Supergirl - Season Four

[JD]

If it's presenting itself as a faux documentary rather than pure fantasy, then that implies an obligation to depict its subject as authentically as a real documentary. If it's just making up random, bad history instead of using alternate history to provide insights into real historical patterns and processes, then it's just empty sensationalism and I have no interest in "going with it."

I mean, the single most basic thing about the Confederacy is that they wanted to be separate from the rest of the US. They saw themselves as a distinct culture and the Northern states as outsiders. So if someone doesn't get that they wanted to split from the US rather than conquering the whole thing, then they've misunderstood one of the most basic facts about the CSA and the reasons for the war, and that renders the entire exercise invalid from the start.

The movie isn't really about that kind of stuff, it mainly uses the CSA taking over whole country as a way to have slavery still around, which is really what the main focus of the movie is. It's not really that deep or serious of a look at what would realistically would have happened if the Confederacy had actually won the war.

 

[Christopher]

The movie isn't really about that kind of stuff, it mainly uses the CSA taking over whole country as a way to have slavery still around, which is really what the main focus of the movie is.

Yeah, but that's hardly necessary. The South wanted to secede, to become their own separate country that would have slavery. In short, exactly what Texas did when it split from Mexico in order to keep slavery and declared itself an independent country for a while (until the US annexed it). If the goal is to show slavery still existing, just show the Confederacy as what it actually wanted to be, a separate nation from the US. That's not a hard thing to get right.

 

[Jayson1]

Yeah, but that's hardly necessary. The South wanted to secede, to become their own separate country that would have slavery. In short, exactly what Texas did when it split from Mexico in order to keep slavery and declared itself an independent country for a while (until the US annexed it). If the goal is to show slavery still existing, just show the Confederacy as what it actually wanted to be, a separate nation from the US. That's not a hard thing to get right.

That could have worked but what they did do was also interesting. I mean it wasn't the greatest thing ever but it worked pretty well. Especially since they had no budget.

Jason

 

[JD]

Yeah, but that's hardly necessary. The South wanted to secede, to become their own separate country that would have slavery. In short, exactly what Texas did when it split from Mexico in order to keep slavery and declared itself an independent country for a while (until the US annexed it). If the goal is to show slavery still existing, just show the Confederacy as what it actually wanted to be, a separate nation from the US. That's not a hard thing to get right.

But it's a more dramatic, extreme change to have them take over the whole country.
Like I said, this wasn't going for some big realistic, historically accurate take on the topic, it was just kinda goofy to honestly. You're taking this whole thing way more seriously than they did in the movie.

 

[Christopher]

But it's a more dramatic, extreme change to have them take over the whole country.

But then it's not about the American Civil War. It's about some cartoon evil plot.

Like I said, this wasn't going for some big realistic, historically accurate take on the topic, it was just kinda goofy to honestly. You're taking this whole thing way more seriously than they did in the movie.

And that is exactly my point, that it sounds like a ridiculous take on the subject.

 

[David cgc]

It's been a terribly long time since I saw the mockumentary, but as I recall, the main thrust of it was how much of their cartoonishly exaggerated world where the Confederacy took over America was thinly veiled, though often ignored, real history. The ending specifically called out that many, if not all, of the blatantly racist alternate-history products being advertised during "commercial breaks" were very real, like Darkie toothpaste and Gold Dust cleaner.

 

[Charles Phipps]

But then it's not about the American Civil War. It's about some cartoon evil plot..

No it isn't. The South funded attempts to take over other nations to introduce slavery in real life.

Besides once the war was fought, only one nation would survive it. There was never any chance of the North recognizing Southern independence. A complete defeat and legalization of slavery is no more unrealistic.

 

[Guy Gardener]

It's been a terribly long time since I saw the mockumentary, but as I recall, the main thrust of it was how much of their cartoonishly exaggerated world where the Confederacy took over America was thinly veiled, though often ignored, real history. The ending specifically called out that many, if not all, of the blatantly racist alternate-history products being advertised during "commercial breaks" were very real, like Darkie toothpaste and Gold Dust cleaner.

Darkie toothpaste was real until 1989.

https://newsone.com/2853883/darkie-darlie-toothpaste-colgate/

At the end, maybe during the credits, they detail how all the racist products that were advertised during the show used to be or still were a thing in the real world where we live.

 

[JD]

But then it's not about the American Civil War. It's about some cartoon evil plot.

It's not about the Civil War, it's about a world where the Confederacy took over, after the Civil War.

And that is exactly my point, that it sounds like a ridiculous take on the subject.

That's exactly what it is, and from the looks of the movie that was exactly what it was trying to be it, It's an exaggerated satire. The whole thing is based around the racial issues, not the politics of the real Confederacy. Not every movie, or every story has to be completely realistic and authentic.

