Superman II: El montaje de Richard Donner

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.

Superman 2 the Richard Donner cut is an unfinished movie that appears to be more of a special feature then an actual concrete movie despite what some might say.

This movie/cut of Superman 2 came about due to the infamous behind the scenes drama of the original Superman 2 (1980).

Originally Richard Donner (who directed the 1st Superman movie) was going to direct the 2nd one as well and even shot a lot of scenes for 2 while he was still making the 1st one.

However due to rising tensions between Donner and the producers he was let go and replaced by Richard Lester who proceeded to finish the movie using some of Donner's scenes while shooting his own which were re-written to some extent. Despite this Superman 2 (1980) ended up being very good and one of the best superhero sequels ever.

Still fans wanted to see what Richard Donned would have done if he had stayed on the project so as a result in 2006 we got the Richard Donner cut.

Now the plot of the Richard Donner cut is essentially the same as the original Superman 2 released in 1980 except there are some differences here and there.

For example in the original Superman 2 the movie opens with Superman saving Lois in Paris from terrorists who are about to set off a hydrogen bomb. Superman throws the bomb into space where it explodes and accidently releases Zod and his cronies from the phantom zone which they were imprisoned in by Superman's father Jor El.

In the Richard Donner cut however we see it is the missile that Superman launches into Space in the 1st movie that sets Zod and co. Loose.

The movie has several alterations like this in the 1st act and the 3rd act which while varying in quality it is still interesting nonetheless.

By the time we get to the 2nd act though where Clark Kent aka Superman and Lois Lane go to Niagara falls and Zod attacks earth that's when the movie really starts to falter.

This is because Donner only shot about 50% of Superman 2 due him being let go before he could finish it so as a result he uses little snippets of footage Lester had shot for his version as well as even screen tests which weren't made to be seen in any capacity to finish the film. You see why this doesn't work right?

I mean I'd be okay with him using the Lester footage since those were actually completed but like I said he only uses snippets if it. So for example let's say a scene in the original Superman 2 (1980) was 2 minutes long, well Donner only uses 30 seconds of it making it appear really rushed. Especially the romance of Superman and Lois.

In the original Superman 2 (1980) Lester shot the relationship between Lois and Superman in well fleshed out and developed scenes meanwhile in the Donner cut it's very rushed and feels under developed since again he only uses snippets of what Lester had shot as well as screen tests.

Which to me is maddening since he could have just used whatever Lester had shot to mitigate that problem.

Like I said there are even times where he uses screen tests to fill in the holes which again are unfinished and barely expectable.

It also doesn't help that all the stuff in the Lester cut was just better than any of the stuff Donner had shot in my opinion.

For example the Paris scene at the start of the original Superman 2 (1980) was a far better opening for the movie vs the missile recap we got in the Donner cut not helping that because this cut was made in 2006 and had a small budget they used really bad cgi to complete the missile scene which looks awful. In fact they even uses stand ins for Christopher Reeve and Margo Kidder at certain points which of course is very distracting.

Due to the unfinished nature of this movie they even re-use the ending of the original Superman (1978) to complete this movie which is completely stupid and makes no sense.

There are literally only 2 good things in this cut.

1. The Marlon Brando scenes which were cut from the original 2nd movie were put back in this cut and are pretty good. The only reason they didnt use any of the Marlon Brando scenes in the original cut was because the producers didn't want to pay Brando again.

2. The fight in Metropolis in the Donner cut is also better then the original cut as it not only has better action but it also cuts out any of the original slapstick humor Lester put in for some reason.

Besides those 2 things however the original Superman 2 (1980) cut by Richard Lester is much better and more worth your time.

Only watch the Donner cut after watching the original cut.

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.

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.

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.