BvS Goyer Admits They Didn't Plan How 'Reporter Clark Kent' Could Make Sense

[Rowsdower!]

LOL, I love the logic of Spacey's Luthor's plan. Grow a wasteland island in the middle of the Atlantic, resulting in earthquakes and tidal waves that will wipe out most of the Eastern seaboard so that anyone who lived there (and isn't already dead) will come to him and buy property on his new island (which has no defenses to stop anyone from taking it by force). Yeah, can't see how that plan would fail...

 

[Infinity9999x]

When did he say this?

He's specifically talking about writing himself into a corner in terms of Clark's secret identity. It's pretty clear. And I think he's thinking too hard about it.

 

[The Riddler]

how do most people even know how superman looks?

 

[Marvin]

LOL, I love the logic of Spacey's Luthor's plan. Grow a wasteland island in the middle of the Atlantic, resulting in earthquakes and tidal waves that will wipe out most of the Eastern seaboard so that anyone who lived there (and isn't already dead) will come to him and buy property on his new island (which has no defenses to stop anyone from taking it by force). Yeah, can't see how that plan would fail...

You'd probably hear more about that if Goyer's name was attached.

 

[Rowsdower!]

You'd probably hear more about that if Goyer's name was attached.

LOL, yup.

 

[Krumm]

And I don't buy either of those explanations. First, no way in heck would I buy that Jor-El would have let his son go if he couldn't go with him. Jor-El recognized the faults in the Kryptonian way of thinking, and the dude wanted to save his son, no reason he couldn't have gone with him.

Not buying it and it not being in the film are two different things. It's no better or worse an explanation than in the source material.

And the second, I DEFINITELY don't buy. First, logically it made much more sense just to hop to mars and rebuild Krypton with no interference. If his true goal was to rebuild Krypton, he would do it somewhere were there was a minimal chance of his plan being thwarted. And I also don't buy that Zod was above taking slaves. Zod rebelled against his Kryptonian culture, he obviously wasn't above breaking conventions.

He needed the codex and birthing matrix to rebuild Krypton completely, which were, again, on Earth. Otherwise, this new planet would only be inhabited by a couple of people. And gain, his job was to maintain it as it was so natural birthing was not an option to repopulate this new planet -- it would be HERESY so the codex and birthing matrix are crucial for success. Now, as he doesn't get what he wants, he gets a little pissed and starts acting out. Maybe terraforming Earth wasn't part of the plan but it was definitely a nice piece of leverage.

Zod rebelled against the council which he felt wasn't maintaining Kryptonian culture. They were keep the entire planet on the ticking timebomb afterall. His rebellion was for the sake of maintaining the current culture.

 

[Bathead]

Which makes it completely and utterly unlike our world in every possible way.

And even then, Goyer didn't even have solid logic that his characters followed. Zod's entire plan didn't make a lick of sense. "I want to turn Earth into a new Krypton!" Why? When there is another planet in our own solar system he could terraform, with no resistance! And even then, WHY did Zod want to change Earth into a Krypton when his people could literally live like gods on our planet? His group of Kryptonians easily could have overpowered the world, and once they raised the kyrptonian babies, there would have been no way for humans to fight back.

It also didn't make sense for Jor-El to not take his family and rabbit off Krypton with their baby to begin with. He never gave a good reason for why he and his wife stayed to die.
.

If I may ... Even as far back as Superman's origins in the comics, the premise was that Krypton had no space program of any type with no kinds of spaceships extant. The rocket that Jor El built was a test prototype for the full sized ships he had wanted to build for the people of Krypton to escape the destruction he predicted, the test model was the only ship that existed on the planet, he didn't have as much time as he had hoped to build a full sized model and the prototype only had enough room for the baby Kal El.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Not buying it and it not being in the film are two different things. It's no better or worse an explanation than in the source material.



He needed the codex and birthing matrix to rebuild Krypton completely, which were, again, on Earth. Otherwise, this new planet would only be inhabited by a couple of people. And gain, his job was to maintain it as it was so natural birthing was not an option to repopulate this new planet -- it would be HERESY so the codex and birthing matrix are crucial for success. Now, as he doesn't get what he wants, he gets a little pissed and starts acting out. Maybe terraforming Earth wasn't part of the plan but it was definitely a nice piece of leverage.

Zod rebelled against the council which he felt wasn't maintaining Kryptonian culture. They were keep the entire planet on the ticking timebomb afterall. His rebellion was for the sake of maintaining the current culture.

