Superman.

I don't know if there is much more that could be done to the first SUPERMAN on DVD. They added 8 minutes of footage to the first disc. I suppose they could add some sort of tribute to Reeve but that DVD is pretty loaded. There probably is a ton of stuff that could be done to part 2 and hopefully that will happen. I would bet all the original SUPERMAN films will get new special editions at the end of '06 just like the BATMAN films are getting this fall.

The first Superman film is still the best superhero movie, in my opinion. Really, it's got everything, and never feels contrived or pandering. There's lots of laughs, and lots of thrills, both of which are essential to a film of this type.

Heck, I'm one of those sullen twenty year olds that's supposed to like the Spidey movies better. As good as they are, they just aren't as rewatchable as this gem.

And that's not even mentioning the score. My God, what a piece of work.

I hope the new film is even half as good as the original.

Superman 2 all the way for me - all thebest parts of the original - Reeve, the score, Gene Hackman's Luthor AND Terence Stamp as General Zod.

Golden.

Still the superhero sequel benchmark for mine.

I think both have huge flaws. The first seems pretty fatty - and some of the cheese factor (Kidder's speech, the pimp) give it a cringe factor sometimes. The second one would be great if it didn't have the Lester crap in it, but it is damn enjoyable.

Couldn't agree more. Fett's right about the Lester crap in Superman II. It sticks out like a sore thumb.

I'm with FutekiNa on this one. I still think Superman is the greatest superhero movie made (Spiderman 2 is a close second). I find myself rewatching this one more than any other. My 2 biggest problems with Superman are the "Can You Read My Mind" scene and the going back in time/reversing the earth. I also think they should have gotten someone other than Kidder to be Lois. I just can "buy" Superman being attracted to her version of Lois. I've heard people not liking Hackman's Luthor (too campy) but I thought he was great. I think Williams' theme is the greatest in movie history.

II is much more flawed in my opinion. I love the story and Stamp's Zod. One of my favorite scenes in any movie is the when Superman gets his powers back and returns to the city and asks Zod to "step outside" I'm no comic purist however the powers they give Superman at the end are fucking stupid. While Il iked it as a kid, now I think Superman's "revenge" on the trucker at the end doesn't really fit something Superman would do.

We won't talk about III or IV.

I only have 1 complaint about the DVD and that is the cheap ass case they put it in. This movie deserves a better package than one sitting in th Wal Mart $5.99 bin. Ive been meaning to put it in a better one since I bought it.

I have no doubt Singer will make great new movie and I like what I have seen so far. I just hope I can get past the fact the late great Reeve is not wearing the cape. Man that guy was good.

I don't know. I can't think of ANY flaws in SUPERMAN THE MOVIE. Much like THE RIGHT STUFF, I consider it to be a uniquely American masterpiece. I think it successfully and effortlessly taps into almost every known genre (intimate drama, disaster epic, crime story, broad comedy, personal journey, science fiction spectacle, romance and musical, etc., etc.)

I've never understood why some people get so hung up on the comedy of Luthor, Otis and Miss Tesmacher, or the fantastically unscientific device of spinning the Earth backwards in time. I find everything in this film, "warts and all," to be enormously, lovingly entertaining in every single way. There's not a moment that bores me or rubs me the wrong way.

SUPERMAN II, on the other hand, is an uneven mess...mostly because of the Lester issue. Whereas Donner was having fun with the story and characters, Lester is clearly mocking them. Donner's work was about wonder, joy, adventure and awe. Lester's work was about parody, camp, ridicule and cheese.

I think SUPERMAN II has a lot of potential for greatness in it, mostly thanks to the Donner sequences that survive, but on the whole, I find it to be a vastly inferior film to the first. I would love to see an ALIEN 3-style Donnerized re-cut of the film, especially one that fixes all of the truly shitty optical effects.

I'm glad that Bryan Singer is such a huge fan of the first film, and based on the phenomenal Comic-Con teaser, I look forward to SUPERMAN RETURNS more than any other upcoming film currently in production. (Yes, even more than SNAKES ON A PLANE.)

...And can we finally clear this up (for the 37,650th time)?

It's not Superman's reverse momentum, that in some way causes the Earth to spin backwards, that in some weird way causes time to rewind.
In his grief for Louis dying he approached light-speed...and went beyond, stopping time and reversing it...I know this isn't obvious from the film...and maybe not a better explanation...but it's what happened.

I envy you. Since Returns is tied in closely to the first two films, why doesn't WB reissue Superman next spring to get people prepped for the new film?

