ACG Reviews: Superman II

21 min read

Deviation Actions

Anicomicgeek's avatar
By
Published:
559 Views
Okay, I'm putting this upfront: I do tackle some thing in relation to what happened to Christopher Reeve and Margot Kidder later on in life after this movies.  Much like my review of the first movie, I do go a bit of a rant at times at issues I have with the movie as well and while I have sworn (and dropped the F-bomb) in prior reviews, one of these rants devolved to a Cluster F-Bomb at the end of it

WARNING: The review contains spoilers.  You've been warned.

The Plot:
  Before sending his son to Earth, Jor-El had helped banish General Zod, a rogue general who attempted to overthrow the Council, and his two cronies, Ursa and the mindless Non, into the Phantom Zod.  Despite being called "an eternal living death", Jor-El noted that this would prevent them from suffering the same fate as the rest of Krypton.  Years later, after Jor-El's son Kal-El had arrived on Earth and established himself as Superman, a bomb he sent into space to keep it from hurting innocent people explode near the Phantom Zone fragment that contains Zod and his allies, freeing them.  They then proceed to head towards Earth.

  At the same time, Ms. Teschmacher breaks Lex Luthor out of prison, who realizes through a device he built in prison that Superman frequently heads to the Arctic and proceeds discover to the Fortress of Solitude, where he learns about General Zod's insurrection.  Suspecting that the General might be loose, Luthor intends to align himself with Zod.

  Unaware of what has happened, Superman, in his alter ego of Clark Kent, is sent on assignment with Lois Lane by their boss, Perry White, to check out a scam a hotel in Niagara Falls is rumored to be pulling.  However, Lois has started to suspect that Clark is Superman, and will go to any lengths to prove it.  When Lois does figure out she's right, their relationship started to get serious and Clark takes her to his Fortress.  After a while, Clark tells the A.I. based on his parents that she wants to be with Lois and it gets him an ultimatum: if he's to be with a human, he must give up his powers to do so—a price Clark is willing to pay, as enters a chamber that strips him of his powers.

  However, General Zod and his allies soon arrive on Earth, laying siege to the planet and even taking over the White House.  Realizing what's going on, Clark resolves to find a way to restore his powers and stop the villains, just as Luthor arrives at the White House to forge an alliance with Zod.  Can Clark restore his powers and if so, can Superman stop three villains with the same powers he has?

The Review:

Story/Characters:

The Movie in General:
  Before we get onto comparing and contrasting the cuts, let's get to a couple of things both cut have in common.

  Let's get the elephant out of the room in regards to both Superman II and Man of Steel: how the hell is the Superman of the latter film a "Man of Murder" given what Superman does here in both cuts of this movie?  In Man of Steel, Superman stops a still-active General Zod from killing a family and it was presented as a desperate, in the heat of the moment decision.  In both cuts of Superman II, Superman tosses General Zod into a pit after depowering him and probably breaking every bone in his hand.  In Man of Steel, Superman screams in horror at the action and feels remorse for what he did, even though it was to protect an innocent family; in Superman II, Superman tosses the depowered with a broken hand Zod into a pit with a grin on his face and doesn't show any remorse whatsoever.  And cite the expanded international and TV cuts all you want, but those cuts came later and even so, that isn't what was released to theaters, that's not what's available on DVD/Blu-Ray, and it sure as hell isn't in the Donner cut—for all intents and purposes, Superman killed General Zod in this movie as well... and unlike the Superman of MoS, this Superman was freaking smiling while doing so and this Zod was depowered and hence, unlike the Zod of Man of Steel, was no longer an active threat when he did it!

  So no, the Superman of Man of Steel isn't a cold-blooded murderer because he snapped Zod's neck: that Zod was in the middle of a breakdown where he vowed to kill as many people as possible (and had even planned to wipe out humanity before that point), he was threatening an innocent family at the time, there wasn't a lot of time to consider options and the decision was made in the heat of the moment to save said family, and Superman there felt remorse about what he did.  But the Reeve Superman is: he depowered General Zod and his cronies, he broke every bone in Zod's hand when he took it.  By that point, that Zod was already beaten and no longer an active threat and what did this Superman do?  He proceeded to toss this Zod into a fucking pit with a grin on his face as he did so.