And that's my point. The comics didn't try to explain it too in-depth, so people don't ask too many questions. They accept the suspension. Once you start trying to provide reasons for questions that don't need to be answers it opens a pandoras box.

And with Zod, his plan before getting the codex was to terraform earth. He could have easily just grabbed it and terraformed earth. Once gain, overly complicated.

And in terms of the foolishness of Spacey's Luthor's plan...yeah, that film got ripped horribly when it came out. So I'm not sure why people are using it as an example.

However, the whole point I'm making is that Goyer feels the need to explain things that don't need explanations. The audience will accept certain tropes of the comic book genre.

 

[Krumm]

And that's my point. The comics didn't try to explain it too in-depth, so people don't ask too many questions. They accept the suspension. Once you start trying to provide reasons for questions that don't need to be answers it opens a pandoras box.

I guess I don't find the reason behind not going with Kal as overly explained. It seems pretty simple to me.

And with Zod, his plan before getting the codex was to terraform earth. He could have easily just grabbed it and terraformed earth. Once gain, overly complicated.

Well, if you knew that was his plan then what's the confusion? And before you ask "why"...

However, the whole point I'm making is that Goyer feels the need to explain things that don't need explanations. The audience will accept certain tropes of the comic book genre.

You seem to be the one asking an awful lot of "why's" so either Goyer didn't do a good job of explaining it, which isn't the case because apparently he's over explaining it, or explanations are necessary.

 

[Marvin]

If I may ... Even as far back as Superman's origins in the comics, the premise was that Krypton had no space program of any type with no kinds of spaceships extant. The rocket that Jor El built was a test prototype for the full sized ships he had wanted to build for the people of Krypton to escape the destruction he predicted, the test model was the only ship that existed on the planet, he didn't have as much time as he had hoped to build a full sized model and the prototype only had enough room for the baby Kal El.

To believe he was building the first prototype that could execute faster than light travel(as must have been required given the distance and baby's youth), or even a warp drive, I can understand. Though why not build a bigger one is beyond me.

But to believe that a race that advanced(on sheers number of years on their planet) had/has no space program of any type is defintely stretching it. I mean, even we have a space program and we're still monkeys according to some of the source material I've read.

The idea given in mos, I find very poignant and infuses jor'el's idealistic characterization in a way I've never seen before. I personally think they aced it whereas before it was hella contrived.
The last place I saw that level of self destructive idealism was in these characters with the no kill rule.

 

[slumcat]

Yes, Haneke, Tarkovsky, Kurbrick, Von Trier, Herzog, etc... They are all great directors/storytellers. Nolan is a great director/storyteller in his own way. He excels at exactly what he aims to do. It's all about adjusting expectations accordingly. I don't know about you, but I don't go to a Zack Snyder movie expecting Wong Kar Wai... I adjust my expectations accordingly.

Obviously. But Nolan's films fail at even internal logic, and are extremely problematic for me and hard to take seriously. So a fantasy movie wants to be a fantasy and does away with logic and I go along. I am judging the movie how it wants to be judged.

And then come Nolan's self-serious clunkers which scream at their top of their lungs to be taken seriously therein highlighting their inherent ludicrousness all the more. I would ignore flaws in logic normally. But not when the movie wants to highlight them and carry its badge of logic.

Nolan films are just dumb blockbusters to me. His last film specially is one of the worst blockbusters I have seen in years.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I guess I don't find the reason behind not going with Kal as overly explained. It seems pretty simple to me.

Seemed completely insane to me.

In other incarnations, Jor-El and Lara didn't go with Kal-el because they COULDN'T for one reason or another.

In this story, they basically had Jor-El say 'we could have come, but we decided everyone on Krypton including us needed to die because we all suck, despite the fact that it'd mean sending our son to an unknown world alone with this big responsibility on his shoulders, and we personally don't actually suck that much'.

I couldn't believe Clark had no reaction to that. As someone with abandonment issues, I just didn't get that.

It's basically like suicide. They just let themselves die instead of being with their son.

In previous incarnations it's sad, but it's also kind of nice for Clark to find out he wasn't abandoned or unwanted like he must have thought growing up... that he was saved. For him to know that his parents loved him and would have done anything to be with him.

 

[Krumm]

Seemed completely insane to me.

In other incarnations, Jor-El and Lara didn't go with Kal-el because they COULDN'T for one reason or another.

