Add a Review

  • Most movie fans know that Richard Donner began shooting Superman I&II simultaneously, and that he was fired after the first was completed to be replaced by Richard Lester. Lester re-shot most of Donner's footage, re-working scenes and dialogue and finishing the second film as well as time, budget, and his own talents allowed.Compared to the first, it was badly paced, choppily edited, and filled with horribly out of place attempts at comedy. Superman's showdown with Zod and his henchmen in downtown Metropolis was still (and in many ways, is still) the greatest superhero battle ever captured on film, but the rest of the film was weak and uneven in comparison. The result was an entertaining enough follow-up, but one was until now left to wonder what might have been had Donner had the opportunity to finish the film properly.

    In an unprecedented move, Warner Bros. recently allowed Donner to re-master and edit all of his original Superman II footage. Most of the footage had survived, and some parts had to be filled in with segments from Donner's re-shoots and even a couple of full dress screen tests.

    The result is, while a bit rough around a couple of edges, remarkable. The new version is paced much better, and gone are the more cringe-inducing moments from the theatrical cut (like Superman's amnesia kiss, or Clark's bumbling around like a buffoon and falling into a fireplace). More importantly, however, is the dramatic weight that some of the restored scenes add to the film. A wonderful father/son dynamic is revealed as Superman and Jor-el (Marlon Brando, appearing in previously unseen footage) find themselves at odds over the last son of Krypton's proper role on Earth. In the theatrical cut, when a de-powered Clark returns to the fortress of solitude in a quest to regain his powers, he finds the glowing green crystalline equivalent of a "Get Out of Jail Free" card. In The Donner Cut, Superman's powers are not restored without a price.

    If you haven't seen The Donner Cut, you haven't seen Reeve's finest acting as the son of Jor El. We also get more Gene Hackman and the delightful Valerie Perrine.

    The action scenes are as punchy as as ever, and again, campier comedic elements have been removed. The new ending will definitely divide audiences. I won't spoil it here, but it certainly is different, and I'm not quite sure how I feel about it yet.

    Here's hoping that in the future, the Man of Steel's cinematic exploits continue to be steered by class directors such as Richard Donner rather than hacks such as Sidney J. Furie or Richard Lester.
  • The Richard Donnor Cut is definitely the superior version of Superman 2. A lot of the silly moments from the theatrical version have been left out and scenes that were vital to the story have been put back in. The Best thing about this movie is the fact that they put Marlon Brando back in as Jor-El and it was wonderful to see new footage of him. Also if you own the theatrical version of Superman 2, you can still get this cut because so many scenes were reshot that it's almost a completely different movie, the only thing that's the same is the story. The only problems with the movie is the fact that it's unfinished and they had to put scenes from the theatrical version in the place of scenes that were never filmed. unfortunately since these 2 movies are different, putting in scenes from the theatrical cut made some pretty big plot holes. nevertheless the Donner cut is way better than the theatrical version.
  • I've just seen this 'Richard Donner' cut of Superman II after getting the Christopher Reeve box set for Christmas. Its great. Really great. But heres the thing. There is material in the Richard Lester version that has been airing in the UK for years that i love and when you see the Donner cut its either edited out or the music is completely changed! The scenes i'am talking about are really around the Krypton villains. Their arrival on the moon and attack on the astronauts was one of the best sequences in the movie and the villains' theme by Ken Thorne (originally by John Williams) which plays over that sequence and whenever they are on screen was fantastic...the soundtrack is not in that sequence in the Donner cut!

    Also, the hand wrestling scene between the farmer and Ursa in the coffee shop is gone! Please don't get me wrong, this version is superb and i guess it is as close to seeing what Richard Donner originally intended for the sequel before he was replaced with Richard Lester. Also the 'new' footage which i have never seen is really great, especially the opening sequence with Lois Lane throwing herself out of the Daily Planet office window in an attempt to get Superman to save her, as is the small new inclusions of the attack on the White House, making it a little longer and more violent was the right direction and you can clearly see where the makers of the X Men got their inspiration from in this sequence.

    The final battle at Superman's address in the North Pole is slightly disappointing. More a battle of super minds than super powers.

    However, this is really fascinating if you are a Superman fan and thankfully because of the box set i now have both versions. One is not better than the other, they are both flawed brilliance.
  • Richard Donner's cut of Superman II is not the definitive answer to "what if Donner had been allowed to finish Superman II?" It is not a stand alone, completed, film so much as it is an abstract representation of where he intended to go. Remember, we are dealing with a reconstruction of an incomplete 25 year-old film. It's a jig-saw puzzle with a few pieces missing, jimmy-rigged with whatever the filmmakers could use to complete it.

    But if you can look past inherent flaws that comes with the circumstance – obvious dubbing issues, inconsistent special effects, glaring continuity errors, a recycled resolution, and lack of an original score – look past all of that, look to the underlying vision, and you'll see something special.

    First and foremost, the return of Marlon Brando's scenes, a presence sorely missed in the theatrical cut of Superman II which allows the characters and story arcs that started in the first film to come full circle. At last nonsensical dialogue from the first film clicks into place – "the father becomes the son, the son becomes the father" – it gains a meaning in a touching exchange between Jor-El and Kal-El. In the Lester cut, Kal-El consults his mother in the fortress of solitude, and somehow it lacks the emotional punch that the exchange should have. Here, though, in the Donner Cut, Marlon Brando's voice rings with fatherly love, and across time and space the essence of the father reaches out to the son. A love that allows Jor-El to guide Kal-El even from his Kryptonian grave. And after 25 years it finally makes sense how Superman regains his powers after sacrificing them to live with Lois Lane.

    Marlon Brando as Jor-El by itself makes the Donner Cut worth the price of the rental. I mean, how do you cut out Marlon Brando? Especially when his character is integral to not only the plot, but to the titular character's arc? Anyway, I particularly liked the restoration of how Lois initially suspects Clark's identity. A passive comment by Jimmy Olson makes her pause and ponder the paradox of Clark disappearing when Superman appears, and she draws a suit, hat, and glasses over a newsprint picture of the Man of Steel. In the Lester version, Lois' eventual revelation feels more chance driven, and even when they have direction it's as though they beat around the bush. It's anti-climactic, and lacks a fulfilling payoff.

