TV, Film, and Entertainment News Daily

David Goyer on Giving Audiences ‘What They Don’t Even Know They Want’

goyer4

As the writer who helped to adapt The Crow, Blade, Batman, Ghost Rider and Superman for the big screen, David S. Goyer has given a lot of thought to the level of responsibility a storyteller has to source material that, in some cases, is truly iconic. But given the secrecy surrounding much of his work, it’s not always possible to discuss the thought process behind those adaptations.

But at the recent Los Angeles press day for Da Vinci’s Demons, which returns Saturday for its second season on Starz, Goyer touched on the ongoing relationship between filmmakers and fans, source material and the medium for which it’s being adapted. While the writer, director and showrunner couldn’t talk specifically about, say, his upcoming work on the Man of Steel sequel, he offered some insights into his feelings about filmmakers taking on cultural touchstones, fan theories, and the challenge of giving audiences “what they don’t even know they want.”

Spinoff Online: As I was asking [Da Vinci’s Demons star] Tom Riley about fan reactions and things like that, one of the things he said was you can’t necessarily put too much stock into just sort of fan response to things.

goyer-dkr

Goyer on the set of “The Dark Knight Rises”

David S. Goyer: Or Internet chatter, because you’re dealing with an incredibly vocal but incredibly tiny sort of [group]. That’s a mistake that I think a lot of sometimes networks and movie studios make is sort of listening too much to [them]. I mean, it’s important to listen to the fan chatter but you’re really talking about a tiny, tiny, tiny portion of your audience that may not be representative of what your mainstream audience actually thinks or feels.

How do you determine then what is worth listening to?

Well, you listen. We’re aware and then you have to kind of gauge that against your own gut feeling. You have to do a gut check and see what you think.

Well, there are always going to be a myriad of fan theories about how something should have been, or would have been. And sometimes it seems like creators are sometimes are so close to something that to take the step back that fans have might provide a perspective that would actually benefit them. Have you found that to be the case?

I mean, I don’t read everything that’s out there. I wouldn’t have the time. But we’re aware of some of it, yeah, and it would be silly not to be. I think it’s helpful, but at the same time, it’s also, and I’m paraphrasing Steve Jobs, it’s like you don’t give the audience or the consumer what they want, you give them what they don’t even know they want. I mean, being involved in some of these comic book movies and stuff like that, people say, well, this is what they should do. And trust me, if we had just done exactly that I don’t think the audiences would have been completely happy. I mean that’s not to say that filmmakers can’t misfire, but if you try to just do what you think the fan community wants you’ll drive yourself crazy and you won’t actually write anything. So it’s good to have that tension, but I think also some creators pay attention to it too much.

Well then, how do you define where your authorship of a property or a character ends, and that fan ownership begins? Using, just for example, Star Trek, people felt like the second movie was ostensibly a betrayal of the identities of those characters. You don’t have to talk about that movie, but —

Goyer with "Da Vinci's Demons" star Tom Riley

Goyer with “Da Vinci’s Demons” star Tom Riley

No, but what I’ll just say is it’s different when you’re dealing with something either A, that you created from whole cloth or B, something like Leonardo Da Vinci where, yes, there are preconceived notions but not any preexisting real iterations of it. So it’s different when you’re dealing with something that has become a cultural touchstone like a Batman or Star Trek. And I think when you’re dealing with something like that that has been a cultural touchstone for decades you do have a responsibility to at least be aware of what the weight of all those decades of kind of fan reaction have been. And so Chris Nolan and I absolutely had discussions about that with regards to Superman or Batman and where he exists in the public consciousness and whether or not this was aligned with that or a betrayal of that or not. And sometimes you say, “Yeah, maybe this is different,” and you go for it. And sometimes you’re celebrated for and sometimes you’re not. And then sometimes you say no, this is the way it’s been and this is what we should do. I mean, I will say that when you’re dealing with something that is a cultural touchstone I always think it’s important to look at what are the elements or themes that are the most sticky, that bubble to the surface again and again over the decades. And those are probably the ones you should pay attention to.

News From Our Partners

Comments

  • Travis

    Well, I like Da Vinci’s Demons, so maybe Goyer is better off sticking with that and leaving Star Trek and Superman to people with a better grasp of the “sticky elements.”

  • Dave

    Marvel Studios listens to their fans and seems to be doing alright. Man of Steel ending and killing Pa Kent didn’t work out that well for WB, did it?

  • Magruber

    I just want to know why WB cant make a comic movie without Goyer? Seriously.

  • Footloose & Scott Free

    Yet Marvel listens to their fans, give them what they want, ALSO give them more, and are laughing all the way to the bank and more well received. Mr. Goyer, with all do respect, look past the blinders.

  • Spencer

    If I don’t even know that I want it, couldn’t you also say that I don’t want it?

  • Footloose & Scott Free

    Oh, and that thing he said of comic fans being a tiny, tiny audience? Granted, the general public makes up the majority of ticket sales for these films, but IT ALL STARTED FROM THE COMICS, The properties in question hail from the comics. Were made popular by the readers of the comics. No, that doesn’t mean they have to be absolutely just like the comics. Nobody expects that in the process of adaptation. We just want quality material that treats the property with respect.beyond just being a 2 and 1/2 hour toy/video game commercial.

  • Michael Pullmann

    Oh, so I just didn’t *know* I wanted to see Superman snap some dude’s neck in front of a couple of kids! Silly me!

  • PietroMaximoff

    well i guess i’m from this minority then.. but i have taken a lot of my family and friends to watch these movies. so, we sort of influence the mainstream audience, right?

  • alistaircrane

    What a tool. I wish DC would stop taking their movie cues from this guy. I’m sick of all the “grim and gritty” superheroes.

  • lewis4510

    Him saying he’s giving us “what we didn’t even know that we wanted” is saying we’re too stupid to know what we want.

    And internet chatter isn’t always wrong.

  • Alex Henderson

    Pretty arrogant statement from a guy with his track record. I know what I want and don’t want…case in point, I didn’t want Blade 3

  • Alex Hayden

    I may not always realize what I want until I have it, but I usually do know what I don’t want.

    Gotta give the guy some credit. He was involved in Blade and the first two Nolan Batman movies. Then again, he was also involved in MoS, DKR, Jumper, Ghost Rider 2… Kind of all over the map in terms of quality storytelling. But, he did help jumpstart things and they could’ve been in much worse hands. He’s just better off moving on to his own ideas now that the established characters we love have a chance to be handled with more care.

  • Joe

    Goyer is absolutely right. People don’t know what they want. With Superman Returns people complained there was no action. In Man of Steel they said it was too much. Christopher Reeves should not be the only point of reference for Superman. Superman fought in comics and cartoons and there was destruction (Superman Doomsday anyone?). What was done in Man of Steel action wise was pretty faithful to the source material. Get over it.

