Sign In

booah

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
8-Aug-2005
Last activity
7-Oct-2014
Posts
234

Post History

Post
#260805
Topic
Superman II Donner, and III & IV extended edits
Time
Originally posted by: The Bizzle
Again, if you think that, then why are you inserting yourself into a discussion where people are trying to figure out how to tie them together even CLOSER? . . . "It's done. It's on DVD. Good night."
It's not that hard, man.


"Inserting myself"? I started this thread, in case you hadn't noticed. The discussion of SR is a separate discussion from the original topic, which is about a Superman II edit combining Lester and Donner. Nothing to do with Returns or tying it in. Working with III and IV also, yes, but not Returns. So who's the one wasting "thousands of words"? It went from a suggestion to something of the utmost importance. For the purposes of making the best Superman II edit, Returns is an afterthought.

"It's done" refers to the fact that Returns is done. This isn't about making a Returns edit (although there should be more discussion about improving that flawed sum'bitch... Superman ReReturns?). Returns *already* ties into the previous movies, so again-- why is its tying in to an unrelated fan edit so important, when it's not the point? Don't get pissed at me because of a tangent, man.

It's not that hard, man.

I guess I should've specified this as a "CHRISTOPHER REEVE SUPERMAN EDIT" thread.
Post
#260735
Topic
FAN EDIT REQUEST THREAD- Post your dream Fan Edits Here!
Time
Originally posted by: FanFiltration
Hey,

The new film "ROCKY BALBOA" is ariving soon, and so far reviews and word of mouth is that this ROCKY is going to be a KNOCK OUT.

I was thinking about how kewl it would be if someone here was able to edit Rocky 2, 3, 4, and 5 into one big movie that would bridge the original Rocky and this new film.


A Rocky project could definitely be kewl. (Although Rocky V could probably be mostly avoided...)

Post
#260734
Topic
Superman II Donner, and III & IV extended edits
Time
You don't even HAVE these questions watching Superman I and II. That's the point. They're their own island, just as Returns is on its own island as well. There is no pregancy, no plans of leaving (so as to Return), no other boyfriend. That is all copyright 2006. Why does any regard NEED to be taken with respect to Returns if making a NEW version of Superman II, other than, it'll make you feel all gooey inside?

For the 100th time: Returns ALREADY "ties in" with the old fucking movies as is. It's done. It's on DVD. Good night. So a cool new version of the old movies or a Superman II hybrid is its own thing-- maybe it ties in, maybe not, who cares? Not to mention the fact that all the Superman movies thus far have pulled stuff outta their ass in terms of "canon", so cinematically Supes has been all one big open field. Have fun, and don't think so much about a fan edit of an already bastardized film having to tie into another bastardized film.
Post
#260733
Topic
Preserving the...*cringe*...Star Wars Holiday Special
Time
Originally posted by: Number20
Originally posted by: SKot
Originally posted by: reave
funny how lucas is trying to keep the holiday special buried, and yet there is a screen shot on starwars.com.
I would say that Lucasfilm does not seem to be trying as hard to bury the Holiday Special lately. In fact, they seem to be referencing it more and more. There are numerous stills from the HS on starwars.com and Hyperspace, and they have shown clips from the cartoon both on the "Bucket Head" documentary (which wound up on the Episode II DVD), and in their Star Wars animation retrospective video that starwars.com hosted a while back.

I just hope it's a sign that they are more open to it now, and maybe we'll see it released someday yet.

--SKot



Thanks to the internet and stuff like that, its harder to keep things like this buried and forgotten about, like it once was. So maybe we'll see something come out someday. After all, the O-OT wasn't supposed to even exist anymore, and we got a release of it, flawed as it was.


I'm sure Lucas has realized that the Holiday Special is another SW product that can be sold (and in various versions/re-re-releases no doubt). So it's probably only a matter of time before it gets officially released in some form or another. Probably an edited version. Or maybe a Special Edition with added bad CGI!
Post
#260524
Topic
Superman II Donner, and III & IV extended edits
Time
What? No it's not. Because HE'S not reversed. He's doing the reversing. Later on in this argument you use "Back to the Future" and When time is reversed, MARTY isn't reversed. It's not like he becomes a zygote and zips back into his fathers dick, right? That's sorta the same argument I'm making about Jason, since Superman isn't going back in time with Lois at the fortress. It very MUCH matters where someone is physically at the time of the reversal in the SUPERMAN movies. At least it matters where SUPERMAN is.


