Watch it at Amazon
95 out of 122 people found the following review useful: The Adventure Continues...or so we thought!, 24 March 2004 Author: TruPretender from Sundance, Utah
This film can be summed up in two words. Superman Trouble. That is the case. There are two versions of the film "Superman II." One is the vision of acclaimed director Richard Donner, full of color flourishes, and camera work by the late Geoffrey Unsworth. The second, is the vision put on director Richard Lester, by choice of the film's producers, Alexander and Ilya Salkind. Both the films contain the same story and characters, but each was shot with a different tone, different dialogue and footage, which clash with intention. So in the end, footage from each are woven into one movie which film buffs all over the world will notice is somewhat difficult to grasp. Due to the different directing styles of each director, the final cut of Superman II ends up being a cliche work of special effects, mismatched character analysis, and central themes. The film deals with Superman and Lois falling in love, and the three super villains from the prologue of the first film landing on earth and ultimately trying to take over. Very intense stuff. But this is where we as an audience need to know all the facts, and here they are: The first version of Superman II, known as "Superman II: The Adventure Continues" was directed by Richard Donner and supposed to be straight forward with serious tones and action packed sequences. This version was shot simultaneously with the original "Superman" in 1977-78. Originally to be released back to back with the original, "Superman II" was filmed with vigorous explosions, dangerous situations, and tense, irrefutable drama. In the opening, a female liberation symbol, Lois Lane, tries to prove that Clark Kent is Superman by throwing herself out a window, knowing that Clark(Superman) will fly out and save her. In another scene, Superman gives up his powers and nearly kills himself, only to get them back later on, nearly killing himself again. This nailbittingly tense script brought back old characters and was to bring the original "Superman" to a full closure. All actors are fully concentrated and the print is a paragon. 80& of this film was finished when the producers fired director Donner due to some arguments that are still unknown to this day, and replaced him with director Richard Lester, and thusly, "Superman II: The Adventure Continues" was culminated. This is where the Richard Lester vision of the film comes into place. Simply titles "Superman II", the Richard Lester version is full of clumsy comedy, amateur plotting, and is nowhere near as affective as the Donner version. Lester is a comic director, whom had worked on the previous Beatles films, "Help" and "Hard Days Night" and had no experience directing any international blockbusters. To give him more credit than Richard Donner, the producers rewrote most of the footage that Donner shot and went in with the actors for re-shoots...even though Donner had already taken care of this! The villains are portrayed here as careless and comic, whereas in Donner's version they were cold as steel, and not to be messed with. In one re-shot scene, we see three villains who are Superman's foes land on earth and take interest in a snake. The snake bites the female villain and instead of showing her wrath on nature, as was seen in Donner's moon scene which she kills an innocent astronaut in cold blood, she sets the reptile on fire and giggles about it! Central themes of love and home were lost because of this as well. Because of budget problems and deadline, the producers could not finish the re-shoot and "Superman II", and had to fill the gaps with Donner footage from the vault, making "Superman II" confusing and abstruce, and that is what made "Superman II" an atavistic failure. 70% of the film is clumsy, contrived comedy and useless violence, while 30% of the film is straight forward, full of munificent morals and such. The final cut has one scene showing the villains breaking into the white house and consequently taking over the world, with sheer John Williams music, the next scene you see them bored and incoherently complaining about being on a world where "mankind doesn't even resist." The first film "Superman" had morals of justice, and the American way, while the second film was supposed to show morals of love and home, and earthly pleasures that remind people of the good in the world-in a sense, taking along with the "truth, justice, and the American way." This message was lost between the footage by raconteur Donner and comic Lester. Nonetheless, the film was a box office success, and many critics, including the late Pauline Kael and Roger Ebert praised the film for it's portrayal of good versus evil in the modern day society. Some of the footage shot by Donner that was not put into the final cut of the film has since been seen on network television showings and bootlegs, but not all of it. The original opening which gave the film a better sense of dangerous excitement, scenes involving Kal-El and his father were scrapped(Due to the Marlon Brando court case) and the full original ending have all been locked away in London vaults and never before seen by anyone. So on the all in all level, "Superman II" fails because it is nothing more than two films put together, one a comedy, one an action drama, and this keeps "Superman II' from being anything close to what the original has become.