  • Joe

    Yeah, they listen so well that they’re retconing the Mandarin.

  • Joe

    They did, it was called Green Lantern.

  • Jermaine Dickerson

    And assuming you’d seen Iron-Man 3, did you take those same kids to see Tony blow a hole in someone’s chest?

  • Travis

    Letting Shane Black turn the middle of Iron Man 3 into a Lethal Weapon movie wasn’t the best of ideas either, but that wasn’t as bad as Man of Steel.

  • Jermaine Dickerson

    I understand both Iron Man and Superman are too completely different characters, with two different moral standards. However it’s seems to be the popular thing to label Superman as a “murderer” despite after killing Zod he’d showed remorse with an intensely emotional cry. However after Iron-Man killed his villain he stated “Get up from that you son of b*tch.” Even so, I have yet to hear anyone call Iron-Man a murderer. As a matter of fact, while we’re at it, let’s call Captain America a murderer with him being a solider and all.

    *sigh* I guess I have a hard time understanding the logic of certain individuals.

  • http://filmsmartblog.wordpress.com/ Josh White

    Very good observation

  • http://filmsmartblog.wordpress.com/ Josh White

    Very true lol

  • http://filmsmartblog.wordpress.com/ Josh White

    That was planned before fans complained

  • http://filmsmartblog.wordpress.com/ Josh White

    I would say it worked out pretty well for them, it has a good fan rating, it wouldn’t be the first time the audience disagreed with the critics. Also, it didn’t make bad money, so I would say they’re doing fine.

  • http://filmsmartblog.wordpress.com/ Josh White

    It is true when he says that fans make up a very little part of the audience, sure we influence the general public but people still come see these “blockbusters” without influence from friends and family who are fans of the comics/characters.

  • todd

    Oh no Superman snapped an evil guys neck. Did you complain when Iron Man killed those people in Iron Man 1? Do you also have a problem with Dragon Ball Z? They are always killing the bad guys on that show.

  • todd

    People just refuse to take off their Christopher Reeve and Marvel glasses. People love the Nolan Batman movies, but those weren’t like the comic, but they get a pass.

  • Phoneo Nemo

    The sad thing, is there is some truth to that statement. Think about superhero movies before The Avengers. Film fans were content to have good movies featuring superheroes, rather than a grand interpretation of the genre. Now it’s only a matter of time before an unexpected hit comes along and we complain that other superhero movies aren’t like it. On the other hand, saying that fan suggestions reduces creativity is like saying an idea generator reduces original thoughts. It doesn’t make sense (yes, Goyer actually said that). http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/26/batman-v-superman-screenwriter-david-s-goyer_n_3995847.html

  • Travis

    Seems like you’ve got the pieces, you just haven’t put them together.

    Iron Man and Captain America don’t have a no-kill code. One makes weapons and the other is a soldier. Sure they avoid it when they can, but it’s not a standard they have set for themselves. While Stark may have been a little too glib about in Iron Man 3 (again, the Lethal Weapon influence), there’s no mistaking what these two are going in to do.

    Superman DOES have a no-kill code. That IS a standard he’s set for himself. When Superman kills, that is a failure of the highest order. Superman loses.

    Superman’s fight with Zod wasn’t some brawl between flying aliens. It was a philosophical battle between Zod’s all-or-nothing fanaticism and Superman’s wish for peace and compromise.

    And Superman. Lost. That. Fight.

    Who the hell wants to pay $8 to see a Superman movie where Superman loses?

  • Dan

    Actually it did work out well, with $668m at the box office.

  • Dan

    Goyer is the only thing keeping DC Comics alive, and he is the reason why we got the dark knight trilogy.

  • regularman

    Who has the history of being non-lethal? Who has the history of being a non-killing superhero? I doubt it’s Iron Man.

    You were trying to challenge somebody but you already know that Superman DOESN’T kill people and you knew that when you originally made your statement.

    Stop trying to pretend that Superman and Iron man, or Superman and any superhero, save Batman, are comparable in terms of non-killing standards. Those two don’t kill, period.

    Yes there were people that had a fuckin’ issue with it, just like there were people that had an issue with Batman killing that clown in Batman Returns, but you look too young to remember that, and judging by your pic, and not just the Batman Begins Ra’s al Ghul reference you made, you don’t seem like someone who would use the killing of a clown as a point of reference anyway.

  • Jermaine Dickerson

    I believe that rule for Superman is circumstantial, more specifically in regards to when he absolutely has no choice but to take a life (Doomsday.)Under the circumstances in Man of Steel, Zod had shown that he was becoming increasingly stronger and adaptive to his powers to where he would have eventually overpowered and killed Superman. A similar situation was portrayed in the comics with Doomsday. During his battle with him, Superman realized that his own life was in danger and if he didnt take Doomsday down, knowing that the monster could kill him, then there would be no one left to save mankind. I think many would’ve had a better understanding of this if Superman’s character was developed much more extensively in Man of Steel. We never got a chance to have to true connection with Clark, so when that moment happened it seemed random and undeserved. However that wasn’t of point I was trying to make.

    According to the logic of many fanboys and girls, when Superman killed Zod that made him a murderer. At face-value we could also declare that Iron-Man or Captain America are are murderers if we are to stay consistent with this logic. However when understanding each of these characters, we began to see how their morals shape their heroic deeds.

  • regularman

    And an answer, to your first question that you asked Michael Pullman, the answer is simple. No one complained because is that, despite Iron Man’s 6 year surge in popularity since Robert Downey single-handedly rescued Marvel and their “at-the-time” new movie Studio, no general person had known about Iron Man.

    “EVERYONE” knows Superman. “EVERYONE” knows that Superman logo. “Everyone” knows the “S”. Whether it’s interpreted as “hope” in Man Of Steel, Superman: Birthright, or just as regular plain-ol’ S/, everyone knows it, everyone knows what he represents, and everyone most assuredly knows that Superman doesn’t kill.

    I know you’ve seen the cartoons, the DC Animated Universe. And I know that you’ve seen Superman refrain from killing someone, or “seriously” seriously hurting them, even when he was about to, or “as” he was about to.

    Don’t act like Iron Man killing someone has the same ground and levity and carries the same weight as Superman or Batman killing someone. Don’t. And please don’t bring up the John Byrne killing of the alternate Zod either; that shit is seriously played.

    To sum up that long answer, no one knew about Iron Man, even though they heard of him. They “heard” of the name, they knew the Ozzy Osbourne/Black Sabbath song “Iron Man”, which is a part of pop culture, so they wisely and easily put it in the first movie as a winking reference point.