  So, the real "Man of Murder" isn't the Superman of Man of Steel, it's the Reeve Superman—and this film being brighter and more colorful doesn't change the fact that, for all intents and purposes, this Superman sent an already defeated foe to his death and doesn't care one way or the other, and what MoS's Superman did was a desperate move in the moment to save people who were presently in danger and didn't like what he did.  And no, just because what happened to Christopher Reeve was tragic doesn't make this Superman's action in this movie above criticism nor does it change the fact this Superman is indeed a murderer.

  And before we move on, yes, the Donner cut does use the "Superman goes back in time to stop something from happening" plot device that the first movie does (but then, it was originally intended for the second movie and used due to a combination of producers liking the effect and decision to focus solely on the first movie to get it done and out), so yes, technically, Zod and company are still alive at the end of the Donner cut—but again, the scene with the arctic patrol capturing Zod and crew isn't present before that, so for all intent and purposes, until Superman changed the past, he killed Zod (and Lois killed Ursa and Non, being the braindead idiot that he is, kills himself).

  While comparing this to Man of Steel, there was collateral damage to Metropolis done here as well.  Despite what some detractors like to think the truth is most of Downtown Metropolis did survive the events of Man of Steel, and well the damage done here wasn't as extensive, the fact remains: there was damage done here, too.  Superman vs. Non did tear up part of Metropolis's sewer system, and that ended with Superman punching Non through a building.  General Zod used his heat vision to blow up several cars, then Superman reflected General Zod's heat vision back at him, destroying a billboard.  Superman then tossed Zod into another billboard and destroyed that one, and Zod himself sent Superman into a Marlboro truck.  A tower that Non was knocked into fell off the building it was on.  Ursa tossed a manhole cover at Superman and sent him flying into a car.  While Superman caught the bus Ursa and Non threw, it sent him back into said cigarette truck.

  As I said in my review of the first movie, I also have moral issues with this version of Jor-El that I decided to save for this review, so let's get to it.  So... who the hell does this Jor-El think he is?  No, seriously, he never even considers that what Kal-El/Clark himself might want; he just decided that his son will be humanity's savior without any thought as to what Kal-El would want or his own happiness.  It's just "You're humanity savior because I said so."  Unlike other versions, this Clark Kent didn't chose to be Superman of his own free will: the minute Clark touched the crystal console in the first movie, Jor-El started to program him for 12 years for the purpose that he sent Kal-El to Earth for.  Even in Man of Steel, despite Jor-El saving one of the reasons he sent Kal-El to Earth was to make some attempt to preserve Krypton and keep another planet from becoming like Krypton, that Clark ultimately chose to be Superman.

  As many of you probably figured out at this point, the reason I decided to save this rant for this review is because of Jor-El's (or Lara's in the theatrical cut) edict that if Clark is to take a human as his lover, he must give up his powers.  No, even ignoring pre-Crisis Earth-Two, post-Crisis, and Lois and Clark, Jor-El has no right to do that.  Who the hell does he think he is giving his son that ultimatum?  Your son can't be a hero and have a family of his own at the same time?  Bullshit!  The great flaw of the "superheroes can't have families" argument is that police officers, firefighters, paramedics, and soldiers among others do it all the damn time!  Then, when Clark decided to take the depowering option, the Jor-EL A.I. has the gall to glare at Lois, trying to shame her.  Again, comparing to Man of Steel, but at least the Jor-El there infused the Codex into Kal-El and sent him to Earth to help save the Kryptonian species and hence realized that his son becoming involved with someone and having kids might not be a bad idea; in fact, it would be conductive to keeping Kryptonians from going extinct.

