Dark Phoenix The Simon Kinberg Thread - Director, Writer & Producer of Dark Phoenix

[Cktopl33]

The destruction porn in Apocalypse wasn't even well done. If Fox demanded him for that, it just shows how he cannot deliver on something he was hired to do. Thing is there are certain people who can deliver even with the studio's demands and limitations.

That would be on the director for Apocalypse who maps out the vision of what audiences will see, not the scriptwriter. A script can be interpreted in many different ways. That's how Singer chose to visualize the action. Singer also never had a track record of being a good action director. We have yet to see how Simon chooses to visualize action sequences. He has a good team in place, so we'll see.

 

[EnDz0n3]

After 12 years in the franchise, we haven't seen anything to judge Kinberg is how that reads. Kinberg is blameless for X3, Fant4stic, This Means War, XXX2, Jumper, Apocalypse is how that reads. We're just haturs of an innocent, nice guy is how that reads.

 

[Charzhin0]

Kinberg will put extra effort in DarK Phoenix because he wants to make a statement in his directorial debut. He may have had writing and producer credits thus far but being a director is the most the spotlight can shine.
This has been demonstrated by his team hes appointed thus far, his on schedule completion and dedication to post production effects.

 

[SumT]

you can put all the extra effort you want, but if you arent as talented..... that effort wont mean anything
I can put all the effort in the world to record a music album, but if I dont have enough talent to write great songs, aside from my voice, I wont make a great music album.

 

[EnDz0n3]

Was gonna post something akin to that. Thank you!

 

[BMM]

That would be on the director for Apocalypse who maps out the vision of what audiences will see, not the scriptwriter. A script can be interpreted in many different ways. That's how Singer chose to visualize the action. Singer also never had a track record of being a good action director. We have yet to see how Simon chooses to visualize action sequences. He has a good team in place, so we'll see.

Agreed, for the most part. It’s one thing to question Kinberg’s ability as a writer, or his unknown skills as a director, but blaming the execution of visual effects sequences on Kinberg is asinine. Apocalypse was Singer’s misfire.

 

[Cktopl33]

After 12 years in the franchise, we haven't seen anything to judge Kinberg is how that reads. Kinberg is blameless for X3, Fant4stic, This Means War, XXX2, Jumper, Apocalypse is how that reads. We're just haturs of an innocent, nice guy is how that reads.

I'm sorry....did Kinberg suddenly direct all those movies now? He was in charge of all the major decision for those films? He decided the composition of film shots, the actors performances, editing, music, sound, production design, or costumes, visual effects design? He did all that for those movies? Strange.

Film directors (for those who are unaware) have ultimate control over the creative side of a film production, including what goes into the script and changes to the script. They direct everyone else, asking them to perform certain tasks or act in a certain way, in order to visualize their creative ideas on the screen. The style, the pace and the impact of a film is dictated by the director. They oversee everything, from casting and set design to lighting and editing.

People seem to forget that screenwriting is, at root, a collaborative form of writing. Quoted from a scriptwriter who described the collaborative process in screenwriting this way: "Bend over! Producers, directors and primary actors all outrank screenwriters. In screenwriting, it is only the case where the text is always in the writer's control when the screenwriter directs his or her own movie. A screenwriter isn't writing literature but a proposal -- let's make a movie! The most you can hope for is to write the best screenplays you can within the parameters of the system." Another has worked in Hollywood for 15 years, and if the experience has taught him anything, it’s that screenwriters don’t have much control over the final product: “Because everyone on a film is more powerful than the writer. When push come to shove, the studio can balk. Screenwriters who want control should be writing novels.”

Nobody claimed Kinberg was blameless except people like you claiming such from defenders of Kinberg. You seem to be inflating Kinberg's role in the entire outcome process of a movie. I'm not going to blame him for the outcome of all those films for the simple fact that he doesn't control the outcome as a screenwriter. He's worked on films that were poor, but he's also worked on successful ones. Kinberg's involvement with the x-men franchise has been tainted with all kinds of interference. This is the first time his role will be met without any kind of meddling or drama. His first x-men movie writing a script without the crowding of any other scriptwriters or story teams (and in his career since 2005). His first time directing from his own creative vision. This is the perfect scenario to form sound judgement because he will literally be in control of the entire movie from beginning to end.

