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

[The Valeyard]

I won't be able to listen to this until later, but what did he say if you don't mind me asking.

He said they'll be in a relationship and she'll be protecting his secret.

 

[godisawesome]

Meh, I liked the kiss, since I think they really did play it well as more of an adrenaline rush thing, which honestly suited the characters better than a hackneyed romance like Rachel Dawes in Batman Begins or even the original films. I've just never been a big fan of any two faced romance between the two. Of course I'm probably as close as you can get to a full on Anti-Silver Age tropes partisan as you can get. I hate Super-dickery, I hate the love triangle, I hate the super klutz, and I want my conflicts to be serious instead of silly. I read Superman more for Sci-Fi action than fantastic adventures.

Plus I figure they can milk three things for the disguise: he's clearly mild mannered when not in costume and gives off a shy and humble attitude that contrasts with his time in costume, he could easily play the resemblance card, and he is about to meet Batman who could easily end the film faking a concurrent appearance in different parts of the city for his new friend.

 

[charl_huntress]

He said they'll be in a relationship and she'll be protecting his secret.

Thanks. This makes me think this movie will take place a few years after MOS. I would have wanted to see that relationship develop, but at least they are in one.

 

[The Valeyard]

Meh, I liked the kiss, since I think they really did play it well as more of an adrenaline rush thing, which honestly suited the characters better than a hackneyed romance like Rachel Dawes in Batman Begins or even the original films. I've just never been a big fan of any two faced romance between the two. Of course I'm probably as close as you can get to a full on Anti-Silver Age tropes partisan as you can get. I hate Super-dickery, I hate the love triangle, I hate the super klutz, and I want my conflicts to be serious instead of silly. I read Superman more for Sci-Fi action than fantastic adventures.

Plus I figure they can milk three things for the disguise: he's clearly mild mannered when not in costume and gives off a shy and humble attitude that contrasts with his time in costume, he could easily play the resemblance card, and he is about to meet Batman who could easily end the film faking a concurrent appearance in different parts of the city for his new friend.

It's even more suspicious that he works with Lois Lane, who (in the MoS version) is well-known to the world as knowing the identity of Superman.

Because of that whistleblower interview who publicly mentioned Lois' name on live TV before the Feds arrested her.

Thanks. This makes me think this movie will take place a few years after MOS. I would have wanted to see that relationship develop, but at least they are in one.

I would assume there would have to be a significant time gap towards the sequel.

Unless it's set in the post-apocalyptic wasteland that Metropolis was after the battle. That kind of damage would realistically take a very long time to clean up and restore. It's like 9/11 times 20.

 

[Fallen Angel]

Thanks. This makes me think this movie will take place a few years after MOS. I would have wanted to see that relationship develop, but at least they are in one.

I'm pretty sure it won't. Goyer said we'll be dealing with what Clark did to Zod in the sequel. So my guess is it picks up maybe a couple of months after MOS. No more than six months tops.

 

[InJustice]

This is is additional proof, although none is really needed, that Goyer really didn't put that much (or even enough) thoughts into his screenplay. The way the secret identity thing was handled in the film is simply outrageous anyways.

When you fail to properly write or at least properly introduce something that is so integral to the character, it just means that you're not the right person for the job.

I find this argument to be very ironic. At least Goyer gets some credit for thinking outside the box and finding new ways to bring forth the Lois-Clark dynamic. You're basically implying that screenwriters should always make their relationship (or at least, Lois and Clark's) the same as what it is in comic books. And that more than anything, is the epitome of lazy and predictable.

If anything, your comment disregards the ideas that he's developed in MOS and you're quick to get into the negatives. You can't be solely critical of him without giving him credit where it's due.

 

[charl_huntress]

That kind of damage would realistically take a very long time to clean up and restore. It's like 9/11 times 20.

You know that's one things I noticed. At the end when Clark is at the DP there is a shot of the window and all the buildings look intact and there's not one crane to be found...lol

I'm pretty sure it won't. Goyer said we'll be dealing with what Clark did to Zod in the sequel. So my guess is it picks up maybe a couple of months after MOS. No more than six months tops.

Hopefully we'll get more details about this.

 

[JKKS085]

I find this argument to be very ironic. At least Goyer gets some credit for thinking outside the box and finding new ways to bring forth the Lois-Clark dynamic. You're basically implying that screenwriters should always make their relationship (or at least, Lois and Clark's) the same as what it is in comic books. And that more than anything, is the epitome of lazy and predictable.

If anything, your comment disregards the ideas that he's developed in MOS and you're quick to get into the negatives. You can't be solely critical of him without giving him credit where it's due.

You didn't get my point at all.

The only thing I was saying is if Goyer didn't plan how "Reporter Clark" could make sense, since "Reporter Clark" is such an important part of the character then I think he isn't the right person for the job. I mean if he doesn't get how to make Clark Kent work and why this persona is as integral to the character as Superman or Kal-El, then he should be doing something else.

I never, and I do mean never covered the way Goyer handled the Lois & Clark relationship so please at the very least when you take the time to answer my messages, don't put words in my mouth.

