Spoilers Batwoman - Season 1

Christopher · Aug 31, 2019

dodge said:
Kara did basically the same thing, she "found herself" in adopting the S("it's not an S"), so I don't get why this is such a problem all of a sudden.

That's not really the same thing, though, because the El mayarah (Supergirl's name for the symbol) is the family crest of the House of El, and Kara grew up on Krypton wearing that symbol on literally every outfit she ever wore, even her pajamas. Heck, since she was born about a dozen years before Kal-El, it was her symbol long before it was his.

What she ended up adopting to mirror Superman was the rest of the costume -- the red and blue color scheme and the cape. Although according to the pilot, she and Winn experimented with a range of other ideas before settling on that as the most practical, so I guess she had some ambivalence about coming too close to her cousin's look.

dahj · Aug 31, 2019

Tuskin38 said:
but there's something off with the cowl.

Problem with the graphite, the next shipment will be up to spec.

Reverend · Aug 31, 2019

dodge said:
She's not adopting an identity, she's adopting a symbol.

Kara did basically the same thing, she "found herself" in adopting the S("it's not an S"), so I don't get why this is such a problem all of a sudden.

History of feminism is basically society saying "this is only for men" and women saying "no, we can do this too" so I see no dissonance between "being yourself" and taking something that was only for men and making it your own.

I get what you're saying, but I don't think the two are really comparable.
For one, the "symbol" of Batman is it's identity, to all intents and purposes. Secondly, the 'S' isn't just Superman's symbol, it's the symbol of the House of El, one that she wore before Kal was even born. It's a birthright. Also, she never made a big deal about choosing an identity for herself, rather she was enthused to follow in her cousin's footsteps.

Again, I'm not saying it's a "this is for men only" thing. Do I need to keep stressing that? In my books it's fine to have a Batwoman, Batgirl, or non-gendered Batperson. Hell, my two favourite characters in the Bat Family (perhaps even more that Bruce) are Barb & Cass!
It's just if one is going to take the tack of "I'm going to make my own identity" for a character, maybe not have them present as being derivative? And visa versa, if you want to tell a story about a character taking up the mantle of a very well established persona, perhaps not write them having such a chip on their shoulder about their individuality? It seems to me like these concepts are inherently at odds. You can pick one, or the other. To my way of thinking, trying to have it both ways makes the character come off as hypocritical at best, cluelessly lacking in self-awareness at worse.

Needless to say, that's not a good look for someone that's suppose to be a positive role model, or at the very least, a compelling hero. I'd much rather see this done intelligently and not resort to something as cheap as a bat themed rendition of 'Anything You Can Do'.

dahj · Aug 31, 2019

Reverend said:
It's just if one is going to take the tack of "I'm going to make my own identity" for a character, maybe not have them present as being derivative? And visa versa, if you want to tell a story about a character taking up the mantle of a very well established persona, perhaps not write them having such a chip on their shoulder about their individuality? It seems to me like these concepts are inherently at odds. You can pick one, or the other. To my way of thinking, trying to have it both ways makes the character come off as hypocritical at best, cluelessly lacking in self-awareness at worse.

You're kinda misconstruing a couple of things here.

For one, I think you're confusing individuality and uniqueness. Especially when it comes to visual presentation. Whatever hairstyle, clothes, shoes you wear etc. I'm sure feel pretty individual to you, but there's probably thousands of guys out there who look exactly the same. Does that take away from your individuality? No. And if there's ever been a comics family that expressed, maybe not thousands, but sooooo many different individualities within one unique theme it's the Bat-Family.

Secondly, it's clear from the first trailer that she doesn't just decide "I'm gonna be a Lady-Batman" She puts on a batsuit out of necessity because it's the only one available and then gets confused for Batman. And when she decides she wants to do this full time she goes ahead to forge the identity of Batwoman.

Now okay, you can say that she could have then decided "I'm gonna be The Incredible Aardvark-Woman" or whatever, and while that would certainly be more unique, that's not really the point.
The Bat now means something to her, it's what got her started on this path, it's a reminder of her missing cousin... and it means something to Gotham, so yeah she is definitely making a statement with it saying she's not gonna be a vigilante, she's gonna be the vigilante. And if anyone's individuality is so cocky to say that, it's definitely Kate Kane's.

Mage · Aug 31, 2019

dodge said:
You're kinda misconstruing a couple of things here.

For one, I think you're confusing individuality and uniqueness. Especially when it comes to visual presentation. Whatever hairstyle, clothes, shoes you wear etc. I'm sure feel pretty individual to you, but there's probably thousands of guys out there who look exactly the same. Does that take away from your individuality? No. And if there's ever been a comics family that expressed, maybe not thousands, but sooooo many different individualities within one unique theme it's the Bat-Family.

