Discussion in 'Misc. Comics Films' started by MasterBoss, Jun 6, 2019.
oooh, battle of the coat-tails......
Both of them are. Fight me world.
Well, Goyer at least has The Dark Knight trilogy on his CV (though he was being overseen by Nolan, of course) so I’d have to say Kinberg is worse, because everything he’s been involved with has been more or less epic s***.
Simon Kinberg hands down.
He makes Uwe Boll look Oscar worthy.
I'd say Simon Kinberg just barely.
Both men are really only competent when their working under people with genuine talent.
David Goyer took the most famous super hero and made him a mopey neck breaker, in a divisive film - which still had a lot of good stuff in it.
Kinberg appears to have taken the most beloved Xmen story of all time and made a movie that was so terrible that it was worse than the same story adaptation by Brett Ratner.
Simon Kinberg,no contest.
I’ve heard they are both nice gentlemen who pay their taxes and are good to their families.
I, too, always drew parallels between those two. They're both mostly writers and producers but have also worked as directors. They've worked in interesting projects and have managed to deliver some good scripts, but only when working with talented directors/co-writers. For the most part their writing has been more than messy, and you can even see elements of that in the few legitimately good movies they've been credited. For some reason they both overstayed their welcome in franchises and I never understood how they still seem to be extremely popular in Hollywood.
I feel like they both have good ideas and some vision from time to time but have no idea how to materialise it properly. Whenever I hear one of their names in a project I'm very cautious about what I'm about to see and really lower my expectations. I remember they even worked together in the movie Jumper about a decade ago. This film pretty much sums up their skill (or lack of) as writers.
That being said I think I'd take Goyer over Kinberg as the lesser of two evils. He's been overall involved in more good or decent projects than Kinberg who always seems to repeat the same mistakes and gives the impression he tries to overcome himself in bad writing. I'm actually surpised that the poll results are so one-sided, though.
"Hack'' is a rather strong word. but Goyer strikes me as being a bit more talented than Kinberg.
It's like asking would you like a cow poop sandwich or a bird poop sandwich.
Goyer's scripts are in general nowhere near as terrible as Kinberg's. Most of my problems with something like Man of Steel lies more with the direction, and even then it isn't like I hated the movie or anything. Kinberg has a big share of the responsibility for some of the biggest turds in recent memory.
He saw Ratner’s Last Stand and thought I can beat that!
Kinberg is likely to be the better director.
Both have taken cover under collaborating with better writers on their best projects (Goyer with the Nolans, Kinberg with Matthew Vaughn and Jane Goldman on DOFP).
.... I'll say Kinberg is a better producer than Goyer, having produced some genuinely good movies, but Goyer is a better writer, as when they're both left to their own devices, they produce junk, but Goyer got lucky on the first Blade a little bit. Both proved to be blah directors.
Whoever wins when they're writing, we all lose.
Kinberg for sure. A kiss of death for X-Men films.
Haha yeah seriously. Kinberg talking about how X-Men 3 screwed up the Dark Phoenix saga and how he was going to do it right reminds of those quotes by Ben Affleck where he talked about how Daredevil sucked and his Batman was going to be so much better... and then his Batman movie got worse reviews than Daredevil. Kinberg is a hack.
Although... David Goyer DID make Blade Trinity and The Unborn. I wish I could repress my memories of those films. Ugh.
“Batman v Superman is what you do when you’ve run out of ideas.”
- the screenwriter of Batman v Superman.
My mind tells me Kinberg, but my heart tells me Goyer.
Goyer is taking a real beating here lol. Only 2 votes.
He's met his match.
Honestly I must be the one person who enjoyed Blade Trinity. Yeah, it was pretty corny and the acting was pretty average but.....
1. Ryan Reynolds was hilarious and that performance laid thr groundwork for Deadpool.
2. Jessica Biel looks awesome full stop, but Jessica Biel kicking Vampire punk ass was just sublime.
3. If viewed as a dark comedy it's not bad.
Yeah Reynolds isn’t bad and Biel was fine but I hated how Blade was made into a side character in his own movie (and supposedly Snipes hated it too). It’s especially egregious when you consider that Blade was (I think) our first black superhero on the big screen (the first serious one at least... I know Blankman and Meteor Man came out first, but come on) and they sidelined him to showcase two white characters. Goyer is lucky that film came out when it did because if he had tried to pull that kinda thing today... his career might never recover.
Anyway, not trying to ruin your enjoyment of the movie. I did like the vampire Pomeranian, lol.
Interesting, I never really saw Blade as being sidelined - particularly as most of the newbies get wiped out. I thought Reynolds added some desparately needed humour and Biel added....well, you know.
I realise that Snipes' Blade was one of the first decent African-American cbm, but his performance was pretty...well it's so serious it's ridiculous. As an ass kicking machine Snipes is always impressive, and in the right film he's a good actor - but somehow that didn't come through in Blade. I thought the other characters added some balance to the film against Snipes' one-dimensional performance.
On a slightly different note, the first Blade film had such a strong start but the ending was just ridiculous - it's like Goyer had a great concept but didn't know how to pull it off or resolve the whole " blood god" thing in a satisfying way.
To me, racial politics didn't even come into it - rather I think that Trinity tried to expand Blade's world a little, with mixed results.
As for racial politics, Andy Serkis plays a scene-stealing villain in Black Panther - who happens to be white ( a white African). Do we then think that we've taken the limelight away from the black African characters ? ( btw I realise this is a slightly different situation than Trinity)
IMO the answer is "No" , irrespective of race good characters in a film make the whole film a better experience. Serkis' performance only made everyone else look better, particularly Jordan, Gurira and Bozeman ( who were already looking pretty good).
Well, that's how I see it anyway.