Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut

• Titled onscreen as simply Superman II
• Directed by Richard Donner
• November 28, 2006
• Based on Superman created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster

Thirty years after being banished to the Phantom Zone, Kryptonian criminals General Zod, Ursa and Non are accidentally freed when Superman diverts a missile into outer space.

Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut is as close as we will ever get to what the great Richard Donner intended for his version of Superman II. I’m not hating on the second one that was originally released. I still have fond memories of it but this is one of those instances where it is interesting what the other guy would have done. There are some noticeable differences between the two if the predecessor is still in your memory.

The first thing that is apparent is that The Richard Donner Cut is much less comedic than Richard Lester’s version of the story. Lester played more into the camp that most people perceived comic book films should be like than into something more serious with funny elements. Donner’s is closer to Tim Burton’s Batman than The Adventures of Superman.

Either version of Superman II was most likely my first encounter with Terence Stamp as an actor. Not to using a word very casually thrown about these days but his General Zod is an iconic film villain. No one else could’ve done it as well. Stamp has that authoritative delivery and just pure evil in his eyes the whole time. Paired with the great Sarah Douglas who could play a good girl but was always so much better as morally gray or just pure evil. Her Ursa treats everyone as the gunk you find on a shoe. And then there is the all muscle and brutish but not in a way that mocks the character Non (Jack O’Halloran). The mild humor he generates is because of the character’s simple mind.

Then there is Christopher Reeve as Clark Kent/Superman. The best of the actors to play the legendary character. He didn’t just play the character. He was the character. He embodied everything you thought of when you thought of the Man of Steel. As Clark he was fumbling and though a good reporter, bumbling. As Superman he was confidence and kindness as well as a big Boy Scout.

I find it kind of funny that Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) is revealed to only have received 25 or so for trying to unleash nuclear Armageddon as part of a land scheme. That just seems like a very minor sentence for the attempted murder of thousands if not millions. This was aimed at the family market but maybe say he’s up for execution. You don’t need to actually show him frying in the chair. Luthor is all egomaniac and confident artist. Under Hackman when he confronts Zod and tries to bargain with him there’s a sense of fear and nervousness in all the bluster and bravado. That’s why Gene Hackman is a legend. Nuance.

Luthor’s bargaining for Australia hinges on him being able to deliver Jor-El’s son to Zod. This occurs not long after the first film, but they don’t say exactly how long. It’s long enough for the association between Lois Lane and Superman to be pretty much public knowledge that at least in Luthor’s words she does his public relations. Maybe in The Lester Cut this was explained better but since this arrived a quarter century after initial production with Donner wanting mostly as much of his vision as possible getting something to establish passage of time was impossible.

I am irritated by the moon scene where not only Zod and his cronies speak while on the moon, but the astronauts can speak through their helmets to them. There’s no air on the moon! It’s just a little too much for me. Even as a little kid I couldn’t handle it. If Krytonians were magically based creatures it might be different. Then again there is an instance of telekinesis with a gun that never pops up.

Lois Lane (Margot Kidder) tricking Clark into spilling the beans is a great moment. It’s a nice demonstration of the character and just generally creative. Unlike in the first movie, in Superman II there’s a little bit more of a reason for Clark to actually like Lois Lane. She’s still a little dismissive of Clark but not as mean-spirited as she was before. In Superman she was just a hairs breath away from laughing in his face. Then again in this movie she’s clearly suspecting that they are one in the same so you could look at it as having something to do with that. On some level she has declared dibs on the super stud pretending to be dweeb so now he’s kinda hot. Is she shallow and superficial?

I never understood why Clark had to give up his powers when he fell in love. Is he supposed to live his life like a monk when he has powers? Jor-El sent him to live on a planet but conversely he must keep himself completely alone. Human or alien that kind of isolation sounds psychologically harmful.

There’s not nearly enough Miss Teschmacher (Valerie Perrine) and the appearance of Ned Beatty as Otis in the beginning just to connect the character leaves a bit of a hole. Both balanced out Luthor a bit. Both were important to the first film and their limited appearances leave this a little less. Teschmacher is in the movie but only as the remaining Donner footage allows which makes things awkward. She is there then she’s not then she is. What gives?

Today’s audiences have gotten very used to frenetic heavy effects superhero battles. Without CGI previous filmmakers just had to rely a little more on drama and acting to sell the conflict. The confrontation between Superman and Zod is effective yet not as rapidly paced. Plenty of cool and even implied super heroics sold are communicated by crowd reaction. 

What Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut has going for it is a more serious story that is also charged with a sense of fun. It’s exciting but more focused on the struggle between Superman and Clark Kent rather than facing the villains. Christopher Reeve as always is that kind of hero you want. Moral and upstanding and uncompromising in his high ideals even if he did beat up a guy for no reason.