Missed opportunity - low cost, bigger spectacle

[crazy_asian_man]

In revisiting theatrical SII / International SII...

Continuously, there seem to be lost opportunities to have 'juiced up' the action and spectacle in the reshot/added scenes.... that might not have cost much more money and gotten more action woven in- (and amped the intensity scale)-

A couple off the bat:

* In the beginning with Non killing the security guard- Would it have been THAT much more expensive to have had two more guards, and have had Non single-handedly beat them all up? I think there would/could have been a PG-13 way to have made the threat more real and not have added THAT much to the budget.

* During the bit with the terrorists at the Eiffel Tower- Superman gets the elevator going up from the bomb, but couldn't they have had (even if implausible) the terrorists shoot at Supes while doing it, and had Supes use his super-breath to knock them all out? (I would have preferred an even more elaborate way- but this is mentioning stuff on the cheap).

Little bits that might not have cost that much more...

[dejan]

Apr 12, 2023 12:41:42 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

In revisiting theatrical SII / International SII...

Continuously, there seem to be lost opportunities to have 'juiced up' the action and spectacle in the reshot/added scenes.... that might not have cost much more money and gotten more action woven in- (and amped the intensity scale)-

A couple off the bat:

* In the beginning with Non killing the security guard- Would it have been THAT much more expensive to have had two more guards, and have had Non single-handedly beat them all up? I think there would/could have been a PG-13 way to have made the threat more real and not have added THAT much to the budget.

* During the bit with the terrorists at the Eiffel Tower- Superman gets the elevator going up from the bomb, but couldn't they have had (even if implausible) the terrorists shoot at Supes while doing it, and had Supes use his super-breath to knock them all out? (I would have preferred an even more elaborate way- but this is mentioning stuff on the cheap).

Little bits that might not have cost that much more...

Yes , some nice ideas there CAM...I recall you mentioned them(or at least the one with the terrorists shooting at Supes as he breaks through the shaft) on another thread awhile back.

I would wager it was more to do with vision rather than cost....they simply never envisioned those (or other) ideas.
But who knows?

You might remember also on that other thread , I proposed that Lester could have established a few quick insert/reaction shots of the Parisian crowd as Supes approaches the Eiffel tower.....and then again when he commences his elevation with the bomb. 
After all, Lester had already assembled a decently sized crowd at the base of the tower to establish Lois's initial arrival.
So getting a few extra shots of the crowd dispersing when the lift falls due to the cables being cut, and then some cheers and claps when supes saves the day ,  should not have been too difficult to shoot.


However, Lester was clever enough to get that quick shot of Lois looking up with a semi- smile as Supes begins his ascent.
That was a nice touch in my book.
Also the musical que that Thorne re-used from William's original score for the rescue of Air force One in STM....was re-aligned quite nicely with this Eiffel Tower sequence.  

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 12, 2023 16:00:55 GMT -5 dejan said:

Apr 12, 2023 12:41:42 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

In revisiting theatrical SII / International SII...

Continuously, there seem to be lost opportunities to have 'juiced up' the action and spectacle in the reshot/added scenes.... that might not have cost much more money and gotten more action woven in- (and amped the intensity scale)-

A couple off the bat:

* In the beginning with Non killing the security guard- Would it have been THAT much more expensive to have had two more guards, and have had Non single-handedly beat them all up? I think there would/could have been a PG-13 way to have made the threat more real and not have added THAT much to the budget.

* During the bit with the terrorists at the Eiffel Tower- Superman gets the elevator going up from the bomb, but couldn't they have had (even if implausible) the terrorists shoot at Supes while doing it, and had Supes use his super-breath to knock them all out? (I would have preferred an even more elaborate way- but this is mentioning stuff on the cheap).

Little bits that might not have cost that much more...

Yes , some nice ideas there CAM...I recall you mentioned them(or at least the one with the terrorists shooting at Supes as he breaks through the shaft) on another thread awhile back.

I would wager it was more to do with vision rather than cost....they simply never envisioned those (or other) ideas.
But who knows?

You might remember also on that other thread , I proposed that Lester could have established a few quick insert/reaction shots of the Parisian crowd as Supes approaches the Eiffel tower.....and then again when he commences his elevation with the bomb. 
After all, Lester had already assembled a decently sized crowd at the base of the tower to establish Lois's initial arrival.
So getting a few extra shots of the crowd dispersing when the lift falls due to the cables being cut, and then some cheers and claps when supes saves the day ,  should not have been too difficult to shoot.


However, Lester was clever enough to get that quick shot of Lois looking up with a semi- smile as Supes begins his ascent.
That was a nice touch in my book.
Also the musical que that Thorne re-used from William's original score for the rescue of Air force One in STM....was re-aligned quite nicely with this Eiffel Tower sequence.  

