Superman II

Superman II (1980)

*** 1/2 (out of 4)

Very good sequel has Superman (Christpher Reeve) giving up his powers so that he can be with Lois (Margot Kidder) but once he does this the planet comes under attack by three Kryptonian bad guys. I might be the only person in the world to think so but to me this sequel actually surpasses the original film and I think by a rather large margin. Everything that was good in the original is pretty much carried over to this film where it's done even better. I think the big benefit here over the original is that this sequel doesn't run too long and instead it has a much better pacing to it. However, what really makes the film tick are some incredibly action sequences, which includes a hilarious one at Niagra Falls where Lois plans to test Clark to try and see whether he's really Superman or not. The way this entire scene plays out is incredibly funny but also contains some great action. Humor is something that is also much better this time around and especially during the scene where the three aliens wreck havoc on a small redneck town. This here is a pretty long sequence but the laughs really don't stop at any point. I think another major plus with this sequel is that we're given not only a great villain in Luthor (Gene Hackman) but the aliens are also a lot of fun. The three of them make for a great group to root against but at the same time you really love to hate them. As with the previous film, the performance are all extremely good with Reeve once again leading the way in his dual role as both the superhero and the nerd with glasses. I think it's safe to say that the actor really just had something special in him that allowed him to perfectly fit into both roles. Both Kidder and Hackman are good in their parts as is Jackie Cooper, E.G. Marshall and Ned Beatty in his one but funny scene. The action scenes are all extremely good and the special effects this time out are even better. SUPERMAN II is a rare case where the sequel is actually better than the original.

This film can be summed up in two words. Superman Trouble. That is the case. There are two versions of the film "Superman II." One is the vision of acclaimed director Richard Donner, full of color flourishes, and camera work by the late Geoffrey Unsworth. The second, is the vision put on director Richard Lester, by choice of the film's producers, Alexander and Ilya Salkind. Both the films contain the same story and characters, but each was shot with a different tone, different dialogue and footage, which clash with intention. So in the end, footage from each are woven into one movie which film buffs all over the world will notice is somewhat difficult to grasp. Due to the different directing styles of each director, the final cut of Superman II ends up being a cliche work of special effects, mismatched character analysis, and central themes. The film deals with Superman and Lois falling in love, and the three super villains from the prologue of the first film landing on earth and ultimately trying to take over. Very intense stuff. But this is where we as an audience need to know all the facts, and here they are: The first version of Superman II, known as "Superman II: The Adventure Continues" was directed by Richard Donner and supposed to be straight forward with serious tones and action packed sequences. This version was shot simultaneously with the original "Superman" in 1977-78. Originally to be released back to back with the original, "Superman II" was filmed with vigorous explosions, dangerous situations, and tense, irrefutable drama. In the opening, a female liberation symbol, Lois Lane, tries to prove that Clark Kent is Superman by throwing herself out a window, knowing that Clark(Superman) will fly out and save her. In another scene, Superman gives up his powers and nearly kills himself, only to get them back later on, nearly killing himself again. This nailbittingly tense script brought back old characters and was to bring the original "Superman" to a full closure. All actors are fully concentrated and the print is a paragon. 80& of this film was finished when the producers fired director Donner due to some arguments that are still unknown to this day, and replaced him with director Richard Lester, and thusly, "Superman II: The Adventure Continues" was culminated. This is where the Richard Lester vision of the film comes into place. Simply titles "Superman II", the Richard Lester version is full of clumsy comedy, amateur plotting, and is nowhere near as affective as the Donner version. Lester is a comic director, whom had worked on the previous Beatles films, "Help" and "Hard Days Night" and had no experience directing any international blockbusters. To give him more credit than Richard Donner, the producers rewrote most of the footage that Donner shot and went in with the actors for re-shoots...even though Donner had already taken care of this! The villains are portrayed here as careless and comic, whereas in Donner's version they were cold as steel, and not to be messed with. In one re-shot scene, we see three villains who are Superman's foes land on earth and take interest in a snake. The snake bites the female villain and instead of showing her wrath on nature, as was seen in Donner's moon scene which she kills an innocent astronaut in cold blood, she sets the reptile on fire and giggles about it! Central themes of love and home were lost because of this as well. Because of budget problems and deadline, the producers could not finish the re-shoot and "Superman II", and had to fill the gaps with Donner footage from the vault, making "Superman II" confusing and abstruce, and that is what made "Superman II" an atavistic failure. 70% of the film is clumsy, contrived comedy and useless violence, while 30% of the film is straight forward, full of munificent morals and such. The final cut has one scene showing the villains breaking into the white house and consequently taking over the world, with sheer John Williams music, the next scene you see them bored and incoherently complaining about being on a world where "mankind doesn't even resist." The first film "Superman" had morals of justice, and the American way, while the second film was supposed to show morals of love and home, and earthly pleasures that remind people of the good in the world-in a sense, taking along with the "truth, justice, and the American way." This message was lost between the footage by raconteur Donner and comic Lester. Nonetheless, the film was a box office success, and many critics, including the late Pauline Kael and Roger Ebert praised the film for it's portrayal of good versus evil in the modern day society. Some of the footage shot by Donner that was not put into the final cut of the film has since been seen on network television showings and bootlegs, but not all of it. The original opening which gave the film a better sense of dangerous excitement, scenes involving Kal-El and his father were scrapped(Due to the Marlon Brando court case) and the full original ending have all been locked away in London vaults and never before seen by anyone. So on the all in all level, "Superman II" fails because it is nothing more than two films put together, one a comedy, one an action drama, and this keeps "Superman II' from being anything close to what the original has become.

