News Superman & Lois Ordered to Series at The CW

[Kirk Prime]

Supergirl and Flash are showing signs of fatigue. As the senior members of the DCW, I guess that's to be expected. They've "lost the plot" for that last few seasons.

The amazing part is that with characters like these, superhero shows should NEVER show fatigue. The problem is, as always, the writers. It just hasn't been right for several years. I think a major problem is that the title character gets lost in the subplots to feed all the supporting characters, of which there are way too many.

This new Superman show--I am hoping for good things, but the more I read about it the more I am wondering if it will be any good at all.

The only hope the show has is a writing team that would be fresh. It won't work if Superman is treated like he was on Supergirl. I'm pessimistic, but I don't want to be pessimistic.

 

[theenglish]

The only hope the show has is a writing team that would be fresh. It won't work if Superman is treated like he was on Supergirl. I'm pessimistic, but I don't want to be pessimistic.

I think you know that you and I have polar opposite opinions on that issue and the implications around that. I would kindly ask that we do not rekindle that debate here.

 

[The Realist]

This new Superman show--I am hoping for good things, but the more I read about it the more I am wondering if it will be any good at all.

Why is that? I searched your posts in this thread, and found where you had expressed concern at one point that the show would be all about the boys, with Lois and Clark as Ma and Pa Kent — is it that, or something else?

Personally, I’ve heard nothing about the premise and setup I haven’t liked. Then again, I’ve no problem with teen characters, and a knee-jerk hostility to them seems dangerously kirk55555 to me.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

I'm kinda hoping for Picket Fences with superheroics.

 

[JD]

I realized I forgot about Batwoman in my last post, that goes up there with Legends and Black Lighting, it got off to a great start.

 

[theenglish]

Why is that? I searched your posts in this thread, and found where you had expressed concern at one point that the show would be all about the boys, with Lois and Clark as Ma and Pa Kent — is it that, or something else?

Personally, I’ve heard nothing about the premise and setup I haven’t liked. Then again, I’ve no problem with teen characters, and a knee-jerk hostility to them seems dangerously kirk55555 to me.

The teen angle is still a concern. The love triangle reeks of Vampire Diaries. And, although I can't find it right now, the idea that the show is about the family rather than Superman kind of worries me. Of course, it could be as amazing as Black Lightning, but I am getting worried that we will get more of the recent seasons of Supergirl and The Flash. I stress that I am not passing judgment until the show airs.

 

[N-121973]

The amazing part is that with characters like these, superhero shows should NEVER show fatigue. The problem is, as always, the writers. It just hasn't been right for several years. I think a major problem is that the title character gets lost in the subplots to feed all the supporting characters, of which there are way too many.

The same is true of the source material. Batman has a veritable platoon of sidekicks and so does The Flash in the comics. Superman had Supergirl and now not one, but two Superboys. True, many of these characters don't appear in every issue of the comics as regulars, but it certainly feels like they are .

 

[Kirk Prime]

I think you know that you and I have polar opposite opinions on that issue and the implications around that. I would kindly ask that we do not rekindle that debate here.

In fairness, you don't have to ever engage. If I see a post that I don't want to interact with, I don't. But what you are asking essentially is to silence an opinion you don't agree with, and is that really right? I get that you may not like the topic, but believe it or not, neither do I, yet it is fair game. This is the Superman/Lois thread. Superman has existed in the Arrowverse for awhile. I am not even close to the only person who thinks the way I do. It's a legit concern of the upcoming show, one that only time will answer. Sometimes the writers hear the complaints and understand them. A perfect example of that was after the first season of the cartoon Justice League. Fans also did not like how Superman was treated and the writers acknowledged it, and improved.

There have been plenty of bad takes on Superman. I don't think they have made a decent movie since Superman II. If you think about it--how is that possible with this character? He does work well, as Lois and Clark and Smallville and the cartoons show. But Hollywood has struggled with understanding what makes Superman tick.

I'm hoping that with different writers, they can rehabilitate this version. That hope will exist until the show proves me wrong, which may not happen with a different writing staff. Also note that as much as I dislike this interpretation of the character, I have never, and would never, ask someone with the opposite opinion not to express it. That defeats the purpose of these message boards and discussions.

The same is true of the source material. Batman has a veritable platoon of sidekicks and so does The Flash in the comics. Superman had Supergirl and now not one, but two Superboys. True, many of these characters don't appear in every issue of the comics as regulars, but it certainly feels like they are .

