You're both adorable.
Spoilers Batwoman - Season 1
- Thread starter dahj
- Start date
Really? That's your only reply to this? Snarky comment? I would actually really appreciate it if you could come with something of more substance. Something that's more than three words and actually builds a foundation for your thoughts and comments. Something that could bring some depth to this discussion perhaps?
Yup. Looks like.
If you're a professional, you would know exactly what I am saying. We all have had to work with people we disagree with, people we dislike, people who get on out nerves--and we put on a public face that does not show that as long as everyone is working toward the same goal. You know, be "professional".
"Professional"? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means...
Guys, if I had a contractor dip out on me mid-way through a project because they can't hack it, necessitating me to not only hire someone else to fill their role, reorganise *everyone* else's schedules, AND have to toss almost all previous planning and almost all progress made, effectively starting the whole thing over (to say nothing of the budget and having to explain all of this to the people upstairs)...I'm not hiring that contractor back anytime soon. They would have just proven themselves to be unreliable, and as any professional would know, reliability is everything. Flakes are bad for business.
Conversely, if I had just quit a gig because I was unhappy with the working conditions, or unsatisfied to such a degree that I'm willing to violate a contract agreement to get out of there...and then a few months later they call me up and are like "hey can you come back to cover a shift for a week" or "would you mind coming back to help your replacement get their project off the ground"; the answer from any sane and not utterly desperate person would be along the lines of "fuck no!". On this side of things professionalism per see isn't the issue, it's professional integrity and self respect. It's a small world, people talk and if you get a reputation for flip-flopping, or worse as a doormat, you're not getting hired by the kinds of people you want to get hired by.
None of this is about individual personalities. It's all about business. So no, I don't see either party being in any hurry to work with each other again...unless a LOT of money is involved.
Guys, if I had a contractor dip out on me mid-way through a project because they can't hack it, necessitating me to not only hire someone else to fill their role, reorganise *everyone* else's schedules, AND have to toss almost all previous planning and almost all progress made, effectively starting the whole thing over (to say nothing of the budget and having to explain all of this to the people upstairs)...I'm not hiring that contractor back anytime soon. They would have just proven themselves to be unreliable, and as any professional would know, reliability is everything. Flakes are bad for business.
Conversely, if I had just quit a gig because I was unhappy with the working conditions, or unsatisfied to such a degree that I'm willing to violate a contract agreement to get out of there...and then a few months later they call me up and are like "hey can you come back to cover a shift for a week" or "would you mind coming back to help your replacement get their project off the ground"; the answer from any sane and not utterly desperate person would be along the lines of "fuck no!". On this side of things professionalism per see isn't the issue, it's professional integrity and self respect. It's a small world, people talk and if you get a reputation for flip-flopping, or worse as a doormat, you're not getting hired by the kinds of people you want to get hired by.
None of this is about individual personalities. It's all about business. So no, I don't see either party being in any hurry to work with each other again...unless a LOT of money is involved.
Last edited:
And as Ruby Rose isn't that big a name and it's the CW we can rule out any big money.
When it comes to actors, it really depends on the situation. There are a lot of examples of actors who leave a show, and then come back later in a one off or recurring capacity. On the Trek shows, Denise Crosby, Wil Wheaton and Jennifer Lien left, and then came back at least once.
I've been watching The Waltons on MeTV for the last few months, and that had both Ellen Corby, who played the grandmother, and Michael Learned, who played the mother, leave, but then still pop back up for a few episodes later.
In the original CSI, Jorja Fox left the show and then a couple years later she came back full time.
24 killed off Carlos Bernard as Tony Almeida in Season 5, but then he showed up alive in Season 7, and popped up a few more times later on in the franchise.
I think the fact that they are having Kate disappear, rather than killing her off, could mean that they are leaving open the possibility of Ruby Rose showing back up in some capacity later.
It can very much depend on when the actors leave and under what circumstances (were contracts up, did they announce it part way through the season and I don't think of them were the lead characters.
Sometimes the workload can get to a point where it becomes too much for the actor and they decide to leave.
Can also depend on the relationship between the cast members and the producers.
sometimes producers can back themselves into a corner with a character that makes it hard for them continue c.f Zoe McLellan in NCIS: New Orleans.