 

[psylockolussus]

That would be on the director for Apocalypse who maps out the vision of what audiences will see, not the scriptwriter. A script can be interpreted in many different ways. That's how Singer chose to visualize the action. Singer also never had a track record of being a good action director. We have yet to see how Simon chooses to visualize action sequences. He has a good team in place, so we'll see.

Writing short destruction scenes in Sydney and the cargo parking are unimaginative. Even on paper, if we describe the destruction of the film it doesn't even sound good. Kinberg can't write action sequences. Before they film action sequences, the script details how the action would proceed. And I doubt what was written in Kinberg's script was so much better than what we got on the screen. Asinine indeed.

And I wasn't talking about visual effects for the record before some one chimes in just to post a negative comment directed to me.

 

[BMM]

The destruction scenes you are criticizing ARE visual effects sequences. It would be one thing if you were trying to blame its poor realization on Kinberg’s oversight as a producer, but, no, you are trying to blame it on his writing. So call it destruction porn or whatever you want. It isn’t going to make a bad argument a good one.

 

[psylockolussus]

I wasn't talking about visual effects. But while we are at it, let's hope Kinberg could demand better vfx/stunt work for his poorly written action sequences.

 

[Charzhin0]

Well a small example is the mall scene that got cut in Apocalypse. Many wanted that scene to be in the final film because it showed the X-kids just chilling out and having fun whilst becoming friends. It also showed that the public had somewhat accepted mutants since the events of DOFP with Nightcrawler out and about in full view. But Singer, the director who has full control and final say, cut almost all of Kinbergs stuff for that instead chose to keep in the sly dig to Brett Ratner, which backfired on him.

Director Kinberg would have kept all of that in and may be expanded on it.

 

[Cktopl33]

Writing short destruction scenes in Sydney and the cargo parking are unimaginative. Even on paper, if we describe the destruction of the film it doesn't even sound good. Kinberg can't write action sequences. Before they film action sequences, the script details how the action would proceed. And I doubt what was written in Kinberg's script was so much better than what we got on the screen. Asinine indeed.

And I wasn't talking about visual effects for the record before some one chimes in just to post a negative comment directed to me.

Yeah....as unimaginative as all the other story people and director Bryan Singer input/approve involved in the production of that script. They were all together when creating this script, especially Singer. The script details how the action would proceed....based on the director's vision. If it isn't, then it's rewritten to the director's approval. Not the screenwriter's approval: "The director needs to be the one to make the decisions as to the actual character of the action listed in the screenplay, and the screenwriting format is supposed to allow them that freedom." Again, screenwriting is COLLABORATIVE.

As far as writing action is concerned: "When it comes to how to write a fight scene or action in general, the most important thing to remember is that whatever you write probably won’t be actually shot that way. It will be changed when it comes time to shoot, depending on the abilities of the performers and the realities of the set. You are not the stunt coordinator. Keep your action writing tight - not verbose. Some writers don't go into much detail at all, leave the fight choreography up to the stunt people or fight choreographers. Ang Lee in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon simply writes: They fight. Tony Gilroy et al in The Bourne trilogies writes thrilling action scenes without going into much detail regarding the action itself. He sets everything up perfectly but leaves the fight choreography details to others. He also has a very tight writing style, which is great for action."

An article on Indiewire about why action scenes in big-budget movies have become so boring stated it plainly: "More and more Hollywood action scenes are unbearable. There's a reason for that: studios aren't hiring the right directors." And to add to that, directors decide the stunt choreography team.

 

[BMM]

I wasn't talking about visual effects.

“I wasn’t talking about visual effects... I was just trying to blame the writer for the execution of the scenes whose realization ultimately falls under the purview of the director in coordination with the visual effects supervisor. Everyone knows writers have final say.”

But while we are at it, let's hope Kinberg could demand better vfx/stunt work

As the director? At least you finally seem to be getting his responsibilities right.

 

[Jh7058622]

It was nothing more than a popcorn flick.

So? Does every writer need to produce Oscar bait films every time?