I haven't read comics in awhile, but when I did, one thing was always clear--the title character was the focus. Obviously, I can't say this is true for every single issue of every single comic, but I don't remember Superman or Batman ever getting lost in the shuffle with big arcs, and if they did, it was something intentional and special, like say Reign of the Superman, when Clark was dead.

That was a different animal.

Flash last year felt like it didn't have enough Barry Allen. Why are seeing storylines for Cisco's girlfriend? Or Iris' coworker? Why are these people regulars? Same on Supergirl. I don't watch that show to listen to Dreamer or Alex or Kelly Olsen. I think Flash should focus on the most important characters--Barry, Iris, Cisco, Caitlin, Ralph and Joe. I think Supergirl should focus on Kara, J'onn, Brainiac, the Luthors, with the supporting cast just supporting them.

The other characters of course can exist, but they shouldn't be anymore than backup. I don't give a damn about their love lives or their angst. They should stick to the title characters.

 

[The Realist]

Alex has been the most significant secondary/supporting character on Supergirl from Day One, with sisterhood being a central theme of the show. Alex is the most important person in Kara’s life, her family, her closest friend and confidant — in many ways, the Lois to her Clark (minus the romantic element, obviously). It’s a failure on the show’s part when Alex ISN’T given sufficient prominence, not the other way around.

 

[Kirk Prime]

Alex has been the most significant secondary/supporting character on Supergirl from Day One, with sisterhood being a central theme of the show. Alex is the most important person in Kara’s life, her family, her closest friend and confidant — in many ways, the Lois to her Clark (minus the romantic element, obviously). It’s a failure on the show’s part when Alex ISN’T given sufficient prominence, not the other way around.

You're right, and that's one of the biggest problems of the show. In the beginning, Alex was important, but then the show became Alex (with Supergirl) for awhile and that was the shark jumping move.

Think about this--Alex is some character made up for this show. I have no problem with that but her role became way too big. Supergirl is a classic character that has been around since the 1950s. When doing this show, they should have focused on her established characters, not some new one--especially one that isn't even in the comics. People don't watch comic book shows to get long drawn out storylines about the non-powered adopted siblings or friends.

This is even worse than say, Perry White: The Early Years.

When I tune into Supergirl, I want to watch a show about Supergirl. The Alex Show is a different show and should be spun off.

Supergirl had a rich history, and I think they failed to tap into it enough. The title character doesn't get enough airtime on Supergirl or the Flash--that's the big problem.

 

[valkyrie013]

I agree that the writing sometimes lets the show down, and yes, it sometimes goes into the weeds on side characters, but they are part of the comic world, even if they are invented for the series. Heard no complaints at adding Harley Quinn to batman, or some other added characters.
But it is difficult to fill 22 episodes with a yearly plot that "may" fill 10 or 12, so you have many filler episodes. Sometimes there great stuff, but often less so. But hey, I'd rather have 22 than 12, or 8..

 

[The Realist]

You're right, and that's one of the biggest problems of the show. In the beginning, Alex was important, but then the show became Alex (with Supergirl) for awhile and that was the shark jumping move.

Think about this--Alex is some character made up for this show. I have no problem with that but her role became way too big. Supergirl is a classic character that has been around since the 1950s. When doing this show, they should have focused on her established characters, not some new one--especially one that isn't even in the comics. People don't watch comic book shows to get long drawn out storylines about the non-powered adopted siblings or friends.

This is even worse than say, Perry White: The Early Years.

When I tune into Supergirl, I want to watch a show about Supergirl. The Alex Show is a different show and should be spun off.

Supergirl had a rich history, and I think they failed to tap into it enough. The title character doesn't get enough airtime on Supergirl or the Flash--that's the big problem.

I don’t think there’s any particular reason comics characters need to be prioritized over original characters in a comics adaptation (lead character aside). I personally believe Alex has been a great addition to Supergirl, and a tremendous asset to the show. Same with Chloe Sullivan on Smallville. And as I’m sure you know, there are characters who are now mainstays in comics who were originally introduced in outside media adaptations, like Jimmy Olsen and Perry White (or as valkyrie013 points out, Harley Quinn).

As for your assertion that people don’t watch comic book shows for the non-powered friends/family of the hero, I’d say that depends on the character and the viewer. For example, I am just about as big a fan of Lois Lane as I am of Clark/Superman, and I’m actually disappointed when she’s not treated as essentially a co-lead (one of many reasons I’m looking forward eagerly to Superman & Lois).

