Was Lester trying to emulate 'It's a mad mad world"?

[crazy_asian_man]

A SUPER (see what I did there? ) comedy I had seen in repeats on tv when I was SUPER young was "It's a Mad mad world" that seemed epic- but funny as heck at the time, with superstars, and filled with madcap moments with what felt like a zillion characters all around the world.

In revisiting it recently- and thinking of the Lester extended cut- was "Mad mad World" stuck in his head? While there's sections of SII by Donner intended to be comedic (Primarily Lex)- Donner's emphasis was the romance and superheroics. The villains were as serious as Lex was supposed to be comedic (but true to his own world view).

Especially with the international extended cut- a LOT is shot with extras doing zany things- stuff cut out of the Niagara Falls, stuff cut out with people at home watching their tvs reacting (in a silly not a serious way) to the news world events, etc.--- stuff that would totally fit with "Mad mad world"- but- much like the ice cream gags forced into SII- was not the right time or spot for what was supposed to be an epic conclusion to a superhero epic started in STM.

I don't know how many here would enjoy "It's a Mad mad world", but it is a bit of a classic..... and remind you a bit of the Lester scenes in SIII and SII- which, as you all know, I didn't care for at all in the half-done SII by Donner. (It didn't bother me so much for SIII as it was all Lester from start to finish).

Anyhow, if curious- here's a trailer:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sla845GW9YM

[atp]

He wanted to create CGI villains rule the mad mad world scene

[crazy_asian_man]

May 19, 2023 2:28:28 GMT -5 atp said:

He wanted to create CGI villains rule the mad mad world scene

Probably! When thinking about Mad Mad World and the sequence with the Metropolis battle- it's hard NOT to think this is what he was basing the movie on becoming. Mad Mad World is a great movie, but not an epic superhero film.

[dejan]

May 19, 2023 1:32:41 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

A SUPER (see what I did there? ) comedy I had seen in repeats on tv when I was SUPER young was "It's a Mad mad world" that seemed epic- but funny as heck at the time, with superstars, and filled with madcap moments with what felt like a zillion characters all around the world.

In revisiting it recently- and thinking of the Lester extended cut- was "Mad mad World" stuck in his head? While there's sections of SII by Donner intended to be comedic (Primarily Lex)- his emphasis was the romance and superheroics. The villains were as serious as Lex was supposed to be comedic (but true to his own world view).

I don't know how many here would enjoy "It's a Mad mad world", but it is a bit of a classic..... and remind you a bit of the Lester scenes in SIII and SII- which, as you all know, I didn't care for at all in the half-done SII by Donner. (It didn't bother me so much for SIII as it was all Lester from start to finish).

Anyhow, if curious- here's a trailer:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sla845GW9YM

Ah yes.
Definitely a classic.
First saw this in the early 80s on TV here in the UK.
Loved it.

Still do...so much so that I got the Blu Ray a couple of years back.
Watch it at least once a year, or certainly every couple of years.

My mum claims to have seen it on it's original theatrical release....although being Italian, she saw the dubbed version.
Odd for my mum, as she was into all the serious European Art Cinema stuff(Pasolini,Antonioni ect) in that period....although the message of Mad Mad World has always resonated.....that people go beserk or do anything just so they can lay their hands on some doe!

As you said Lester was a cynic, so that undelying message of Mad Mad was straight up Lester's street.
The irony is that Stanley Kramer, the director Of Mad Mad, was reknowned for making serious social drama , commentary stuff.
Off the top of my head , I am not all that familiar with his other work, but Mad Mad was apparently , a radical departure for him.
But he pulled it off.
Having a who's who of the American(and even British) comedy world probably helped.

They just don't make stuff like this anymore.
I mean it's epic!.....shot in 70mm with a real wide aspect ratio an all'.

IMHO, as to whether Lester was influenced directly by it......it's definitely a possibilty.
The straight ahead slapstick of SIII's opening in particular could even be a tiny homage to Mad Mad.

The funniest Lester film ,IMHO(that I have seen at least), is Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum from 1966.
There is a link to Mad Mad because Forum has Phil Silvers as a debased Roman "procurer".
I think this movie is a riot.....there is slapstick but Lester also has ironic, almost sarcastic humor....which can get overshadowed by the straight ahead site gags.