  No, what this Clark should have done is what the Clark of Smallville did in the penultimate episode of that series: tell the A.I. based on his manipulative, self-righteous, inconsiderate, sanctimonious asshat of a father to fuck off and stay out of his life, then go on and be with Lois, anyway!  In short, fuck this Jor-El, fuck his lack of consideration for what his son would want, fuck his lack of foresight, fuck his self-righteous bullshit, fuck his anger at Lois, and fuck Lara in the theatrical cut for the same reasons!  They had no right to ever make that ultimatum and put that pressure on their son!

  Why are Luthor and Teschmacher working together again?  Luthor sent a missile (which in the Donner cut, Superman tossing it into space is used as the way that Zod and company escaped the Phantom Zod, as opposed to the use of a different nuclear bomb in the Lester cut) towards the town Teschmacher's mother lived in, which is why she decided to help Superman and remove the Kryptonite, and hence how his plan got thwarted and Luthor himself the pokey.

  At least the relationship between Lois and Clark's halves are explored further in this movie and it dies feel natural.  While, yes, one can argue Clark is selfish, I agree with some that he doesn't come across as unsympathetic here.  He wants what a lot of us want: it be happy, to be with the person he loves.  But then again, as one of my earlier rants pointed out, unlike other incarnations, this Clark Kent didn't chose to be Superman, either: in the universe of the films, it was forced upon him by an A.I. based on Jor-El, so he didn't get a say in the decision of what he was going to do with his own life.  So, it's perfectly natural for him, like everyone else, to want a say in their own life.  Granted, some of Lois's actions are stupid and in one particular case in the Donner cut, it's outright jackassery, even ignoring Margot Kidder's later mental health issues.

   And on a that sad note, this can be uncomfortable to watch at times, especially a lot of the stuff with Clark and Lois, including the scenes where Lois tries to get Clark to confess to being Superman (her leaping off Niagara Falls in the theatrical cut, Lois leaping out a window in the Daily Planet and shooting Clark with a blank in the Donner cut, Clark getting beat up by the trucker in the diner).  The reasons why are obvious and because of hindsight: Christopher Reeve's accident (which itself can making these movies a bit hard to sit through knowing what happened) and death and Margot Kidder's own mental health issues in the years following the series.  Ergo, it can be quite hard watching this, knowing what happened to the actors.   This isn't the fault of the movie, of course, but I feel I would be remiss if I didn't point this out to people who haven't seen it.  Of course, even ignoring that, the scene of Lois firing a blank at Clark in the Donner cut can be harrowing in retrospect for a different reason (besides the obvious fact she pointed a gun at Clark): when Clark tells Lois that he'd be dead if she was wrong, she responses by revealing it was a blank.  Maybe I'm reaching here a bit, but sadly, as we now know, most famously from the horrible accident that led to Brandon Lee's death during the filming of The Crow, blanks can kill people.  Of course, that event happened years later, but that doesn't change the fact that Lois still could've killed Clark by accident if she was wrong regardless of what she fired.

The Richard Donner Cut:
  In the summer of 2004, I'd bought the Alien Quadrilogy DVD set, which came with a little booklet (or in my case, 3).   In it, when it came to talk about the Alien 3 assembly cut, it said that a true director's cut of the film wasn't possible as that would require David Fincher to reshoot the whole film and have complete creative control.  While true in some regards (Fincher has also tried distance himself from the film from the moment the filming of it wrapped, which given some of the bullshit he put up with, is understandable), why did I go on this tangent?  It stuck in my mind when watching this recently.  Why?  Because the truth is, despite the name, it really isn't a finished movie; it's cobbled together from stuff Donner shot before he moved focus to solely the first movie and then being fired, screen tests of Christopher Reeve and Margot Kidder he'd shot before filming actually began (the aforementioned scene of Lois firing a blank at Clark), and edited footage that Richard Lester shoot that the editor felt comfortable using (hence probably the only reason General Zod telekinetically pulling the shotgun towards him was kept when all the other extra powers bits were cut out).  For it to truly be the movie he intended, Donner, like Fincher, would have to back in time and given more free reign to do the movie he wanted, including come up with a new ending as he's on record as saying he'd have done so if he returned (again, what was used in the first movie was originally meant for use in this movie).

