it kinda worked.
Heck, I saw the 2 flicks back to back and never made the association between the discrepancy of the villain trial sequences in SI & SII.

To be honest, I would rather have had what we got in the theatrical,  than another actor step into replace Brando completely. I actually think York gave a more convincing performance than Brando for the corresponding parts of SII anyhow. 
Maybe Donner would have done something  similar to Lester had he come back to finish SII in 79'.Who knows?!

I love Brando, but he could be a right royal pain in the a**e when it came to continuity! Let's not forget that Coppola had to skillfully navigate around his absence from Godfather Part II!

atp

I hear you on how your affinity for Lester's SII has changed over the years. I am the same as you.

However I just watched Tranformers , Darkside Of The Moon for the first time in 10 years the other night.
Yes it's the biggest sack of movie poop this side of the moon!!!!!

But some of Darkside's visual elements regarding the destruction of Chicago, were practically incorporated almost shot by shot for Man Of Steel, by Snyder.
There was nothing special about MOS in that regard. Ditto for Supes Returns in 2006.....or quite frankly...any of the Marvel movies.
That's not  really the fault of either Snyder Singer, Whedon(or anyone else) in this regard.
They just happened to make a Superman/superhero movie in an era when even a TV commercial features convincing digital special effects.

But back in 1981, there was no such film(either then or prior) that showed 2 human like individuals(Non and Ursa) picking up a bus and throwing it!!!!!
If there was I missed it-lol.
Of course STM , was the only other movie that existed by that point....that featured such Super feats...so to speak.

But when Non and Ursa lifted that bus....you felt the theater almost suck in it's breath. I was completely blown away.
Ditto for the fighting/flying sequences.

That's where SII was special.
 
Had Donner completed it back in 79'......maybe it would have been even better.
But what we got on the screen in 81' was still truly unique for that point in time.

And it's within that context which SII should also be viewed.

Yes, S2 had some breathtaking effects by Lester. I remember the audience gasping when Non crashed into the spire of the building and it started falling. I also remember Ursa throwing the manhole cover.

The Metropolis battle only really jumps the shark when the villains start blowing the crowd away. I wish it had gone from Superman catching the bus directly to him flying away and Zod saying, "So. He is a coward after all."

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 23, 2021 14:56:40 GMT -5 atp said:

Apr 23, 2021 11:55:42 GMT -5 dejan said:

That''s interesting regarding a potential substitution of Brando with someone else(if Donner had been allowed to finish in 79')!
I had never considered that before.

Of course Lester substituted Brando's voice and barely got away with it.
Lester's little trick was to use that quasi prequel like sequence where Non strangles the guard with the subsequent descent of those "prisoner" rings to encapsulate the 3 villains........which ended up deflecting attention away from the fact that Brando was absent.
In an era before the internet and the proliferation of home video......it kinda worked.
Heck, I saw the 2 flicks back to back and never made the association between the discrepancy of the villain trial sequences in SI & SII.

To be honest, I would rather have had what we got in the theatrical,  than another actor step into replace Brando completely. I actually think York gave a more convincing performance than Brando for the corresponding parts of SII anyhow. 
Maybe Donner would have done something  similar to Lester had he come back to finish SII in 79'.Who knows?!

I love Brando, but he could be a right royal pain in the a**e when it came to continuity! Let's not forget that Coppola had to skillfully navigate around his absence from Godfather Part II!

atp

I hear you on how your affinity for Lester's SII has changed over the years. I am the same as you.

However I just watched Tranformers , Darkside Of The Moon for the first time in 10 years the other night.
Yes it's the biggest sack of movie poop this side of the moon!!!!!

But some of Darkside's visual elements regarding the destruction of Chicago, were practically incorporated almost shot by shot for Man Of Steel, by Snyder.
There was nothing special about MOS in that regard. Ditto for Supes Returns in 2006.....or quite frankly...any of the Marvel movies.
That's not  really the fault of either Snyder Singer, Whedon(or anyone else) in this regard.
They just happened to make a Superman/superhero movie in an era when even a TV commercial features convincing digital special effects.

But back in 1981, there was no such film(either then or prior) that showed 2 human like individuals(Non and Ursa) picking up a bus and throwing it!!!!!
If there was I missed it-lol.
Of course STM , was the only other movie that existed by that point....that featured such Super feats...so to speak.

But when Non and Ursa lifted that bus....you felt the theater almost suck in it's breath. I was completely blown away.
Ditto for the fighting/flying sequences.

That's where SII was special.
 
Had Donner completed it back in 79'......maybe it would have been even better.
But what we got on the screen in 81' was still truly unique for that point in time.

And it's within that context which SII should also be viewed.

