image45

<the titles of SUPERMAN III are my favourite part of any Supes film, though it's a pretty shonky movie otherwise>

Yes the opening is very well done; I often look for the blind man whose dog runs off so he ends up using the yellow line-painting machine. The Blind man is played by well-known comic actor Graham Stark who is in my favourite episode of Out of the Unknown – ‘The Midas Plague’ from its first session in 1965.

A Shonky movie, I know it did not do very well at the box office however there are many aspects of Superman III that I like for example as you said

<etc. I do like the brand of humour he brought to the series>

For a long time I felt that if I got to see Richard Donners cut of Superman II it would be the lack of humour that I would find to be missing the most! However on reflection now I find that Donner had indeed injected his own humour to scenes that are play in a much dryer take in the Lester version.

<Ironically, Donner is now known as a very fast director, whereas he was fired for taking too long (with the result that SUPERMAN overran it's budget by three times the original amoung planned).>

His love for the film and his drive to get ground breaking effects to look right could well have cost him the chance to complete the second film as sadly going three times over the planned budget to get your work of art to look the part does not always stand up in a world run by £££££££’s and $$$$$$$$$’s

"Seya next time!"

Aaryk Noctivagus

'The Birds'... the children's Birthday party just before the Seagulls attack. However, I don't think it was nicked... Children's parties often have children's laughter in them... otherwise they'd be quite dreary.

Aaryk Noctivagus

Yes, I've listened to the commentary, but you don't get what I mean. 'III' (the Donner version) never existed except in Donners' head, and a few words on a commentary do not change that. 'II' was an awful lot of filming done... so you can SEE for your own eyes the direction and vision he had.

image45

Can you think of any other films in history that had this level of filming done before the director was replaced?


I might have been looking to deep into the commentary by ‘Donner’ on what he was hoping to lead on to do in a Superman III. From a visual point of view yes I see what you are saying about having a Donner cut of Superman II so you can see what he was trying to put on screen

Sorry for been small minded

"Seya next time!"

Wolfgang

Something similar happened with Waterworld did it not? Kevin Reynolds directed most of it and then Kevin Costner fired him and reshot huge chunks of it. It was not too bad from what I recall.

And wasn't The Spy Who Loved Me filmed mostly by Kubrick?

Aaryk Noctivagus

I wouldn't have called you 'small minded' in the least... however, I wasn't expecting such a discussion from my simply saying I wept (figuratively) for the movie that might have been.

The only one that springs straight to my mind is 'Alien 3' although David Fincher wasn't replaced and retained his credit. Its really a bit of a studio hatchet job over the Director's head... and there are many examples of that sort of thing, mostly unfortunate.

David Fincher walked off the production... but the Assembley Cut of 'Alien 3' displays, I think, a better movie that might have been... but unfortunately the 'Alien 3' so many know and loathe was what was actually released into the cinemas.

OK... not really a Director replacement strictly speaking, but the only thing which sprung to mind immediately.

ChristineCB

The recently-released PAYBACK DIR-CUT was a completed film until Mel Gibson & Co. decided to bring in a different director and screenwriter, and re-do huge portions of the film - creating whole new characters (Kris Kristofferson's head bad-guy, for example; plus his son, plus the son's kidnapping sequence and all that went with it) plus the ending.

Actually, according to this new DIR CUT's release, where Mel, the orig screenwriter and orig director all have extensive convsations, the process was "Mel doesn't want to die in the end - his career can't take it at this point - he needs to live in the film."

The screenwriter balked. The director supported the screenwriter. "So if we fire the screenwriter because he won't change it, what will you do, Dear Director?" Well, I'll just quit.

So the gauntlet was thrown, and Mel was convinced his career couldn't stand a dark ending. So those two were canned and they brought in new writers and a new director. We saw the original PAYBACK in Mel's version, and 10 years later, we see the original one. I don't know why Mel's career can stand the 'bad parts' now, however... that one quote from him sounds even more ludicrous - even from him.

Aaryk Noctivagus

I don't know whether or not I've ever seen 'Payback'... though the Director's Cut looks like something I'd be interested in.

As far as I can tell its only released Region 1 so far... I wonder if there's any news of a Region 2 release of the Dir Cut.

ChristineCB

Image, I finished the SUPER-2-DONNER with the Commentary Audio Track turned on it's kind of fun and enlightening to listen to, but Donner & Pal seem to whine a bit more than I'd have recommended. "Oh, if only I'd been allowed to..." or "Well, I didn't shoot this scene, so I can't recommend it..." or things like that.

Still, I'm glad they included this track. I have a fresh new, first-hand opinion of Donner now... whether he likes it or not-!

image45

<but Donner & Pal seem to whine a bit more than I'd have recommended>

Yes I often found myself jumping between the standard audio and the commentary track so scenes I like were not spoilt by the 'I didn't shoot this scene' talk.

Shame really like

"Seya next time!"

D Cairns

Just saw Stellan Skarsgard talking here at Edinburgh Film Festival and he spoke about doing the Exorcist prequel where director Paul Schrader was fired and Renny Harlin brought in to reshoot. Eventually the script was re-written so much than Skarsgard agreed to reshoots as long as he could change his makeup slightly, which prevented them using ANY of his scenes from the first version. So we ended up with TWO COMPLETE VERSIONS of that film, both at 50 million $. "And neither works!"

Re Lester: he was brought in to work as an associate producer (anyone who will associate with a producer) on the first SUPERMAN because Donner was no longer speaking to the Salkinds and they needed a go-between. His conditions were that he wouldn't interfere with Donner's direction under any circumstances, and the Salkinds would pay him the money they owed him from THE THREE MUSKETEERS in 1973! It was inevitable that Lester, known as the most budget-dependable of directors, would be asked to take over the second film since communications had broken down so badly with Donner. The Salkinds had had to go back to Warner Bros with cap in hand so many times during the first film to get more cash that they ended up giving away all their profit points in the first film: the sequel became essential so they could make some money!

image45

I did not expect this thread to become so big for the size of the opening post, you live and learn!

"Seya next time!"

Aaryk Noctivagus

Is it a bird?
Is it a plane?
No. Its Super-Thread

Lord Brett

Not really. Kubrick helped out with the lighting on the huge set for the inside of the Liparus oil tanker on 007 stage as the Director of Photography (whose name escapes me, he was French) was suffereing from a degenerative eye disease so couldn't light such a large set.

image45

Thats sad to hear

"Seya next time!"