So in How I Won The War from 1967.....John Lennon(who plays the part of a disgruntled soldier) quips that he used to be a British fascist.....to which his commander played by Michael Hordern responds:

"Yes, I used to be a fascist too but we can't all change the world".

That for me represents Lester's best humor....but it if you blink you will miss it.

You had it in SIII too, when Webster says:

"To think that Columbia can dictate the economy of a open market!" 
Again it's a brilliantly ironic line that got a bit submerged by the guy getting the pie in his face and all that other stuff  with Prior. 

[crazy_asian_man]

May 19, 2023 11:39:03 GMT -5 dejan said:

May 19, 2023 1:32:41 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

A SUPER (see what I did there? ) comedy I had seen in repeats on tv when I was SUPER young was "It's a Mad mad world" that seemed epic- but funny as heck at the time, with superstars, and filled with madcap moments with what felt like a zillion characters all around the world.

In revisiting it recently- and thinking of the Lester extended cut- was "Mad mad World" stuck in his head? While there's sections of SII by Donner intended to be comedic (Primarily Lex)- his emphasis was the romance and superheroics. The villains were as serious as Lex was supposed to be comedic (but true to his own world view).

I don't know how many here would enjoy "It's a Mad mad world", but it is a bit of a classic..... and remind you a bit of the Lester scenes in SIII and SII- which, as you all know, I didn't care for at all in the half-done SII by Donner. (It didn't bother me so much for SIII as it was all Lester from start to finish).

Anyhow, if curious- here's a trailer:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sla845GW9YM

Ah yes.
Definitely a classic.
First saw this in the early 80s on TV here in the UK.
Loved it.

Still do...so much so that I got the Blu Ray a couple of years back.
Watch it at least once a year, or certainly every couple of years.

My mum claims to have seen it on it's original theatrical release....although being Italian, she saw the dubbed version.
Odd for my mum, as she was into all the serious European Art Cinema stuff(Pasolini,Antonioni ect) in that period....although the message of Mad Mad World has always resonated.....that people go beserk or do anything just so they can lay their hands on some doe!

As you said Lester was a cynic, so that undelying message of Mad Mad was straight up Lester's street.
The irony is that Stanley Kramer, the director Of Mad Mad, was reknowned for making serious social drama , commentary stuff.
Off the top of my head , I am not all that familiar with his other work, but Mad Mad was apparently , a radical departure for him.
But he pulled it off.
Having a who's who of the American(and even British) comedy world probably helped.

They just don't make stuff like this anymore.
I mean it's epic!.....shot in 70mm with a real wide aspect ratio an all'.

IMHO, as to whether Lester was influenced directly by it......it's definitely a possibilty.
The straight ahead slapstick of SIII's opening in particular could even be a tiny homage to Mad Mad.

The funniest Lester film ,IMHO(that I have seen at least), is Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum from 1966.
There is a link to Mad Mad because Forum has Phil Silvers as a debased Roman "procurer".
I think this movie is a riot.....there is slapstick but Lester also has ironic, almost sarcastic humor....which can get overshadowed by the straight ahead site gags.

So in How I Won The War from 1967.....John Lennon(who plays the part of a disgruntled soldier) quips that he used to be a British fascist.....to which his commander played by Michael Hordern responds:

"Yes, I used to be a fascist too but we can't all change the world".

That for me represents Lester's best humor....but it if you blink you will miss it.

You had it in SIII too, when Webster says:

"To think that Columbia can dictate the economy of a open market!" 
Again it's a brilliantly ironic line that got a bit submerged by the guy getting the pie in his face and all that other stuff  with Prior. 

I think Mank may have been the most diplomatic (and maybe most fair) in saying that he thought Lester was a good director- but just aesthetically wrong to finish a project started by someone who was a sentimentalist, like Donner.

In an alternate universe, - all kidding aside- Lester might have been better to do Spiderman (though I most likely would prefer Raimi's hearfelt yet quirky version)- as his superhero outing rather than completing Donner's Superman- and maybe I'd be singing his praises beyond Three Musketeers.

