This year marks two decades since the world was treated to the reveal of a film thought long lost and never likely to see the light of day – 2006’s Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut, the original filmmaker’s version of his 1980 sequel to the mega-hit Superman in 1978.
Christopher Reeve and Terence Stamp star in “Superman II.”
Source: Warner
Superman II – The Dawn Of Director’s Cuts
Here’s a short version of the long and painful production process that caused all of this: After filming the brilliant Superman and most of Superman II simultaneously as one long two-part story from March to October of 1977, Donner was fired in 1979 and replaced by Richard Lester near what should’ve been end of Superman II’s production, resulting in most of the footage being reshot and the story changed significantly, for a very different and decidedly sillier film.
For decades after, fans and other interested parties wondered about Donner’s original version, and eventually efforts arose to convince the studio to release it. Donner himself wasn’t interested for a long time, but once the project finally started to move, he came aboard.
Superman II and Blade Runner combined to popularize the idea and era of the “director’s cut.” Occasional extended cuts of films featuring “never before seen footage” happened in the past, including 2000’s re-release of The Exorcist. But the release of a director’s original (but previously altered for theatrical release) vision wasn’t really a common thing until after the success of efforts to get Superman II restored to Donner’s original vision and likewise for Blade Runner.
Blade Runner saw a so-called “director’s cut” in 1992, but this wasn’t actually Ridley Scott’s own assemblage or personal cut of the film. It was, though, a significant improvement over the theatrical version and crucially altered both the perspective of the main character’s identity and the story’s ending toward their original designs.
Later, in 2007, came the full equivalent of a director’s cut with Blade Runner: The Final Cut, containing the entire and fully restored dream sequence, swapped out several sequences with Scott’s preferred versions of sequences, and contained much more violence.
While Richard Donner’s Superman II was never as close to a completed form as Scott’s version of Blade Runner, and lacks the latter film’s 1990s “director’s cut” attempt, it nonetheless is equally famous for its role in popularizing and normalizing the concept of releasing a “director’s cut” of a film.
The background surrounding production of Superman and Superman II, Donner’s firing and replacement by Richard Lester, and years of fan efforts to get the original version of the film completed and released to the public is no less impressive than fans’ modern efforts to will Zack Snyder’s Justice League into existence.
It was just as big of a surprise when Warner Bros. agreed to fund the creation of Donner’s version of the film. The differences and improvements over the theatrical release were mixed, since Donner’s version lacked many completed visual effects and certain scenes weren’t filmed, and in many cases only practice or audition shots were available for reconstructing the original story. Yet while it didn’t match the stunning polished and consistent quality of ZSJL, the Donner Cut was a similarly qualitative storytelling leap in the eyes of its fans.
Superman II – The Reception
Critics were more divided about the Donner Cut, however. While most gave it positive reviews, many were less enthusiastic about the results and treated it as a curiosity or a lesser project compared to the theatrical release. I personally previously ranked Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut as the second-best Superman movie of all time (2025’s Superman has now moved into that position).
There’s a certain sense among some of the begrudgingly positive reviews that resentments toward fans for making the project happen got in the way of those reviewers’ ability to properly review the film, leaving them incapable of fully perceiving the film’s storytelling and value beyond the surface limitations of incomplete scenes. This is a reconstruction of a vision preempted even as it was being created, and such critics seem capable of judging older films with limited projection values in a more fair and serious manner that’s about the art and storytelling.
Still, there’s no denying that Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut enjoyed overwhelmingly positive reception among fans and most entertainment press. The story itself is at once basically the same as the theatrical release, yet somehow mostly different in execution and many of its biggest moments, including the climax.
Had Donner been allowed to finish his plans for the two-part Superman saga, the sequel would’ve achieved the same transcendent epic quality the original film achieved, more serious and connected as opposed to the theatrical version’s frequent feeling of unrelated scenes and moments strung together.
The underpinnings of purpose and destiny, and the message from Krypton and Earth parents and how to balance the competing life lessons, are far more pronounced and meaningful in Donner’s story. Clark’s choices amid the grave warnings and signs, and how this story is a companion to and extension of the first film are far clearer here, and Clark’s overarching mission and the meaning he finds in it drives both stories in a connected way that I feel is largely missing from Richard Lester’s film.
It’s a testament to how great the entire larger two-film project was, to the talent and vision of everyone involved, and to the character’s power and relevance that Lester’s lesser film is still as great as it is, despite being packed full of camp and far less respect for the character as a new iconic movie hero for all ages. Enough heavy lifting had been done to prevent too much damage from undermining the overall quality of Superman II. Lester’s desire to demystify the franchise, and his publicly stated disinterest in taking the material seriously as an epic, led to his efforts to bring Superman down to Earth and sort of make fun of the fact anyone takes it seriously in the first place.
