BvS David S. Goyer IS the Script Writer! - Part 1

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]464255[/split]

 

[slumcat]

So far this is what has been revealed by the studio.

Story: David S. Goyer & Zack Snyder
Screenplay: David S. Goyer

This was revealed at Comic Con when it was announced that Batman would star in Man Of Steel Sequel.

Now that Ben Affleck has been announced as Batman, do you see any change in the above line-up. Even if Affleck doesn't get an official story or screenplay credit, he might ghost-write them.

But what would you like Goyer to write in the sequel?

I would like lots of dialog scenes for Clark (not Superman), and a lot of scenes with Jenny and Martha. Diane Lane gave a very strong performance I think. She should definitely get some good scenes.

 

[The Question]

I just like the image of the climax of the film being Superman actively protecting civilians, not killing a big robot thing in the middle of nowhere/crashing a ship/killing a guy in a big spectacle fight scene where the civilian toll is basically unaddressed.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

• Start where MOS left off.
• Don't leave the causulties/collateral damage go unaddressed. Mention that Superman spent day and night afterward searching for survivors to take to the hospital.
• Develop Lois/Perry/Daily Planet
• This INCLUDES the real Jimmy Olsen. Introduce him as an intern or something
• Develop Clark Kent
• Show the world's reaction to Superman. MOS kind of started that way, but it was then traded for more scifi battles and Kryptonian dialog.
• Which implies a real-world atmosphere. Keep it realistic-until a supervillain shows up.
• Then have that superpowered enemy be stylized and bring the genre to life
• This means bringing in a supervillain that can drop in and out of the plot at any time.
• As to not have the villain take over the story and overpower the character development
  • Let Lex be a "hidden villain/secret mastermind" Do everything in your power to throw the audience off (full name, nice demeaner). Hair couldn't hurt
    • Let Batman's role be minor, but important, enhancing the themes of MOS2
    • Batman will get his sequel. Let Clark have his movie.
    • I like the idea of Superman being framed by Lex, and Batman going after Batman to contain this threat.
    • In regards to the fight, Batman should TOTALLY wear a robo suit.
    • But this should not be his normal costume.
    • The fight should take place at night. Stalemate is optimal, but if someone DOES win, it should be Superman.
    • Most people want Batman to team up with Superman to take down the villains.
    • I personally think Batman should leave Metropolis, knowing he failed his mission, but gained an ally.
    • Note I didn't say FRIEND. I want a sequel to explore them becoming friends.
    • Have Superman physically take on the henchman/prominent villain (I want Metallo) and confront Lex, but only using his words this time.
    • I want Lex to escape the legal system. It makes him seem smarter, and adds a dark edge. And he can team up with a greater villain (Brainiac)for the sequel. And I want the immediate sequel to be a TRUE Superman/Batman movie.
    • Lois should totally reprise her more investigative role.
    • More Ma Kent scenes couldn't hurt.
    • I think there should be about one or two flashbacks of Pa Kent, with Kent teaching EXTREMELY moral lessons to Clark.
    • This can allow audiences to appreciate him more
    • Kind of like Uncle Ben in Spider-Man 2. Have him take up no more then three minutes of screen-time, but that's really what it would take to reform his image (I hope)
    • Okay, I totally want MOS2 to be a more dramatic Sm2
      

 

[The Question]

This INCLUDES the real Jimmy Olsen. Introduce him as an intern or something

Meh. There's nothing wrong with Jenny Olsen except for the fact that she's a non-character. I don't see a problem with gender-swapping the character.

 

[DA_Champion]

I just like the image of the climax of the film being Superman actively protecting civilians, not killing a big robot thing in the middle of nowhere/crashing a ship/killing a guy in a big spectacle fight scene where the civilian toll is basically unaddressed.

You've been right about a lot of things in the past few pages.

I agree with you about the stupid squid, it just didn't work at all. I, and many other people, think it was only in there because producer Jon Peters has been craving a fight between Superman and a giant robotic spider for 20 years now. It was in Kevin Smith's script. Apparently the giant metal spider also shows up in Mark Waid's Birthright. I agree that it's a stupid plot point and it weakens the movie, but it might have been a studio requirement.

I also agree that it might have been better not to introduce Metropolis in this movie. I'd go even further, that it might have been better for Lois Lane to have a minor role, even a cameo role or no role. It's better to tell one good story then a dozen half-complete stories. They tried to cover too much ground in MoS, they "tried to be epic" and we saw Krypton and Jor-El and Metropolis etc etc etc the result is that everything is half-assed everything.