[dejan]

@cam

Regarding Mank's thoughts on Lester:

It's interesting having just reaquainted myself with all 4 Lethal Weapons back to back and having enjoyed them a lot.
I went onto Wiki to refresh and in some cases familiarise myself with Lethal's back story and how Shane Black departed the franchise during/after part 2 claiming that he did not like the direction the series was going in:


From the Wiki page for LW2
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lethal_Weapon_2

Following the success of the first film, Warner Bros. and producers decided to make the sequel. Producer Joel Silver asked writer of the first film Shane Black to write the script for the sequel in the spring of 1987 and Black agreed.[3] Although he was struggling with personal issues, Black still managed to write the first draft along with his friend, novelist Warren Murphy, co-creator of Remo Williams (the lead character of The Destroyer novels). Their original title for the script was Play Dirty. Although many people thought that their script was brilliant, it was rejected by Silver, studio and director Richard Donner for being too dark and bloody, and because in the ending of the script Riggs dies, while they wanted to keep him alive in case of further sequels. They also wanted the second film to focus more on comedy, while Black's draft focused more on courage and heroics, like Riggs willing to die to protect Murtaugh and his family, due to his love for them.[4][5]



When his script was rejected, Black felt that he had failed the producers. He initially offered to give his payment back, but his agent talked him out of it. Black also refused to re-write the script and quit from the project after working for six months on it. Black later said how the problem with the second film was that they did too much comedy, and how he dislikes the third and fourth films because of the way Riggs' character was changed.

So, despite there being differences with the Supes series, it's still like a role reversal of sorts , where this time it's Donner who is accused of compromising the original artistic intentions ,but of the scriptwriter, as opposed to another director(as was the case with Supes).

It's a long shot, but could Donner himself given into some overindulgences, and corrupted SII, even if he had been allowed to finish and continue the franchise!
Given what happened with LW, it's not impossible(although unlikely).
As I said a few times before, being without Barry,Unsworth,Bowie and Brando would have forced Donner to make alterations to whatever he did to finish SII, had he been allowed too.
Also, Margot was going through personal problems.....and seeing as she was Mank's ex by the time of resuming SII, maybe that could have been a problem on set for Donner and Mank, had they been there.Just a possibility......and Margot was reknowned for being volatile.

Also:

To be fair Donner's version of comedy is kinda more straight ahead in your face, prank type humor.
So don't get me wrong.....I could not help but crack up in LW2 ,when Glover goes back to his desk to find it saturated with condoms!
But that's Donner's take on getting laughs.
Even in the world of comedy there are different interpretations. 

[crazy_asian_man]

May 19, 2023 17:05:48 GMT -5 dejan said:

@cam

Regarding Mank's thoughts on Lester:

It's interesting having just reaquainted myself with all 4 Lethal Weapons back to back and having enjoyed them a lot.
I went onto Wiki to refresh and in some cases familiarise myself with Lethal's back story and how Shane Black departed the franchise during/after part 2 claiming that he did not like the direction the series was going in:


From the Wiki page for LW2
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lethal_Weapon_2

Following the success of the first film, Warner Bros. and producers decided to make the sequel. Producer Joel Silver asked writer of the first film Shane Black to write the script for the sequel in the spring of 1987 and Black agreed.[3] Although he was struggling with personal issues, Black still managed to write the first draft along with his friend, novelist Warren Murphy, co-creator of Remo Williams (the lead character of The Destroyer novels). Their original title for the script was Play Dirty. Although many people thought that their script was brilliant, it was rejected by Silver, studio and director Richard Donner for being too dark and bloody, and because in the ending of the script Riggs dies, while they wanted to keep him alive in case of further sequels. They also wanted the second film to focus more on comedy, while Black's draft focused more on courage and heroics, like Riggs willing to die to protect Murtaugh and his family, due to his love for them.[4][5]



When his script was rejected, Black felt that he had failed the producers. He initially offered to give his payment back, but his agent talked him out of it. Black also refused to re-write the script and quit from the project after working for six months on it. Black later said how the problem with the second film was that they did too much comedy, and how he dislikes the third and fourth films because of the way Riggs' character was changed.

So, despite there being differences with the Supes series, it's still like a role reversal of sorts , where this time it's Donner who is accused of compromising the original artistic intentions ,but of the scriptwriter, as opposed to another director(as was the case with Supes).

