Man of Steel – 3 things I try not to put in a script







So, Man of Steel – is it any good?


Neeeeeyarrrrrrgghhh …

No. And yes.

I enjoyed it.

Most of it.

Except for the bits I didn’t, the bits I had to shut my mind to. And the bits which didn’t really work. And most of the CGI which, to me, looked fairly poor.

But apart from that – Henry Cavill is awesome. He’s exactly how I want Superman to be. Amy Adams is awesome. Russell Crowe kicks arse, which is nice, Kevin Costner is just wonderful (fuck it, the whole cast are amazing) and the costume and set design are exquisitely lovely.


Ultimately, I enjoyed the film … but I had to work really fucking hard in order to do so. I think I brought in so much good will and desperate desire for it to be good that I forgave all the bad bits.

And there were a lot of them.

The CGI thing is funny: Iron Man 3 and Star Trek Into Darkness both had sequences where everything on screen was CGI – but I never really noticed whilst watching.

Man of Steel kept kicking me out of the reality of the film – my brain kept telling me none of it looked real. Don’t know if that’s down to the quality of the CGI or because we can’t do people properly yet. Even those breathing masks annoyed the piss out of me – I felt I was constantly trying to look past them to see the actors. As if someone had just scribbled all over the negative.

Not sure if that’s just me though.

All I know is I spent a large portion of the film arguing with myself to just shut the fuck up and go with it. Same with bits of plot, characters and motivations.

But let’s not get into that. Today I just want to talk about three things I noticed which I try really fucking hard to avoid in scripts.

I often fail, mind.

Or at least, I fail in the first draft and someone reminds me how shit they are so they can be removed for the second draft.


This isn’t a criticism of the script or David Goyer, by the way – I haven’t read his script so have no idea if these were his things or director/producer mandated or just happened that way in the edit. I’m not pointing fingers or assigning blame, just wanted to use the film as an example for discussion.

So, first up:


I like telling stories in multiple time periods, flashing forward and back between now and then or today and tomorrow. I just love it.

It’s fucking hard to do, but I love films which get it right. The Escapist is one I’ve seen recently which does it really well – a superb film if you get the chance to see it.

If you don’t get the chance, make your own luck. It’s worth it.

The thing about dual time periods is both time periods have to be interesting. Ideally, when I transition from one to the other, I want the audience to be torn – I want them to be annoyed because they’re desperate to find out what happens next in this time period, but excited because they desperately want to know what’s going on in the other one.


Both stories have to be compelling. The best way to maintain this, I think, is to leave each story at an unresolved story point. The sniper’s crosshairs are on the hero’s head, the sniper’s finger tightens on the trigger … BANG! The bullet streaks towards the hero …

… and we’re in the past.

Did the bullet hit?

A question.

One which (hopefully) will make you want to stick around to find out the answer. To me, the rule is: always leave on a question.

Man of Steel has that wonderful transition where Clark sees a bus … and remembers he once sat on a bus.


Um … right.

So we’re leaving the story at the heart-stopping moment of … a man sees a bus. Which, even then wouldn’t be that bad, if there were some relevance to the bus in the present day story.

But there isn’t. There isn’t even really any story in the present day yet – Clark is just meandering around being a bit of a loner.

The entire sequence between two bits of past backstory is: Clark steals some clothes. He sees a bus.

Is that interesting?

If that sequence were cut out of the film and we just stayed in the past, would we be missing any information?

Well, yes, we’d be missing the fact that Clark has to steal clothes; but if we saw him wearing new clothes, we’d assume he’d bought them. Or not even think about it. Given I think the point of that scene is to show why he needs a super-suit – is the stealing important? It seems a bit … un-Superman. Not sure it really adds anything.

the Incredible Hulk bill bixby image

As for his ability to see buses. Yeah … probably could have taken that for read.

Okay, so technically it does leave on a question – “Why’s he a bit mooney-eyed about that bus?” But even if you accept that as an interesting question, it’s answered in the other time period – so there’s no desire to come back to the present. There’s no continuing story we’re missing out on and eager to catch up on.

I find these sort of things in my scripts all the time – and hack the fuckers out. My aim is to always transition from one time period to the other at a moment of excitement or tension or … something other than seeing something.

Or seeing something mundane, anyway.

