Spoilers Supergirl - Season 1

[davejames]

Right. Here's the Slade Wilson episode. Kara finds out there's a guy with guns trying to kill people. She finds him, disarms him and throws his ass in jail. What happens in the other 33 minutes of the episode?

Sigh, clearly I meant the kind of threat that he represented to the Arrow characters. Not Slade Wilson himself.

It's faithfulness is why it's good, whether you realize it or not.

That would suggest that any adaptation would be great as long as it was completely faithful to the source. Personally I think it's more to do with the writers and directors being really good at what they do, and knowing how to make a really good TV show.

 

[JD]

Faithfulness is nice, but it's not the only thing that determines quality.

I disagree emphatically. It would've basically implied that a female hero wouldn't be worth turning to unless her male equivalent were unavailable -- that if the male hero existed at all, he would automatically and inevitably overshadow a female hero. It would perpetuate sexist preconceptions, and it would undermine her as a character if it were suggested that she was only valuable as a substitute for Superman. So it's very important that Superman is, in fact, alive and well and yet Supergirl is still able to be an independent and noteworthy hero in her own right.

And the show has done a good job establishing reasons why they follow their own separate paths most of the time. She was the older cousin on Krypton, the one sent to protect him, so she wouldn't default to seeking his help. They both have their own cities to protect, and she feels she can't be effective and trusted by the people if she can't handle that job without Superman's help. Also, Superman preferentially works alone, and he doesn't work with the government, while Supergirl has DEO ties.

Besides, they didn't have to kill off Steve Austin to give Jaime Sommers her own series. They didn't have to kill off Hercules to give Xena her own series. For that matter, they didn't have to kill off Buffy to give Angel his own series. So why should this be any different?

Sure, audiences are going to ask questions about why Superman isn't around, but audiences always ask questions, and some of them are worthwhile questions and others are just silly and contentious. You can't base your creative decisions on worrying about what bees the audience will get in its bonnet. That would be writing defensively, and as Cat Grant wisely reminded us, it's unhealthy to let your choices in life be governed by fear.

I can understand all of that, and I don't mind how they've handled Superman, but I think his existence is geting to be a distraction, at least here. It just seems at times the more of the discussion on here is about Superman and when or if he'll show up. This is pretty much the only place I discuss this stuff, so it might not be as bad in other places. I haven't read many of the recaps or reviews on other sites, so I'm not sure how much other places are talking about him.

Well, gee, thanks for pointing out that this comic book fan is part of an insignificant minority whose opinions mean very little. I'll be sure to keep that in mind as we continue our discussion.

But on that subject: if the opinions and input of people who actually read comic books are that unnecessary to the success of the show, then why the hell is the focus of it a comic book character, who dresses like a comic book character and interacts with friends and foes taken right out of comic books? It's like opening an Italian restaurant and saying "Who gives a fuck what people from Italy think of the food?"

Honestly, comic book fans are going to be such a small fraction of the audience that they you can't cater just to them. Even though comic book shows and movies are popular right now, the number of people who actually read the comics is pretty small, so the number of people who watch the shows and movies but don't read the comics is going to be way, way, way bigger. They really need to appeal to everyone, rather than just the comic book fans. They are also two very different mediums, with different writers who are going to handle things in different ways.

Let's be real: if the creators really had no interest in offering any kind of satisfaction to comic book fans they would be doing Supergirl (and all the other Berlanti DC shows) like Kenneth Johnson's The Incredible Hulk, where the only things they took from the comic book are the title character and the title. There was never any question about what characters and villains would be added from the comics because you were made aware from the outset that the series creators were going to stay away from all that, for various reasons. So why isn't Berlanti and company doing it that way if comic book fans don't matter? (My theory is Kenneth Johnson and Co. were exponentially better writers than Berlanti and Co.)

