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

[roach]

Knowledge does not inform opinion. If I feel like apples are the best fruit...no bit of knowledge is going to change that.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Well considering how I have a Master's Degree in Creative Writing and have been screenwriting for 10 years now, my informed opinion trumps your uninformed opinion. Man of Steel was a good film. That is all.

Ooh! Are we flaunting accomplishments???

But seriously, congratulations and well done on your achievements thus far. Unfortunately, I haven't read/seen any of your work, so I cannot gauge whether or not there is any credence to your claim.

Nor have I seen any of your arguments as to why Man of Steel was a good film, or why the killing of Zod made sense thematically or character-wise. Until I do, your "opinion" doesn't really hold much weight.

 

[Krumm]

Ooh! Are we flaunting accomplishments???

But seriously, congratulations and well done on your achievements thus far. Unfortunately, I haven't read/seen any of your work, so I cannot gauge whether or not there is any credence to your claim.

Nor have I seen any of your arguments as to why Man of Steel was a good film, or why the killing of Zod made sense thematically or character-wise. Until I do, your "opinion" doesn't really hold much weight.

His accomplishments are pertinent to the argument. It's hardly flaunting.

BTW, roach, I wouldn't mind seeing some of your stuff. I've study screenwriting as well and dabble in it a bit.

 

[roach]

Ooh! Are we flaunting accomplishments???

But seriously, congratulations and well done on your achievements thus far. Unfortunately, I haven't read/seen any of your work, so I cannot gauge whether or not there is any credence to your claim.

Nor have I seen any of your arguments as to why Man of Steel was a good film, or why the killing of Zod made sense thematically or character-wise. Until I do, your "opinion" doesn't really hold much weight.

Here's the thing...just our little debate about opinions makes me think that I could type out the most informed and intelligent thesis on why killing Zod makes sense and I don't think it would do any good.

and I wasn't flaunting my accomplishments...it seemed like you ignored posters theories and thoughts based on how you think people are not qualified to comment on character.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Knowledge does not inform opinion. If I feel like apples are the best fruit...no bit of knowledge is going to change that.

Right. Justin Beiber is a better musician than Beethoven.

Not right. Not wrong. Just extremely uninformed and ignorant.


I'm going to assume you missed this part of my post:

It's not about "convincing" you otherwise. It's about taking this other, knowledgable individuals wisdom and adding it to your understanding of said idea/concept.

 

[roach]

Right. Justin Beiber is a better musician than Beethoven.

prove that he's not

 

[Vid Electricz]

prove that he's not

Allow me to re-post:

Not right. Not wrong. Just extremely uninformed and ignorant.

I'm going to assume you missed this part of my post (again):

It's not about "convincing" you otherwise. It's about taking this other, knowledgable individuals wisdom and adding it to your understanding of said idea/concept.

 

[The Guard]

On what planet does the source of an opinion matter more intellectually than the content of an opinion?

 

[roach]

Allow me to re-post:

Not right. Not wrong. Just extremely uninformed and ignorant.

I'm going to assume you missed this part of my post (again):

It's not about "convincing" you otherwise. It's about taking this other, knowledgable individuals wisdom and adding it to your understanding of said idea/concept.

but you've yet to add a knowledgeable individuals wisdom to the idea/concept. You can't just say Beethoven is better than Bieber...say to state otherwise is uniformed and ignorant and not back it up.

 

[roach]

On what planet does the source of an opinion matter more intellectually than the content of an opinion?

welcome to the internet

 

[jimbob]

Opinions on works of art are subjective, not objective. While it is possible to reason that the square of the hypotenuse of a right triangle is equal to the sum of the square of the other two sides, it is not possible to reason whether Superman killing Zod was the correct outcome, or whether the Mona Lisa should have had a frown or a smile. Also, Argument from Authority is a logical fallacy in matters objective, and even more so in matters subjective.

 

[roach]

Opinions on works of art are subjective, not objective. While it is possible to reason that the square of the hypotenuse of a right triangle is equal to the sum of the square of the other two sides, it is not possible to reason whether Superman killing Zod was the correct outcome, or whether the Mona Lisa should have had a frown or a smile. Also, Argument from Authority is a logical fallacy in matters objective, and even more so in matters subjective.

thanks...i was trying to guide him to this standpoint

 

[jimbob]

It's all good. You can say you think Bieber is better than Beethoven(I just threw up in my mouth a little), it's a totally valid opinion. Of course, everyone else has the right to think they should castrate you in a public square for that opinion.

