I tend to agree with this article. I mean, Lester's comedy is jarring, but what I found really annoying about the Donner cut was that damned time-travel thing, AGAIN, as used in the first movie, and why is Clark Kent picking on that poor trucker at the diner at the end, when it's likely the initial fight between them never happened??
I admit I have never seen the Donner cut but I am turned off from wanting to see it due to Superman spinning back time again. It's way worse than the first movie cause he basically makes it so the entire movie didn't even happen.
The amazing alley way change scene (best change scene in any Superman film ever)
The Paris bomb sequence (over the Lois throws herself out the window to certain death BS)
No silly screen test scene (i mean cmon)
Banging Lois after he gives up his powers (not before lol)
The dimly green lit confession/repower scene (Reeve's acting in this scene in the Lester Cut is incredible, the Donner Cut not so much)
"General, would you care to step outside.."(not 'Freedom of the press')
Great FoS battle (not straight into the chamber)
Memory Kiss (over time travel again lol)
Getting Rocky back for beating him up (as opposed to beating his ass for no reason)
The only negatives is no Brando (but in a way Lara dealing with Kal Els love life seems more apt, and no Brando appearing for the repower creates a certain mystique) and the silly gag stuff during the Metropolis battle
So yeah there's no comparison really, the Lester Cut is the one
It's light years better. The Donner Cut is garbage that's pushed by useless nerds who base their whole identity around this nonsense. Donner is good but the editor, that Thau person, butchered the material and thus it's a forever flawed cut. Sometimes you just have to use footage that's useable, not different for the sake of it, and when this cut puts in screen tests and deletes good scenes just to be petty, it's no more than a glorified special feature.
Plus with some distance, I think Lester is actually a pretty good judge of pace; he reviewed what did and didn't work and actually improved on some scenes. In the same way that yeah, the Snyder Cut of JL was "better," but good god it was too long and indulgent; the Whedon cut omitted too much but it did some things right, so sometimes the best film is a happy medium. The Donner Cut just deletes things for the sake of it and elongates scenes that never should have been. The result is a Frankenstein mishmash of a movie without a good pace that fills the running time with everything Donner shot, at the expense of rhythm or vital scene transitions. Sloppy.
One can't claim the Donner version is garbage because I haven't seen it. I can say this though - the Lester version was fine. I saw it in a theater as a little boy with a bunch of friends. We all went nuts (in fact the entire audience did) when it ended and said COMING SOON SUPERMAN III.
When you've got an entire audience cheering as a film concludes, well, then the director must have done something right. Whether the Donner cut is or isn't better , one thinks, is irrelevant. SUperman II was fine as it was - I have no problem with it at all.
The drop off was Superman III, LOL. That's when things started going South.
The Theatrical Version is far better than the Donner Cut.. Sort of like how the theatrical version of "PAYBACK" was better than PAYBACK: The DIRECTOR'S CUT with no Kris Kristoferson
PAYBACK: STRAIGHT UP: The DIRECTORS CUT has such a radically different feel to it compared to the Theatrical Version and is more depressing I think and with no Kris Kristoferson and is replaced by Sally Kellerman and she's never seen, just her voice is heard on the phone..