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

[jimbob]

Just because your lines suck doesn't mean an actual screen writer couldn't have done something. The dialog in MoS was often clunky and wooden. Dialog is supposed to represent the way people actual converse, not Saturday morning cartoon level speechifying, and plot point illumination.
Yes, your post is more like the way people actually converse, but I think that's more of a statement about our schools. Or maybe English is just a new language for you and I'm being too harsh. Either way, your "Dialog is supposed to represent the way people actual converse" is a classic, right up there with "Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"
There were several things I loved about MoS, The dialog just was not one of them.

You've got a point, I hated the part where Zod called her a "mewling quim." I mean, who talks like that?! Oh, wait..that was Loki, wasn't it? My god, a superhero with unrealistic lines?! What's next, a college comedy with scantily clad women? I'm shocked! Shocked, I say!

 

[The Guard]

Agreed. Almost every line of dialogue in this movie was a "speech".

I guess it depends on what definition of "almost" and "speech" you are using, but no. No it wasn't.

Dialog is supposed to represent the way people actual converse, not Saturday morning cartoon level speechifying, and plot point illumination.

Dialogue can be many things, and has many uses. The only rule is that, if it's not somewhat self aware, it is supposed feel natural for specific characters. Not like people actually conversing. What a ridiculous statement to make.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

Agreed. Almost every line of dialogue in this movie was a "speech".

Ah, man... the more I think about it the more I fear for BvsS.

Now, I know Inception's an arguably more skillfully made film than MOS, but Nolan is also known for his wordy monologues, and he doesn't get called out on it as much.

That being said, I hope there's more "casual" dialog in the sequel that isn't just a thematic or plot exposition in conversational form.

 

[king666]

General Zod: What have you done?

Jor-El: We've had a child, Zod. A boy child. Krypton's first natural birth in centuries, and he will be free, free to forge his own destiny.

General Zod: Heresy! Destroy it!

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Now, I know Inception's an arguably more skillfully made film than MOS, but Nolan is also known for his wordy monologues, and he doesn't get called out on it as much.

That being said, I hope there's more "casual" dialog in the sequel that isn't just a thematic or plot exposition in conversational form.

Whoever made that picture is a moron.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ I didn't make it. But yeah, that person should use spellcheck

 

[roach]

Yeah Most of Jor-El's dialogue did sound like speeches...as if he was a robot or some sort of advanced AI that was patterned after Jor-El.

 

[BatLobster]

I would say Inception is a little more than an "arguably" better-made film than MoS.

Nolan gets called out PLENTY for his exposition though, which is probably Inception's biggest weakness.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Yeah Most of Jor-El's dialogue did sound like speeches...as if he was a robot or some sort of advanced AI that was patterned after Jor-El.

The AI was Jor-El he had his conciousness uploaded into it. From the little we saw of the biological Jor-El, it seems that would be how he would actually speak.

Otherwise you end up in a situation with Kevin Flynn and Clu, in which Clu represents only an aspect of Flynn. Also, the actor would be credited for two parts.

 

[Marvin]

The AI was Jor-El he had his conciousness uploaded into it. From the little we saw of the biological Jor-El, it seems that would be how he would actually speak.

When it comes to biological Jor-El. I personally saw him speak one way to certain people in certain situations, whilst speaking another way to the likes of his wife. Kinda difficult to derive all that much from a few minutes of dramatic interaction.

 

[KangConquers]

I guess it depends on what definition of "almost" and "speech" you are using, but no. No it wasn't.



Dialogue can be many things, and has many uses. The only rule is that, if it's not somewhat self aware, it is supposed feel natural for specific characters. Not like people actually conversing. What a ridiculous statement to make.

Dialogue should sound natural. A truly gifted story teller will be able to use other narrative devices to enable the viewer to pick up on what's going on, aside from having character A pound character B, C, D and E with questions in order to illuminate plot points. That's called ****** writing sir.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

Dialogue should sound natural. A truly gifted story teller will be able to use other narrative devices to enable the viewer to pick up on what's going on, aside from having character A pound character B, C, D and E with questions in order to illuminate plot points. That's called ****** writing sir.

Yes. To me, film is at its most cinematic when it uses little to no dialog.

A good example is the end of Unbreakable, with the clippings and the "new power" that

Spoiler

allows Bruce Willis to see bad guys. You see Elijah, and then he discloses the motive.

That's good storytelling, because it uses BOTH visuals and dialog to convey information.