Other times characters can be intended for certain number of episodes or series and the actors are contracted for that period of time (the character of Dodo disappeared from Doctor Who because the actresses contract finished part way through a story so she fell asleep on a bench and was never mentioned again and Jacqueline Pearce was contracted for a certain number of episodes in S4 of Blake's 7 and was pissed off that S04E13 rolled around but her contract was finished).
Sometimes actors get canned without actually knowing about it (Kevin Kilner after the first series of Earth: Final Conflict though that was later retconned).
But a lead who quits partway through the first series and things get messy. Can't think of another examples of this off the top of my head (yes there was there Genevieve Bujold, but she quit Voyager with in the first days of filming Caretaker, not after the show had gone to air).
Were any of those examples you cited principle cast members? Were they in the title role? Were their contracts up? Did they give proper notice? These things matter. Context matters.
In the case of The Waltons, IIRC that on and off recasting was just the show runners doing their best to accommodate some on-going health issues with the very elderly actress in question. Not really applicable here.
All of the people I talked about were main cast members, that was why I used them as examples. I'm not sure exactly why all of them left though.
That was just Ellen Corby as Grandma, from what I found on Wikipedia Michael Learned just didn't want to do the show full time any more. And at the point she left, she was one of only 3 actors included in the opening credits, along with Corby, and Ralph Waite as the father.
The Waltons was the worst.
You're confusing "principle cast" with "is in the title sequence." Not the same thing. All of the ones you listed were supporting or recurring cast members. All of them disposable, and indeed the shows themselves were strictly episodic with ensemble casts, not serialised, arc based shows centred around a main character....you know, like Batwoman.
Those shows have *way* for latitude on how many cast members they can ditch before they run into trouble. Hell, by the time Jennifer Lien called it a day, her character was so underused one could be forgiven for hardly noticing her absence.
Even if Mulgrew, Brooks or Stewart had decided they wanted out it would have been a relatively minor problem to write around since even as the Captains, they shows didn't really centre on them so much. Those shows were entirely different animals.
I really don't see the point of comparison between a period family drama made in the 70's and a modern arc based superhero show. Apples and oranges.
Last edited:
If her back/neck gave out, and she can't do stunts any more, then the producers should be fine with her.
They're TV shows with people in the cast, that's good enough for me.
And with Batwoman we still don't really know enough of what happened to know how the people in charge of the show felt about Ruby Rose leaving. I haven't seen anything to indicate that there are any hard feelings on either side.
Like I said before, the fact that they aren't outright killing her off, could mean that they are open to her coming back in some form.
If that was the case, they'd have said so. Better press.
Well that's just being wilfully ignorant. Which incidentally is the point where I no longer care enough to continue. Toodles!
Then she is uninsurable, and can't act anymore.
Not true.
In "The War Machines" both Dodo's absence from the last 2 episodes and her departure are addressed.
The absence is addressed right after the Doctor breaks WOTAN's control over Dodo. The Doctor says she'll sleep for about 48 hours and then need quite and rest to recuperate. Sir Charles offers to have her sent to his country estate and have his wife look after her.
The departure is addressed right at the end of the story. Polly passes along a message from Dodo to the Doctor, who was waiting outside the TARDIS for Dodo to show up, that she's feeling better and has decided to stay.
In a novel, a third Doctor era trapped on Earth Master captured Dodo, and then tortured her to death, trying to find out the Doctor's secrets.
One thing I don't understand in that logic of them now hating Ruby Rose for her presumed unprofessionalism, if she gave so little notice and threw a wrench in the showrunners' plans, why did they create a completely new character for the lead?
If they really were married to their original plans, they just would have recast the Kate Kane character, but they didn't do that. They went to the considerable trouble of creating a whole new character. It wasn't Rose who made them abandon/change their planned story arcs, they did that themselves.
So, no, I don't buy that they now consider her persona non grata.
If they really were married to their original plans, they just would have recast the Kate Kane character, but they didn't do that. They went to the considerable trouble of creating a whole new character. It wasn't Rose who made them abandon/change their planned story arcs, they did that themselves.
So, no, I don't buy that they now consider her persona non grata.