Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut (1980/2006)

The vote is in: I like Richard Donner's version better.

In several important ways, this will be less review and more analysis, comparative in a way that most every review on this blog is not. The film under inspection is Superman II, originally released in 1980 as directed by Richard Lester but re-released in 2006 as directed by Richard Donner. Having been fired from Superman II, Donner had already filmed most of his rendition of Superman II, initially intending both the first and the second films be shot simultaneously; after the studios vetoed this idea, Donner - with 75% or so of the sequel in the can already - halted his Superman II until 2006, when he finally edited his cut together.

Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut is, in broad strokes, very similar to Lester's Superman II. The overall plot is the same: Superman (Christopher Reeve) fends off a Kryptonian criminal invasion led by General Zod (Terence Stamp) in alliance with Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) while dodging the suspicions of Lois Lane (Margot Kidder) that Clark Kent and Superman are one and the same. It's in the details that the two versions differ, and as the saying goes, the devil is in the details. I'm most pleased to say that all the things to which I objected in the Lester version are excised from Donner's cut, although Donner's version isn't entirely polished, leading to some distracting problems with the ending (which, inevitably, I'll have to spoil).

My aim here isn't to simply compare and contrast, to pick apart what's new and different between versions. Better reviewers than myself have had four years to do just that; for one, see DVD Verdict, who did a pretty good comparison job. Instead, my aim here is to look at the (in my eyes) most significant changes and whether or not they enrich the film. For starters, my favorite line - "Superman, thank God" - is untouched (and indeed plays out funnier, for reasons to be discussed below), so score one for Donner.

The Donner cut opens with Jor-El (Marlon Brando) sentencing Zod, Ursa, and Non to the Phantom Zone. This scene was added into the DVD version of Superman: The Movie, so it's nothing new in this reviewer's eyes; indeed, it's even a little distracting to see the same scene replayed again. But I fully understand and appreciate the Donner cut's aims in reinstating this scene: it clearly and finely restores Jor-El to the plot of Superman II, making more apparent the "son becomes the father" parallel I noted in the Lester cut. It also underscores a larger role for Jor-El to play, a role fulfilled by Superman's mother Lara (Susannah York) in the Lester cut in order to avoid paying Brando the exorbitant fees he commanded; bringing Jor-El back into the story creates a deeper connection with the first film and introduces a more compelling dynamic than the one with Lara. Donner leading Lester, 2-0.

I praised Lester's treatment of the growing dynamic between Clark and Lois, but Donner takes the advantage here for doing a better job with it. Donner's cut more subtly highlights Lois's growing suspicions, replacing the Parisian terrorist scene with a more successful scene at the Daily Planet, which introduces both Lois's cause for suspicion and the honeymoon racket expose; instead of throwing herself into Niagara Falls, Lois instead leaps from the Daily Planet offices. And instead of Clark clumsily tripping into the fireplace, Lois takes a more proactive approach, which would be criminal to spoil since it's undoubtedly the best "new" scene in the Donner cut. 3-0 now.

Donner's cut explains a lot of problematic plot holes in Lester's rendition, chief among them the connection between Lex Luthor and the Kryptonians, as well as the restoration of Superman's powers (which I thought was more a problem of audience members not interpreting correctly, but oh well). Here, when Lex breaks into the Fortress of Solitude with Miss Teschmacher, he's treated to a crystal projection of Jor-El explaining his role in Zod's imprisonment. By explaining the plot to Lex and by Hackman's perfect portrayal, it's apparent why Luthor feels he can reason with Zod & Co.; more importantly, this new scene explains how Lex knows that Superman is Kal-El, a fact that's not apparent in the Lester cut. Later, the restoration of Superman's powers is accomplished through a great scene between Brando and Reeve, who play off each other very well. It's a scene that cements Jor-El's compassion for his son, and the sad resignation on Brando's face is evidence enough for why Brando was considered one of the best actors of his generation. Donner's 4-love, for those playing the home game.

The greatest thing Richard Donner did for Superman II, however, is his judicious exorcism of all things slapstick from Lester's version of the story. Gone are the silly wind jokes during the battle for Metropolis; left by the wayside is the silly characterization of Non as an inept dullard with no grasp of his powers. Consequently the villains are entirely - finally - threatening, surrounded by only menace and dread, not the lurking suspicion that a gag is just around the corner. In Lester's cut, I got the idea that Zod was exasperated with the fact that he was the only particularly daunting figure in the trio, but in Donner's version I now feel - as Superman must - that all three Kryptonians present a viable threat. That isn't to say that Donner's cut is entirely humorless; rather, the laughs come from all the right places: Luthor's sly attitude, the Clark/Lois relationship, and Reeve's easygoing personality. 5-0 now.