Actually, Marty was about to be "zipped back into his father's dick" when his parents were in danger of not mating.

But your point that it matters where Superman is in those flicks when time is reversed is merely an assumption. [and Samuel L. Jackson said, "When you make an assumption, you make an ass out of you, and umption.")] Please point out in Superman I or II where there is evidence that Lois is pregnant or that a kid was on the way. Singer's kid plot isn't justified retroactively, and it doesn't make it any more relevant. It was one idea among a million possible ideas for anyone's 21st century "reboot"/"rehash"/"whatever" of the Superman franchise. If Singer included a Superman Brother, or Krypto the SuperPup, would that have to be tied into Supes II, just because the movie was released, even if they weren't the greatest additions?

This isn't about me "not liking" SR. It's about ignoring it FOR THE PURPOSES OF A SUPERMAN II FAN EDIT, simply because it's not a real sequel. It's not a true follow-up. It's reuses actual lines of dialogue word-for-word from the old flicks (which remakes do... sequels don't... pretty simple). The whole Superman's kid thing is fine by itself in a new work made by Singer, and no one's telling you to destroy your copy of the movie. But it didn't exist in 1981, like III and IV. My point is, everything is ALREADY tied together AS-IS. Keeping SR in mind for a Supes II edit is pointless, as it already "ties in" (no matter how half-assed). In making a movie that is the best of both worlds (those worlds being Lester and Donner), Singer is not part of those worlds, and his flick ain't either. The super-kiss should be included if it works out to the be a good story choice, based on the existing II flicks and scripts and whatnot. If it makes people feel better about SR's existence, fine. It just has no bearing on a new alternate version Superman II. I'm not trying to negate SR-- again, it was always be there, so watch it 'til your heart's content.

As far as other Superman comic stories to base a film off of, there are countless good ones that are sadly left untapped.
Post
#260379
Topic
Superman II Donner, and III & IV extended edits
Time
Originally posted by: Batman Beyond
For me, the ideal SII is the Donner cut without the time reversal and with the amnesia kiss in. That way I can enjoy it for what it is and still watch SR afterwards, knowing that it continues SII's story. Which is ideal, as it allows me to believe that these entries still count.


But SR DOES continue it enough AS IS, if you already see it that way and like it. Again, this is talk of a NEW EDIT of Superman II. The 2 *pre-existing* Superman II movies will always be there, and SR will always be there. The new edit is a whole new monster, inspired by Lester/Donner, and not Singer.
Post
#260373
Topic
Superman II Donner, and III & IV extended edits
Time
when Superman goes back in time, he removes himself from the equation--he's not on the planet moving backwards, reversing all his actions. He's up in space. He's not down there. Lois died because he WASN'T there, so he reversed time to when he could be. But the pregnancy is different because he WAS there. So you can't take back the sex, because he's not on the planet humping backwards in reverse. There's nowhere for the sperm to go back into. She's still pregnant by the end of Superman II, which is essentially the end of Superman I.

Dude, haven't you ever seen a time travel movie? When time is reversed, EVERYTHING is reversed. It doesn't matter where anyone physically is at the time of the reversal-- that's just goofy. Time doesn't know where you are when it's being rewound. And if you use Back to the Future's time travel "rules" as a guide, as soon as you create another timeline via time travel, a second time traveller is also created, hence Marty seeing himself at the end of BTTF I. He went back in time and came back, creating another, alternate timeline, and another Marty. While the time-reversing Superman is spinning the earth around, the Superman that was in the first, Lois-dies/Lois sex timeline is also being reversed. After time is rewound, Lois is alive, and Superman did not bang Lois-- that's the result of reversing time, chief. Plus, Lois is not pregnant by the end of Superman II, is she? (no one knows if Clark brought his Trojans or what)-- the pregancy was a sloppy Singer device/assumption that just because they had sex, Lois is automatically pregnant so the kid character could be added. HOWEVER, all of this is meaningless when considering that fact that if you reversed the rotation of the earth, time would NOT rewind, but continue forward, with the earth just spinning in the opposite direction. Sort of how in Ferris Bueller's Day Off, the miles on the car continued to go up, even though the car was in reverse. And if the earth's rotation was suddenly changed, everything on earth would shift and fly around. But the effect looks really cool in the movie, and it's a movie, and it's Superman, so whatever. And for the record, I thought SR would've been a more interesting movie if the kid turned out to NOT be Supes'. Superman just doesn't go around having kids, even with Lois Lane. [And why the fuck is Superman's child asthmatic?]