 

[Vid Electricz]

On what planet does the source of an opinion matter more intellectually than the content of an opinion?

Nobody has argued otherwise.

???

but you've yet to add a knowledgeable individuals wisdom to the idea/concept. You can't just say Beethoven is better than Bieber...say to state otherwise is uniformed and ignorant and not back it up.

It was an example to counter your own "apple" argument, demonstrating not "right" or "wrong", but an "informed" and "uninformed" understanding of a principle or area of study.

It was not meant to begin a actual debate (which is completely beside the point)on why Beethoven's work is more important/better/resonant, etc...than Justin Beiber's.

 

[The Guard]

Opinions on works of art are subjective, not objective. While it is possible to reason that the square of the hypotenuse of a right triangle is equal to the sum of the square of the other two sides, it is not possible to reason whether Superman killing Zod was the correct outcome, or whether the Mona Lisa should have had a frown or a smile. Also, Argument from Authority is a logical fallacy in matters objective, and even more so in matters subjective.

Yup.

 

[Vid Electricz]

It's all good. You can say you think Bieber is better than Beethoven(I just threw up in my mouth a little), it's a totally valid opinion. Of course, everyone else has the right to think they should castrate you in a public square for that opinion.

Yes. Completely "valid", but also uninformed. Knowing and accepting that there are people more informed than you, who know things that you do not (in this case, character arcs, the principles of storytelling, thematic elements in storytelling, etc...) is the first step to learning and expanding your own breadth of knowledge and understanding. Why is this so difficult to understand?

 

[Vid Electricz]

Opinions on works of art are subjective, not objective. While it is possible to reason that the square of the hypotenuse of a right triangle is equal to the sum of the square of the other two sides, it is not possible to reason whether Superman killing Zod was the correct outcome, or whether the Mona Lisa should have had a frown or a smile. Also, Argument from Authority is a logical fallacy in matters objective, and even more so in matters subjective.

Yes, but we're not talking about abstract expressionism or a David Lynch movie here. It's a straightforward, superhero adventure movie, and there ARE principles to storytelling just as sure as there are principles to mathematics.

Claiming that it's IMPOSSIBLE to decide whether Superman killing Zod made sense to the story either thematically or character-wise, whether the moment felt earned or tacked on...THAT is a complete cop out. Just because the boundaries of storytelling are more flexible than those of mathematics, doesn't mean there aren't any. That's the true fallacy.

 

[Krumm]

Yes, but we're not talking about abstract expressionism or a David Lynch movie here. It's a straightforward, superhero adventure movie, and there ARE principles to storytelling just as sure as there are principles to mathematics.

Claiming that it's IMPOSSIBLE to decide whether Superman killing Zod made sense to the story either thematically or character-wise, whether the moment felt earned or tacked on...THAT is a complete cop out. Just because the boundaries of storytelling are more flexible than those of mathematics, doesn't mean there aren't any. That's the true fallacy.

It is impossible to decide because it's a matter of opinion. But more to your point, I would say its a matter of opinion based on facts, therefore it's it also an informed opinion. An informed argument could be made for either side.

 

[roach]

It was an example to counter your own "apple" argument, demonstrating not "right" or "wrong", but an "informed" and "uninformed" understanding of a principle or area of study.

The point you seem to not see is that there is no informed or uninformed understanding/opinion that could change my opinion that apples are the best fruit ever.
An apple grower can come into this thread and give his informed opinion
an Orange grower can come into this thread and give his informed/uninformed opinion
Their opinions do not matter when I bite into a nice red apple and taste the sweet ambrosia of the gods. Nothing anyone can say will change that because opinions are governed by who we are as people. it is all subjective. That is why opinions can not be right or wrong.