 

[JKKS085]

How was the execution lazy?

Lois shouting is name with a policeman nearby, Clark revealing to the military where and when he arrived on Earth, the blog-guy saying on TV that Lois Lane knows the alien's identity ... Is this sharp execution for you or even good storytelling?

And to an extent, I even have a problem with how Lois finding out Clark's identity was showcased in the film. They made it look like it was a piece of cake.

By the end of the movie, the military should know his identity, along with almost everyone in Smallville (and anyone able to make the connection between Clark, Superman and Smallville) and Lois would be in permanent danger because the all world knows she knows the truth about Superman.

That's textbook bad storytelling. The way Goyer handled Superman's secret identity is a shame, especially because he had the opportunity to do things differently this time around.

 

[Lencho01]

It'll be the same as how they approached it in Smallville, they play off the assumption that no one like Superman could possibly ever live among normal folk.

I thought they just conveniently turned everyone who met Clark before he was Superman into idiots/gave them some form of amnesia.

That's why I'd like them to tone back a bit on the hyper realism. Sometimes when you introduce an element of verisimilitude you only point out how ridiculous the concepts of the story are.

Just let him be Clark. Audiences have been nitpicking about the glasses for generations, nobody cares anymore, they just accept it.

That said the Earth One Superman did a good job of this.

I haven't read the book, but looking at the art, I assumed they made Superman look more average in order for him to hide better. Thus, he isn't as tall or big as he's usually depicted.

 

[charl_huntress]

Lois shouting is name with a policeman nearby, Clark revealing to the military where and when he arrived on Earth, the blog-guy saying on TV that Lois Lane knows the alien's identity ... Is this sharp execution for you or even good storytelling?

And to an extent, I even have a problem with how Lois finding out Clark's identity was showcased in the film. They made it look like it was a piece of cake.

By the end of the movie, the military should know his identity, along with almost everyone in Smallville (and anyone able to make the connection between Clark, Superman and Smallville) and Lois would be in permanent danger because the all world knows she knows the truth about Superman.

That's textbook bad storytelling. The way Goyer handled Superman's secret identity is a shame, especially because he had the opportunity to do things differently this time around.

Yeah, I had an issue with most of those things too. In some sense I do agree he didn't really put a lo of thought into how the identity would be kept a secret in the long run because he was jus telling this story. I think they will probably just ignore these things in the next film...instead of acknowledge them so they can be fixed.

 

[InJustice]

You didn't get my point at all.

The only thing I was saying is if Goyer didn't plan how "Reporter Clark" could make sense, since "Reporter Clark" is such an important part of the character then I think he isn't the right person for the job. I mean if he doesn't get how to make Clark Kent work and why this persona is as integral to the character as Superman or Kal-El, then he should be doing something else.

I never, and I do mean never covered the way Goyer handled the Lois & Clark relationship so please at the very least when you take the time to answer my messages, don't put words in my mouth.

Did we ever see MOS dealing with the Reporter side of Kent? Obviously not (not counting the ending scene of MOS since that's not really enough to gauge an idea of what "Clark" would be like). Moreover, It's easy to see why it would be difficult to plan the Clark Kent identity: MOS is based on realism (insofar as it asks the question: how would Superman exist in our world?), and as such, we're in a world where people are not stupid. The bumbling Clark Kent that was so iconic in the comics doesn't necessarily translate very well to film. And again, to repeat what was done before is the laziest thing a writer can do (contrived and convenient).

So maybe instead of jumping the gun and calling him lazy for not figuring something out (that mind you wasn't even emphasized on the first film), see how difficult it is for certain aspects of comics to be translated on screen.

You said and I quote "The way the secret identity thing was handled in the film is simply outrageous anyways." I took that to mean the fact that you dislike the fact that Lois knows who Clark is since that's a departure from the comics. That's why I said what I said. Either be clear next time, or emphasize the statement further.

 

[Wise]

I thought they just conveniently turned everyone who met Clark before he was Superman into idiots/gave them some form of amnesia.



I haven't read the book, but looking at the art, I assumed they made Superman look more average in order for him to hide better. Thus, he isn't as tall or big as he's usually depicted.

Looking at that pic of Clark. Nicholas Hoult would have be perfect if they were making an Earth One adaptation. I'm glad they went with Cavill though.

 

[DrCosmic]

People are mistaken for others all the time. And how many people get a good look at both Superman and Clark Kent?

Anyone who cares could google both of them.

So why not just be open about the fact it doesn't, acknowledge that it's NOT the real world, and just let audiences enjoy the silliness of it.

Because they didn't allow for or invite any silliness whatsoever in the first film. If the first film had been lighter and whimsical in the vein of an Iron Man or something, that would have been fine, but now, after going so deep as to make biology on Krypton coherent, to say 'Hey it just works' to something that fundamentally does not function - that's reckless and simply doesn't fit. It is a painfully obvious anachronism that shows a lack of thought and foresight. It is a fault with the first film, and, as acknowledged by the screenwriter, is one without a known solution for the sequels.