  Considering that both this and the first movie were originally intended to be—and until production got delayed and focus got shifted to the first movie, were—shot back to back, the intent was for the movies to be a two-part epic.  This is reaffirmed by the Donner cut's opening, which, after a recap of the events of the first movie (albeit with footage at different angles in a lot of cases) featuring the missile Superman stopped from him Hackensack exploding and unleashing the Phantom Zone criminals and our first shot after the opening credits being a copy of the Daily Planet talking about Superman thwarting Luthor's scheme and Luthor being locked up.  Relating to this,  despite my moral issues with this Jor-El, his inclusion does also connect the two better.  I do agree with Donner and Tom Mankiewicz in their commentary that, as the two movies are basically one big story, his absence in the theatrical version does mean the movie is missing something.  Also, we have a better idea of how Clark regained his powers as Clark rediscovered the crystal that made the Fortress and contained the Jor-El A.I., which proceeds to reactivate the latter, which then explains that he had foreseen that Clark would realize that giving up his powers was a mistake and sacrifices itself to restore them.

  Keeping the part where Clark returns to the diner to get even on Rocky (the guy who beat him up earlier just before Clark finally learns about Zod's arrival) makes Clark look petty.  Granted, Rocky is an asshole is both versions and one can make the case that he was being petty in both cuts, but considering Superman once again went back in time to prevent the events of the movie from happening in the Donner cut, the beating didn't happen; at least in the theatrical cut, Rocky can understand the exact reason why Clark picked a fight with him when Clark returns to the diner and hands him his ass.  Also, the guy still says "I just had this place fixed; it cost me a fortune" when Rocky gets up.  Seeing as Superman prevented the events of the film from happening in the Donner cut, does this Rocky has a history of bullying people and trashing stuff?  Granted, it could also be true in the theatrical cut, but if so, why not ban him from the premises and call the police if he returns again?

  And just as the Krpytonite in the first movie, the universe of these films once again bends over backwards to prove Luthor right despite no proof otherwise: even with the weapon (the terrorist bomb in the theatrical cut, the missile that Superman stopped from hitting Hackensack in the first movie in the Donner cut) that Superman sent off into space, there's no way Luthor could have known that Zod and his cronies have already escaped when he visited the Fortress of Solitude—and especially not before they arrived and started terrorizing the planet.  After they started terrorizing the planet, maybe, but definitely not before.  At least the movie explained away his figuring out about the Fortress's location by having Otis say radars have directed him fly north afterwards and Luthor having built his own more advanced device and following the traces.  But regarding General Zod and gang, once again, Luthor pulls an idea out of his ass and he's right because the movie says so.

  Some of the special effects also aren't as good as they are in the theatrical version, but then again, this is understandable: there likely wasn't a lot of money spent to finish the stuff that was really needed (the missile and the Washington Monument reforming as Superman reverses time) and some of what could be done required the actors (in the properly finished shots of the Phantom Zone, we see Zod and his cronies moving within the panel; in the clearly unfinished shots, all we get in just still images).  I won't lie: I would've liked to have seen more polished versions, but again, I understand that there are limitations.

  I do have an issue with something in the Lois/Clark subplot in the Donner cut, but I'll say that for the theatrical cut.

