Superman II [4K UHD]

I haven't been this excited to own a DVD in a long time! In fact, if everything that I've been hearing regarding this DVD release is true, Warner Bros. might actually want to consider releasing this NEW version to the BIG SCREEN as well! This isn't JUST a director's cut, it's practically a WHOLE NEW film!Richard Donner, the director of Superman "the movie" completed 75% of Superman II in 1977. Donner was actually hired to film the first movie AND the sequel at the SAME time! But before he could film the final 25% of Superman II, Richard Donner was fired and a terrible "hack" named Richard Lester was hired to complete the film. The Marlon Brando footage was removed (so that the producers would not have to pay Brando) and the script was given a quick re-write. When Richard Lester finally resumed production of the film in 1979 he decided to re-film the MAJORITY of the story. He ended up TRASHING about 45% of everything that Donner had filmed and replaced it with quickly shot, poorly directed scenes. Gene Hackman quit, he did not want to work with Richard Lester. A body double was used to replace Hackman in several scenes that had not yet been filmed. John Williams also quit stating that he "could not work with the man" (in regards to Richard Lester). Both Christopher Reeve and Margo Kidder WANTED to quit but were contractually obligated to finish the project.In the end, the version of Superman II that finally made it to the theater in late 1980 (Europe) and 1981 (U.S.) can be broken down like this:70% filmed in 1979 by Richard Lester.30% filmed in 1977 by Richard Donner.This new DVD version breaks down like this:75% filmed in 1977 by Richard Donner8% filmed in 200617% filmed in 1979 by Richard Lester (re-edited in 2006).50% of this new "edit" should be footage NEVER BEFORE SEEN by the public! Mostly stuff that was filmed by Donner in 1977 and then trashed by Richard Lester in 1979.I'm hoping this new version lives up to the hype, but I'm not expecting a perfect film. Keep in mind that this is a movie that was shot 30 years ago!I'm giving the DVD 5 stars without even viewing the film simply because I think the idea itself (gathering all of the original footage and allowing Donner to complete the film... 30 years later) is absolutely incredible!Now that this film has finally seen the light of day, I can only hope for the following releases:* "Back to the Future; the Eric Stoltz version" I know it may not even exist (according to most accounts), but there are a few sources online that claim that ALL of the Eric Stoltz scenes were filmed. I can dream can't I?* Original "Star Wars" trilogy (fully RESTORED plus the deleted scenes)* "Superman the movie" enhanced with new CGI effects, ONLY where it seriously NEEDS it. Mostly at the end of the film, the town flood, bridge, and earthquake sequence could certainly use a revamping! I would only use CGI to correct and improve the old effects shots that NEED fixing. I would not pull a "George Lucas" and ruin the film by changing it too much! This film really does need some fixing. It's a true classic in every way, but the BAD model effects at the end of the film need to be fixed!!!I'll update my review once I actually watch the new version of superman II!----------- UPDATED REVIEW -----------A lot of excellent reviews have appeared since my initial review/announcement of this DVD's arrival. I cannot really add more to the argument, but I would like to simply bring my review up to date.I agree completely with those reviewers pointing out flaws with this version, it's certainly not a perfect film. You have to remember that it was NEVER finished to begin with and Richard Donner had to FIGHT every step of the way to TRY to achieve his vision. If he had been allowed to finish the ENTIRE superman project (both films) in the way that he had originally intended (without constant interference and script altering), we may have ended up with two truly GREAT films.Those voicing dissapointment with the ending of this film must remember that it was indeed the ORIGINAL ending. When "Superman: The movie" was rushed to completion they simply took the ending from Superman II and used it to complete the first film. After Donner was fired, Superman II was left without an ending. I'm quite content to see the ORIGINAL ending used.Also, after comparing both the Lester and Donner versions - I can say without a doubt that the Donner version is FAR superior. The film certainly has flaws, but that's primarily due to the fact that it was never finished to begin with. Modern viewers must also remember that this film is almost 30 years old. If you're a fan of the current crop of CGI based super-hero movies then this film might be a let down.Watch both versions back to back. You'll be amazed at how much better the Donner version is. I'm not claiming that it's a GREAT film, but I am claiming that you'll become painfully aware of just how BAD the Lester version is. It will leave you wondering just what Richard Donner might have accomplished with BOTH superman films had he simply been left alone by the producers.-JM

Nicely

What is there not to love about this movie. It’s Superman who does not love it. I love and miss the fun we have while watching.