Nothing solid as far as DVD reissues go, but there was some rumor about the possibility of a Donner Supes II recut over at the Home Theater Forum and Superman Cinema (where some members had been working on a fan recut of Supes II and stopped as soon as the news was announced) around the time that Singer announced that he'd be using Brando footage. Since then, nothing. The only thing I'd want is more trailers and TV spots (say, the stuff available over at capedwonder.com) and split the set over two discs instead of a DVD-18 (I bet this happens anyway if the DVDs are reissued next year).

The FACTS behind the reverse time thing

The science behind the superman-reverse-time-thing is ridiculous.

No, Nope, No way, Nevah, No-nerino, No way Jose, and my favourite-falling off a cliff-NOOOOoooooo o o o o

*doof*

The only way it could come close to working is if he flew much much much faster and created what is termed a 'black hole' by the earth - this of course would kill us all....

Besides, he shoulda been able to get those two missiles - hes SUPERMAN!

I think that people get too hung up on the science of that scene. The core of it, really, is that he chooses to do what Pa Kent raised him to instead of what some ghost AI of his dead father ordered him to. He chooses humanity over his own heritage, and I always thought that that was pretty cool.

I think Superman is nearly flawless but I'm not a fan of any of the sequels, which leads me to the one problem I have with the restored version I have on DVD:

The trial of the Kryptonian criminals at the beginning is extended, possibly to give more screen time to Brando, but the effect of which is to weaken the film by making it dependent on the sequel for resolution to a plot thread which goes nowhere in the first film. That scene, by dwelling upon the outlaws and their past, rather than simply serving as a passing atmospheric detail of Kryptonian culture and geography, creates an expectation that those characters will return, which they do, but only in the sub-par sequel.

I like all of the other footage that was added back in, but that one scene really bugs me. That stuff would have been more fitting in the beginning of the second film (though I still wouldn't care to own that one on DVD), which if memory serves does start with a quick flashback depicting one of the murders the outlaws commit on Krypton. But I'd prefer that the first film be as untainted by the events of the second film as possible.

So what you're saying, to clear things up for Yas, and this makes perfect sense, at least as sci-fi logic, is not that time is reversed, but that Superman himself goes back in time, and we see time reverse, basically, from his point of view. That is a much better interpretation of that scene, which has always worked for me on a poetic level.

Hmmmm

Its just Supes travelling back in time just opens so many questions. Think about it, it was a decision by the writer/director made in the 70's and we are discussing it here....now.

I only really saw the movie for the first time a month ago, I enjoyed it and thought a lot of it was well made.....there were a lot of cheese and campity side orders (Lois-Poem-Flying-Why?).

Well, I have to stand by the science part of my statement, thats true I'm afraid, read it recently - although my point was that the time travelling stretched it a little far....c'mon, surely?

I've always just thought- Strong-yes, Flies-cool, Heat/X-ray vision-Why not?, Kryptonite-I'l buy it. And thats it. Travelling through time? Shield-turning-into-funky-plastic-wrap? Memory-loss lips?

(Splitting in two and fighting self is too well executed a sequence to mention........just did though..)

I'd like to see the original cut of the sequel, from everything ive heard it sounds a far better thought out film. Essentially connecting the first two films more closely.

P.S.-Reeves really nailed it.

You do know that Superman exists in a fantasy universe, right? A world where a super-smart guy is a viable opponent for a super-human alien? Expecting the "science" of a plot device to meet the demands of natural laws in a comic book movie is asking a little too much.

You should really expand on your understanding of how time travel works, if you can form a complete sentence.

Besides, this is Superman we're talking about. He gets a new superpower every week, depending on who's writing him, and frequently forgets that he has super-strength for some reason.

http://supermancinema.co.uk/daily_pl...ws/index.shtml has some information about a UK SE releases of of II-IV.

Superman really has only one superpower, the power of narrative causality. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

It's also worth noting that the Superman films, by and large, came Pre-Crisis, when Superman could pretty much do anything he wanted.

He was weakend by his exposure to kryptonite.

It was NEVER the 'reverse-time, save Lois-thing' that irked me from the original film...but an earlier scene.
Lois is falling from a screwed up helicopter from the top of 'The Daily Planet' building at 9.8 meters per second per second, Superman is flying up to grab her at God knows what speed...and CATCHES HER WHILE STILL TRAVELLING UP!!

Either Superman has some cool 'inertial-dampening field' that I've NEVER read from the comics,...or he should of flown above her, and matched her descent and then grabbed her...
Superman should really of been covered in 'Lois-berry jam' in that encounter; she would of been better-off just bouncing off the pavement.

...or do I just need to stop being so anal?

Wait, don't answer that...

Don't dwell on it.




I gotta agree with Litmus, the original supes is the tits for me.


I love Hackman, sure he cracks-wise and insults Otis, but he still kills four people.
Kinda cool too that every incarnation of Luthor since, comic or otherwise, has had him
as the maniacal plutocrat.

