Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut

Wow, looks like last time I wrote my blog it was to review Superman Returns. Well only Supes could draw me out from hiding - today I watched Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut. And, in accordance with the spirit of blogging, I'm going to let you know what I think! You have been warned: It is long.

There will be minimal spoilage, because hopefully some of you are actually going to want to watch this some time!

Incidentally, it's my birthday today (Dec 12... well it used to be anyway). And I just found out I share a birthday with Sarah Douglas, who plays Ursa, one of the three villains in Superman II, so that is cool. Um, happy birthday, Sarah.

OK, brief backstory: Richard Donner directed Superman: The Movie, and simultaneously shot about 75% of Superman II only to be inexplicably fired after Superman was released. He was replaced with Richard Lester, who completed the movie and re-shot most of it in the process. Why? It ruined the movie. Superman II is half-serious, half-joke. Furthermore, since Marlon Brando was demanding ridiculous millions to appear in Superman II, the new director and producers decided to simply remove his character (Jor-El) from the movie and replace his scenes with Superman's mother Lara (Susannah York). Second big mistake. The movie lost a heck of a lot of sense.

So here we are, 26 years and thousands of fan letters later, with Warner Bros and Richard Donner having finally decided to restore all of the old "lost" (literally) footage, including that involving Marlon Brando, and edit it into a coherent movie, released November 28, 2006. It's essentially the ultimate director's cut. See the wiki for full information.

Before the film proper, the DVD includes a special introduction by Richard Donner himself. It was a heartfelt message. I really feel as though I have come to know and understand Donner over the past 6 months, and he only reaffirmed this, when he introduced himself thus: "I'm Dick Donner. Well, my name is Richard Donner, but my friends call me Dick. And I consider everybody out there to be friends right now." It's a little awkward when he explains some of the history, but he has a right to be upset. The man was trampled on, and he fully deserves this re-edit, a tribute to his great work on Superman I and II.

Of course, it's a mixed experience. Overall, the Donner Cut leaves me with this feeling of regret - here we have two versions of the film which complement each other. Yet, they are both compromises. Superman II was a compromise between the new and old footage, a self-imposed mashup of two directors. The Richard Donner Cut is a forced mashup of so many sources, inevitably there are going to be issues with it - things missing or out-of-place which are no fault of the 2006 editors. Fortunately, they did an excellent job, and it's very hard to notice continuity errors.

I have to say the most enjoyable part was the opening sequence. Frankly, everything about the opening to Superman II shitted me. The absence of Marlon Brando in the "villains exile" scene and flashback scenes stuck out like a hole in a bucket. The music was a crappy watered-down version of John Williams' classic score. The "flying credits" in space were cheap suck (not to mention the insulting absence of Richard Donner's name). The flashback scenes were irrelevant, poorly-timed to the music, and explained nothing.

The Donner Cut's opening is all class. It opens with the thing Superman Returns was missing (or at least, hid halfway down the ending credits) - a big glowing dedication to Christopher Reeve. Then, there is a proper recap, presented with actual incidental music (not the main theme), including a newly-edited version of Marlon Brando's original exile scene. More than just a recap, it does what The Two Towers did, and shows more of what was going on at the same time (namely, the three villains coming to Earth, or "Houston"). It then concludes with the credits sequence - with masterfully-updated titles in the style of Superman: The Movie (including "Directed by Richard Donner") and the full emphatic John Williams score.

Obviously, the biggest thing missing from this new cut is the Eiffel Tower sequence, a major "heroic" scene where Superman saves Lois, invented by Richard Lester. While I understand the removal of this entire sequence (it wouldn't really be "The Donner Cut" with this bit in it), it doesn't make the most sense as far as the film goes. I quite liked this scene - it was pretty much the only time in the whole saga where Lois went down and got herself in a heck of trouble, as she always did in the 1940s cartoons. Also, all of the films need some early-on Superman action (Superman has the helicopter, Superman III has the chemical plant, Superman IV has the train, and Superman Returns has the plane). With the removal of the Eiffel Tower scene, The Donner Cut no longer has any early scenes with Superman at all. In fact, the Man of Steel is seen for only two scenes before the climactic battle at the end. This is a bit of a problem.

Now, to the film itself. It was less of a radical change than I thought - the film follows the same story closely. There are several brand new scenes which completely own ("brand new" as in, there was no equivalent scene in Superman II). This includes two extensive new Marlon Brando scenes. But then there are a whole bunch of scenes which are effectively the same as in Superman II (very similar lines, costumes, set, etc), but are Donner scenes here, where they were previously Lester scenes.

Which begs the question: Why? Why re-shoot perfectly good material just to demonstrate your directorial control (I'm referring to Lester here). It saddens me to see this old footage which was abandoned to pointlessly. But it is good that it has finally been restored - a fitting tribute to Donner, Christopher Reeve (Clark/Superman), Margot Kidder (Lois), and Marlon Brando (Jor-El).

A side note: I wonder if Coca-Cola is paying them extra for product placement. If I'm not mistaken, they've added additional shots of the giant Coca-Cola sign! (Amongst other coke references).

