Gotham - Season 1
- Thread starter Agent Richard07
- Start date
Nothing wrong with an older woman?
Camren Bicondova,15 years (May 22, 1999)
David Mazouz, 13 years (February 19, 2001)
Compared to the 8 years difference between Bale and Hathaway, or the 5 year difference btween Julie and Adam, or the 7 year age difference between Michael and Michelle.
Seriously.
This is the first tima a (live action) Catwoman actress has been older than a Batman actor.
No?
Eartha Kitt was a year old than Adam West.
####.
Why do you have to embarrass me like this?
Camren Bicondova,15 years (May 22, 1999)
David Mazouz, 13 years (February 19, 2001)
Compared to the 8 years difference between Bale and Hathaway, or the 5 year difference btween Julie and Adam, or the 7 year age difference between Michael and Michelle.
Seriously.
This is the first tima a (live action) Catwoman actress has been older than a Batman actor.
No?
Eartha Kitt was a year old than Adam West.
####.
Why do you have to embarrass me like this?
I think it was given a reasonable chance, but didn't earn success. The show had too many inherent flaws. It was a mess conceptually because it was adapting a series that was a spinoff with a lot of complex continuity, and that was offputting to the audience. Also it was trying to imitate too many things at once -- the Burton/Schumacher films in the tone and aesthetic, Charmed in the characterizations and attitude, and Smallville in the shoehorned metahuman elements. It looked studio-bound and artificial, and the plotlines were too dependent on coincidental interconnections among the main characters. There were some things about it that worked -- its Oracle and Alfred were perfect and its Harley was terrific -- but there was more that didn't. Again quoting my review, "It’s an interesting novelty but ultimately not a success."
I've only ever seen two Batman movies, so I'd hardly call myself a fan but this has peaked my interest.
It was also one of, if not the, first "hour-long" show to come in under 40 minutes.
At least, it was the first I noticed.
I hope Gotham is good. Like Smallville and Birds of Prey, I will likely watch because I'm a fan of the material. Although, I did stop watching Smallville consistently but that's because I'm not the biggest Superman fan. I am a bigger Batman fan, however, so I will probably stay with Gotham unless the show turns out to be utter dreck.
I also hope the pilot is better than the script I read. I did hear it was revised before it went into production, so I am somewhat hopeful. I think my biggest problem with the pilot script was the not-too-subtle "wink" nature of the Batman's Rogues Gallery and how they are incorporated into the show. I had a friend who saw the actual pilot at Chicago Wizard World and said it was better than he expected it to be, so here's hoping.
I also hope FOX gives the show a chance and doesn't cancel it after one season, unless it deserves it. I'm thinking because it is a Batman-oriented show they'll give it a chance. If anything, the cast is solid and I have a feeling whatever shortcomings the show has the cast will make up for.
I also hope the pilot is better than the script I read. I did hear it was revised before it went into production, so I am somewhat hopeful. I think my biggest problem with the pilot script was the not-too-subtle "wink" nature of the Batman's Rogues Gallery and how they are incorporated into the show. I had a friend who saw the actual pilot at Chicago Wizard World and said it was better than he expected it to be, so here's hoping.
I also hope FOX gives the show a chance and doesn't cancel it after one season, unless it deserves it. I'm thinking because it is a Batman-oriented show they'll give it a chance. If anything, the cast is solid and I have a feeling whatever shortcomings the show has the cast will make up for.
What I'm hearing is that the introduction of proto-Rogues won't be leaned on as heavily in later episodes as it was in the pilot, since the pilot had to "front-load" the concepts and characters. Reportedly the focus is primarily on Jim Gordon's adventures and travails as an honest cop navigating a corrupt system.
Contrary to popular belief, these days quick cancellation seems to be more of a risk on other networks like NBC or ABC than it is on FOX.
A couple early reviews of the first episode.
http://www.hitfix.com/whats-alan-watching/review-foxs-gotham-gives-us-a-batman-show-without-batman
http://time.com/3394388/review-gotham-no-batman-no-bat-problem/
http://www.hitfix.com/whats-alan-watching/review-foxs-gotham-gives-us-a-batman-show-without-batman
http://time.com/3394388/review-gotham-no-batman-no-bat-problem/
Yeah, that's the consensus I am hearing. Good pilot, but people are questioning whether or not it can sustain itself without Batman. I think it can. Jim Gordon is probably my favorite character behind Batman. If anyone can sustain a TV show, it is him.