Yes, S2 had some breathtaking effects by Lester. I remember the audience gasping when Non crashed into the spire of the building and it started falling. I also remember Ursa throwing the manhole cover.

The Metropolis battle only really jumps the shark when the villains start blowing the crowd away. I wish it had gone from Superman catching the bus directly to him flying away and Zod saying, "So. He is a coward after all."

Prior to the villains' blowing the crowd away, the cutaways to all the laughing crowds making remarks deflated it, but the other bit of Super and Non 'fighting underground' and off-camera cheaply made my teeth grind- I remember when the early Adam West tv show had run out of money on an episode (though I didn't know it at the time, but in interviews afterwards)- and so, the lights 'went out' during the fight as it cut to darkness and the sound effects.

What kills me is that two films built up to this giant spectacle of heroes and villains punching one another in the sky- which we get maybe TEN SECONDS of.... I wanted the equivalent of the Death Star battle from Star Wars: a New Hope. Imagine how audiences would have reacted in Star Wars if that last battle was played for laughs and cheap budget tricks. But, yeah, the part where the villains start blowing ice cream into people's faces just went beyond a point where I was already annoyed and disappointed at Lester's handling of SII...

[atp]

The Otis stuff in STM annoys me more than most of the humour in S2.

And the "Say Jim, that's a bad outfit!" part in STM is just as out of place as some of the crowd reactions in S2. Despite that, it still somehow works!

I wonder if it would be better in S2 to have Superman dodge the bus and just fly away. Interesting idea for a fan cut! It would make the comments about chickening out and being a phony and a coward be more appropriate. It would also remove all the superbreath nonsense totally.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 24, 2021 5:24:17 GMT -5 atp said:

The Otis stuff in STM annoys me more than most of the humour in S2.

And the "Say Jim, that's a bad outfit!" part in STM is just as out of place as some of the crowd reactions in S2. Despite that, it still somehow works!

I wonder if it would be better in S2 to have Superman dodge the bus and just fly away. Interesting idea for a fan cut! It would make the comments about chickening out and being a phony and a coward be more appropriate. It would also remove all the superbreath nonsense totally.

The first STM I feel is a celebration of the joy before the darkness. I was thrilled when I first found someone at a convention who owned a copy of SII (wish I remembered his name) and sent me a hardcopy of his copy of the Mank script- the seriousness of the script convinced me that I wasn't imagining my feeling that the second one in the theatres was really 'off' from the vision of the first one.... the scenes read like a perfect compliment.

Otis and Lex annoyed me in the first film- but he's a perfect foil for the seriousness (as originally conceived by Donner) for the second one.
STM was setup for SII in more ways than one. If Richard Donner wasn't able to be allowed to finish SII, I just wish we got a director who was going to honor the script for SII as originally written and not have had it rewritten and tones changed. It already had multiple rewrites and Mank's rewrite was the one that Donner approved for shooting. I would have been okay with recasting Brando, as good as Susannah York was. Reeve and Kidder and the rest already 'fit into their characters' by the end of shooting STM- I really feel the movie was ready to just plug and play- for any director as long as you had good intents to finish it as scripted.

[atp]

I used to think that in Lester's footage, Zod was always less menacing than in Donner's. But yesterday I watched S2 again, and noticed two Lester shots where he looks pretty chilling.

First is where he lands on top of the car, just after Superman goes flying into it because of the manhole cover.

Second in in the fortress where he loses it and screams "Fools. Take him. Take. Hiiiiiiiiim."

Unfortunately, these are the exceptions. I wish the sherriff car and East Houston scenes had never been part of S2.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 25, 2021 6:26:29 GMT -5 atp said:

I used to think that in Lester's footage, Zod was always less menacing than in Donner's. But yesterday I watched S2 again, and noticed two Lester shots where he looks pretty chilling.

First is where he lands on top of the car, just after Superman goes flying into it because of the manhole cover.

Second in in the fortress where he loses it and screams "Fools. Take him. Take. Hiiiiiiiiim."

Unfortunately, these are the exceptions. I wish the sherriff car and East Houston scenes had never been part of S2.

Agreed... they weren't part of the Mank/Donner script.
Also what undermines the moments of Zod during the battle---

The cutaways to the woman in the car underneath who says, "The car! He'll pay for it!" while Superman is smashed against the windshield and then--- a shot of the same woman EATING Popeye's chicken if you look at the shot of Supes throwing the dummy of Zod out of frame. Great direction, Lester---so much for trying to be faithful to the spirit of the first movie! (grrr)

[dejan]

@cam(and ATP)

You made an interesting observation regarding the death star climax from Star Wars 77' and how that compares to SII's finale.