It's a long shot, but could Donner himself given into some overindulgences, and corrupted SII, even if he had been allowed to finish and continue the franchise!
Given what happened with LW, it's not impossible(although unlikely).
As I said a few times before, being without Barry,Unsworth,Bowie and Brando would have forced Donner to make alterations to whatever he did to finish SII, had he been allowed too.
Also, Margot was going through personal problems.....and seeing as she was Mank's ex by the time of resuming SII, maybe that could have been a problem on set for Donner and Mank, had they been there.Just a possibility......and Margot was reknowned for being volatile.

Also:

To be fair Donner's version of comedy is kinda more straight ahead in your face, prank type humor.
So don't get me wrong.....I could not help but crack up in LW2 ,when Glover goes back to his desk to find it saturated with condoms!
But that's Donner's take on getting laughs.
Even in the world of comedy there are different interpretations. 

Hey Dejan- Appreciate the thoughts- as always, fun to have respectful differing views.

I enjoy (and love to varying degrees) what Donner has done, but I don't always agree with his choices, too.

One weakness of his it seems is an insistence of a happy ending, no matter what. In a book on Donner's life, it mentioned how it came a deeper place.... but it also can upend work as well.

All of my criticism of Lester boils down to two things (imo):
#1: How much I hated his (unnecessary imo) rewrite and changes to SII-
#2: How he came off as trying to steal credit on Donner's back- particularly in the documentary.

If Lester had done things I thought were as good as or an improvement, I would be upset at #2, but give credit for #1.
I would have preferred Lester to have come out and said anything in a commentary to share his side of the story, but.... he didn't want to talk, doesn't want to talk, so what can one do?

Donner was not perfect, but there's few who would have taken the 180 dive into sheer slapstick with the Metro battle like Lester did. Donner's work also was more visual- with subtext. I believed more in the handling of the love story with the Donner portions shot.

With Lester's version- one, Kidder hated Lester also because of how Donner was fired, so that didn't help with her performance- two, it was rewritten with Lois pretty much nagging Clark all the time- (in STM and extended she is dismissive, but it always felt taken to a new level in rewatches that makes her character unlikeable. The scenes originally written in the Honeymoon haven in the beginning by Mank are hilarious and makes Clark seem more like the whiner and more palatable.)

Also.... STM is 100 percent Donner/Mank/Baird. I keep feeling like that gets dismissed. SII as was written sticks to the tone set and started on the different tracks consistently. Bluntly, (and this is of course just my view, I know the world may feel differently) Lester had a creative right to ruin his own films, but I would have looked on him more favorably if he had completed SII with the Mank script.... or changed it (since he felt he had to) for the better.

In his mind, maybe did, but I think there's a reason that there's a zillion fan cuts to fix what damage both Lester (and unfortunately) Thau did to SII.

And there is/are the giant changes in tone when looking at STM/SII- they still CAN work (and to a number of people they do), but to me it's like a left turn into a worse written version of the same story, when it didn't need to.

Supes/Clark/Lois is still with Lois being a little feisty, but not nearly as unlikeable as under Lester's rewrite.

Lex was the same under both, because Hackman didn't return.

The Villains were written as dark without humor- and psychotic. Not comedic- The villains are iconic, but I argue even moreso had they not been turned into comic relief under Lester.

The outtakes/stuff edited by Thau I don't even really consider because pretty much all the sequences Thau cut or chose to have alternate takes felt incredibly wrong- the extended cut with Donner footage (maybe) is more likely Donner/Baird.

Donner's Lethal Weapon 3 and Lethal Weapon 4- went too far into the silly/comedic territory at times, but nothing CLOSE to the damage I felt that Lester did to SII.

Still.... I agree with Shane Black- to a point (Shane Black still needs to apologize for his Predator reboot, so he's not perfect either. ). The ending of LW 2 should have been Riggs dying, and Murtagh burying him next to his wife. (It's a pity Donner didn't shoot that and have that be an alternative cut) As is, though, LW 1 & LW 2 are very strong as an entertaining cop bromance/80's action film.

Donner also lightened up Inside Moves from the original, but, it definitely has more than enough dark material inherently to keep the depth. In watching Inside Moves, it has a great balance of light that you want with the darkness, arguably.

