BvS David S. Goyer IS the Script Writer!

[MydnightPhoenix]

I have no idea what is even going on anymore with the essays being written in this debate. Im so lost i don't even know what the argument is.

 

[Krumm]

I have no idea what is even going on anymore with the essays being written in this debate. Im so lost i don't even know what the argument is.

I'm not sure they do either, with all due respect.

 

[slumcat]

The entire thread is full of tl;dr

 

[Marvin]

DA,

to keep it simple. I asked you why krypton even bothers with jail and criminal justice law enforcement(guards) if the script means to imply that these people are genetically programmed to not be capable of ‘dissent’ and or freethinking outside of order. Your answer began with this:
"The Kryptonians have a judicial system and prison but other than Zod they don't use it much.."

I’m going to pass on debating the minutia in your observations as that tends to lead to a back and forth I simply have no more interest in and just point to the greater issue. In a society of robots no jails sentencing quotas and things of that sort are needed. Clearly that’s not what krypton is or was ever said to be.

Prisons, Courts and Laws = Individuals who can break societies rules. Doesn’t get much more straightforward than that imo.

I should point out, your words:
"You speak like we're dissecting a real and rigorous parallel universe. We're not."
"...Your ability to come with plotlines external to the script"
I remind you of this of coruse in light of your detailed answer to my question. Feel free to get into your own fiction and internal logic, but last time I checked, that was something I was solely accused of.

 

[Marvin]

Mjolnir, I'll take from your queue and only address the pertinent.

I think one reason we get stuck in circles is that we get stuck on details instead of just judging the effectiveness of the writing, which is more in line with the topic.

On the greater discussion of script effectiveness, I’ve come to the conclusion that this is going to lead us in circles on premise alone.
I mention something like Zod’s battalion rebelling for what they believe to be the greater good as evidence against your specific interpretation of what Jor’s line of dialogue about loss of choice meant and how literal it was, I ultimately get a response confirming that if your interpretation of what the script meant is valid than that means the script is inconsistent and ineffective. It simply begs the question of what it is you in fact take away from Jor’s explanation of loss of choice/chance in a child having his societal role chosen for him. Considering Jon Kent later goes on to state that Clark needs to choose what kind of man he wants to be, one would think the thematic consequence is rather that of the "free will to choose" your destiny and not simply one of free will incarnate.

If you grew up with your destiny as a star fleet engineering officer set in stone, and your brain function designed for better number crunching, then jor’s exact line:
Jor-El:“Every child was designed to perform a predetermined role in our society as a worker, a warrior, a leader, and so on. Your mother and I believed Krypton lost something precious: the element of choice, of chance. What if a child dreamed of becoming something other than what society had intended..”
Would make just as much sense and what’s more, it would make sense in the movie we were presented with far less “inconsistencies.” It’s about the ideal of being able to choose whom you want to be, not simply to be able to think freely. That’s my stance.

I guess this is just another case where we just disagree, since I think that's a very vague motivation for something so important. I don't see why him being a product of Krypton didn't prevent him from doing what he did in the first place, and I think that it seems a lot simpler to take to new ideals in a different place than to do it when you're living in the society you supposedly are too much a product of.

In short I think it looks like he truly has all kinds of free will, while he seems to say that Kryptonians don't.

My point has consistently been that Jor is a product of Krypton’s corruption by definition. No matter how many choices he’s made and how against his "programming" they have been, they have ultimately been as a result of someone else's initial design. In the mind of an idealist that probably isn’t enough free will to satisfy him. Which is why he later said:
Jor-El: We couldn't, Kal. No matter how much we wanted to. No matter how we loved you. Your mother, Lara, and I were a product of the failures of our world as much as Zod was. It's hard to explain.