I agree- getting some gasps and cheers (like the helicopter rescule in STM) from the crowd that won't go away would have been nice to elevate the action.... and, low-cost.... as one irritation with that whole sequence was the LOOOOONG build up to Supes getting there- to (and it may have been intentional) the quick save/Lois' suprise. There is the big explosion, but for little cost, the Paris sequence could have had a LOT more 'oomph' to it.

[crazy_asian_man]

Also in talking about lower cost, bigger spectacle...

Why didn't Lester save money by NOT doing the Paris rescue sequence- AND- saving money on the Niagara Falls jump ..... by KEEPING the Donner shot DP jump sequence (that was mostly done already)....

Then shoot the much cheaper (Cheaper than Paris or the Niagara Falls water jump by far) bullets sequence that Donner did a screen test for (as well as the much funnier prior setup sequence Mank wrote for the Honeymoon Haven where Lois is the aggressor and kisses Clark in the room?).... so as to have extra money to put into the process shots for more aerial battles in the Metro battle sequence?

Speaking of which...

Why all the lame misplaced 'blowing' effect jokes? The Mank script had some weak jokes as well but not for the dramatic final acts. The main cast (as far as I know) didn't have Brando-like contracts that had restrictive windows to have them for more battle scenes. Rather than stretch out the Fortress of Solitude sequence, why not just put more battle bit back in Metropolis?

On the flip side...

If making a big deal out of going to shooting on location to (I believe) South America for Superman to pick up the flowers.... was anyone overly impressed with the results? I thought it was shot in a theme park somewhere. It wasn't BAD..... but for the cost of flying Reeve and a second unit out there with the equipment- I thought for something like the Arctic sequences, it was great to have the real deal in the background, but the value felt lost here to me.

In an interview I love the idea that Reeve proposed about Supes flying halfway across the world to get THE flower for her- extremely sentimental, but if that was the case, maybe it needed to be shot a more dreamily way like Ridley Scott's Legend.... (as well as the idea of Superman taking away all the memories with a kiss, rather than a heat-vision drink as was originally scripted by the Newmans).

But....
Summarizing words by Mank- who credited Lester as a solid director- Lester was a cynic, Donner was a romantic.

Lester's job to finish on the cheap and efficiently- is arguable (see my arguments above)- I feel money was spent on the wrong places- and it was shot mostly in a flat conventional matter usually at best.

I don't mind shooting fast and cheap- Robert Rodriguez prides himself on shooting efficiently- but the vision was closer to Superman III slapstick comedy as a priority, not a special hero's story. The times it dips into romance felt to me extremely clunky and a bit awkward even with good performances (compare the pink bears to the talks outside the FOS by Supes and Lois- the screen test to me dont' count as they were screen tests).

If everything had to be fast and shot like a tv movie..... then at least stick to the Mank script. But, hm...

[atp]

That entire precredits scene in S2 was a waste of money. It wasn't needed, and just looked cheap and second-rate compared to STM.

I do think that the opening credits was done well, though, and that it was clever to recap STM in the credits.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 13, 2023 13:46:30 GMT -5 atp said:

That entire precredits scene in S2 was a waste of money. It wasn't needed, and just looked cheap and second-rate compared to STM.

I do think that the opening credits was done well, though, and that it was clever to recap STM in the credits.

At the time, I do vaguely recall reading something about (though memory could be bad) Brando not being in the film- so I did wonder how he was going to be removed without any gaps in the story...

So when the villains came on screen and five seconds later it's cut into the Brando trial scene- it happened so fast, that I didn't have too much time to really absorb how cheap it was. I mainly was getting over how clunky and silly it was covering up its tracks (poorly) over the loss of Brando-el.

But- much of Lester's stuff was second-rate compared to STM. I was okay with him shooting to finish cheap- but while some of the stuff was acceptable to me.... to varying degrees things were godawful in terms of re-written content.

For awhile I wondered if it was my imagination- but getting a copy at a convention on the more serious and concise Mank script validated it.

If Lester had recast Brando, reshot those scenes and stuck to Mank's script- even if things might have been shot more tv movie-like, I doubt I would have been griping all this time like now.

On the flip side, it is amazing to see how many fan cuts have come out of this that seem to get more and more elaborate. But- I know there's more footage out there- if the 4k blu rays sell well, HOPEFULLY we'll finally get extended SII cuts & full SIV cuts- but..... with the lack of new extras on the 4k, I don't hold up much hope.

[dejan]

Hi CAM


Hehe

We obviously have diametrically opposed views when it comes to SII!
Of course,  the following are my opinions and are neither here nor there in terms of validity.

But hopefully the following will underlie the reasons why I have these opinions.