On the flip side, the sadly confusing mess (messy behind the scenes behind and front) with Radio Flyer- seemed problematic from the getgo.... the scenes are authentic and well directed, but how can ANYONE solve the problem of trying to make an uplifting film about kids being beaten domestically? (The film is an interesting study and almost impossible to figure out how to fix)

But- I digress.
I point to Mank's (imo far superior) SII's script, the quality of STM's final product, the quality of the FINISHED (Donner/Baird presumably in the Donner cut) Donner scenes in the extended- and in the end, either fans will be split or united on whether or not Lester was a good or bad thing to SII. It is what it is...

[dejan]

No worries CAM - back at ya buddy - enjoy having this conversation too.

I actually brought up the Kidder factor as I came across this docu linked below:
Maybe you have seen it, but if not, enjoy!(or not, because it touches on her personal troubles).



What is also revealing in this docu, is the fact that Mank and Margot were an item during the production of STM.
I don't think that was something that was well known.

That's cool and absolutely fine, but as I said before, she cannot be trusted to be impartial  when it comes to analysing what's good and bad in a comparison between the productions under Lester and Donner.
I mean, she was always going to side with Mank!

In the 1981 TIME magazine expose' of the behind scenes travails, Kidder says:
"Lester was under tremendous pressure arriving on set and he did a good job".

Bare in mind that in the same article, Kidder did not hold back when it came to describing the Salks:
"I have nothing but contempt for them!"

So if she hated Lester, I think she would have said it.


There is another interview that Margot also did in 1981, to the Rolling Stone magazine where she  claimed that she liked STM and SII for different reasons:

Eventually, the conversation wound around to Superman II. The sequel, which has a more linear plot and relies more heavily on the Superman myth, has been favored in the early reviews.



“I like the second one a lot,” Kidder said. “It’s definitely faster and funnier. But it’s hard for me to compare II with I, because they’re separate movies and they’ll have separate appeal. To me, watching a movie never means watching the plot; I watch the characters and their interactions. That’s what interests me in fiction, and in life.” She went into her self-deprecating grin. “I guess that’s why I’m such a bad screenwriter and such a terrible judge of scripts.”



Richard Donner shot a good portion of Superman II while making the first film, but he received no screen credit on the sequel. Richard Lester (A Hard Day’s Night, Help!) replaced Donner, who reportedly had a financial dispute with the producers. At first, it was hard for Kidder to accept the dismissal of Donner, the man she feels was essentially responsible for her career. But she enjoyed working with Lester and realized her unhappiness during the filming had nothing to do with the movie.

Something else to note, as disclosed in that documentary...Kidder,after the success of STM and SII , prided herself on taking on projects that were small/art house/indie like productions which ironically should have made her more closer to Lester in terms of artistic affinity(that's the scene where Lester cut his teeth throughout the entire 1960s).

In terms of Kidder's perfomance in Lester's parts of SII, as discussed in other threads, we pretty much disagree in how that panned out!

That's cool.

I will say that even though I am still missing quite a few of  Lester's (and Donner's) works as I write this, he did work on romantic themes within some relatively profound contexts, in The Knack & How To Get It(but in a very oblique way), The Bed Sitting Room(in a darkly ironic and satirical way) and in Robin & Marian(in a traditional yet melancholic way).
Romance is also a driving force behind Cuba too.

And then there's Petulia(excellent chemistry between Julie Christie and George C Scott, who Lester says was the best actor he ever worked with).

And of course, there is SII.
So he did have a pedigree in that area.

As far as SIII is concerned, that's a script issue as opposed to a directorial one(although seeing as Lester was probably indirectly involved with said script means that he is still guilty....just in a different way).

IMHO, within their own context, the actual scenes with O' Tool and Reeve are very well recited, restrained yet heartfelt.
It's just the script did not use that chemistry  as a place to go somewhere.....hey, why not have Webster kidnap Lana and make something of it......or have Lana be the reason why the schism between Clark and Supes occurs(as opposed to the synthesized Kryptonite). 

Because I have still not seen Assassins,Maverick,Timeline or 16 Blocks...and most importantly Inside Moves, maybe I should refrain from dissing Donner's romantic chops......but from everything that I have seen within what I would call his peak period(1976-1989).....it's not neccessarily his forte' (as much as I love Ladyhawke and the romantic stuff in STM notwithstanding). 
Maybe Inside Moves will make me change my mind on that one.