    In Donner's version, by contrast, the challenge is more direct. A one on one battle of wits with Lois fighting to conclusively prove that Clark is Superman, while he makes clever use of his powers to keep his identity hidden – early on Lois throws herself out a window. And instead of Superman flying to the rescue, Clark uses his super-breath to slow her descent, and his eye beam to unlatch a canopy to break her fall. She lands safely, and lo and behold Clark hasn't moved from the window 50 floors up. "Lois! What have you done?!" Point: Superman and Richard Donner.

    The exchanges are just more fun in Donner's version – it's like a cat and mouse game that escalates until the eventual pay off in a scene that Donner, sadly, never shot. Reconstructed from screen tests, gaping with continuity errors, but it's remarkable the power that still underlines the moment when Clark is finally caught red handed, and removes his glasses. Subtly transforming from Kent to Superman right before our eyes – it finally feels like the pivotal moment it should be, and resonates more deeply because the previous scenes support and sustain it. I guess what I'm getting at is, once again, the arc feels more natural, more complete.

    Gone are as many as the throw-away Naked-Gunesque sight gags as Michael Thau could afford to cut. And what a difference that makes to the overall tone of the movie. Of particular note: the battle over Metropolis that finally feels like the epic brawl it should be. Other than a few additions, the major difference between Lester and Donner's version lay in the editing. And yet I cheered every time Superman sent one of the villains flying through a building or a sign as though watching this sequence for the first time – I was thrilled when the villains created a powerful wind to stop the mob and the focus stayed on the destruction at hand – cars crashing into buildings and other cars – and not wigs and silly phone booth conversations. The villains are more threatening, more intimidating, and the battle appears more destructive now that their powers weren't used to generate jokes.

    While I'm hesitant to say the humor in Donner's film is more sophisticated (the Donner cut does have toilet humor not present in the Lester cut), I will say Donner's jokes are better planned and executed. At least in his version most of them have proper build up and pay off.

    Finally, the issue of complaints: were this another film under another set of circumstances, I would have room to complain. It does have flaws, yes. As mentioned above, the Richard Donner Cut of Superman II looks like a jigsaw puzzle that was finished with "whatever." Unlike Superman, Donner could not turn back time and finish shooting with the full resources he needed to do the job right. The disclaimer before the film clearly states it's a representation of the Donner concept. Nothing more.

    Like I said, this is only a hint of what could have been. And that's more than we should reasonably have hoped to get.
  • Before you watch this DVD there is something very important that you must understand. Richard Donner never completed Superman II. And, since he never completed the film it was impossible to truly make a "Donner cut" per say. What this DVD (edited and produced by Michael Thau) shows us is what the film "may" have looked like. Once you understand that you will be able to enjoy the experience.

    Why do I go through that explanation? Well...because from the complains I've heard and read it seems that people don't seem to understand that. So, that's why I felt it should be addressed.

    Now, on to the review...

    Donner was hired by the Salkinds in '76 or '77 to direct two Superman films at the same time. When time and money was running out the decision was made to stop production on Superman II and focus on the first one. By that point Donner had already completed about 80% of the film. When Superman became the biggest hit of 1978 the decision by the Salkinds was to fire Donner. He was replaced by Richard Lester (A Hard Day's Night) and Lester re-shot most of the film. Only about 30% of Donner's work remained.

    After almost 30 years WB finally released Donner's version since most fans demanded to see it. And, on the DVD, Donner, thanks the fans which I felt was a nice touch.

    The plot of the movie is the same as Lester's Superman II. General Zod and his goons escape the Phantom Zone. They arrive at Earth (or Planet Houston as they call it) and quickly take over. And, where's Superman? He made the mistake of giving up his powers to be with Lois Lane. So, will Superman recover his powers on time to save Earth from Zod? You will have to watch the film to find out.

    Now, the question on everyone's mind is whether or not this version is truly better than Lester's take. The answer is yes! Why? Because Lester never really understood the material. Which is prove when you watch Superman III. Donner, on the other hand, truly understood the material. He understood that...YES...it's a comic book adaptation but it's still an art form. As silly as Superman may seem he understands that there is a wonderful story to tell. And, he understands that there is wonderful characters to develop and have an audience understand and fall in love with. When you watch this DVD that's what you'll see. A film directed by a man in love with the material. Not a film by a man who did it for the money. If you love Superman: The Movie then you'll love Richard Donner's version of Superman II. The ONLY flaw of this version is that it was never completed.
  • This should have been the original Superman II! When you watch it, you finally understand what the hell Superman and his father have been saying all these years. It all makes sense now. Having grown up on Superman, I feel cheated!!! I had to wait until now to finally understand one of my favorite film series! It's just a crime!

    Not only does Donner's film flow better and enlighten the viewer, it even makes those annoying villains have more purpose. Even as a kid, I thought they were ridiculous. They're still ridiculous in this film, but Donner links them more clearly to Superman's past, so you get pulled into the plot line more.

    Watch this film and you'll see my point.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    In this version Superman reverses time to make Lois forget that Clark Kent is Superman. He does the old fly around the world thing again to make time go backwards. So the scene where Lois and Clark go and get a bite to eat and the trucker beats up Clark with a sucker punch to the back of the head, yeah that scene. Clark goes back to the diner to beat the guy up, even though that first scene never takes place because of Supermans actions in reversing time. The trucker would have no idea why this guy wants to beat him up. So Richard Donner should have left the last scene out entirely. Talk about continuity!!! Other then that, the movie was in my opinion not as good as the Richard Lester version. I might be bias because I grew up watching that version. But if you want to see Superman II in a whole new way. You should pick up a copy and judge for yourself, you may like it.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    December 1978 and 'Superman The Movie' just premiered worldwide. It's that rare epic that's humorous and fun! It honors the legend and offers a refreshing take on our first encounter with a super flying hero. When the end credits cap with..."Next Year Superman II", it was met with thunderous cheers and applause.

