Who ruined the Donner cut most?

[atp]

Who is the biggest culprit?

[crazy_asian_man]

Lester, who, if he had more respect for Donner's work in the beginning... he could have told his ego to take a backseat and competently finished it more in line to Mankiewicz's script and tone. But.... then again, Ilya Salkind said himself he could have put the brakes on some things that he felt went too far himself but that he was distracted by a relationship at the time.

If the movie had been more in line with what Donner intended, and Lester did his own thing for SIII- a Donner cut probably wouldn't have been even that craved for. Instead, it's so far out, that I can't blame Donner for being so upset that he wanted to remove every frame as possible that he didn't direct.

At the same time- the best version so far imo are the fan cuts that don't obliterate the bits that are needed from Lester's footage and even improve upon it with added effects or wipe out the more offensive bits.

[dejan]

It's a relatively complex problem IMHO

I said in another thread a while back that the decision to remove Donner, at exactly the point in production(for SII) where a substantial amount of footage had already been shot (but that a viable amount could be reshot) and unfilmed scenes completed, with a different director(i.e Hamilton , Lester ect ect) - was very cold and calculating.

And that responsibility has to fall squarely on the Salkinds, Spengler and potentially Lester too.

I say potentially Lester, because I do wonder if the Salkinds(and Spengler) made a unilateral decison to fire Donner at exactly the moment when the "moratorium"(as Petrou called it) was imposed on SII in late 1977/early 1978........or after the Vanity Fair article in early 79'.

OR

Did the Salkinds consult Lester(in late 77'/early 78') with the proposition that they intended to fire Donner and asked him if it would it be possible ( for Lester) to shoot the yet to be filmed sequences(Metropolis battle,villains taking over the world ect ect) and reshoot some of the " already canned" Donner stuff , in an economical and efficient manner.

If Lester had said:

"NO!-it's too complex and Donner has already filmed so much that it's just not realistic for me(or indeed any other director) to complete SII and assume directorial credit + it's going to be really expensive to reshoot those already completed scenes(opening at the Daily Planet,moon jacking, diner stuff ect ect)"........

Then maybe that would have been the end of it and cinematic history would have been very different  with Donner taking the reigns once more. 

But

It seems that  Lester said something along the lines of :

"Yes!-I am contracted to film Cuba and Cassidy for most of 1978-but afterwards I will be available to helm SII from early 79' onwards-and there is just the right amount of stuff that has already been shot(to facilitate completion of production in a timely manner) with more than enough scenes that are still to be lensed.....so I can claim the all important directorial credit." 

And that was possibly the moment that the Salkinds made the decision to fire Donner-in late 77'/early 78'.

If Donner had been able to complete(or at least partly shoot) the Niagra scenes,some of the extra fortress coverage and maybe even some portions of the Met climax during the original STM/SII production run........he would have had more leverage over the Salkinds with regards to the eventual completion of SII.
As it was, the Salkinds realized that they could jettison Donner without incurring astronomical costs for reshoots.

Until Ilya,Spengler or Lester spill the beans on exactly went down for that decision to impose a "moratorium" on SII, we will never know who to blame exactly.

[atp]

Apologies, I should have been more clear about my question.

I wasn't asking who ruined Superman 2. I'm asking who (in 2006) ruined the Donner Cut specifically.

After decades of waiting, the Donner Cut in 2006 was lacklustre and disappointing. Who is to blame for the 2006 project being so crap ?

[Metallo]

Not sure you can put it mostly on any one person. I think the blame is pretty equal. Donner and Mankiewicz stubbornly didn’t want any Lester material in there if it wasn’t necessarily even if their ideas were inferior. That “Freedom of the press” line still gets me. I know they wanted the movie to be their version but it was never totally going to be.

It really is fascinating how much it mirrors the Snyder/Whedon Justice League situation in some ways. Different circumstances but in both cases ego got in the way of some better material being used because of hurt feelings.

WB let Donner and co do it their way (when they arguably could have stepped in to offer some advice) but also cheaped out on the budget compared to what they could have put into it. Thau was doing what he was told.

I’d like to say Thau just because the actual finished product comes off as very amateurish in spots but Donner should have been there more on a day to day basis to supervise because he’d have an eye for things Thau wouldn’t. Some of the audio mixing and editing in the Donner cut is absolutely painful even with the budget they had.

[dejan]

Jun 25, 2022 16:07:55 GMT -5 atp said:

Apologies, I should have been more clear about my question.

I wasn't asking who ruined Superman 2. I'm asking who (in 2006) ruined the Donner Cut specifically.

After decades of waiting, the Donner Cut in 2006 was lacklustre and disappointing. Who is to blame for the 2006 project being so crap ?

No worries ATP.

Got you the first time,  but wanted to elaborate on the background factors that would have made making a good Donner cut in 2006 almost nigh on impossible.

There are still some unknown variables in terms of what footage is/was available.

The opening Daily Planet sequence is a good example.

So , I would blame Thau IF

.......there were in fact other better takes(although this is always subjective),angles and coverage that he did NOT use.

But:

I would blame Donner IF

....... Thau used the very best angles and coverage that were available.
Because that would mean, IMHO !, that  Donner did a bit of a sloppy job on this scene way back in 77'.
The fact that he hyped this scene up(during the late 80s/early 90s) when it was still inaccessible to the public for independent review probably raised the expectations for this footage,  over and above it's intrinsic quality.

Ilya did say in the commentary for SII that certain scenes were cut, not because of any directorial credit politics stuff, but because they were simply deemed not good enough by the Lester crew(which still featured a fair amount of ex-Donner staff).

In fact, thinking about it , it would have been pretty easy for the Lester team to refilm that opening Daily Planet sequence(as scripted by Mank)  seeing as they had rebuilt enough of the Daily Planet set aswell as the entrance to the DP Building at street level) to literally mimick Donner's version.
But I would say kudos to Lester's crew for inventing an entirely new opening sequence in Paris.
They took a risk and IMHO- it payed off.  

It's also feasable that Donner himself would have reshot , completely or in part , this entire opening DP sequence , had he been allowed to finish in 1979 , because it's just off , in terms of dynamics, kinetics ,delivery of dialogue ect ect , again IMHO.
Unsworth's cinematography is still sumptouse , but that alone cannot carry a scene.

And I would apply this same principle to all the other unique Donner shots throughout the rest of the Cut.

So it's still a complex situation lol    

 

[crazy_asian_man]

Jun 25, 2022 14:26:12 GMT -5 dejan said:

It's a relatively complex problem IMHO

I said in another thread a while back that the decision to remove Donner, at exactly the point in production(for SII) where a substantial amount of footage had already been shot (but that a viable amount could be reshot) and unfilmed scenes completed, with a different director(i.e Hamilton , Lester ect ect) - was very cold and calculating.

And that responsibility has to fall squarely on the Salkinds, Spengler and potentially Lester too.