Apart from seeing the STM/SII double bill in June 81'.......I also saw  Star Wars/Empire back to back(also for the first time) a few months before( April 81').
So yeah....from a personal perspective, those few months in 81' were somewhat of a personal revolution in terms of enjoying a cinematic experience.
The cheer size of the At-At's is still an indelible memory .

But at no time whilst watching SII's metropolis punch up did I think about Star Wars's(or Empire's) amazing pitch battles. 

Totally different engagements.
One featured all manner of space ships blasting at one another.
The other had super humans ducking and weaving through the skies as they pounded each other.
It's interesting that you perceived those airborne battles as being very quick(and you are not wrong to say that).
But this was still 1981...... to even get a few seconds of Supes doing a double barrel roll and kick Non in the head was still quite awesome!
Had there ever been another film that had airborne figures trying to swat each other?!
Totally original as far as I am concerned  and on par with Star War's dog fights in terms of novelty.
So to have the odd toupee' fly off someone's head or an ice cream blow into someone's face may have been somewhat disgruntling to a more perceptible audience member.... but on my theatrical viewings of SII in 81' and 82', the mostly adult crowd that I saw it with, lapped it up.....as those mere seconds of superficial triviality were overshadowed by Supes being tossed into a Malboro truck.....and Non and Ursa throwing that bus! 
As opposed to Nuclear Man's "If you do not tell me....I will hurt people!!"....which drew howls of derision on my theatrical viewing (and I was hurt quite deeply by what I saw that night in 87'!).

As for the East Houston stuff.
Zod deflecting the fire onto the tavern or Ursa blowing the helicopter into the barn, especially  for the time period, were visually quite striking and psychologically very powerful.
Was there another film before Supes II, that showed a human who was impervious to fire(well there was STM.....but that scene was cut out!).....or that showed a woman forcing a helicopter to crash....by merely blowing at it( I have tried to phrase that carefully! ).

Of course we are so desensitized now.....having watched The Battle Of Minis Tirith, Pod Racing, Neo fighting 1000's of Agent Smiths ect ect......that Non zapping a jeep into a building may seem quite quaint by comparison!
But I will still take that over thousands of digital orcs, Stormtroopers or agent Smiths!

I actually watched the Lord Of The Rings Trilogy in 4K recently.......and nothing takes me out of a movie more than seeing a bunch of elaborate digital cartoons(orcs, trolls, oliphants ect ) bash into each other.
I will take that 18 inch puppet Rancor(manned by Phil Tippet) from Return Of The Jedi any day of the week.......over that troll from Fellowship. Heck, I will even take those Ewoks......at least they are real!
And on a big screen , there is no comparison.




 


   

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 26, 2021 16:02:38 GMT -5 dejan said:

@cam(and ATP)

You made an interesting observation regarding the death star climax from Star Wars 77' and how that compares to SII's finale.

Apart from seeing the STM/SII double bill in June 81'.......I also saw  Star Wars/Empire back to back(also for the first time) a few months before( April 81').
So yeah....from a personal perspective, those few months in 81' were somewhat of a personal revolution in terms of enjoying a cinematic experience.
The cheer size of the At-At's is still an indelible memory .

But at no time whilst watching SII's metropolis punch up did I think about Star Wars's(or Empire's) amazing pitch battles. 

Totally different engagements.
One featured all manner of space ships blasting at one another.
The other had super humans ducking and weaving through the skies as they pounded each other.
It's interesting that you perceived those airborne battles as being very quick(and you are not wrong to say that).
But this was still 1981...... to even get a few seconds of Supes doing a double barrel roll and kick Non in the head was still quite awesome!
Had there ever been another film that had airborne figures trying to swat each other?!
Totally original as far as I am concerned  and on par with Star War's dog fights in terms of novelty.
So to have the odd toupee' fly off someone's head or an ice cream blow into someone's face may have been somewhat disgruntling to a more perceptible audience member.... but on my theatrical viewings of SII in 81' and 82', the mostly adult crowd that I saw it with, lapped it up.....as those mere seconds of superficial triviality were overshadowed by Supes being tossed into a Malboro truck.....and Non and Ursa throwing that bus! 
As opposed to Nuclear Man's "If you do not tell me....I will hurt people!!"....which drew howls of derision on my theatrical viewing (and I was hurt quite deeply by what I saw that night in 87'!).

As for the East Houston stuff.
Zod deflecting the fire onto the tavern or Ursa blowing the helicopter into the barn, especially  for the time period, were visually quite striking and psychologically very powerful.
Was there another film before Supes II, that showed a human who was impervious to fire(well there was STM.....but that scene was cut out!).....or that showed a woman forcing a helicopter to crash....by merely blowing at it( I have tried to phrase that carefully! ).