    'Superman The Movie' may not be perfect. But with so much heart and a quality 'tongue-in-cheek' approach that it made for perfect entertainment!

    "Good news", the film makers say, "the best is yet to come with Part 2. Most of it's already in the can". That WAS good news!

    Unfortunately, months later...Bad News strikes!

    First: Director Richard Donner gets nixed!? Some of his scenes are to be replaced?!?

    Then: Marlon Brando Is OUT!!

    BRANDO?? THE LEGENDARY ACTOR ICON OF THE 50'S AND 70'S! "Financial Reasons"(?). But since he's already been paid his salary, his percentage of the gross for Part 2 is contractually guaranteed. His name attached to any movie at that time spells big bucks! And he's essential to the plot!! Go Figure!! But the producers didn't see it that way; a similar renege they attempted in their all-star opus "The Three..." and "Four Musketeers" in the early 70's.

    So Brando's out! Brando sues! And Brando wins! He's reimbursed and he's upset!! (Wouldn't you be after receiving a couple of mil'?!)

    Most of Donner's scenes are re-filmed. Without Donner, the heart of the saga is jettisoned. Several actors and crew members are understandably outraged. Even the very professional Christopher Reeve makes a negative statement that it's shameful the world will be deprived of a performance by an actor of Brando's stature.

    SPOILERS: When "Superman II" was released in 1980/81, it got great reviews. For me; a was a mixed bag! The movie opens on Krypton...and Brando's absence becomes painfully obvious.

    The music swells! But where's the rich textured motifs that composer John Williams had firmly established from Part 1 (less musicians = less money)? Themes get carelessly substituted. Even Otis' musical cue continues long after Ned Beatty's early exit. And where's that dramatic, epic feel. Proof positive?? Compare "Zod's Phantom Zone Release" in both the 'Theatrical' and 'Donner Cut' versions. There's no arguing the difference in dramatic impact.

    And Margot Kidder! Her performance under Lester's direction is heartbreakingly noticeable. Under Donner's direction, she's spunky, energized, spontaneous. And beautiful! (Courtesy of Director of Photography Geoffrey Unsworth who's name is (finally) properly re-instated into the opening titles).

    A Comic book continuation on a grand scale is forever lost!!

    So...how does "The Donner Cut" cut it?? Depends on how much you know on Part II's troubled history and your level of enjoyment of the theatrical version.

    For me...and I ain't apologizing! It's the most near satisfying movie I've seen this year. Almost like time traveling 25 years back and you're hoping the press made some sort of mistake about Brando not being in it; and Donner not directing the little bit left to film and;...and whatever!

    So now Donner's version opens with an ominous score by John Williams, followed by a heartfelt tribute!

    Then! And finally! The 1st voice you now hear is...Brando. You can't help feel that this is the way it should've always been!

    An alternate universe that most lovers of Superman lore will embrace. The joy ride is in the number of alternate and extended scenes; and those crappier ones left out. Is this a definitive version? Of coarse not! Poor decisions canceled out any definitive version from ever existing a long time ago.

    Non's unnecessary comic schtick is mercifully dusted. The evil Kryptonians are now leaner and meaner. Gone too, are the annoying comic spectator reactions to the battle of the titans.

    Top billed Gene Hackman's limited screen time nearly doubles and you can't help wonder why they got cut to begin with. His stand-in double and silly voice-over one liners (by a mimic) are minimized. Ned Beatty and Valerie Perrine also get more screen time and I'm probably one of the few who appreciated the flushing pay-off.

    What's baffling is why did all that great footage get originally scrapped?

    The alternate Lois attempt (in the new opening scene) to reveal Clark's alter ego is a SCREAM!!! The film's resolution is more poignant, if illogical. The main thing is: it's different! Why repeat what already exists in the theatrical version when a Donner alternate is available that showcases his original intent. And Lois & Clark are back at their teeny, tiny desks along with all the other office riffraff and background mayhem, as opposed to Lester's (more accurately, the producers') cost-cutting version of Lois secluded into her own office.

    The awe from 'Superman The Movie' is somehow recaptured. It's obvious from the DVD's documentaries and interviews that Donner loves working with actors. From the cast interviews; it's obvious the affection is mutual. On screen; it obviously shows!

    Donner should be commended for his courage on revisiting this painful period in his past. This is a new and exciting vision with a whole different feel. Also, I doubt he could maintain a dry eye whenever Christopher Reeve was on screen.

    This is a must see and a 1st in movie history! Never before has an internet campaign been so successful in making an impossible dream became possible.

    The legacy of Christopher Reeve & Marlon Brando demands that their 'lost' footage be celebrated. Their solo scene where they 'connect' is worth the price of admission.

    It's unavoidable that fan's opinions will split! Which version is better? You decide! I don't have the arrogance to state which is better. I can only say which version I enjoyed more.

    And there's no way to conclude a 'Superman II' review without saluting Michael Thau.
  • I believe the greatest mistake was made by the Salkinds, by attempting to make two huge movies at the same time. It would have been like making star wars and empire strikes back at the same time. Nevertheless, Donner did a hell of Job to try and pull it off, and superman the Movie is a classic that I grew up with as a kid. However, a lot of Donner's S II footage looks a little tired to me. Lois lane jumping out the window was silly, and some of the action fight scenes in metropolis were dreadful. It looks to me as if the Salkinds actually had no choice but to bring in someone fresh to replace a drained Donner struggling to find creative Ideas to complete the project. If Donner was allowed to concentrate on one movie at a time, I think S II would have been better than lester's version. On the commentary, Donner came across as still being very bitter, and he didn't give Lester any credit at all for what were some great scenes that improved the movie no end compared to Donner's. I think Donner was exhausted and frustrated, and you could tell that his movie was suffering. That being said, it is still a Donner / Lester movie, and much of Donner's work makes S II what it is. Both Directors combined made a great film, and if Brando's scenes were included in the theatrical version, it would be a completed movie where both directors must share the credit. The Salkinds had the money but no movie making sense. We have Lester's Version, and Donner's patched up version, and now we need the ultimate version with the best of both movies, but I'm afraid, apart from the Brando scenes, and a few others, it will mostly be the original theatrical release. Lester deserves more credit for injecting some fresh direction into a movie that we can now see was struggling.
  • I, like many others have been waiting for this cut to come along. I got the DVD yesterday and expected a film with missing holes, missing scene title cards and un-easy editing due to the footage used.

