BvS David S. Goyer IS the Script Writer! - Part 2

[Llama_Shepherd]

Superman killed Zod in a story that was pretty reviled.

You know the scene in Batman: Year One, where Batman confronts all the mobsters of Gotham at dinner and tells them none of them are safe? Essentially, Batman's first crowning moment of badassery? It was later retconned that Bruce wet himself in that sequence.

Not everything necessarily needs to be adapted quite so literally. I personally prefer the death in For Tomorrow.

 

[Marvin]

You say literally as if the events of man of steel are a play by play of some previous story.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Literally as in Superman intended to kill Zod. Not panel to frame translation, my bad.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Literally as in Superman intended to kill Zod. Not panel to frame translation, my bad.

lol. Are we talking about the alternate universe/elseworlds story where "Superman" cool and calmly kills Zod and co. in a torturous and debilitating manner? Yes, since it's "in the comics" it's all good! Because this is obviously a parallel that mirrors the situation in MOS to a great degree and is highly representative of 70+ years of work on the character. lol.

 

[Marvin]

I personally wasn't talking about that story.
(that one somehow slipped my mind).

 

[DA_Champion]

That's an extremely broad generalization. There are plenty of members of the Superman fanbase that have never said such a thing. In fact, there a plenty of members who would argue the opposite.

Yes, of course I'm making generalization, unless you want me to delineate the view of every individual fan, one by one.

The generalization of the fanbases' reaction to SR is quite representative, not of everybody but of a significant number of people. A lot of people have said it's a bad movie because he doesn't land a single punch, look up some reviews online and some subsequent analysis, or better yet:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=superman+returns+superman+doesn't+land+a+single+punch

And I'm not sure the fanbase is saying mos was a 'bad movie because he killed'. By fanbase I assume you mean superman fans and not the GA?

Like you said there are other problems, so I'm curious where you derived these conclusions other than the sentiments of a few, loud(like waid) or others.

It was a huge controversy in the weeks following the release and the number one thing talked about in general news outlets. It was the first plotline I found out about prior to reading the movie, even though I tried to avoid spoilers. For me, anyway, that's unfortunate, as I don't think it's the most impactful decision made in the writing process. I think it would be a very similar movie if Zod had just fallen into the phantom zone.

Moreover, weren't you going on about how wb(goyer/snyder specifically) probably won't take the criticism but rather just do what they want(maybe that was tobias).

I'm not sure on the exact process as to how GA reactions percolate in, but I'm pretty sure they do and we often see movies that are responses to the reactions to previous films.

one difference between returns and mos is the basic superman tropes of old such as the daily planet stuff, costume changes and excuses, luthor, a superman that waved to people..etc. This stuff puts returns in a more 'superman film' category than returns which simply chose to go in a fresh, prequelesque route. I think some people that want to see that 'stuff' may have been put off by this non superman film which might have lead to some of the criticism about some stuff missing. I see that changed next time around. When someone said the fun was missing, I suspect at least some of that has to do with no classic shirt rip or things of that sort.

All that being said, I personally think this team has a way with sequels.

There are plenty of Superman tropes and fan-service scenes in MoS, as there should be, and this movie would be a lot worse if Goyer had inserted every possible trope in a 2 hour movie.

Die hard superman fans got to see:
- Keel-ex in live action for the first time;
- Jor-El and Zod wear nonsensical suits that "look cool";
- the fortress of solitude;
- Flying treated as the most significant superpower, it's the power he learns right after meeting Jor-El, and it's the first power he shows off when meeting General Swanwick;
- The ending scene at the Daily Planet;
- The entire Lois and Clark relationship;
- Lois kind of naming Superman;
- Adult Clark wearing glasses;

There are plenty of Superman tropes in MoS, I think that whatever subset of tropes had been included there would have been some complaints that it was the wrong ones, and I'm not particularly caring about things like the shirt rip or the glasses.

 

[Marvin]

The funny thing is that "The Superman you know and love" is not described as "Donner Superman" or "Reeve Superman".

When you have a point to make(to fans in particular) why miss out on the opportunity to use suggestive/manipulative epithets.
Moreover, donner superman I suppose would be a bad example here, for obvious reasons.
Lastly, I suppose not everyone is enamored with the Donner superman, he can make a greater point with the epithets.

Your point isn't lost on me, but those three elements just outlined are what they are.

 

[Marvin]

It was a huge controversy in the weeks following the release and the number one thing talked about in general news outlets. It was the first plotline I found out about prior to reading the movie, even though I tried to avoid spoilers. For me, anyway, that's unfortunate, as I don't think it's the most impactful decision made in the writing process. I think it would be a very similar movie if Zod had just fallen into the phantom zone.