61 out of 88 people found the following review useful: The Adventure Continues...or so we thought!, 23 March 2004 Author: TruPretender from Sundance, Utah
After the rushing into pre-production of Superman, Superman II footage remained in vaults in Pinewood Studios for the time being. This was where the cast and crew were supposed to pick up filming of Superman II in early February of 1979. However a new order was called in by producer Ilya Salkind. A new director to be exact, and that was the dellima of Superman II. In 1977-78, Richard Donner shot a near estimate of 80 % of Superman II simultaneously with Superman, but that is not the point. The point is that his version was a much more subtle version, which followed the characters emotions from the blockbuster first film, and had an exciting plot of Lois and Superman falling in love, villains killing earth beings, and Superman almost having to risk it all for the world...or the woman he loves! But when director Richard Lester came in to do reshoots and shoot all new scenes, he had a different vision in mind. His version was simple. Make the villains look like dumb butts, while Lois and Superman enjoy an unequal relationship where Lois is given the back seat treatment to mediocre looks and a Superman that would rather make the metropolis people laugh than save the world! As that is what so wrongly happens, we shall go over the facts. Superman and Lois are supposed to have the kind of love that EVERY American dreams of having. Donner insured this in never seen love scenes which would have garnered the film an R-rating. Lester's love scenes are cheap and tacky with hilarious dialogue and no wit to back it up. The villains scenes in the Donner version are cruel, ruthless, and downright evil. In Lester's scenes, the villains pronounce names wrong, look at eachother in stupidity, and act like imbeciles. The film had a good premise going for it: Superman has just saved the world from nuclear destruction and then the villains arrive and start destruction. Meanwhile, Lois and Superman fall in love. That was still the plot, but the myth and mystique which made the original film such a classic are nowhere to be seen here. Instead we get NASA jerks talking about a "curl" in space! Lester was really trashing the mythology with this peice of junk. America had thought that the second Superman film would be a film that they would remember. No such luck as one would have guessed. The film is basically two unfinished films sloppily put together in this turkey! Superman II is NOT without interest. In fact, alot of the scenes are fun to watch because of the action sequences. But it is true what others say, that it seems like Lester was trying at a Beatles/Superman film. Clumsy comedy and stupid chaos ensues as the villains blow through metropolis. Another thing that gets on this writer's nerves is when the townspeople are rooting for Superman in the battle sequence! This villains are trying to kill these people and what do they do? They don't run in fear as they should, but root for Superman when he beats the villains up, calling out rediculous dialogue such as "C'mon! Get 'em Superman!" as if they are present at a high school football match! Too much stupid writing and directing. I will always have respect for Superman II because the whole Superman series has been a part of my better memories in life for a long time. We have yet to see if the true version of Superman will ever be released on DVD, in the form of the Richard Donner cut, as so many fans like to call it. IT is really Ilya Salkinds cut, as he has the contract to the rights of ALL the films(including Supergirl) and their footage. All in all, Superman II fails on a lot of top levels but has the interest for lower levels. Only if Richard Donner's version gets released, will we as an audience and appreciative film viewers get the true experience of Superman II: The Adventure Continues!
39 out of 49 people found the following review useful: Best Of The Superman Series, 31 October 2005 Author: ccthemovieman-1 from Lockport, NY, United States
This is the best of the Superman movies because of the three villains, played by Terrence Stamp, Sarah Douglas and Jack O'Halloran.Those three are so good, particularly Stamp, that they make this easily the most memorable of the four films. The scenes with them on the moon, their first encounter on earth and their climactic fight against Superman in the skies above Metropolis are all outstanding.Once again, Superman goes a little overboard in his romance to Lois Lane (do you believe some reviewers are upset there weren't explicit sex scenes in the film?) Hey, folks, it's just a comic book and it's supposed to be innocent, clean fun. Sorry that turns you off. For the rest of us, this is generally very enjoyable film from start to finish, with no real lulls.