Why didn't Lester save money by NOT doing the Paris rescue sequence- AND- saving money on the Niagara Falls jump ..... by KEEPING the Donner shot DP jump sequence (that was mostly done already)....

Simple.

Because both the Paris sequence or the recreation of the Daily Planet scene at Niagra were much better, anyways, in terms of actor performance, editing and even cinematography.

That must be the way that Lester and the Salkinds saw it....and IMHO(having now seen Donner's DP footage) they were right.

It also ,paradoxically , substitutes the villains ruling the world montage in Mank's script by giving the film an international flavour , straight off the bat......seeing as Lester would would focus squarely on East Huston  as the primary battle field for Zod and co to do their stuff later on in the flick.

Then shoot the much cheaper (Cheaper than Paris or the Niagara Falls water jump by far) bullets sequence that Donner did a screen test for (as well as the much funnier prior setup sequence Mank wrote for the Honeymoon Haven where Lois is the aggressor and kisses Clark in the room?).... so as to have extra money to put into the process shots for more aerial battles in the Metro battle sequence?

The bullet sequence as originally scripted is fraught with contradictions.

Or it needed some extra stuff added so as to mitigate said discrepancies.

Lois already knows that Supes can't see through lead(as established in STM).....and seeing as she is now suspecting that Clark is indeed Supes....surely she would need to conceal the false weapon from him more dilgently, before springing the surprise("you are right Clark, I bet my life instead of yours").



Otherwise Supes is going to anticipate in advance that Lois is up to something.



Also:



Can't Supes see through the sheathings of the gun to detect that's it’s full of blank cartridges?!....and with that being the case,does it not then give him the advantage to play some quick trick on Lois by calling her bluff - e.g making up some superficial excuse("Lois.....I already happen to know that gun is full of blanks- I saw you pack it your suitcase earlier!")...or whatever but hopefully you get the gist.



Anyways, even if a blank was fired , would he not instantaneously be able to tell that nothing hit him?



I know I am over analysing this thing....but this could be one of the weaknesses of the Donner/Mank axis....that they sometimes went for raw emotion....and lost sight of reason.

We got a dose of that with the turning back the world scene(with all it’s contradictions-irrespective of whether it is appended to STM or SII).



Lester, on the other hand, has Supe's question his own motives:

("I don't know why I did that?")



It's a beautifully delivered line and offers some sense of doubt and introspection.

It's subtle and clever.



For the earlier scene , I distinctly remember the theater audience in 1981/82, having a good laugh when Clark sits down on the water bed("gosh -it's alive!")....so that scene as finally filmed, definitely works and the sexual attraction is implied as opposed to being forced.

Let's be honest....at the time of Mank's script for SII being turned in...most of the emotional/sexual stuff on his screen writing resume' was in the James Bond films(none of which had any depth whatsoever when it came to romantic relationships).....indeed some of the stuff in Man With The Golden Gun is downright awful.

Diamonds Are Forever and The Spy Who Loved Me are not much of an improvement.



I checked the wiki page and saw that Mank was also involved in 1977's The Deep.

Again....whilst there is a romance between Nolte and Bissett in that film....it's not at the level that was attained or necessary for SII.



Obviously Mank had other TV type assignments before taking on Bond...so maybe he excelled with romantic stuff there.

But in the mid 70s ,Mank's reputation in the cinematic sphere when it came to romance....in my view, lacked nuance and skill.

He topped himself on STM, and Donner's guiding hand and the organic chemistry between Reeve and Kidder got the romantic element over the first hurdle.

But that romance as depicted in STM, was essentially a first date type scenario....but it needed to go to another level for SII....and Lester in the end, took it there. Too bad if Donner refused to acknowledge that.

But the critics did.

Could Donner have done the same?

Definitely….but I don’t know that for certain, given his other romantic output.


Ladyhawke is beautiful from a romantic perspective…..but the lovers spend the entire movie apart.

When Pfeiffer and Hauer do get together at the end, it’s an earned moment……but it’s a quite different dynamic to SII , which necessitated the lovers being together for pretty much the whole movie……in fact they are ultimately separated at the end!

Could a pre-Ladyhawke Donner have pulled that off?

Maybe.



Lester had already done the romance thing quite effectively between Hepburn and Connery in R&R.
Petulia, The Bed Sitting Room and The Knack And How To Get It also tackle the complexities of romance on several levels and this has been critically acknowledged.

Speaking of which...



Why all the lame misplaced 'blowing' effect jokes? The Mank script had some weak jokes as well but not for the dramatic final acts. The main cast (as far as I know) didn't have Brando-like contracts that had restrictive windows to have them for more battle scenes. Rather than stretch out the Fortress of Solitude sequence, why not just put more battle bit back in Metropolis?

