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

[Marvin]

I think the point dude is making is the difference between "fighting for months" for something you like vs fighting for months against something you hate.
If there was a twilight section on here, I doubt many of us would visit it.

That being said, I think everyone is entitled to their opinion, it's what keeps this place rolling.

I also think the weakness people see in the film would be better presented without the hyperbole, it might clear things up. For example, 'An hour of action figures', here I clock that final 'fight' at about 7 -12 minutes or something in that range, this sort of thing has led to arguments.

 

[king666]

And killing Zod. Sure he had no choice. He had as much choice as Snyder and Goyer gave him. They made the choice. They wanted people to reassess the character, and move him away from the boyscout image, by making him tortured and depressed and now a murderer of Zod (and arguably his adoptive dad...).

 

[Krumm]

Though, of course, it's not futile, stupid or pathetic to try to convince people that their very valid criticisms of said movie are worthless, right? Brilliant. We've got some geniuses on board here.

Also, I didn't find MOS to be "awful", but I'm not so blind/ignorant that I'm going to look past it's weaknesses. This is obviously difficult for you to understand, but one can still critique something even if they like it. This movie had it's strengths, but also weaknesses- looking at some of the apologist zealotry infesting this board, one might understandably get a little confused.

Who's to say these "apologists" don't have their own critiques of the film? It really depends on the framing of the discussion.

 

[Vid Electricz]

I never meant to convey your argument, I stated what becomes from deriving anything from trends in public consumption in a self serving manner as opposed to an objective one.

DA:So I spoke to some twenty year olds today, and they told me that they found man of steel to be very average, because there was too much story that they knew already, and they were bored, and they were thinking "just get to the cool action already".

You:
Welcome to the GA (lowest common denominator), is more like it. The vast majority of audiences believe that they want to see (are conditioned to understand anyway) two action figures punching each other for an hour is "entertainment"

If you want to assume the largest demographic in the industry simply likes mos due to the 60 minute fighting as one would assert given your response to DA's anecdote, the one in which you seemingly answered his 'question', then I'm going to stand by my statement. Is that why the largest demographic likes TDK/Avengers as well? Do they support all these films for the same reasons or are the reasons going to be picked and chosen depending on the point we want to make on that message board that day...


I would think so.

My reply, while pertaining to what I felt was action that extended and spilled over into the "needless" and "over-the-top" category, in MOS, was also a commentary on a sympton (trend) that is plaguing action/adventure movies at the moment. I've seen the same complaint voiced by the teenagers, voiced over and over and over again on these very boards. Just a look at the sprawling groupthink that SR could have been solved by having Superman punch someone tells us this.

And yes, the big, dumb action spectacle is exactly why audiences flock to these event films in such great numbers (I don't know how one can even argue against that). It is only by virtue of chance/luck that these films (TDK/Avengers) were helmed by individuals with brains. The GA doesn't flock to these movies for witty/clever character interaction or political commentary 9/11 undertones.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Who's to say these "apologists" don't have their own critiques of the film? It really depends on the framing of the discussion.

If they do, they're good at keeping them a secret.

 

[Krumm]

If they do, they're good at keeping them a secret.

I'm sure they could say the same about you. From the posts I read, I wouldn't think you really liked the film at all.

It really depends on the conversation you're having. I don't think the script was the best but I surprisingly enjoyed the disposal of Zod. I'll argue for that but that doesn't mean I think the story didn't have problems.

 

[roach]

I guess I am an apologist and while this movie isn't perfect…I find I don't have time to discuss what I didn't like because I have to defend "Superman didn't save anyone", "Jor-El was the real hero of the movie", "Superman should never,ever,ever, never kill".

