Let me make one thing clear at the start. While neither version is flawless, both versions of “Superman II” are good films. Fun action, entertaining performances, and good character moments. But the reason two versions exist at all is because Richard Donner was fired and replaced with Richard Lester. We won’t get into the story behind production because that will be too complicated. Plus, it really isn’t all that relevant to what this piece is trying to explore. Looking at both versions and identifying what makes them unique, we have to ask the question. Which version is better?

I think the biggest, most fundamental difference between the two is tone. Richard Donner saw the Superman mythos as modern mythology. And I personally believe that all superhero/comics mythos as modern day mythology as well. Stories of Hydras, gods like Zeus & demigods like Hercules have now been switched out with stories about Spider-Man, Batman & metahumans. Admittedly, the two major superhero universes (DC & Marvel) also have Hydras, gods like Zeus and demigods such as Hercules, but you get my point. Back on topic – Donner approached his movie with a more dramatic approach. It still had moments of humor. This is still a movie that has to entertain audiences and he is adapting the Silver Age version of these characters. But Donner was continuing a character focused journey and the obstacles that Superman has to overcome.

Lester’s version had more comedy in it. Much of that comedy did overlap with what Donner’s cut had, but there are some notable differences. The third evil Kryptonian – the mute called Non – had a few more moments int he film that made him come off as more pathetically goofy early one. Some of that had been cut out of Donner’s version as the focus was more on him being pure brute force. In Lester’s version, there is more of a comedic banter between Clark and Lois. Especially when they are at Niagara Fall for a story. Clark himself is more of a klutz in Lester’s version in general. Him being a klutz is actually what helps Lois confirm that Clark is Superman. Donner’s version cut most of the comedic banter out, thought still some. And made sure that the two still generally worked off of each other well. And if we are specifically talking about Lois, well, she is suspicious right at the start that Clark is Superman in Donner’s Cut while in the theatrical it takes her couple of scenes before she gets suspicious. And as for how she determined Clark was Superman? Well…she shot Clark! Granted, it was a gun filled with blanks and she therefore tricked Clark to admitting the truth. But man, Donner really know how to adapt that aspect of Lois’s personality!

Aside from tone, there is a handful of differences you can pick up on. Donner’s Cut had Marlon Brando as Jor-El while Lester’s version had to cut him out and use Clark’s mother. Clark briefly gives up his powers in both versions, but Donner had it more explicitly stated why he chose to do that. Lex Luthor is in the film for roughly the same amount of screen time. Only major difference with him is that a couple of his scenes were rearranged in the beginning. Both versions open with the flashback of showing Zod and his henchmen being imprisoned in the Phantom Zone. Lester’s version included a terrorist attack at the Eiffel Tower where Superman had to launch a hydrogen bomb into space, where it went off and free them from the Phantom Zone. In Donner’s Cut, he used the beginning to show that Superman redirecting one of Luthor’s bombs from the first film is what freed them. Also, Lester’s version had a montage of scenes playing while the opening credits rolled. While Donner’s had a montage before the credits and that montage included audio while Lester’s just showed the visuals.

So you might be thinking that there isn’t too much of a difference between the two. While one might have more comedy, they still shared the vast majority of scenes and the plots are for the most parts exactly the same. But there is a big difference when it comes to how they end. Lester’s version had a big fight between Superman and the Zod’s crew in the city. Then they all went to the Fortress of Solitude where another fight happen. One that utilized very bizarre powers never before used in the film or past film and weren’t used in the following films. But then Superman uses a trick to get rid of his enemies powers and kills them. At the end of the film, Superman plants a kiss on Lois to wipe her memory in regards to his secret identity. Now…the Silver Age Superman did have a lot of bizarre powers. But I have yet to hear of a story where he does that. And it kind of ages badly.

In Donner’s version, he also includes the big fight in the city. And all the main characters do go to the Fortress of Solitude. But there is no fight in the Fortress. It goes into Superman’s trick and killing them. Superman then destroys the Fortress and returns Lois home…and then Superman flies around the world to turn back time just like in the first movie! All the events that happened are reversed and Zod and his crew are still in the Phantom Zone. My problem with this is not only does this repeat the ending of the first movie, but it’s kind of a middle finger to the audience by saying nothing that happened actually mattered.

With that in mind, I have to side with the Lester’s version – the theatrical cut. It does have more goofy stuff in the film and Donner’s does have more character focus. But Lester’s didn’t go so far as to wipe out the entirety of the film’s plot. Lois may no longer remember Clark is Superman but everything else is still intact. But Donner’s Cut is still a very interesting version to watch. And I still recommend you go seek it out. I’m always going to be interested in different takes on certain movies and how things might have played out. And this certainly satisfied my curiosity. You might have a different opinion but that’f fine. “Superman II” is always a fun watch, no matter which version you prefer.