But these are mere nitpicks for me....I still love Donner 's stuff!




 

[crazy_asian_man]

May 20, 2023 17:38:59 GMT -5 dejan said:

I will say that even though I am still missing quite a few of  Lester's (and Donner's) works as I write this, he did work on romantic themes within some relatively profound contexts, in The Knack & How To Get It(but in a very oblique way), The Bed Sitting Room(in a darkly ironic and satirical way) and in Robin & Marian(in a traditional yet melancholic way).
Romance is also a driving force behind Cuba too.

And then there's Petulia(excellent chemistry between Julie Christie and George C Scott, who Lester says was the best actor he ever worked with).

And of course, there is SII.
So he did have a pedigree in that area.

As far as SIII is concerned, that's a script issue as opposed to a directorial one(although seeing as Lester was probably indirectly involved with said script means that he is still guilty....just in a different way).

IMHO, within their own context, the actual scenes with O' Tool and Reeve are very well recited, restrained yet heartfelt.
It's just the script did not use that chemistry  as a place to go somewhere.....hey, why not have Webster kidnap Lana and make something of it......or have Lana be the reason why the schism between Clark and Supes occurs(as opposed to the synthesized Kryptonite). 

Because I have still not seen Assassins,Maverick,Timeline or 16 Blocks...and most importantly Inside Moves, maybe I should refrain from dissing Donner's romantic chops......but from everything that I have seen within what I would call his peak period(1976-1989).....it's not neccessarily his forte' (as much as I love Ladyhawke and the romantic stuff in STM notwithstanding). 
Maybe Inside Moves will make me change my mind on that one.

But these are mere nitpicks for me....I still love Donner 's stuff!




 

Well.... I think at the end, we both see different views of who was better for the Reeve Superman movies-

But I do wonder: If Lester could have directed STM from the get go, would you have preferred that to Donner's STM?

(Which is totally fine, of course- I'm genuinely curious..... but more and more it's clear we really have two different views on Lester and his work, outside of 3 Musketeers)

With Donner's chops for romance- I scratch my head when you feel it's not his forte-- STM is totally sentimental as is Ladyhawke- if anything, I would have been fine if he pulled BACK a bit on the sentimentality (The Margot Kidder 'song' in STM could have been vocal-free and I think totally fine)... but we have different takes on films, just suprised that we don't see eye to eye on that aspect. All good...

The core of STM is the love story, as is "Inside Moves", and arguably what makes the Lethal Weapon films (all of them) extremely watchable is the 'love story/bromance' between Riggs and Murtagh.

But I don't think all of Donner's films were completely successful (and I don't think any director has a total win list either)

For my own recommendations: (and some of this might be a repeat of earlier postings, apologies)
From must see's to should see's on the Donner list-

#1: STM (of course) and SII international cut/selected parts of RDC
#2: Ladyhawke
#3: Inside Moves
#4: Lethal Weapon #1 & #2 (#3 and #4 still have parts that make it worth watching, but it also has groanworthy silly bits too)
#5: Omen
#6: Twilight Zone: the classic episode with William Shatner
#7: Goonies (although knowing the audience is skewed for younger audience, it's pretty much a Donner-Speilberg film also)- classic for what it is, although it's not something I think I could rewatch daily...
#8: Maverick is FUN- showcasing Mel Gibson (and suprisingly Jodie Foster's) comic talents- but is it a great movie? Hm... I'm not sure. The ending is wonky, but the parts are fun with Gibson in a great role as a con man.
#9: Conspiracy Theory- A decent movie that actually used Julia Roberts well with Mel. (Not something that I need to see a million times, but solid)
#10: 16 Blocks- It's solid for what it is- but, again, like Conspiracy Theory- it's not something I need to see over and over.

Skip-
Assassins.... The concept started off ok, but ultimately a waste of Stallone and Banderas. The director imo is responsible for the script as well- Maybe a love story would have helped this from becoming mostly a big bore.

Timeline..... It's not horrible, but the payoff isn't (to me) worth the setup. Not a lot of laughs. But if it's on in the background while doing laundry, it's ok tv movie fare.