I have a confession to make. I love Superman II. Such innocent, almost niave, filmmaking, it personifies the term "family entertainment" and is, simply, great fun to watch.

Other superheroes have floundered at the box office, and maybe this is to do with lack of affinity between the makers and the source material. Certainly, the Superman films are tongue-in-cheek but never so that they're disrespectful to their content or their audience. The Crow was a good example of the "graphic novel" set, and the Batman series did well under the underrated Michael Keaton, but floundered under the flat Val Kilmer and increasingly childish set-pieces. The less said about "Batman and Robin" the better.

Of course, Superman had his own "Batman and Robin" in the guise of "Superman VI: The Quest For Peace", a movie made four years after the third and with seemingly a fraction of the budget. But Superman II was the series at its' peak. The theme music, a startling Star Wars sound-a-like by John Williams, fades to edited recaps of the previous film. These involve Superman as a baby being sent from the destruction of his home planet and are cleverly spliced together so as to avoid having to pay Marlon Brando any more royalties. (Yet we do see Brando's hand. Surely that's worth half a million?). 20% of this movie was shot alongside the 1978 vehicle and so we get reminded in this sequence of the three Kryptonian villains, about to be accidentally released by Superman in a h-bomb explosion.

This was still in the days when films were properly constructed to allow for a genuine build-up, a fully-formed middle and a proper end. Even minor players, such as Perry White (Jackie Cooper) have great lines and characterisation thrusted upon them. This may be just a "fun" movie, but it is lovingly put together, not "thrown together" as many films are. All the actors are wonderful, Christopher Reeve is just right as Superman, Margot Kidder is the definitive Lois Lane (despite almost drowning in soft focus for her close-ups) and Gene Hackman is, of course, absolutely hilarious as Lex Luthor.

But my favourite player in this sequel is Terence Camp as General Zod. Terence plays Zod exactly the same as he plays Bernadette in "The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert" and makes great work of the lead villain that must be, in Hollywood circles, always English. "Why do you say these things when you know I will kill you for it?" he minces to Hackman with great effect.

Of course, now twenty years old, this film is less "You'll believe a man can fly" than "You'll believe a man can swing on wires in front of an unconvincing backdrop" but this is still wonderful entertainment. Maybe the middle section, with Clark getting cut to ribbons after being thrown through a plate glass window is a little violent, as is the confrontation between Superman and the trio of villains. There's also the nagging feeling that this section is the biggest single example of product placement ever seen on film. Or is it coincidence that a Superman who featured in a comicbook anti-smoking campaign (against "Nick O'Teen", no less) is continually thrown into a Malboro van? Even Zod gets to know "things look better with Coca-Cola" as he is unceremoniously hurled into a neon sign for the corporation.