 

[matt47]

Im just gonna give my perspective on this speech topic.
Jor el- he's a very advanced and intteligent alien so no complaints there..
Pa kent-he was only in flashbacks and these were key moments in clarks life so they were fine being "speechy"
Zod-again, like jor el, advanced, different species, who are we to say how they speak?
Ma kent- minus the flashback to school there wasnt any speechy dialogue
Lois-i really dont remember any scenes where she seemed like it was unnatural for a reporter to speak like she did
Clark-Nor did he i dont think ?

To all the people saying the script was boohaki, i just dont get how it is...jor el,zod and pa kent say some pretty badasss and memorable quotes, everytime i saw man of steel i got goosebumps with every word that came out of jor els mouth (probably because its russell lol)

 

[fangz]

Im just gonna give my perspective on this speech topic.
Jor el- he's a very advanced and intteligent alien so no complaints there..
Pa kent-he was only in flashbacks and these were key moments in clarks life so they were fine being "speechy"
Zod-again, like jor el, advanced, different species, who are we to say how they speak?
Ma kent- minus the flashback to school there wasnt any speechy dialogue
Lois-i really dont remember any scenes where she seemed like it was unnatural for a reporter to speak like she did
Clark-Nor did he i dont think ?

I don't think it's a matter of proof whether these people might talk like that or not. This kind of writing is very obvious when it's happening.
I think the best of looking at this type of writing is as if it's a stylization. like it's purposefully doing what it does, in an unreal way, in order to create dramatic effect.
This works for some people, they can watch it and enjoy it.
For others, it's painful to watch is how bad it is. and It seems less like a stylization than an incompetency. which I guess stylizations are often being accused of that.

but if someone dislikes Goyer's style of writing, there's no explanation like, this is how someone would talk if they were brought up in such and such a place that would make it any better.
it's fundamentally a certain way, and the words used to describe what it is are going to depend on whether you find it acceptable or not.

 

[matt47]

I don't think it's a matter of proof whether these people might talk like that or not. This kind of writing is very obvious when it's happening.
I think the best of looking at this type of writing is as if it's a stylization. like it's purposefully doing what it does, in an unreal way, in order to create dramatic effect.
This works for some people, they can watch it and enjoy it.
For others, it's painful to watch is how bad it is. and It seems less like a stylization than an incompetency. which I guess stylizations are often being accused of that.

but if someone dislikes Goyer's style of writing, there's no explanation like, this is how someone would talk if they were brought up in such and such a place that would make it any better.
it's fundamentally a certain way, and the words used to describe what it is are going to depend on whether you find it acceptable or not.

100% agree mate, this sort of topic is extremely subjective. Im just glad im one of the few that enjoyed man of steels dialogue for the most part. Having said that i do agree that the scrip could have been better in some areas, but im not sure if i would change it if that meant the lines from jor el (they will join you in the sun kal speech) and pa kent (nearly everything he said) were to go too...

 

[DA_Champion]

Dialogue should sound natural. A truly gifted story teller will be able to use other narrative devices to enable the viewer to pick up on what's going on, aside from having character A pound character B, C, D and E with questions in order to illuminate plot points. That's called ****** writing sir.

Yes. To me, film is at its most cinematic when it uses little to no dialog.

A good example is the end of Unbreakable, with the clippings and the "new power" that

Spoiler

allows Bruce Willis to see bad guys. You see Elijah, and then he discloses the motive.

That's good storytelling, because it uses BOTH visuals and dialog to convey information.

Good posts.

In the director's commentary to his masterpiece, Pan's Labyrinth, we learn that:

It's storytelling without words that interests me the most, I hate dialogue and I love storytelling with the camera

There's several shots in this movie where the camera just lingers on characters and their interactions, showing everything from hugs to mannerism to let us know who they are and how they are. He explains in detail a lot of scenes in that movie where nobody says anything, but we nevertheless learn a great deal about the characters and the world they live in. It's possibly the most informative director's commentary I've ever listened to (for that praise Krumm and jimbob will claim that I am GLD's cousin). GLD goes over in great detail the meaning of many of the different images, how they were made, and he also gives a lot of stories in it.

In fairness to Goyer, for a tentpole blockbuster like Man of Steel with a 225 million dollar budget, you can't be too subtle because then the teenage boys, assorted low-information individuals, etc won't understand what's going on unless it's laid out for them with a lot of exposition, for example Avatar. I could be convinced otherwise, but I don't think being thrifty with dialogue is a realistic option when you want to break bank. The best case scenario in these situations is to use both dialogue and imagery and other devices to tell the story. Further, it's largely Snyder's responsibility to "show" things, not Goyer's.