This version is pretty good, considering it was patched together 25 years after the first director was fired.But it doesn't flow quite as well as more modern movies, and there are problems with continuity and logic.I'm happy Lois Lane is observant enough to notice that Clark Kent looks like Superman. I also was really impressed that Superman managed to "prove" Clark Kent *isn't* Superman.(spoilers ahead)Lois deliberately does something so stupid and dangerous that it forces Clark to save her as Superman — but he manages to do it in a way that looks like he didn't do anything!That said, Superman's super-breath might be the *stupidest* superpower a person could ever make up.I don't mind that he can make *cold* breath, although I don't think there's a good explanation for it.I *do* mind the sheer volume of it, which is nonsensical. You can't exhale more air than can fit in your chest.It makes no sense unless Superman has a big hole in his back!A fan is open at *both* ends so the air it blows out can be replaced by new air from behind it.And why is Zod telekinetic? He's supposed to have the same powers as Superman.When did Superman ever use the Force from Star Wars?Also, everything in this movie seems to be full of dynamite. Every collision results in an explosion.Even the kid on the horse explodes into a fountain of dirt when the rooftop police light hits him.The only thing that doesn't explode is Lois when she hits the fruit cart.Next, the time travel ending is just stupid, and many viewers don't fully understand what happened — in either part one or part two.The direction Superman flies in doesn't matter, and the direction of the Earth's spin doesn't matter.The idea, if I understand it, is that Superman used the gravity of the Earth to accelerate so quickly that he reached the speed of light, and somehow that makes time travel possible.It's the same slingshot effect that Star Trek IV used later to justify its time-travel.Superman seems really petty when he goes back to the diner to fight the big goon a second time.That fight should have stopped right after the goon hurt his hand by punching Clark.I think that's enough, and mashing him into his food and then into a pinball machine were excessive.The people in the diner shouldn't even *remember* Clark after the time travel (although bad editing makes it look like they do.)Which reminds me... people usually think of Superman as kind-of a boy scout compared to Batman, who is clearly a violent vigilante, but if I remember right, Superman and Lois kill all three villains after they've been rendered *powerless* in the fortress.Why were they treated so much more harshly than Lex Luthor, who just got sent back to prison?Lois and Superman do a lot of stupid things in this version.For one thing, Superman flies to the Fortress carrying Lois, and then gives up his powers while they're there.How did he expect to get home?We know it's possible for a normal person to travel from the city to the Fortress and back, since Lex Luthor did it — but he used the same method to go both ways. He presumably had a vehicle.Lois didn't. So Superman is an idiot.Suddenly giving up his powers was stupid in general.Who was he doing it for? No one was watching except Lois and he didn't even notice her.That question applies to several things in Superman II. "Who was he (or she) doing it for?"Why does Lois shoot at Clark with blanks?She already knows he's Superman. And *he* knows he's Superman — it's not like he had amnesia or something.So who was she doing it for? No one is watching. There's no camera and no witness.And why did Clark keep trying to hide his identity from Lois anyway?She's the one person he shouldn't hide it from.Sure, hide it from the bad guys. And hide it from other reporters.But not *this* reporter, just the ones who might reveal it to someone like Lex Luthor.And speaking of Luthor, *he* should have been the one to take away Superman's powers.The movie would have made more sense.I don't know why they got rid of the kryptonite at the end of part one. They *knew* there would be a sequel.They were already filming it!