I really don't feel that way. The Incredible Hulk is fun, but it's pretty much just another cliche ridden '70s man on the run show, doing the same stories those shows had already been doing for years. At least Supergirl does more original unique stories. It might not always be the best, most original show ever, but is at least more original than TIH.
I don't have the quotes handy right now, but I've never been bothered by supervillains facing heroes other than their usual nemesis. I tend to think of the villains as their own unique character, rather than someone that has to be connected to only one hero.

 

[Christopher]

Most recently Maxima, though.

Oh, right. I forgot her. And there's Cadmus too. And we know Superman has encountered J'onn at some point. So he hasn't had a completely boring career.

Faithfulness is nice, but it's not the only thing that determines quality.

Absolutely. You'll find more fans of the Bill Bixby Incredible Hulk, which strove to be as unlike the comics as possible, than you will for the Ang Lee Hulk, which was often excessively faithful to the comics in style as well as content. And while many admire Snyder's Watchmen for its shot-for-shot recreation of the comic, there are still many who feel it failed to capture the substance of what it copied. People who assume that fidelity is about copying the surface forms or exact plot details are missing the point. It's more important to be faithful to the spirit of the work than its letter.

I can understand all of that, and I don't mind how they've handled Superman, but I think his existence is geting to be a distraction, at least here. It just seems at times the more of the discussion on here is about Superman and when or if he'll show up. This is pretty much the only place I discuss this stuff, so it might not be as bad in other places. I haven't read many of the recaps or reviews on other sites, so I'm not sure how much other places are talking about him.

Like I said, the creators shouldn't base their decisions on what discussions the fans may or may not have. They need to do what serves the story. And they're the ones who get paid to decide that, the ones who've done the work and developed the skill and experience to make that kind of decision. It's bizarre that laypeople who have no training and experience in a profession feel that they're somehow qualified to judge the choices of trained experts. It's like having the passengers on a jet demanding to be let into the cockpit to tell the pilots how to fly. Sure, being aware of the passengers' comfort and needs is important, but not to the point that it gets in the way of the pilots' own professional judgment.

 

[JD]

Of course they should run the show how they see fit, but I can still state my opinion.

 

[Admiral2]

That would suggest that any adaptation would be great as long as it was completely faithful to the source. Personally I think it's more to do with the writers and directors being really good at what they do, and knowing how to make a really good TV show.

In this case, what the writers and directors did was hew to the good writers and artists that brought us the characters in the comics.

Source material is important, dave. it just is.

 

[Christopher]

Of course they should run the show how they see fit, but I can still state my opinion.

The point is, if you say "They should've killed off Superman because the fans keep asking questions about why he doesn't show up," that isn't a good enough reason. No matter what you do, some fans are going to question it. So that doesn't hold any water as an argument in favor of a creative choice.

 

[JD]

I guess that does make sense.

 

[Admiral2]

You know what I don't get? People around here keep saying "they won't show Superman because he would overshadow Supergirl" and those people don't realize surrounding her with his friends and foes means he's overshadowing her anyway. How is this not obvious?

It is not just about following or not following the comics. In fact, its true that they should be ignoring the comics, because then Kara could have original characters for friends and original villains to fight. But that isn't what they're doing. What they're doing is borrowing heavily from the comics and hoping nobody will notice because the person wearing the "S" has boobs. And those who fall for this spout the line "Well it's okay if they don't follow the comic exactly..." They are following the comics exactly! They just gender switched the protagonist!

 

[JD]

But they are creating unique relationships with the characters, and making them their own. Even if they started out as Superman characters, at this point the versions we see on the show are very much it's own characters.
I think a lot of it might come down to them wanting to use characters and elements that will be familiar to the people who aren't hardcore comic book fans.
I know a fair amount about comics, but I don't think I could name a single Supergirl supporting character, or a uniquely Supergirl villain other than Silver Banshee.

 

[DigificWriter]

I never thought I would see the day when someone was advocating that a comics-based property shouldn't actually draw on the comics upon which it's based.