The Theatrical Cut:
  I'm going to be honest: while the Donner cut is overall superior, there are some things done in the theatrical cut that I prefer over it.  One of these things is doing the recap through the opening credits, so opposed to doing them separately.  By combining them, it does save time and let us get into the story faster.  Personally, if I'd worked on the Donner cut, I'd saved the escape of the Phantom Zone criminals for the end of the credits or at least shortly afterward.  Also, (granted, though ADR and voice doubles as Gene Hackman refused to continue without Donner), Luthor knowing about the three Phantom Zone criminals and their escape and is explained by his device detecting them and him making the connection and realizing this after visiting the Fortress instead of just automatically thinking they escaped as soon as he hears about them (of course, this brings into question the range of the device, but at least Luthor knowing they escaped before they arrived it wasn't completely pulled from the filmmakers' asses, unlike in the Donner cut).

  There was also two things relating to the Clark/Lois subplot that like more than in the Donner cut.  First, more time seems to have passed as well in between the events of the first movie and the theatrical version of this movie, so we can assume Superman did have more adventures in Metropolis, and there's more time for Lois to come to suspect Clark and make the connection between both of his identities.  Also, Lois finds out through something other than her whipping out a gun.  Even ignoring what happened later on in real life to Reeve and Kidder, Lois whipping out a gun and firing it at Clark is a jackass and insane move on her part.  Even ignoring what we now know about blanks, what if she had indeed been wrong about Clark?  Would she have continued to hound Clark until she finally got it through her head?  At least through Lois finding out by accident, it doesn't make her come across like a inconsiderate and crazy jackass (well, less so than usual, as in the Donner cut, she did jump to test her theory).

  That said, I agree with many people that there's too much humor is this and it does like to tonal whiplash.  There are scenes of slapstick that follow or precede scenes intended to be taken completely seriously—or even in the same scene!  We're supposed to take General Zod, Ursa, and Non seriously, but some of their scenes and the aftermath are mired in comedy unsuited for the scenes, and hence lose a little of their impact.  Also, Lester's scenes likely are the ones involve the Krpytonians whipping out new powers out of their asses like astral projections, teleportation, telekinesis, and of course, the two biggest ones the amnesia kiss and that stupid cellophane "S" Superman tosses at Non (which then disappears after he hits the floor).  There's also some very stupid lines  (In this cut, when Superman pins Non under a tower, Ursa says "He caged Non!"  By the way, this is the very same tower that Ursa sent Non flying into, that then fell and Superman stopped from hitting a woman and her baby.).

  That said, it's possible not all some of the sillier stuff in the theatrical cut might be Lester's fault, though, as aside from killing a cop and someone in Addis Ababa when stealing the Kryptonite, Luthor was still a buffoon in the first movie.  In the theatrical cut of this movie, Clark's civilian clothes also just materialize out of nowhere and replaces his costume after he becomes depowered and we see in glimpses of this in the Donner cut as well he has the button-up shirt on as the chamber finishes.  Then again, the shots inside the chamber might also be among those scenes that Donner didn't do himself.

  Again, despite my moral issues with Superman's parents in this series, the film is lacking something without Jor-El's presence, including his asinine ultimatum.  As some people have noted, we don't know how Clark restored his powers, especially as this cut forgoes Jor-El, but we do see Clark finding the green crystal here as well, so we can speculate that in the theatrical version, a similar safeguard was in place.

Acting:
  All of the returning actors once again deliver good jobs in the roles, but again, special mention goes to Christopher Reeve and Margot Kidder as the stuff between Lois and Clark works because of the chemistry between them.  Getting to someone I didn't mention last time, in part because he only appears in the opening, Terence Stamp delivers a wonderful hammy performance as General Zod.  Similarly, Sarah Douglas delivers a sutiably cold performance as Ursa.

Final Verdict:
  Overall, I prefer the Donner cut despite some issues, but both are worth checking out.

© 2016 - 2024 Anicomicgeek
Comments10
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
MoArtProductions's avatar
I understand where your coming from with the Zod incident, but personally the scene with him and his cronies escorted by the Arctic Police was intended to be included but was and has been incomplete until later on. Sort in a similar situation with Richard Williams, The Thief and the Cobbler, it's still being continuously edited with every release to make the project better along the way.

Sophist to say, while it was not included earlier it still counts in my book.