    But outside of an easily-made iconic song, especially from the 70’s, and just the name “Iron” “Man” in general, what did the general public know about Iron Man in terms of his status on killing villains and whatnot?

    What did they know? But, now, take Superman for instance, on the other hand, and EVERYONE knows Superman is not a killer. My grand mom, who is 96, knows that. Superman, “god-forgive-me-for-setting-myself-to-get-corrected-but” Hulk, Batman, Spider-Man, these iconic, legendary, and known-for-decades characters are known for being heroic, selfless, and NOT KILLING.

    Iron Man wasn’t known for shit, especially to people who use him as a comparing reference point to Superman.

  • Jermaine Dickerson

    I admire your passion and love for the character, that is something we both share. Please reference my previous post.

    Thanks man :)

  • Lol.

    Yeah, Marvel Studios is listening to fans and making some good kids’ movies.

  • regularman

    Dude…..stop. I’m “NO” defender of Marvel movies, but in terms of live-action cinema screen input, you can’t compare, or even make a comparison or joke about it.

    Marvel Studios makes kids movies? I agree; they make sitcoms. I do believe that. I feel/believe that their movies are cheaply made, from the actors cast to the writers and directors chosen, not to mention their B-list-ass characters.

    HOWEVER, they at least GET those characters out there. They are whipping Warner Bros (I can’t say “DC” or “DC Comics” because “DC” or “DC Comics” doesn’t even have their own studio, and they don’t even get to call their own shots and control how “their” characters are being made in live-action movies because “their” characters are not even “theirs” when “WARNER BROS” owns the characters) asses when they (Marvel) couldn’t even get all of their properties under one roof.

    Warner Bros owns the entirety of DC Comics, and all they can get and give you is Batman times a thousand, and a failed or “controversial-at-best” Superman.

    Marvel has characters spread out at other studios in Hollywood, and yet they are able to whip even their own characters’ asses with “B”-“LEVEL” “characters”! How the fuck is that possible?

    How are you LEADING the industry with fucking “Iron” Man? How? How can you even have the gall to make a movie out of Guardians Of The Galaxy, when most or all of the Guardians Of the Galaxy books have been total failures?

    I remember bringing that up once before, and someone mentioned the Men In Black movie and the comic that it was based on, a comic even more obscure than Guardians Of The Galaxy. I forget what I said in response, but I know I did respond and I know that I did point out how silly it was to use that as a reference point of an obscure property becoming a household name through movies. Wish I remember what I said.

  • Well

    Batman has a no killing rule for a reason. Yeah, EVERYONE know Superman doesn’t kill, but it would be better if EVERYONE knew why. It’s always better to add an extra layer of details. It’s only a good thing. I can’t understand all the whining.

  • Lol.

    I’m not into the lame DCvsMarvel shit. Spider-Man is my favorite superhero. But I’d rather have 1 good movie every five years than 3 bad ones in a year.

  • Perry Constantine

    That’s a straw man argument. It’s not just a matter of “anything different from the comic is bad.” It’s a matter of how the spirit of the characters are captured.

    Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine is not short, Tobey Maguire’s Spider-Man had organic web-shooters, Robert Downey Jr’s Tony Stark was injured in Afghanistan instead of Vietnam, but these are cosmetic changes. The spirit of the characters is still intact.

    That’s not the case with Man of Steel. To trivialize the arguments against the film as “oh, you just want it to be exactly like the comic” is intellectually dishonest.

  • regularman

    “I believe that rule for Superman is circumstantial, more specifically in
    regards to when he absolutely has no choice but to take a life
    (Doomsday.)Under the circumstances in Man of Steel, Zod had shown that
    he was becoming increasingly stronger and adaptive to his powers to
    where he would have eventually overpowered and killed Superman.”

    Circumstantial? Zod was getting stronger and adaptive to his powers? He would have over-powered Superman?

    Ok, if Zod were getting stronger, as you say, then, well, how did he die? How did he get his neck, or head, caught in a headlock?

    If Zod were getting stronger (as the fight went on), how in the hell did he managed to be “IN” Superman’s grip, at the end of the fight? I agree, he got stronger, he was whipping his ass right up until that “headlock-out-of-nowhere” right before they crashed through the train station ceiling. You wanna know how? Shitty writing.

    That’s how. Just like in wrestling, a wrestler, say a good guy, or even a bad guy (’cause at least bad guys, or “heels”, as they call ‘em, can win in wrestling) can be losing a match for the most part, or for all of it, and “out-of-nowhere” pull some bullshit special movie out of nowhere and win the match, or the fight. Superman did just that in this movie.

    Towards the end of that fight , or near the end of it, I should phrase it that way, near the end of it, Zod had an upper-hand. there was “NO” indication that a guy who grew up on a farm could perform that kind of a move versus a trained fucking combatant/warrior who was a promoted to (a) fucking GENERAL and “LEADER” of an entire planet’s military defense (Jor-El inexplicably whipping his ass in the beginning of the movie notwithstanding).

    I didn’t make it clear, above, with the wrestling example, but when they book shows for wrestling, and pre-determine the winner, they have (unfortunately too many times in the past), had a wrestler getting his ass kicked throughout the entire match only to pull an improbable move to win out-of-nowhere.

    That’s why I made the comparison to wrestling and Goyer’s shitty writing and Snyder’s shitty directorial decisions.

  • Perry Constantine

    Here is an example of how ludicrous your argument is: You liked when Superman broke Zod’s neck? Then how come you didn’t complain when Batman refused to kill the Joker in The Dark Knight?

    Painting every character with the same brush is absolutely ridiculous. No, I didn’t complain when Iron Man killed the terrorists in the first Iron Man film, because Iron Man is not Superman. No, I’ve never complained about the characters in DBZ killing villains because none of those characters is Superman.

    Do you get it? The issue isn’t that “there should never be any depiction of a hero killing a villain,” the issue is that it’s contrary to Superman’s character.

    By the logic you’re putting on display here, every character should act exactly the same.

  • Perry Constantine

    Bad example. Iron Man 3 was also a travesty.

  • Joe

    Nolan made Batman kill Harvey Dent and no one seemed to care…

  • Perry Constantine

    The issue isn’t just that Superman killed Zod. That was just the final straw. The issue is that Superman is shown to be reckless with his powers.

    Instead of just showing Superman giving as much care to innocent bystanders as Zod did, show Superman actually trying to save people. Don’t just show him continually punching Zod with no effect, but let’s see him trying to get Zod away from the city, trying to save people who are about to be crushed by the buildings Zod is dropping, don’t just let him ignore the collateral damage.

    Show Superman pushed to his limit, show that he actually does care about the rest of the earthlings, and then I could buy him killing Zod.