The kiss has been there for YEARS now, one fourth of a century


That is the lamest argument I've ever heard. Superman II itself has been there for 25 years, too, but that didn't stop the Donner cut from being released, or any of the countless alternate cuts of movies from all eras for that matter. The kiss will remain in Richard Lester's Superman II for all eternity. We're talking about a NEW edit here.

The bottom line is, Superman Returns is IRRELEVANT to making a new, ideal Superman II. Bending over backwards to link them (when Singer's links are more homage/rehash than continuation) is akin to Lucas altering the OT to fit the PT. It's all about making the best Superman II story. A bigger question is: should Superman II.0 be assembled with regard to making the best sequel to Superman: The Movie, or just the best version of Supes II? What everyone is forgetting is that Superman Returns is ALREADY connected enough to the pre-existing I and II, so again, for the purposes of making a better Superman II, it can be left alone on its own merits (or lack thereof).
Post
#260367
Topic
Paint Wars: A New Hope
Time
What are some people's problems here? ZigFried doesn't really owe anyone anything. He took time to start a creative, intriguing project, but it's obviously a massive undertaking, and it's understandable to get overwhelmed. Even if the dude's attitude may not be the best, there's no need for browbeating someone who's doing something for fun (which I imagine must be made more difficult when it's being scrutinized on the internet). Does this really need "waaah, you broke your promise!" Is there a rule that you must be true to your word and unwavering when working on a fan project, or you shall be exiled? And most threads like this contain daily changes and delays, so wtf. It's one thing to get excited over something new, but it's another to act entitled to it. You're acting like he kicked your puppy. If he finishes it, great, it looks like it'll be really cool. If not, it was fun while it lasted. As I'm sure most people know, shit happens every day and not everything can be easily as accomplished as one would like. As George Carlin once said, "Relax... have some dip."
Post
#260364
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Time
Originally posted by: Fang Zei
At least when Spielberg first put close encounters on dvd he just said "this is it, I'm done."


That's probably due in no small part to the fact that Spielberg has continually made movies since then and has challenged himself, and his audience, countless times. Why futz with your old movies when you have Minority Report, A.I, Schindler's List, Munich, etc, in you? Who knows what else Lucas has in him, except an apparent desire to screw with the very work that made him a household name, and make money off of his claim to fame. It's ironic that he's changed the very creations that have afforded him to continually change his creations.

Post
#260222
Topic
Superman II Donner, and III & IV extended edits
Time
This site (written pre-Donner Cut release) has fascinating, what-if edit suggestions/speculations for making Lester's Supes II as close to Donner's as possible, using scripts and footage and edits, complete with visual aids/screen caps. Wonder if Donner checked this out before tackling his cut?...
Superman II Reconstructed Speculation

The time travel issue is addressed, and one suggestion mirrors some others here about cutting out the kiss. Since the earth-spinning bit was concocted pre-Back to the Future, I don't think writers at the time thought as much about plausability or common sense in regards to time travel "rules" and effects. It's probably safe to assume that before something like BTTF dealt with time travel in mainstream entertainment in a more logical manner (changes to the past rippling through the timeline, being erased from existence, etc.), it was viewed more literally ("he'll just reverse time and make her forget-- sounds good").