Of course we are so desensitized now.....having watched The Battle Of Minis Tirith, Pod Racing, Neo fighting 1000's of Agent Smiths ect ect......that Non zapping a jeep into a building may seem quite quaint by comparison!
But I will still take that over thousands of digital orcs, Stormtroopers or agent Smiths!

I actually watched the Lord Of The Rings Trilogy in 4K recently.......and nothing takes me out of a movie more than seeing a bunch of elaborate digital cartoons(orcs, trolls, oliphants ect ) bash into each other.
I will take that 18 inch puppet Rancor(manned by Phil Tippet) from Return Of The Jedi any day of the week.......over that troll from Fellowship. Heck, I will even take those Ewoks......at least they are real!
And on a big screen , there is no comparison.




 


   

Around this time- I think the second Star Wars film had come out before or about the same time- and the leaps and bounds the Star Wars films made with effects, I had expected with Superman II--- so for the flying/punching to be truncated so much and replaced by Lester's 'gags' annoyed me to no end. Superman never even punches anyone ONCE on-screen in the Lester version! The Donner version only had the one shot for the trailer inserted, but it's better than nothing...

[dejan]

@cam

Can see where you are coming from there, bud.

I have re-read the Mank SII script with regards to the metropolis punch up.
It's interesting because at least the first 2/3rds of that fight involve just Non and Supes!

Zod then joins in and kicks Supes into the Cola display.
And it culminates with Ursa picking up and throwing that bus(with no help from Non!) .

But it looks like Donner made adjustments on the fly as he was shooting.......seeing as it is Supes who gets kicked into the Statue Of Liberty(as opposed to Non, in the Mank script).
Maybe Donner realized that Mank's script was too Supes Vs Non centric.......hence the reason why he chose to shoot Zod kick Supes into the Liberty....again I am speculating.

In the theatrical, to be fair,  Supes does kick Non in the head(as opposed to punching him).....so there is a bit of airborne physical fighting, so to speak.
I do remember people in the theater laughing when Supes slipped through Non's clutches to then get hit by Ursa's lamp post("wow....home run!"). That happened on both my theatrical viewings in 81' and 82.

As I said, the cinematic sensibilities of the time period are totally different to what we have now.
And IMHO....what we have now is shockingly bad. But that is for another thread.



 

[crazy_asian_man]

May 6, 2021 12:09:30 GMT -5 dejan said:

@cam

Can see where you are coming from there, bud.

I have re-read the Mank SII script with regards to the metropolis punch up.
It's interesting because at least the first 2/3rds of that fight involve just Non and Supes!

Zod then joins in and kicks Supes into the Cola display.
And it culminates with Ursa picking up and throwing that bus(with no help from Non!) .

But it looks like Donner made adjustments on the fly as he was shooting.......seeing as it is Supes who gets kicked into the Statue Of Liberty(as opposed to Non, in the Mank script).
Maybe Donner realized that Mank's script was too Supes Vs Non centric.......hence the reason why he chose to shoot Zod kick Supes into the Liberty....again I am speculating.

In the theatrical, to be fair,  Supes does kick Non in the head(as opposed to punching him).....so there is a bit of airborne physical fighting, so to speak.
I do remember people in the theater laughing when Supes slipped through Non's clutches to then get hit by Ursa's lamp post("wow....home run!"). That happened on both my theatrical viewings in 81' and 82.

As I said, the cinematic sensibilities of the time period are totally different to what we have now.
And IMHO....what we have now is shockingly bad. But that is for another thread.

 

I'm currently re-watching "Avengers: Infinity War" and the humor but the intensity and spectacle of Thanos & his children battling the Avengers makes me feel how I feel Donner's Metro battle would have been tone-wise. As in the Mank script of SII- there's no humor to the battle--- there is humor in the Infinity War, but the battles are completely serious and engaging and the humor is truthful to the characters as designed.

I still remember each viewing at the theatres of Infinity War and Endgame to a packed theatre where EVERYONE was hanginng on each and every moment. Not all the MCU movies are perfect, of course, but tonally I felt I got the type of feeling and excitement I anticipated having with that big battle in SII by Donner originally, but felt robbed of by Lester's approach. Had the feeling for a second or two, but sadly that was it. If you subtract all the comedic cutaways, there's very little to the battle- unfortunately.

[dejan]

May 6, 2021 15:45:26 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

May 6, 2021 12:09:30 GMT -5 dejan said:

@cam

Can see where you are coming from there, bud.

I have re-read the Mank SII script with regards to the metropolis punch up.
It's interesting because at least the first 2/3rds of that fight involve just Non and Supes!

Zod then joins in and kicks Supes into the Cola display.
And it culminates with Ursa picking up and throwing that bus(with no help from Non!) .