I say potentially Lester, because I do wonder if the Salkinds(and Spengler) made a unilateral decison to fire Donner at exactly the moment when the "moratorium"(as Petrou called it) was imposed on SII in late 1977/early 1978........or after the Vanity Fair article in early 79'.

OR

Did the Salkinds consult Lester(in late 77'/early 78') with the proposition that they intended to fire Donner and asked him if it would it be possible ( for Lester) to shoot the yet to be filmed sequences(Metropolis battle,villains taking over the world ect ect) and reshoot some of the " already canned" Donner stuff , in an economical and efficient manner.

If Lester had said:

"NO!-it's too complex and Donner has already filmed so much that it's just not realistic for me(or indeed any other director) to complete SII and assume directorial credit + it's going to be really expensive to reshoot those already completed scenes(opening at the Daily Planet,moon jacking, diner stuff ect ect)"........

Then maybe that would have been the end of it and cinematic history would have been very different  with Donner taking the reigns once more. 

But

It seems that  Lester said something along the lines of :

"Yes!-I am contracted to film Cuba and Cassidy for most of 1978-but afterwards I will be available to helm SII from early 79' onwards-and there is just the right amount of stuff that has already been shot(to facilitate completion of production in a timely manner) with more than enough scenes that are still to be lensed.....so I can claim the all important directorial credit." 

And that was possibly the moment that the Salkinds made the decision to fire Donner-in late 77'/early 78'.

If Donner had been able to complete(or at least partly shoot) the Niagra scenes,some of the extra fortress coverage and maybe even some portions of the Met climax during the original STM/SII production run........he would have had more leverage over the Salkinds with regards to the eventual completion of SII.
As it was, the Salkinds realized that they could jettison Donner without incurring astronomical costs for reshoots.

Until Ilya,Spengler or Lester spill the beans on exactly went down for that decision to impose a "moratorium" on SII, we will never know who to blame exactly.

Interesting thoughts--- you're completely right- that we'll never know the whole truth of the matter. Even if you had a videocamera on, and locked Ilya, Spengler, Lester, Donner, and Mank in a room for a week and forced them all to spill every second of what they remember went on.... and they all were given injections to say everything unfiltered by any possible legal or financial repercussion.... I think it would be a Roshomon situation, as everyone had emotional stakes put into it. Everyone is the hero in their own story---- but it is telling that Donner, Mank, Ilya, and Spengler were willing to do commentaries- whereas Lester never talks a word about it post-Superman III.

Why? Guilt? Shame? I think shame, but who knows. As a filmmaker, I'm sure he had to know how the Making of Superman II was edited in a way to make it appear like the majority of the quality scenes were filmed by Lester, when in fact he had done some inserts (one shot of 'Would you care to step outside', and the one shirt-rip run in the alleyway doesn't make Lester anywheres Donner's equal in my opinion. Look at SIII compared to the quality of DOnner's STM and SII scenes. Even Reeve didn't brag about his SIII in hindsight.... nor SIV for that matter, but that's a woel other thing)

I will admit, though.... very much of my opinion came from a few things:

#1: the final result disappointing me wholeheartedly even on first view of SII- in bits and pieces. At the time, I LOVED Three Musketeers and thought if it was going to be finished, it was highly possible that getting Lester might have been a good choice.
So, I clearly remember being VERY open to the idea of another director coming in, assuming that we would get equal or better quality as what DOnner had provided. I went from total excitement and anticipation to being jerked back and forth on the film's quality as I watched it... and felt it such a lost opportunity walking out of the theatre. Heartbroken except for portions.

If I felt like what resulted was as good as or better, I would have felt bad for Donner...but not that bad. But what resulted disappointed so much, I was horrified.

#2: reading the actual Mank script for SII--- and having my suspicions confirmed on what would have/should have transpired. It would have been STM jumped to another level-

#3: Seeing SIII and Lester 1000 percent in charge of a script that was 'eh' on paper... but what came out went below that in my opinion.

#4: Seeing the quality of Donner's Lethal Weapon 1 & 2 (even 3 and 4 - while not as good and had some goofiness in it, still was entertaining and by no means was as horrible as the majority of Lester's work on Superman I felt)

Anyhow--- again.... if any director had come in and had done an equal or better job than Donner, then I would have felt a little bad for Donner- but would have conceded that it was creatively for the better. It still would have been wrong for a new hypothetical director to have done "Making of Superman II" and be fine with it suggesting 99 percent credit for the film= but it's like salt in a wound.

But.... I'm glad Donner had a successful and seemingly joyful life beyond Superman. TO have been asked to do Superman IV had to be a vindication of sorts already- that Reeve didn't go to Lester to ask and an admission (especially if asked by WB directly to come back to fix the ship).... but in an ideal alternate world, WB would have given Donner unlimited resrouces earlier on to redo SII- while the actors were younger.... but then again, even two years later- as Donner predicted- even Margot had looked quite a bit different.

And Lester's approval of Margot's wig for reshoots should be proof he is NO Donner.

[crazy_asian_man]

Jun 25, 2022 16:41:20 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Not sure you can put it mostly on any one person. I think the blame is pretty equal. Donner and Mankiewicz stubbornly didn’t want any Lester material in there if it wasn’t necessarily even if their ideas were inferior. That “Freedom of the press” line still gets me. I know they wanted the movie to be their version but it was never totally going to be.

It really is fascinating how much it mirrors the Snyder/Whedon Justice League situation in some ways. Different circumstances but in both cases ego got in the way of some better material being used because of hurt feelings.

WB let Donner and co do it their way (when they arguably could have stepped in to offer some advice) but also cheaped out on the budget compared to what they could have put into it. Thau was doing what he was told.

I’d like to say Thau just because the actual finished product comes off as very amateurish in spots but Donner should have been there more on a day to day basis to supervise because he’d have an eye for things Thau wouldn’t. Some of the audio mixing and editing in the Donner cut is absolutely painful even with the budget they had.

It's hard to know just what conditions and situations Thau was under- he didn't sound 1000 percent forthcoming, but then again, maybe he was. Who knows?

For sure- I know a good chunk of fans including me DON"T consider all the takes chosen as the best, as we also have the extended tv cut.... unless, of course, he was correct in saying that in some cases the originals were damaged and HAD to swap to an alternate.... but we only have his point of view to go on.

In any case..... expectations and demands have been lowered quite a bit. WB/DC- please just put out an official blu ray extended of SII in wide and blu ray, so good fan cutters have the material to do the best version!!! Plus, it's a sure moneymaker- look at the profits of the first STM extended!

[crazy_asian_man]

Jun 25, 2022 17:16:22 GMT -5 dejan said:

Jun 25, 2022 16:07:55 GMT -5 atp said:

Apologies, I should have been more clear about my question.

I wasn't asking who ruined Superman 2. I'm asking who (in 2006) ruined the Donner Cut specifically.

