Donner Cut more popular than I thought...

[Daughter of Krypton]

I think the only way to explain all these problems is to clearly define Superman's "turn-back-time" super power.  This power obviously doesn't really turn back time 100% - it only "sort of" turns back time, leaving some of the original events in place, but turning back time on others.  Plus, most people still have a subconcious memory of those original events, since many of them kind-of-sort-of took place, which explains why Lois is so confused about who Jason's father is.

[maggiethecat]

Even if Superman killed everyone in the Fortress upon destroying it, it doesn't matter, since he turned back time.  This means that Lex is still alive and the Zoners never make it out of their cube... here's the fun part! He only turned back time on Earth, meaning that as time continues again, they will not be re-released.  He now knows not to throw the bomb in that direction and they never escape and thus never die! 

It's all too much fun

[Daughter of Krypton]

He only turned back time on Earth, meaning that as time continues again, they will not be re-released.  He now knows not to throw the bomb in that direction and they never escape...

Until Superman Returns - The Sequel.

[DBN]

He only turned back time on Earth, meaning that as time continues again, they will not be re-released.  He now knows not to throw the bomb in that direction and they never escape...

Until Superman Returns - The Sequel.

*groans* Well, it's not like Singer could do anything original.

[Uncle Mxy]

Richard Lester weighs in on the Donner cut:

http://www.avclub.com/content/interview/richard_lester

AVC: A great deal was made of the Richard Donner cut of Superman II. Do you have an opinion on the re-cutting of the film?

RL: I didn't know it was re-cut. I read about it once. I've never seen it. I don't know anything about it.

This stands in such stark contrast to the emotion Donner feels about it, where he won't even say Lester's name.

[jayce77]

Honestly this thing would have been an actual enjoyable and quite emotional version of Superman II. Right up there with the Classic 1982 A.B.C. braodcast version, if it had been given too an actual talented and passionate editor and Dick Dooner had stayed as far away from this thing as the Sun is from the Moon. Like he original said he would in multiple interviews.

What we got is hardly watchable. And makes people thankful that he did'nt finish it. Which is the exact opposite of how we should feel. What a shame.

[BBally81]

I think the only way to explain all these problems is to clearly define Superman's "turn-back-time" super power.  This power obviously doesn't really turn back time 100% - it only "sort of" turns back time, leaving some of the original events in place, but turning back time on others.  Plus, most people still have a subconcious memory of those original events, since many of them kind-of-sort-of took place, which explains why Lois is so confused about who Jason's father is.

Yeah..... I personally don't consider SR as official canon to the Christopher Reeves films (first 2 anyway), I know my opinion doesn't matter to Waner Bros. but I would rather watch Superman 3 and 4 than rewatch Returns.

[jayce77]

Yeah..... I personally don't consider SR as official canon to the Christopher Reeves films (first 2 anyway), I know my opinion doesn't matter to Waner Bros. but I would rather watch Superman 3 and 4 than rewatch Returns.

Honestly I think Superman III, gets a bad rap by a lotta people. Sure it's nowhere near perfect. But it's definitley a fun and entertaining stand alone Superman adventure. Plenty of good and even some great.