But it looks like Donner made adjustments on the fly as he was shooting.......seeing as it is Supes who gets kicked into the Statue Of Liberty(as opposed to Non, in the Mank script).
Maybe Donner realized that Mank's script was too Supes Vs Non centric.......hence the reason why he chose to shoot Zod kick Supes into the Liberty....again I am speculating.

In the theatrical, to be fair,  Supes does kick Non in the head(as opposed to punching him).....so there is a bit of airborne physical fighting, so to speak.
I do remember people in the theater laughing when Supes slipped through Non's clutches to then get hit by Ursa's lamp post("wow....home run!"). That happened on both my theatrical viewings in 81' and 82.

As I said, the cinematic sensibilities of the time period are totally different to what we have now.
And IMHO....what we have now is shockingly bad. But that is for another thread.

 

I'm currently re-watching "Avengers: Infinity War" and the humor but the intensity and spectacle of Thanos & his children battling the Avengers makes me feel how I feel Donner's Metro battle would have been tone-wise. As in the Mank script of SII- there's no humor to the battle--- there is humor in the Infinity War, but the battles are completely serious and engaging and the humor is truthful to the characters as designed.

I still remember each viewing at the theatres of Infinity War and Endgame to a packed theatre where EVERYONE was hanginng on each and every moment. Not all the MCU movies are perfect, of course, but tonally I felt I got the type of feeling and excitement I anticipated having with that big battle in SII by Donner originally, but felt robbed of by Lester's approach. Had the feeling for a second or two, but sadly that was it. If you subtract all the comedic cutaways, there's very little to the battle- unfortunately.


 

I think we might be viewing our movie experiences through different filters(which is cool).

I personally enjoyed Endgame and Infinity War. However, I did not see them in the cinema....but I do own the 4K versions  and have used them to give my home theater system a good work out!.

There is a youtube video of an audience member recording the reactions in the cinema as the film(s) unfold. Very cool. No doubt people/fans had a blast watching them(except for the guy who keeps shouting "ahhh s**t!!!! once too often ---lol).

But, IMHO, they are only great contemporary super hero flicks(from a story telling perspective) when compared to the current fantasy/sci fi  opposition...which are average/mediocre at best(Spiderman Far From Home, Captain Marvel, Terminator: Dark Fate, Rise Of Skywalker, Frozen, Aquaman, Shazam, Toy Story 4 and the list goes on).

SII's direct competition was a mix of  genres(social dramas/historical/comedy) some of which met with critical acclaim at the time of release:
On Golden Pond, Chariots Of Fire, Reds, French Lieutenant's Woman , Arthur,  Stripes ect

.....as well as an obligatory mix of  sci fi/fantasy/action/horror:
Raiders, Clash Of The Titans, Outland, Dragon Slayer, Excalibur, American Werewolf in London , For Your Eyes Only, Escape From New York  ect ect
(I saw Clash and Eyes Only in the theater in 81', and enjoyed both of them..........but SII was in a different league!)

So compared to it's contemporaries ........SII stood out from the crowd with a heck of a lot to spare.

And there in lies the difference.

There is absolutely nothing in Endgame or Infinity War(from a spectacle perspective) that has not  been seen before in Transformers, The Hobbit/Lord Of The Rings, Potter, DC or other Marvel flicks, Star Wars prequels/sequels, Pacific Rims, Fast And Furious ect ect. 

If I want to watch mega CGI city destructions......Michael Bay had/has already provided plenty of that trash! 

SII's spectacle was unique(in 1981) with only the 2 year old STM(at that point) rivalling or surpassing it.
Indeed some contemporary critics deemed SII's effects to be better than STM.

In terms of the tone, I understand 100% where you are coming from and what you would have preferred to see on screen with regards to SII in 1981.

All I can say is that from my perspective, I will still take that flying ice cream and toupee' in SII to that quick bit of banter in Infinity War:

"New haircut?"
"I see you copied my beard----by the way this is my friend...Tree"
"I am groot"
"I am Steve Rodgers"
"How much for the gun"
"Not for sale"
"How much for the arm"---oh I will get that off"
"It's not gonna be like NYC pal......this suit has already kicked the crap out of the Hulk!

ect ect......and I could go on. Completely takes me out of the battle when characters mouth off such nonsense to each other(with CG characters fighting in the background---Attack Of The Clones pioneered that one!)  but I get why it's there.....and as I said, I did ultimately enjoy these flicks.

As I also said, I have a 2:35 100inch scope screen(with an anamorphic lens) and a pseudo 8K projection system(calibrated).
And I have compared Reeve's Supes films to many of Marvel (and DC) contemporary flicks, as well as other contemporary sci -fi stuff(just isolating specific scenes).
And IMHO ,hands down , there is no substitute for real life miniatures(no matter how cumbersome they are), optical composites, natural lighting, mattes and live action set pieces on a big screen.

