David Goyer hired to write Man of Steel

[Saint]

1) Be completely the opposite of the current comics and how Geoff Johns sees the character
2) Be 20+ years out of date
3) Be a slap in the face to Siegel and Shuster, which is maybe part of WB/DC's intention since this movie is being made in part because of their continuing exploitation of them.
4) Not be Superman.

Exploitation aside, the "Slap in the face" bit is junk. Superman has been shaped by many creators, as is the case with pretty much all big comic book properties, and featuring one interpretation over the other isn't a slap in the face to anyone.

Similarly, this "It won't be Superman" line is also junk. Naturally, I understand if you dislike this interpretation or that interpretation (Frankly, I'm a Birthright man, myself), but saying that it's "not Superman" is obviously wrong. Superman is a lot of things; John Byrne's Man of Steel is one of them. Obviously you feel strongly about the issue, but I think you need to think more carefully about what you're saying.

 

[Webhead2006]

totally all us fans have the different takes we like and dislike. that is why i really hope they will take the best from all takes of the character and find a way to get it to work all together. so there is something there for every type of fan to enjoy.

 

[kalelkilla]

as long as it's not campy, and taken seriously by the film makers, that is all you can really ask for, we have the best man for the job in Nolan, so we all should take a deep breath and relax a little...but for god sake no krypto!

 

[SpiderByte]

God, that was always a terrible idea. Superman's PET DOG?

Seriously, what crap were the writers smoking when they came up with THAT idea?

 

[Kurosawa]

Exploitation aside, the "Slap in the face" bit is junk. Superman has been shaped by many creators, as is the case with pretty much all big comic book properties, and featuring one interpretation over the other isn't a slap in the face to anyone.

Similarly, this "It won't be Superman" line is also junk. Naturally, I understand if you dislike this interpretation or that interpretation (Frankly, I'm a Birthright man, myself), but saying that it's "not Superman" is obviously wrong. Superman is a lot of things; John Byrne's Man of Steel is one of them. Obviously you feel strongly about the issue, but I think you need to think more carefully about what you're saying.

In my opinion, Byrne's version by design spat on every principle Jerry Siegel created Superman to represent. I feel what Byrne did was create a Superman type character that just happened to get the name from DC. His version had as much in common with the 1938-1986 character as Sentry or Hyperion or Supreme or any number of other Superman ripoff/tribute characters, it just so happened that his got the name. It's technically Superman just like if William Hung covered Sgt Peppers it would technically be Sgt Peppers, but it's a far cry from the real thing or even a good copy. But I will say as a Superman fan, it was official and we're stuck with it as part of his history. And a lot of what came after it by Jurgens and Stern was excellent. Regardless, this version has ran it's course and it's as much a part of the past as anything that Mort ever did. Probably in 10-15 years the new hot writer will be nostalgic for MOS and we'll see an ash-ugly Krypton and all again.

God, that was always a terrible idea. Superman's PET DOG?

Seriously, what crap were the writers smoking when they came up with THAT idea?

Superboy's pet dog actually, and they were writing comics for kids back then. Geoff Johns likes and uses Krypto in his Superboy series, and unlike Byrne, he's actually relevant in today's comic market.

 

[SpiderByte]

Dude, chill out. It's not as if the fact that it isn't completely based off of Siegel and Schuster's version that they are trying to insult them. They are making a film, not a statement to the original makers.

You call us ignorant, yet you talk as if your opinion is fact, and that if it's not Siegel and Schuster, then it must be horrible. We're okay with you not liking Byrne, we just aren't okay with you considering us not true fans, or that we don't care about Superman, if we don't agree with you.

Chill.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I love Krypto. He is awesome. Why does everything have to be serious and realistic?

In my opinion, Byrne's version by design spat on every principle Jerry Siegel created Superman to represent. I feel what Byrne did was create a Superman type character that just happened to get the name from DC. His version had as much in common with the 1938-1986 character as Sentry or Hyperion or Supreme or any number of other Superman ripoff/tribute characters, it just so happened that his got the name. It's technically Superman just like if William Hung covered Sgt Peppers it would technically be Sgt Peppers, but it's a far cry from the real thing or even a good copy. But I will say as a Superman fan, it was official and we're stuck with it as part of his history. And a lot of what came after it by Jurgens and Stern was excellent. Regardless, this version has ran it's course and it's as much a part of the past as anything that Mort ever did. Probably in 10-15 years the new hot writer will be nostalgic for MOS and we'll see an ash-ugly Krypton and all again.