 

[Jh7058622]

Agreed, for the most part. It’s one thing to question Kinberg’s ability as a writer, or his unknown skills as a director, but blaming the execution of visual effects sequences on Kinberg is asinine. Apocalypse was Singer’s misfire.

You'll find many asinine accusations by some here. They will blame Kinberg for their stubbed toe, burned hand from too hot faucet water or if they left their cheese out for too long and it's starting to stink.

There are plenty of reasons to dislike the guys work but some invent it just to pile on the guy which is unfortunate.

 

[Frankeh]

Nobody claimed Kinberg was blameless except people like you claiming such from defenders of Kinberg. You seem to be inflating Kinberg's role in the entire outcome process of a movie. I'm not going to blame him for the outcome of all those films for the simple fact that he doesn't control the outcome as a screenwriter. He's worked on films that were poor, but he's also worked on successful ones. Kinberg's involvement with the x-men franchise has been tainted with all kinds of interference. This is the first time his role will be met without any kind of meddling or drama. His first x-men movie writing a script without the crowding of any other scriptwriters or story teams (and in his career since 2005). His first time directing from his own creative vision. This is the perfect scenario to form sound judgement because he will literally be in control of the entire movie from beginning to end.

So now writers' body of work can only be judged if they controled EVERY element of the movie? Why even give Oscars to writers for movies they didn't direct, produce, etc? Why even give a "written by/story by" credit to a person, if they're not accountable for it?

You say Kinberg isn't blamelesss... but you don't blame him. He may not be 100% to blame but he is part of why those movies sucked. So what's it gonna be?

 

[EnDz0n3]

Well a small example is the mall scene that got cut in Apocalypse. Many wanted that scene to be in the final film because it showed the X-kids just chilling out and having fun whilst becoming friends. It also showed that the public had somewhat accepted mutants since the events of DOFP with Nightcrawler out and about in full view.

I'm sorry but that was a horrible scene. Singer and Ottman were right in taking that scene out.

I'm all for the team having some down time but a better planned, better written, better executed and better edited scene should've been dreamt up, and not another montage so close to the Quicksilver scene.

But Singer, the director who has full control and final say, cut almost all of Kinbergs stuff for that instead chose to keep in the sly dig to Brett Ratner, which backfired on him.

Director Kinberg would have kept all of that in and may be expanded on it.

Kinberg's writing, in X-men: Apocalypse in particular, was not gold. "Evil" Singer didn't mess up his mojo. Get out of here with that. lol

Apocalypse's failure was a team effort.

 

[Frankeh]

Maybe someone needs to dig up the Days of Future Past screenplay to put this "Singer is ruining Kinberg's screenplays!" thought to rest.

 

[Lip]

Out of the 8 movies Kinberg wrote, 6 are bad. 6/8. That's who he is as a writer and storyteller.

Now you can argue that a director approach storytelling differently than a writer and Kinberg might turn out to be a good director. Ok. But that's the thing: He's directing his own script! The guy who wrote 6 bad movies out of 8! This time there isn't other directors and producers like Vaughn or Singer to help, give some insight, etc. It's entirely on him. And no, I'm not trying to take all the credits from DoFP away from Kinberg.

Are you going to say that those 6 bad movies were bad because the directors didn't know how to translate well Kinberg's script? So you either have to say that the problem was the directors not doing a great job with his scripts, or admit that he is a terrible screenwriter.

So we're not talking about a first time director directing a script from Sorkin or Kaufman. We're talking about a bad writer producing and first time directing his own ****ing script! That's crazy! And seriously, there is no way I can't make the problem more clear than that.

That's why is so crazy this idea that we should not judge him as a director. The problem is not his first time directing and his bad scripts separately. The problem is both happening together. It's a trainwreck!

 

[psylockolussus]

And when it comes to the Cb films, 3 out of 4 turned to be critical failures. The thing is some people want to give him a chance, but he has to earn it by delivering good films. Like I said before, he got lucky with Dofp. And in a franchise like this, luck isn't enough.

 

[Cktopl33]

So now writers' body of work can only be judged if they controled EVERY element of the movie? Why even give Oscars to writers for movies they didn't direct, produce, etc? Why even give a "written by/story by" credit to a person, if they're not accountable for it?