After reading that WB apparently did not compensate Donner for his time on the new version, maybe the earth-spinning was tacked on in lieu of a more clever ending if he wasn't getting paid and wanted to wrap it up. Who knows...
Post
#260220
Topic
Superman II Donner, and III & IV extended edits
Time
For the purposes of making a new Supes II, SR is totally irrelevant when you think about. Just because it came out, doesn't make it essential. Someone mentioned that it was supposed to be a "vague sequel", and vague is something that it sure is. As a Superman fan, I understand *why* it was made the way it was made, but it's not my fault that WB and Singer decided to do a big-budget-yet-half-assed reboot-slash-sequel instead of going balls-out from the get-go. It's kinda similar to Lucas insisting he "had to" make Menace and Clones boring and loaded with pointless exposition to get to Sith, when he could've done whatever the hell he wanted.

It's more of a jumbled part-sequel, part-remake. There is both overlap and disconnect, so "tying it in" is largely a waste of time. Keeping the stupid super-kiss, even though its removal may improve the old story, just to weakly tie it into a movie that itself weakly ties into the old ones is a waste of time. Excising the kiss doesn't damage the continuity or the story-- Lois doesn't *need* to forget anything. It's the end of the movie-- it could be open-ended as to if she really remembers. As long as it ends with Supes flying off into the distance, the flick's gold. You can acknowledge SR's existence all you want for yourself, but for Superman II.0 purposes, it doesn't need to be a factor. If SR is indeed a "sequel" (which it's not), it should've been stated that Supes was gone TWENTY-five years, since the 21st century world depicted in the movie (not to mention the exact-opposite-of-sassy new Lois attitude) is very far removed from Donner/Lester, as is Returns as a whole. Either way, all of the films revolve around a dude from Krypton in blue tights, so they "tie in" enough...

Should any of the mother footage be left in? It was nice to see all the Brando footage, but I also felt the mother lent a nice touch in places as well in the Lester version.
No for a few reasons.
1) It's inconsistent with S:TM in which Superman talks to Jor-El.
2) Lara did not record her intellect and personality onto the crystals, only Jor-El did.
3) There would be no conclusion to the mother & son relationship as there is with father & son.


While Brando is essential, there is an obvious, strong bond with the mother in part I as well, and her presence could be a nice addition (not replacement). I don't recall anywhere stating that the mother *didn't* record anything for Jor-El, so it's plausable that both his mom and dad imparted wisdom. And there doesn't need to be a "conclusion" with the mother/son relationship-- her love is more simple and unconditional-- there is nothing that needs concluding. The father/son bond, like with many fathers and sons, seems more complex and would still see resolution even with the inclusion of some mom footage.
Post
#260054
Topic
Superman II Donner, and III & IV extended edits
Time
Originally posted by: Darth_Evil
I'm wondering why Lester's ending with the kiss wasn't left in the Donner cut. After all, he was trying to come up with a new ending upon his sacking, so he probably would have come to an ending similar to that.


From what I understand, the earth-spinning ending was originally intended for part II, but later moved to the end of I since it fit well with that story. Being left with no new ending written or shot for II, it seems that the ending was reinserted for the Donner Cut *as scripted* for completion purposes. Who knows how Donner would've concluded II-- if he didn't address it or comment on it, then one can only assume. I think the kiss works on a comic-booky level, but it always was rather cheesy. Envisioning that scene in my mind, I wonder with a bit of editing, if the actual kiss itself could be removed, but Lois getting woozy from Clark's powers (a sound effect, or a slight shuffling of the scene's footage) could work. Or, ditch the kiss thing altogether. Lois doesn't really *need* to forget. It's only a movie...
Post
#260050
Topic
FAN EDIT REQUEST THREAD- Post your dream Fan Edits Here!
Time
Originally posted by: DarthCarr
Originally posted by: booah
Mallrats: ABC Cut


I actually have this.

But I do have ideas to make this better.

Mallrats:"Enter a name here" Edition
Mallrats ABC Cut
Mallrats Dailies(Bad quality but great for fans)

Anyone wanna do this project and maybe even make some covers,and make some of the other ViewAskew wants?


