SUPERMAN II - THE RICHARD DONNER CUT
How I learned to stop worrying and love the Donner Cut.

DHARMESH'S VERDICT

How I learned to stop worrying and love the Donner Cut.

I know there's been puzzlement as to why I haven't discussed the Donner Cut in any detail or even indicated that I would even review it since the release date - well, I finally have put pen to paper after viewing it four times: Once in L.A.; once in the privacy of my own home; twice with a friend. This is my verdict.

When I first watched the film at Warners, the presentation was akin to that of an electronic store set-up.
The DVD was compressed, the anti-aliasing on the credits was very noticeable - it represented a relic computer game rather than a motion picture; the Plasma screen had burn-in and the sound collapsed to the centre speaker.

After the presentation I was quite bemused, a lot of head scratching about the film itself - I was extremely disappointed. Upto this point, I hadn't seen the Lester cut in a number of years, even though it's a good film, there are too many technical issues, and having recently re-visited it, the seams and joins are even more evident and off-putting. I think Lester did a good job given the mandate but Superman 2 belongs to Donner's authorship. Lester was always going to have that 'I'm looking into the Superman world as a cynic' whereas Dick was immersed in that world as a romanticist. Both valid storytelling techniques but in this instance, Superman II is Dick's film and Mankiewicz's re-conception, and it fulfills the promise of the first one.

Where was I?

I didn't like the Donner Cut.

Let me explain, I had high expectations, and they were not met. I thought some of it was very sloppily edited. Music edits were a mess and some of the acting was sub-par. It's not what I had envisaged. I received a few reviews during the summer which may have influenced the way I watched it. Although I rarely watch the Lester version, I know the film, so that was playing on my mind - is it a fair comparison? From an acting POV, no because Dick would've reshot. What about story and concept? Yes, I think it's a fairer comparison.

I didn't come away hating it, some of the scenes were stunning - it was some of the editorial decisions which left me perplexed. Was I blaming Michael? No, firstly, two film-makers and an editor were locked away in the editing booth; can you imagine that all three may have different ideas on the presentation of the footage shot in 1977? Dick and Tom are quite similar in style and then Michael, who professed that he's not a Superman expert but nevertheless enjoys the films, thinks a little differently on certain issues. Michael never stuttered, he was confident in his decisions. The other issue is budget, it was small, and so it was a compromise. Then there's time, I got the sense that it was rushed.

Now you understand why I didn't review it - I wanted to give it another chance! In early December I finally got my hands on the boxset. In the privacy of my own home, on a typical, cold December night I watched it again. This time I thoroughly enjoyed it, I had ball. I unlearned what I had learned about my previous experience and the Lester version was extinguished from my mind.

>>>Page II