Just to show I don’t disagree with you on everything, however, I do concur that the Arrowverse shows tend to have overstuffed supporting cast rosters, who often get too much attention and focus. I’ve said many times that my preference is something like the classic Superman formula: exactly one superhero, and a non-costumed, non-powered supporting cast that you can count on one hand. (In Supergirl‘s case, the first season had it right with Kara, Alex, James, Winn, and Cat Grant. And while I like J’onn, he was also the initial step down the slippery slope to the “everybody’s a superhero” approach that’s crept in over the show’s run, to its detriment.)

 

[The Realist]

New Superman & Lois casting calls (spoilers inherent):

Spoiler

https://www.theilluminerdi.com/2020/09/21/superman-lois-cast-mercy-graves/

 

[LaxScrutiny]

And while I like J’onn, he was also the initial step down the slippery slope to the “everybody’s a superhero” approach that’s crept in over the show’s run, to its detriment.

I get most of what you're saying, but not this. Kara was presented from the start as young and inexperienced. Alex, Jimmy, Kat, etc. could not provide the role of a hero mentor. J'onn gave the show an anchor. Kara could explore and make mistakes, but J'onn was there to bring her back to centre. Alex could do that sometimes, but less so when her (Alex's) relationship story lines took over the show. Basicly, Alex kept Kara centred as a person, J'onn kept her centred as a hero.

 

[The Realist]

I get most of what you're saying, but not this. Kara was presented from the start as young and inexperienced. Alex, Jimmy, Kat, etc. could not provide the role of a hero mentor. J'onn gave the show an anchor. Kara could explore and make mistakes, but J'onn was there to bring her back to centre. Alex could do that sometimes, but less so when her (Alex's) relationship story lines took over the show. Basicly, Alex kept Kara centred as a person, J'onn kept her centred as a hero.

Good observations (except for the bit about Alex's relationship storylines "taking over the show," which is not a thing that happened).

My larger point was that I like these shows' superheroics to be about the title character. The Arrowverse formula seems to be to "suit up" everybody onscreen, so the main hero is eventually a "Where's Waldo?" proposition among a sea of costumed characters. J'onn was fine, for the Supergirl-specific reasons you cite, but I'd prefer they had stopped there.

 

[Kirk Prime]

I don’t think there’s any particular reason comics characters need to be prioritized over original characters in a comics adaptation (lead character aside). I personally believe Alex has been a great addition to Supergirl, and a tremendous asset to the show. Same with Chloe Sullivan on Smallville. And as I’m sure you know, there are characters who are now mainstays in comics who were originally introduced in outside media adaptations, like Jimmy Olsen and Perry White (or as valkyrie013 points out, Harley Quinn).

It's a fair point to an extent, but there is a difference. Smallville never became the Chloe Sullivan show, where her stories became as important or more important than Clark's. It was always Clark's story. Same with Jimmy or Perry or even Harley. Jimmy and Perry never got in the way of Superman's story. They were PART of it, but the show was still Superman. As for Harley, it never became the Harley Quinn show--it was always Batman. I think it's great that Harley broke out, but she's also a good comic book character.

You aren't going to see a comic book title of Perry White--news reporter.

That's where Supergirl went wrong, and Flash too. The writers chose to make the supporting characters equals or even superior to the title character. I feel like Flash and Supergirl are not the focus of their own shows.

As for your assertion that people don’t watch comic book shows for the non-powered friends/family of the hero, I’d say that depends on the character and the viewer. For example, I am just about as big a fan of Lois Lane as I am of Clark/Superman, and I’m actually disappointed when she’s not treated as essentially a co-lead (one of many reasons I’m looking forward eagerly to Superman & Lois).

Lois Lane is a great character. But how successful could a show based on Lois Lane be without Superman? It's possible because of the character that it could work, but a show like that is NOT a superhero show. It's a show about a strong reporter who investigates stories and breaks them. It's a show. It could work. But it's not a superhero show based on an iconic superhero. And if you make a Superman show all about Lois, you have done a bait and switch and you will find the audience leaves. That's what happened to Supergirl.

Just to show I don’t disagree with you on everything, however, I do concur that the Arrowverse shows tend to have overstuffed supporting cast rosters, who often get too much attention and focus. I’ve said many times that my preference is something like the classic Superman formula: exactly one superhero, and a non-costumed, non-powered supporting cast that you can count on one hand. (In Supergirl‘s case, the first season had it right with Kara, Alex, James, Winn, and Cat Grant. And while I like J’onn, he was also the initial step down the slippery slope to the “everybody’s a superhero” approach that’s crept in over the show’s run, to its detriment.)