33 out of 48 people found the following review useful: The Greatest Superhero Movie Ever Made, 31 December 1999 Author: The_Movie_Cat from England
I have a confession to make. I love Superman II. Such innocent, almost niave, filmmaking, it personifies the term "family entertainment" and is, simply, great fun to watch.Other superheroes have floundered at the box office, and maybe this is to do with lack of affinity between the makers and the source material. Certainly, the Superman films are tongue-in-cheek but never so that they're disrespectful to their content or their audience. The Crow was a good example of the "graphic novel" set, and the Batman series did well under the underrated Michael Keaton, but floundered under the flat Val Kilmer and increasingly childish set-pieces. The less said about "Batman and Robin" the better.Of course, Superman had his own "Batman and Robin" in the guise of "Superman VI: The Quest For Peace", a movie made four years after the third and with seemingly a fraction of the budget. But Superman II was the series at its' peak. The theme music, a startling Star Wars sound-a-like by John Williams, fades to edited recaps of the previous film. These involve Superman as a baby being sent from the destruction of his home planet and are cleverly spliced together so as to avoid having to pay Marlon Brando any more royalties. (Yet we do see Brando's hand. Surely that's worth half a million?). 20% of this movie was shot alongside the 1978 vehicle and so we get reminded in this sequence of the three Kryptonian villains, about to be accidentally released by Superman in a h-bomb explosion.This was still in the days when films were properly constructed to allow for a genuine build-up, a fully-formed middle and a proper end. Even minor players, such as Perry White (Jackie Cooper) have great lines and characterisation thrusted upon them. This may be just a "fun" movie, but it is lovingly put together, not "thrown together" as many films are. All the actors are wonderful, Christopher Reeve is just right as Superman, Margot Kidder is the definitive Lois Lane (despite almost drowning in soft focus for her close-ups) and Gene Hackman is, of course, absolutely hilarious as Lex Luthor. But my favourite player in this sequel is Terence Camp as General Zod. Terence plays Zod exactly the same as he plays Bernadette in "The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert" and makes great work of the lead villain that must be, in Hollywood circles, always English. "Why do you say these things when you know I will kill you for it?" he minces to Hackman with great effect.Of course, now twenty years old, this film is less "You'll believe a man can fly" than "You'll believe a man can swing on wires in front of an unconvincing backdrop" but this is still wonderful entertainment. Maybe the middle section, with Clark getting cut to ribbons after being thrown through a plate glass window is a little violent, as is the confrontation between Superman and the trio of villains. There's also the nagging feeling that this section is the biggest single example of product placement ever seen on film. Or is it coincidence that a Superman who featured in a comicbook anti-smoking campaign (against "Nick O'Teen", no less) is continually thrown into a Malboro van? Even Zod gets to know "things look better with Coca-Cola" as he is unceremoniously hurled into a neon sign for the corporation.But these are minor gripes, and how anyone can hold them against such a harmless film is beyond me. Superman II isn't Citizen Kane by any means, but I defy you to sit through this movie and not love it.
