Gotham

Goddamn, writers, slow down. This is supposed to be before Batman. Stop.

Can't do that.

Gotta put as many people into the story as possible.

That's how they do things in GOT-HAM.

Michael Chiklis Joins "Gotham" as Series Regular

http://www.comicbookresources.com/article/michael-chiklis-joins-gotham-as-series-regular

I didn't know who that person was.

Calm down. Breath. Kid!Batman Bruce is just starting his own underage harem. Selina, Ivy (who expresses attraction to Batman in the comics), and now this St. Starfox girl. They probably won't be the main subject of an episode - her uncle running for mayor is far more important than her role in Bruce's life at this point.

The largest breach of premise in this show I've found is Bruce discovering the Batcave so early.

Chiklis? That...is probably one of the most appropriate casting choices you could make for a show like Gotham...but is Barnes a character in the comics?

edited 22nd Jul '15 7:23:30 AM by FFShinra

DC's own website says he is an original character.

A character they need to add is a young Aaron Cash. Silver St Cloud is who? An alsoran that pales in comparison to Catwoman or Talia in terms of popularity, so doomed to failure as a potential love interest for Bruce. Yawn.

Cash can kick ass and take names.

edited 22nd Jul '15 10:13:09 AM by Eagal

Re: Silver St. Cloud—an alsoran meaning someone that they have little motivation to "save" for when Bruce is an adult. More freedom to write a decent character, perhaps?

edited 23rd Jul '15 6:54:34 PM by illegalcheese

Good point. Hadn't thought it that way.

As long as they write her more like Chloe and less like Lana, that sounds like a fantastic use of a character....

Right. My brother says Small Ville was better than Gotham.

I hated Small Ville, but both have the concept of young hero (Super Man and Bat Man) before they become heroes.

I was turned off to Gotham from the get go, but gave Gotham a chance (though I admit because it was more about Jim Gordon, and seems to take some cues from some stuff in the comics).

He calls me a Hypocrite for liking one and shunning the other.... and he may not be wrong.

Now I'm sure there are people who have watched both, so I have to ask, is he right? Is Small Ville better?

Despite similar sounding premise and origins the two shows have little in common.

Apples and oranges.

Fair enough.

I need something though, otherwise he's gonna claim that he's right.

And while I can live with it if TV Tropes says Smallville is better, I'd rather hear it from here than have him claim it without any proof.

In hindsight, Smallville wasn't all that terrible if you ignore Seasons 1 and everything past the "Smallville-era" of the show.

It had a nice blend of silly Silver Age Superman with contemporary nuances.

Smallville was good at going off script. By that I mean when it broke from canon, it was usually quite well done, especially with characters (see Chloe, Lionel, certain depictions of early Smallville characters). And when those aspects were focused on the most (see Season 3) it created great television.

It was when they tried toeing the line that they sucked. Gotham is actually much better at this than Smallville is.

Likewise, Gotham hit the ground running on set design, whereas Smallville never really did.

Both seem about equal in the acting talent pool, and Gotham so far suffers from the same problem Smallville had in that the stakes don't feel high because plots end too quickly and/or too cleanly. Gotham has the advantage of time to correct it though.

Smallville did have some awesome fights, IMO.

Smallville really suffered from having a low base for writing, acting and probably the aspect that's aged the most, the look of the show (so very low budget and unmemorable). Gotham might be low on the writing and acting front too (having improved at times but still well below where it needs to be), but it does look distinct and memorable, with one of the better Gothams depicted on screen. Arrow, for its faults, also has its own look (and its action is a good draw for the show).

I feel like Daredevil has strongly raised the bar for overall quality on a superhero TV series, however. If you're not trying to match that in quality (not necessarily tone), you're behind the times.

Eh, Daredevil has the advantage of being a non-Network production. Comparing network shows to it is like comparing apples and oranges because of the different levels of funding, different realities in behind the scenes work, etc.

If this show was on HBO or something and was still having the same issues, then you'd have a point.

So she dumped Adam Goldberg for Bruce Wayne. Hell of a trade up.

Firefly has been cast.

They created a female character to take on the mantle. Her name is Bridget Pike and she is played by Michelle Veintimilla.

edited 17th Aug '15 3:51:01 PM by Halberdier17

As long as she incessantly screams fire puns and speeches about how 'GOTHAM'S GONNA BURN' at the top of her lungs, I'm sold.

"KEROSENE, KNOW WHAT I MEAN?"

edited 17th Aug '15 8:54:57 PM by KnownUnknown

.....Why did the writers of this show do that to Barbara's character? And Renee Montoya? And Fish Mooney? And Selina Kyle??

Ugh.

A female Firefly can work fine. As said, as long as she's dangerously enthusiastic about arson she's good.

For a split second I thought they were making a sequel show to Firefly and that they'd found Nathan Fillion's replacement...

edited 18th Aug '15 1:11:26 AM by TheHandle

As far as I'm concerned a Firefly without a jetpack is not Firefly. I'm looking at you, Jason Marsden.

So Ms Veintimilla better be sporting a jetpack, Gotham, or there will be hell to pay.