After decades of waiting, the Donner Cut in 2006 was lacklustre and disappointing. Who is to blame for the 2006 project being so crap ?

No worries ATP.

Got you the first time,  but wanted to elaborate on the background factors that would have made making a good Donner cut in 2006 almost nigh on impossible.

There are still some unknown variables in terms of what footage is/was available.

The opening Daily Planet sequence is a good example.

So , I would blame Thau IF

.......there were in fact other better takes(although this is always subjective),angles and coverage that he did NOT use.

But:

I would blame Donner IF

....... Thau used the very best angles and coverage that were available.
Because that would mean, IMHO !, that  Donner did a bit of a sloppy job on this scene way back in 77'.
The fact that he hyped this scene up(during the late 80s/early 90s) when it was still inaccessible to the public for independent review probably raised the expectations for this footage,  over and above it's intrinsic quality.

Ilya did say in the commentary for SII that certain scenes were cut, not because of any directorial credit politics stuff, but because they were simply deemed not good enough by the Lester crew(which still featured a fair amount of ex-Donner staff).

In fact, thinking about it , it would have been pretty easy for the Lester team to refilm that opening Daily Planet sequence(as scripted by Mank)  seeing as they had rebuilt enough of the Daily Planet set aswell as the entrance to the DP Building at street level) to literally mimick Donner's version.
But I would say kudos to Lester's crew for inventing an entirely new opening sequence in Paris.
They took a risk and IMHO- it payed off.  

It's also feasable that Donner himself would have reshot , completely or in part , this entire opening DP sequence , had he been allowed to finish in 1979 , because it's just off , in terms of dynamics, kinetics ,delivery of dialogue ect ect , again IMHO.
Unsworth's cinematography is still sumptouse , but that alone cannot carry a scene.

And I would apply this same principle to all the other unique Donner shots throughout the rest of the Cut.

So it's still a complex situation lol    

 

I still maintain: Lester could have saved a ton of money (and put it into the Metro battle properly as Mank scripted)- if he kept the DP jump (and just add the needed practical fx of a stunt jump- similar to what Donner did for Lethal Weapon when he had a stunt jump from a high building that amazed) and ditched the rather slow moving and (imo) incredibly meh elevator sequence that he replaced it with. I'm glad if others enjoyed it- but I was wholly unimpressed by the Paris section, even then.

The complete opening DP sequence IS missing elements. I refer to a couple of the Lethal Weapon sequences where a stunt man and a stunt woman are jumping/ falling off a tall building. Also, in the script, Lois looks over and sees Superman replacing Clark - easily done now with home software and it does have a difference in fan cuts.

When music and the other shots are added to the DP jump, in my opinion- its SOOOOO much better than the Lester scene- but, again, differences of opinion. And, again, I was onboard with Lester or ANY director taking over as long as I felt the end results were good as or better.... but I did not feel they were where it really counted. Some parts and scenes I thought were not as good, but I was ok with enough for the performances (the pink bear scene as one and the replaced York/Reeve FOS scene)- but they didn't have the special touch that just about every scene in STM had. Or Lethal Weapon 1 and 2 had. Or Ladyhawke had- all Donner/Baird collaborations, I believe.

Anyhow,.... ugh..... just holding out hope for the SII and SIV extended cuts on Bluray/ wide. SIII's extended would be ok, as any Reeve/Supes footage is welcome- but SII extended is the golden child I want on the blu ray shelf already, if only so that fan cutters can fix the best possible Donner cut.

[atp]

Jun 26, 2022 2:40:22 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

Jun 25, 2022 14:26:12 GMT -5 dejan said:

It's a relatively complex problem IMHO

I said in another thread a while back that the decision to remove Donner, at exactly the point in production(for SII) where a substantial amount of footage had already been shot (but that a viable amount could be reshot) and unfilmed scenes completed, with a different director(i.e Hamilton , Lester ect ect) - was very cold and calculating.

And that responsibility has to fall squarely on the Salkinds, Spengler and potentially Lester too.

I say potentially Lester, because I do wonder if the Salkinds(and Spengler) made a unilateral decison to fire Donner at exactly the moment when the "moratorium"(as Petrou called it) was imposed on SII in late 1977/early 1978........or after the Vanity Fair article in early 79'.

OR

Did the Salkinds consult Lester(in late 77'/early 78') with the proposition that they intended to fire Donner and asked him if it would it be possible ( for Lester) to shoot the yet to be filmed sequences(Metropolis battle,villains taking over the world ect ect) and reshoot some of the " already canned" Donner stuff , in an economical and efficient manner.

If Lester had said:

"NO!-it's too complex and Donner has already filmed so much that it's just not realistic for me(or indeed any other director) to complete SII and assume directorial credit + it's going to be really expensive to reshoot those already completed scenes(opening at the Daily Planet,moon jacking, diner stuff ect ect)"........

Then maybe that would have been the end of it and cinematic history would have been very different  with Donner taking the reigns once more. 

But

It seems that  Lester said something along the lines of :

"Yes!-I am contracted to film Cuba and Cassidy for most of 1978-but afterwards I will be available to helm SII from early 79' onwards-and there is just the right amount of stuff that has already been shot(to facilitate completion of production in a timely manner) with more than enough scenes that are still to be lensed.....so I can claim the all important directorial credit." 

And that was possibly the moment that the Salkinds made the decision to fire Donner-in late 77'/early 78'.

If Donner had been able to complete(or at least partly shoot) the Niagra scenes,some of the extra fortress coverage and maybe even some portions of the Met climax during the original STM/SII production run........he would have had more leverage over the Salkinds with regards to the eventual completion of SII.
As it was, the Salkinds realized that they could jettison Donner without incurring astronomical costs for reshoots.

Until Ilya,Spengler or Lester spill the beans on exactly went down for that decision to impose a "moratorium" on SII, we will never know who to blame exactly.

Interesting thoughts--- you're completely right- that we'll never know the whole truth of the matter. Even if you had a videocamera on, and locked Ilya, Spengler, Lester, Donner, and Mank in a room for a week and forced them all to spill every second of what they remember went on.... and they all were given injections to say everything unfiltered by any possible legal or financial repercussion.... I think it would be a Roshomon situation, as everyone had emotional stakes put into it. Everyone is the hero in their own story---- but it is telling that Donner, Mank, Ilya, and Spengler were willing to do commentaries- whereas Lester never talks a word about it post-Superman III.