 

[Admiral2]

But they are creating unique relationships with the characters, and making them their own. Even if they started out as Superman characters, at this point the versions we see on the show are very much it's own characters.
I think a lot of it might come down to them wanting to use characters and elements that will be familiar to the people who aren't hardcore comic book fans.
I know a fair amount about comics, but I don't think I could name a single Supergirl supporting character, or a uniquely Supergirl villain other than Silver Banshee.

Silver Banshee comes from John Byrne's run on Superman, JD.

I never thought I would see the day when someone was advocating that a comics-based property shouldn't actually draw on the comics upon which it's based.

On the contrary: I would be more than happy if it were based on the comic property the title suggests. It's not. It's based mostly on another property entirely. This is what I'm trying to get across.

 

[davejames]

I'd still say there's a big difference between Supergirl borrowing characters from, say, Batman or Wonder Woman, than borrowing them from Superman. Who is her cousin. With the same exact powers and same basic costume. And who is part of the same Superman Family.

And I seriously doubt the majority of viewers out there feel like the character is being "overshadowed" by Superman. Especially given all the praise for Benoist's charming performance and how emotionally invested many fans seem to be in her character.

 

[Corran Horn]

If I had one criticism of the handling it's that It's difficult to believe that there are sufficient things happening in-universe such that Superman is kept busy given the characters' reactions to some of the other things that have happened.

I'm too lazy to look up specific instances.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

The Incredible Hulk is fun, but it's pretty much just another cliche ridden '70s man on the run show, doing the same stories those shows had already been doing for years.

Nonsense. One, there were no "cliche ridden 70s man on the run series, aside from The Immortal--a 1970-71 series that was its own animal. The average 1970s tv series did not have a hero like Banner--for example, not only plagued in a Jekyll & Hyde situation, but fears of his other side he cannot control, experimenting on himself, only to bring out a violent, implied sexually aggressive tormentor, violated by the violent side of life the average TV character never faced, etc. The Incredible Hulk remains one of the most mature, intelligent comic adaptations in TV or film (one of the many reasons for its first run success and cultural longevity)--things no one is saying about Supergirl.

At least Supergirl does more original unique stories.

Name one. Just one "original, unique" story that in one way or another, have not been produced before.

 

[JD]

I'd still say there's a big difference between Supergirl borrowing characters from, say, Batman or Wonder Woman, than borrowing them from Superman. Who is her cousin. With the same exact powers and same basic costume. And who is part of the same Superman Family.

And I seriously doubt the majority of viewers out there feel like the character is being "overshadowed" by Superman. Especially given all the praise for Benoist's charming performance and how emotionally invested many fans seem to be in her character.

Yeah. Don't Robin, Nightwing, and Batgirl also tend to fight a lot Batman's villains?

Nonsense. One, there were no "cliche ridden 70s man on the run series, aside from The Immortal--a 1970-71 series that was its own animal. The average 1970s tv series did not have a hero like Banner--for example, not only plagued in a Jekyll & Hyde situation, but fears of his other side he cannot control, experimenting on himself, only to bring out a violent, implied sexually aggressive tormentor, violated by the violent side of life the average TV character never faced, etc. The Incredible Hulk remains one of the most mature, intelligent comic adaptations in TV or film (one of the many reasons for its first run success and cultural longevity)--things no one is saying about Supergirl.

Well, yeah the details of who/Banner was might not have been done in other shows, but the stories of the actual episodes were basically the same kinds of stranger stumbles into somebody else's drama that had been on TV at least since The Fugitive. There might not have been a lot of those shows on in the '70s, but there were still a lot of those kinds of man on the run shows going back decades.

Name one. Just one "original, unique" story that in one way or another, have not been produced before.

Ok, I'll admit you have gotten me here, there have been a lot of shows that have done similar stories. But I really don't care because I still enjoy the show.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

And I seriously doubt the majority of viewers out there feel like the character is being "overshadowed" by Superman.