Viral marketing begins anew:
http://gothamchronicle.com/
Some of the neighbourhood names cited in the fuller entries on this site are from the comics, and others are new and probably specific to this TV series...for now, anyway.
http://gothamchronicle.com/
Some of the neighbourhood names cited in the fuller entries on this site are from the comics, and others are new and probably specific to this TV series...for now, anyway.
I know it's still early...but do y'all think the show would benefit form flash forwards, of Batman and/or Bruce Wayne recalling a certain episode?
We know the Penguin and Riddler survive in the future...so the episode could show them older in the future...
We know the Penguin and Riddler survive in the future...so the episode could show them older in the future...
No, that sounds awful and pointlessly restrictive.
That's not the kind of series Gotham is; it's a '21st Century Noir' series set in the present (2014), telling the origins of significant characters in the Batman mythos as if they're happening NOW.
NOW or now-ISH.I mean , will we see product placement of he iPhone6 or Twitter references? If it's just cell phones & e-mail, it could be a 15 year window.
I'm still holding out that crazy hope that it will be connected to SOME other DC property that's not a direct spin off.
How is that restrictive? We KNOW Penguin & Batman will whatever happens. Fish Money & DOnal's character, not so much.
And I mean the flash forwards to be occasional..not EVERY episode. I know this ain't Arrow or Lost.
Harrison Ford narrated/bookended a special episode of The young Indiana Jones Chronicles.
Breaking format makes me giddy.
It's plain to see that the variable here is Fish Mooney.
The entire point of this story is to understand why or how she is not in the comics set During Batman's prime.
Breaking format makes me giddy.
It's plain to see that the variable here is Fish Mooney.
The entire point of this story is to understand why or how she is not in the comics set During Batman's prime.
The showrunner has said something to the effect of "It's set in the past, but it's both an 18-year-old's past and a 54-year-old's past." It's not in a real-world setting, but in a sort of alternate reality that's an amalgam of different eras, with a general 1970s New York noir flavor but with characters using cell phones. (Note that the Burton films and Batman: The Animated Series, not to mention the 1990 The Flash, used a similar hybrid of 1940s Art Deco and 1990s modernity.)
Very unlikely. The DC folks have made it pretty clear that the only interconnections are between Arrow and The Flash, and separately among the various upcoming movies. They're saying they prefer to give each set of creators freedom to do things their own way rather than compelling them to conform to what other productions are doing.
And I think that's a reasonable approach. We've already got Marvel doing the mass-interconnection thing, and while that has its strengths, it also has its weaknesses -- recall how inhibited the first season of Agents of SHIELD was up until it was free to reveal the secrets from Captain America: The Winter Soldier. So I think it's good if the two franchises take different approaches, one interconnected and one separate, rather than both trying to do the same thing. That way, the Marvel shows and films have the benefits of interconnectedness and the DC shows and films have the benefits of independence.
Theoretically, we know they'll exist, but we don't know in what form. Even though this is drawing on the standard Batman story, it's a new version thereof, and is under no obligation to adhere slavishly to any prior version. If they wanted to, if it served the needs of the show itself, they could decide that Cobblepot became the Penguin long before Batman showed up, or died before Batman showed up. There's certainly precedent for altering the timing of events. Smallville had Clark defeat Doomsday and Zod and form the Justice League before he ever became Superman. And the X-Men films have made Storm an older team member than Iceman, Havok a generation older than Cyclops, Sebastian Shaw a generation older than Jean Grey, etc. So the continuity of the comics and prior films is just a starting point, not a straitjacket. It's the prerogative of adaptations to change things to fit their needs -- that's literally what the word "adapt" means.
The producers and Ben McKenzie all used the term 'present' repeatedly in talking about the series and it's setting, tone, and aesthetic in the recently-produced Beyond Gotham BtS special that you can find on the show's official Youtube channel.
^Right, but it's a present that happens to resemble 1970s New York City in many ways.
Hence why the series is '21st Century Noir'.
Similar threads