With alot of these movies comes loud initial talking point controversy. I'm sure there was talk of 911isms/violence "controvery" post TDK in 'general news outlets'. That being you explanation I still don't see how it correlates to: the Superman fanbase is saying that MoS is a bad movie because "Superman killed"

If your statement about what the fanbase is literally saying, as a whole is true, it stands to reason the fanbase is lame

 

[Krumm]

Yes, of course I'm making generalization, unless you want me to delineate the view of every individual fan, one by one.

The generalization of the fanbases' reaction to SR is quite representative, not of everybody but of a significant number of people. A lot of people have said it's a bad movie because he doesn't land a single punch, look up some reviews online and some subsequent analysis, or better yet:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=superman+returns+superman+doesn't+land+a+single+punch

I wasn't disagreeing with that. I was referring to your generalization that the fanbase is arguing that MOS is bad film because Zod being killed. There is a certain contingent, yes, but an entire fanbase, no.

Now regardless of size of the negative reaction, a response to the killing in the sequel is an obvious given. A major plot point and character choice like that is introduced with the intent of it informing the story and character going forward.

 

[MrMaooz]

"Dick splash."

Don't do that again, Goyer.

 

[Rorschach2012]

the dick splash line was definitely weird. I'd never heard that one before

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

What's with Goyer's obsession with d!cks?

Imagine BB with such strange vulgarity.

"But I won't have to save you, D!CK!"

 

[DA_Champion]

Maybe he has a small ...

 

[TheBat812]

"Dick splash."

Don't do that again, Goyer.

Haha I don't remember that line, when was that?

 

[Rorschach2012]

What's with Goyer's obsession with d!cks?

Imagine BB with such strange vulgarity.

"But I won't have to save you, D!CK!"

Yeah I don't know... First it was dick splashes, then it was measuring them.. both unnecessary

 

[DA_Champion]

Also, the movie opens with us seeing baby superman's penis, I'm not sure if that was Goyer's or Snyder's decision.

It's unfair to that little boy that his penis was shown to the whole world, he might grow up traumatized, look what happened to the Nirvana baby:

ETA: Apparently Kryptonian architecture had a vaginal theme as well:
http://www.comicbooktherapy.com/sco...gery-in-man-of-steel-its-yonic-imagery-154976

 

[Rorschach2012]

You can see a kids penis in the original Superman movie too. Dumb complaint, you're not the kid, and I don't think anyone will judge him on what his penis looked like when he was a baby.

 

[DA_Champion]

You can see a kids penis in the original Superman movie too. Dumb complaint, you're not the kid, and I don't think anyone will judge him on what his penis looked like when he was a baby.

Some people are slow.

I'm obviously not actually feeling bad for the kid.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

This thread is making ME a little bit prickly.

 

[Krumm]

Also, the movie opens with us seeing baby superman's penis, I'm not sure if that was Goyer's or Snyder's decision.

It's unfair to that little boy that his penis was shown to the whole world, he might grow up traumatized, look what happened to the Nirvana baby:

Ha!

 

[roach]

The naked baby and seeing his thing was a Snyder decision

 

[Dragon_316ca]

http://www.deadline.com/2013/10/war...-david-s-goyer-to-three-year-first-look-deal/

 

[Isearch4dope]

Does anyone else think that it would have made more sense for Goyer to tackle the Clark Kent persona from the start other than running away and setting up more problems than solutions in the created universe if we weren't going to get a true superman focused origin story?

With Clark working at the daily planet already (seeing that it's a non-issue for him to get a job there) and being friends with Lois or at least having an attraction to her could have made the romance way more believable and allow a more interesting dynamic when things unfolded later on. Also this would be a far more plausible way he could find out about the scout-ship other than just magically hearing strangers talk about it and supposedly picking up random jobs at the exact region where the ship is? This means that Clark would have continued to mope around for centuries searching for answers and not even think about becoming superman if he wasn't in Alaska (he could have been anywhere else), in a bar, overhearing strangers talk about something. If someone is so keen on looking out for any sign of alien life (to discover his mysterious origin and give himself desperately needed closure) or gaining current info (even if false) on anything strange, what other places are more perfect than The Daily Planet, a media house or the internet at least for a start?

Wouldn't it have been more interesting if Clark was longing to become human (forget about alien heritage) with each passing day of searching for answers (dead ends) and eventually ends up suppressing everything heroic about himself (turning his father's belief of the world isn't ready into.....I'm an abomination, outcast, curse etc.) and really feeling alone until Lois befriends him (sense of purpose) and eventually tells him about the thing in the ice she is secretly going to investigate. This way she means even more to him and she (a human) gave him hope in a time he needed it most. With this in mind he then steps in front of the human race not with a...."you're not ready or I'm not ready".... but with a..." I am ready ……this is who I am and this is what I am willing and ready to be in your presence......a Man of Steel." He discovers himself as a man but his heroic and alien nature eventually leads to him being known as Superman.

