Lois was not supposed to die originally at the end of STM.
BTW, here is a YouTube video I came up with (that someone else assembled) that shows how the Lois situation could be handled.
Neil
Superman 2-Donner cut
- Thread starter RobertScorpio
- Start date
BTW, here is a YouTube video I came up with (that someone else assembled) that shows how the Lois situation could be handled.
Neil
IIRC, the original ending for the first film has Superman prevent one of the nukes from going off on Earth by throwing them in to space. I don't think Lois was ever supposed to be killed.
That nuke then allows Zod and co to escape from the Phantom Zone, completely replacing the entire Eiffel Tower sequence from the Lester cut.
The reverse time ending was always supposed to be the ending for Superman II but the pressure on Donner to get the first film finished (and to stop spending the Salkinds' money) some meant that he ended up using it for the first movie instead.
While I know that the Donner Cut will never be a complete movie I prefer it over Lester's version. I really loved how the Donner cut included all the extended Jor-El scenes and cut out nearly all of Lester's camp.
But the ending for the Donner cut felt REALLY sloppy. I agree with chrisspringob that they should have had Lois still remember everything and ended it with the scene of Superman over Earth. There would have been nothing wrong with Lois knowing the secret at the end of the second movie. That's what we call character development. Who the heck cares about Superman IV anyway?
But the ending for the Donner cut felt REALLY sloppy. I agree with chrisspringob that they should have had Lois still remember everything and ended it with the scene of Superman over Earth. There would have been nothing wrong with Lois knowing the secret at the end of the second movie. That's what we call character development. Who the heck cares about Superman IV anyway?
The problem is that the big chunks of Donner's version were unfilmed when he was let go (and I seriously doubt the Salkinds take on that), and they'd already decided they'd have to rethink the ending when they came back to finish II, which obviously didn't happen.
I look at the Donner cut as sort of a historical artifact, a partial reconstruction of what was intended, to give you an idea of what the film was supposed to be like. I think, perhaps, the problem is that it was released like it was a complete alternate cut, instead of the incomplete artifact it is. I'm not going to deny the editing is sloppy and other faults of the storytelling, but the point was to show what Donner wanted, a style mostly incompatible with Lester's.
Personally, I find Lester's version of Superman II unwatchable for its broadness and its own sloppiness (you want continuity errors, it's full of them) and its bad taste.
I look at the Donner cut as sort of a historical artifact, a partial reconstruction of what was intended, to give you an idea of what the film was supposed to be like. I think, perhaps, the problem is that it was released like it was a complete alternate cut, instead of the incomplete artifact it is. I'm not going to deny the editing is sloppy and other faults of the storytelling, but the point was to show what Donner wanted, a style mostly incompatible with Lester's.
Personally, I find Lester's version of Superman II unwatchable for its broadness and its own sloppiness (you want continuity errors, it's full of them) and its bad taste.
Last edited:
^Yeah, I somehow doubt Donner would have used footage from screentests if he'd had a choice.
Watching the documentaries on the DVDs, the Salkind's don't come off at all well. The only people who come off worse are the Golan Globus guys who took over for Superman IV when they bought the rights from the Salkinds.
Strangely, I got the same vibe from the various financier people during the Dangerous Days documentary film about Blade Runner.
Watching the documentaries on the DVDs, the Salkind's don't come off at all well. The only people who come off worse are the Golan Globus guys who took over for Superman IV when they bought the rights from the Salkinds.
Strangely, I got the same vibe from the various financier people during the Dangerous Days documentary film about Blade Runner.
I liked it as an alternate glimpse. The BOBW would include a careful edit of both versions. The only problem Lester's version had was that it went from deadly serious to very silly camp. I would also at least look at some scenes cut but used for TV broadcasts, like the PZers killing that kid from a distance. But it would prolly look even worse than the cellophane S.
But keep the workable humor. I mean, was the movie irreprably harmed by 'Excuse me, General....' ?
But keep the workable humor. I mean, was the movie irreprably harmed by 'Excuse me, General....' ?
S
Stone_Cold_Sisko
Guest
The Donner Cut is an interesting exercise, but its just too incomplete and the time-turning thing AGAIn just kills the ending. Yes yes i know the whole backstory, was the original ending of the first two movies, blah blah blah, it's still fuckin' stupid.
I agree with you on almost every point. I am surprised that no one has done a Phantom Edit style cut from the available versions. I would love to see the two films reworked exactly like you are suggesting.
My ideal cut would be pretty much exactly what is in the Lester Cut except I would swap out Lara with Jor-El for the Fortress of Solitude stuff and I would go with some of the small trims that the Donner Cut made to the campier bits of Lester's footage. Like it or not, the Lester Cut is simply a more complete version of the movie. The Paris opening is exactly the kind of high energy action sequence that a movie like this should start with. The magic kiss is kind of a lame ending but it's better than turning back time so far that the entire movie never even happened. And the campier bits of General Zod's performance are exactly what has made the character such an icon over the last 28 years. "KNEEL before Zod!"
I liked it but I hated the cop-out of an ending.
Christopher Reeves did his best acting in the deleted scenes with Brando I thought. The most interesting visual is when he's speaking to Jor-El. He's dressed like Clark Kent but he looks like Superman.
Christopher Reeves did his best acting in the deleted scenes with Brando I thought. The most interesting visual is when he's speaking to Jor-El. He's dressed like Clark Kent but he looks like Superman.
The ending was fine except that it was used in Superman I and the bar scene made no sense. But they explained it in the making of feature. They decided to use the turning back time in Superman I knowing they would need a new ending to II. Then Donner was fired. So for the DVD they had two options, use the super kiss or spin the earth again. They didn't like the super kiss so the only option was to turn back time. Personally I have no problem with it. I only wish they cut the 2nd bar fight.
It was a bad idea back then, too. I only barely forgive them for using it in the 1st movie because...
1.) He only turns things back a few minutes, rather than erasing the entire movie.
2.) There's a certain implication that he probably wouldn't be able to do it again because he was only able to summon the strength to do it this time due to the uncontrollable rage at Lois Lane's death.
Superman turning back time erased everything he did in the movie. He had to suffer no consequences (loss of life I mean) for his actions. Also, is Jor-El still "alive" because he turned back time? Foolish ending I think.
Norrin Radd
Vice Admiral
If he went back in time, wouldn't he meet himself? That's really the only problem I have with it.
Maybe he killed his past self, then went to mack on Lois.
Sneak attack!
There can be only one...
Maybe he killed his past self, then went to mack on Lois.
Sneak attack!
There can be only one...
I didn't say I liked the concept of Superman turning back time. I just don't think it's any worse in SII:TRDC than in S:TM. Based on your post, I can understand why you would. Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.
Exactly. If he could do this every time, that means he wouldn't have to suffer any consequences. He could just reverse whatever went wrong. I'd rather have the whole "Earth spinning" thing be a one-time thing, brought on only because of his inconsolable loss.
I didn't say I liked the concept of Superman turning back time. I just don't think it's any worse in SII:TRDC than in S:TM. Based on your post, I can understand why you would. Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.
Let me clarify -- I mean the time reversal gimmick in SII:TRDC doesn't bother me any more than it does in S:TM, with the assumption that Donner would have written a different ending for S:TM had he not been shitecanned.
Similar threads