    What people forget is that Richard Lester's version was pretty hot in 1980 minus a bloke getting blown around while on the phone in the heat of a battle.

    Well ... I was shocked, and I clapped at the end. Superman II now feels like a different film. The new scenes are very good (and just show what Chris Reeve could do - what a wonderful actor he really was), Marlon Brando scenes are superb to watch, new music cues - from Superman one, lots of new funny scenes, and new special effects that don't look out of date in what is supposed to be a 1980 film. Gene Hackman's part seems more fleshed out here than before - witness the Fortress of Solitude crystal scenes. lovely and funny.

    This shows the power of DVD and show special it is. This cut simply could not have been made. You will find that some of the new edits jump from scene to scene in a flash - that because we already know the film from Richard Lester's version. Watch this like is was new and you would love it more. You, if you are a Superman fan, will fall in love with the new opening scene with a new look at the Phantom zone capture (new camera angles you see) and get this - new credit sequence up to the standard of the original supe adventure.

    So it really like a fantastic new look at a old film. You could point out the faults in lines dubbed or the odd bit of tinkering even the ending but this really is a new Chris Reeve film you though could never have been made. Bonus.

    Masterful piece of reimaging - Superman is back

    Lee
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I don't blame Donner for wanting to put together a cut of this film with as much of the footage he shot as possible, but the result is a rather dull, way-too-serious mess that is illogical to boot. It was interesting to see the new scenes, but if this was the version released in theaters in 1980, the film would not have been the success it was.

    I thought Lois's suspicions of Clark being Superman were played out much better in the original. In the new one, she draws glasses on a newspaper image of Supes, and is suddenly so convinced that she leaps out of the skyscraper a minute later to test Clark. Uh... yeah. Then she shoots a blank out of a pistol at Clark in their honeymoon suite to gauge his reaction. Wouldn't Superman realize it was a blank before admitting that he is indeed Supes?

    I know a lot of the new stuff is purportedly "test footage", but some of these scenes come across with less snap than a daytime soap. Scenes are stretched out so much that it kills the tension. It's been said that Donner was fighting the producers to keep the movie camp and slapstick free, but some of the now-eliminated bits are sorely missed. When the Kryptonians are super-blowing away the approaching crowd, we no longer have the oblivious guy who's laughing into the payphone even after he and it are blown over. And where is Lois's co-worker who would comically punctuate the big Metropolis fight scene with her dumb remarks: "the big one's just as strong as Superman!" (Lois pushes her). Maybe Donner cut these things simply because he didn't shoot them, but why throw away these memorable little jokes in a film otherwise almost completely devoid of humor? The sequences of Non, Zod and Ursa getting acquainted with the locals of the Midwest town, and the big sprawling city fight (the highlight of the original Superman II) are now cut up so much that they are flat-out dull. So basically, if you're going to be stuck on a deserted island forever with only a DVD player and a TV, and could only take one version of Superman II, it is my opinion that you should bring the theatrical version.
  • Back in 1978, 'Superman' was a huge success and stands today as a generation defining film. The disputes between the father and son production team, the Salkinds, and director Richard Donner were no secret; filming the two original films back-to-back proved problematic. Following the triumph of the first film, Donner was sacked and the director's chair was handed over to Richard Lester for 'Superman II', who distorted Donner's original idea significantly, producing a camp and hugely flawed Superman sequel that started the franchise's fall to ridicule. 'Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut' is the film that should have been, superior in every way to Lester's theatrical version… until the last few minutes.

    Richard Donner's name explodes emphatically onto the screen at the end of the opening credits, establishing Donner's authoritative mark on this film: the closest thing he can get to *his* original vision. It is an entirely different film to Lester's, which is to be expected. Donner had already recorded roughly 80% of the footage before he was fired, which Lester would have to rewrite and reshoot under the rules of the Director's Guild. Thus, everything ludicrous about 'Superman II' is gone: no more Kryptonians with finger pointing levitation beams or the power to erase memories with a kiss (even those giant Superman emblem "nets" are not present). Instead, the story is much more absorbing, the characters are therefore fleshed out incredibly and it truly is a much more enjoyable and worthwhile Superman film.

    The character dynamics are of noteworthy interest. The three Kryptonian villains (Terence Stamp, Sarah Douglas and Jack O'Halloran), for example, are much more integral to the plot and Gene Hackman develops much more in this edition as the evil genius Lex Luthor, supported wonderfully by Miss Teschmacher (Valerie Perrine). But dedicated to Christopher Reeves memory, this definitely is his greatest performance as the titular character. Reeves is ever charming as Clark Kent, yet the contrast between him and Superman is particularly mesmerising here, as Reeves is remarkably more powerful and captivating as the superhero. It really is a shame that general audiences may never see him play the character the way he did here: it is the definitive Superman portrayal.

    Yet it is still a flawed film. An excusable downside to the cut is the often choppy editing, making some areas feel rushed, but as the film was never finalised, it is fair to allow this slide as an unfortunate product of circumstance. However, the ending is an utter disappointment. It is difficult to get over the way that the closing moments make the entire film inconsequential. Granted, studio interference played a part here, but Donner could have reached unprecedented heights with Superman in this new cut, should he have chosen to make the logical choice and evict this ending from his cut (disregarding continuity errors that may impose).

    'The Richard Donner Cut' is overall undoubtedly the better movie, and yet still could have been even better with a more satisfactory finish.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    (This review also contains a very subtle potential spoiler for Superman Returns)

    The Richard Donner version of Superman II cannot be considered a complete film in any way, shape or form. Obviously this is because Donner never was able to complete his vision of the film, and as a result this is a cobbled together mixture of Donner scenes, scenes shot by Richard Lester for the theatrical version of Superman II, and even a couple of screen tests edited together to recreate a key scene Donner never filmed.