Why? Guilt? Shame? I think shame, but who knows. As a filmmaker, I'm sure he had to know how the Making of Superman II was edited in a way to make it appear like the majority of the quality scenes were filmed by Lester, when in fact he had done some inserts (one shot of 'Would you care to step outside', and the one shirt-rip run in the alleyway doesn't make Lester anywheres Donner's equal in my opinion. Look at SIII compared to the quality of DOnner's STM and SII scenes. Even Reeve didn't brag about his SIII in hindsight.... nor SIV for that matter, but that's a woel other thing)

I will admit, though.... very much of my opinion came from a few things:

#1: the final result disappointing me wholeheartedly even on first view of SII- in bits and pieces. At the time, I LOVED Three Musketeers and thought if it was going to be finished, it was highly possible that getting Lester might have been a good choice.
So, I clearly remember being VERY open to the idea of another director coming in, assuming that we would get equal or better quality as what DOnner had provided. I went from total excitement and anticipation to being jerked back and forth on the film's quality as I watched it... and felt it such a lost opportunity walking out of the theatre. Heartbroken except for portions.

If I felt like what resulted was as good as or better, I would have felt bad for Donner...but not that bad. But what resulted disappointed so much, I was horrified.

#2: reading the actual Mank script for SII--- and having my suspicions confirmed on what would have/should have transpired. It would have been STM jumped to another level-

#3: Seeing SIII and Lester 1000 percent in charge of a script that was 'eh' on paper... but what came out went below that in my opinion.

#4: Seeing the quality of Donner's Lethal Weapon 1 & 2 (even 3 and 4 - while not as good and had some goofiness in it, still was entertaining and by no means was as horrible as the majority of Lester's work on Superman I felt)

Anyhow--- again.... if any director had come in and had done an equal or better job than Donner, then I would have felt a little bad for Donner- but would have conceded that it was creatively for the better. It still would have been wrong for a new hypothetical director to have done "Making of Superman II" and be fine with it suggesting 99 percent credit for the film= but it's like salt in a wound.

But.... I'm glad Donner had a successful and seemingly joyful life beyond Superman. TO have been asked to do Superman IV had to be a vindication of sorts already- that Reeve didn't go to Lester to ask and an admission (especially if asked by WB directly to come back to fix the ship).... but in an ideal alternate world, WB would have given Donner unlimited resrouces earlier on to redo SII- while the actors were younger.... but then again, even two years later- as Donner predicted- even Margot had looked quite a bit different.

And Lester's approval of Margot's wig for reshoots should be proof he is NO Donner.

If anyone had to replace Donner on S2, I think Steven Spielberg would have been the best choice. He would have been in between CEOT3K and E.T., and at that point in his movie career, he had the same magical touch as Donner. In fact, a lot of people I grew up with assumed that STM was a Spielberg film!

If not him, then Jeannot Szwarc would have also done a good job. Yes, we all know that Supergirl was crap, but he did well with Jaws 2 (honestly, nobody could ever hope to surpass the first Jaws), and Somewhere In Time is fantastic too.

I can't think of any other directors in 1979/80 that would have done better with a Superman sequel. Robert Zemeckis also had that special something, but he appeared later on the scene.

[Kamdan]

I’d like to say Thau just because the actual finished product comes off as very amateurish in spots but Donner should have been there more on a day to day basis to supervise because he’d have an eye for things Thau wouldn’t. Some of the audio mixing and editing in the Donner cut is absolutely painful even with the budget they had.

Donner did say at one point that he was doing this for free and when you’re not paying someone to supervise a project of this size, you get The Donner Cut.

An important factor that everyone in this thread is overlooking is that even if Donner returned for Superman II, there still would’ve been no Marlon Brando in the movie, which would have made Donner walk off right then and there. I’m not 100% sure if this timeline is correct, but it seems that the whole falling out with Brando being cut out of II happened before Donner made the darning comment to Army Archerd that II was going be made on his terms only. It’s never been confirmed, but I’m 100% convinced that Donner was seriously under the impression that Warner Bros. was going to buy out the Salkind’s stake in the deal once they saw the high level of production value Donner was delivering and he thought he could get away with making statements like that. Obviously, the Salkinds weren’t going to let go of an obvious cash cow and used their power to dismiss Donner. The reception II received proved that they were right. They didn’t need Brando and they didn’t need Donner to have another hit movie and they were confident enough to carry on the franchise. Donner can’t complain because Warners treated him very nicely after this incident by giving him an office on the lot that he appeared to have been at for the remainder of his life.

[atp]

Jun 26, 2022 5:21:14 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

I’d like to say Thau just because the actual finished product comes off as very amateurish in spots but Donner should have been there more on a day to day basis to supervise because he’d have an eye for things Thau wouldn’t. Some of the audio mixing and editing in the Donner cut is absolutely painful even with the budget they had.

Donner did say at one point that he was doing this for free and when you’re not paying someone to supervise a project of this size, you get The Donner Cut.

An important factor that everyone in this thread is overlooking is that even if Donner returned for Superman II, there still would’ve been no Marlon Brando in the movie, which would have made Donner walk off right then and there. I’m not 100% sure if this timeline is correct, but it seems that the whole falling out with Brando being cut out of II happened before Donner made the darning comment to Army Archerd that II was going be made on his terms only. It’s never been confirmed, but I’m 100% convinced that Donner was seriously under the impression that Warner Bros. was going to buy out the Salkind’s stake in the deal once they saw the high level of production value Donner was delivering and he thought he could get away with making statements like that. Obviously, the Salkinds weren’t going to let go of an obvious cash cow and used their power to dismiss Donner. The reception II received proved that they were right. They didn’t need Brando and they didn’t need Donner to have another hit movie and they were confident enough to carry on the franchise. Donner can’t complain because Warners treated him very nicely after this incident by giving him an office on the lot that he appeared to have been at for the remainder of his life.

The Brando scenes in the 2006 Donner Cut were actually pretty crap. Even the repowering scene was disappointing

[Metallo]

Jun 26, 2022 5:21:14 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

I’d like to say Thau just because the actual finished product comes off as very amateurish in spots but Donner should have been there more on a day to day basis to supervise because he’d have an eye for things Thau wouldn’t. Some of the audio mixing and editing in the Donner cut is absolutely painful even with the budget they had.

Donner did say at one point that he was doing this for free and when you’re not paying someone to supervise a project of this size, you get The Donner Cut.

An important factor that everyone in this thread is overlooking is that even if Donner returned for Superman II, there still would’ve been no Marlon Brando in the movie, which would have made Donner walk off right then and there. I’m not 100% sure if this timeline is correct, but it seems that the whole falling out with Brando being cut out of II happened before Donner made the darning comment to Army Archerd that II was going be made on his terms only. It’s never been confirmed, but I’m 100% convinced that Donner was seriously under the impression that Warner Bros. was going to buy out the Salkind’s stake in the deal once they saw the high level of production value Donner was delivering and he thought he could get away with making statements like that. Obviously, the Salkinds weren’t going to let go of an obvious cash cow and used their power to dismiss Donner. The reception II received proved that they were right. They didn’t need Brando and they didn’t need Donner to have another hit movie and they were confident enough to carry on the franchise. Donner can’t complain because Warners treated him very nicely after this incident by giving him an office on the lot that he appeared to have been at for the remainder of his life.