I'm worried that they're going to try and be epic in BvS. Snyder has said the only logical outcome is to "go global".

 

[DA_Champion]

Meh. There's nothing wrong with Jenny Olsen except for the fact that she's a non-character. I don't see a problem with gender-swapping the character.

Apparently her ID card says Jenny Jurwich in the movie.
http://dcmovies.wikia.com/wiki/Jenny_Jurwich

But she's basicaly Jenny Olsen anyway, and that's fine

 

[The Question]

I'm worried that they're going to try and be epic in BvS. Snyder has said the only logical outcome is to "go global".

Granted, we don't know for certain until the movie comes out, but it's amusing to me that according to his interviews Joss Whedon's approach to Avengers 2 is the exact opposite. First movie was big and epic and 'splosion-y? The sequel's going to be smaller in scale and more focused on character driven drama.

 

[DA_Champion]

Granted, we don't know for certain until the movie comes out, but it's amusing to me that according to his interviews Joss Whedon's approach to Avengers 2 is the exact opposite. First movie was big and epic and 'splosion-y? The sequel's going to be smaller in scale and more focused on character driven drama.

He's said that before. His attitude to sequels is to go smaller, not bigger.

Buffy season 2 was in many ways smaller, Spike didn't want to destroy the world the way the master did, he was not as physically strong as the master, and he did not command an army. The war was entirely more meaningful because Buffy and Angel had fallen in love, and because Angelus and Spike had been friends a hundred years prior.

The same is true of Angel season 2. They brought in: Darla.

I have fairly high hopes for Avengers 2.

 

[D.P.]

• Start where MOS left off.
• Don't leave the causulties/collateral damage go unaddressed. Mention that Superman spent day and night afterward searching for survivors to take to the hospital.
• Develop Lois/Perry/Daily Planet
• This INCLUDES the real Jimmy Olsen. Introduce him as an intern or something
• Develop Clark Kent
• Show the world's reaction to Superman. MOS kind of started that way, but it was then traded for more scifi battles and Kryptonian dialog.
• Which implies a real-world atmosphere. Keep it realistic-until a supervillain shows up.
• Then have that superpowered enemy be stylized and bring the genre to life
• This means bringing in a supervillain that can drop in and out of the plot at any time.
• As to not have the villain take over the story and overpower the character development
  • Let Lex be a "hidden villain/secret mastermind" Do everything in your power to throw the audience off (full name, nice demeaner). Hair couldn't hurt
    • Let Batman's role be minor, but important, enhancing the themes of MOS2
    • Batman will get his sequel. Let Clark have his movie.
    • I like the idea of Superman being framed by Lex, and Batman going after Batman to contain this threat.
    • In regards to the fight, Batman should TOTALLY wear a robo suit.
    • But this should not be his normal costume.
    • The fight should take place at night. Stalemate is optimal, but if someone DOES win, it should be Superman.
    • Most people want Batman to team up with Superman to take down the villains.
    • I personally think Batman should leave Metropolis, knowing he failed his mission, but gained an ally.
    • Note I didn't say FRIEND. I want a sequel to explore them becoming friends.
    • Have Superman physically take on the henchman/prominent villain (I want Metallo) and confront Lex, but only using his words this time.
    • I want Lex to escape the legal system. It makes him seem smarter, and adds a dark edge. And he can team up with a greater villain (Brainiac)for the sequel. And I want the immediate sequel to be a TRUE Superman/Batman movie.
    • Lois should totally reprise her more investigative role.
    • More Ma Kent scenes couldn't hurt.
    • I think there should be about one or two flashbacks of Pa Kent, with Kent teaching EXTREMELY moral lessons to Clark.
    • This can allow audiences to appreciate him more
    • Kind of like Uncle Ben in Spider-Man 2. Have him take up no more then three minutes of screen-time, but that's really what it would take to reform his image (I hope)
    • Okay, I totally want MOS2 to be a more dramatic Sm2
      

Your ideas seem to severely downplay Batman on purpose.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ I just don't want Batman spending copious amounts of Superman's narrative time. And them getting equal time just seems wrong, IMHO.

And I'm someone who WANTS to see Batman rebooted, who DOESN'T think the Nolan films are the be-all-and-end-all of Batman. I'm kind of a Batman nut. But Superman deserves a real sequel, and Batman can fit into that. But a film built around both characters seems like a disservice to Supes. MOS3/Superman/Batman can be like TA with Iron Man, with Superman getting one final sequel after the big WF film.

