Nice reivew, Les! I agree with everything you said. To add a review of my own:
A TRIUMPH!!
I remember loving Superman II as a kid. I remember really liking Superman III as well. When I saw them a few years ago I found them embarassing and intellectually insulting. I mean, Superman grabs the symbol on his chest and throws it at people? Superman can turn invisible and throw projections of himself? That would have made it easy for him to fool Lois and the rest by projecting Clark somewhere as he flew around. No, the movie was laughable.
But not anymore!!
They did 3 things:
1. Took out the most embarassing things (like the bald headed stand in for Jor El and the weird judgemental mother and the fight in the Fortress).
2. Beefed up the emotional beats and character arcs (that the "other" director watered down).
3. Since they recut it almost completely, the movie exhibits a much more modern, much more sophisticated style of editing.
They still have some clunkers that were unavoidable. Zod has the ability in one scene to levitate a gun with his eyes -- a scene realized by the "other" director with no alternate takes... they can "talk" in the vaccumm of space... and the key revelation scene is made up of two different screen tests (and they didn't have the resources of ILM behind them when they restored it).
The character arcs are so strong. Lois in Superman's shirt the morning after, Jor-El shooting her a dirty look... Jor-El's final lesson to his son... As Les pointed out, Zod mowing people down with the machine gun...
With the Fortress and Jor-El and Clark/Superman and Lois relationships it reminded me of fully fleshed out conflicts in Smallville.
Now, as someone has pointed out, they pulled the world backward trick in Superman I. But, that was intended for Superman II. I would be curious to see a Superman I with its original ending to see if it works better.
I can't say enough good things about this movie. The only reasons to prefer the first one, I think, would be nostalgic ones.
A TRIUMPH!!
I remember loving Superman II as a kid. I remember really liking Superman III as well. When I saw them a few years ago I found them embarassing and intellectually insulting. I mean, Superman grabs the symbol on his chest and throws it at people? Superman can turn invisible and throw projections of himself? That would have made it easy for him to fool Lois and the rest by projecting Clark somewhere as he flew around. No, the movie was laughable.
But not anymore!!
They did 3 things:
1. Took out the most embarassing things (like the bald headed stand in for Jor El and the weird judgemental mother and the fight in the Fortress).
2. Beefed up the emotional beats and character arcs (that the "other" director watered down).
3. Since they recut it almost completely, the movie exhibits a much more modern, much more sophisticated style of editing.
They still have some clunkers that were unavoidable. Zod has the ability in one scene to levitate a gun with his eyes -- a scene realized by the "other" director with no alternate takes... they can "talk" in the vaccumm of space... and the key revelation scene is made up of two different screen tests (and they didn't have the resources of ILM behind them when they restored it).
The character arcs are so strong. Lois in Superman's shirt the morning after, Jor-El shooting her a dirty look... Jor-El's final lesson to his son... As Les pointed out, Zod mowing people down with the machine gun...
With the Fortress and Jor-El and Clark/Superman and Lois relationships it reminded me of fully fleshed out conflicts in Smallville.
Now, as someone has pointed out, they pulled the world backward trick in Superman I. But, that was intended for Superman II. I would be curious to see a Superman I with its original ending to see if it works better.
I can't say enough good things about this movie. The only reasons to prefer the first one, I think, would be nostalgic ones.