I don’t think anyone is overlooking it. I know I’m not. It’s simply irrelevant to ATP’s question about the version of the Donner Cut we were able to get in 2006. Going back in time and asking who has the biggest fault in derailing Superman II in the late 70s is an entirely different question as others have already pointed out.

As for Donner if he wasn’t going to put in a better effort he should have left it to someone else entirely because what we got was half @ssed. WB should have insisted that he take some kind of payment because they’d already crunched the numbers on the project and knew they’d make some kind of profit. That’s just business 101.

[Metallo]

Jun 26, 2022 7:21:25 GMT -5 atp said:

Jun 26, 2022 5:21:14 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

Donner did say at one point that he was doing this for free and when you’re not paying someone to supervise a project of this size, you get The Donner Cut.

An important factor that everyone in this thread is overlooking is that even if Donner returned for Superman II, there still would’ve been no Marlon Brando in the movie, which would have made Donner walk off right then and there. I’m not 100% sure if this timeline is correct, but it seems that the whole falling out with Brando being cut out of II happened before Donner made the darning comment to Army Archerd that II was going be made on his terms only. It’s never been confirmed, but I’m 100% convinced that Donner was seriously under the impression that Warner Bros. was going to buy out the Salkind’s stake in the deal once they saw the high level of production value Donner was delivering and he thought he could get away with making statements like that. Obviously, the Salkinds weren’t going to let go of an obvious cash cow and used their power to dismiss Donner. The reception II received proved that they were right. They didn’t need Brando and they didn’t need Donner to have another hit movie and they were confident enough to carry on the franchise. Donner can’t complain because Warners treated him very nicely after this incident by giving him an office on the lot that he appeared to have been at for the remainder of his life.

The Brando scenes in the 2006 Donner Cut were actually pretty crap. Even the repowering scene was disappointing

I think a lot people built it up in their heads imaging what it would look like. The chances were slim that anything would live up to peoples imaginations especially when you think about the time these movies were made and who was writing them.

Also, even though Brando shouldn’t have laughed at him what Reeve was doing in the scene was quite silly. I appreciate the effort and like Reeve said what is something like that supposed to look like but as it is it just doesn’t work.

[Kamdan]

The Brando scenes in the 2006 Donner Cut were actually pretty crap. Even the repowering scene was disappointing

Sadly true. I wish I could pinpoint the ambiance of Brando’s scenes in Superman I. The reinstated scene of Superman and Jor-El speaking to each other after Superman’s first night is so beautifully crafted with the two actually looking like they’re having a conversation and Brando’s eloquence shines through. The original unedited version of Brando saying “If it were not for vanity, at this very moment, I could embrace you in my arm” makes me believe he was worth every penny he was paid. I never once got that feeling during The Donner Cut, aside from the glance he gave Lois, but I wasn’t crazy about the camera angle they utilized.

I blame the disappointment of the repowering scene on the fact that it was literally the first thing Reeve shot for movie. As with the usage of the screen test, Donner is just too proud of himself to admit that Lester actually did a better job than him when you see his improved version of the scene where he simply says “I failed” instead of his long and drowned out soliloquy. It really proved that less is more than the whole ordeal with Jor-El putting his hand on his shoulder and him convulsing, that reportedly made Brando laugh out loud when he saw Reeve do it. That should be the last reaction you want out of this pivotal moment.

I’m also not at all convinced when Thau was trying to say that the Donner footage in Lester’s cut was edited by Stuart Baird.

As for Donner if he wasn’t going to put in a better effort he should have left it to someone else entirely because what we got was half @ssed. WB should have insisted that he take some kind of payment because they’d already crunched the numbers on the project and knew they’d make some kind of profit. That’s just business 101.

Warner Bros. simply saw this opportunity as another tie in for Superman Returns that was banking on continuing the continuity with Donner’s films, so that’s where their head was at this time. Without Brian Singer getting his way off on incorporating footage of Marlon Brando into his film, they more than likely wouldn’t have gone to the trouble of a Donner Cut at all. Also, was the 2001 extended edition ever treated as “Donner’s preferred version” of the film at all? It just seemed like an excuse to throw us a bone over the excessive amount of deleted scenes that were added to the television version and provided Donner the opportunity to approve of an extended cut that wasn’t the TV version.

[Metallo]

Jun 26, 2022 18:39:02 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

Warner Bros. simply saw this opportunity as another tie in for Superman Returns that was banking on continuing the continuity with Donner’s films, so that’s where their head was at this time. Without Brian Singer getting his way off on incorporating footage of Marlon Brando into his film, they more than likely wouldn’t have gone to the trouble of a Donner Cut at all. Also, was the 2001 extended edition ever treated as “Donner’s preferred version” of the film at all? It just seemed like an excuse to throw us a bone over the excessive amount of deleted scenes that were added to the television version and provided Donner the opportunity to approve of an extended cut that wasn’t the TV version.

The problem with that is that neither Superman Returns or The Donner Cut were slam dunk guarantees so banking on the tie in factor was still a risk. As history proved it didn’t quite work out as well as they hoped. That’s why you put your best foot forward to mitigate the risks as much as possible. Like I said before they did the calculations to see what they’d make or what they’d lose on the Donner Cut before the project was even given the green light but any business is going to want to maximize profits. Their approach on the Donner Cut probably shows why Warner Bros has been underperforming when it comes to this kind of material for decades as well as all the problems they’ve had on the business and creative side of things particularly with Superman and DC.

[Kamdan]

The problem with that is that neither Superman Returns or The Donner Cut were slam dunk guarantees so banking on the tie in factor was still a risk.

Warners certainly thought Returns was gonna be a slam dunk. They were finally gonna have something to show for their decade of development heck and they were feeding our appetite with the biggest push of Superman related material we will ever see that not only included new special editions of the films, but the complete series release of The Adventures of Superman with Lois & Clark and the first season of Superboy.

[crazy_asian_man]

Jun 26, 2022 5:21:14 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

I’d like to say Thau just because the actual finished product comes off as very amateurish in spots but Donner should have been there more on a day to day basis to supervise because he’d have an eye for things Thau wouldn’t. Some of the audio mixing and editing in the Donner cut is absolutely painful even with the budget they had.

Donner did say at one point that he was doing this for free and when you’re not paying someone to supervise a project of this size, you get The Donner Cut.

An important factor that everyone in this thread is overlooking is that even if Donner returned for Superman II, there still would’ve been no Marlon Brando in the movie, which would have made Donner walk off right then and there. I’m not 100% sure if this timeline is correct, but it seems that the whole falling out with Brando being cut out of II happened before Donner made the darning comment to Army Archerd that II was going be made on his terms only. It’s never been confirmed, but I’m 100% convinced that Donner was seriously under the impression that Warner Bros. was going to buy out the Salkind’s stake in the deal once they saw the high level of production value Donner was delivering and he thought he could get away with making statements like that. Obviously, the Salkinds weren’t going to let go of an obvious cash cow and used their power to dismiss Donner. The reception II received proved that they were right. They didn’t need Brando and they didn’t need Donner to have another hit movie and they were confident enough to carry on the franchise. Donner can’t complain because Warners treated him very nicely after this incident by giving him an office on the lot that he appeared to have been at for the remainder of his life.