Transitioning as the hero sees a werewolf leaping out of a birthday cake wearing his best friend’s lungs maybe a bit more exciting.



That sequence where Jor-El explains the fall of Krypton and General Zod’s role in the final days is heart-achingly beautiful. Really. I fucking love the animation in that scene. Fucking awesome.


Not so fucking awesome is the fact we already knew 90% of that information and I’d already assumed the other 10%.

I really fight with myself not to have a character explaining something we’ve already seen/already know to another character. It’s just … boring.

Take Margin Call, for instance:

Spock sees something I don’t understand on a monitor screen so he tells his bosses. They freak out … and immediately explain the same thing to Kevin Spacey. He freaks out and immediately explains the same thing to his bosses. They freak out and immediately explain the same thing to Jeremy Irons.

This takes about an hour.

It’s exceptionally tedious.

Oh … and I’ve just realised, that’s a SPOILER FOR MARGIN CALL.


Sorry. It’s a tedious film anyway, you’re not losing out.

Seriously, the same thing gets explained four times, in slightly different, but equally incomprehensible ways.

Coming out of that film, I fully understood why the banking crisis happened – it’s because bankers are fucking idiots who need things repeatedly explaining to them in very small words “as if they were a Labrador”.

Again, I try really hard not to have characters explaining the plot to other characters.

I try not to do it generally; but I really try not to do it when the audience already know what’s going on. It’s dull and repetitive and rarely makes it past the first draft.

To be honest, it rarely gets put into a first draft.


A story drop is possibly a term I made up; but more likely stolen from someone else.

Essentially, it’s the point in a story where there are no more obstacles and every question has been answered.


The odd thing about Man of Steel is it’s two stories stuck together.

Sort of.

The first one is: Clark isn’t sure who he is or why he’s been sent to Earth. Jor-El explains all that to him. Clark becomes Superman, end of story. All of the questions have been answered – Clark knows who he is, where he’s from and why he’s here.

Hmm … but there’s over an hour to go!

Ah ha! Here comes story number two: Zod’s turned up, which, okay we knew he was coming so it’s kind of not that bad of a story-drop.

Zod wants Kal-El or he’ll kill the world!

Lordy, lordy, what on Earth will Clark … oh, okay. He’s surrendered.


Well, I suppose it’s the logical, brave thing to do because … there’s no reason not to.

Apart from cowardice, which isn’t really a super-power.

So Clark surrenders, the bad guy wins and will just go away. I guess.

images (1)

So is that the end?

Are we stopping now?

Bit of an odd place to stop; but since there’s no more story I guess that’s it. Shall I just get my coat ready and find my keys? I know I dropped them here somewhere.

Yes, I know Zod’s a baddie so will do something bad and the story will start again … but that’s the point – it has to start again.

Right now, the story has finished (again) because there are no more obstacles.

It kind of reminds me of a scene I’ve always wanted to write but never found a place for: the hero is tied to a table and the villains are going to torture him.


“Join us or die!” they say.

“Okay.” says he.

“Okay what?”

“Okay, I’ll join you. Just untie me and we can go fuck up some kittens or something.”

“Um … hang on. My Evil GCSE didn’t really cover this. Are you sure you want to join us?”

“Yup. If the alternative is death, then sign me right fucking up.”

And so on …

I think there should be a reason why the goody can’t just give the baddie what he wants. (And possibly a reason why I spell goody with a ‘y’ and baddie with an ‘ie’.) And that reason has to be apparent before the goody gets offered the choice. We have to know exactly why giving the baddie what he wants isn’t the best action to take … or it just seems like an obvious, if a bit sad, way to end a film.

If Leia had just handed over the Death Star plans to Vader … it might have felt like a good place to end the film.

Okay, so she might have a copy or they might be fake plans … but it would take a while to feel dramatic again, instead of feeling like there were no more obstacles to overcome.

I try to avoid this sort of thing too.

So there you go: tension-less transitions, secondary exposition and finishing the story in the middle of the film – three things I try not to do in scripts.

Feel free to tell me what you liked or disliked about the film, but please try not to slag off any of the people involved – you weren’t there, so please don’t go pointing fingers!


