You’ll believe a man can fly. . . er, again.
I love Superman II. In some ways more than its predecessor, in some ways less. What I love most about it is the epic storyline. Superman the Movie’s evil plot was essentially a real estate scam. In Superman II, the Man of Steel must brave three other Kryptonians with serious vengeance issues, Lex Luthor, and, ultimately, himself and his dual nature as both a child of Krypton and a child of Earth.
But the big bads are epic. One devious, one ultra strong, and one sexy, that pretty much makes an unholy triumverate you do not want to mess with. And Zod is played with such cunning ambition and reckles abandon of all moral pretense (“Why do you say this, when you know I will kill you for it?”) by Terrence Stamp that it cements him forever as probably the greatest Superman villain ever, at least on screen. For years the Superman franchise has been chasing its tail trying to recapture some of that Zod magic, but this is lightning in a bottle. Try to pull that today and it probably wouldn’t work.
I also love the personal journey Superman takes in this film. In some ways, my favorite scenes in the movie are in the diner up north. Having given up his powers in order to be with Lois, Superman tries to take on a truck stop bully and gets the tar beat out of him.
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRRFMrzTYpE
“Blood. . .that’s my blood. . .”
(Also noteworthy is that director Richard Donner played an extra in this scene.)
But more cosmically important is that in this moment, he realizes what being Superman has meant to him, to Lois, to everyone. He can’t protect himself, he can’t protect the world against threats like Zod. And so he has to go back. And then in a final scene, after regaining his powers, Supes returns to the truck stop and not only takes the bully down, he pays the diner owners for the damages (and more, it looks like!)
But this movie has some serious problems. They were ones I never noticed as a kid, but taking a critical look at it now, this film is a Frankenmovie of epic proportions.
A history lesson: Superman the Movie and Superman II were shot simultaneously by director Richard Donner as a single artistic vision. After the producers got antsy about the potential cost to finish Superman II (they balked at paying Marlon Brando 11.75% of the gross box office for his work) and fired Donner and replaced him with Richard Lester. Lester re-wrote and re-shot almost half of the film, adding in a lot of slapstick humor and camp into a film where Donner had specifically and explicitly eschewed camp in favor of a more serious approach. While many of the principal cast returned, Gene Hackman notably refused, meaning every shot involving Lex is either original Donner footage or employed a body double. In fact, a fun game was to watch the film and spot the non-Hackman. Who was that flying on Ursa’s back? Not Gene Hackman. In some of the scenes in the Fortress of Solitude? Yeah.
Before I come off sounding like a Donner sycophant and a Lester hater, let me begin by saying that Richard Lester directed one of my favorite movies of all time (A Hard Day’s Night) and also did an admirable job with Superman III. But his scenes which he added to the film are simply uneven. It is a film made up of two competing visions which don’t quite mesh, even though they technically form a single narrative.
Furthermore, Lester’s new footage plays fast and loose with the powers of Superman and Kryptonians in general. Suddenly Zod can shoot a beam from his hand that is telekinetic in nature. Superman can appear and reappear, creating at least three holographic duplicates. And finally, he can throw a colored cellophane version of the Superman logo off his chest to temporarily wrap up a foe. Seriously? SERIOUSLY?
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiN0Lwvi7CA
So much has this raised the ire of folks, that a contributor over at ComicBookResources coined the term “Throwing the S” as a cinematic version of “Jumping the shark.”
Enter The Donner Cut. Released in 2006 on DVD, it represents Donner’s original vision of the film. It restores Marlon Brando’s Jor-El to the film, which remains the single biggest difference. Quite simply, the interplay between father and son here is irreplaceable.
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchxYM0WhDM
No amount of using Superman’s mother is a replacement for this. Not only because it is Brando, but because the father-son relationship is just so much more impactful.
Having watched these back to back, it makes me appreciate what is so good about Superman II all that much more. It also points out the flaws that I glossed over so easily as a kid because all I cared about was “KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!!” and. . .
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRWowww2lEI
Before I began this sojourn into Superman, I would’ve told you that Superman II was far superior to Superman the Movie. Now I’m torn. The Donner Cut of Superman II is probably my favorite, but not by much. Which is all too bad, because now we begin a 25+ year sojourn of mediocre to bad Superman films, with the only really absolutely phenomenal stuff happening in the animated world.
But what think the rest of you robots? Let us know whether you kneel before Zod or worship at the throne of Donner.