Lastly on this issue of setting up an effective villain. I should confirm that I don’t think having Zod suffer the circumstances he did, all that damning when it comes to traditional critique of such a thing. If the measure is that if raw effectiveness than yes you would be right, Zod could have been shown as more effective/successful, technically he could have been taller and all knowing and able kill people with a gaze too, as that would increase the measure of effective villain threat. However, when it comes to "if they failed in establishing their villain effectively", I can only offer a subjective no, and point to similarly less than boss villainy and emasculation resulting in the desired effect of really scary bad guy that met and dispatched in his match against the patriarch or matriarch in the first act scenario:

-From the Lion King we have Scar, who seemingly was consistently talked down to, backed down and defeated in an effort to glorify the hero’s patriarch, and also killed the king in a devious underhanded “cheap shot”.
-From Harry Potter you have that Lord Voldemort, whom before the main plot even began was known to have failed in his usurping plot, failed in killing an innocent child and was in fact killed/dispatched by a dying mother.
-Then we have many of villains from Game of Thrones but that’s another matter.

Could both Scar and LV have been “more effective” sure, however is the writing now worthy of being criticized as you have done with the Zod design? I’d argue no.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

The entire thread is full of tl;dr

And heated discussions

 

[Marvin]

Blue,

Too much pettiness, hyperbole, shouting, rallying behind the troops, self-validated ad hominum and or diminishing of character...This started as recent as post #588, not sure when you started validating this disposition though, as at this point I was simply sharing with you one of your early strawmen. From what I gather, name-calling seems more just your response to frustration. I’d enjoy addressing your essay of script elements here but I fear it will only result in more frustration and accusations from your end; particularly of response length. Safe to say I disagree with most. I do think you have a point about the Council’s behaviour, though on the issue of timely warning, I recall Jor mention having gotten around to warning them for some time, not just weeks before, then again maybe I missed the part where he took back this statement, as you are the one that watched it 5 times and with a note pad no less, I know how much of a difference that can make.

There was nothing “quiet” about my explanation of Trope. Constantly with the assumed implied bs. I for one celebrate and defend trope usage. A skilled writer can use familiarity to convey basic ideas to an intelligent and experienced audience(heroes journey and/or basic relatable characters and stuff). You might have confused the term with cliché, I can’t be sure.

Lastly, the migration of many of the more vocal enthusiasts can be explained in the same way as the diminished numbers of the vocal detractors, people move on, conveniently this only seems to apply to one side of the boat in your world. As for being “arsed” to argue, I’m sure I’m not the only one doing so…again your observations are those of convenience.

As for the rest, I’d rather not waste my time.
Up until this point I really didn’t know what you were all about, clearly you laid it all out in your post. Doesn’t seem like a scenario for even keeled productive conversation, not with that much bile and schoolyard belligerence present, I see more negative epithets being hurled and less relevant points. This is me actually being passive aggressive and condescending. This entire response is. I figure if I’m going to be accused of something I may as well embrace it. Feel free to use this to justify more hot air.

 

[DA_Champion]

Marvin,

I agree with you that on Krypton, a nearly dissent-free society, little to no security and jails would be needed, and indeed they had virtually none. There was no security guarding the codex, and Zod and his team were the only people to get out of the phantom zone.

That's not minutia, it's a huge change from the mythology. I've seen and read a few Superman mythologies, it's the first time I learn of an empty phantom zone. They had a prison, they just never used it until Zod.

I don't know if this was done intentionally by Goyer to create a more internally consistent world, or if the logical coherence of it is a pure coincidence and that in fact this issue never occurred to him.

 

[TheBat812]

Werent' there more people in the phantom zone? That's why he has like a whole crew of Kryptonians.

 

[Krumm]

Werent' there more people in the phantom zone? That's why he has like a whole crew of Kryptonians.

I assumed most of his crew were already part of his insurgency. However, the PZ was clearly already a prison otherwise Zod would not have understood his punishment the way he did.

 

[TheBat812]

Ya, I think you're right. I think that they kind of expect you to die of starvation in the Phantom Zone, but since Krypton was destroyed immediately after, they didn't succumb to that. But that would explain why there are no other people there. Either way, it's simply not important to the story.