But in the last quarter, Lester scores a point for a better ending. "Hang on," you say, "this is the guy who used cellophane super-shields and multiple Supermen to end his movie?" Well, yeah, and thank God those are gone. Donner's Fortress scenes are overall cleaner and truer to the spirit of Superman, but the actual ending of Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut is unpolished in very distracting ways. This newer version leaves entirely unanswered the fate of Lex Luthor, stranding him in the Fortress of Solitude - which, seconds later, is destroyed by Superman. Huh? And while Donner earns high marks for better handling Lois's conflicted feelings about knowing Clark's secret identity, he loses points for unoriginality. As much as I hated the amnesia kiss, I was even more let down by the way in which the Donner cut handles the problem of Lois knowing: reversing the rotation of the earth and going back in time. This ending worked in the first movie, but here it just feels like Donner ran out of ideas. For a film that feels so much fresher in the new cut, the ending doesn't do the rest of the film justice; as an added detriment, this time-traveling ending problematizes the last scene of the Donner cut, in which Clark returns to a diner to even the score with a burly trucker - which, if time had been undone, shouldn't need to be done if it didn't happen. So in that regard, Lester has the advantage, especially for his patriotic ending in which Superman restores the American flag to the White House. For a man who allegedly didn't understand the character, he sure hit the nail on the head with that one. Final score? 5-1.

So while the Donner cut isn't perfect, it's still leaps and bounds (over a tall building, most likely) better than the more pronounced-ly flawed Lester version. Some are complaining about the rough cut nature of the film; some effects shots are unfinished, and other scenes are drawn from screen tests plagued with continuity issues. But this is an iconic character whose very nature is based on the power of imagination. In the words of DC Comics marketing, "Just imagine." This is the version in which a man truly flies, the version I'll be watching again and again.
Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut is rated PG "for sequences of action violence, some language and brief mild sensuality." In terms of objectionable content, it's exactly identical to the original film, although the removal of comic relief may make the violence seem a little more unrelenting - which isn't a bad thing in my opinion. I doubt that Kryptonian criminals hot out of exile would stop to arm-wrestle a few yokels.

Superman II (1980)

I've always had the impression that Superman II is, with Spider-Man 2 and The Dark Knight, widely (perhaps almost universally) regarded as a comic book sequel that's better than its predecessor. I'm not entirely convinced by that statement, but only because I'm not certain that Superman II exceeds its predecessor. It certainly soars equally as high, but there are a few missteps which seem to be newcomer director Richard Lester's fault (I'll know more after I screen the Richard Donner cut). Don't get me wrong, though; Superman II is nevertheless fantastically compelling.

With Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) safely behind bars, Superman (Christopher Reeve) is flying high, thwarting Parisian terrorists and saving children at Niagara Falls. His mild-mannered alter ego, reporter Clark Kent, is teamed on a honeymoon racket expose with tough-as-nails Lois Lane (Margot Kidder), who's growing suspicious of Clark's absence every time Superman appears. Meanwhile, a freak accident unleashes three Kryptonian criminals (Terence Stamp, Sarah Douglas, and Jack O'Halloran) from the prison dimension The Phantom Zone; these new foes seek to conquer Earth and take revenge on Superman, the son of their jailer Jor-El. Meanwhile, Superman wrestles with the decision between his superpowers and a mortal life with Lois.

Superman II picks up right where its predecessor left off and so feels more like a natural extension of the first than an actual sequel (where, for contrast's sake, The Empire Strikes Back felt more like a sequel to Star Wars, three years removed both in real time and narrative time). Consequently, much of what I praised about the first film still applies here; the action scenes are still rousing, the performances are still above-board, and the movie is just as fun as the one that kicked off the franchise. As all the best sequels do, Superman II builds upon and deepens material from Superman: The Movie without resting on its laurels and merely repeating more of the same (though I loved it, Iron Man 2 was guilty of this "more of the same" business, although that worked tonally for the movie, which needed only to be more than the first to be successful, which it was). Standout features here are the complex relationship between Clark Kent and Superman; this identity crisis, merely alluded to in the first film, takes one of three rings in this circus, fleshed out by riveting performances by Reeve and Kidder, between whom the chemistry is palpable.