 

[jimbob]

I say spending time arguing about a movie you don't like is futile, stupid, and pathetic. Vid acts as if he were personally addressed, and says that we're wasting time on a Man of Steel fan forum rebutting his "valid" dead horse points. Okay Vid, you win. You are a bon vivant of the art of the motion picture. You understand film in a way that us dullards could never comprehend. Everything you say is deeply rooted in wisdom and logic. You are completely right, and we are miserable cretins who are not worthy of your awe-inspiring presence. We are morons who despite your months of lecture, still love Man of Steel as much if not more than when you began. At some point, Jane Goodall stopped lecturing chimpanzees about the virtues of a democratic society, as the chimps just became annoyed and threw stuff at her. I know you think the wind is blowing the wrong way here, but you're still the one spitting into it.

 

[Migu-EL]

I thought Man of Steel was awesome

 

[DA_Champion]

Vid,

I think it is also the fact that a movie like mos, or really any movie, will come off as more original to a 20 year old than to a 30 year old, because on average the younger person gas seen fewer movies. I have enjoed action scenes not justified byva thick story, if they were different from what I had seen before, 300 is a good example.

In the case of MoS, I also suspect the story is no good to people not really familiar with superman. For example, it wants us to feel bad when jonathan kent dies even though the character has not been well developed in this specific story. But you might actually feel bad if you alreadt know JK from other cobtinuities.

 

[The Guard]

I guess I am an apologist and while this movie isn't perfect…I find I don't have time to discuss what I didn't like because I have to defend "Superman didn't save anyone", "Jor-El was the real hero of the movie", "Superman should never,ever,ever, never kill".

Heh.

You could always just put certain posters on ignore.

 

[MrMaooz]

For the people saying there was too much action, should MOS have been a little influenced by Saving Private Ryan? A movie with a TON of action and made all the character moments really count.

 

[Vid Electricz]

For the people saying there was too much action, should MOS have been a little influenced by Saving Private Ryan? A movie with a TON of action and made all the character moments really count.

Great example. in SPR you felt for these characters and saw/felt the consequences of their actions. They felt like real human beings. Too much action wasn't the problem in MOS, it was the execution of that action/characters.

This is the difference between a deft, experienced hand like Spielberg's who places character first and someone like Snyder who places emphasis on style over substance.

 

[Marvin]

There was also killing in SPR.
We don't like that sort around here.

 

[roach]

Heh.

You could always just put certain posters on ignore.

where's the fun in that? I came here to discuss Man of Steel and if I or someone else *winkwinkwink* can't deal with opposing points of view I/they should get off the internets and go out side and play.

 

[jimbob]

Saving Private Ryan was a nonsensical film full of puke and war porn. That shaky cam stuff was distracting too. Like this whole unit of soldiers is going to neglect the all the other people being killed to save one soldier? The script is weak, and Spielberg is a really amateur director for resorting to cheap gimmicks and poorly realized characters that aren't what you'd call heroes at all. It's an insult to WWII vets and anyone with a basic understanding of combat. See, you can apply nitpicking to anything.

 

[roach]

The problem with Superman is that everyone thinks he is an old-fashioned character but no one wants him to change.

 

[Krumm]

Great example. in SPR you felt for these characters and saw/felt the consequences of their actions. They felt like real human beings.

The characters were fantastic I just wish the plot hadn't ended with a deus ex machina...

 

[jimbob]

You get the same thing with Star Wars fans. They want the new movies to be the way the old ones were, but they don't want the old ones to be like that. Makes perfect sense. Maybe we can just re-release the original Donner movies as "Special Editions" and these folks will be happy. Because Superman smiled when he killed Zod in Superman II. That makes it cool.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Saving Private Ryan was a nonsensical film full of puke and war porn. That shaky cam stuff was distracting too. Like this whole unit of soldiers is going to neglect the all the other people being killed to save one soldier? The script is weak, and Spielberg is a really amateur director for resorting to cheap gimmicks and poorly realized characters that aren't what you'd call heroes at all. It's an insult to WWII vets and anyone with a basic understanding of combat. See, you can apply nitpicking to anything.