I always used to wonder what the 1st part of that Donner Fortress climax sequence looked like and was underwhelmed when it was finally revealed in the Donner Cut, although the cinematography is once again,excellent.
Having said that, if Donner had finished SII in 79’ with a violent , no holds bar , emphatic clash in Metropolis….then his slightly more reserved and cerebral climax in the Fortress would have been more appropriate.

Lester on the other hand, needed to add a bit more oomph to his Fortress scenes…..as his Metropolis bash up was not as full on as Donner’s(at least as scripted).

On the flip side...



If making a big deal out of going to shooting on location to (I believe) South America for Superman to pick up the flowers.... was anyone overly impressed with the results?

I was!

Enjoyed it in the cinema back in the day and it looks great on my projector now.

Hopefully the upcoming UHD will add even more to the piece.

The approach of Supes from afar to the Caribbean gives the scope…..and then his elegant descent into the folliage completes the scene.There is also a nice pan down from the top of the water fall to Supes picking his flowers.

Nice close up of the Parrot and once again, good use of William’s ques by Thorne, applies the final touch.

It’s quick and sweet and when contrasted against the carnage in Houston, provides a nice juxtaposition.

All my opinions of course.



If I had to be critical, the scene in STM when Supes lands on the New York side walk, just prior to tunnelling his way through the ground into Lex's lair …….is so blatantly a front projection plate that had it been shot by Lester…..everybody would be complaining…see how that works!

I thought it was shot in a theme park somewhere. It wasn't BAD..... but for the cost of flying Reeve and a second unit out there with the equipment- I thought for something like the Arctic sequences, it was great to have the real deal in the background, but the value felt lost here to me.

IMHO, when the film is viewed in its entirety, having that brief sequence of the Caribbean as well as those arctic shots with Lex and Eve….gives a nice grand geographical palette to the movie as a whole(and also a nice contrast of environments).

In an interview I love the idea that Reeve proposed about Supes flying halfway across the world to get THE flower for her- extremely sentimental, but if that was the case, maybe it needed to be shot a more dreamily way like Ridley Scott's Legend.... (as well un vision drink as was originally scripted by the Newmans).

I agree, that as a procedure, the memory wipe is a bit too unilateral in the way Supes imposes it on Lois……but the performance between the 2 actors is endearing(with great direction from Lester) and heartfelt….that it still works(IMHO).

But....

Summarizing words by Mank- who credited Lester as a solid director- Lester was a cynic, Donner was a romantic.

That's true, but I would argue that it was in fact Mank, who was at best , at least up until that point in time (mid 70s)just a solid script re-writer and that it was Lester who was in fact a great director with a very substantial portfolio behind him by the time he tackled Supes.

Lester's job to finish on the cheap and efficiently- is arguable (see my arguments above)- I feel money was spent on the wrong places- and it was shot mostly in a flat conventional matter usually at best.

But STM is shot in a conventional manner…..just a very elegant conventional manner!


Lester had to adjust his shooting style to match Donner’s.


Lester’s traditional method of shooting and editing, was distinctly European New Wave(and definitely not British or TV orientated ,as has mistakenly been asserted).

It’s because Lester’s casts and crew  were overwhelmingly British that this association with the British comedy TV /film making Biz ,has been made.


But it’s just completely wrong.


Lester’s cinematic techniques are not conventional.They have Fellini's,Antonioni's and Goddard's fingerprints stamped all over them.


And had Lester filmed with Italian/French and German actors and crews then this whole British association thing would have been put to bed.

As proof and for the record, having now watched most of Lester’s stuff in such close proximity…..SII was the first time in Lester’s career that he shot in widescreen anamorphic!


Also, there are no hand-held camera shots, which was Lester’s trademark throughout the 60s, and which he continued to utilize(although far less frequently) all the way up until Cuba in 1979.

Ok ,there are a few hand held shots interspersed throughout SII, one quickie of Lois climbing the stairs at the Eiffel Tower, another loose close up shot of Lois’s hand as she puts out a cigarette stub in her office and if I recall accurately….another unstable shot of the military chopper flying over Houston….there maybe a few more here and there but you get the gist.

But there are more hand held/surreal shots in the first 5 minutes of The Knack And How To Get It ,How I Won The War,The Bed Sitting Room and even A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum, then there are in the entirety of SII and SIII combined!

And I have not even mentioned Petulia yet(which is Lester's masterpiece).

So Lester definitely changed his style for Supes……whether he was successful is another matter.

I don't mind shooting fast and cheap- Robert Rodriguez prides himself on shooting efficiently- but the vision was closer to Superman III slapstick comedy as a priority, not a special hero's story. The times it dips into romance felt to me extremely clunky and a bit awkward even with good performances (compare the pink bears to the talks outside the FOS by Supes and Lois- the screen test to me dont' count as they were screen tests).