Secondly, it's clear from the first trailer that she doesn't just decide "I'm gonna be a Lady-Batman" She puts on a batsuit out of necessity because it's the only one available and then gets confused for Batman. And when she decides she wants to do this full time she goes ahead to forge the identity of Batwoman.

Now okay, you can say that she could have then decided "I'm gonna be The Incredible Aardvark-Woman" or whatever, and while that would certainly be more unique, that's not really the point.
The Bat now means something to her, it's what got her started on this path, it's a reminder of her missing cousin... and it means something to Gotham, so yeah she is definitely making a statement with it saying she's not gonna be a vigilante, she's gonna be the vigilante. And if anyone's individuality is so cocky to say that, it's definitely Kate Kane's.

Well f*** me.... That's the first time anyone actually made me feel more interested in her choices as to becoming Batwoman.
That is one hell of a way of looking at things, and I love it!
The whole idea of "it means something to Gotham and I will make it mine".... I love that.

Reverend · Sep 1, 2019

dodge said:
You're kinda misconstruing a couple of things here.

For one, I think you're confusing individuality and uniqueness. Especially when it comes to visual presentation. Whatever hairstyle, clothes, shoes you wear etc. I'm sure feel pretty individual to you, but there's probably thousands of guys out there who look exactly the same. Does that take away from your individuality? No. And if there's ever been a comics family that expressed, maybe not thousands, but sooooo many different individualities within one unique theme it's the Bat-Family.

Secondly, it's clear from the first trailer that she doesn't just decide "I'm gonna be a Lady-Batman" She puts on a batsuit out of necessity because it's the only one available and then gets confused for Batman. And when she decides she wants to do this full time she goes ahead to forge the identity of Batwoman.

Now okay, you can say that she could have then decided "I'm gonna be The Incredible Aardvark-Woman" or whatever, and while that would certainly be more unique, that's not really the point.
The Bat now means something to her, it's what got her started on this path, it's a reminder of her missing cousin... and it means something to Gotham, so yeah she is definitely making a statement with it saying she's not gonna be a vigilante, she's gonna be the vigilante. And if anyone's individuality is so cocky to say that, it's definitely Kate Kane's.

All I'm gonna say is: you're making a much better case then the promos are, and leave it at that.

TREK_GOD_1 · Sep 1, 2019

Reverend said:
All I'm gonna say is: you're making a much better case then the promos are, and leave it at that.

True. And a trailer/spots should not need faceless fans to interpret/sell the concept. That is the job of the producers and the network airing it...

dahj · Sep 5, 2019

Marc · Sep 10, 2019

For those in Canada, Batwoman will be on Showcase.

Just saw a promo for it.

Mage · Sep 10, 2019

Marc said:
For those in Canada, Batwoman will be on Showcase.

Just saw a promo for it.

I hope this is a good sign that international negotiations are completed or nearing it anyway. Still no word on who's gonna stream or air it in the Netherlands.

Marc · Sep 10, 2019

Mage said:
I hope this is a good sign that international negotiations are completed or nearing it anyway. Still no word on who's gonna stream or air it in the Netherlands.

It's also a sign of how they can get messy

Showcase has Supergirl and now Batwoman, Syfy has Legends and Arrow. The Flash has vanished into the speedforce and Blacklightning hasn't been shown.

Also being on Showcase means that SG and BW won't be on crave which is the Canadian competitor to Netflix (which will probably wind up with both shows).

JD · Sep 11, 2019

I'm surprised they'd split them up like that. I would think with these shows so interconnected it would be an all or none kind of thing, everywhere they show them.

Marc · Sep 11, 2019

JD said:
I'm surprised they'd split them up like that. I would think with these shows so interconnected it would be an all or none kind of thing, everywhere they show them.

Remember when Supergirl started out it was very much disconnected from Arrow and the Flash. Those two programs were picked up by CTV (owned by Bell Media) overtime where shifted to CTV2 (which fewer people had) and finally onto Space (not Syfy as I wrote earlier) which is also owned by Bell.

It has made things fun with the cross-overs.

Ovation · Sep 11, 2019

Marc said:
It's also a sign of how they can get messy

Showcase has Supergirl and now Batwoman, Syfy has Legends and Arrow. The Flash has vanished into the speedforce and Blacklightning hasn't been shown.

Also being on Showcase means that SG and BW won't be on crave which is the Canadian competitor to Netflix (which will probably wind up with both shows).

Flash is on Netflix Canada, just two days behind. Black Lightning is also on Netflix Canada, probably similarly behind.