In this story, they basically had Jor-El say 'we could have come, but we decided everyone on Krypton including us needed to die because we all suck, despite the fact that it'd mean sending our son to an unknown world alone with this big responsibility on his shoulders, and we personally don't actually suck that much'.

I couldn't believe Clark had no reaction to that. As someone with abandonment issues, I just didn't get that.

It's basically like suicide. They just let themselves die instead of being with their son.

To each his own then.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

So you think allowing yourself AND your wife to die because you've given up on your entire race makes sense? And that Clark shouldn't be a bit angry about that?

 

[Infinity9999x]

I guess I don't find the reason behind not going with Kal as overly explained. It seems pretty simple to me.



Well, if you knew that was his plan then what's the confusion? And before you ask "why"...



You seem to be the one asking an awful lot of "why's" so either Goyer didn't do a good job of explaining it, which isn't the case because apparently he's over explaining it, or explanations are necessary.

Okay...you're not getting my point obviously. This is what I'm conveying. Other films/comics/cartoons simply accept some of the sillier aspects of comic mythos, like no one realize that Clark Kent and Superman look exactly the same. They don't try to offer any explanation, because they accept that audience will simply suspend their disbelief for the medium. And the audience does.

Once you start trying to explain these things, trying to offer more "logical" reasoning, it makes people start questioning things because you've drawn their attention to it and opened up the Pandora's box of trying to fit a Superhero world into something somewhat realistic.

 

[Krumm]

So you think allowing yourself AND your wife to die because you've given up on your entire race makes sense? And that Clark shouldn't be a bit angry about that?

Jor was willing to commit HERESY! because of his ideological beliefs concering the state of Krypton. Sacrificing his life is not much a stretch for me.

As for Clark's anger, this seems to be beyond the point of what we're discussing, but sure he should be angry but did we really need a more dour Superman?

 

[Krumm]

Okay...you're not getting my point obviously. This is what I'm conveying. Other films/comics/cartoons simply accept some of the sillier aspects of comic mythos, like no one realize that Clark Kent and Superman look exactly the same. They don't try to offer any explanation, because they accept that audience will simply suspend their disbelief for the medium. And the audience does.

Once you start trying to explain these things, trying to offer more "logical" reasoning, it makes people start questioning things because you've drawn their attention to it and opened up the Pandora's box of trying to fit a Superhero world into something somewhat realistic.

I was only responding to the points you presented. If they were off base in terms of your argument then I don't see that as my fault.

As for the explanation of Clark's identity, I didn't get the sense that Goyer feels the need to explain anything outside of possibly Perry and maybe the military, considering the latter's advance intelligence techniques. But Goyer has said that Smallville is keeping his secret, which I think is cool, and the Perry will most likely figure it out if he hasn't already.

I don't see a need to explain anything further concerning his identity, nor do I think that anything has already been excessively explained in MOS. You may point to Lois knowing his secret as an explanation, but I find the change more in the service of Lois' character than explaining the nuances of the disguise.

 

[Vid Electricz]

That's the problem Goyer is running into. He thinks his world is grounded in logic...which is crazy, because it has a flying alien who looks like a man with superpowers. But past that, he thinks he needs to explain how people don't recognize Clark Kent, which is silly!

Because, you know what? You won't be able to explain why people don't recognize him realistically, especially in a world with facial recognition. It won't happen. But he needs to realize that he doesn't NEED to come up with a realistic explanation for why no one recognizes Clark. And to add to it when he tried to give more "logical" explanations in the last film it only opened up more questions he couldn't answer.

It is a bit of a tricky situation, because despite the aliens and caped men flying around, the human beings should still act/react/behave like human beings in "reality". So yes, I will be very interested to see how they choose to solve this "problem". Try to make it too logical (attempting to explain why no one recognizes Clark) and it comes off as pedantic, make it too "out there" (No one recognizing Clark) and the viewer checks out because it doesn't meld with the world they've established.

Personally, I think this is a part of the Superman mythos that needs to tread on the line between those two- but it is inherently absurd. It's almost a lose/lose situation, given this context. I don't think they should try to come up with excessive explanations, but don't move into cartoon territory...

 

[Krumm]

It is a bit of a tricky situation, because despite the aliens and caped men flying around, the human beings should still act/react/behave like human beings in "reality". So yes, I will be very interested to see how they choose to solve this "problem". Try to make it too logical (attempting to explain why no one recognizes Clark) and it comes off as pedantic, make it too "out there" (No one recognizing Clark) and the viewer checks out because it doesn't meld with the world they've established.