From an acting perspective, the Pink Bear scene is vastly superior to the “outside of the Fortress” and Lois SII balcony stuff lensed by Donner.

The cinematography OTOH, in those Donner scenes are lovely but the performances , less so, compared to Lester's - again IMHO.
I am sure Donner would have reshot them had he been allowed to finish back in 79'....and especially given the fact he would not have been permitted to use another turning back the world motif (which is what those "outside of the fortress" and balcony scenes were originally intended for)......he may have been forced to junk them entirely.


Lester managed to coax some extremely subtle performances by both actors in the quieter moments of SII.

He should be acknowledged for that.

If I use the stuff from The Goonies or Lethal Weapon 2 as an example….then romantic subtelties are not Donner’s forte’.

If everything had to be fast and shot like a tv movie..... then at least stick to the Mank script. But, hm...

Superman IV is the definitive TV movie of the franchise unfortunately(and as I said before- I really wish this monstrosity of a film never saw the light of day).....in fact it's so bad than even rank and file episodes of Maguiver or The A Team surpass it.

I honestly hope nobody buys the 4KUHD for SIV! 

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 15, 2023 6:25:50 GMT -5 dejan said:

Hi CAM


Hehe

We obviously have diametrically opposed views when it comes to SII!
Of course,  the following are my opinions and are neither here nor there in terms of validity.

But hopefully the following will underlie the reasons why I have these opinions.

Hey Dejan!

I'll go in deep later on a reply for all these thoughts (spoiler: going to be Pro-Donner- lol)--- but, first and foremost, love that we can disagree on an extreme.... BUT.... still be friends and be respectful (even as I disrespect Lester)!-

Will go deep on a reply, but just want to also say thanks that we can disgree without it devolving into Man of Steel-era postings where things got super-ugly here...

Cheers!

[dejan]

No worries CAM

Total respect for your views and opinions.

Watched Ladyhawke for the first time in over 20 years the other night BTW.

F***kin awesome movie.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 15, 2023 6:25:50 GMT -5 dejan said:

Because both the Paris sequence or the recreation of the Daily Planet scene at Niagra were much better, anyways, in terms of actor performance, editing and even cinematography.

The Paris sequence to me COULD have been better- (as forementioned suggestions that might not have cost an arm and a leg)- but, Supes flies there, has a moment with Lois, and then flies the elevator out (in an extremely cheap long shot miniature)...

But- even dealing with the terrorists might not have been a showstopper, but it would have been SOMETHING. Glad you liked it, and I wouldn't have bagged on it, if at the end it felt like wasted money and s-l-o-w with minimal payoff.

That must be the way that Lester and the Salkinds saw it....and IMHO(having now seen Donner's DP footage) they were right.

Donner's DP jump was missing footage not shot (Lois's closeup falling and Supes appearing over Clark from LOIS's pov in the script) and Thau didn't help by not having the score and the added fx were weak, but with seeing fan cuts with additions, it is better than the Niagara jump by far.

It also ,paradoxically , substitutes the villains ruling the world montage in Mank's script by giving the film an international flavour , straight off the bat......seeing as Lester would would focus squarely on East Huston  as the primary battle field for Zod and co to do their stuff later on in the flick.

If they had arranged it so that Supes did SOMETHING clever in the beginning with the terrorists or that action sequence, it would have made me forgive the rewritten & newly shot Paris scene. It still serves its purpose, but (like many other Lester scenes) it could have been so much more.

The bullet sequence as originally scripted is fraught with contradictions.....

I know I am over analysing this thing....but this could be one of the weaknesses of the Donner/Mank axis....that they sometimes went for raw emotion....and lost sight of reason.

The bullet screen test cut together is a mess- I won't defend the bad judgement of including that on the Donner cut- (I would have had it as an extra)--- but, the 'wacky wacky isn't this battle funny' choice by Lester (it's not even in the Newman's screenplay- or not as extensive as it is in the theatrical)--- that defies reason to me and goes straight into temporary insanity.... but... I'm mixing in another sequence when I should stick the subject!

The three scenes that Mank wrote- The first (unshot but hilarious) scene of Honeymoon Haven with the dialogue reversed and Lois being the aggressive one and Clark being the bitter one over the assignment, then the bullets scene--- suggested that Lois was still not really seeing Supes as he was-

And the way the Mank script was for the depowering (not shot!)- Lois realizes her giant mistake when she's in TEARS over what she (inadverdently) caused.

In the final FOS scenes (which I found superior, but that's my opinion)- it lines up and only THEN Lois seems to face reality.

--- In the way Lester/Newmans had it re-written ----

I agree that the Pink Bear scene is well acted (I argue that a watermelon could have directed that scene given the talent involved and I would have preferred the watermelon, as the watermelon wouldn't have taken full credit for the movie)- by Reeve and Kidder....