As a more basic comparison ,when you see the Arab army ride into Aqaba with 100's of horsemen(er camels!) in Lawrence Of Arabia...............it's way more visceral than watching the CG horse bound Rohirim storm Minis Tirith in Return Of The King(I know they did use live action extras for those scenes.....but the green/blue  screen extensions are very disconcerting on a big screen).  

Trust me, Lester's SII & SIII hold up very well as does STM(of course!)....from a cinematographic point of view when compared to something like Lord Of The Rings ,Transformers (1-5) or Endgame/Infinity. 
SIV also has bits of nice photography here and there.......but the lack of passion(not the budget) are the true inhibitors for that particular project.

[crazy_asian_man]

May 7, 2021 17:01:21 GMT -5 dejan said:

May 6, 2021 15:45:26 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

I'm currently re-watching "Avengers: Infinity War" and the humor but the intensity and spectacle of Thanos & his children battling the Avengers makes me feel how I feel Donner's Metro battle would have been tone-wise. As in the Mank script of SII- there's no humor to the battle--- there is humor in the Infinity War, but the battles are completely serious and engaging and the humor is truthful to the characters as designed.

I still remember each viewing at the theatres of Infinity War and Endgame to a packed theatre where EVERYONE was hanginng on each and every moment. Not all the MCU movies are perfect, of course, but tonally I felt I got the type of feeling and excitement I anticipated having with that big battle in SII by Donner originally, but felt robbed of by Lester's approach. Had the feeling for a second or two, but sadly that was it. If you subtract all the comedic cutaways, there's very little to the battle- unfortunately.


 

I think we might be viewing our movie experiences through different filters(which is cool).

I personally enjoyed Endgame and Infinity War. However, I did not see them in the cinema....but I do own the 4K versions  and have used them to give my home theater system a good work out!.

There is a youtube video of an audience member recording the reactions in the cinema as the film(s) unfold. Very cool. No doubt people/fans had a blast watching them(except for the guy who keeps shouting "ahhh s**t!!!! once too often ---lol).

But, IMHO, they are only great contemporary super hero flicks(from a story telling perspective) when compared to the current fantasy/sci fi  opposition...which are average/mediocre at best(Spiderman Far From Home, Captain Marvel, Terminator: Dark Fate, Rise Of Skywalker, Frozen, Aquaman, Shazam, Toy Story 4 and the list goes on).

SII's direct competition was a mix of  genres(social dramas/historical/comedy) some of which met with critical acclaim at the time of release:
On Golden Pond, Chariots Of Fire, Reds, French Lieutenant's Woman , Arthur,  Stripes ect

.....as well as an obligatory mix of  sci fi/fantasy/action/horror:
Raiders, Clash Of The Titans, Outland, Dragon Slayer, Excalibur, American Werewolf in London , For Your Eyes Only, Escape From New York  ect ect
(I saw Clash and Eyes Only in the theater in 81', and enjoyed both of them..........but SII was in a different league!)

So compared to it's contemporaries ........SII stood out from the crowd with a heck of a lot to spare.

And there in lies the difference.

There is absolutely nothing in Endgame or Infinity War(from a spectacle perspective) that has not  been seen before in Transformers, The Hobbit/Lord Of The Rings, Potter, DC or other Marvel flicks, Star Wars prequels/sequels, Pacific Rims, Fast And Furious ect ect. 

If I want to watch mega CGI city destructions......Michael Bay had/has already provided plenty of that trash! 

SII's spectacle was unique(in 1981) with only the 2 year old STM(at that point) rivalling or surpassing it.
Indeed some contemporary critics deemed SII's effects to be better than STM.

In terms of the tone, I understand 100% where you are coming from and what you would have preferred to see on screen with regards to SII in 1981.

All I can say is that from my perspective, I will still take that flying ice cream and toupee' in SII to that quick bit of banter in Infinity War:

"New haircut?"
"I see you copied my beard----by the way this is my friend...Tree"
"I am groot"
"I am Steve Rodgers"
"How much for the gun"
"Not for sale"
"How much for the arm"---oh I will get that off"
"It's not gonna be like NYC pal......this suit has already kicked the crap out of the Hulk!

ect ect......and I could go on. Completely takes me out of the battle when characters mouth off such nonsense to each other(with CG characters fighting in the background---Attack Of The Clones pioneered that one!)  but I get why it's there.....and as I said, I did ultimately enjoy these flicks.

As I also said, I have a 2:35 100inch scope screen(with an anamorphic lens) and a pseudo 8K projection system(calibrated).
And I have compared Reeve's Supes films to many of Marvel (and DC) contemporary flicks, as well as other contemporary sci -fi stuff(just isolating specific scenes).
And IMHO ,hands down , there is no substitute for real life miniatures(no matter how cumbersome they are), optical composites, natural lighting, mattes and live action set pieces on a big screen.