 

[Project862006]

^ I just don't want Batman spending copious amounts of Superman's narrative time. And them getting equal time just seems wrong, IMHO.

And I'm someone who WANTS to see Batman rebooted, who DOESN'T think the Nolan films are the be-all-and-end-all of Batman. I'm kind of a Batman nut. But Superman deserves a real sequel, and Batman can fit into that. But a film built around both characters seems like a disservice to Supes. MOS3/Superman/Batman can be like TA with Iron Man, with Superman getting one final sequel after the big WF film.

you do realize this is not mos 2 right???

 

[Mjölnir]

^ I just don't want Batman spending copious amounts of Superman's narrative time. And them getting equal time just seems wrong, IMHO.

And I'm someone who WANTS to see Batman rebooted, who DOESN'T think the Nolan films are the be-all-and-end-all of Batman. I'm kind of a Batman nut. But Superman deserves a real sequel, and Batman can fit into that. But a film built around both characters seems like a disservice to Supes. MOS3/Superman/Batman can be like TA with Iron Man, with Superman getting one final sequel after the big WF film.

I'd say that it's fairly essential for the new Batman to get screen time given that it looks like DC is rushing things to get to a JL movie as quickly as possible. I agree with you in general, MoS really needs a sequel for several reasons, but that DC context puts things in a different light in my opinion.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

you do realize this is not mos 2 right???

Pretty much. I'm saying what SHOULD happen, not what's going to

 

[smallville fan]

• Start where MOS left off.
• Don't leave the causulties/collateral damage go unaddressed. Mention that Superman spent day and night afterward searching for survivors to take to the hospital.
• Develop Lois/Perry/Daily Planet
• This INCLUDES the real Jimmy Olsen. Introduce him as an intern or something
• Develop Clark Kent
• Show the world's reaction to Superman. MOS kind of started that way, but it was then traded for more scifi battles and Kryptonian dialog.
• Which implies a real-world atmosphere. Keep it realistic-until a supervillain shows up.
• Then have that superpowered enemy be stylized and bring the genre to life
• This means bringing in a supervillain that can drop in and out of the plot at any time.
• As to not have the villain take over the story and overpower the character development
  • Let Lex be a "hidden villain/secret mastermind" Do everything in your power to throw the audience off (full name, nice demeaner). Hair couldn't hurt
    • Let Batman's role be minor, but important, enhancing the themes of MOS2
    • Batman will get his sequel. Let Clark have his movie.
    • I like the idea of Superman being framed by Lex, and Batman going after Batman to contain this threat.
    • In regards to the fight, Batman should TOTALLY wear a robo suit.
    • But this should not be his normal costume.
    • The fight should take place at night. Stalemate is optimal, but if someone DOES win, it should be Superman.
    • Most people want Batman to team up with Superman to take down the villains.
    • I personally think Batman should leave Metropolis, knowing he failed his mission, but gained an ally.
    • Note I didn't say FRIEND. I want a sequel to explore them becoming friends.
    • Have Superman physically take on the henchman/prominent villain (I want Metallo) and confront Lex, but only using his words this time.
    • I want Lex to escape the legal system. It makes him seem smarter, and adds a dark edge. And he can team up with a greater villain (Brainiac)for the sequel. And I want the immediate sequel to be a TRUE Superman/Batman movie.
    • Lois should totally reprise her more investigative role.
    • More Ma Kent scenes couldn't hurt.
    • I think there should be about one or two flashbacks of Pa Kent, with Kent teaching EXTREMELY moral lessons to Clark.
    • This can allow audiences to appreciate him more
    • Kind of like Uncle Ben in Spider-Man 2. Have him take up no more then three minutes of screen-time, but that's really what it would take to reform his image (I hope)
    • Okay, I totally want MOS2 to be a more dramatic Sm2
      

Some of these ideas I think are good. I definitely agree on Lex framing Supes, Batman does deserve a larger role though. You kind of do need to take into account a lot of the general audience will want to see the fruition of the "Batfleck nonsense" that happened this year. What I think could work is a sort of role reversal from that of Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns" with a few extra tweaks to suit the context of the movie.