    I've heard some people -- including actors involved in the film -- call the Donner Cut superior to the original. I have to disagree. I liked it well enough, but I felt there was too much padding, from unnecessary toilet jokes (making moot the criticisms that Lester inserted too much inappropriate humor into his version -- it is Donner who gives us the spectacle of a flushing toilet in the Fortress of Solitude!) to some really slow character moments. The first 45 minutes are rather uneventful and could have used some trimming. Lester's Superman II feels more like a complete film, and has some action set pieces that add a level of excitement to the film that, after the initial novelty wears off, the Donner version admittedly lacks.

    That's not to say the Donner Cut is a bad film. It has a lot to recommend it: more footage of the underrated Sarah Douglas as Ursa, for one thing, allowing a bit more character development. The relationship between Lois and Clark is established as becoming sexual a bit more clearly than in the Lester version; this may be a bit controversial, but it works.

    The real joy in this film is seeing some pretty substantial scenes involving Christopher Reeve and Marlon Brando. There is a subplot about "the father becoming the son" which was all but eliminated from the Lester version. Here it's given full reign and plays out beautifully (in the process providing a strong tie to Superman Returns where the theme resurfaces). Of most note is the one and only scene filmed in which Brando and Reeve appeared in the studio together (the scene was later re-filmed by Lester with Susannah York instead of Brando.) Donner's version also makes more clear the fact that Jor-El had created an artificial intelligence program; Superman I and the Lester version of Superman II sort of gloss over this. In the Donner cut it's made more explicit, which is quite something considering this was filmed in 1978, long before A.I. became a buzzword.

    The performances in this film are consistent with those of the first Superman film, which makes sense since they were shot at the same time. Margot Kidder, in particular, looks terrific (she never looked better, even in the simultaneously shot Superman I); reportedly she wasn't pleased when Richard Lester took over Superman II, and I think you can tell by comparing her performances for Donner with those for Lester.

    The ending is a problem only if one desires to "decanonize" the Lester version of the film along with Superman III and IV. The fact the ending is virtually identical to the first Superman film might put some people off. But it is clearly stated on the DVD that Donner would have used a different ending for Superman II had he been allowed to complete the film. So once again we are simply reminded by this (and by Chris Reeve's hilariously changing hairstyles in the screen test footage used in lieu of Lester's Niagara Falls secret identity revelation scene) that the Richard Donner Cut of Superman II is not intended to be a replacement for the theatrical release -- which, despite many people disliking Lester's work, will remain the definitive version. Instead, it is a fascinating and highly recommended piece of "what if" experimentation which gives a fascinating look at how the production of a major film can result in widely diverging creative ideas.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I bought this on Blu-Ray along with the first Superman. I own the films on DVD and laserdisc - and I was pretty hyped to see the Donner cut. As I sit here now, I don't know why. It was terrible.

    More serious? No - not really. The toilet flush in the Fortress of Solitude was 20 times worse than any comedy inserted in the other cut. The loooonnng recap of Superman 1 was unnecessary. When they did Wrath of Khan, they didn't first show pieces of the original Trek episode - they just went right on it. A couple of establishing shots were all that was needed. And the first film had it's little funny moments - all of Clark's slapstick, and the phone booth scene where it's not a phone booth. Classic.

    Brando footage ... who cares. Brando frankly always struck me as more of an alcoholic at that point in his career. To be frank, when Jorel "appears" and "gives himself up" to give Superman his power back - it ruined it for me. He was dead long ago - but now he can walk up and touch Superman? How did he do that? In the original, there's the green crystal that begins to glow - and it hearkens to the first film - even as a kid I was able to imagine how it happened - and I was fine with it. To me this was VERY similar to George Lucas deciding to explain the "Force" in Episode I as "midichlorians." Seeing this in Superman II does not explain to me better how he got his power back - it makes it by having a completely illogical occurrence.

    The scenes at Nigara in this version make next to no sense. The Lois shooting Superman scene had no drama to it. It wasn't poignant - or anything else. It was a lame plot device. Next you know, they are flying off to have dinner at the Fortress of solitude, where somehow there is chicken and champaign that is really good, but we have no idea where that came from. So earlier, we get that there must be a bathroom because Miss Tessmarker flushes, but then here I have to take it for granted that there is a kitchen to prepare food in. Then, they cut to Superman in post coitus. Then they cut immediately to him asking to lose his powers so he can be with her. Honestly, without the explanation for why the question is asked - it doesn't make sense. In fact, given the way Lois is presented in the film, talking about Superman and how once you've seen him in action, etc - it's very hard to believe that she would have asked him to do that. If I had never seen the theatrical, this whole seen would literally make no sense.

    The big fight seen was a complete incoherent mess in the Donner cut. I actually suspect Lester simply shot the additions directly from the script - but for the Donner cut, because they were not Donner's shots - he cut them. This to me is a key issue - cutting shots because they are not yours as the sole reason doesn't make it good - if it leaves holes (which it does here), it makes it bad. Should have left in Lester's shots - and removing them simply shows the arrogance of Donner.

    The original Lester work to me is the single greatest tale of the horror of giving up everything for your own desire - most directly, for a man giving up everything to be with a woman. Lois falls in love - Superman falls in love, but to be with her - and have children, he must become earthly. She says she wants it, but when she sees how he's not the same, she realizes that was not what she really wanted. All the while, some bad people are taking over the planet. At the end of Lester's version, there is a great shot of Superman returning the American flag to the White House - and he says to the President that he was sorry he had been away for a while - and that it won't happen again. In this version - it's gone. Instead - we just get the re-tread of reversing time, and then the non-sensical return to the diner to have it out.

    Oh that's enough. This cut was self indulgent nonsense from a director who passed his prime a long time ago. Donner needs to hit the golf course with Lucas and stay away from making movies anymore.
  • Superman 1 and 2 were intended by the director to be a unit, and were filmed concurrently, as Jackson's Lord of the Rings films were. This approach works. Originally, after most of Sup 2 was in the can, the producers got rid of Donner and the Brando footage to save money and broke up the thematic flow of the two films. They made Sup 2 into a cheap money-maker follow-on to 1 and ruined it in the process.