I think the best that has come of these restored scenes is the appearance of Margot Kidder (Lois). I have no idea whether it was the makeup, the lighting, whatever, but for the majority of Superman II, she looks "mousey". Her face is small and pointy and she looks really tired in many scenes as well. It's the weirdest thing, and as I said, I don't know what caused it, but I can plainly tell the difference between the Donner and Lester footage involving Margot. And it was really good to see that now, for the majority of the film, she looks "normal" again, as she did in the first film, and the sequels!

Two scenes, which alone were worth the price of admission, were the famous "blank bullets" scene, and the "restoration" scene with Marlon Brando. Both crucial points in the story - the first butchered by Lester, and the second inexplicably missing from the original movie (forming the biggest plot hole in Superman II). The "blank bullets" scene was never filmed, except for a screen test with Reeve and Kidder shot during the audition process (included on the 2001 Superman DVD). Watching those tests on the DVD, I had no idea how they were going to edit together into a cohesive scene, but it was done brilliantly.

The "restoration" scene was the crux of the film. Brilliantly-executed (I read that this scene was rather complex to restore, involving body doubles, and special effects), it finally fills in the big plot hole and gives new meaning to Jor-El's "prophecy" from the first movie, all without removing any of the dramatic tension of Superman's eventual return.

I am still disappointed with the role of Gene Hackman (Lex Luthor) (still credited with top billing) and his cohorts Otis and Eve (played by Ned Beatty and Valerie Perinne). I never got why they were really in this film. Otis and Eve are just here to help Lex escape, then they inexplicably disappear from the film. After this, Lex's entire role in the film is to think he is helping out the three supervillains, when really they could have killed him numerous times (which they continually point out, to which he continually replies, "Kill me? Lex Luthor? The greatest criminal mind of our time?") He has some funny moments ("Australia!"), and plays a key role in the final climax, but essentially he plays fourth-fiddle to the other villains and doesn't assume the proper role of Lex, which is to be the brains behind the operation.

I had read that Gene Hackman had a "much bigger" role in The Donner Cut. While he did have some extra lines that had originally been cut, he didn't actually have any additional scenes and played no bigger role in the Donner Cut than he did in the original.

I also have to throw in my objection to the "diner bully" scenes, in which a de-powered Clark gets beaten up by a thug, and then in the second scene at the end of the film, a re-powered Clark goes and beats him up. I have always hated these scenes, directed by Donner. The first one is OK - I don't think it's within Clark/Superman's personality to pick a fight, but assuming he does, the scene works. But the ending scene disgusts me - I don't see why Superman would be so petty as to beat this guy up. It doesn't fit my idea of Superman's ethos. These two scenes remain in the film, unedited.

Now the film holds together (as far as the plot goes) surprisingly well. However, there are about 3 moments I could list where it jumps forward jarringly. Footage from Superman II could have been used to plug these holes, but I can see why they were reluctant to use it. (Except for the ending, where Lex Luthor just disappears inexplicably - apparently there is a deleted scene on the DVD where he gets arrested, but I haven't seen it so I don't know why it wasn't included). But on the plus side, the ordering has been improved, with previously lengthy scenes being intercut with one another to increase the pacing.

Some of the best parts were me cringing with anticipation as I knew some tacky scene or line was coming up, only to find it had been cut from the film. A lot of the small changes were simply cuts to Lester scenes. A good example is Superman flying around to gather cooking ingredients. Also the entire group of scenes in the tacky++ "hotel interior" set has been excised in favour of the aforementioned "blank bullets" scene.

A final caveat is the ending. I was spoiled as to what the ending would be, but I'm glad I was. I think everyone should know what's going to happen before they watch this film, because otherwise they're going to shit themselves when it actually happens. So here it is, spoiler warning and all that: Superman flies around the Earth and turns back time. Again. Geez, it was bad enough the first time. This time it makes even less sense, because he basically turns back the whole film - what was the point of it? The justification is that this was the originally-scripted ending to Superman II (not Superman, which it got used in). I think it was pretty obvious they couldn't use Lester's ending. And it would have been too hard to create a new one. So I understand why they did it. But it does ruin the film a good deal. However, it is executed brilliantly, so I'll credit them for that, and leave you to see how they pulled it off for yourself.

Overall, great. Monumentally better than the original, mainly for the presence of the opening, blank bullets and Marlon Brando scenes. Those are the main gems, but there are, as promised, small and large changes scattered throughout the film which make small and large improvements all over. While there are some missing scenes from the original which I'd ideally like to see still in the film, it's understandable why they are gone. Producer/editor Michael Thau has made his mark on the Superman franchise with an important task, handled with great care and done masterfully. It's only sad that the stars of the show, Christopher Reeve and Marlon Brando aren't here to see it.
"I just got a kick out of seeing it - something I never thought would happen. It was quite emotional, quite exciting. Thirty years."
- Director Richard Donner

3 Comments:

At 10:33 am, Blogger Tim Cuthbertson said...

You know that huge fan review of Superman Returns that was almost as long as the movie itself? You're getting there ;P

 
At 11:54 pm, Blogger Toria/Deb said...

Okay, Blogger is finally cooperating with me, in allowing me to post a comment. Well, do I need to see the movie now that I've read that summary of it? ;) Did you know that it's been like 30 years since I've seen a Superman movie, I think?

Enjoy your marathon! :) /wave

 
At 9:59 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

just stopping by to say hey

 

Post a Comment

<< Home