|
Have you ever seen a movie you absolutely loved and
then the sequel just kinda sucked? Have you ever
wished you could see that movie remade right? Sure, we
all have. I think aside from the last few Star Wars
films, nothing sums up this level of disappointment
than Richard Lester's Superman II. As far as
remaking sequels go, Richard Donnor's Superman II is
all one could hope for. Dick Donnor has balls. His
introduction to the film is about as polite a screw
you to Ilya and Alexander Salkind as he could possibly
give and still be allowed to get his footage out of
the vault.
As far as big changes, that pointless film padding
fight scene at the Eifel Tower--- that's gone. The
random schizophrenic feel of the movie caused by
having two directors (Donnor and Lester) is made a lot
smoother by sticking with the Donnor footage instead
of the corny and over the top Lester stuff.
While much of the film is the same, there are many
distinct changes. Lara is not in 'Superman 2.5' at
all. It is not really missed since it includes much
of the same dialogue/plot elements with Marlon Brando
as Jor-El and the true meaning of some of the dialogue
from Superman: The Movie. Very little (if any) of
the poorly loop dubbed dialogue of the Gene Hackman
impressionist remains in the Donnor cut. Another plus
since even someone as hearing impaired as I am could
tell it was an impressionist. The start of the film
has many differences and the ending changes are fairly
big as well. (Aside from the Eifel Tower fight being
gone-- I'm leaking nothing.)
Which did I like better?
Hard to say. See, I have a soft spot for the Lester
Superman movies for the sheer cheese factor. My
friends and I used to have Mystery Science Theater
3000 MYOC (Make your own comments) style parties and
that was one of our favorites to watch. That and Dick
Tracy. I think for sentimental reasons I will track
down a DVD copy of Lester's Superman II at some point.
Richard Donnor's version is a much more sleeker
film. More of the pseudo-Joseph Campbell's 'Power of
Myth' interpretation of Superman exists in Donnor's
film. On the other hand, Lester blows more stuff up.
I like explosion. (Too bad that's the best that can
be said for Superman III and IV.) The plot is more
coherent and doesn't dissolve to slapstick or camp as
much as the Lester film. I think on a purely
contextual/emotional level Donnor wins out. Lester
makes us see a man can fly, but Donnor makes us want
to believe it.
|