    What the studio has done here is, nothing short of grand. They've essentially remade this film as it was intended to be. It flows seamlessly from Superman The Movie now. Richard Donner's great pride in his work is evident from his enthusiastic intro on the DVD.

    The storyline is cohesive, the emotionally soaring (!) tone of the first film is maintained and heightened. Scenes that reflect the fabulous chemistry between Reeve and Kidder have been restored.

    The extensive Marlin Brando footage, shot and intended for the Fortress of Solitude scenes, has been restored.

    This film is well worth a watch, particular in conjunction with a re-look at Superman I first. Hats off to Warner Brothers for bringing Richard Donner's vision for it back to life!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Superman II was Superman Trouble. I will spare the sordid details as they can be read in my "Superman II" review on the Lester version boards. But let's just say that if you really want something bad enough, it can and might happen. Such is the case with this new, and most say, REAL version of Superman II. After many years, and even more letters, Warner Brothers finally financed a Donner recut of Superman II. But as has been stated before - the two films are both incomplete, and one will never actually see what Donner's version will ever really be. However, with this new cut, we as an audience can finally see what Donner had intended, and conceived.

    "Superman II" begins with sparing no expense, or exposition. We see the action start right away, with such rumored scenes as Lois jumping out of the window, longer Lex Luthor prison scenes, and finally, the scenes with Marlon Brando which were long thought a rumor. Also seen are the full fortress finale, the full Donner interiors to the Daily Planet, and the screen tests for both Reeve and Kidder that were ingeniously edited together to create a scene in itself. These are great new scenes, with the soft Geoffrey Unsworth lighting, John Barry production design, and gorgeous Margot Kidder, and of course, Donner direction that give off the feel that the first film had. The print really shines, and the Donner footage is exactly what fans had hoped for.

    The writing is better too, better dialog, better pacing, and no Lester humor. The Metroplois battle is harsher, the way Lois finds out Superman's identity is more clever (you can see why Margot was cast, her screen test inter-cut with Reeve's plays well as an actual scene) and the finale is pithy and in your face. It has been years and years coming, and I Feel we are now given the Superman II that we wanted.

    There are a few quibbles. The editing. Michael Thau had some great ideas, but he jumps around every take it seems ever shot and never sticks with one. While it is great to see fresh new takes of favorite scenes, it is frustrating that some dialog has been lost, that was once seen on network television. The editing appears choppy in some scenes as well. We don't get a good enough look at some shots due to this. The Music. It is used rather effective in some scenes, better than the Theatrical version, and then in some scenes, it is not so effective. But these shouldn't really make a difference to the general audiences, only to the devotees like me who knew about this version years in advance.

    Despite those small shortcomings, the film will grow on you. I have learned to accept the film, editing and musical differences for what they are: Donner's intention. Remember the Donner scenes presented theatrically were done so by Lester's crew, so everything in this film is how Donner would have done his version. An acquired taste of a new way to look at this classic film. It works. As many of us new it would. It really works.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I first read about how Richard Donner got fired during the filming of Superman II in a Wizard magazine when I was a kid. Ever since then, I have been wondering what a Richard Donner Cut would have been like. I was totally psyched when I learned Donner was assembling his own cut, but I knew he would have to use some Lester footage in order to make a complete movie. Unfortunately, the bad blood between Donner, Ilya Salkind, and Richard Lester led to some pretty stupid editing decisions that almost ruin the film.

    The Good (LOTS of spoilers ahead):

    I must say I love the new beginning, even though the Superman I recap is a bit too long. It's good to see Marlon Brando in Zod's trial, as his absence was a little weird in the original Superman II. The new special effects are not good by today's standards, but when you consider the fact that this is a straight to DVD movie, what more can you expect? The best part however is the opening Daily Planet scene, where Lois begins to suspect Clark is Superman. This is the equivalent of the scene in Lester's cut where Lois jumps into Niagara Falls, but instead she jumps out of Perry White's window (Some have argued that jumping out of a building was too over the top, but diving into Niagara falls was just as crazy!). The scene features a clever use of Superman's powers, but make no mistake, it's the chemistry between Reeve and Kidder that makes this scene work.

    The screen test is one of the more controversial aspects of the Donner Cut, but it doesn't bother me that much. It shows how clever Lois really is and it is a great compliment to the Daily Planet opening. I think it's hysterical. Reeve's reaction when he learns he was shot with a blank and not a real bullet is priceless. The only thing that bugs me is that it's quite a stretch to believe Lois Lane obtained a gun in Toronto in such a short period of time.

    The first Marlon Brando scene with Gene Hackman is nothing special, but I prefer the Donner Cut's version of the scenes where Superman gives up and regains his powers. They really focus more on the fact that Superman was making a big mistake, which makes the scene with the bully in the diner even more powerful. In order to give back his powers, Jor-el has to drain all the energy from the green crystal, which means Kal-el won't be able to speak to his father anymore. I like how Superman has to pay a price for screwing up in this version. They really let him off the hook in Lester's cut.

    The White House fight really seems more violent in this version, but I haven't been able to pinpoint what's different about it. Maybe it's the sound effects.

    The Bad: The scene that has received the most criticism is the new (or old, depending on your point of view) ending where Superman reverses time to erase Lois' memory and all of Zod's damage. Not only is this a cop out, but it goes without saying that it's pretty stupid to use the same ending twice! This was the originally scripted ending for Superman II, but they decided to use it for Superman I to give it a bigger punch. Donner would not have used this ending if he wasn't fired. Unfortunately Donner's pride got in the way and he just couldn't bring himself to use Lester's ending, even though it would have worked better. This of course reverses the damage to the Fortress of Solitude, which makes the destruction scene pointless! Now Superman doesn't have to pay a price for his mistake. The only good thing that comes from this ending is a sweet scene with Reeve and Kidder, but it doesn't make up for it.