I just want to note how you make this issue personal by referencing Siegel and Shuster all the time and talking about how DC raped their corpses. You re not saying "i like this version of superman and DC strayed a lot from what the character used to be." To you its personal. Its probably the 1000th time that i am saying this but are you sure you re not a Siegel family member?

 

[Saint]

In my opinion, Byrne's version by design spat on every principle Jerry Siegel created Superman to represent. I feel what Byrne did was create a Superman type character that just happened to get the name from DC. His version had as much in common with the 1938-1986 character as Sentry or Hyperion or Supreme or any number of other Superman ripoff/tribute characters, it just so happened that his got the name. It's technically Superman just like if William Hung covered Sgt Peppers it would technically be Sgt Peppers, but it's a far cry from the real thing or even a good copy.

Yes, I know what you think about MOS. My response is the same as it was in my last post.

 

[Kurosawa]

Dude, chill out. It's not as if the fact that it isn't completely based off of Siegel and Schuster's version that they are trying to insult them. They are making a film, not a statement to the original makers.

You call us ignorant, yet you talk as if your opinion is fact, and that if it's not Siegel and Schuster, then it must be horrible. We're okay with you not liking Byrne, we just aren't okay with you considering us not true fans, or that we don't care about Superman, if we don't agree with you.

Chill.

I prefaced what I said by saying IN MY OPINION.

I love Krypto. He is awesome. Why does everything have to be serious and realistic?I just want to note how you make this issue personal by referencing Siegel and Shuster all the time and talking about how DC raped their corpses. You re not saying "i like this version of superman and DC strayed a lot from what the character used to be." To you its personal. Its probably the 1000th time that i am saying this but are you sure you re not a Siegel family member?

Well, he (Byrne) also wrote Superman nothing like the way he was written by Bill Finger, Ed Hamilton, Otto Binder, Leo Dorfman, Robert Bernstein, Jim Shooter, Don Cameron, Cary Bates, Gerry Conway, Bob Rozakis, E. Nelson Bridwell, Martin Pasko, Denny O'Neil, Len Wein, or last but certainly not least Elliot S! Maggin. But Siegel started it and the other guys followed suit and wrote Supes with pretty much the same personality. If we were talking Spider-Man and Marvel had retconned Peter Parker as a jock and a frat boy and a ladies man, then I would be talking about how what they did was a slap in the face to Lee and Ditko even though a ton of other guys did Spidey after that.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Fair enough.

 

[Webhead2006]

well thats the thing each writer/creator/artist who has come on and off this iconic characters for decades each try to do things they want to do or want to see happen for the character. Sure there is folks who may not like the direction they take. But each fan is different in their tastes. For me as an example i stated many times over i dont read much dc stuff and in general know more modern stuff from any comics i do read. But i have no love or hate to the classics either. And when i can i do like to read up or learn about stuff i dont know about a character or a certain story.

For me i want them to really look at superman as a hole. Find the best stories and traits that envoke who and what the character is. Then combine it all together and hopefully make a well round out character. All fans can enjoy.

 

[kalelkilla]

I know this is going to drive some people on this board crazy, but I highly doubt that they are going to use any comics for inspiration written before the John Byrne era. In my opinion it is best for a modern take on Superman which is what Nolan an Co. want to do.

I don't even think they should use Byrne, I think they should just stick to using the Loeb and Mark Waid comics for inspiration. That's what I would use if I was writing a script and wanted the modern, more realistic approach.

Goyer has written some JLA comics in the past, he knows Superman very well obviously I am sure he is up to date on what's working for Superman right now and what isn't. He is the closest thing to a fanboy we will ever get writing Superman(other than Kevin Smith). So relax, he will do a great job.

 

[Webhead2006]

well sure they are likely to look at the more modern era 80s-00s more so then 70s-30s stuff. But like how they took traits/stories from batman that are well liked. AS i and others have said the best thing to do with superman would be to use the elements that best worked for the character from 30s-now and some of the more well liked stories on the character. Combine all the elements together and round out the film in a new original tale.

 

[Kurosawa]

I know this is going to drive some people on this board crazy, but I highly doubt that they are going to use any comics for inspiration written before the John Byrne era. In my opinion it is best for a modern take on Superman which is what Nolan an Co. want to do.

I don't even think they should use Byrne, I think they should just stick to using the Loeb and Mark Waid comics for inspiration. That's what I would use if I was writing a script and wanted the modern, more realistic approach.

Goyer has written some JLA comics in the past, he knows Superman very well obviously I am sure he is up to date on what's working for Superman right now and what isn't. He is the closest thing to a fanboy we will ever get writing Superman(other than Kevin Smith). So relax, he will do a great job.