Also developed is a throwaway line by Marlon Brando (who is noticeably missing here) in the first film: "The son becomes the father." Here, Superman is held culpable for his father's role as jailer of Stamp's General Zod and his compatriots Ursa and Non. Superman's acceptance of this responsibility is well-played by Reeve, who lets us see the conflicted nature of this choice. While we're on the subject, major points to Terence Stamp, who's absolutely dynamite as General Zod; Stamp never lets us remember that this is a comic book movie, because Zod is so three-dimensional and real that it's easy to forget his intricate sci-fi backstory. Underneath all his black leather and superpowered trappings, Zod still possesses very human sensibilities - the desire to conquer, the inevitable boredom in an arena without challenge, and a general contempt for lower creatures (which, in Zod's case, is anyone else). Stamp so fully inhabits the character that it's no surprise people are still to this day quoting his trademark "Kneel before Zod!" to the point where his current comics counterpart invokes the slogan every so often. Douglas and O'Halloran are serviceable but ultimately little more than window dressing to accentuate the degree to which Superman is outmatched.

As for the human villain, Hackman returns as Lex Luthor and does an even better job than he did before; in Superman: The Movie, Lex was fairly one-note - brilliant but disdainful of others - where here he gets a new dimension. With only his great criminal mind at his disposal after a quick jailbreak, Lex allies himself with the Kryptonian supercriminals in a bid for conquest and the destruction of mutual enemy Superman; this plan is a fairly poor one, though, and it's fascinatingly fun to watch Hackman struggle to play both sides against each other while ensuring that he's friends with the winner when the dust settles. Hackman gets bonus points for delivering my favorite line of the film - a simple "Superman, thank God," which he imbues with a mix of relieved desperation and pitch-perfect comedic timing. Other humans include Kidder, who takes her game to the next level, making Lois's burgeoning suspicions about Clark feel natural and not forced; comics readers wondered for decades why Lois couldn't figure it out, and Kidder reminds us why - the character is so razor-sharp that her discovery was inevitable, and if anyone could bring that intellect to life, it's Margot Kidder.

All this has been in praise of Superman II, but the film isn't entirely golden. Like its hero when exposed to Kryptonite, the film stumbles in a few places, and I'm inclined to blame director Richard Lester for these boo-boos. First and most apparent is the introduction of several unconventional and/or entirely unprecedented new superpowers exhibited by Superman, Zod, and the latter's compatriots. I'm inclined to pardon the film's depiction of Zod, Ursa, and Non as telepathically capable; although as Kryptonians they shouldn't have any powers Superman doesn't, tweaking the source material here isn't a dealbreaking travesty. More problematic, though, is the bevy of abilities Superman exhibits here: teleportation (which, if a Google search is any indication, is intended to be super-speed, though poorly rendered), self-duplication, cellophane S-shields, and amnesia kisses. It's been alleged that Lester knew nothing about the Superman mythos before joining the production team, and it's not unfathomable based on the outlandish disregard for the commonly accepted Superman mythology (the amnesia kiss was deployed once or twice in throwaway issues of the Silver Age). Other problems include an overreliance on distracting slapstick comedy; while Superman is intended to be a fun character, unburdened with the gravitas that dominates characters like Batman and The Hulk, the humor here borders on distracting, as when Zod deploys super-breath against Metropolis - and a dozen or so visual gags ensue. One or two would have sufficed, but it seems Lester didn't want to waste a single wind joke. Moments like this pepper - or rather, pollute - the film, taking away dramatic importance by shifting focus away from the growing threat of the Kryptonian conquerers and placing the spotlight instead on nitwit sheriffs in Houston or on bumbling bystanders.

None of this, fortunately, is severe enough to damage the movie irreparably. Indeed, their greatest offense in my book is to prevent Superman II from being altogether better than Superman: The Movie. Viewed back to back, these two films are a little like The Godfather and its sequel, The Godfather, Part II in that they're really one experience broken in half, with complementary but not competing qualities. It's difficult to identify a superior picture (between Superman flicks, not Godfather movies), so let's simply concede that both are well constructed depictions of America's greatest icon.
Like its forebearer, Superman II is rated PG, although without an explanatory note. It's on the whole very similar to the first film in terms of violence (that is, bloodlessly cartoonish), although this one introduces a snippet of bare-shouldered cuddling, the implications of which parents may not approve for their children.