 

[Ovation]

Yeah, but that's hardly necessary. The South wanted to secede, to become their own separate country that would have slavery. In short, exactly what Texas did when it split from Mexico in order to keep slavery and declared itself an independent country for a while (until the US annexed it). If the goal is to show slavery still existing, just show the Confederacy as what it actually wanted to be, a separate nation from the US. That's not a hard thing to get right.

Why don’t you try watching it before telling everybody why a satirical mockumentary is “getting it wrong”.

 

[Christopher]

Not every movie, or every story has to be completely realistic and authentic.

There's a place in the world for junk food, but if someone says they'd rather find a good restaurant, there's nothing wrong with having that preference. So please allow me to have my preference. It is not bad to have standards.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

This is exactly why history teachers (at any level above middle school, and arguably earlier) need to explain the context of things like the Antebellum South or 20th century fascism or Soviet oppression of Eastern Europe or colonialism or... A facile “these were the purely evil bad guys” may offer a moment of moral superiority and satisfaction but does very little, if anything, to advance our understanding of such movements or forces, thereby offering no insight on how to recognize them in their early stages where resistance and reversal can happen without extreme consequences for targets of oppression.

Well said.

Creating fictional Boogeymen (as seen in Supergirl) is not a realistic address of the issues behind any subject or event, but self-congratulatory finger wagging without understanding what they are setting before cameras.

Nope. That attitude violates the essential core of my profession (I’m an historian). Moreover, it’s counterproductive in the long run, as denying context renders events, people, and movements meaningless and significantly interferes with learning how to recognize similar situations in their early, less obvious stages.

Explaining DOES NOT equal endorsement. It DOES, however, lead to understanding (not in the sense of empathy for perpetrators of oppression and other vile actions but understanding how and why such actions can arise—knowledge is the most effective countermeasure).

Again, well said.

 

[YLu]

There's a place in the world for junk food, but if someone says they'd rather find a good restaurant, there's nothing wrong with having that preference. So please allow me to have my preference. It is not bad to have standards.

Preferences is fine, but elitism is something else. You realize you're essentially saying people who enjoy highly unrealistic fiction or, I guess, junk food do so because they have lower standards than you?

 

[Christopher]

Preferences is fine, but elitism is something else. You realize you're essentially saying people who enjoy highly unrealistic fiction or, I guess, junk food do so because they have lower standards than you?

Whaaaaaaaa???? I haven't said a thing about other viewers. I've strictly expressed my own reaction to the premise, as someone with a history degree reacting to a hypothetical alternate history and its plausibility. I'm not judging any member of the audience; any judgment I've expressed is directed toward the creators of the work and the standards they put into their creation. If you're satisfied with the movie, fine. That's got nothing to do with me, and my skepticism toward the premise has nothing to do with you. So we're both entitled to express our opinions without the other seeing it as directed toward them. It's solely directed toward the work itself, as criticism always should be.

 

[JD]

There's a place in the world for junk food, but if someone says they'd rather find a good restaurant, there's nothing wrong with having that preference. So please allow me to have my preference. It is not bad to have standards.

I never meant to imply you can't have your preferences, it just seemed like you were approaching this from a different perspective than the creators did, and I was just trying to explain what perspective the creators were approaching it from.

 

[Greg Cox]

FYI: DC's big new "Leviathan Rising" event starts tomorrow at comic shops everywhere.

How much this ties in with SUPERGIRL's next season is anyone's guess.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

This is why I wish HBO hadn't chickened out of doing that show were the South had won the Civil War. That could have been one of the most hard hitting political shows that really explore racism in a realistic way. I know it's silly to even think of "Supergirl" being on par with a HBO drama but it could do things a little better. Maybe not to much, because of the youth connected target audience, aka little kids, but still better.

Jason

Someone's spoken out about this show and why it's not really needed:

I Don’t Want to Watch Slavery Fan Fiction

Despite how good The Man In The High Castle and V For Vendetta is, I agree with the author.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Supergirl
Season Four Ratings*

Compare S4 with season three's ratings:

*Courtesy of tvseriesfinale.com

 

[JanewayRulz!]

CW ratings for all of its shows for the 2018-2019 season... https://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/cw-2018-19-season-ratings.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Supergirl came in 4th place of all CW shows, both in total viewers and in the favored 18-49 demographic.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Jon 2 months ago

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Jon 2 weeks ago

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Can't wait for Crisis on IE next year.

 

[Jayson1]

Those ratings are kind of weird in that Supernatural is 3rd and Arrow 5th so I don't know why they would want to cancel them. I can go with some more seasons from them. Of course it's a tv sin that "Legends of Tomorrow" doesn't get better ratings but a even bigger one is "Crazy Ex-Girlfriend" being dead last. I really got into that show just recently and I am starting it's 4th and final season and frankly it's the best show on the CW. How in the world does the show come into last place? To use the pun, This is why we can't have nice things.


Jason