In my mind, it would play out something like this, in TDKReturns, you have Superman who's on the omniscient higher authority antagonist's(US Government's) speed-dial and beck and call while old Batman is the upstart making a name for himself in Gotham and we know how that story goes. In my mind, for the movie it would still have something like that happening, but differently. Superman's the upstart making a name for himself in Metropolis doing the whole "Truth, Justice & The American Way" thing and just being Superman, stopping crime, left right and center and helping workers rebuild Metropolis, and just generally helping people, heck throw in a scene of saving a cat from a tree or helping an old woman cross the street haha. Of course people are somehow warming up to him(for argument's sake let's say the damage to Metropolis wasn't as bad as we thought it was and more people are actually left displaced rather than killed) and the Daily Planet writing glowing reports about Superman. Of course not everyone's happy about the alien, here we introduce Lex Luthor, who takes the place of the US Government as the omniscient higher authority from TDKReturns.

Luthor doesn't like what he sees and feels Superman upstages him at every corner(perhaps show him flipping through the latest issue of the Daily Planet where Superman is pages 1-5 while Luthor's page 10 lol). Luthor flips out and decides to concot his plan to take own the Man of Steel by first framing him for a crime he didn't commit, preferably murder(ala Public Enemies) and of course Superman goes on the run trying to prove his innocence as seen in the comic/animated movie, Lois could help here if she wants. Since no known police can actually take someone like Superman in, Lex uses his connections to a friend in Gotham City(Jim Gordon) who in turn calls in the people's superhero Batman, who supposedly handles an assortment of freaks like this on a daily basis.

The movie becomes pretty much a cat and mouse game between Superman & Batman culminating in a fight in Gotham's Crime Alley ala TDKReturns. After that, Superman and Batman go and team up and defeat Lex Luthor, and then give the film a good closing point for Superman and Batman for them to create the JL. Of course Superman wins, and Batman sees he's one of the good guys and leaves gaining an ally as you said.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ Totally. But I think Bruce/Batman should be introduced near the end of the second act. This allows 2/3's of the film to be devoted to Superman. The "team-up and save the day" just seems too tidy, too conventional, and too simplistic for my tastes. I think having a whole movie devoted to it would be more satisfactory in the long term.

 

[sf2]

I think he is doing great. Just make sure there are some creative innocent saving scenes, fanboys will be very happy.

 

[manofsteel4life]

I just wanna know what kind of crime are they gonna give Clark/Superman to tackle

 

[smallville fan]

I just wanna know what kind of crime are they gonna give Clark/Superman to tackle

I'm hoping they go for a route similar to Public Enemies, so a murder with Superman in the wrong place wrong time making himself look guilty? If it was me writing it, I'd do a murder of an important political figurehead, someone who'd been supportive of Superman before he died. I'd get a merc like Deathstroke for example to do it after being hired by Luthor. He makes the murder look like Superman did it, preferably a neck snap? and burning of the room he was in complete with the house of El symbol burned into a wall. The reasoning for the murder of this figurehead would of course be a power play for Lex to eventually go onto become President of the U.S.A..

 

[marvelrobbins]

^ Totally. But I think Bruce/Batman should be introduced near the end of the second act. This allows 2/3's of the film to be devoted to Superman. The "team-up and save the day" just seems too tidy, too conventional, and too simplistic for my tastes. I think having a whole movie devoted to it would be more satisfactory in the long term.

Oh please!They aren't going to leave batman out of 2/3 of film.WB's CEO has
called this batman VS Superman.

Considering my meh attitude of man of steel my excitement for this film Is based on batman,Ben affleck playing batman,and description of batman.

Superman will be on equal footing with batman.

This Is coming out like X-Men days of future past all over again.Some disappointed that OT characters are in film and upset that OT characters matter and they aren't flooding screen with new characters In past part of film.

I just hope Goyer can do a batman begins quality script and not a man of steel quality script.Maybe Affleck can help with thatt:

 

[Project862006]

^difference is people care about henry a hell of alot more than they do with batfleck

 

[The Guard]

You know, I'm going to ignore all the opinions, and the stuff about how the loudest noise in a movie is the climax, and how antagonist VS the protagonist has nothing to do with the plot of a film and so on and just address these little bits...

It's not that Superman doesn't kill, it's that Superman is broadly perceived as not killing, as such having him kill in the movie creates a cheap and undeserved shock.

People insist on this reaction being because SUPERMAN did this, based on the public's knowledge that Superman doesn't (I really don't think a lot of people are familiar with this, I think it's more along the lines of "but, but superheroes and heroes don't kill!").

People seem entirely unable to separate the event within the film from what the some fans know about Superman. Here's the thing. It's entirely possible that there would be a similar reaction to many cinematic heroes who had not been depicted as a killer doing this to a villain in as abrupt, shocking and equally brutal manner. Which is the point of the sequence.