But the romantic scenes - while well acted- were written in a way that felt off and inauthentic to me. Mank/Donner/Baird expressed the emotions and subtexts nonverbally (John Williams score didn't hurt either. --- though, the bit with Margot Kidder 'singing' the "Can You Read My Mind" is anything but subtle in STM-- (hard to believe that they considered having her REALLY singing it)-

Especially the lines 'I love you' (Though I also had difficulty with Gamora saying it directly in Avengers: Infinity War- I rarely see people say that verbally out loud unless its wedding vows)- always felt a bit flat to me and on the nose.

It IS a romantic fantasy- but Donner accentuated the scenes with beautiful cinematography and art direction (by comparison, can having the kiss look any uglier than in Lois' cluttered office? At least go to the DP roof or something more scenic or visually romantic! Talking about logic, having Supes/Clark kiss Lois in the DP with see-through windows all about doesn't seem to be very logical-nor visually attractive! Having a half-eaten sandwich in the background might have been consistent if it popped up in Lois' chaotic office, but... really?)

Having the start of the romance (arguably the first date in STM) and the end of the romance both at the lavish apartment might have been a stretch--- but gorgeous to watch. Could put a frame on any of those images from those two scenes.

But- anyhow- those are my feelings on it. Annnnd.... again, I give credit to Lester for an EXCELLENT Three Musketeers. So- I'm not just bashing on Lester because it's Lester. The shirt-rip is awesome in SII even if not logical, too (Clark was high up- why not jump out a window at superspeed or the broom closet?)

We got a dose of that with the turning back the world scene(with all it’s contradictions-irrespective of whether it is appended to STM or SII).

Turning back time and the world is a horrible idea for a narrative taken seriously under ANY director. The blank bullets I can roll with better if Lois was fast on it (and looked psychotic with how Kidder played it, part of the fun).

Lester, on the other hand, has Supe's question his own motives:

("I don't know why I did that?")



It's a beautifully delivered line and offers some sense of doubt and introspection.

It's subtle and clever.

There are parts of the scene that I think are nice, that's one of them. But it comes at the expense of an otherwise somewhat clunky romantic arc. The Mank scenes looked at, all together--- makes it seem like Lois is somewhat myopic and overly confident with the romance.... up until the depowering. (Where she's in tears in the Mank draft, not shot... and scared out of her wits by Jor-el, hinted at only because Kidder's stuff wasn't shot).

Looked at as a whole, the scenes are much tighter and have a specific progression. The scenes in the theatrical rewrite- dance a bit uncomfortably to me as to where Lois's and Supes' heads are at.

Not that it doesn't have it's nice moments, but it's as a whole inconsistent in the ways that bother me. (Mank/Donner's script has inconsistencies as well- but ultimately it's whether or not those inconsistencies ruffle one's feathers).

For the earlier scene , I distinctly remember the theater audience in 1981/82, having a good laugh when Clark sits down on the water bed("gosh -it's alive!")....so that scene as finally filmed, definitely works and the sexual attraction is implied as opposed to being forced.

Let's be honest....at the time of Mank's script for SII being turned in...most of the emotional/sexual stuff on his screen writing resume' was in the James Bond films(none of which had any depth whatsoever when it came to romantic relationships).....indeed some of the stuff in Man With The Golden Gun is downright awful.

Diamonds Are Forever and The Spy Who Loved Me are not much of an improvement.

The script was different for STM/SII- comparing it to the Newmans drafts before/after makes me feel even more confident he was the correct one to rewrite it... but that's my bias.

But in the mid 70s ,Mank's reputation in the cinematic sphere when it came to romance....in my view, lacked nuance and skill.

He topped himself on STM, and Donner's guiding hand and the organic chemistry between Reeve and Kidder got the romantic element over the first hurdle.

But that romance as depicted in STM, was essentially a first date type scenario....but it needed to go to another level for SII....and Lester in the end, took it there. Too bad if Donner refused to acknowledge that.

Let me say.... I'm so glad we can be friends even if we see two TOTALLY different realities.

But- like I said- the 'first date feel' in Lois' head only comes crashing down to reality once the depowering happens- making it more tragic. The reality happens even more with the trip back to civilization and the diner. More concentrated and succinct. I liked it much more that way.

Lester/Newmans decided to make the 'crash to reality' happen with the Niagara jump- so there's the time between that where she 'declares her love'- to clunky conversations, because the 'mental honeymoon' already starts to fade the second she says that in the Pink Bears scene.

Glad if it turned out the way you wanted- but I think Lester is the one with the personality issues, not Donner. (Ok, I took it personal.... to them, not us! )

But the critics did.