The shabby treatment of Donner and the attempts to dumb-down the sequel were a one-two punch to the artistic integrity of the film, in the eyes of some people working on the production. As a result, Gene Hackman refused to return to film additional scenes for Lester – Donner had shot most of the film already, but Lester discarded much of it to reshoot it himself so he could have directing credit on the film, resulting for example in many scenes looking sloppy because performers looked different from scene to scene and sported awful wigs at times.
For comparison, Lester followed up Superman II by directing the film Butch and Sundance: The Early Years, a sequel to the Oscar-winning film Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid starring Paul Newman and Robert Redford. If Superman II still succeeded as a sequel and terrific film despite Lester’s campier approach that shoehorned slapstick nonsense, the filmmaker’s western sequel was both a critical and financial dud unworthy of its association with the original film.
The point is that, after Butch and Sundance: The Early Years and the equally unimpressive Cuba, Lester returned to the DC franchise with Superman III and officially wrecked the blockbuster franchise. Christopher Reeve is always watchable and gives his utmost to the character, but Lester’s descent into further comedy and camp led inevitably to a fourth sequel that killed the series off for decades.
Superman II – The Legacy
Had Superman II: The Donner Cut been fully realized during the original filming and made it to theaters, I think it would’ve been an even bigger smash hit than Superman II turned out to be. Donner still at the helm would’ve changed the history of the series, and probably of comic book film adaptations overall.
Would Donner have stuck around for a third movie? Probably, had he been given the control and time he wanted with the first two projects. But even if Donner walked away after the second film, the reputation and success of two more epic and mythical adaptations would’ve surely prevented the wrongheaded choice to turn the franchise into low-budget camp. More of the supporting cast would’ve been willing to return, too, I bet.
Unfortunately, none of that happened. Aside from a few exceptions, most notably Batman, superheroes suffered a qualitative and box office drop off in the aftermath of the Superman franchise collapse. It wasn’t until the 2000s that comic book adaptations regained their blockbuster status and started to take over cinema.
And it was in the growing environment of more serious consideration of superhero cinema during the late-1990s, and efforts to get the genre going again with bigger icons from the comics, that Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut finally saw the light of day.
Warner was trying to figure out how to successfully revive both the Superman and Batman series, so reminding everyone of how great Superman movies used to be, and that they started the entire superhero film genre in the first place, was seen as a worthwhile move. After multiple starts and stops, including the doomed project Superman Lives, a choice was made to simply revive Donner’s series with a new cast and filmmakers. And that, in turn, made the release of the Donner Cut a no-brainer as a tie-in promotion that generates additional revenue and earned media.
In 2006, the same year the Donner Cut was released, Superman Returns offered a direct sequel to Donner’s first two films, and while modestly successful it failed to reignite passion for the character at a financial level the studio expected and hoped for. A sequel was considered but dropped, and the choice was made to reboot the entire Superman franchise, since the then-recent reboot film Batman Begins led to the billion dollar success of The Dark Knight.
Man of Steel was sort of a combination of the first two Donner films into one modernized retelling to establish Superman in a more realistic and somber world. The later DCEU films featuring Superman didn’t reflect much of the Donner era after that, as the filmmakers sought a new approach and direction with the character in a shared universe of other heroes. Batman v Superman, Justice League, Zack Snyder’s Justice League, and Black Adam each featured varying degrees of appearances/cameos by Superman, and only Justice League’s choice to use the character’s theme music from the 1978 film provides additional references to the Donner era.
Of course, the DCEU ended in 2024, and newly minted DC Studios’ co-CEO James Gunn (alongside co-CEO Peter Safran) rebooted the entire DC slate of films in 2025 with writer-director-producer Gunn’s Superman. The film is not set in the same universe as Donner’s movies, but it has a plethora of callbacks and ties to those films anyway. From the use of that 1978 theme by composer John Williams to the Fortress of Solitude’s crystalline structures and Superman’s red trunks, the film returns the franchise to its roots visually and thematically and tonally.
Without the release of Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut, the character’s 21st Century history would’ve likely turned out very different. Donner established a prefect template for adapting superheroes that has remained the most successful approach, visible in Christopher Nolan’s Batman Begins, as well as most of the Marvel Studios MCU releases and 20th Century’s X-Men franchise. So if you love those films, you can thank Richard Donner. And if you loved Gunn’s Superman and can’t wait for Supergirl this summer and Man of Tomorrow next year, then you can send some gratitude Donner’s way as well.
Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/markhughes/2026/02/26/superman-ii-the-richard-donner-cut-20-years-later/