Look around the various boards--some of the most vociferous SG fans seem to hate Superman, as if there's some "injustice" in this fictional, male super-being being the face of anyone bearing the "S" shield--that his existence is an offense to this TV version of Supergirl. I've read several people hoping Superman will die in the series. That is an astoundingly weak mindset--revealing how equally weak the SG series must be, that the most famous superhero has to be killed in order for Supergirl to stand on her own..or appear to be a strong character, when that should be achieved no matter what other heroes exist.

 

[JD]

My not wanting Superman to not be around at this point is mainly just so people will stop talking about him and actually start talking about Kara.

 

[Admiral2]

My not wanting Superman to not be around at this point is mainly just so people will stop talking about him and actually start talking about Kara.

It's too late for that. Even if Superman died in a kryptonite storm tomorrow people would still be talking about him because Kara is surrounded by reminders of him, and has been for the whole damn season.

I'd still say there's a big difference between Supergirl borrowing characters from, say, Batman or Wonder Woman, than borrowing them from Superman. Who is her cousin. With the same exact powers and same basic costume. And who is part of the same Superman Family.

So you're in the camp that says if they ever do a She-Hulk series, she should be dating Rick Jones and be best friends with Betty Ross and only fight the Hulkbusters and Doc Sampson because the character most closely associated with those characters is her cousin, and they have the same powers, and they look the same, and they're family.

I used to love the old She-Hulk comics, and I think she's a great character, and I thank God the creators who've handled her to this point don't think like you.

Do you have any idea how bereft of imagination what you wrote really is? It says just because the two characters share some traits it's perfectly all right to not waste time coming up with unique challenges for the character that was introduced second. That's what you wrote. That's how Berlanti and Co. are treating this show.

And I seriously doubt the majority of viewers out there feel like the character is being "overshadowed" by Superman. Especially given all the praise for Benoist's charming performance and how emotionally invested many fans seem to be in her character.

The fact that not everybody believes that doesn't mean no one does, and those of us who do believe it have as much right to point it out as those of you drinking the kool-aid.

 

[davejames]

Look around the various boards--some of the most vociferous SG fans seem to hate Superman, as if there's some "injustice" in this fictional, male super-being being the face of anyone bearing the "S" shield--that his existence is an offense to this TV version of Supergirl. I've read several people hoping Superman will die in the series. That is an astoundingly weak mindset--revealing how equally weak the SG series must be, that the most famous superhero has to be killed in order for Supergirl to stand on her own..or appear to be a strong character, when that should be achieved no matter what other heroes exist.

Wow, what boards are these? I've been reading lots of comments on different sites over the season (after episode recaps or ratings reports or on ew or comingsoon or twitter or supergirltv, etc), and while there may be quite a few who hate the show in general, I don't think I've seen any hate directed at Superman himself.

Especially from Supergirl fans who seem to be a lot more positive and upbeat than most.

 

[Christopher]

If I had one criticism of the handling it's that It's difficult to believe that there are sufficient things happening in-universe such that Superman is kept busy given the characters' reactions to some of the other things that have happened.

You can say the same about any comic or show in a multi-hero universe. People ask why Tony Stark or Captain America didn't call in the Avengers in their Phase II solo movies. They ask why Batman doesn't call Superman in whenever Gotham is facing its latest cataclysmic crime wave. Heck, back in the day, they asked why the Deep Space 9 crew didn't call in the Enterprise for help. It's just a necessary conceit.

Me, I find it hard to believe there aren't sufficient things happening in-universe to keep Superman busy. I mean, Metropolis is a major city that no doubt has a lot of its own stuff going on. And there are still a lot of Superman villains that haven't been mentioned yet on the show -- Luthor, Metallo, Parasite, Darkseid, etc. And then there's that Legion flight ring.

My not wanting Superman to not be around at this point is mainly just so people will stop talking about him and actually start talking about Kara.

We've talked plenty about Kara. Superman is an occasional side issue. Again, I object strongly to the implication that the only way a female character can get attention is if a male character is removed from the picture entirely. You should have more faith in Kara's ability to compete on a level playing field.