 

[roach]

Does anyone else think that it would have made more sense for Goyer to tackle the Clark Kent persona from the start other than running away and setting up more problems than solutions in the created universe if we weren't going to get a true superman focused origin story?

With Clark working at the daily planet already (seeing that it's a non-issue for him to get a job there) and being friends with Lois or at least having an attraction to her could have made the romance way more believable and allow a more interesting dynamic when things unfolded later on. Also this would be a far more plausible way he could find out about the scout-ship other than just magically hearing strangers talk about it and supposedly picking up random jobs at the exact region where the ship is? This means that Clark would have continued to mope around for centuries searching for answers and not even think about becoming superman if he wasn't in Alaska (he could have been anywhere else), in a bar, overhearing strangers talk about something. If someone is so keen on looking out for any sign of alien life (to discover his mysterious origin and give himself desperately needed closure) or gaining current info (even if false) on anything strange, what other places are more perfect than The Daily Planet, a media house or the internet at least for a start?

Wouldn't it have been more interesting if Clark was longing to become human (forget about alien heritage) with each passing day of searching for answers (dead ends) and eventually ends up suppressing everything heroic about himself (turning his father's belief of the world isn't ready into.....I'm an abomination, outcast, curse etc.) and really feeling alone until Lois befriends him (sense of purpose) and eventually tells him about the thing in the ice she is secretly going to investigate. This way she means even more to him and she (a human) gave him hope in a time he needed it most. With this in mind he then steps in front of the human race not with a...."you're not ready or I'm not ready".... but with a..." I am ready ……this is who I am and this is what I am willing and ready to be in your presence......a Man of Steel." He discovers himself as a man but his heroic and alien nature eventually leads to him being known as Superman.

I think people would still complain especially if he is just Clark at the Planet and not saving people. With this version we see a man with the innate desire to use his powers for good.
It also creates a problem with the secret identity thing. If people at the Planet know him as Clark minus glasses how are they not recognizing him as Superman. I realize that the whole glasses thing is pretty stupid to begin with but it's more believable that Clark can fool people that never met Clark than Clark all of a sudden wearing glasses….which is one of my biggest problems with Smallville.

 

[Isearch4dope]

I think people would still complain especially if he is just Clark at the Planet and not saving people. With this version we see a man with the innate desire to use his powers for good.
It also creates a problem with the secret identity thing. If people at the Planet know him as Clark minus glasses how are they not recognizing him as Superman. I realize that the whole glasses thing is pretty stupid to begin with but it's more believable that Clark can fool people that never met Clark than Clark all of a sudden wearing glasses….which is one of my biggest problems with Smallville.

He doesn't automatically stop saving people. He eventually loses his will to do so (some kind of depression) because the giant hole left by not knowing his alien heritage which he desperately longs for is starting to take it's tole on him as a man (basic identity crisis) because he lacks that closure. This would lead to him having thoughts of wanting to forget that side of him all together because it makes him feel as if though he was a mistake, unwanted, neglected etc. due to no follow up by his parents/people and progress in uncovering the reason he was sent to earth. He wants to disappear into the Clark Kent persona (glasses, hair, clumsiness etc...... In this case he wouldn't use his real name and would fake an identity seeing he didn't plan to stay their forever....second paragraph addresses why) which at first he basically viewed as a temporary act to fit in among humans to aid in uncovering the truth about himself with little suspicion. With this premise you can at least kinda buy into him not being recognized because he could make a conscious effort to conceal his identity when being heroic (shades,hat,shirt tied around his head etc.) because he has to keep up with appearances. Also the reason he won't openly expose himself to the world would not be because Pa Kent felt that the world wasn't ready, but because Clark himself is reluctant due to being unsure of who he's supposed to be as an individual. This way it could have have been a more self centered choice after his breakthrough (made possible by Lois and not magical coincidence) to reveal himself and no longer hold back the hero in him other than being forced out by Zod. This way the heroic side of him is truly preserved and is only affected and conflicted due to him (the man) longing for a true identity and not knowing who he was. Wouldn't this make the story more focused on the character who should be the driving force of the story?

With regards to how he would regain continue to work at DP after revealing himself is another story. I really don't know how the glasses could ever realistically translate to a grounded universe which is why the identity crisis angle would be a little more plausible. Before revealing himself, Clark was struggling with his identity so he wouldn't even use his real name (Clark) before this and would go to great ends to preserve his natural appearance. Maybe this is where a fake beard, mustache and fake tan would come in handy as well as maybe using heat vision and an iron comb to flatten and straighten his hair while walking differently etc.t: Desperate times call for desperate measures. This would give him a totally different look. When he finally isn't unsure of who he is anymore and gets a new job at DP post crisis, all the theatrics are in the past and he can now be the real Clark Kent with the name. This would show his progression as a character and be symbolic of his new found sense of self, purpose and confidence. The other question now is why risk it and go back to DP which my answer is....because of Lois Lane along with basically the same reason offered at the end of MOS.