    But when you show Superman not giving a shit about the people around him, and at one point even dragging Zod from the cornfields and chucking him into a gas station in the center of Smallville, then you’re not showing me Superman.

  • Travis

    Press Ctrl+F and type in “murder.”

    Tell me what you find.

  • Joe

    And that’s what really frustrates me. Batman killed Dent… Nolan made him break his rule and yet people are okay with it. Whatever…

  • Perry Constantine

    Because they’re uncreative and lazy.

  • Perry Constantine

    They make movies for kids and adults to enjoy.

    Which, in case you’ve been living under a rock for the better part of the twentieth century, is how these characters became so massively popular in the first place.

  • Well.

    Because he was never Superman in the movie…he has not yet learned to control his abilities. And there are plenty of scenes where he’s shown to care about people. Plenty.

  • Perry Constantine

    With the exception of Iron Man 3, every movie Marvel Studios has put out has been far superior to all of the DC films, with the exception of The Dark Knight. So I don’t know what you’re complaining about.

  • Jermaine Dickerson

    i’m not seeing your point.

  • Lol.

    Iron Man 2, 3, Captain America 1, Thor 1, 2, Incredible Hulk. So Idk what movies you have been watching.

  • Perry Constantine

    The whole “he’s not Superman yet” argument shows abject laziness. Don’t give me a Superman movie and then cop-out and say “oh, it’s okay for him to be a reckless idiot because he isn’t quite Superman yet.”

    And he hasn’t learned how to control his abilities? Do Kryptonians learn in reverse or something? He certainly seemed quite capable of using his powers in a measured way that allowed him to save people in the beginning of the film. But when he puts on the suit, all of a sudden he forgets that he has the ability to save people?

    And there are plenty scenes where he’s shown to care about people? I guarantee you you’ll probably find more scenes in Man of Steel where he gives absolutely zero consideration to collateral damage than you’ll find scenes when he tries to help people.

  • Perry Constantine

    Watched all of those and with the exception of Iron Man 3, I’ll watch any of them over Man of Steel. But silly me, I’m someone who thinks superhero movies should be about superheroes acting heroic.

  • Lol.

    Good for you, if you enjoy those kinda movies.

  • Perry Constantine

    And then they changed it after they realized what a massive mistake they made.

  • Perry Constantine

    That’s what superhero movies are supposed to be. If you don’t like those kinds of movies, then you don’t like superheroes. It’s like complaining about romantic comedies because there aren’t any grisly murders—there aren’t supposed to be.

  • Lol.

    Oh I wasn’t aware superhero movies were supposed to have groan-worthy one liners.

  • Well

    Have you even watched the movie? Do you remember any of the conversation betweem Jor-el and Clark?

  • Jermaine Dickerson

    Actually I’d say it’s fairly balanced. It’s just that the destruction was so overwhelming that it over-looked any good deeds he did. But to name a few:

    Saving the kids on the bus.
    Saving the general from Faora
    Saving a pilot from Faora
    Telling the people of Smallville to go inside (even though that didnt do much lol)
    Saving the world from the world engine.
    Trying to fly out of Smallville
    The oil rig
    plus more….

    However many of these are so subtle, and almost unnoticeable.

  • Perry Constantine

    I do, because the conversation was all about what Superman is supposed to be:

    “You will give the people of Earth an ideal to strive towards. They will race behind you, they will stumble, they will fall. But in time, they will join you in the sun. In time, you will help them accomplish wonders.”

    Wonderful speech. Echoes of Brando’s equally incredible, “They can be a great people, Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show them the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you, my only son.”

    But unlike Superman: The Movie, Man of Steel spends every moment after that speech to do the exact opposite of what Jor-El said he should do.

  • regularman

    Neither am I. I had a feeling, or a thought, that you could possibly be neutral, but it was a small thought and a very faint glimmer of a hope, if it was even considered “hope”, because most people love to engage in that silly youtube/comicbookmovie/imdb/IGN Marvel versus DC Comics bullshit, when both Marvel Studios and Warner Brothers make warmed-over shit

    I’ve had the belief now, but now it’s all but confirmed, or just confirmed period, that Warner Brothers sees their comic properties, or comic property, DC Comics, as a form of material that belongs on the small screen only.

    Look at it, they’ve been able to have Smallville on the air and weather storms to stay on the air for 10 years, a successful Green Arrow show, the animated universe which is the pinnacle of adapted comic book superhero story-telling, successful video games (even though a bunch of them feature Batman, or heavily favor Batman – DC Universe Online I’m looking at you and your recent marketing materials favoring Batman over Wonder Woman and Superman). Warner Bros owns the terrestrial world.

    Warner Bros owns the terrestrial world, when it comes to TV, but they can’t do shit when it comes to live-action movies. They suck. I “HATE” Marvel Studios’ cheap approach to movies, I hate universally every actor they cast in their roles, and Marvel’s approach to those characters in these movies.

    But think about it, when you think of a good or average or ok comic book video game, besides maybe Spider-Man (maybe), do you think of a Marvel character? When you think of a quality cartoon, or a quality animated movie, that’s worth buying, do you think of Marvel? When you think of a live-action TV show that’s worth watching, is it based on Marvel’s collection?

    Marvel is clearly in this for movies, and movies alone. Their live-action tv show shows that. The cancelled one good (animated) show that they had (Earth’s Mightiest Heroes – Avengers) shows that. On the other hand DC couldn’t make a faithful live-action movie if they tried (FUCK Nolan) but yet they can make tv shows – live action, that, although take liberties themselves, are far-more faithful and dial up the fan-service to 10 than their movie counterparts.

    Warner Bros would “NEVER” do the Suicide Squad in “ANY” shape form or fashion in live-action movies. “ANY” form. Closest they tried to get to that was merely having Amanda Waller “IN” Green Lantern, and look how that turned out. Again, their tv counterparts don’t adhere super-closely and “Zack Snyder-pre-Man-of-Steel” strictly to the comic book material, but they are practically filming The New 52 or modern era page to page compared to their movie counterparts.

    Another thing I like about Marvel (Studios), that I “HATE” about Warner Bros, is how they don’t look down on you, unlike Warner Bros, who look down on you, and have contempt for their audience, as this article is the latest example to show.

    Marvel will be transparent with their fans, will show them their plans for the future, will show them constant bits and pieces of information, don’t act like they’re trying to change the universe or rewrite the rules (which they are, with every movie studio now seemingly trying to copy their format for success), whereas Warner doesn’t want you to know shit, and act like each and every single thing they do is God’s plan itself and shouldn’t be questioned.

    For fuck’s sake they made Iron Man more popular than one of the top four or five recognizable superheroes in the world (Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Spider-Man, The Incredible Hulk – I think it’s fair to say that pre-2008 they were the top 5, worldwide and easily/instantly recognizable).

    Before I end my book-long rant, how can you own Wonder Woman, Batman, and Superman, the three most iconic super hero, comic book, characters of all time, and “NOT” have a plan for all of them? How can you own the three most iconic characters of all time for 75 years, and not have them show up in a movie together, but yet have 8 Harry Potter movies in 12 years time? Five Lord Of The Ring movies in 11 years time. How is this possible?

    How is there a Catwoman film in existence made by WB, but not a Wonder Woman film? Green Lantern, who deals with outer space shit, but not Wonder Woman, who, to paraphrase a WB executive, said “was hard to get right”.

    Marvel is making a movie with a squirrel and a tree, but Wonder Woman is “hard to get right”.

  • Perry Constantine

    That’s the problem—they are so subtle and unnoticeable, not to mention completely overshadowed by all the reckless endangerment Superman directly causes. And telling the people to “go inside” is hardly a moment of life-saving heroics, given that he brought the threat right to their doorstep—literally.

  • William_Spike

    About the endless “Superman kills” discussion:

    Yes Superman has his “no killing” rule in the comics, however what most of you fail to grasp here is that the Superman we see in man of Steel is not the wise, experienced Superman we know from the comics yet. That is actually a very important point in the movie that apparently none of you bother to see.

    In MoS Clark had only just become Superman, he had literally only donned the costume on the day before the battles. He was completely new to this and hadnt even discovered the whole scope of his powers yet. He is a very unrefined, raw Superman who simply hasnt formed that no killing rule for himself yet. He wasnt born with that rule. Sure the Kents raised him with their moral beliefs and values but they could never teach him what to do in situations like this because they never expected situations like this.

    Superman was thrusted without much preparation or training or anything like that into this war with Zod. Peope complained that Superman destroyed way too much in the battles but what was he supposed to do? He had to fight alien beings that have his power and are way more trained than he is. The whole damn world and all of mankind was at stake and Kal had never experienced something like this before. He wasnt the Superman we know yet. He was only starting out. And to me the whole point of his character that although he has the powers of a god he isnt a god and he doesnt want to be a god. As Jor said he is a chiold of Krypton and earth. he isnt just kryptonian, he is also human. And believe it or not – being human also means to make mistakes. That is a very important point in the movie that made Superman relatable. he doesnt have to be perfect. he is no god. And he is most certainly untrained and unprepared and not yet the inspiring Superman yet that he will be.

    Actually the TV-Series Arrow is following the same approach where Arrow at first is just a hardened, killing vigilante. He wears the costume and fights bad guys but he isnt the Green Arrow hero yet. The same can be said about Man of Steel. He wears the suit, he is Superman – but he isnt the Superman yet that we know. He stumbles, he makes mistakes, he has lessons to learn. But that what makes him human.

    And yes he caused a lot of destruction but it was necessary. Otherwise Zod and his soldiers would simply have destroyed everything. And our young and still inexperienced Superman was just desperate to stop the super powerful aliens from wiping out mankind. It was war. And in war there are casualties. There is destruction.

    as someone already said there has certainly be a lot of destruction in Superman comics as well when Superman faced such powerful foes. Doomsday certainly comes to mind, as well as Our Worlds at war or Infinte Crisis.

    And lets be clear – Superman HAS killed in the comics. In fact he killed Zod (or an iteration of Zod anyway). In the Injustice series he kills the Joker after he caused Lois Lanes death. he certainly killed in the comics even though he is generally very adamant about there always being another way. But Superman is not immune to flaws and mistakes. I loved the scene in Injustice #1 where Batman insists that even Joker cant corrupt Superman and that nothing ever can while Joker knows better. He knows that even Superman can be pushed over the edge if you just push hard enough and hit him where it hurts the most – his family. Superman is the best of us yes and he is the symbol of hope but he is neither god nor saint. People tend to forget that.

    And in that final battle with Zod, that Superman (at the point where he was in his life) simply saw no other way. In fact I´d argue that he did the right thing. Because what would have been the alternative? Sure he could flown up with him and knock him out or something but then what? No prison on earth could hold Zod, the Phantom Zone was closed and Superman in this version isnt able to fly into space and just take Zod to the moon or something. No matter what he would have done, Zod would just continue where he left off as soon as he would have woken up again. And Zod is the far superior fighter, a trained soldier. The danger of him killing Kal was much more likely than Superman being able to defeat him again and again.

    And there is another very important unique point in this. In the movies mythology Kryptonians are unable to go against their genetic programming. Thats why Jor and Lara couldnt leave Krypton and thats why Zod would have NEVER stopped to wipe out mankind. It was a very unique situation. Our inexperienced and still very new Superman was faced with a much more superior fighter, who had all of his powers and was hellbent on destroying mankind in retribution for the loss of his people. And if by some slim chance Superman would defeat Zod, he couldnt contain him anywhere. Eventually Zod will be back and more people will die. The truth is by killing Zod Superman saved millions. He saved the whole damn human race. The older, more experienced Superman would have probably come up with another idea, another way. But in that particular situation, with that particular foe and this inexperienced and unrefined Superman who was in over his head – there was no other way.

    And Superman was faced with that. He knew perfectly well what it meant to kill Zod. But in that situation it was either Zod or mankind.

    Its kind of like in Arrow where Ivo forces Oliver to choose between sara and Shado. Oliver doesnt want to choose but if he doesnt Ivo kills both. So when Ivo was about to fire, despite knowing how much pain it would cause him and how bad it was he chose sara and Shado was killed.

    Again MOS presents a very similar situation. And we saw what it did to Clark. he cried out in pain afterwards because killing Zod went against anything he believed in but that is the cruelty of war. Killing Zod would have been a big problem if Superman had been the older, experienced, inspiring hero that we know. But he wasnt. Not yet. And this lesson of pain will be an important one for him on his journey to BECOME the Superman we know. The journey wasnt over when he put on the suit – thats when the journey BEGAN. The killing of Zod was a very painful and necessary lesson for Clark and it will form him into the Superman we know. Its probably the catalyst why he becomes so adamant about not killing in the future. At the end of the film we see him assuming his public identity of reporter Clark kent for the first time. That identity and life for him didnt even exist when he fought Zod yet. Which shows you how very far at the beginning of his journey he still was. And his journey will continue in the sequel and we will see him more and more becoming the Superman we know.

    Its sad that people condemn the movie and its choices without really thinking about all of this stuff first.

    And to everyone who still cant see why the killing of Zod wasnt a mistake but interesting character drama – I give you Hit-Girl.

    DAVE: No way. I´m not going to kill anybody. I´m supposed to be a fucking superhero.

    MINDY: Oh kiss my ass. What is this, the Silver Age? I´m afraid we forgot our magic fucking hypno-ring that turns bad guys into good guys.

    (Kick-Ass #6)

    ;)

  • Joe Bloggs

    The problem is Goyer himself doesn’t know what he wants…so he gives us what we don’t need.

  • William_Spike

    Maguires Spider-Man didn NEVER embody the spirit of the comic. he was just a whiny bore and had none of the wit, intelligence and trademark humor that defines Spider-Man. Andrew Garfield FTW

  • Sleeper99999

    It’s amusing that you seem to think this is a criticism. There’s nothing wrong with children’s movies. Superheroes are characters created to entertain children.

  • Sp!racy

    He said that people on the internet were the vocal minority, which they are. Stop jumping to conclusions and read the article.

  • chien_clean

    Yea but Nolan is a visionary filmaker.

  • chien_clean

    Cheers, dude!

  • todd

    Very well said. It is sad how people can’t see that the Man of Steel Superman is inexperienced and not the way he is in the comics. I love how people say Superman should have led Zod away from the city, but like you said Superman has been Superman for like a day and with no military experience. When he was thrown into that fight with Zod the only thing going through his mind was how to stop Zod. As for the destruction of the city Zod’s machine did a good chunk of it and by the time Superman and Zod were fighting I am pretty sure many of those buildings were empty anyway because people were trying to flee the city. Also I can’t even picture Zod agreeing to fly somewhere else to fight. I could see him not following Superman and staying behind to kill more humans.

    In some comics like Superman Secret Origin and Earth One he wasn’t the symbol for hope right away either. Just because the Christopher Reeve movie did it that way doesn’t mean newer ones have to. I am sure Man of Steel 2 will dive into more of how the people react to Superman with some seeing him as the guy who saved them and others as the enemy. probably by the end of Man of Steel 2 or Justice League he will be the Superman more people know. Finally bonus points for quoting not only a Kick Ass comic, but Hit Girl as well :)

  • chien_clean

    Wait there’s a new Da Vinci Code movie? Good Lord.

  • runner_j

    Give the fans what they don’t know they want = bullshit.

  • Chris

    It could have made twice that amount.

  • alrightnow

    Batman lunging at Dent and the two of them tumbling over the edge of a platform doesn’t quite constitute killing.

  • Justin

    good points, but “Silver-Age,” old-time morals will always have a place in comic lore. Just read Kingdom Come and you’ll see the ramifications of your Hit-Girls and Mindys and whatnot.

  • makayli verran

    My Uncle James recently got a new black Mazda MAZDASPEED3
    Hatchback by working at home online. you can try here C­a­s­h­D­u­t­i­e­s­.­ℂ­o­m

  • Travis

    The “inexperience” argument wasn’t a good argument the last 10,000 times it was made. What made you think it would be valid now?

  • Dre Day

    David S. Goyer is AWESOME!! Christopher Nolan leaned heavily on Goyer during The Dark Knight Trilogy. Goyer’s a comic book guy. He understands how to bring those iconic characters to life. And Blade Trinity wasn’t THAT bad.

  • Corey A

    Because they drank the kool-ade of the 1980s that everything must be dark and gritty, heroes are really psychopaths, women are whores and Frank Miller is a god. Until they get rid of the people who have Year One and The Dark Knight Returns on list of must reads, we will never get stories of the Batman that kids play, that inspire people who have cancer and suffer abuse. DC Comics and hence Warner Bros don’t believe that Batman exists. They only believe in Miller’s psychopath, and that’s why the Goyers out there will ultimately ruin any mythology they tackle.

  • SnapIntoASlimJim

    You really, really don’t know what you are talking about if you think David Goyer is a talent.

    Nolan did not lean on him at all. Goyer was only there to give Nolan info on the Batman mythology because Nolan was not a Batman expert.

    Goyer is a terrible writer. This is the same idiot that wrote and directed the terrible Blade 3 and the god awful “horror” movie The Unborn.

  • SnapIntoASlimJim

    Goyer had no more involvement in The Dark Knight than he did in The Dark Knight Rises which means he had no more than a “Story by” credit. The Dark Knight’s script was leaps and bounds better than Batman Begins. Guess who was a screenwriter on Begins but wasn’t on The Dark Knight? My, what a difference that made.

    Goyer is a terrible writer and somehow an even worse director. He wrote and directed the terrible Blade 3 and the god awful “horror” movie The Unborn.

  • SnapIntoASlimJim

    “the issue is that it’s contrary to Superman’s character.”

    No, it’s not. You have no idea what you are talking about.

    In “Superman Executioner” (notice the name) Superman kills Zod and two of his underlings (I believe one of them was Faora). That’s two more people than he did in Man of Steel and when he did so, just like Man of Steel he was pained for doing so.

    It did not go against his character in anyway shape or form.

    Oh and you don’t know the characters in Dragon Ball either because the Son Goku in it has a similar philosophy as Superman does: He tries his absolute hardest to not kill anyone. He’ll fight them sure because Dragon Ball’s Son Goku loves to fight but he does not kill anyone unless he is really given no choice.

  • SnapIntoASlimJim

    “but let’s see him trying to get Zod away from the city”

    We do actually see Superman trying to get Zod out of the city. More than once in fact. The one part when Superman kept punching Zod in mid-air pushing Zod more and more away from the city and then later on when Superman reverse a tackle that Zod does and launches Zod into space. Problem is, Zod kept bringing the fight back into Metropolis.

    You weren’t paying attention to the fight. It seems you needed Superman to actually yell at Zod “Get out of the city!” for you to catch on.

  • todd

    Why isn’t the inexperienced argument any good? Having a guy who has been Superman for only a few days be inexperienced makes sense to me.

  • todd

    I didn’t complain when Batman didn’t kill Joker, because I didn’t care. I know no movie is going to be 100% like the comic and many times the movies take their own liberties. Superman has killed before in the comics and he is still Superman. Why can’t this Superman have that moment when he kills Zod be his realization that he will never kill anyone again?

  • todd

    He also killed Ra’s Al Ghoul, at least I consider that scene to be Batman killing him.

  • todd

    Superman can still be Superman even though he killed Zod. In Man of Steel he still had many of Superman’s traits such as being from Krypton, wanting to do good, working at the daily planet, traveling abroad in his younger days, to name a few. Marvel did that with the Avengers. The characters aren’t exactly like their ultimate counterparts. Characters and events had things taken from both the 616 and ultimate universe.

  • todd

    This! This is basically my response when people say John Stewart should have been in Green Lantern because he was on Justice League. Those people watched a cartoon that was only on for 4 years. If it wasn’t for comics there would be no Justice League cartoon for people to watch. Also Green Lantern wasn’t made mostly for people who watched Justice League it was made for people who read comics and like superhero movies. Just like I am sure Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk weren’t made just for people who watched the 90’s cartoons.

  • todd

    I don’t like to always be Marvel vs DC either, but I admit I am guilty of always trying to defend DC by going after Marvel a lot of times. It shouldn’t have to be like that. Just because DC isn’t putting out live action movies like Marvel doesn’t make them “worse”. You are right about DC being better at TV, animation, and video games. That is an un official fact lol. We may never get DC movies like we get Marvel movies, but at the same time we will never get classic Marvel stories as animated movies like we do with DC.

    I say just sit back and enjoy the live action movies, animation, tv, shows and video games we get as a whole because even not everyone is going to like everything we now live in an age where the technology can give us a good looking product.

  • todd

    I just have to ask this since you brought up shitting writing. What were your thoughts on Iron Man flying to the middle east from the US in like 5 seconds lol?

  • Tophman

    Goyer has been hit and miss… but I get that nobody’s perfect so I’ll let it slide (even if he did write “Nick Fury: Agent of SHIELD”). Looking at his filmography though, I have to say I liked more than I hated so I’ve got nothing against him continuing his work for DC properties. However, I do feel that Warner/DCE needs to consider hiring other writers since I agree that Goyer’s ‘dark’ take on the DCU leaves much to be desired (though that may be primarily due to Chris Nolan’s shadow).

    Regarding “Man of Steel”, the debate rages on but I think a lot of folks forget the fact that:

    1) when you have two combatants with that much power fighting each other in a major metropolitan city, you do expect a lot collateral damage (regardless of how Kal tries to avoid it);

    2) Kal trying to lead Zod away from the city won’t work as Zod had realized that his foe is more concerned about preserving the human race rather than his own Kryptonian heritage. Hence Zod will simply lay waste to everything he sees if Kal tries to lead him away;

    3) Superman killing Zod is a sore point to a lot of fans, specially since we put Superman (the blue boyscout) in such a high pedestal, morally speaking. In the film, Kal didn’t kill Zod just for the heck of it. He actually tried to do everything in his power to try to stop Zod. Zod was just too experienced to defeat. –S P O I L E R S — AHEAD–

    The point a lot of people have missed is that Zod (who has lost everything when their ‘ark’ was destroyed & his lieutenants were sent to the Phantom Zone) pretty much decided to ‘death by cop’. He made Kal choose between his morality or the humans (who he was actually going to incinerate with his heat vision). Kal wasn’t strong enough to move Zod at all (they had been fighting for a while) and the only way he could think of was to kill him (since even if he could have saved the family Zod was targeting, Zod would keep trying to kill humans). I don’t see this as a moral flaw in Kal. This is what folks in law enforcement have to deal with every day and taking a life wasn’t something he did lightly. This could even cement his ‘No Killing’ policy vowing never to do what he did ever again.

  • Dre Day

    First of all, WHY did you see the The Unborn movie? So a couple of movies makes him terrible? Goyer wrote Batman Begins and co-wrote the next couple. I’ve heard interviews with him, his fingerprints were all over the success of that trilogy. If you wanna just give Nolan all the credit. Go ahead. If it weren’t for Goyer, Nolan’s Batman wouldn’t have even had a utility belt!

  • Dre Day

    “Didn’t work out that well for WB, did it”? I’d say it worked out pretty well for Warner Brothers, actually. Man of Steel made about 670 million at the box-office, and it’s sequel will be one of the most anticipated movies in cinema history.

  • Jeff Forehand

    No, the reason we got the Dark Knight Trilogy was the Nolan brothers. Of the three films, they did the screenplay for the better two.

  • Jeff Forehand

    They actually wrote and filmed that before IM3 even came out. It may have felt like retconing, but they planned that ahead of time.

  • Jeff Forehand

    The final two Dark Knight films (that most people agree were the best) were written by the Nolan brothers, Goyer only got a “Story By” credit. Working out the basic plot’s outline with Christopher Nolan doesn’t mean “his fingerprints were all over the trilogy’s success”. It means he threw in more comic book elements to tie it to Batman and his villains than Nolan would have if he did it alone.

  • SnapIntoASlimJim

    “First of all, WHY did you see the The Unborn movie?”

    So even you admit it was terrible. lol!

    “So a couple of movies makes him terrible?”

    Well, gee… when you keep making bad work what else can it mean? Do you call people great when they do nothing great?

    “I’ve heard interviews with him, his fingerprints were all over the success of that trilogy”

    No, they weren’t. A person with a “Story By” credit in two out of the three movies (one of them being far and away the best of the three) is not “fingerprints” all over that series.

    “f you wanna just give Nolan all the credit. Go ahead”

    It’s not me. It’s just obvious. Look at the difference in quality between the scripts for Man Of Steel (a script written only by Goyer) and The Dark Knight Rises (written by the Nolan brothers).

    “If it weren’t for Goyer, Nolan’s Batman wouldn’t have even had a utility belt!”

    Which is why Nolan asked for Goyer’s help because Nolan was not a Batman expert. Nolan only used Goyer to fill him in on the Batman mythology. Nolan then took that information to make the scripts. Goyer though, apart from Batman Begins, had no real script involvement in that series.

  • Dre Day

    I’m pretty sure that most people would rate Batman Begins over The Dark Knight Rises as far as story-line and quality. The director is always MORE important. But I, Warner Brothers and Nolan understand Goyer’s value. That’s all I’m say’in.

  • Simon Is

    Goyer isn’t bad but his argument that Superman had to kill to make him relatable is a dumb as they come.

  • Dre Day

    Haha. With Unborn, I never had any desire to spend money to see it or even see it for free. So you’re gonna just gloss over Goyer’s work on Batman Begins? Okay. Man of Steel was fine. It didn’t underwhelm, like Superman Returns and Green Lantern, and had some great CGI action scenes. Maybe the script was too grown-up and serious for you? And yes, Goyer was heavily involved with crafting the stories for The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises. Believe what you want, hate the guy’s work if you want to, but facts are facts. Thanks for reading.

  • SnapIntoASlimJim

    “With Unborn, I never had any desire to spend money to see it or even see it for free”

    Again, even you admit it was bad.

    “So you’re gonna just gloss over Goyer’s work on Batman Begins?”

    What work? You mean the corny and cheesy lines from Batman Begins (“I got to get me one of those”. “You need to lighten up!” “How about a little taste of your own medicine, doctor”) that was seemingly absent in The Dark Knight as soon as Goyer was not the screenwriter?

    “Maybe the script was too grown-up and serious for you?”

    Grown up? The direction was fine. I liked the fact that it took itself seriously. But grown up?? It was the script that was the problem. You know, how it almost has no second act since it just jumps straight to the climax. How the script makes no attempt to spend time with Superman’s meeting with the only other group of beings that are like him and just jumps straight into the climax. How cheesy and corny many of the lines were kinda like how it was in Batman Begins which Goyer co-wrote.

    “And yes, Goyer was heavily involved with crafting the stories for The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises”

    No, he was not. Nolan used Goyer to give him info on the Batman mythology. Had Goyer had more involvement it would’ve been reflected in the credits.

    “but facts are facts”

    Ironic coming from you. I listed facts and backed them up. You on the other hand did nothing but make claims with no evidence.

  • SnapIntoASlimJim

    Batman Begins is worse than Dark Knight Rises. Rises has many problems but at least it didn’t have incredibly cheesy lines and the stupid shaky cam that Nolan was doing in Batman Begins.

    Goyer has no value. He has proven time and time again that he is a hack. The only reason he was working with Nolan is because Goyer sold himself as a comic book expert in Hollywood and Nolan wanted someone to be able to give him info on Batman while he was working on his movies. That’s the only use Goyer really had. Nolan rewrote Goyer’s script on Batman Begins before he shot the movie. Why is that? Because Goyer is a bad writer. What has given Goyer life is that connection to Nolan. Had it not been for that lucky break Goyer would’ve been doing what he should be doing for the rest of his career. Writing and directing direct to video Steven Segal movies.

  • Dre Day

    I’ve never watched Unborn. But because of you, I will, very soon. So thanks. Batman Begins wasn’t an Oscar worthy film, but the critical success of that movie, had a huge positive impact on the Batman brand and other comic book movies. I give Nolan, along with Goyer, credit for that. As far as his involvement. I wasn’t there, I’m just going off of Wikipedia and what he’s said in interviews. He WORKED on The Dark Knight and Rises. Man of Steel had heart and most importantly, he got to punch something! If you didn’t like the dialogue and character interactions, well that sucks, for you. Thanks for the discussion. I like educating people.

  • Dre Day

    What did D. Goyer do to you? I hope he didn’t abandon you as a child or fail to give you an autograph. Batman Begins was AWESOME! The Dark Rises was great but other than Anne Hathaway as Catwoman, it falls short to Batman Begins. I think MOST people would agree with me. So I guess, I win. YAY!

  • SnapIntoASlimJim

    “I’ve never watched Unborn. But because of you, I will, very soon. So thanks”

    Don’t thank me. I didn’t make that piece of shit.

    “Batman Begins wasn’t an Oscar worthy film, but the critical success of
    that movie, had a huge positive impact on the Batman brand and other
    comic book movies.”

    Which has a lot to do with the fact that the last Batman movie (Batman & Robin) was so bad. It made Batman Begins look much better than it actually was.

    “I give Nolan, along with Goyer, credit for that”

    Nolan re-wrote Goyer’s script. You can look it up yourself.

    “He WORKED on The Dark Knight and Rises”

    So did the Best Boy Grips. That doesn’t mean they deserve the credit for the movies’ success.

    “Man of Steel had heart and most importantly, he got to punch something!”

    I agree it was great to see Superman in action but that could’ve been in a far better script than the one Goyer provided.

    “I like educating people.”

    On how ignorant you are about Goyer’s badness, I suppose.

  • SnapIntoASlimJim

    “What did D. Goyer do to you?”

    Write terrible scripts.

    “Batman Begins was AWESOME!”

    If my only other experience with Batman was Batman & Robin, sure.

    ” The Dark Rises was great but other than Anne Hathaway as Catwoman, it falls short to Batman Begins”

    I actually think she was one of the worst things in that movie. A shame because the way Catwoman was written in it was pretty spot on in terms of accurateness to the comic books.

    “it falls short to Batman Begins”

    Not enough cheesy lines and shaky cam for you?

    “I think MOST people would agree with me. So I guess, I win. YAY!”

    Not an intelligent way to look at things.

  • Dre Day

    First of all, you are amazing. Your ignorance is both humorous and fascinating. No disrespect. I’m done defending a great movie, that spawned two great sequels, (Batman Begins). Catwoman was written well and Hathaway delivered, like great actresses usually do. Even President Obama gave her, her props! If it weren’t for David S. Goyer, you and MANY other people wouldn’t even know who, the Marvel character, Blade is! He pitched the idea to the studio and wrote all three films. He was a huge part of the Batman reboot, and The Great Christopher Nolan liked Goyer’s Superman “script” so much, that he got the movie green-lit, and produced it. Hating on and disrespecting talented and successful people is unhealthy, and kinda sad. Now excuse me while I check out this Unborn movie, that you “love” SO MUCH.

  • SnapIntoASlimJim

    “Catwoman was written well and Hathaway delivered”

    She was written very well but Hathaway was miscast and was bad. She was way too contrived.

    “Even President Obama gave her, her props!”

    The same President that singed away our rights as Americans by having everything we do and say recorded?? Yeah… that isn’t an opinion I much care about.

    “If it weren’t for David S. Goyer, you and MANY other people wouldn’t even know who, the Marvel character, Blade is!”

    You act as if Goyer is the only writer out there. Goyer is also the same man who wrote and directed Blade 3 which is the movie that destroyed the Blade film franchise.

    “He was a huge part of the Batman reboot”

    No, he was not. As I have said, Nolan only used Goyer to fill him in on the Batman mythology. Goyer was not a mastermind of anything in that film series.

    When left to his own devices, Goyer makes horrible movies like Blade 3 and The Unborn.

    “The Great Christopher Nolan liked Goyer’s Superman “script” so much, that he got the movie green-lit, and produced it.”

    It’s ironic that you say about me that my “ignorance is both humorous and fascinating” yet you write falsehoods like this. Goyer didn’t have a script for Nolan. Goyer simply told Nolan and idea on a new Superman movie and then Nolan as a favor vouched for Goyer. Nolan didn’t have much to do with the Man Of Steel movie as evidenced by the lousy quality of the script.

    “Hating on and disrespecting talented and successful people is unhealthy, and kinda sad”

    Being mindless sheep is actually what is “unhealthy, and kinda sad”.

  • Mr. Nave Kent

    Well, i agree with you but to make your point better — Marvel making movies with bad directors and actors? Yeah, I guess Anthony Hopkins, Jeff Bridges, Natalie Portman, Gweneth Paltrow, Robert Downey Jr, Tommy Lee JOnes, Robert Redford, Edward Norton, Liv Tyler, Sir Ben Kingsley, Guy Pierce, and Samuel L. Jackson are all bad and cheap actors right?