Everything that TrekBBS is not. Shocking, I know.
Spoilers Batwoman - Season 1
- Thread starter dahj
- Start date
Sort of skimmed through this thread and was surprised about that "weakening men" take, which I didn't get at all, and if there is a bit of ham-handedness than perhaps in the name of inclusiveness to a young audience, why not? Dirty Harry? How about Dirty Hariette? Got a Girl with the Dragon Tattoo vibe from the whole trailer.
I liked the trailer.
I don't see any evidence of the men in the trailer being "weakened" unless you call the bad guys getting their lights punched out by the hero as "weakening".
If so then Stephen Amel has been doing that for 7 years and no one's complained.
Oh, and just because she wants to get credit for the work she's doing, I don't see that as "man hating". She's just a new age Rosalind Franklin who isn't going to go away quietly. Thankyou to the commenter up thread pointing out the red costume/hair modification after her "credit" comment that purposefully highlighted her gender.
At least the redness is less a target than Batman's old yellow oval.
https://www.target.com/p/batman-men...heritage-batman-costume-one-size/-/A-14657186
I guess there is an argument for Kate Kane's inappropriate "cultural appropriation" of the bat mantel, but can it really be considered that if she just used her cousin's equipment?
Since I've not been a comic reader for the last 20 years, I'm not up on Batwoman. Is the guy she's hugging in the trailer (the head of Crow Securities) her father? If so I assume that means he's Martha Wayne's younger brother? Does he know Bruce is Batman and if so did he tell his daughter, or does she somehow know the truth from Bruce himself?
I don't see any evidence of the men in the trailer being "weakened" unless you call the bad guys getting their lights punched out by the hero as "weakening".
If so then Stephen Amel has been doing that for 7 years and no one's complained.Oh, and just because she wants to get credit for the work she's doing, I don't see that as "man hating". She's just a new age Rosalind Franklin who isn't going to go away quietly. Thankyou to the commenter up thread pointing out the red costume/hair modification after her "credit" comment that purposefully highlighted her gender.
At least the redness is less a target than Batman's old yellow oval.
https://www.target.com/p/batman-men...heritage-batman-costume-one-size/-/A-14657186
I guess there is an argument for Kate Kane's inappropriate "cultural appropriation" of the bat mantel, but can it really be considered that if she just used her cousin's equipment?
Since I've not been a comic reader for the last 20 years, I'm not up on Batwoman. Is the guy she's hugging in the trailer (the head of Crow Securities) her father? If so I assume that means he's Martha Wayne's younger brother? Does he know Bruce is Batman and if so did he tell his daughter, or does she somehow know the truth from Bruce himself?
Last edited:
Yes, Jacob Kane is Kate's father. I don't know if he's aware of Batman's identity in the comics. From the trailer, it looks as though the show's Kate discovers that for herself.
For the sake of argument, why doesn't she say "I'm not about to let anyone take credit for my work."?
Maybe it's not man hating just empowering or whatever, I'm not trying to argue it's bad just that it's definitely very present and prevalent throughout. In these times, is it necessary to lay it on thick? Maybe...
Last edited:
If you've been following the news this past week? Yes, absolutely. Women's basic rights and equality are under attack in the US to a degree they haven't been in generations.
Hence, in these times...
Did you check the ^^ sneak peak clip too?
" 'Find your own way'. That's why Bruce became Batman..."
Sounds like "he" was talking to someone. I assume it was Bruce to Kate, by phone or by text.
Guess we'll have to wait for a few more months to find out the truth for this series.
Hmmmm.
So the inner aspect of the cape IS supposed to be red. I wondered since it wasn't red in the Elseworlds' cross over.
I had forgotten the "no one has seen Bruce in 3 years" stuff from Elseworlds.
I like the Batcave under the Wayne Building more in the new trailer than in the Elseworlds' scene.
I also loved Kara's embarrassment ^ when Kate teased that she had more tattoos than Kara could see.
Geezzz.
This Batwoman stuff ^^ is more complicated than I expected.
This next promo includes a snippet of a scene we (?) haven't seen before.
Yup, that darned CW network is just a hotbed of SJW's.
^ Personally, I like the last promo.
Because the only one who could take credit from her in the public consciousness is batMAN?
In case you are wondering why women tend to be anal about getting credit for what they do, here's the story about Rosalind Franklin's short life.