 

[Krumm]

The point you seem to not see is that there is no informed or uninformed understanding/opinion that could change my opinion that apples are the best fruit ever.
An apple grower can come into this thread and give his informed opinion
an Orange grower can come into this thread and give his informed/uninformed opinion
Their opinions do not matter when I bite into a nice red apple and taste the sweet ambrosia of the gods. Nothing anyone can say will change that because opinions are governed by who we are as people. it is all subjective. That is why opinions can not be right or wrong.

While I tend to agree with you, this argument is literally apples and oranges... .

A stronger argument would be whether or not you should listen to an apple grower's opinion on whether red delicious are better than granny smith.

Now, if you are saying that comic writing is apples to screenwriting's oranges then that is different.

 

[roach]

A stronger argument would be whether or not you should listen to an apple grower's opinion on whether red delicious are better than granny smith.

of course they are

 

[Krumm]

of course they are

t:

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

To me, I think, with something like film, I think it is perfectly reasonable to disagree with smarter/more credible/more informed people as long as you find reasons of your own to back it up. If you say something like "I liked it despite its flaws" you are a'cknowledging that it has weaknesses that didn't mar the film experience for you. But there are people (not so much here, but IMDB and whatnot) who are like 'THIS IS PERFECT WHAT KIND OF CRITIC ARE YOU?! ETC.'

Those people make it personal, as if the critic didn't deserve the platform he or she earned as a professional writer/movie reviewer.

As for Waid, I think he has a VERY fixed idea of who Superman should be. But is he wrong for having those opinions? I don't think so, and I think he has a better idea than most of what an ideal Superman film SHOULD be .

I think when we say all opinions are EQUAL, we give no value to any one person, despite a person's hypothetical knowledge, experience, and credibility.

That being said, I won't stop liking a film because a respected author doesn't like it. HOWEVER, I also think he/she should not be dismissed easily.

A good example is the fact that Waid actually LIKES the tornado scene. I don't, but I think that this insight shows that he is okay with Clark being put to the test, and failing, as long as his ideals are in check (he wants to respect the desires of his father).

I think tonally Waid's MOS would be a lot better (and probably have better dialog), but I don't think it would have the "impact" of MOS. This isn't a diss on Waid, as much as a notice of the confrontational nature of Goyer/Snyder.

I personally would prefer a 'safer' and more conventional Superman movie, but with appropriately paced action. They could then make the bolder film for the sequel.

But now, there's kind of a crossroads. If Goyer/Snyder pulls back in terms of seriousness, the series might feel inconsistent in tone. If they go full speed, it's kind of more of the same. I am hoping for the former. I think Superman and Batman playing off each other as teammates should be FUN.

Not that Waid isn't full of boldness either. The "bullet catch" was an awesome moment

 

[jimbob]

Roach is right on this one. Informed vs. uninformed opinions on movies are a silly game. I say the ending was right. Mark Waid says it sucked. Christopher Nolan says it was great. Surely Nolan knows more about making comic book movies than Waid, so therefore his opinion is more informed and valid, right? Wrong! It's art, not science. I might think Picasso is brilliant. Gerhard Richter might think it's some crap a five year old could do. If you want to evaluate Picasso, you shouldn't compare my resume to Richter's. It's meaningless.

 

[Vid Electricz]

The point you seem to not see is that there is no informed or uninformed understanding/opinion that could change my opinion that apples are the best fruit ever.
An apple grower can come into this thread and give his informed opinion
an Orange grower can come into this thread and give his informed/uninformed opinion
Their opinions do not matter when I bite into a nice red apple and taste the sweet ambrosia of the gods. Nothing anyone can say will change that because opinions are governed by who we are as people. it is all subjective. That is why opinions can not be right or wrong.

Let me re-post this for the fifth(?) time now:

It's not about "convincing" you otherwise. It's about taking this other, knowledgable individuals wisdom and adding it to your understanding of said idea/concept.

If there is an angle and I look at it and say, "this looks like a right angle. In my opinion, it's a right angle.", then a mathematician comes and explains exactly why it's not a right angle and that I was looking at it incorrectly and that it's actually an 80 degree angle. I would understand what the mathematician, who is obviously more knowledgeable than me has explained and add it to my breadth of understanding about angles. Lame example, but these same principles apply to storytelling. Just because it's "art" doesn't mean you can throw anything up on screen and it'll "work". That's a cop out. I'd think that someone with a Master's in creative writing would understand that.