This film is exactly what the character needed at that point in time.
Constantly plagued with shitty stories and writing, this flick gave Superman
back his soul and reminded everyone why he is needed.

As great as it is, it didn't start out that way. One of the very first
drafts has Luthor as a Woody Allen clone who eats kleenexes when he gets
nervous. Another stupid bit has Superman sitting on a toilet in Grand
Central Station pulling the chain to gain entrance to Luthor's lair.

One of the Kryptonian villains was named Kru-El, get it?

Props and credit to Donner who demanded this lame shit gone
before taking the job.

And that gloriuous score by John Williams....

Superman II is fine as a sequel, but needs fixed. Some of the FXs are just
awful and distracting and the audio is seriously lacking, although it sounds
great on my laserdisc version. The Houston stuff is kinda goofy, but I've
always loved the Metropolis melee.

Interested to see the Brando footage (unless Singer uses it) and more of the three baddies tearing
apart the White House.

Superman III has always been unwatchable save for the Smallville stuff with
Annette O'Toole. Not sure of any missing footage, not that I want any.

Superman IV has 45 minutes of missing footage. Not sure if it would help, but
even as it stands its still a better flick than 3 and now I'm just curious to
see it.

The digitalbits has some rumblings posted today of SEs for all four flicks.

Unless we get some more extras, like the original trailer of Supes standing in the wheatfield, not sure what else there is to add to the original unless its strickly used to cross promote Returns.

Watch the scene when Miss Tessmecher rescues Supes. She makes him promise to stop the missle headed east first, (get it, HEAD EAST?)

He made a promise and kept it. No plot hole, just how it is.

Now that I'm thinking about it, the original ending of S:TM had Supes pushing the first missle out in space resulting in the escape of the Krypto baddies.

Not sure if this was ever edited into the film or just an idea. Be cool though if they used this to link the first two Donner flicks.

For anyone and who loves quality superhero stories, watch "Justice League" and now "Justice League Unlimited!" Top-notch all the way around.

Forget all these damn origin stories, turn these kids loose on a live-action Leaguer flick.

Again, it comes back to the fact that Donner was fired from Superman II. Even with a so-called directors cut, we'll never get a complete idea of how Superman II would have panned out if Donner had finished it. Maybe that criminal's footage in Superman would have more resonance in a different version of Superman II.

I would like to think that, just like some of the shit that was mentioned that was excised from the Superman script, Donner would have done the same thing regarding the Saran Wrap S-shield and some of the other corny shit that was in the sequel.

This would be amazing if it panned out. I hope Donner is up for it.

After Timeline, I doubt he's that busy.

Well I think he's finishing up work on 16 BLOCKS which is supposed to come out in '06. That one sounds like it could be as good as MIDNIGHT RUN or as bad as THE MAN. Hopefully Donner can complete that movie and do what he can to make SUPERMAN II closer to his vision.

You've obviously forgotten the robot lady. Best. Villain. Ever.

Just remembering the first time i saw that....













.......a little bit of wee came out, I believe.

the robot lady always kinda freaked me out when I was young.. actually.. what freaked me out most was when she first got sucked in and her moans/wails kinda die off as she gets consumed by the circuitry.

So would someone please tell me what parts of the current version of Superman II are by which director? I've been catching parts of it on cable this month and I've been noticing differences in styles.....

Thanks!

That robot lady scared the shit of me when I was a kid, it was so bad, I couldn't watch the scene where she get's sucked into that circuitry.

I haven't seen Superman for awhile but what it was a magnificent piece of entertainment. I'd love to see the donner cut of Superman 2.

Same here there was something deeply disturbing about that whole sequence.

It creeps me out just thinking about it.

It's hard to know exactly who is responsiable for what.

Some say Donner shot 80% of the sequel before getting fired, others claim 60%.

A lot more footage on Krypton with the baddies.

The opening Paris terrorists junk belongs to Lester.

Instead of the Paris foolishness, the original opening had Lois looking at pictures of Clark and Superman side by side. She draws glasses on Superman and connects the dots.

She makes Clark reveal himself to her by jumping out the window of the Daily Planet. Clark stays in disguise and uses his super breath to push Lois in the awnings for support. She eats crow, but only temporarily.

This plot point is evident in the original version during the Niagra Falls stay when Lois jumps in the river demanding Clark, change into Superman and save her.

The jokey stuff with the villains in the town is Lester. That's why we hear a young boy inexplicably speak with an English accent. The kid was Lester's grandson.
There was an interesting scene in Donner's version that had Non, the silent one, kill a young boy for running from General Zod. A woman comes up to him and says, "He was just a boy." Zod says, "NO ONE Leaves."

The hick sheriff was Lesters.

The White House invasion had tons more footage. One scene had Zod grabbing a machine gun and using it to mow down several White House staffers. Early bits of this scene are still in the movie, but it cuts just as Zod grabs the gun and flings the guy through the window.