Warners treated him great apparently after SIII was a box office disappointment and asked him and Mank to come back to fix up their mistakes with doing SIII without Donner. Unless Mank was exaggerating about WB coming back to beg him and Donner to come back to the franchise. That they asked speaks volumes, rather than making Lester a daal he couldn't refuse if they considered it such a success...

As cold as it sounds, as a movie fan, I would have been fine with anyone taking over SII if I liked the results of the changed product. I hated 99 percent of the changes... and if I loved the changes, I still would have been irritated at any new director allowing the press and the documentary making it seem like anything good was all him.

But.... sadly, Donner's gone and Mank's gone. Everyone has their feeling on Lester's work and how important they feel it was in comparison to what Donner had done and could have done. But, good to agree to disagree civilly.... and... honestly, nothing we say or feel won't change the past, but.... so it goes. It just would be nice if Lester came out before he dies to give his side of the story- but I doubt he's ever going to.

[crazy_asian_man]

Jun 26, 2022 22:27:51 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

The problem with that is that neither Superman Returns or The Donner Cut were slam dunk guarantees so banking on the tie in factor was still a risk.

Warners certainly thought Returns was gonna be a slam dunk. They were finally gonna have something to show for their decade of development heck and they were feeding our appetite with the biggest push of Superman related material we will ever see that not only included new special editions of the films, but the complete series release of The Adventures of Superman with Lois & Clark and the first season of Superboy.

It was nice to see WB look like it went all out by the multiple releases of the Buperboy series, Donner Cut approval, etc etc.- and that gorgeous dvd box set edition.... but it was just too much overconfidence or SOMETHING. But, it's nice to see that over time, SR has gotten something of a 'cult' status- particularly after the divisive MOS.

I always say that it's so unforunate that Singer didn't get a chance to do SR II--- it seems like directors who did a first film for a superhero franchise then a sequel- mostly had a far stronger film (except for Iron Man 2)- Batman Begins/ Dark Knight, Raimi's Spiderman and then SPideran 2, Singer's own X-men and X-men 2.... It could have been a flop but possibly StytyR II could have had that giant quality upgrade.

I'm glad that WB originally greenlit a cheaper SR II- but it's a pity SInger didn't jump right on it asap... but, oh well. It might have gotten that Dark Knight box office WB was wanting to makeup for its long development heck years with Superman.

[crazy_asian_man]

Jun 26, 2022 18:39:02 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

The Brando scenes in the 2006 Donner Cut were actually pretty crap. Even the repowering scene was disappointing

Sadly true. I wish I could pinpoint the ambiance of Brando’s scenes in Superman I. The reinstated scene of Superman and Jor-El speaking to each other after Superman’s first night is so beautifully crafted with the two actually looking like they’re having a conversation and Brando’s eloquence shines through. The original unedited version of Brando saying “If it were not for vanity, at this very moment, I could embrace you in my arm” makes me believe he was worth every penny he was paid. I never once got that feeling during The Donner Cut, aside from the glance he gave Lois, but I wasn’t crazy about the camera angle they utilized.

I blame the disappointment of the repowering scene on the fact that it was literally the first thing Reeve shot for movie. As with the usage of the screen test, Donner is just too proud of himself to admit that Lester actually did a better job than him when you see his improved version of the scene where he simply says “I failed” instead of his long and drowned out soliloquy. It really proved that less is more than the whole ordeal with Jor-El putting his hand on his shoulder and him convulsing, that reportedly made Brando laugh out loud when he saw Reeve do it. That should be the last reaction you want out of this pivotal moment.

I’m also not at all convinced when Thau was trying to say that the Donner footage in Lester’s cut was edited by Stuart Baird.

As for Donner if he wasn’t going to put in a better effort he should have left it to someone else entirely because what we got was half @ssed. WB should have insisted that he take some kind of payment because they’d already crunched the numbers on the project and knew they’d make some kind of profit. That’s just business 101.

Warner Bros. simply saw this opportunity as another tie in for Superman Returns that was banking on continuing the continuity with Donner’s films, so that’s where their head was at this time. Without Brian Singer getting his way off on incorporating footage of Marlon Brando into his film, they more than likely wouldn’t have gone to the trouble of a Donner Cut at all. Also, was the 2001 extended edition ever treated as “Donner’s preferred version” of the film at all? It just seemed like an excuse to throw us a bone over the excessive amount of deleted scenes that were added to the television version and provided Donner the opportunity to approve of an extended cut that wasn’t the TV version.

Donner doesn't get enough credit- the DOnner cut was so poorly assembled, sadly, it makes his efforts look bad and unintentionally gives off the wrong impression that Lester did a better job, in my opinion. But, I know we'll probably always see this differently. But it is saying something I think that Lester doesn't want to say anything about Donner nor his participation in SII.... or SIII at this point.

[crazy_asian_man]

Jun 26, 2022 5:01:54 GMT -5 atp said:

Jun 26, 2022 2:40:22 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

Interesting thoughts--- you're completely right- that we'll never know the whole truth of the matter. Even if you had a videocamera on, and locked Ilya, Spengler, Lester, Donner, and Mank in a room for a week and forced them all to spill every second of what they remember went on.... and they all were given injections to say everything unfiltered by any possible legal or financial repercussion.... I think it would be a Roshomon situation, as everyone had emotional stakes put into it. Everyone is the hero in their own story---- but it is telling that Donner, Mank, Ilya, and Spengler were willing to do commentaries- whereas Lester never talks a word about it post-Superman III.

Why? Guilt? Shame? I think shame, but who knows. As a filmmaker, I'm sure he had to know how the Making of Superman II was edited in a way to make it appear like the majority of the quality scenes were filmed by Lester, when in fact he had done some inserts (one shot of 'Would you care to step outside', and the one shirt-rip run in the alleyway doesn't make Lester anywheres Donner's equal in my opinion. Look at SIII compared to the quality of DOnner's STM and SII scenes. Even Reeve didn't brag about his SIII in hindsight.... nor SIV for that matter, but that's a woel other thing)

I will admit, though.... very much of my opinion came from a few things:

#1: the final result disappointing me wholeheartedly even on first view of SII- in bits and pieces. At the time, I LOVED Three Musketeers and thought if it was going to be finished, it was highly possible that getting Lester might have been a good choice.
So, I clearly remember being VERY open to the idea of another director coming in, assuming that we would get equal or better quality as what DOnner had provided. I went from total excitement and anticipation to being jerked back and forth on the film's quality as I watched it... and felt it such a lost opportunity walking out of the theatre. Heartbroken except for portions.