Categories: My Way, Someone Else's Way | 7 Comments

Post navigation

7 thoughts on “Man of Steel – 3 things I try not to put in a script

  1. Anton

    I’m going to swoop (see what I did there) in with an argument that it could be one story. The story of Superman finding out who he needs to be in this world, and both discovering who he was and what he needs to do (choose to save the humanity over his own corrupted people even if it means killing) is the journey and story he goes on. In saying that I agree with pretty much everything else. I went in with so much goodwill but the CGI numbed me.

    • Aye, possibly. I felt he figured out all but the killing part by the middle of the film.

      I really wanted a stronger reason for him putting on the suit beyond his father told him to. Would have been nice if it had been his idea.

  2. whatsername

    I thought it was littered with head scratchers –

    * Why have that whole thing where suddenly breathing the earth’s atmosphere is severely weakening because it take a lifetime to get accustomed to it and then have the bad guys about 20 minutes and they’re fine
    * And since it only takes about 20 minutes to be fine, why keep the irritating stupid masks?
    * If the whole explanation by General Zod of where they’ve been for the last 33 years takes place while Superman is unconscious, can we be sure Superman even caught the gist of it? And if he did catch the gist of it, how does he know it’s not an unreliable dream? Wouldn’t it be better to tell him in front of Lois Lane (they could combine it with telling her why the hell they’d bothered to take her too) so at least there would be one awake person to verify it actually happened?
    * If General Zod is such a bad guy why does Superman spend so much time fighting his henchpeople, one of whom (the tall one) I don’t think even had a name
    * Has Superman actually be wandering the entire face of the planet until he accidentally stumbles across the place where Russell Crowe’s hologram is hanging around or does he know something we don’t? (or maybe they told us in a dream and I just didn’t remember it when I woke up)
    * How stupid are the people of earth – some load of aliens takes over the TV and says “Hand over Superman or else….” or else what? Is it fear of the cancellation of the Coronation Omnibus that has humankind say “Okay, here he is”. Would we really not require a bit more clarity on the consequences front?
    * What is the whole deal with the “first pregnancy in hundreds of years because all Kryptonians are harvested out pods, although for the purposes of this story that is completely irrelevant we just thought we’d mention it because otherwise the useless confusing bits would be a bit thin on the ground”.
    * Since every planet Krypton ever colonised managed to fail spectacularly enough to kill every Kryptonian colonist, why does General Zod – who although evil surely isn’t stupid – think he can do better on earth with the same equipment and the same Kryptonians, Especially since it apparently takes 20 minutes to acclimatise anyway, and the current atmosphere gives them superpowers.

    I know there are more, and I know the above are out of sequence but it’s late and I’m tired and there was drink taken your honour. Other that these I agree with everything you said. Oh and also Kevin Costner is overrated (pretty much always) (although presumably that wasn’t in the script).

    • I love your last point there! Why terraform a planet to make it HARDER for your people to survive on it? Madness.

      I can (partially) answer two of those – Clark found the crashed ship because he overheard some army people talking about it in the cafe/bar/diner/whatever he was working in. Jor-El wasn’t waiting there, he was in the key from Clark’s spaceship, waiting to be downloaded into something.

      The natural birth thing – I think that’s supposed to be about choice and how Kal is the first baby in generations who isn’t specifically bred to be a toilet cleaner or something. He gets to choose his own destiny … but then, confusingly, decides to become Superman because his dad tells him he has to.

      Not sure how that fits thematically. Zod was right all along?

      That mask/20 mins thing – how moronic was that? And since they had all their superpowers bar sight and hearing before they took the masks off …. does that mean the air conveys those powers and not gravity/yellow sunlight? Which, I know, doesn’t actually make sense anyway; but at least it’s fucking consistent.

      Excellent points though! It’s as if no one really bothered to think anything through before they started filming.

      • whatsername

        I agree that it looks like nobody really bothered to think anything through before they started filming. But alas I suspect that’s because way too many people insisted on overthinking everything and adding their “wouldn’t it be cool if….” notes to the pile of already way too many notes.

        (Oh and thanks for clearing up that wandering around and stumbling upon the hologram thing. Still not convinced on the pod babies though).

  3. Really funny article! 🙂
    This is something similar! Hope will make you laugh!

  4. Pingback: 2013 | The Jobbing Scriptwriter

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: