Powerless - New DC Universe based Sitcom
- Thread starter JoeZhang
- Start date
A wayward Joker goon, I'd imagine. Although I again have to wonder what he's doing outside of Gotham. Well, I guess he could be a Joker copycat.
Or maybe he's one of those clown-based villains who get created every few months by falls into Ace Chemical vats, as Emily mentioned last week.
This ep was an improvement. The show seems to be focusing more on the superhero stuff and less on the office stuff which is what it needs to do. The idea of Emily dating a henchman was a good one. The Batman and Robin jokes were good too. The show is not stellar by any means but at least it is not horrible anymore. It is a slightly below average, cute and amusing sitcom.
One thing I really like about the show is the main title sequence. Aside from it just being impressive that a modern sitcom even has a main title sequence, it's a really clever one, a superb way of conveying the premise of the show by taking classic comic-book covers and focusing in on the helpless civilians in the background. Pretty good theme music, too.
Here's an article that identifies all the source covers used in the title sequence (in "slideshow" format, unfortunately):
http://comicbook.com/dc/2017/02/02/powerless-what-are-the-comics-in-the-opening-credits-/
It doesn't really give a good look at the covers, but I've provided image links below, and for comparison, here's the title sequence on YouTube.
The first image, appropriately, is the Joe Shuster cover to Superman's debut in Action Comics #1, the beginning of the entire DC Universe -- though with the female character representing Vanessa Hudgens being new artwork (or maybe a lift from some other source) in place of the male civilian in the original image. The second is Gil Kane and Joe Giella's Green Lantern #25 cover from 1963, and the guy representing Danny Pudi is based on the original artwork. Next is Norm Breyfogle's Batman #455 cover from 1990, and Christina Kirk is also represented by a woman from the actual artwork. Ron Funches is drawn in place of a different black spectator on George Perez's The Flash #293 cover from 1981 -- followed by another Perez cover from 1988's Wonder Woman #24, with the guy dangling from the window redrawn to look like Alan Tudyk in a suit.
Whether any of these artists or their estates get paid for the reuse of the images is unclear, but it's good to know who they are, at least.
Here's an article that identifies all the source covers used in the title sequence (in "slideshow" format, unfortunately):
http://comicbook.com/dc/2017/02/02/powerless-what-are-the-comics-in-the-opening-credits-/
It doesn't really give a good look at the covers, but I've provided image links below, and for comparison, here's the title sequence on YouTube.
The first image, appropriately, is the Joe Shuster cover to Superman's debut in Action Comics #1, the beginning of the entire DC Universe -- though with the female character representing Vanessa Hudgens being new artwork (or maybe a lift from some other source) in place of the male civilian in the original image. The second is Gil Kane and Joe Giella's Green Lantern #25 cover from 1963, and the guy representing Danny Pudi is based on the original artwork. Next is Norm Breyfogle's Batman #455 cover from 1990, and Christina Kirk is also represented by a woman from the actual artwork. Ron Funches is drawn in place of a different black spectator on George Perez's The Flash #293 cover from 1981 -- followed by another Perez cover from 1988's Wonder Woman #24, with the guy dangling from the window redrawn to look like Alan Tudyk in a suit.
Whether any of these artists or their estates get paid for the reuse of the images is unclear, but it's good to know who they are, at least.
Well, kind of the whole point of the show is that it's not about the heroes, it's about the civilians. Putting the big-name heroes on camera would overshadow the characters that the show is about. So they're talked about rather than seen, like the grownups in Peanuts. The heroes we are seeing are minor, obscure ones, in part because they're available, but in part because they don't make us wonder why the show isn't about them instead.
The showrunner did say in an interview that it might be possible to bring in some familiar faces at some point as in-jokes and/or stunt casting -- say, have Grant Gustin show up as the "Earth-P" version of Barry Allen. But I suspect he was just speaking hypothetically.
Besides, it's not like we don't already have enough Batman on our screens. And this show is set in Charm City, not Gotham or Metropolis. I already mentioned how odd it was to have Batman and the Riddler in town. For the most part, the big heroes should be at more of a remove.
Yep, although it took me a few minutes to place him. At first I thought it was Scott Speedman instead.
Liked this one as well. Not perfect, but really nice. My favorite moment was Tudyk's "Go away, you're embarrassing me".