16 out of 18 people found the following review useful: If there was a greater sequel..., 3 October 2006 Author: dee.reid from United States
(I just couldn't wait for the director's cut, so anything I say here might soon be outdated.)"Superman II," directed in 1980 by Richard Lester, is probably the best sequel of the first wave of superhero movies. "Superman II" is big, goofy fun, with a sense of action, romance, and humor that wouldn't quite be seen again in the genre until last year's "Fantastic Four." "Superman II" is one of the great sequels, despite its sloppy editing and a controversial back-story worthy of a movie of its own.We know that "Superman" (1978) director, Richard Donner, was originally supposed to direct the sequel but was fired under highly suspicious and (to this day) unknown circumstances following a dispute with that film's producers, the Salkinds. Supposedly, it began with issues over creative direction. Compounding that, Donner had gone over the originally planned budget for "Superman," and the Salkinds had been rushing the poor man to complete the film. Conversely, Marlon Brando (Jor-El in "Superman"), didn't want to be in the second movie and filed suit over his percentage of that film's earnings. Simultaneously, Donner had also been shooting footage for "Superman II" and had completed somewhere around 75% of it between 1976-1978 before he was fired. But of course, the lore is well-known to those who pay attention to this film's history, and what I just described were probably the biggest reasons for Donner's removal.Lester was brought in after Donner, scrapped most of Donner's footage, and replaced it with his own material that was filmed between '79-'80 (to the untrained eye, the different footage appears seamless but to those aware of "Superman II's" history, it'll be a lot like a shooting gallery for continuity errors). Only about 25% of the original scenes Donner filmed are in the movie we know today, with jarring transitions between scenes since nearly three years had passed between the two directors' filming of scenes. This all caused a near-mutinous insurrection on the set, and many of the actors (Gene Hackman, Christopher Reeve - R.I.P., Margot Kidder, and Terence Stamp) were quite vocal about this; Hackman refused to appear in any of Lester's new scenes and it's easy to tell when a body double is being used.Original composer John Williams also walked away from the project following Donner's removal, and was replaced by Ken Thorne, who takes material from Williams's score and merely covers it with his own in much the same way Lester did with Donner. Lastly, cinematographer Robert Paynter gave a comic book look to the film that conflicted with the sparkling, epic cinematography of the late Geoffrey Unsworth. What we get, to paraphrase another viewer, is "sloppy seconds," but still an enjoyable and moving experience in its right. "Superman II" still made a box office killing in 1981, so it couldn't have been that bad (?). (Hopefully, this will all be cured by the new Richard Donner cut that's due out on Nov. 28 later this year, which should include more of Donner's original material, more Hackman footage, Marlon Brando, more violence and story dealing with the three Krypton villains' task on Earth, more scenes with Reeve and Kidder, completed special effects, a new opening and ending - ?, and Lester footage to fill in the gaps.)In "Superman II," the Man of Steel, as Clark Kent (Reeve), is getting serious with Lois Lane (Kidder), and considers giving up being Superman. If he were to do this, however, he will become a normal human being, with no way to restore his powers, and no way to stand up to a diner's bullying customer. This romantic infatuation probably could not have come at a worse time because a nuclear explosion in outer space shatters the Phantom Zone, the eternal prison of three outcasts from Superman's home planet Krypton. The blast frees the traitorous head of Krypton's military forces, General Zod (Stamp), the man-hating Ursa (Sarah Douglas) and the brutish Non (Jack O'Halloran), who then make a bee-line for Earth in a bid for world domination. Once on Earth, they discover they have all of Superman's powers, and then some. Meanwhile, Lex Luthor (Hackman) manages to escape from prison (with help from Miss Teschmacher, played by Valerie Perrine), leaving a hapless Otis (Ned Beatty) behind, and sets out on a quest to the North Pole to find the Fortress of Solitude using a device he constructed while incarcerated.What this all climaxes in, is an action-packed (if not somewhat slapstick) special effects bonanza that takes place in the skies over Metropolis, with Superman and the three Krypton villains going head to head. It's really exciting stuff to see Superman grappling with the new experience of fighting three adversaries of his power level.Is "Superman II" a failure? Yes, because it betrays what was originally laid out by a great director and is probably one of the great, early examples of Hollywood "chopping & screwing." "Superman II" is still highly regarded as a cult classic, and director Sam Raimi makes a few nods with "Spider-Man 2" (2004). I can see that DC Comics is making a comeback; if original Superman co-creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster could see these films, I bet they'd be proud.P.S.: R.I.P. - Marlon Brando10/10