CorporalCaptain · Sep 11, 2019

Christopher said:
That's not really the same thing, though, because the El mayarah (Supergirl's name for the symbol) is the family crest of the House of El, and Kara grew up on Krypton wearing that symbol on literally every outfit she ever wore, even her pajamas. Heck, since she was born about a dozen years before Kal-El, it was her symbol long before it was his.

Reverend said:
I get what you're saying, but I don't think the two are really comparable.
For one, the "symbol" of Batman is it's identity, to all intents and purposes. Secondly, the 'S' isn't just Superman's symbol, it's the symbol of the House of El, one that she wore before Kal was even born. It's a birthright. Also, she never made a big deal about choosing an identity for herself, rather she was enthused to follow in her cousin's footsteps.

Earth isn't Krypton, though. The crest of the House of El is interpreted by Earthlings as the sign of Superman. No Kryptonian on Earth has to wear a uniform or costume with Kryptonian significance when displaying their Kryptonian powers, especially when displaying their powers to be a superheroic symbol of truth and justice, just as they don't have adopt a secret identity and appear like regular Earthlings while not in that mode. Kara's decision to display the Kryptonian symbol in the same way that Kal-El had was very much, um, doing that the way that Kal-El had done it.

Reverend · Sep 11, 2019

CorporalCaptain said:
Earth isn't Krypton, though. The crest of the House of El is interpreted by Earthlings as the sign of Superman. No Kryptonian on Earth has to wear a uniform or costume with Kryptonian significance when displaying their Kryptonian powers, especially when displaying their powers to be a superheroic symbol of truth and justice, just as they don't have adopt a secret identity and appear like regular Earthlings while not in that mode. Kara's decision to display the Kryptonian symbol in the same way that Kal-El had was very much, um, doing that the way that Kal-El had done it.

And Kara isn't human, she's Kryptonian, no matter where she happens to live in the universe and that's essentially her family coat of arms. Also, in most interpretations of the material, the suit isn't meant to be a uniform, but a form of Kryptonian garb. Again, it's her cultural heritage.

Conversely, the bat symbol is not the Wayne (or Kane) family crest, the cape and cowl have no cultural significance and "scaring the shit of of muggers" is not a long held family tradition.

So no, these really are not comparable circumstances.

CorporalCaptain · Sep 11, 2019

Reverend said:
And Kara isn't human, she's Kryptonian, no matter where she happens to live in the universe and that's essentially her family coat of arms. Also, in most interpretations of the material, the suit isn't meant to be a uniform, but a form of Kryptonian garb. Again, it's her cultural heritage.

Conversely, the bat symbol is not the Wayne (or Kane) family crest, the cape and cowl have no cultural significance and "scaring the shit of of muggers" is not a long held family tradition.

So no, these really are not comparable circumstances.

The point is that the clothing is alien to Earth. In terms of how the clothing is perceived by Earthlings the circumstances are entirely comparable (while not being identical) and the detail that, oh, the clothing is really Kryptonian garb is irrelevant.

DigificWriter · Sep 11, 2019

I agree with those who are saying that Kate choosing to use Bruce's vigilante affectations is not comparable to Kara taking on a superhero persona based on Clark's because of the simple fact that the latter instance falls under the umbrella of cultural identification (as has already been pointed out).

Reverend · Sep 11, 2019

CorporalCaptain said:
The point is that the clothing is alien to Earth.

The point it may be, but I'm afraid not a *valid* point.

CorporalCaptain said:
In terms of how the clothing is perceived by Earthlings the circumstances are entirely comparable (while not being identical) and the detail that, oh, the clothing is really Kryptonian garb is irrelevant.

I'd really like to know what kind of bizarre logic can interpret a person wearing clothing and symbolism both specific and meaningful to their cultural heritage, and it being irrelevant to their cultural heritage.
And why would an earth centric perspective be the relevant one in this decision? Rhetorical question.

CorporalCaptain · Sep 11, 2019

Reverend said:
The point it may be, but I'm afraid not a *valid* point.

I'd really like to know what kind of bizarre logic can interpret a person wearing clothing and symbolism both specific and meaningful to their cultural heritage, and it being irrelevant to their cultural heritage.
And why would an earth centric perspective be the relevant one in this decision? Rhetorical question.

I wasn't talking about whether it was relevant to their cultural heritage. That was clear enough.

This off-topic sidebar is going nowhere, so not even agree to disagree, just disagree.

Spoilers Batwoman - Season 1

Writer

Vice Admiral

Admiral

Vice Admiral

Rear Admiral

Admiral

Vice Admiral

Vice Admiral

Fleet Admiral

Rear Admiral

Fleet Admiral

Fleet Admiral

Fleet Admiral

Admiral

Nerd

Admiral

Nerd

Vice Admiral

Admiral

Nerd

Forums