Not that this character doesn't kill, or wont kill, but that doing so the first time, even to a villain, affects him so intensely. That's where the shock comes from. The emotions HE experiences from the event. It's a very human moment from a man who might as well be a God. That's the point of the moment.

There are other problems with the Superman-killing-Zod sequence aside from Superman killing Zod:

It included the destruction of the Fortress of Solitude, which removes it from the continuity;

1. So? The Fortress' importance is not established in this film to the degree it has been in the comics. Its importance within the film universe here was to represent Krypton's past and potential future, and to help Superman discover his origins. It more than served its story purpose, arguably moreso than any previous version of the Fortress on film has (I haven't seen all the SMALLVILLE Fortress moments).

2. There's nothing to say there can't be another Fortress of Solitude. There have been in the comics. He could build another one, or grow another one, or what have you.

It included the terrible visual of Superman frying all those innocent babies in the Genesis chamber with his heat vision, as he destroyed the ship;

That WOULD be a terrible visual. Except that there weren't any babies. I'm pretty sure that the genesis chamber was empty and that the film pointed this out.

It included the terrible dialogue of "Krypton had its chance," "This ends one way, you die or I die," and "You're a monster Zod, and I'm going to stop you";

That's not really terrible dialogue. It's just simple, straightforward dialogue. The last bit is pure Superman/superhero stuff.

It must have killed tens of thousands of people;

It must have? Based on what, exactly?

It led to the plot hole of Lois finding Clark the instant he killed Zod, which pulled a lot of people out of the film;

Yeah, that's a bit hard to swallow. But then, it's a movie. People need to be able to suspend their disbelief to some degree.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

You know, I'm going to ignore all the opinions, and the stuff about how the loudest noise in a movie is the climax, and how antagonist VS the protagonist has nothing to do with the plot of a film and so on and just address these little bits...



People insist on this reaction being because SUPERMAN did this, based on the public's knowledge that Superman doesn't (I really don't think a lot of people are familiar with this, I think it's more along the lines of "but, but superheroes and heroes don't kill!").

People seem entirely unable to separate the event within the film from what the some fans know about Superman. Here's the thing. It's entirely possible that there would be a similar reaction to many cinematic heroes who had not been depicted as a killer doing this to a villain in as abrupt, shocking and equally brutal manner. Which is the point of the sequence.

Not that this character doesn't kill, or wont kill, but that doing so the first time, even to a villain, affects him so intensely. That's where the shock comes from. The emotions HE experiences from the event. It's a very human moment from a man who might as well be a God. That's the point of the moment.



1. So? The Fortress' importance is not established in this film to the degree it has been in the comics. Its importance within the film universe here was to represent Krypton's past and potential future, and to help Superman discover his origins. It more than served its story purpose, arguably moreso than any previous version of the Fortress on film has (I haven't seen all the SMALLVILLE Fortress moments).

2. There's nothing to say there can't be another Fortress of Solitude. There have been in the comics. He could build another one, or grow another one, or what have you.



That WOULD be a terrible visual. Except that there weren't any babies. I'm pretty sure that the genesis chamber was empty and that the film pointed this out.



That's not really terrible dialogue. It's just simple, straightforward dialogue. The last bit is pure Superman/superhero stuff.



It must have? Based on what, exactly?



Yeah, that's a bit hard to swallow. But then, it's a movie. People need to be able to suspend their disbelief to some degree.

And yet nobody complains about Gordon blowing out the track, without pressing the wrong button on weaponized vehicle he had never drove before.

 

[The Question]

You know, I'm going to ignore all the opinions, and the stuff about how the loudest noise in a movie is the climax, and how antagonist VS the protagonist has nothing to do with the plot of a film and so on and just address these little bits...

That's not what he said. He said that Superman VS. Zod had nothing to do with the central conflict of the film, because the central conflict of the film was (or at least should have been) Superman struggling to find his place in the world and the best way to use his powers to help people responsibly. Superman's fight with Zod wasn't a resolution of the central conflict, it was tying up a loose end. A loose end that didn't even need to exist if they simply disposed of Zod with the rest of the Kryptonians via the Phantom Zone.

It must have? Based on what, exactly?

Multiple skyscrapers were partially or completely demolished, and there was no sign that any kind of evacuation procedure was being enacted.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

It looks like they were scrambling out when the World Engine was initiated. But I do think some people died during the final fight.