The Toy..... A bit of a giant mess. Pity. Not funny, on top of it- overly sentimental.

For my own recommendations:
From must see's to should see's on Lester's list-

#1: Three Musketeers- Imo the best adaptation to date- even now!!!
#2: Most of the Four Musketeers- Edited/structured in a weird way, that to me had the energy stop to a dead halt for a silly gag (much like his SII)
#3: Three minutes of SII
#4: Some of "Help"---- for film history reasons. I can get why this might have been revolutionary at the time, so I'm glad I saw it- for that reason. But definitely not my taste for rewatching.

Saw "Juggernaut", didn't care for it. Just never fell into it.

I am, however, still very much wanting to see "Robin and Marion"- hoping it's so great it gets me to feel better about SII. (And SIII)

[dejan]

Hi CAM

I was going to say that if you wanted to feel better about SII....get a 4K TV(or a projector - like me- hey - we are a dying breed!)....and watch that UHD!

It looks fantastic, by far the best it has ever looked on home video and better than it probably looked in theaters back in 81'.
As I said before, SII now looks better than STM on this 4K platform.
To be fair , STM's 4K from 2018, whilst still servicable and respectable, is in desperate need of a makeover.

But back in 2001 when STM was released in that Special Edition DVD with all the bells and whistles, SII was left to languish with the substandard  master that was ported over from the 1996 widescreen laserdisc.

Considering Donner's influence within the power structures of WB....he could still have made an effort to have the SII,III and even IV DVDs have better scans and masters ways back then in 2001.

Instead,II,III and IV(well that would look s**t no matter what you did with it!) ended up looking second rate compared to STM by some considerable distance.
And a lot of the post 2000/2001 dissing of SII and III from a picture quality perspective,emanates from those first gen DVDs.

However, back in the VHS and Laserdisc days(specifically the early 80s) , there was no distinction as to which films looked better or worse in relation to each other.
I should know......I was there at the time and I still have them all now!
For what it's worth , at the VHS level ,I would argue the best looking one is SIII(released under the EMI label in 1984).
STM and SII looked a bit washed out by comparison......but no one cared back then....we were just happy to be able to see them in our living rooms!

Anyways with regards to  how would STM would have turned out if Lester had been in control and would I have been happy with it?

To answer that question, I would have to dislike STM in order to evaluate if Lester could do a better job.

But I love STM just the way it is!


I don't imagine any director(let alone Lester)at  being able to have been more proficient than Donner in pulling off STM.

SII is a bit different because now there was more emphasis on the love story......with it going deeper than before.

And with the other non Supes Donner flicks I have seen, I am not sure that would have been a guaranteed  home run.

Lester's depiction of romance in his films has always been restrained but resonant and subliminal at the same time, again, IMHO.

Donner's interpretations(at least in LadyHawke, Lethal Weapon's 2&3 and Conspiracy Theory) are more ebuliant and maybe have more effervescence , which works within the context of first date type scenarios....in fact all 4 of those films have the lovers interacting with each other for the first time within a romantic context.

You got that in LW 2 & 3(for instance, I liked the riffs off Jaws in how Russo and Gibson show each other their scars).
Great stuff, but not neccessarily a lot of depth.

Lester on the other hand, went to greater romantic  levels in Petulia,The Knack and Robin & Marian.
Even Cuba and rather suprisingly, Butch And Sundance have touching romantic moments.

Also,I concede I was refering to conventional romance as opposed to bromances in my previous post.

But yeah, no question ,the rapport between Glover and Gibson is obviously now a pop culture icon.

But for what it's worth Butch and Sundance has a bromance of sorts between Berenger and Katt which is also excellent.
Actually, I watched the Blu Ray again the other night and enjoyed it quite a bit more than on my first viewing several week prior.
It's a nice little Western film and as I said,there is great chemistry between the 2 leads.
I checked the Ebert and Siskel Butch and Sundance review from 1979 .....and they highlighted the acting as being one of the film's best elements.

In fact, I would say that in every Lester film I have seen, there are  great actor performances across the board, irrespective of whether the film itself is any good.
SIII comes to mind!

With regards to your Donner must see list......I am hoping to see the remaining ones when I get my hands on them next month.
Inside Moves being the jewel in the crown.