The biggest omission was Brando as Jor El. With the new film coming out, that is rumored to be using this footage, who knows if it will surface in the new DVD?


The amnesia kiss I think was Lester. I'm not sure what Donner had in mind for this. It always felt like a major cop-out.

The rest is hard to figure out. I would say, whenever there is something jokey or stupid, it belongs to Lester.


Can not wait for these DVDs in November.

There are a few ways to identify Donner's footage in SUPERMAN II:

1. If Gene Hackman is in it, it's Donner. Upset by Donner's firing, Hackman refused to return for the Lester shoot. A body double was used in his absence and Hackman's voice was later dubbed by celebrity impressionist Rich Little.

2. Donner's footage, shot by the late, great Geoffrey Unsworth, employs a diffusion filter not readily evident in Lester's footage. Donner's footage has a timeless storybook quality as a result, while Lester's bland footage is more on par with a sitcom.

3. If Margot Kidder looks like a skanky cancer poodle, it's Lester. If she looks healthy with pornstar lip gloss, it's Donner. (Also, all the footage of Kidder with her dyke assistant is from the Lester shoot only.)

4. If you see a Kryptonian other than Jor-El, it's Lester. Those scenes all used to have Brando until the Salkinds figured they could save a few bucks by not using them. So all his dialogue was reshot with Susannah York and the guy who played Lobot. A scene such as the one where Lex Luthor infiltrates the Fortress of Solitude and listens to the recordings is a complex intercutting of Lester and Donner footage.

5. The moon attack scenes are all Donner. The mission control part of those scenes, the ones with John Ratzenberger are Lester. His character apparently lost his job with the Navy monitoring their nuclear weapons as seen in the first film and is now working for NASA. His partner, played by Shane Rimmer, apparently loses his job after this film and is seen in Superman III as a state policeman.

6. The diner scenes where Clark gets beat up and later returns to get revenge is Donner.

7. Lester shot everything regarding the Paris terrorists including the Daily Planet introductory scenes.

8. Lester shot all of the scenes with Clark and Lois at the Daily Planet: the orange juice squeezer and the amnesia kiss.

9. Lester shot all of the Niagara Falls scenes.

10. Lester shot all of the lovey dovey scenes in the Fortress of Solitude.

11. Lester shot the lead-up to the big fight up to the point where the villains invade the Daily Planet. Everything from there to the point where Superman makes his entrance is Donner. The majority of the fight appears to be Lester except for the cutaways to Lex Luthor. In the Lester footage Margot Kidder is wearing a bad wig.

The orange juice squeezer scenes. God those were awful as were the rest here.

12. Fortress of Solitude fight. The first part of it is Lester: the flight in, the finger lasers, the holographic Superman stuff. Lex Luthor is conveniently deposited in another part of the Fortress. During the fighting Gene Hackman's Plan 9 double makes his way to the action. At the point he finally gets there, we're back to Donner footage and the real Gene Hackman

In the 1977 shooting script, Lex Luthor is with them the whole time. There isn't any fighting as in the Lester reshoots. It's more about Superman trying to con the villains into getting into the molecule chamber and General Zod grandstanding. Presumably this is what we would have seen in Donner's cut. In favoring more action/fight scenes over the original material, Lester and co. had to figure out a way to do them without Gene Hackman.

Rimmer then apparently lost his job as that state policeman and ended up as a Gotham City water board technician in BATMAN BEGINS.

Ratzenberger famously found a side job between his Navy assignment and NASA gig by working for the Rebel Alliance on Hoth in THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, where he was stationed with Ray Hassett, who was reincarnated there after his job as a Metropolis detective in SUPERMAN THE MOVIE ended with him being run over by a train near Lex Luthor's underground lair.

Donner

I know someone mentioned the movie before, but I am still utterly flabbergasted that the director of Superman, Lethal Weapon, Goonies, Maverick (and yes even LadyHawke) could direct... TIMELINE? It blows my mind that anyone with any storytelling skills and an eye for good acting could be responsible for that... Mind you, I never read the original Crichton book.

Needless to say, I am excited for the Singer version... I got chills hearing Williams score in the trailer. John Williams! That manipulative SOB... I still get tears hearing the music that played during the discovery of sick Elliot & E.T. on the bathroom floor...

I actually really enjoyed the book. A lot of the elements of risk/suspense/grit were kinda lost in the movie, and it turned out just being a mindless adventure romp. That being said, I think most probably considered the book to be subpar for Crichton.

Donner hates the film too.

I too, crave this movie like no other. Ever since the teaser came out. This movie will own me like Batman Begins. DC is on a roll here. I can't wait until they announce who is playing Wonder Woman. That should be announced some time in September.