But these are minor gripes, and how anyone can hold them against such a harmless film is beyond me. Superman II isn't Citizen Kane by any means, but I defy you to sit through this movie and not love it.

After the rushing into pre-production of Superman, Superman II footage remained in vaults in Pinewood Studios for the time being. This was where the cast and crew were supposed to pick up filming of Superman II in early February of 1979. However a new order was called in by producer Ilya Salkind. A new director to be exact, and that was the dellima of Superman II. In 1977-78, Richard Donner shot a near estimate of 80 % of Superman II simultaneously with Superman, but that is not the point. The point is that his version was a much more subtle version, which followed the characters emotions from the blockbuster first film, and had an exciting plot of Lois and Superman falling in love, villains killing earth beings, and Superman almost having to risk it all for the world...or the woman he loves! But when director Richard Lester came in to do reshoots and shoot all new scenes, he had a different vision in mind. His version was simple. Make the villains look like dumb butts, while Lois and Superman enjoy an unequal relationship where Lois is given the back seat treatment to mediocre looks and a Superman that would rather make the metropolis people laugh than save the world! As that is what so wrongly happens, we shall go over the facts. Superman and Lois are supposed to have the kind of love that EVERY American dreams of having. Donner insured this in never seen love scenes which would have garnered the film an R-rating. Lester's love scenes are cheap and tacky with hilarious dialogue and no wit to back it up. The villains scenes in the Donner version are cruel, ruthless, and downright evil. In Lester's scenes, the villains pronounce names wrong, look at eachother in stupidity, and act like imbeciles. The film had a good premise going for it: Superman has just saved the world from nuclear destruction and then the villains arrive and start destruction. Meanwhile, Lois and Superman fall in love. That was still the plot, but the myth and mystique which made the original film such a classic are nowhere to be seen here. Instead we get NASA jerks talking about a "curl" in space! Lester was really trashing the mythology with this peice of junk. America had thought that the second Superman film would be a film that they would remember. No such luck as one would have guessed. The film is basically two unfinished films sloppily put together in this turkey! Superman II is NOT without interest. In fact, alot of the scenes are fun to watch because of the action sequences. But it is true what others say, that it seems like Lester was trying at a Beatles/Superman film. Clumsy comedy and stupid chaos ensues as the villains blow through metropolis. Another thing that gets on this writer's nerves is when the townspeople are rooting for Superman in the battle sequence! This villains are trying to kill these people and what do they do? They don't run in fear as they should, but root for Superman when he beats the villains up, calling out rediculous dialogue such as "C'mon! Get 'em Superman!" as if they are present at a high school football match! Too much stupid writing and directing. I will always have respect for Superman II because the whole Superman series has been a part of my better memories in life for a long time. We have yet to see if the true version of Superman will ever be released on DVD, in the form of the Richard Donner cut, as so many fans like to call it. IT is really Ilya Salkinds cut, as he has the contract to the rights of ALL the films(including Supergirl) and their footage. All in all, Superman II fails on a lot of top levels but has the interest for lower levels. Only if Richard Donner's version gets released, will we as an audience and appreciative film viewers get the true experience of Superman II: The Adventure Continues!

This is the best of the Superman movies because of the three villains, played by Terrence Stamp, Sarah Douglas and Jack O'Halloran.

Those three are so good, particularly Stamp, that they make this easily the most memorable of the four films. The scenes with them on the moon, their first encounter on earth and their climactic fight against Superman in the skies above Metropolis are all outstanding.

Once again, Superman goes a little overboard in his romance to Lois Lane (do you believe some reviewers are upset there weren't explicit sex scenes in the film?) Hey, folks, it's just a comic book and it's supposed to be innocent, clean fun. Sorry that turns you off. For the rest of us, this is generally very enjoyable film from start to finish, with no real lulls.