Superman II: Donner or Theatrical - Which is better?

Let's discuss which version I personally prefer and see if you agree.

Dedicated to the late Margot Kidder.

Superman II the Donner Cut and Theatrical Cut images and footage owned by Warner Bros. Used for educational purposes and entertainment.

[adifferentperspectivewithj]

Check out my Personal Video (10/19) where I respond to some of your great comments!

[movieflicktube]

The Donner cut . It’s disgusting what went on behind the scenes to get rid of Donner. Even John Williams refused to score the Lester version and walked out of negotiations .The cast and crew preferred Donner

[bkdmode]

The thing that annoys me the most in the Lester version that I probably enjoyed as a kid is the slapstick crap during fight in downtown Metropolis - the guy on rollerskates, the guy on the phone, the guy eating an ice cream cone... The Donnor cut just felt more mature; it still had campy moments but nothing as cringe-inducing as Lester's slapstick shlock.

[Doodlebugdude]

It wasn't because of Wb, it was the producers who were cheapskates.

[Magnus]

When I got the Donner Cut, I was prepared to be amazed. I’d heard about the behind the scenes drama between Donner & the Salkinds, and wanted to see what we missed. My judgement: it’s 70% better, but 30% worse, and that 30% really matters. The turning back time ending is awful, and consequently, his attacking the bully took me right out of the movie to wonder why Superman would be such a jerk. An edit of the two versions for a superior third version would make me happiest.

[saycheese]

I like both cuts. I watched the donner cut for the first time last night, and while I had some technical production problems with it, I think it was more entertaining and was paced a bit better than the theater cut. I do think that the turning back time ending is a bit of a cop out, but a memory erasing kiss is also sort of a cop out. Either way we get a cop out ending. I know the donner cut wasnt 100% finished and they couldnt go back and reshoot things, but I'm fine with that. I prefer the donner cut over the lester cut mostly due to better pacing, more consistent tone and the more cohesive connection to the first movie. But I like both cuts

[ProfessorZoom]

Believe it or not but, the 'magic kiss' is actually comic accurate.
Yeah, I was surprised too.
There was a very similar moment in one of the old comics.

[robertlauncher]

The Donner Cut’s repowering completes an arc set up in the last movie. Jor El uses the last of his energy stored in the crystals to give his son his power back. There’s nothing vague about it. He literally explains that before reciting the prophecy. “The son becomes the father, and the father becomes the son.”

[kevingiven]

I preferred the theatrical version too. I liked the Eiffel Tower scene, plus, if he just flys back in time, why not do that any time there's a problem. In the first film, he flew back in time to save the woman he loves. violating the rules for a reason. It was hard for him to do it.

[Zebowillisjr]

Factually inaccurate. The studio WB did not fire Richard Donner. The producers did.

[notsparctacus]

Great thing about Donner Cut is seeing more of Geoffrey Unsworth's cinematography.

[nickhutcheson]

Honestly the scenes between superman and his father is what puts the donner cut above the original. How its a little heated between them and Christopher Reeves performance is amazing. He was such a good actor. But you do make some valid points. Theres aspects I like of both versions.

[johnprudent]

I loved the theatrical cut the first time I saw it in tv as kid. But then heard about the story behind it when I got older. Then eventually I got the Donner Cut as a gift when I was older. I absolutely loved it. I’ve said before and will again Superman 2 is great example of of the story behind the movie being as interesting as the movie itself. That said, you raised a lot of good points. Some I kind of thought were nit picky. But now I can say that both versions have their merits. Thanks for the video.

[davidge]

Many of your issues with the Donner Cut were addressed by Donner himself in the Introduction to the Donner Cut and/or the "Restoring the Vision" Featurette, the most important issue being the fact that the original intent was to save money by shooting both films AT THE SAME TIME (not back-to-back), and that they had to STOP doing that in order to make the release date for the first film. So even though he filmed 80% of Superman II, he never actually got to finish. So the "Donner Cut" is really an attempt to showcase what WAS filmed, and to approximate what MIGHT have been, because he never intended to use the time travel gag twice, for example. Mario Puzo wrote a HUGE script, and Donner brought in 007 writer Tom Mankiewicz to cut it in half and rewrite it. They always thought that after the first film released, they could go back and complete the last 20% of the film - including a different ending.

The scene where Lois shoots Superman for the reveal - it's LITERALLY comprised of test footage that was never intended to be shown - but again, the Donner Cut is an approximation, not a complete cut. As for Brando's scenes, he was getting the largest paycheck an actor had ever received at the time, so they shot all his stuff first, but when Lester was brought in, a legal loophole said the producers would have to pay Brando another fortune to use his footage in a separate, non-Donner film, so they reshot those scenes with Lara instead.

I agree that the theatrical version is a more polished and complete film, but its nothing short of EXTRAORDINARY that Donner and Michael Thau - the reconstruction editor/ producer, to whom all Donner Cut fans owe some thanks - were able to take 80% of a movie, stitch it together with a bit of the Lester material, and make a version of the film 20 years later that comes SO CLOSE to showing the original intent, and is nearly as good - certainly as watchable - as the Lester film. Yes, the theatrical version is more "complete", but I think Donner's would've been on par with The Godfather Part II had he and Mank been allowed to go back and actually finish, reshooting the Lois-shoots-Clark scene for real (not a screen test), and adding a new ending that we can only dream about. I love both for what they are, and I totally get what you're saying about Kidder's performance in the hotel scene and the finale, but the Donner Cut stirs my imagination and makes me drool dreaming of what might have been. That's my two cents. Thanks for sharing yours!

[sha]

With the Donner cut, I think he went to confront Rocky because he wanted to teach him those manners so he'd never do it again. Rocky probably was a past troublemaker with others. He knew who Rocky was. Turning back time didn't erase his memory of Rocky.

[Thunderwing]

Even though it does have some flaws, Donner cut overall. I buy the ending both times because it was originally meant for II. I place Lester cut after the Donner cut and before Superman III.

[christopherhibbert]

Things I liked in both, honestly. I've yet to find anyone who disagrees with the following, when Superman confronts Zod from outside Perry's office window. It's an important line:

"General! Don't you believe in freedom of the press?" Eh. Meh.

"General! Would you care to step outside?" Oh hell, yeah!

[SRice-sdpy]

I largely agree. I like both but I think the theatrical version is better. The mystery of the green crystal is better instead of Jor-el touching him. The magic kiss is from the comics. The love story is much better in the Lester cut.

[enterprises]

Today, I learned about all this controversy which I think it is a circus that lasted for years in Donner's head. He was so pissed off for so long for being fired. Besides, he could make his cut because lots of people had died, and he not only did that but he also used Lester's work to finish his supposed own vision

[todi]

Do combination of both. It’ll be the ultimate cut.