Well, they used stuff from the Golden Age Batman comics in TDK, so I think they may very well pull from all eras. I'd draw mostly from Maggin and Morrision's books myself, especially Maggin. Maggin mixed with Jurgens actually.

 

[Daybreak_st]

Is the maggin stuff in any trades? i'd like to read some of his stuff.

 

[Daybreak_st]

double post

 

[Kurosawa]

There's some stuff of his in The Greatest Superman Stories ever told, and Superman in the 70's, along with his two Superman novels, Last Son of Krypton- and Miracle Monday, both are out of print but cheap on Amazon, and he wrote the novelization of Kingdom Come.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I also found this:

Which is the single best Doomsday manip I have ever seen.

Thats an awesome Doomsday manip, I wouldnt mind that as his design in a movie at all.

 

[Daybreak_st]

There's some stuff of his in The Greatest Superman Stories ever told, and Superman in the 70's, along with his two Superman novels, Last Son of Krypton- and Miracle Monday, both are out of print but cheap on Amazon, and he wrote the novelization of Kingdom Come.

Thanks for the info, i'm gonna check it out

 

[Retroman]

Old quotes can sometimes come back to haunt you. And David Goyer is no exception when he commented on the possibility of writing a Superman movie in an interview with producer Mike De Luca for the DVD series The Dialogue(features extensive in-depth discussions with proffesional screenwriters).

Not sure when exactly the interview was conducted but it appears to be post-BB.

From thedialogueseries.com:

MIKE DE LUCA: Does it require a special skill set to make a comic book believable on screen?
DAVID GOYER: I think it does. If it’s a well-known character, there’s a canon, a known lore. You have to be very careful about what you choose to change. I’d like to think that because of my background reading comics and also writing comic books, that in the case of Batman, I had a pretty good handle on what was sacred and what could be modified. I would maintain that some of the comic book movies that have been made, that aren’t successful, have been the ones that veered too far away from the source material.

DE LUCA: Was [honoring the original Batman comics] a big consideration in the drafting of the story?
GOYER: We had to walk a thin line between delivering something for the fans and something for the broader mass audience. The problem was that the core fans were used to a dark depiction of Batman. But the mass audience wasn’t used to it…. We had to make sure we didn’t shock them. It was definitely a juggling act.

DE LUCA: Are there certain themes that you like to explore in your work?
GOYER: I like to tell stories about either reluctant heroes or heroes who [are alienated]. In the case of Blade, he’s acting heroically, but the rest of the world thinks he’s a vigilante. As is the case with Batman.
In “Dark City,” again, it’s a hero acting alone, who’s isolated. I don’t think I’d be good to write Superman, because it’s the opposite of that.

DE LUCA: He’s angst-free.
GOYER: Yeah. I wouldn’t know the angle. I’m so angst-ridden. I wouldn’t know what to do with a
character like that.

SOURCE

 

[GreenKToo]

Lol, damn. I guess money and time has changed him huh.

 

[dark_b]

could be money. but maybe he just changed hes mind.

someone was reading spiderman at 12 and then 5 years later batman.

 

[El Payaso]

GOYER: We had to walk a thin line between delivering something for the fans and something for the broader mass audience. The problem was that the core fans were used to a dark depiction of Batman. But the mass audience wasn’t used to it…. We had to make sure we didn’t shock them. It was definitely a juggling act.

"The mass audience wasn't used" to a dark depiction of Batman? Really? Where was Goyer living during the 90's. Even Scghumacher's Forever had a dark tone around the character of Bruce Wayne/Batman.

DE LUCA: Are there certain themes that you like to explore in your work?
GOYER: I like to tell stories about either reluctant heroes or heroes who [are alienated]. In the case of Blade, he’s acting heroically, but the rest of the world thinks he’s a vigilante. As is the case with Batman.
In “Dark City,” again, it’s a hero acting alone, who’s isolated. I don’t think I’d be good to write Superman, because it’s the opposite of that.

DE LUCA: He’s angst-free.
GOYER: Yeah. I wouldn’t know the angle. I’m so angst-ridden. I wouldn’t know what to do with a
character like that.

Well, after the cheese he put in B Begins, I'd say he can handle it.

 

[Webhead2006]

yea folks can change their minds and viewpoints on things over time. So probably at the time the interview was conducted he didnt think he was right for superman. But things changed between then and now.

 

[Eros]

"The mass audience wasn't used" to a dark depiction of Batman? Really? Where was Goyer living during the 90's. Even Scghumacher's Forever had a dark tone around the character of Bruce Wayne/Batman.


Well, after the cheese he put in B Begins, I'd say he can handle it.

LOL I guess Goyer thought Batman89 and Batman returns were lighthearted?