As a more basic comparison ,when you see the Arab army ride into Aqaba with 100's of horsemen(er camels!) in Lawrence Of Arabia...............it's way more visceral than watching the CG horse bound Rohirim storm Minis Tirith in Return Of The King(I know they did use live action extras for those scenes.....but the green/blue  screen extensions are very disconcerting on a big screen).  

Trust me, Lester's SII & SIII hold up very well as does STM(of course!)....from a cinematographic point of view when compared to something like Lord Of The Rings ,Transformers (1-5) or Endgame/Infinity. 
SIV also has bits of nice photography here and there.......but the lack of passion(not the budget) are the true inhibitors for that particular project.

Yeah... I wasn't a fan of the quips mid-battle myself with those characters but I was thinking more along the lines of the last portion where they stopped quipping and the earlier battles (on Titan with only Spiderman & Starlord making any remarks- more natural I think)-

I didn't mind the more absurd or naturally funny characters like Spiderman or Rocket making remarks, but the 'banter' between the other characters took me out the action also in the last act and not needed. I think the main reason was to avoid a half hour of relentless mayhem like MOS's last act without relief, but I don't feel most of those extra asides felt truthful at all- or at least they way they were delivered and edited seemed VERY forced. (Fortunately, the second half with Endgame felt much more intense and tighter all around imo)

But- for SII's case, Hackman's humor was just enough imo.... didn't need (and it didn't help) to have the villains be humorous, let alone the citizens of Metropolis. One question I might ask though is:

If comparing the Mank-scripted metro battle versus the rewritten Metro battle under Lester - Do you feel like the lightening is preferred over the 'darker' Mank version? If so, I respect if we look at it differently- just curious....

[dejan]

Hey cam

In preparation for responding to your question I just read the Lester SII script regarding the NYC fight sequence.

www.scifiscripts.com/scripts/superman_II_shoot.txt

I had always assumed that the Lester SII script pertaining to the super breath sequence always had humor(as I had never read that part before).

In fact, much to my surprise....it is actually scripted quite seriously from a tonal perspective:


374 EFFECTS -- It's a hurricane force wind. wreaking incredible damage. Before the mighty,

relentless gale nothing can hold. Cars, trucks, people are blown down the street, smashing,

tumbling. An amazing spectacle.



375 Superman flies in the face of the gale force - trying to reach the people.



SUPERMAN

(pleadingly)

Stop it! .Please, stop it!


There is no ice cream, toupee', guy still speaking on a subsided pay phone, waitress coming out of a restaurant with spare change , roller skate guy rolling backwards ect ect.

Lester was not kidding when he recounted in the SII making of doc, that he adlibbed parts of that scene.
But it's much worse than that.....he literally changed the entire tonal emphasis of that scene as he shot it!

Now, looking at the Mank script, there are references to the crowds running for cover during the fight and there is an implication that Supes is concerned about the impact the damage is having on the people:

ANGLE ON SUPERMAN





SUPERMAN looks down, deeply concerned about the havoc and

destruction he is helping to cause.





SUPERMAN

(still half-dazed)

Too many innocent people ... have to get

him away ...


Not quite sure how Donner would have approached shooting those few frames(oh what it means to be creative!).........maybe he could have had a voice over(like Blade Runner!!!!)......although that may not have jived with the tonal narrative of the rest of the film. Again , I am just speculating.

In terms of crowd interactions.
The Mank script does not have any(and does not need it)......ironically this script reminds me more of Man Of Steel!

I am pretty sure that Donner would have padded out those scenes with small snippets of cheering/applause at the opportune moments without  mitigating it's intensity.

In the Lester script, the Taxi driver does say:
"This is gonna be good!"

And in fact, it's Jimmy who says the now world famous:
"The big one is just as strong as Superman!" 

Again, in the theater in 81' and 82', I do remember that the audience laughed when Loueen got pushed away by Lois after muttering the above.

In terms of context.....that punch by Non that sent Supes hurtling backwards into the building was the first time that we, the audience, got to see our protagonist as being physically vulnerable(outside of Lex's Kryptonite in STM and Rocky's demolition job on Clark)......so IMHO it's a fantastic moment.

Of course it would have been the same under Donner(and maybe even better).