 

[Project862006]

The entire thread is full of tl;dr

 

[BlueLantern]

Blue,

Too much pettiness, hyperbole, shouting, rallying behind the troops, self-validated ad hominum and or diminishing of character...This started as recent as post #588, not sure when you started validating this disposition though, as at this point I was simply sharing with you one of your early strawmen. From what I gather, name-calling seems more just your response to frustration. I’d enjoy addressing your essay of script elements here but I fear it will only result in more frustration and accusations from your end; particularly of response length. Safe to say I disagree with most. I do think you have a point about the Council’s behaviour, though on the issue of timely warning, I recall Jor mention having gotten around to warning them for some time, not just weeks before, then again maybe I missed the part where he took back this statement, as you are the one that watched it 5 times and with a note pad no less, I know how much of a difference that can make.

There was nothing “quiet” about my explanation of Trope. Constantly with the assumed implied bs. I for one celebrate and defend trope usage. A skilled writer can use familiarity to convey basic ideas to an intelligent and experienced audience(heroes journey and/or basic relatable characters and stuff). You might have confused the term with cliché, I can’t be sure.

Lastly, the migration of many of the more vocal enthusiasts can be explained in the same way as the diminished numbers of the vocal detractors, people move on, conveniently this only seems to apply to one side of the boat in your world. As for being “arsed” to argue, I’m sure I’m not the only one doing so…again your observations are those of convenience.

As for the rest, I’d rather not waste my time.
Up until this point I really didn’t know what you were all about, clearly you laid it all out in your post. Doesn’t seem like a scenario for even keeled productive conversation, not with that much bile and schoolyard belligerence present, I see more negative epithets being hurled and less relevant points. This is me actually being passive aggressive and condescending. This entire response is. I figure if I’m going to be accused of something I may as well embrace it. Feel free to use this to justify more hot air.

Reads like pretty much all your other posts. I don't know why you're pretending like you just started writing in such a manner.

 

[Dagenspear]

By the way, Tempest, Birthright had a sound reason for why Clark was the only survivor of Krypton. The civilization's council had forbidden space exploration and anything linked to it, which was complemented by a sentry system to shoot down any potential vessels attempting to do so. The small craft designed by Jor-El was the most functional prototype he created and only large enough to fit a baby at the time. So they took the risk. Donner's universe portrayed a dystopian society which was in denial of their fate as related by the dialogue and they thus forbade any attempt by Jor-El to instigate an evacuation or himself leave. Both reasonable explanations.

I think the animated series had a pretty good one too, though I can't completely recall. But MOS just kinda handwaves everything with nonsensical flowery dialogue. I think a better way to go would've been to give Krypton a similar backstory as that of in Superman: Unbound. Have Krypton just months or a few years prior to the events of the film being attacked, but instead of Brainiac just leaving and not destroying it because he knows the planet is near destruction anyway, have it be that he corrupts Krypton's own computer systems so that it overlooks the problem that Brainiac's superior systems found early, until Jor-El discovers the truth mere hours from destruction, this way it presents an interesting race against the clock scenario. The Unbound treatment could also benefit Zod's character, give him a little more depth, like him turning on the Kryptonian council because they surrendered to Brainiac and allowed him to kill many citizens, and because of this he believes their society is weak and requires a militaristic rule, one that can defend Krypton against such threats, making him FURIOUS when he discovers it's impending destruction, but then giving him the idea that he could construct Krypton anew. He could ask Jor-El to help him by accessing the codex, but Jor, knowing that the World Engine can only work on a habitable planet, could refuse and escape, stealing the codex and trying to escape the planet with his family, but he has to stay to make sure the ship escapes the planet safely, and have Lara get badly wounded and dying in the ship, which would create this really haunting image of Jonathan and Martha entering the ship to find a dead mother clutching to her crying baby for dear life, or better yet she could still be alive when they find her and try to save her, leading to this beautifully tragic moment where a dying mother asks this man and woman trying to save her life to protect her child. Or the Birthright way is good too. Lol.

 

[DA_Champion]

Ya, I think you're right. I think that they kind of expect you to die of starvation in the Phantom Zone, but since Krypton was destroyed immediately after, they didn't succumb to that. But that would explain why there are no other people there. Either way, it's simply not important to the story.

When they sentenced Zod, they said he would have 300 cycles of re-education and then be released. That means you don't "die of starvation" in the phantom zone. You get re-educated and released.