19 out of 24 people found the following review useful: Excellent film from the days when a good story was essential!, 10 July 2006 Author: Philip King from United Kingdom
Not many films from the 70's have stood the test of time but those that have had one basic fact in common: "a good story". The fact that this film has a great story as well as some of the best special effects available in the 1970s is perhaps the reason for it's success. If you are reading this thread and have not seen this film you must certainly be from another planet. I will not spoil this film by telling you the plot or anything that happens in the film as others more worthy of my name ("filmspoiler") have done. I will only say that this film joins the very few (Terminator 2, Back to the future 2, Final Destination 2) sequels that are as good as, if not better than, there prequels. I only hope that the 2006 remake "Superman Returns" is 30 years ahead of it's time!!(PS: Above comments written by someone old enough to remember the much older "Rocket Man" TV series)
15 out of 17 people found the following review useful: Explosively entertaining.*****, 2 September 2001 Author: David Slicer (davidslicer@hotmail.com) from Amherst, Massachusetts
"Superman II" opens up with a spectacular opening shot of Superman(Christopher Reeve)saving Lois Lane(Margot Kidder)from danger at the Eiffel Tower in Paris and goes on to deliver exciting events at every turn that gives this film plenty of firepower and the viewer alot of heart racing excitement."Superman II" continues te events of the man of steel in which he must battle three supervillains(Terence Stamp,Jack O'Halloran and Sarah Douglas)with the same powers he has.These villains take over the world which results in plenty of nonstop excitement that I thought was spectacular in every way.I enjoy fast paced action films and "Superman II" is one of them.The romance between Superman and Lois Lane is given first class treatment and the score by Ken Thorne is grand and really great.The battle scenes in Metropolis is a perfect example of great special effects. "Superman II" is a film that entertains to the fullest.
14 out of 16 people found the following review useful: The Greatest Adventure in the Superman Series, 21 May 2001 Author: Tom Bixby (marchofthewoodensoldiers_2001@hotmail.com)
This Superman movie has got to be the bench mark for future producers of Superman movies. They must be sat down with this film, because it is an absolute classic, and as far as Superman films go it will be hard to top. Richard Lester, is not very popular with some Superman fans, because he took over on a movie that they feel would have been better had Richard Donner been allowed to complete. But Lester has his admirers, and iam one of them. The first Superman movie tended to go along with boring philosophising, or over sentimental dramatics, these are mainly absent in Superman II,. They are replaced with cut to the action dramatics by Richard Lester who in my opinion saved the movie, or at least made it all the more exciting. I enjoy his sense of comic book adventure, and the final Times Square battle between Superman vs Zod,Non and Ursa is straight out of a comic book and is all Lesters. The main thing that complements the movie is the towering performance by Christopher Reeve as Clark Kent/Superman. Reeve is hillarious in his Cary Grant-a-like interpretation of Kent and wonderfull as a humanistic Superman. Margot Kidder is fabulous to and it is the acting of theese two that makes the Superman//Lois love triangle work. Terance Stamp as Zod is very creepy, and Sarah Douglas as Ursa very sexy, but the man who very nearly steels the show is Gene Hackman hilarious as Lex Luther. The special effects are brilliant, because they look glossy, and the Ken Thorne variation of John Williams Superman theme is at its best here. The best aspects though is the action, the aforementioned Times Square battle, and the interaction between the actors. Well done Richard Lester. A True classic of Superhero cinema.
