Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueSuperman agrees to sacrifice his powers to start a relationship with Lois Lane, unaware that three Kryptonian criminals he inadvertently released are conquering Earth.Superman agrees to sacrifice his powers to start a relationship with Lois Lane, unaware that three Kryptonian criminals he inadvertently released are conquering Earth.Superman agrees to sacrifice his powers to start a relationship with Lois Lane, unaware that three Kryptonian criminals he inadvertently released are conquering Earth.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 4 victoires et 1 nomination au total
- Boris
- (as Jim Dowdell)
- Prison Warder
- (as Angus McInnes)
Avis à la une
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Le saviez-vous
- Anecdotes(at around 1h 45 mins) The actress playing Lois Lane using the typewriter during the end scene is not Margot Kidder. The ending that was written, but never filmed, had Lois Lane die at the Fortress of Solitude, which in turn caused Superman to reverse time. The typewriter scene was shot in 2006, specifically for the restoration, and had an uncredited actress stand in for Lois.
- GaffesSuperman turns back time so that General Zod, Ursa and Non never leave the Phantom Zone, but we aren't shown how Superman deals with the missiles launched at the end of the first Superman movie - meaning, after turning back time, they should escape again, if Superman dealt with the nuclear missiles in the same manner. (This is a problem that actually stems from the first movie, where we aren't shown Superman dealing with the crisis in a different fashion after Lois dies - he shows up at Lois' car, and the aftershocks that caused her death just never happen.)
The next scene we see is meant to be the beginning of the movie again, with the Daily Planet - so after the nuclear explosions, and before the arrival of the villains - but Clark goes back to straighten out the trucker who hit him afterwards - though because Superman turned back time, basically, this event never happened - so Clark was hitting an innocent man for no reason. (The diner owner says that he just had the place fixed up - meaning the scuffle did occur, and Clark claims he's been working out, meaning from the last time they saw him, when he was beaten - however, again, this never happened because Superman turned back time again.)
Moreover, towards the end of the film, Superman destroys the Fortress of Solitude with his heat-sight - the Fortress of Solitude should be reconstructed (and with Jor-El available to guide Kal-El again) due to Superman turning back time again. The time travel device, beyond complicating the film's time-line, nullifies Jor-El's sacrifice and Superman's lesson, as after turning back time, things should be "back to normal" again.
Furthermore, if Superman's end-game was to turn back time all along, he didn't have to fight the super-villains in Metropolis or in the Fortress of Solitude at all - he could have turned back time immediately after regaining his powers, or following the Metropolis fight.
- Citations
Lois Lane: You ARE Superman, aren't you?
Clark Kent: Lois, now we've been through these haullcinations of yours before. Can't you see what you almost did? Throwing yourself off a building 30 stories high? Can't you see what a tragic mistake you almost made?
Lois Lane: I made a mistake. I made a mistake because
[Lois pulls out a gun]
Lois Lane: I risked my life instead of yours.
Clark Kent: Lois... don't be insane!
Lois Lane: And don't fall down 'cause you're just going to have to get up again!
Clark Kent: Lois, don't be crazy now... LOIS!
[Lois fires at Clark, who just stands there with a stern look on his face]
Lois Lane: [Lois looks at amazement] It IS you...
[Clark takes off his glasses to reveal that he is indeed Superman]
Lois Lane: I guess I've known this for the longest time.
Clark Kent: You realize, of course, if you had been wrong, Clark Kent would've been killed.
Lois Lane: [Lois holds up the gun] With a blank?
[Clark closes his eyes in embarassment]
Lois Lane: Gotcha!
Clark Kent: [Clark sits down ready to talk]
- Crédits fousAfter the Warner Bros./DC Comics logos, there is an on-screen dedication "in loving memory" of Christopher Reeve, "Without whom we would have never believed a man could fly".
- ConnexionsEdited from Superman II (1980)
Meilleurs choix
- How long is Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut?Alimenté par Alexa
- Why was Richard Donner fired from directing the original cut of Superman II?
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 54 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée1 heure 56 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39 : 1