Awesome, I haven't seen this since it aired-- I thought I taped it at the time, but it must've gotten lost along the way. It's a hilarious edit, and the bad voiceover work of Jay's lines alone is worth it. Never knew of/saw dailies, but that would definitely be a cool addition to a project.

Mallrats: The Smell of Commerce Edition
Mallrats For Kids Edition
Mallrats: Sanitized Edition
Mallrats: PG Version

or just Mallrats: The ABC Cut (all the cutesy titles lately are getting a bit tiring...)
Post
#259650
Topic
Superman by Taolar (Formally: Son of Jorel) WORKPRINT AVAILABLE
Time
Originally posted by: Doctor M
I can't wait to see this edit.

I remember loving these films when they first came out. Now I crawl out of my skin watching them. I don't know if it's because I'm older, they're dated, or are campy compared to todays films.


They're somewhat dated and campy, but they still inspire that sense of wonderment of many '80's sci-fi/fantasy flicks. Everything today is so overly serious, there's not many childlike tones in anything. After re-watching I and II after seeing the rather lifeless Supes Returns, I still found them enjoyable. Reeve is still a great choice for the role, even if the material wavers between good and cheesy.

Post
#259647
Topic
Superman II Donner, and III & IV extended edits
Time
Salvaging the Kent/Superman fight from Supes III is key, because that is one of the few salvagable scenes of that flick. Without having watched the deleted IV stuff, I think that's an underrated movie. Flawed (the Nuclear Man stuff is laughable), but underrated, and still possessing the spirit and heart of the Reeve films. If combined with III, it could work as part 3 of a "Reeve Trilogy."

Originally posted by: Batman Beyond
I mean, SR is clearly a sequel to those two films (any cut).

Uh, no it's not. It's far from a "sequel." It may be "inspired by", and "stolen from", but it's more of a remake/companion than anything. Aside from saying he was gone for x amount of years, it doesn't continue the stories of I and II, it just replicates elements from them and sets it in present day. It rehashes some origin story from I, and recycles the "man vs. superman" theme of II. It's all been done. It could've been more inspired by the old flicks without just redoing a lot of it.

Originally posted by: Commander Courage
You make valid arguments against Superman Returns, but at the end of the day I still think we got a quality movie. Singer being such a Donner fan is a wonderful thing, although I'll admit he takes things a bit overboard at times. When promoting the sequel as "Wrath of Khan"-esque I can only hope he doesn't plan on using Zod yet again. That definitely would be crossing the line. So yes, more orginality on Singer and his writers' parts is in order, but I think SR accomplished what it set out to do: update the Reeve Superman franchise and bring it into modern times. Now that's been done, and I don't see why SR2 can't be one of the best Superhero films of all time.


Yeah, it was decent enough overall, and not embarassing (like Batman & Robin or something). It just left a lot to be desired. I hope Singer does go more all-out with story in a follow-up. It has the potential to be great stuff.
Post
#259645
Topic
Robocop - ITV Family Friendly "Freakin' Airhead" Version
Time
Originally posted by: dirtybluemetal
Originally posted by: focuspuller
The two that I like are from:

Back to the Future
Instead of
"holy shit doc, you desintergrated Einstein!"

You get
"Jeez Loueez doc, you decintergrated Einstein!"



Don't forget:
"What, do we become ASSHOLES or something"
turns into:
"What, do we become JERKS or something"

it was reshot for TV, and it pissed me off that they didn't include it on the dvd as a bonus scene.


Yeah, they should've included some TV stuff on there. "Jeez Louise" was actually used instead of "Jesus Christ", not "Holy Shit." Another BTTF TV dub (which I remember it being used from other places in Biff's dialogue, because it sounds sloppily inserted:

"You caused 300 bucks damage to my car, you SON OF A BITCH. Now I'm gonna take it outta your ASS."
"You caused 300 bucks damage to my car, you SON OF A BUTTHEAD. Now I'm gonna take it outta your HYDE."
Post
#259641
Topic
See, George, This is how it's done ...
Time
Originally posted by: Fang Zei
I can understand how the SIII thing happenned


I can't. The contents are a disc from a 6-year-old release. How could there have been that many of the old versions of Superman III lying around like, right next to the new ones, that they not only stamped a new label on the old disc, but actually put it in the box set? It's pretty ridiculous. It's obvious that WB has little to no quality control. My friend said that on the Willy Wonka remake 2-Disc edition, one of the Oompa Loompa songs is missing a verse. Yet another WB slip-up among many...
Post
#259519
Topic
Superman II Donner, and III & IV extended edits
Time
q]It's already on the drawing board, folks. Plus more great stuff.