If I felt like what resulted was as good as or better, I would have felt bad for Donner...but not that bad. But what resulted disappointed so much, I was horrified.

#2: reading the actual Mank script for SII--- and having my suspicions confirmed on what would have/should have transpired. It would have been STM jumped to another level-

#3: Seeing SIII and Lester 1000 percent in charge of a script that was 'eh' on paper... but what came out went below that in my opinion.

#4: Seeing the quality of Donner's Lethal Weapon 1 & 2 (even 3 and 4 - while not as good and had some goofiness in it, still was entertaining and by no means was as horrible as the majority of Lester's work on Superman I felt)

Anyhow--- again.... if any director had come in and had done an equal or better job than Donner, then I would have felt a little bad for Donner- but would have conceded that it was creatively for the better. It still would have been wrong for a new hypothetical director to have done "Making of Superman II" and be fine with it suggesting 99 percent credit for the film= but it's like salt in a wound.

But.... I'm glad Donner had a successful and seemingly joyful life beyond Superman. TO have been asked to do Superman IV had to be a vindication of sorts already- that Reeve didn't go to Lester to ask and an admission (especially if asked by WB directly to come back to fix the ship).... but in an ideal alternate world, WB would have given Donner unlimited resrouces earlier on to redo SII- while the actors were younger.... but then again, even two years later- as Donner predicted- even Margot had looked quite a bit different.

And Lester's approval of Margot's wig for reshoots should be proof he is NO Donner.

If anyone had to replace Donner on S2, I think Steven Spielberg would have been the best choice. He would have been in between CEOT3K and E.T., and at that point in his movie career, he had the same magical touch as Donner. In fact, a lot of people I grew up with assumed that STM was a Spielberg film!

If not him, then Jeannot Szwarc would have also done a good job. Yes, we all know that Supergirl was crap, but he did well with Jaws 2 (honestly, nobody could ever hope to surpass the first Jaws), and Somewhere In Time is fantastic too.

I can't think of any other directors in 1979/80 that would have done better with a Superman sequel. Robert Zemeckis also had that special something, but he appeared later on the scene.

ABSOLUTELY- Speilberg... or Jeanot Swarc with keeping the Mank script. Swarc is more of a romantic than cynic if based on his SOmewhere in Time work. If Lester hadn't gone way off the rails in SII (for my tastes) even beyond the rewrite, or if he had been more honest on sharing who did what for SII- I wouldn't feel so much irritation and venom on Lester I think.... but I will also say that I felt like iniitially Ilya Salkind was responsible for all going south- but in listening to his commentaries, I appreciated him telling his side of the story and was more open-minded after that towards him.

Same with the amazing Schumacher commentaries for Batman and Robin- where he apolgizes and says how disappointed he was that he didn't deliver. How many directors bother to do that???

[Kamdan]

Warners treated him great apparently after SIII was a box office disappointment and asked him and Mank to come back to fix up their mistakes with doing SIII without Donner. Unless Mank was exaggerating about WB coming back to beg him and Donner to come back to the franchise.

The main selling point of Warners to Donner and Mankiewicz was that the Salkinds were finally out of the picture. However, Reeve was now taking more responsibilities than just being the actor they chose to play the title role. That must have been off-putting for them to carry on a story Reeve developed and seemed to be the only way to get him in the suit again (along with another personal project of his). There also may have been some resentment towards Reeve and his inaction to address the termination of Donner for the sake of his developing career. Once Reeve had his accident, that may have all been forgiven and forgotten and that’s when we start hearing all of the “Reeve was the greatest kid who ever walked the face of the Earth” and how Donner and Mankiewicz suddenly had a plan to carry out the franchise.

As cold as it sounds, as a movie fan, I would have been fine with anyone taking over SII if I liked the results of the changed product. I hated 99 percent of the changes... and if I loved the changes, I still would have been irritated at any new director allowing the press and the documentary making it seem like anything good was all him.

I really want to have further clarification on Lester asking Donner if he wanted to share credit on II. The story goes that Donner either immediately said “I don’t share credit” or he attempted to watch it and was turned off by the opening Paris scene that he declined his credit. Both responses show an extreme amount of ignorance on Donner’s part, because he really should’ve watched the whole thing through and saw how his own material was handled. Of course, by that point I think he was just trying to put all of that behind him and move forward with his career. He had to have realized his mistake once he saw reviews saying how much funnier Hackman was in II now that a comedy director was directing, as a common criticism from the first one was the comedic angle with Luthor.

It just would be nice if Lester came out before he dies to give his side of the story- but I doubt he's ever going to.

Lester is smart to say mum’s the word when it comes to Superman. All he would have honestly have to say is that it was a complicated situation stepping into something he wasn’t 100% committed to and had to deal with the guilt of taking a job away from someone else. I still always hear that the whole death of Lois and turning the world backwards idea of the first movie came from Lester’s suggestion which Donner and Mankiewicz would never admit, but that idea helped the first movie cement itself as a great movie, especially further driving Superman’s motivation with the call back to the death of Jonathan. I don’t think everyone involved in The Donner Cut understood how much that decision would have affected II as well because Jor-El seems irrelevant after he’s been defied. It was absolutely correct to continue this narrative with Lara returning and have the spared green Crystal be the method of restoring his powers. Lester’s legacy on the franchise should be accounted for instead of just being the guy who directed the ice cream gag in II.

But, it's nice to see that over time, SR has gotten something of a 'cult' status- particularly after the divisive MOS.

Has it really reached that? All that I’ve noticed about the film is that it’s now being received exactly as I first reviewed it as a terrible looking film with botched casting decisions and terribly executed ideas. When it first came out, I do remember everyone on these forms first acting like no criticisms should be brought up, including the major aspect of Superman appearing to be a deadbeat dad who creepily spies on Lois‘s home live. Nowadays, that’s the common criticisms I hear when someone decided she to dig Returns up again from a rightful grave. It always pissed me off to hear that Singer got his way by digging up Tim Burton’s Superman material and saying that his ideas was better than theirs. It says a lot that Singer later admitted that it would have been smart to have just rebooted the franchise with Nicholas Hoult instead of that whole “vague history” nonsense.

Donner doesn't get enough credit-

He certainly liked to give himself credit with that “A Richard Donner Film” line before the main title of both films. Lester said in interview that it is not a fair to take a credit on a film of this magnitude when there are many of the technicians making your film even possible. You can stand there all you want and say you want a sense of verisimilitude to your film, but you need someone to back that up. I’m sure they wanted verisimilitude for Superman IV but were burdened with a slashed budget, a problem that seemed to not ever effect Donner. His push for waiting on clear days to film and striving for perfection in the flying significantly drove the budget upwards. Despite the end results, I give IV credit for making something rather than just throwing up their hands and quitting.

but I will also say that I felt like iniitially Ilya Salkind was responsible for all going south- but in listening to his commentaries, I appreciated him telling his side of the story and was more open-minded after that towards him.