There was nobody else in the phantom zone, Zod was the only criminal on Krypton, him and his team. Is that deliberate by Goyer, in what is actually a clever world-building move (imo), or a coincidence?

It's relevant because we've spent ten pages wondering if there was coherence to the world-building on Krypton. If they got this right, then they get a point. Two points if you include the lack of security at the codex.

 

[Krumm]

When they sentenced Zod, they said he would have 300 cycles of re-education and then be released. That means you don't "die of starvation" in the phantom zone. You get re-educated and released.

There was nobody else in the phantom zone, Zod was the only criminal on Krypton, him and his team. Is that deliberate by Goyer, in what is actually a clever world-building move (imo), or a coincidence?

It's relevant because we've spent ten pages wondering if there was coherence to the world-building on Krypton. If they got this right, then they get a point. Two points if you include the lack of security at the codex.

Sure there was lack of security but there was a civil war going on.

 

[BlueLantern]

You'd think the future of their race would be even better guarded then.

 

[Marvin]

BlueLantern
I suppose it would, to you.
The one who snuff’s out my “new tricks” and “quiet admissions.”
In this last post I called you all sorts of names and asserted your thoughts not worth my time. I didn’t know I was doing that before you showed up and snuffed me out. I personally think you just read what you want to, considering how you feel about me I can’t say I blame you. After all, I am like the “Chemical Ali,” of these parts.

 

[Marvin]

DA

Phantom zone(if you want to be traditional about it) is a pocket and/or parallel dimension, not some base on the moon. As with the original films there is no accounting for how many people are lost or stranded in it without the film explicitly telling us. As for why the black zero(prison/transport ****) escaped alone and so immediately after it was sent though the gateway, there are a number or reasons on can assume. And that’s just it, lots of logical assumptions I not going to get into here, whereas I intended to focus on the implications of the concepts presented. Just like you suggested we do upon hearing Jor utter a single line about lack of choice and then proceeded to condemn all other occurrences where that seemed inconsistent. When I said there is plenty of logical assumptions derived from the fact that jor has armour and can fight, that was waved off as inconsistent vs. having a logical reason, now we see prisons and laws but they are being waved off due to “no one else in jail/no one guarding the safe”
I feel you’re not being consistent in your critical approach.

As for the lack of Codex security/sentries, this leads to another round hypothesizing 3 in brief:
-What does krypton look like on a normal day and not when it’s own military(guards) has turned upside down. Zod, being the aforementioned martial “leader of the guard,” and his forces being the ones that greeted the culprit in the act…seems worth considering.
-Just how far beyond petty/grand theft(especially of the self destructive nature) an advanced society can evolve without needing to lack free will, similar ideas have been broached in Roddenberry’s 24th century.
-Lastly, there is something to be said for the penalty deterrent. In a society where every crime is met with the equivalent(but not exact) to the death penalty with a highly advanced martial system in place one assumption is that the crime rate would drop, if not be abolished all together.

I would add that perhaps lack of security(even circumstantial) is one of these plot driven script oversights we’ve heard so much about. I mean even in a society of brainwashed robots, you would think these people would still have their life spring defended against outside threats such as Thanagarians and other such things.

From the scene in question:
Kelex: May I remind you that stealing the Codex is a Class A crime, punishable by...
Jor-El: Nobody cares anymore Keelex.

Point being punishable crimes is indicative of people having the capacity to as such.

 

[TheBat812]

When they sentenced Zod, they said he would have 300 cycles of re-education and then be released. That means you don't "die of starvation" in the phantom zone. You get re-educated and released.

There was nobody else in the phantom zone, Zod was the only criminal on Krypton, him and his team. Is that deliberate by Goyer, in what is actually a clever world-building move (imo), or a coincidence?

It's relevant because we've spent ten pages wondering if there was coherence to the world-building on Krypton. If they got this right, then they get a point. Two points if you include the lack of security at the codex.

The reason it remains pretty irrelevant IMO is whether or not there were others, only zod and his team had a mission and desire to seek out Clark and the kryptonians outposts. If there were others in the zone who went their own ways, they don't affect the story being told. It's like how Clark always was the 'last survivor of krypton' until writers invented Zod and the many other kryptonians. It's not bad world building because of it, it was just information unknown to us and the characters in the story.