18 out of 24 people found the following review useful: Superman's only worthy sequel, 23 June 2003 Author: the_mysteriousx from LI, NY
For those who are into the comic book movie craze today, this one is one of the best comic-y movies from the beginning of the summer blockbuster heyday. The original Superman is really an excellent film with solid, honest direction by Richard Donner. Donner shot around half of this sequel and his scenes are all excellent (Note: Every Gene Hackman scene was shot by Donner - Hackman refused to return to production after Donner was fired).There is still much hope that Donner's footage will re-surface. Most importantly of all there are vital scenes with Marlon Brando returning as Superman's father, Jor-El and giving his "life" to save his son and save the planet from the evil villains he vanquished from Krypton. It would also be interesting for audiences to see the difference between Donner's scenes and the ones re-shot by Lester.The characters are great. Superman, played by Christopher Reeve, is in solid form and he and Lois are given the opportunity to enhance their relationship from the original story. Jackie Cooper is once again great as Perry White, the chief editor of the Daily Planet.What makes this movie move is the villains. Gene Hackman is funnier and still up to no good and the villains from Krypton are menacing. His dialogue is truly witty and Hackman's timing is perfect. Terence Stamp is the power hungry General Zod, out for revenge against the son of Jor-El. Stamp plays it straight and his scenes directed by Donner show a true megalomaniac. Jack O'Halloran is solid as the hulking Non.Best of all is Sarah Douglas as the cold and evil Ursa in a truly underrated performance. She is the most curious and most interesting of the bunch. She collects badges as trophies for her conquering of earth, wearing them to mock human hierarchy. Ursa seems to be a forerunner of all of the sexy female superwoman today, but her role is not overstated and stale. She is not given gratuitous cleavage shots or anything of the sort. Ursa is a beautiful vamp and a tease, and if anything we wish she would have more screen time. Sarah Douglas constantly gives us hints as to Ursa's wishes, and we can only try to surmise what evil plans she is up to.The music is John Williams' score from the first film, but used differently. Not sure if much of the music is original. Ken Thorne does a good job here of accenting cuts with Williams' original score (Williams too refused to return after Donner was fired.) Some great cues are Superman returning to fight the villains, which is wonderfully heroic; Ursa's shocking appearance to both the astronauts on the moon (a violent scene that uses the darkest motifs from Krypton in the first film); and the whole Metropolis battle in the end, which is well supported by the music.The effects are very good for 1980. I keep reading how people are unhappy and always apologize for the FX in any movie more than a couple of years old. This one is solid and for the film it serves, does well. The only major goof is when Superman delivers the American Flag at the end - The water fountain in front of the White House is clearly a model with "frozen" bursting water! The scene in the de-powering chamber is not well-handled either.Overall, this is a very entertaining film, and really amazingly considering it is obviously the work of two directors. Of all the comic book movies made from the 60s thru the 90s, this one definitely rates in the top five along with the first Superman, the first two Batmans. Supermans 3 and 4 were really poor. It is too bad that Christopher Reeve did not make more good Superman films. This one has some camp, but it's way too entertaining and it's the only sequel to still have the flavor of the original. And please, let's see a special edition DVD with all of the missing Richard Donner footage!!!!!
8 out of 8 people found the following review useful: Great film, 20 November 2001 Author: EnriqueH from Miami, Fl.
Simply put, Superman II is one of the best action/comic-oriented films of all time. I'd rank it second only to the original Superman: The Movie and only X-Men is right up there.The thing about this movie that bugs me is that I grew up watching the ABC expanded version. That's the version my dad taped for me, so for years I thought the expanded version was the only version. It wasn't until the mid-80s when I saw SII on HBO that I realized what the theatrical cut was and how much of the expanded version added to the film.So if you ask me about Superman II expanded edition, I'd definitely rank that as the best comic oriented film all time. Hopefully, Warner Bros. will put together an interesting DVD on the film with all the supplemental footage, including the never-before-seen Marlon Brando segment that was completely removed from the picture. The making of this film was a big time headache. All of Gene Hackman's scenes were filmed by Superman I director Richard Donner, and then he was fired, and Richard Lester was brought in. So it would be really cool and really insightful if a future DVD came out on the making of the film. But I digress.The (theatrical version) film, while a bit aged, is still tremendous fun. Christopher Reeve remains the embodiment of the Man of Steel and remains a case for one example of perfect casting. He makes the whole Clark Kent/Superman thing plausible by making Kent an insecure, bumbling reporter. Terrence Stamp is also wonderfully cast as arch-villain General Zod.The climax in Times Square is still exciting and funny. And the whole relationship between Lois and Clark/Superman is brought to the fore-front.I'd definitely put this film as a supreme candidate for the full DVD red carpet treatment complete because the current DVD lacks big time.
Add another review