I can’t emphasize how much I appreciated them stepping up and telling their side of the story after Thau painted them in a very negative light for the 2001 documentaries. The deal with people like Donner is that even though they seems very pleasant and approachable (a definite positive quality of a director), people like that can just as easily turn into the complete opposite of that if you upset them. For the rest of his life after being fired from Superman II, Donner was convinced that whatever he did was right despite not all of the circumstances not siding with him. Now, on the other hand, you have somebody like Salkind who was convinced that he was right at the time for his actions, but his lack of success afterthe Superman films made him become a humbler person and to me way more appealing to listen to.

[Metallo]

Jun 26, 2022 22:27:51 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

The problem with that is that neither Superman Returns or The Donner Cut were slam dunk guarantees so banking on the tie in factor was still a risk.

Warners certainly thought Returns was gonna be a slam dunk. They were finally gonna have something to show for their decade of development heck and they were feeding our appetite with the biggest push of Superman related material we will ever see that not only included new special editions of the films, but the complete series release of The Adventures of Superman with Lois & Clark and the first season of Superboy.

That’s where the problem lies. Nothing is ever a sure thing and they should have realized that. They spent over ten years trying to get away from that kind of movie thinking it wouldn’t work. Then they jumped back to it when their ten plus years of development on other films went nowhere and suddenly expected it to work. It’s not just about the concept but the execution of said concept and they didn’t see any issues. It’s a problem with the corporate culture at WB especially when it comes to their superhero stuff. But you see the same problems with their Potter universe films and other older franchises as well.

[crazy_asian_man]

Jun 27, 2022 7:56:31 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

Warners treated him great apparently after SIII was a box office disappointment and asked him and Mank to come back to fix up their mistakes with doing SIII without Donner. Unless Mank was exaggerating about WB coming back to beg him and Donner to come back to the franchise.

The main selling point of Warners to Donner and Mankiewicz was that the Salkinds were finally out of the picture. However, Reeve was now taking more responsibilities than just being the actor they chose to play the title role. That must have been off-putting for them to carry on a story Reeve developed and seemed to be the only way to get him in the suit again (along with another personal project of his). There also may have been some resentment towards Reeve and his inaction to address the termination of Donner for the sake of his developing career. Once Reeve had his accident, that may have all been forgiven and forgotten and that’s when we start hearing all of the “Reeve was the greatest kid who ever walked the face of the Earth” and how Donner and Mankiewicz suddenly had a plan to carry out the franchise.

As cold as it sounds, as a movie fan, I would have been fine with anyone taking over SII if I liked the results of the changed product. I hated 99 percent of the changes... and if I loved the changes, I still would have been irritated at any new director allowing the press and the documentary making it seem like anything good was all him.

I really want to have further clarification on Lester asking Donner if he wanted to share credit on II. The story goes that Donner either immediately said “I don’t share credit” or he attempted to watch it and was turned off by the opening Paris scene that he declined his credit. Both responses show an extreme amount of ignorance on Donner’s part, because he really should’ve watched the whole thing through and saw how his own material was handled. Of course, by that point I think he was just trying to put all of that behind him and move forward with his career. He had to have realized his mistake once he saw reviews saying how much funnier Hackman was in II now that a comedy director was directing, as a common criticism from the first one was the comedic angle with Luthor.

It just would be nice if Lester came out before he dies to give his side of the story- but I doubt he's ever going to.

Lester is smart to say mum’s the word when it comes to Superman. All he would have honestly have to say is that it was a complicated situation stepping into something he wasn’t 100% committed to and had to deal with the guilt of taking a job away from someone else. I still always hear that the whole death of Lois and turning the world backwards idea of the first movie came from Lester’s suggestion which Donner and Mankiewicz would never admit, but that idea helped the first movie cement itself as a great movie, especially further driving Superman’s motivation with the call back to the death of Jonathan. I don’t think everyone involved in The Donner Cut understood how much that decision would have affected II as well because Jor-El seems irrelevant after he’s been defied. It was absolutely correct to continue this narrative with Lara returning and have the spared green Crystal be the method of restoring his powers. Lester’s legacy on the franchise should be accounted for instead of just being the guy who directed the ice cream gag in II.

But, it's nice to see that over time, SR has gotten something of a 'cult' status- particularly after the divisive MOS.

Has it really reached that? All that I’ve noticed about the film is that it’s now being received exactly as I first reviewed it as a terrible looking film with botched casting decisions and terribly executed ideas. When it first came out, I do remember everyone on these forms first acting like no criticisms should be brought up, including the major aspect of Superman appearing to be a deadbeat dad who creepily spies on Lois‘s home live. Nowadays, that’s the common criticisms I hear when someone decided she to dig Returns up again from a rightful grave. It always pissed me off to hear that Singer got his way by digging up Tim Burton’s Superman material and saying that his ideas was better than theirs. It says a lot that Singer later admitted that it would have been smart to have just rebooted the franchise with Nicholas Hoult instead of that whole “vague history” nonsense.

Donner doesn't get enough credit-

He certainly liked to give himself credit with that “A Richard Donner Film” line before the main title of both films. Lester said in interview that it is not a fair to take a credit on a film of this magnitude when there are many of the technicians making your film even possible. You can stand there all you want and say you want a sense of verisimilitude to your film, but you need someone to back that up. I’m sure they wanted verisimilitude for Superman IV but were burdened with a slashed budget, a problem that seemed to not ever effect Donner. His push for waiting on clear days to film and striving for perfection in the flying significantly drove the budget upwards. Despite the end results, I give IV credit for making something rather than just throwing up their hands and quitting.

but I will also say that I felt like iniitially Ilya Salkind was responsible for all going south- but in listening to his commentaries, I appreciated him telling his side of the story and was more open-minded after that towards him.

I can’t emphasize how much I appreciated them stepping up and telling their side of the story after Thau painted them in a very negative light for the 2001 documentaries. The deal with people like Donner is that even though they seems very pleasant and approachable (a definite positive quality of a director), people like that can just as easily turn into the complete opposite of that if you upset them. For the rest of his life after being fired from Superman II, Donner was convinced that whatever he did was right despite not all of the circumstances not siding with him. Now, on the other hand, you have somebody like Salkind who was convinced that he was right at the time for his actions, but his lack of success afterthe Superman films made him become a humbler person and to me way more appealing to listen to.

Kamdan, love ya, man--- but I think at the end of the day, we will probably agree that we love STM, and disagree on everything else Donner/Lester. That's cool, still love ya. (In a respectful not creepy way)

[Kamdan]

Kamdan, love ya, man--- but I think at the end of the day, we will probably agree that we love STM, and disagree on everything else Donner/Lester. That's cool, still love ya. (In a respectful not creepy way)

I love talking to you all that still stop by here. Don’t get much of that opportunity within my community.