 

[Mjölnir]

On the greater discussion of script effectiveness, I’ve come to the conclusion that this is going to lead us in circles on premise alone.
I mention something like Zod’s battalion rebelling for what they believe to be the greater good as evidence against your specific interpretation of what Jor’s line of dialogue about loss of choice meant and how literal it was, I ultimately get a response confirming that if your interpretation of what the script meant is valid than that means the script is inconsistent and ineffective. It simply begs the question of what it is you in fact take away from Jor’s explanation of loss of choice/chance in a child having his societal role chosen for him. Considering Jon Kent later goes on to state that Clark needs to choose what kind of man he wants to be, one would think the thematic consequence is rather that of the "free will to choose" your destiny and not simply one of free will incarnate.

Yes, I don't think we'll get much further on this issue. I could list why I disagree with the above but as it won't lead anywhere it's better to just leave it at that.

My point has consistently been that Jor is a product of Krypton’s corruption by definition. No matter how many choices he’s made and how against his "programming" they have been, they have ultimately been as a result of someone else's initial design. In the mind of an idealist that probably isn’t enough free will to satisfy him. Which is why he later said:
Jor-El: We couldn't, Kal. No matter how much we wanted to. No matter how we loved you. Your mother, Lara, and I were a product of the failures of our world as much as Zod was. It's hard to explain.

Lastly on this issue of setting up an effective villain. I should confirm that I don’t think having Zod suffer the circumstances he did, all that damning when it comes to traditional critique of such a thing. If the measure is that if raw effectiveness than yes you would be right, Zod could have been shown as more effective/successful, technically he could have been taller and all knowing and able kill people with a gaze too, as that would increase the measure of effective villain threat. However, when it comes to "if they failed in establishing their villain effectively", I can only offer a subjective no, and point to similarly less than boss villainy and emasculation resulting in the desired effect of really scary bad guy that met and dispatched in his match against the patriarch or matriarch in the first act scenario:

-From the Lion King we have Scar, who seemingly was consistently talked down to, backed down and defeated in an effort to glorify the hero’s patriarch, and also killed the king in a devious underhanded “cheap shot”.
-From Harry Potter you have that Lord Voldemort, whom before the main plot even began was known to have failed in his usurping plot, failed in killing an innocent child and was in fact killed/dispatched by a dying mother.
-Then we have many of villains from Game of Thrones but that’s another matter.

Could both Scar and LV have been “more effective” sure, however is the writing now worthy of being criticized as you have done with the Zod design? I’d argue no.

Yes, but since I think it's way harder to go against everything the society stood for when you're in that society I don't think those hindrances seem to matter.

As for your examples.

Scar was successful with his coup. Zod was not.
Voldemort is consistently shown to be the most powerful wizard and can only be killed by a boy with a destiny (same reason he failed in the first place). Zod gets beaten up and only seems dangerous when he's picking on us low developed humans (it's mainly his stuff that's dangerous though).
I don't know which villains you refer to in Game of Thrones. Many are more gray than just being pure villains but those that are willing to do what's necessary rather than what's "right" often prevail.

 

[BlueLantern]

BlueLantern
I suppose it would, to you.
The one who snuff’s out my “new tricks” and “quiet admissions.”
In this last post I called you all sorts of names and asserted your thoughts not worth my time. I didn’t know I was doing that before you showed up and snuffed me out. I personally think you just read what you want to, considering how you feel about me I can’t say I blame you. After all, I am like the “Chemical Ali,” of these parts.

It seems you're losing your rag more than I was supposed to have been. Oh well, good luck with whatever film you whiteboard next with over the top justifications for plothole.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

 

[Dagenspear]

And fish are gonna swim, birds are gonna fly, vampires are gonna drink blood and make teenage girls swoon, and apologists are gonna apologize. Your point?

 

[DA_Champion]

You'd think the future of their race would be even better guarded then.

I think the lack of security actually makes perfect sense. Krypton lacks internal security because it doesn't need it, I'm just not sure if Goyer deliberately did this or stumbled into it.