As to why Batman was in Charm City, I thought it was pretty clear that he came to retrieve the Batarang, since it did have GPS and he actually did retrieve it.
As to why Batman was in Charm City, I thought it was pretty clear that he came to retrieve the Batarang, since it did have GPS and he actually did retrieve it.
Except it's a hell of a coincidence if the Riddler and his gang just happen to be there at the same time. It seems more likely that Batman would've been tracking them, with the batarang being incidental. That's why it seems odd that he didn't show up to thwart the henchmen's robbery of Wayne Security (a business that Batman would presumably have an interest in protecting, given that he owns it).
And really, I wasn't asking for an in-story explanation; it's more that I'm concerned the writers are blurring the lines of comic-book geography too much. Including both Batman and the Riddler in the same episode, without establishing any causal link between their presences, made it feel like the show was set in Gotham City instead of Charm City. (Or should I say Gotham? Nobody seems to say the "City" part anymore, except when talking about the GCPD.) Not to mention that a Green Lantern was apparently in town around the same time. It makes the show's world feel too small. I hope they don't make a habit of that.
If they ever brought the A-list superheroes to the show, it might be fun to let the voice actors play them. Tim Daly as Clark Kent, Nathan Fillion as Hal Jordan, Michael Rosenbaum as Wally West, Kevin Conroy as Bruce Wayne would make the fans go crazy but he doesn't physically fit the part anymore.
I agree that he wouldn't work for
(Batman: TAS era c "1990s")
But I think he could still pull off my favourite of his DC voice roles:
(Old Bruce Wayne, Batman Beyond era c "2030s")
This week's episode could've been better. Too much of the generic office-sitcom stuff again and not enough DC/superhero-comedy stuff. The "invisible jet model kit" idea was funny, but too brief. (I have the impression there was a longer subplot about it in the original pilot.) "Cold season" being a convergence of ice-themed supervillains was a cute idea -- seriously, DC has a ridiculous number of those -- but they didn't do much with it. The climax with Crimson Fox was okay, but you'd think she would've been more appreciative of them saving her life -- and they missed a chance at a joke, because after she flew off with the heat gloves, Emily and Teddy were still stuck on the balcony and unable to unfreeze the doors.
Looks like tonight's episode was pulled at the last minute.
In favor of a rerun of another sitcom. That's not a good sign.
Ugh... Not only was this episode not funny, not only was it another generic office-sitcom plot having almost nothing to do with a superhero-universe premise, but much of it involved toilet humor. Most unpleasant.
The lack of exploration of the superhero angle is the biggest miss. I mean, isn't Wayne Security supposed to be in the business of inventing defenses against superpowered threats? Shouldn't they see the departure of Crimson Fox as a massive business opportunity, an incentive to develop some new protective devices? It's like the writers forgot what business their characters are actually in.
I gather it's only a couple of episodes more before Natalie Morales (yay) shows up as recurring superhero Green Fury, aka Fire. I'd assumed she'd be around in addition to Crimson Fox, but it looks like she's the replacement. Not that I mind; Crimson Fox was underwhelming as a character, her cowl is ugly as hell, and the show's version has nothing in common with her comics namesake.
The lack of exploration of the superhero angle is the biggest miss. I mean, isn't Wayne Security supposed to be in the business of inventing defenses against superpowered threats? Shouldn't they see the departure of Crimson Fox as a massive business opportunity, an incentive to develop some new protective devices? It's like the writers forgot what business their characters are actually in.
I gather it's only a couple of episodes more before Natalie Morales (yay) shows up as recurring superhero Green Fury, aka Fire. I'd assumed she'd be around in addition to Crimson Fox, but it looks like she's the replacement. Not that I mind; Crimson Fox was underwhelming as a character, her cowl is ugly as hell, and the show's version has nothing in common with her comics namesake.
Above all, a sitcom needs compelling and interesting characters who are flawed yet compelling. What's the opposite of compelling?
"I'ma friend you" was a terrible episode. The jokes were predictable and not funny. Like Christopher, I don't care for toilet humor. And the part between Emily and the secretary trying to be her friend did nothing for me. The episode did nothing with the superhero premise, just gave us bad office humor. 0/5
I don't mind toliet humor as long as it's funny. This wasn't. It was painful to watch.