These are some pretty vague, juvenile, reaching nitpicks (Most of which aren't even true- "poorly realized characters"? Let's pull stuff out of thin air! lol) . Spielberg is amatuer? Script is weak? Why, pray tell? At least I can elucidate the what and why there were weak moments in the MOS script/direction. Can you?

What is vague, juvenile or reaching in suggesting that Snyder should have acknowledged some (any!) of the insance levels of death and destruction in this film?

Do you see the difference? Who am I kidding, of course you don't.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

The problem with Superman is that everyone thinks he is an old-fashioned character but no one wants him to change.

Yeah. I think there are a lot of factors. I think Reeve giving a killer performance in a classic movie has blinded people of tonal and script weaknesses from S:TM so they remember the old movie as better than it was. I also think that Nolan's Batman movies has instilled this "DC good guys don't kill" mentality, which comic fans tend to have for different reasons

Also, Superman never had a reboot until MOS. If Superman had a bad reboot to transition critics away from the Donner films (like Joel Shumucker's BM films to Burton, for example) people would be saying "at least it's better than Superman Lives."

The general audience is already saying that about MOS, but I think the critics think of Superman as a movie invention, with the "canon" being the 1978 film.

Superman HAS to save everyone! He HAS to romance Lois! He has to be on the upbeat side-even in stressful situations!

I think very many people WANT to like Superman. But these same people can't accept the idea of Superman as a human character with occasional vices.

If MOS was better, I still feel like it would be underrated. People would be complaining that it's just another origin, that we've seen it all, etc.

If MOS was an absolute masterpiece, people would be saying that the movie "made Superman awesome" and that he was a weak character beforehand.

 

[Vid Electricz]

There seems to be a misunderstanding between coping with changes to characters v. the overall execution.

I, for one, don't have a problem with changes, as long as it makes sense, is consistent with the overall spirit of the character and is well written/executed. The question is, to what extent can you change a character and still have them remain the character we know and love from the comics/cartoons, etc...?

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ FYI, I would have a more traditional Pa Kent/Pete Ross/Lang interpretation. Show Clark having both happy AND sad moments in childhood. I like Lane's Ma Kent, so I would keep something similar. And I wouldn't have Clark steal/kill in his first movie!

 

[jimbob]

These are some pretty vague, juvenile, reaching nitpicks (Most of which aren't even true- "poorly realized characters"? Let's pull stuff out of thin air! lol) . Spielberg is amatuer? Script is weak? Why, pray tell? At least I can elucidate the what and why there were weak moments in the MOS script/direction. Can you?
Of course I can, but you like the movie, so I'm not stupid enough to waste too much of my time. What would be the point?
What is vague, juvenile or reaching in suggesting that Snyder should have acknowledged some (any!) of the insance levels of death and destruction in this film?
I don't recall any gory shots of people being blown to pieces in MOS. Snyder was able to convey the horrors of an alien invasion much more significant than the little squabble of political differences in WWII without resorting to gratuitous bloodfest of the washed-up Spielberg in his lame attempt to re-create better war films of the past by upping the carnage factor to make up for is lack of originality and skill.
Do you see the difference? Who am I kidding, of course you don't.

By the way, the fact that my post was intended as a spoof apparently flew right over your head, even though I pretty much spelled it out for you at the end. But I can play Devil's Advocate if you'd like.

 

[Vid Electricz]

By the way, the fact that my post was intended as a spoof apparently flew right over your head, even though I pretty much spelled it out for you at the end. But I can play Devil's Advocate if you'd like.

You already are playing devil's advocate. You posted some goofy examples (which I obviously acknowledged) of nitpicks to try to prove a point.

Your attempted satire fails because of the absence of validity in nitpicks provided. That was my point. Did you get that? Obviously not.

Also, as previously mentioned, I can acknowledge, understand and accept weakness and shortcomings in films I like. I'd be more than happy to hear some as to some of the real problems/issues you had with Saving Private Ryan's script. I already know/understand it's not a perfect movie and that it does have weaknesses. Can you say the same for MOS?