Could Donner have done the same?

Definitely….but I don’t know that for certain, given his other romantic output.

Ouch! Almost all his films are love stories to a degree- he's had a couple of off movies, but I think I have more joy for Donner's filmography as you have joy for Lester's filmography... that's cool.

When Pfeiffer and Hauer do get together at the end, it’s an earned moment……but it’s a quite different dynamic to SII , which necessitated the lovers being together for pretty much the whole movie……in fact they are ultimately separated at the end!

Could a pre-Ladyhawke Donner have pulled that off?

Maybe.

Unfortunately, the Salkinds and Lester didn't give a proper chance by letting Donner finish what he started.

And... we saw in SIII what Lester could do with that fantastic romance with Lana and Clark.... wait.... what fantastic romance?

Lester had already done the romance thing quite effectively between Hepburn and Connery in R&R.
Petulia, The Bed Sitting Room and The Knack And How To Get It also tackle the complexities of romance on several levels and this has been critically acknowledged.

I'm a critic, you're a critic. Only our opinions count, forget the other critics.

In any case.... appreciate the back and forth- but.... would love to hear your thoughts and reviews of Three Musketeers, (which I lavished ultimate praise on Lester), Four Musketeers, and Return of the Musketeers,sometime!

I always used to wonder what the 1st part of that Donner Fortress climax sequence looked like and was underwhelmed when it was finally revealed in the Donner Cut, although the cinematography is once again,excellent.
Having said that, if Donner had finished SII in 79’ with a violent , no holds bar , emphatic clash in Metropolis….then his slightly more reserved and cerebral climax in the Fortress would have been more appropriate.

Lester on the other hand, needed to add a bit more oomph to his Fortress scenes…..as his Metropolis bash up was not as full on as Donner’s(at least as scripted).

Here we agree! The problem with the action sequences under Lester is that he doesn't see them as emotional scenes, with progression. With Three Musketeers, it was somewhat channeling Jackie Chan-style with comedy blended in.... which felt like what he was going for in the Metro battle.

Again, Lester to me would have been great on a different type of superhero film... but not Superman. (evidence: Superman III- though, of course, just my opinion.)

I was!

Enjoyed it in the cinema back in the day and it looks great on my projector now.

Hopefully the upcoming UHD will add even more to the piece.

The approach of Supes from afar to the Caribbean gives the scope…..and then his elegant descent into the folliage completes the scene.There is also a nice pan down from the top of the water fall to Supes picking his flowers.

Nice close up of the Parrot and once again, good use of William’s ques by Thorne, applies the final touch.

It’s quick and sweet and when contrasted against the carnage in Houston, provides a nice juxtaposition.

All my opinions of course.

Appreciate that- mine are just that, too...
But- for the sake of discussion and clarity- I loved the IDEA of going around the world to find the flowers- but the execution felt a bit tv-movie like, and not necessarily all that imaginative....

Fine with the location. Fine with the idea. But- given the expense, couldn't SOMETHING have been done with that scene (at least show Reeve/Supes fly UP with the flowers from an interesting angle? The same cheapness irritated me when Supes WALKS away from Lois in the FOS to get flowers, but fixed by many fan cuts.)

If I had to be critical, the scene in STM when Supes lands on the New York side walk, just prior to tunnelling his way through the ground into Lex's lair …….is so blatantly a front projection plate that had it been shot by Lester…..everybody would be complaining…see how that works!

I haven't seen of any complaints. It did look fake to me, but so did (I know it sounds like blasphemy but it didn't matter) much of the front projection flying scenes that weren't on higher res for STM also looked false.

I have zero problem with them spending money on location.... it's just HOW it was underutilized that left it as a bit of a headscratcher to me. Again, glad if you and others felt it was well executed...

But I feel spoiled by STM were every shot was composed so beautifully, every shot felt worth framing.

Donner had worked in tv a long time- but I could see in STM him trying to do something MORE than a tv movie style shoot - but more of a David Lean approach.... there was little that was 'small' in STM- also I love the difficult 'one-ers' that he attempted with many of the scenes that required everything to go off without a hitch, and twist into an undderated camera move.

Conversely, what looked like an expensive as heck city set was lit under Lester's supervision to look like a small set- with unfunny gags that would diminish the scale. I know I keep coming back and back and back to the unfunny Metropolis comedy sketch.... but it's SO painful....

IMHO, when the film is viewed in its entirety, having that brief sequence of the Caribbean as well as those arctic shots with Lex and Eve….gives a nice grand geographical palette to the movie as a whole(and also a nice contrast of environments).

Again, the locations are great- I just wish it was shot better and/or with more imagination to be an even more memorable moment.