You say Kinberg isn't blamelesss... but you don't blame him. He may not be 100% to blame but he is part of why those movies sucked. So what's it gonna be?

Kinberg is not responsible for the outcome of the movie. A screenwriter doesn't have that much power. The director is responsible for the outcome of a movie. The screenwriter writes the script....but they're also writing in all the input from the director, studio heads, actors, and so on. Scriptwriters get credited because they're putting it together, but that doesn't show the entire process a script goes through from start to finish.

 

[Cktopl33]

Here's some insight to power and influence in screenplay development in Hollywood:

All script development projects start out small. They consist of a writer, who comes up with the film idea, and a producer, who can also be the originator of the idea. But as the project moves forward, more players get involved and they significantly shape the direction the script takes. These constant changes make film development a fluid and complicated process. Competing interests will always influence a project and those who possess the power at a particular point will have a greater say.

The studio (or the broadcaster) is the most powerful player at the outset of negotiations because it has the capital in place to fund the script development. It chooses the producer and writer it wants to develop the script. It also hires the director it wants and possesses the authority to replace anyone if it so chooses.

Not surprisingly, the writer is at his greatest strength during the time he/she writes the first couple of drafts; he/she is the only one writing the script and is, therefore, in control. This control does not last forever, though; it begins to wane once the drafts are handed over to the producer, development executive, script editors, and other trusted partners for review. The next step in the process is to “send [the script] out” to development financers. The decision about when to do this belongs to the producer. All films need financial backing to move forward and those with the money can essentially make or break a film project; they can either reject or accept the script. Producers know that development funders can eventually be production financiers if they so wish, so first impressions are critical. The film development team fully understands that financers can reject the screenplay and that, in order to convince a financer to fund the project, major changes must be made to the script itself or to the development team. The producer should also consider how many financers (and which ones) the script should be sent to. Because of these factors, the “external” players have more power over the project’s direction. A financer reads a script and gives feed back on it when s/he agrees to fund a project from the start, particularly with adapted films.

Once drafts are “sent out” to external players, the script development process becomes much more complicated because there are more people to contend with. The writer’s power decreases a great deal at this stage. Financers, film production financers (broadcasters or public subsidy financers), equity financers, and co-producers all give the producer their feedback about the script.

The producer must be careful, however; financers always have the choice to sign onto the project or not. In order to get them to do so, he and the writer must weigh the advantages of incorporating the financer’s feedback against the possibility that doing so would result in a significant loss of creative control over the screenplay.

Financers are not the only external players who begin to exert influence at this stage. Directors often get involved in script development as well and they typically have a lot of power. Their reputation and the fact that they are very skilled in how to visualize a script on the big screen combine to become powerful forces.

The director also has his own staff, friends, and family who provide their advice as well. As with input from others, the producer and writer must take into account the director’s feedback. The idea that the script development process is very fluid is especially true when it comes directors, because they can withdraw from a project at any time for any number of reasons, allowing another director to join.

As one might expect, the constant changes described here almost always alter the direction of the script based to the input of the new players. Actors can have as much influence as any other participant in the process. Since they are the ones who perform the script, they also give the writer and producer feedback. They must take into consideration the same issues as everyone else: the quality and direction of the storyline, who the director is, and how the film will be financed. As outlined in this article, a lot of negotiation takes place before a screenplay comes to life on the big screen. Everyone involved in script development possesses different degrees of power and influence at different points in the process. The writer has the most influence in the early stages but inevitably loses some control. Financers, directors, and actors all play an influential role as well.

 

[psylockolussus]

Its never his fault, you could just say that. Instead of a copy/paste post that few would read.

So? Does every writer need to produce Oscar bait films every time?

Nope. I don't even usually enjoy films that get nominated for Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay.

 

[Cktopl33]

No, I'd rather post information about the movie business that so few people are aware of. It gives a more rounded view of the process rather than baseless simplification. But you go ahead psylockolussus......

 

[psylockolussus]

Well twas very helpful. Would that change our opinions about Kinberg? Most likely no.