    What really almost kills it for me is the middle. Since Donner wanted to keep the Lester footage to a minimum, Michael Thau really chopped up the Houston scenes. Since Zod's initial arrival at the Hick town has been removed, it looks like the military attacks him for no reason, since he really hasn't done anything bad. But worst of all, some of the romantic scenes in the Fortress of Solitude have been cut, even though there was really nothing wrong with them. The middle just feels rushed, and the love story isn't properly developed as a result.

    There were a few other inexplicable dubbing decisions as well. Several lines that were fine in the Lester cut have been replaced with a voice actor that clearly isn't Reeve. Reeve's awesome "Would you care to step outside" line had been replaced with the weaker "General? Haven't you heard of freedom of the press?" The Metropolis fight contains some new footage that is nothing special, although some of Lester's humor has been removed.

    There are even a few deleted scenes that should have been in the movie. You think they would have put them in considering the fact that Donner filmed them. As it stands now, it looks like Superman kills Lex Luthor when he destroys the Fortress of Solitude. There is a deleted scene where police arrest Lex Luthor and take him away from the Fortress, so we know Superman isn't a murderer. Even though the concept of the arctic patrol is absurd it's better than turning Superman into a murderer.

    All in all, it's still worth watching. It's a good example of how a director can influence a film. Since this will always be an incomplete movie, I won't give it a star rating. Some of its flaws can be fixed easily, but since everyone has their own opinion on what Superman II should be, we will be seeing a lot of fan cuts in the future!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Man I wanted to love this movie better than Lester's version because Donner's vision in the first Superman was so wonderful. I have to say though, Donner's Superman II is corny, has questionable visual effects, and some uncharacteristic bad acting from Christopher Reeve. The way Lois calls Clark Kent out as Superman is bad, bad, bad. Lester's version showing Clark's clumsiness by falling with his hand in the fireplace was more convincing and emotional. Donner's version basically plays Superman for a fool by falling for Lois' trap with the pistol threat. One of my favorite lines from Lester's version is completely excised from Donner's version: "General, would you care to step outside?" Good points, include the villains escaping from the Phantom Zone. These nice effects and longer shots were better than the "cartoon" exploding effect of the Phantom Zone in Lester's version. Also, the legendary Marlon Brando is resurrected from the grave by inclusion of his many more scenes. Nice to have one last look at the big guy Brando.
  • Richard Donner's cut is a little more grim than the original theatrical release. It definitely works better than the first Superman movie because the villains are much more formidable. Also the story involving Clark Kent and Lois Lane is fleshed out and bittersweet. A great version of a classic movie.
  • neil-47626 November 2006
    Warning: Spoilers
    I'd better add a spoiler warning - I don't think I will be spoiling anything which hasn't already been mentioned, but better safe than sorry.

    I've been really looking forward to the Donner version since it was announced. After all, it's the Holy Grail, isn't it? And it's good to see the reinstated sequences, and it's good to see the departure of the cellophane S and the teleportation game etc., not to mention much of the misplaced humour (good riddance).

    There are flaws - some of the old ones remain, and the recutting has created new ones: the "Planet Houston" sequence, for instance, no longer has the appalling "Please don't hurt my daddy" child (hooray), but has been hacked about so comprehensively that there is no longer any flow to it - it might as well have been cut from the movie completely (and the fact that the return to the diner at the end involves Clark exacting retribution for an offence which Rocky retrospectively never committed - very un-Supermanly! - has already been mentioned).

    And I thought the screen test scene used for the Niagara Hotel unmasking was TERRIBLY jarring visually - I didn't think it fitted at all. It leapt off the screen at me and invited me to suspend my suspension of disbelief - wow, it was bad.

    But my main disappointment is that, notwithstanding the new beginning and ending sequences, and various other additions and removals, in the end, the film just didn't feel that different to me.

    And then I watched the various documentaries and listened to how bitter Donner is towards Lester, and wondered why. Lester was no more than an artisan for hire - he did the job he was hired for. His brief included a degree of revision to Donner's vision and, in working within that brief, he honoured Donner's vision as much as he could, it can now been seen. Donner's spleen should be reserved for the Salkinds, and not Lester - I was left with distaste at the way Donner can't even bring himself to speak Lester's name, an expression of disrespect out of all proportion to Lester's responsibility for what Donner suffered.

    My feeling, scorewise, is 5 out of 10 for disappointment, but I give it 7 because it's still an entertaining film.
  • This Release Actually Improves The Story That Much More Making it a whole lot more fun
  • Warning: Spoilers
    "Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut" finally reveals the long-forgotten original version of Superman II as intended by its original director, Richard Donner. Both Superman I and II were shot simultaneously in 1978, but after a fallout with the producers, Richard Donner was replaced and new scenes were shot under the direction of Richard Lester. Surprisingly, much of the original Donner version had already been completed by the time Warner Brothers had hired Lester to re-direct Superman II. Many of the deleted scenes had been found lying in dusty vaults at Warner Brothers, and because some scenes had never been filmed, several test shots had to be substituted in order to provide for continuity. The final product is familiar in many regards (a large number of scenes come from the Lester version), but this one represents a departure in character development, especially the growing love story between Lois Lane and Clark Kent/Superman, as well as the relationship between Superman and Jor-El as son and father.

    While I liked some aspects of the "new" version, especially the fact that much more is explained about the relationship between Clark Kent and Lois Lane, I found this version oftentimes tedious, long-winded, and slow. Many of the Donner scenes, for example, include superfluous dialogue and banter between Lex Luthor and his cronies, as well as the three Kryptonian antagonists. Perhaps the scene that I found least likable- but which Donner reportedly felt was critical- was a scene where Lois Lane attempts to "prove" that Clark Kent is actually Superman by jumping out of the Daily Planet thirty stories up. This scene was entirely unnecessary- Lois Lane's suspicions could have been revealed in a much more, shall I say, sane way. A woman jumping out of a building to prove a point- even if she is dead on target- is truly disturbing. Even if Clark Kent transforms into Superman in order to save her life, he will probably not want to have a romantic relationship with this sort of nutty woman, let alone conceive giving it all up for her.