I will give Lester credit for this- the change of the Lex balloon from the prison to the arctic looked great and added scale on the bigscreen, even if Donner had intended it to be a night scene and moments after.

I agree, that as a procedure, the memory wipe is a bit too unilateral in the way Supes imposes it on Lois……but the performance between the 2 actors is endearing(with great direction from Lester) and heartfelt….that it still works(IMHO).

It NEVER worked for me but felt like an ugly, cheap looking scene. Great acting, (to me) terrible writing. And Louanne, Lester's welcomed addition to the DP family.

Lester who was in fact a great director with a very substantial portfolio behind him by the time he tackled Supes.

I'm glad we can be friends and see two totally different realities.

But STM is shot in a conventional manner…..just a very elegant conventional manner!

I guess I should have phrased my earlier comment better.... STM was shot as if it was a cinematic experience. The compositions in particular.

SII had many shots that felt- 'meh', but gets the job done for the most part. (Again, I would have been more accepting if the tone and script by Mank had been more kept to).

Lester had to adjust his shooting style to match Donner’s.

Of course he did, to take full credit. (Insert anger emoji here)

So Lester definitely changed his style for Supes……whether he was successful is another matter.

I wish Ilya stepped in more when Lester decided to rewrite the story off the rails with the Metro battle comedy sketch... but even Ilya alludes to this in his commentary.

From an acting perspective, the Pink Bear scene is vastly superior to the “outside of the Fortress” and Lois SII balcony stuff lensed by Donner.

The cinematography OTOH, in those Donner scenes are lovely but the performances , less so, compared to Lester's - again IMHO.
I am sure Donner would have reshot them had he been allowed to finish back in 79'....and especially given the fact he would not have been permitted to use another turning back the world motif (which is what those "outside of the fortress" and balcony scenes were originally intended for)......he may have been forced to junk them entirely.

I'm so glad we can be friends and see two completely different views of reality.

Lester managed to coax some extremely subtle performances by both actors in the quieter moments of SII.

He should be acknowledged for that.

I'm so glad we can be friends and see two completely different views of reality.

If I use the stuff from The Goonies or Lethal Weapon 2 as an example….then romantic subtelties are not Donner’s forte’.

See "Inside Moves" with Donner sometime. Very nice film.
(Don't see "Toys" with Donner, though. )

Superman IV is the definitive TV movie of the franchise unfortunately(and as I said before- I really wish this monstrosity of a film never saw the light of day).....in fact it's so bad than even rank and file episodes of Maguiver or The A Team surpass it.

I honestly hope nobody buys the 4KUHD for SIV! 

Superman IV was sincere in its intentions. I'll take any low budget, cheap looking scene from SIV over the Metro comedy sketch scene or most of SIII- but.... I'll share this: I also had my jaw drop that WB even tried to make a blu ray (let alone a 4K) out of SIV.

On a more positive note...

Three Musketeers is awesome. And parts of Four Musketeers. In that, Lester is supreme!

[dejan]

Hi CAM

Totally respect your views and understand 100% why you have come to your conclusions.
So total respect.
I tried writing an answer to your latest post and got myself tied up in knots trying to write it in a cohesive way-lol!
But then realized your very last sentence maybe accentuates where our sensibilities diverge.

But not for the Supes movies, but for the Musketeers!.......which may in turn inform us on why we have different opinions on SII.

You see,I  prefer  the 4Ms to the 3Ms.
Wheras as you say for yourself, it's the other way round!
lol!

Because if I were to have hazarded a guess ,I would have thought you would prefer the 4Ms to the 3Ms!
And I am guessing that you would have thought that maybe I would have prefered the 3Ms to the 4Ms, possibly?!

But can discuss that in more detail on the Lester/Donner non supes films thread.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 17, 2023 15:14:14 GMT -5 dejan said:

Hi CAM

Totally respect your views and understand 100% why you have come to your conclusions.
So total respect.
I tried writing an answer to your latest post and got myself tied up in knots trying to write it in a cohesive way-lol!
But then realized your very last sentence maybe accentuates where our sensibilities diverge.

But not for the Supes movies, but for the Musketeers!.......which may in turn inform us on why we have different opinions on SII.

You see,I  prefer  the 4Ms to the 3Ms.
Wheras as you say for yourself, it's the other way round!
lol!

Because if I were to have hazarded a guess ,I would have thought you would prefer the 4Ms to the 3Ms!
And I am guessing that you would have thought that maybe I would have prefered the 3Ms to the 4Ms, possibly?!

But can discuss that in more detail on the Lester/Donner non supes films thread.

Cheers your way, too, Dejan!

Tried to inject a little humor with our different experiences on the movies with the last reply- but, always fun to talk.

With Three Musketeers and Four Musketeers- sure, I can open up a thread on Don's Diner, I guess.