As I said before, Manks' script really is more about Non v Supes(for the majority of the fight)......and whilst it seems pretty intense(almost like an airborne Rocky Vs Creed!----which would have blown the minds of an early 80s cinema going  audience)................. I have to confess that Lester did well to mix it up a bit more and allow Zod(hurling the pre-fabricated wall, blowing up the cars) and Ursa(belting Non with the flagpole, throwing the manhole cover) to participate to a greater degree.
I honestly think that Donner would have also figured out a way to include Zod and Ursa earlier in the fight, had he been allowed to finish in 79'.
In fact he does have Zod kick Supes into the liberty which was not scripted by Mank!

So lots of variables to consider when taking into account the complexities of shooting SII's climax.......which was a massive endeavor in the late 70s.

Nowadays, for a movie going audience,  having a city blow up is standard fare that it's no longer special.
In fact it's boring.....I seem to recall that a journalist in 2003 said that the Agent Smith Vs Neo punch up in Matrix 3 reminded  him/her of SII....but without the charm and fun.

On Edit:
Found the original Matrix 3 review:

The Matrix: Regurgitated

The final episode is a slam-bang, dreary mess.

BY DAVID EDELSTEIN

NOV 04, 2003
7:44 PM

The final battle in the skies is like Superman II (1980), only nowhere near as fun.

slate.com/culture/2003/11/time-to-pull-the-plug-on-the-matrix.html




 

 

[atp]

I still think S2 could be vastly improved by avoiding the superbreath crap. Just have Superman catch the bus then fly away.

I do think the aerial fighting had some fantastic parts. The scene where Non drops down and gets superman in a grip while Ursa flies off to get the flagpole still holds up. It looks so real and solid, unlike today's CGI crap.

Also love that shot from below of Non coming down like a piledriver and smashing Superman into the pavement.

[dejan]

May 9, 2021 0:47:16 GMT -5 atp said:

I still think S2 could be vastly improved by avoiding the superbreath crap. Just have Superman catch the bus then fly away.

I do think the aerial fighting had some fantastic parts. The scene where Non drops down and gets superman in a grip while Ursa flies off to get the flagpole still holds up. It looks so real and solid, unlike today's CGI crap.

Also love that shot from below of Non coming down like a piledriver and smashing Superman into the pavement.

I am way more critical of the slapstick now than I was back in 81'.
I am sure 30 years from now, fans of EndGame and Infinity War will complain about the silly banter between the Superheroes(as they duff up the bad guys)......that proliferates throughout those 2 flicks.

As for SII(and STM), I personally feel privileged  just to have watched them at the time they came out.
That experience was one in a million....and never to be replicated.

[crazy_asian_man]

May 9, 2021 0:47:16 GMT -5 atp said:

I still think S2 could be vastly improved by avoiding the superbreath crap. Just have Superman catch the bus then fly away.

I do think the aerial fighting had some fantastic parts. The scene where Non drops down and gets superman in a grip while Ursa flies off to get the flagpole still holds up. It looks so real and solid, unlike today's CGI crap.

Also love that shot from below of Non coming down like a piledriver and smashing Superman into the pavement.

I agree that the aerial fighting had some fantastic stuff... but I wanted a whole half hour or so of it, like the Desth Star battle in SW... not 3 shots (Non punches Supes into a wall, one kick, and Non hit by Ursa)- the Mank script shows it was supposed to have more initially.

One thing that had to be a giant obstacle was O'Halloran and Reeve not getting along- if Donner was there, I think he was so beloved, he would have smoothed the waters and we could have seen more layers of the battle even beyond what was scripted. If the diner scene was more powerful than scripted, by focusing on the emotions of the characters involved, I think we would have seen more dimensions of the villains and Supes during that Metro battle beyond the spectacle.

If anything, I think of the Endgame battle with Thor, Iron Man, and Cap versus Thanos- much of that battle has you on the edge of your seat with the closeups and emotions- not just the noise and fireworks, like MOS had.

[crazy_asian_man]

May 10, 2021 16:00:53 GMT -5 dejan said:

May 9, 2021 0:47:16 GMT -5 atp said:

I still think S2 could be vastly improved by avoiding the superbreath crap. Just have Superman catch the bus then fly away.

I do think the aerial fighting had some fantastic parts. The scene where Non drops down and gets superman in a grip while Ursa flies off to get the flagpole still holds up. It looks so real and solid, unlike today's CGI crap.

Also love that shot from below of Non coming down like a piledriver and smashing Superman into the pavement.

I am way more critical of the slapstick now than I was back in 81'.
I am sure 30 years from now, fans of EndGame and Infinity War will complain about the silly banter between the Superheroes(as they duff up the bad guys)......that proliferates throughout those 2 flicks.

As for SII(and STM), I personally feel privileged  just to have watched them at the time they came out.
That experience was one in a million....and never to be replicated.

Yeah--- I agree.... While I'm forever bummed by Lester's undermining of SII for my own movie experience, it doesn't take away from being able to see STM on the big screen with a fantastic audience.