So would Rosalind Franklin be OK if it was another woman taking credit for her work? I guess I can't really get across why that line rubs me wrong without coming off badly so I'll stop (I'll concede maybe I need to reevaluate my own thoughts). And I still think the line likely plays better in context of whatever they are actually discussing.
Please remember the lesson of Shazam!
At least Levi looked like Shazam, and the basic premise was the same (kid gets magic powers from a Wizard). Its a totally different situation, especially since The CW fails much more then it succeeds at this point.
So, no, there is no comparison. The Shazam film took a bad comic and managed to make it an enjoyable film by changing most of the really bad parts. "Batwoman" is stealing the name of a comic character (and basically nothing else) and making a terrible, generic CW show. Comparing how the two are going about adapting a superhero is like comparing Captain America: The First Avenger to the first Reb Brown Captain America TV movie.
There is no other context for what they're discussing.
She wants Luke to redesign the suit so that the public knows at a glance that she's a woman and not a man.
Last edited:
You might want to watch the documentary before you ask that question, Mr. A.
The narrator is a voice you might fondly recognize.
And no, its not Nichelle Nichols.
Instead of complaining about a line in the trailer maybe guys could google a bit and inform themselves how women have been historically, and unfortunately still to this day, undervalued at the workplace, held to different standards, how still prevalent sexist attitudes lead to men getting hired and promoted over equally(or better) qualified women, how we still on average get paid less for doing the same job, etc.
Just a thought.
Just a thought.
Instead of complaining about a line in the trailer maybe guys could google a bit and inform themselves how women have been historically, and unfortunately still to this day, undervalued at the workplace, held to different standards, how still prevalent sexist attitudes lead to men getting hired and promoted over equally(or better) qualified women, how we still on average get paid less for doing the same job, etc.
Just a thought.
Then it wouldn't be mansplaining.
Yeah, lesson not learned. All the stuff you're saying about Shazam! now is with benefit of hindsight. Before you saw it, you had nothing even remotely positive to say; on the contrary, your negative hyperbole was at your usual apocalyptic pitch.
The lesson was: wait until you see it, then judge.
You're negative and dismissive of a trailer you recently saw and thinking the whole things is going to be junk as a result? This is new!
Looking over the comments in the YT page for the Batwoman trailer which, yeah, I know they're YouTube comments so you kind of have to expect this but...
I just see more of the disgusting, repulsive and toxic behavior from so many triggered men and in one case a "humorous" thread they're using that doesn't even make sense.
A few months ago there was a viral video of a transgendered woman get upset in a store and yelling at the clerk to refer to her a "ma'am" after he'd apparently used a masculine pronoun for her and continued to do so.
People found this funny since, well, the woman wasn't "passing" very well and hadn't quite found her new voice (if she was even try to use one) so it became something of a meme.
In the YT comments section many people seem to be wanting to call this BatMA'AM because.... Ruby Rose looks like a middle-aged transgendered woman early in her transition...
Huh?
I don't get it, but it's just despicable behavior.
It wasn't by any stretch a great trailer or, hell, even really "good" but I didn't find it terrible and think it looks potentially, maybe, promising. But I like Ruby Rose and seeing her kick-ass might be enough for me.
I dunno, but so many people seem to want to just be so easily set off by any suggestion of a woman behaving in a masculine/dominant way. The trailer maybe went a bit far with the feminisim stuff (the word "hero" becoming "her") but considering the centuries, nay, millennia women have gone through of being treated as so secondary to men I think it somewhat gets a pass.
In the trailer this woman acts smug and as if she doesn't need help from anyone, particularly men, around her. It's like she's... a flawed character or something? I mean... I mean... What use is that? Other than, I dunno, the arc of the show being her learning she does need help from those around her.
I am constantly amazed by the shrieking fragility and cowardice of men who purport to be defending the strength and superiority of the masculine sex. Genuinely strong people aren't terrified by the existence of other strong people.
I'd request, though, that you don't use the word "triggered" to characterize their behavior. People like them have co-opted that word to mean "offended," but that's a profound corruption of its meaning. The term refers to a post-traumatic stress trigger, a stimulus that can trigger a genuine panic attack or flashback in a PTSD sufferer. It's a serious and deeply distressing psychological and medical symptom, and using it as a derogatory label for someone who's merely had their sensibilities offended is highly inconsiderate and inappropriate. It should be reserved for use by people who actually have PTSD, and to caution them about discussions of subject matter that could be traumatic for them.