There are a few solutions. Keep the updating theme of these films and actually earn the Clark Kent status quo. Have Perry figure out Clark's secret as any guy with half a brain would and put him on the international beat to help him protect his secret. Let Steve Lombard also be 'onto' Clark and basically get done like that accountant from The Dark Knight... or actually die. Either could be good.

But having Clark Kent hang around undiscovered a bunch of reporters in a film with as heavy and dark in tone as Man of Steel meets Batman is simply bad filmmaking.

 

[Shikamaru]

And they always had plans for Batman.

 

[DrCosmic]

And they always had plans for Batman.

I hope not. Unfortunately they do now, so the glasses will come off extra bad as 'whimsy.'

Allow me...

my work is done here. Need more??

any questions?

One question: Do you see how easy it is to google two public figures and verify if they are or are not in fact the same person?

 

[Kevin Smith]

This is is additional proof, although none is really needed, that Goyer really didn't put that much (or even enough) thoughts into his screenplay. The way the secret identity thing was handled in the film is simply outrageous anyways.

When you fail to properly write or at least properly introduce something that is so integral to the character, it just means that you're not the right person for the job.

Yeah. So much for that "unapologetic" Superman movie Snyder promised. First thing they do is get rid of the things most associated with Superman: The secret identity, the costume, no kill policy...lol. What horse crap.

 

[Kevin Smith]

"Obviously we sidestepped it in this movie (Man Of Steel)"

Around the 1:12:00 mark.

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=37841

Goyer admits he wrote himself into a "corner" for the sequel. They never came up with a plan on how the 'Clark Kent' disguise could make sense in a film grounded in logic.

I wonder how they'll realistically explain it in the sequel or if they'll bother to explain it.

**** Goyer.

 

[The Valeyard]

And they always had plans for Batman.

Since you mention Batman, I have to admit I loved how Nolan handled the 'Playboy Bruce' persona. He was intentionally exaggerated and played up by Bruce. It was believable that most would not suspect Bruce is Batman. And those that did (like Mr. Reese) were shut down in a logical way.

Nolan handled the secret identity stuff really well.

 

[Lencho01]

Looking at that pic of Clark. Nicholas Hoult would have be perfect if they were making an Earth One adaptation. I'm glad they went with Cavill though.

I don't really see it with Hoult. Even so, the way he's drawn in that dorky Clark Kent pic looks to be on purpose. The art I've seen of him as Superman and regular Clark Kent, to me he looks more heroic as one would expect Superman to look.

 

[nouan]

And wasn't the hole concept of Man of Steel the idea of what if Superman really existed? So it's asinine to even think that Superman could just blend in like in the comics. He is more like a celebrity, not a loch ness monster. People would recognize him.

 

[Fallen Angel]

And wasn't the hole concept of Man of Steel the idea of what if Superman really existed? So it's asinine to even think that Superman could just blend in like in the comics. He is more like a celebrity, not a loch ness monster. People would recognize him.

You have a guy who flies without any wings. So a person like that doesn't really exist. It's Superman suspension of disbelief folks.

 

[JKKS085]

Did we ever see MOS dealing with the Reporter side of Kent?

No but you have Goyer admitting in an interview, that is pretty much the subject of this thread mind you, that he didn't plan to make "Report Clark" work in the context of the franchise. Which is in my mind a lazy approach of the character since Clark Kent is kind of important in his own way.
Now if he didn't seemed so embarassed with this idea to the point where he barely had (Reporter) Clark Kent involved in a Superman origin story (which I still find at the very least debatable by the way) and is now confessing that he had no idea how to make the persona work, I wouldn't be concerned.

It's pretty simple actually, if he is not up to the task, if he really is unable to make something so important from the Superman mythos work within the context he created, if he can't thoroughly think out of the box and go through with his own ideas instead of just writing himself into a corner after one freaking movie, then I'm pretty sure he can find some other ways to occupy his free time

You said and I quote "The way the secret identity thing was handled in the film is simply outrageous anyways." I took that to mean the fact that you dislike the fact that Lois knows who Clark is since that's a departure from the comics. That's why I said what I said. Either be clear next time, or emphasize the statement further.

Or like I said don't jump to conclusions and avoid stock prepared answers.
I talked about the secret identity thing and never mentionned Lois or a departure from the comics.

 

[smallville fan]

I thought they just conveniently turned everyone who met Clark before he was Superman into idiots/gave them some form of amnesia.

Well in the Smallville show, pretty much anyone who's seen Clark without the glasses are either:

a)The core cast and allies e.g. Lois, Chloe etc
b)In Belle Reve and declared insane e.g. Every meteor freak from Season 1
c)Dead e.g. Jimmy Henry James Olsen, Lionel Luthor
d)Amnesia e.g. Lex Luthor

Did I miss anyone?

 

[nouan]

You have a guy who flies without any wings. So a person like that doesn't really exist. It's Superman suspension of disbelief folks.

It just doesn't work in the reality of the movie. It's very grounded. They have internet and probably google. And phone cameras. And after all the destruction he is probably even more scrutinized then your average celeb. His face is going to be everywhere.