    In a later scene, which was actually a test shot- Lois Lane fires a blank at Clark Kent to once again "prove" he is Superman. Again, this seems a bit imbalanced for Lois. It is even more awkward that in the very next scene the two are madly in love with each other and Superman is ready to give up his super powers- against his father's wishes (at the same time, fey and nutty Lois seems unbothered by the fact that Superman will give up the powers he could use to save the world just for her- what kind of woman is that?). It seems as if Superman himself has gone insane (in the Donner version, Marlon Brando as Jor-El tells his son that if he gives up his powers now he is making a big mistake. Yet Superman decides that it is worthwhile to give all of this up for a woman who just jumped out of a building and tried to shoot him). The transition and "revelation" of Kent's true identity was significantly more credible in Lester's theatrical version.

    To be fair, the producers of the Donner cut did not have the original actors to work with (of course, we all know that, sadly, both Marlon Brando and Christopher Reeve have passed away). Even were Donner able to bring back all of the original actors, they could not re-film their scenes almost thirty years on. So Donner and crew did a pretty good job splicing the original scenes into this version.

    That said, I do not feel that this movie is a substantial improvement upon the original. If Donner had been able to complete his original film, it might have been significantly better, especially from a character development standpoint. Even with Lois Lane's crazy antics, we can tell that there is much more going on in this movie than in the original 1980 theatrical release. And I am especially impressed by the dialogue between Reeve and Brando as father and son, something that creates a powerful continuity with the original movie and which symbolizes the passing of the baton (apparently, Brando's scenes, which had been filmed along with those for Superman I, were cut because the film's producers were too cheap to pay Brando royalties for the second movie).

    This movie appears, unfortunately, unfinished, with many segments (especially dialogue between Reeve and Kidder, and Reeve and Brando) that symbolize the potential brilliance of a movie that could have been. Other scenes should simply have been left on the cutting room floor (many so-called director's cuts have the problem of including entirely superfluous scenes and dialogue). If you love the original Superman movies, this version will give you an interesting perspective on the original vision of Richard Donner, but for me at least, the original theatrical release is still the better, more focused and tight version.
  • Three villains (Terence Stamp, Sarah Douglas and Jack O'Halloran) from the home planet of Krypton are coming to Earth. Which these powerful villains wants to rule the world. Clark Kent/Superman (Christopher Reeve) starts falling for Lois Lane (Margot Kidder). Which she slowly finds out that Superman is Clark Kent. But Lex Luthor (Two Time Oscar-Winner:Gene Hackman) escapes from prison. He tries to find any new weakness of Superman but Lex decides to team up with these villains are just as powerful as Superman. But these villains are three time more overpowering than Superman.

    This review is for the Director's Cut, which it was originally directed by Richard Donner (Conspiracy Theory, The Goonies, Superman). Which the director was fired, when he was nearly done with the film by the producers. Which the producers made many changes for the budget of the movie, especially not hiring the late Oscar-Winner:Marlon Brando for certain key scenes (Which Donner already shot for the first picture but deleted it for using those scenes for the sequel). Which Brando was replaced by Susannah York in the Richard Lester (Superman 3, A Hard Day's Night, The Three Musketeers) version. In this new version, Donner removes all the footage shot by Lester in the original theatrical release by adding his as it was originally intended in the screenplay. The scenes with Brando are added back in, the Lois Lane character plots more designs to unmask Clark Kent as Superman and more.

    DVD has an sharp anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an digitally remastered-Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD has an introduction by the director, an running commentary track by the director and creative consultant:Tom Mankiewicz, a featurette about restoring Donner's cut and deleted scenes. I actually enjoy Donner's cut more than Lester's. Still Lester's version isn't bad, since about 60 percent of Lester's cut was shot by Donner. The conclusion of both cuts are different. Donner's cut is actually more personal, it is very close to the first "Superman" film. Donner had a chance to credit as co-director before the theatrical release of "Superman 2" but he decline. He felt that the producers and Lester made many changes that they were silly , especially in certain key moments. Donner's cut is actually 12 minutes shorter that Lester's version. Actually it is a matter of personal taste, what version you like best. Judge it for yourself. Panavision. (**** 1/2 out of *****).
  • I find hard to believe this "film" has the highest rating on imdb, its even higher than the first movie! Dont get me wrong, its nice to see the never-seen footage but this looks more like a bunch of deleted scenes put back together rather than a MOVIE. There is a lot missing in the transition, the build-up is not there either, sequences are shown out of order, etc. which will make you go crazy if you haven't seen Lester's version. The ending is the worst part because it doesnt make any sense.

    Bottom line, is enjoyable but not for a 7.7 by any means...
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I didn't even know a re-cut version of Superman II existed until I was home this past Sunday afternoon and discovered it would be airing on AMC.

    Even with commercial interruptions, this "imagined" re-cut has its nice share of ideas. I really appreciated the scenes with Marlon Brando and the explanation of how Superman regained his powers after sacrificing them to be with Lois. I also enjoyed the initial set-up with the ICBM from the first film bringing the destruction of the phantom zone, despite its rather average look on the screen.

    The problem with the re-cut is the flow. If you've seen the original then you know that even with its one major flaw (Superman regaining his powers with NO explanation whatsoever) the scenes were seamless and the dialog didn't come across rehearsed. The scenes involving Lois and Clark at the honeymoon resort, while well intended were CLEARLY rehearsal pieces as indicated but come on, putting them in a film and trying to pass it off as a scene that's worthy? I also disliked several sequences: 1) The Washington monument being toppled over mixed with the dialog from the first film when Mt. Rushmore was defaced 2) The extra dialog between Otis and Lex at prison, not needed IMO 3) Miss Tessmaker's obsession with and finding the toilet in Superman's home 4) Superman stating at the Daily Planet upon arriving to fight Zod "haven't you heard of freedom of the press" as opposed to "do you care to step outside?".

    These are just a few select examples of the splicing and re-editing I didn't care for. I understand that there was some call for this vision (after reading wikipedia) and I really do appreciate Donner's original idea. I'm just not sure that was was presented is sufficient enough to qualify as movie-ready material.

    I'll always prefer the first version due to its continuity but I'll always be on the fence regarding the re-cut.
An error has occured. Please try again.