Personally, this is a part of the Superman mythos that needs to tread on the line between those two. Don't try to come up with excessive explanations, but don't move into cartoon territory.

At this point, I feel that enough people know (Lois, an entire town) or have the possibility of figuring it (Perry, the military), that no explanation is needed -- the line is being treaded on enough, in your words. Look a TDK, you get that one guy who tries to blackmail Wayne and the problem is pretty much put to rest.

 

[The Guard]

I don't have any issues with Zod wanting to terraform Earth (instead of another planet) because the film makes it apparent that the Kryptonians see the humans as lesser evolved beings. To them, it's just wiping out a planet full of bugs. Also, Earth is described as one of the only planets similar enough to Krypton to support life in the film when Lara is searching for a hospitable world. For all we know, there weren't any other planets capable of sustaining life.

It's also a bit like asking why explorers and settlers didn't just find another North America, why we had to kill Native Americans and push them off their land. Because it was easier. Cheaper. Better for those who chose this option.

And Luthor's plan in SUPERMAN RETURNS makes perfect sense to me...because it's not really about the land. It's about using Superman's heritage in a grand revenge plan; to torture and kill him, while placing billions in peril. It's Luthor's ego unchecked. The land Luthor is creating is just a bonus to the real plan.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Jor was willing to commit HERESY! because of his ideological beliefs concering the state of Krypton. Sacrificing his life is not much a stretch for me.

As for Clark's anger, this seems to be beyond the point of what we're discussing, but sure he should be angry but did we really need a more dour Superman?

Well sure, people are insane all the time in the real world... but they didn't present it in that way.

They presented it as though the audience was supposed to sympathize with and even understand his decision.

He was not painted as a mad man so hell bent on his belief that he'd gone a bit crazy... which logically, is what happened.

He was presented as this wise and philosphical man whose words of wisdom where spread throughout the film, and who Clark was learning about how to be a hero from. Which to me is illogical, because the logical reaction to learning of that information would be anger and dismay...

As for Clark being angry, no, I for sure did not want to see an even more upset Clark.

But that's why i'd have prefered it if they'd not altered the part of the story in which Jor-El and Lara had NO CHOICE about whether they could go with him or not.

Giving them the choice, and having the CHOOSE to die makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and I can't even begin to understand why Goyer wrote that in.

 

[Krumm]

Well sure, people are insane all the time in the real world... but they didn't present it in that way.

They presented it, in tone and execution, as though the audience was supposed to sympathize with and even understand his decision.

He was not painted as a mad man so hell bent on his belief that he'd gone a bit crazy... which logically, is what happened.

He was presented as this wise and philosphical man whose words of wisdom where spread throughout the film. Which to me is illogical...

As for Clark being angry, no, I for sure did not want to see an even more upset Clark.

But that's why i'd have prefered it if they'd not altered the part of the story in which Jor-El and Lara had NO CHOICE about whether they could go with him or not.

Giving them the choice, and having the CHOOSE to die makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and I can't even begin to understand why Goyer wrote that in.

Like I said, I have no problem with it.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I don't have any issues with Zod wanting to terraform Earth (instead of another planet) because A, the film makes it apparent that the Kryptonians see the humans as lesser evolved beings. To them, it's just wiping out a planet full of bugs. B, Earth is described as one of the only planets similar enough to Krypton to support life in the film. For all we know, there weren't any other planets capable of sustaining life.

It's like asking why explorers and settlers didn't just find another North America, why we had to kill Native Americans and push them off their land. Because it was easier. Cheaper. Better for those who chose this option.

And Luthor's plan in SUPERMAN RETURNS makes perfect sense to me...because it's not really about the land. It's about using Superman's heritage to torture and kill him, while placing billions in peril. It's Luthor's ego unchecked. The land Luthor is creating is just a bonus to the real plan.

My problem was more that they needed to terraform at all.

I mean, why make it so that you're making everyone vulnerable and mortal again, when on this planet you can have powers and be disease free and fly and make palaces in seconds with your hands and never go hungry...

 

[Krumm]

My problem was more that they needed to terraform at all.

I mean, why make it so that you're making everyone vulnerable and mortal again, when on this planet you can have powers and be disease free and fly and make palaces in seconds with your hands and never go hungry...

It's about maintaining Kryptonian culture as it was - that was his purpose.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

No his purpose was to protect his people. He was a general, not a conserver of culture.