Great-- can't wait.

I'd also like to see it be able to tie into Superman Returns.


I totally disagree. Superman Returns was an empty, soulless, plagaristic, sloppy wet kiss on Donner/Lester that recycled and outright stole from Superman I and II, and squandered what could've been a great flick on Singer's obvious hard-on for the old stuff mixed with special effects that were ironically used to little effect. From the music, font (which sadly wasn't used on the generic-ass poster logos), and actual lines of dialogue, it was less a follow-up to those movies as a half-ass homage-slash-rehash.

Not to mention, riddled with irksome elements: If it's 5 years after the events of the old movie, why isn't everyone in '80's clothes, and why are there cellphones and laptops? (seems like he was gone for *25* years) Why would Superman take 5 years to find his homeland, when, since he's *Superman* and all, it couldn't possibly have required that long (he was really brooding like Batman for 5 years)? Why is the child Clark wearing glasses when he doesn't need them as an alter ego yet (other than to remind the clueless audience that yes, that's Clark)? Why would anyone try to shoot Superman with a gun at this point in history, when average joe villain is more than aware that he exists and is bulletproof (other than to showcase the pretty-but-pointless eyeball effects shot)? Why do we need to see Superman get violently beaten to a pulp like a Scorsese film? Why is Superman's kid asthmatic? How is Lex going to build some sort of profitable city to sell land on, if the land is made of jagged molten rock? Why does Supes strike a Christ pose more often than Scott Stapp in a Creed video? Why does Parker Posey's character exist other than to duplicate the equally irrelevant Miss Tessmacher from the old flicks? (there's that Donner/Lester hard-on again) Why is Brandon Routh's performance so wooden? Why is Lois' character not remotely a feisty newspaper woman, and some cold, humorless wench? And what the hell was up with the cannibal dog?

I wasn't a huge fan of the better but still massively flawed Batman Begins, but at least it didn't use Elfman's music, and have anyone say, "Where does he get those wonderful toys" again or whatever.
Post
#259516
Topic
FAN EDIT REQUEST THREAD- Post your dream Fan Edits Here!
Time
Originally posted by: DarthCarr
Requests....


Chasing Amy:Extended(with the original opening[Banky/Holden at the comic store] and all the other scenes edited back in)
Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back:Extended Edition(All scenes edited back in)
Clerks II:Extended Edition (All scenes edited back in)


Dogma: Extended Edition (with deleted scenes back in, and/or the 3-hour initial cut)
Mallrats: ABC Cut

And for Clerks II, I'd rather see a whole re-edit to make it, well, more Clerks-like. Some of the deleted stuff would've worked well back in the flick, and the removal of stupid shit like the overdone donkey show, reducing the painfully annoying new male fast food store character, and some of the awful, unfunny bits throughout. And why do the deleted scenes have title cards throughout, but the movie itself doesn't? Just another reason for a retool.
Post
#259254
Topic
Superman II Donner, and III & IV extended edits
Time
Originally posted by: strangelove

On top of all this, we're lacking an explanation of how I should end in order to lead into the new edit-- does Superman just turn back time after every adventure? I guess the true solution would be to somehow cut I and II together into a single film (as originally originally intended), drawing from both Donner and Lester footage.


Unless someone can recreate something closer to what was intended via an original old script or something, it seems like it would be most efficient to focus on the elements used for II and merge the 2 versions. Since the time travel bit was used in I, its redundancy in II could be eliminated, along with the aforementioned bagging of the "Super kiss" bit as well. To make a single film, the best way to keep the time travel would be to hack it from the end of I, and move it to somewhere where it wouldn't be too close to the end of the II story. I don't know. My brain hurts now...