 

[SpideyFan866]

The dialogue in MOS was speechy in many places, but that wasn't the flaw.

The flaw was that much, if not most, of the dialogue was exposition.

And that sucks because those moments where we did get non-expositional dialogue were really good, IMO.

 

[Krumm]

In the director's commentary to his masterpiece, Pan's Labyrinth, we learn that:

There's several shots in this movie where the camera just lingers on characters and their interactions, showing everything from hugs to mannerism to let us know who they are and how they are. He explains in detail a lot of scenes in that movie where nobody says anything, but we nevertheless learn a great deal about the characters and the world they live in. It's possibly the most informative director's commentary I've ever listened to (for that praise Krumm and jimbob will claim that I am GLD's cousin). GLD goes over in great detail the meaning of many of the different images, how they were made, and he also gives a lot of stories in it.

Or maybe you are GDT(?)! Which means GDT(?) is Hulk!

Kidding.

But despite that quote being his personal preference, it is obviously an effective an interesting way to tell a story.

(Short aside: I've never seen Pan's Labyrinth. I've always meant to but never got around to it. One day...)

As for my own preference, I'm a big fan of dialogue. I love snappy, witty dialogue that jumps all over the place but always stays on topic. I like getting inside the thought process of characters and learning how they see the world (Diner and Swingers comes quickly to mind as examples). It is the one thing guaranteed to pull me in no matter how poorly or well it's shot.

In fairness to Goyer, for a tentpole blockbuster like Man of Steel with a 225 million dollar budget, you can't be too subtle because then the teenage boys, assorted low-information individuals, etc won't understand what's going on unless it's laid out for them with a lot of exposition, for example Avatar. I could be convinced otherwise, but I don't think being thrifty with dialogue is a realistic option when you want to break bank. The best case scenario in these situations is to use both dialogue and imagery and other devices to tell the story. Further, it's largely Snyder's responsibility to "show" things, not Goyer's.

I didn't have any real problem with MOS -- the dialogue was mostly just there. Could it have been better? Sure. Could it have been worse? Definitely.

 

[DA_Champion]

(Short aside: I've never seen Pan's Labyrinth. I've always meant to but never got around to it. One day...)

I recommend it. Watch it, then watch the commentary. At the very least, it will help you better understand GLD's Simpson's introduction:
[YT]CtgYY7dhTyE[/YT]

Could it have been better? Sure. Could it have been worse? Definitely.

That assessment is true of everything that has ever existed

 

[Krumm]

I recommend it. Watch it, then watch the commentary. At the very least, it will help you better understand GLD's Simpson's introduction:
[YT]CtgYY7dhTyE[/YT]


That assessment is true of everything that has ever existed

That was awesome. Yeah, I really need to see it and a good commentary track is always welcome.

Ha. Fair enough.

 

[Coca Cola Duracell Franklin.]

Why did the poll close 1.5 years early?

 

[jimbob]

I know who Guillermo Del Toro is, and only in Da Champion/Hulk's dreams is he a relative. I do find it odd that dialogue nitpickers would be fans of his. Let's get this straight: You think MOS concentrated too much on spectacle and was ruined by bad dialogue and weak character development, but the guy who directed Pacific Rim is a maker of masterpieces? By the way, who the heck is this GLD person?

Dialogue should sound natural. A truly gifted story teller will be able to use other narrative devices to enable the viewer to pick up on what's going on, aside from having character A pound character B, C, D and E with questions in order to illuminate plot points. That's called ****** writing sir.

- KangConquers.
Kang, it was so much more entertaining when you said like this -

Dialog is supposed to represent the way people actual converse

 

[roach]

How people speak is a bit subjective also. I have a screenwriting friend who hates scenes in movie where characters talk to themselves. It's not believable to him because he doesn't talk to himself....while I do it sometimes and I know people who do it all the time. It was one of his hits against Gravity.

 

[jimbob]

How people speak is a bit subjective also. I have a screenwriting friend who hates scenes in movie where characters talk to themselves. It's not believable to him because he doesn't talk to himself....while I do it sometimes and I know people who do it all the time. It was one of his hits against Gravity.

That's weird. Surely he's aware that other people talk to themselves? Does he think to himself or just go full on meat slab mode when not speaking? I'll bet he really hated Castaway.

 

[roach]

That's weird. Surely he's aware that other people talk to themselves? Does he think to himself or just go full on meat slab mode when not speaking? I'll bet he really hated Castaway.

I tell him I talk to myself frequently....like when I read DA Champion's post I look at the screen and say "Seriously!?"