The first season characters were very well balanced. The show did start off pretty well. It's not the inclusion of Alex that bothers me--it's the emphasis. They wanted to make her too important and while there is an audience for that, I don't believe it's the SAME audience. I found that at times, you could literally fastforward Alex's entire storyline and scenes and miss nothing relevant. That was back when she was with Maggie Sawyer. There was an episode that was almost 50/50 between an Alex show and a Supergirl storyline with Mars. They were completely separate and it was amazing how in the Supergirl scenes, I was engaged, and in the Alex scenes, I was not.

One was a superhero show, one was not.

I don't mind multiple superheroes on the show, but let's not pick some D list character that no one has heard of just to check another box. Make the other superhero more important than that. I loved bringing in J'onn. And even though I don't like the casting and portrayal, Brainiac 5 and the legion was a great idea too.

But Dreamer is useless. Kelly Olsen--useless (made worse by giving her a Guardian shield). Their screentime could be better spent on a story involving the title character.

And Flash is even worse in this regard. I don't even know all their names. I really need a storyline with Cisco's girlfriend? Or Iris' co-worker?

I get most of what you're saying, but not this. Kara was presented from the start as young and inexperienced. Alex, Jimmy, Kat, etc. could not provide the role of a hero mentor. J'onn gave the show an anchor. Kara could explore and make mistakes, but J'onn was there to bring her back to centre. Alex could do that sometimes, but less so when her (Alex's) relationship story lines took over the show. Basicly, Alex kept Kara centred as a person, J'onn kept her centred as a hero.

See here's where I would have done something differently. I would have had Superman as Kara's mentor. I would have been secure enough to have Kara be great even if Superman was more experienced and physically stronger. It wouldn't matter. Superman would rarely be seen in action. It would only happen in storylines where Kara would need backup. Even then, I might expand the story so that the same threat is in Metropolis, so Superman is helping Kara that way. I would have Superman in a similar role as he had in Season 1--but of course making appearances. He would be seen mostly on the phone as a mentor/sounding board. A SUPPORTING character, not someone to fight Kara's battles. They would have each others backs and be close.

 

[The Realist]

^ You were doing so well until the “check another box” thing. You just can’t help yourself, can you?

Other than that, solid post, and I don’t think we even disagree all that much except in degree, and in the value of Alex’s character. As the show’s most important supporting character, she should have screentime and storylines and character development. Her second season arc that you so despise was, to me, involving and expertly handled. Not everything on a superhero show has to be about superheroics. Bottom line, am I interested in knowing more about Alex Danvers as a person, and not just a cog in the Supergirl machine? I am. Your mileage obviously varies.

 

[Kirk Prime]

Other than that, solid post, and I don’t think we even disagree all that much except in degree, and in the value of Alex’s character. As the show’s most important supporting character, she should have screentime and storylines and character development. Her second season arc that you so despise was, to me, involving and expertly handled. Not everything on a superhero show has to be about superheroics. Bottom line, am I interested in knowing more about Alex Danvers as a person, and not just a cog in the Supergirl machine? I am. Your mileage obviously varies.

I call it like I see it, and believe me, it frustrates me more, because I wish they would just focus on the superhero stuff. Perfect example of doing it right was Stargirl season 1. I'm really concerned that season 2 will follow the same poor decisions that the other CW shows have made.

I don't even mind that Alex exists--not at all. I had no issue with her as a supporting character. But the key to a supporting character is by definition, that she SUPPORT the title character. Her love life should not be a separate arc that has nothing to do with the main one, straight or gay. It doesn't matter. A show about her is a completely different show, which is fine, but NOT a comic book show. Her second season arc, which I absolutely despise, was not handled well in my opinion--it did not add to the superhero premise. What they were going for does have a purpose, but not on a superhero show. It was very in your face and over the top, and I feel the decision to go that route hurt the character and defined her by just the one characteristic. It was so in your face she did everything but wear a shirt that said "I'm gay." Again, there's a place for that kind of story, but I don't feel a superhero show is that place. Before that arc, Alex was more interesting as a highly competent DEO agent who was great at her job despite not being a powerful hero. She backed up Supergirl and provided a confidant and support system. That's her role. I don't feel Alex should be taking lead.

The show isn't Alex Danvers: Agent of DEO.

There are so many stories to tell, but the writers got bogged down on their agenda and mandates rather than just tell good stories. The contrast between Stargirl and Supergirl was incredible. But Supergirl had all this good stuff in the beginning.

Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if Andrew Kreisberg stayed on. I don't know how much of a different it would have made regarding some of the plot lines I didn't like, but there was a difference between when he was there and when he was not.

 

[EnderAKH]

Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if Andrew Kreisberg stayed on. I don't know how much of a different it would have made regarding some of the plot lines I didn't like, but there was a difference between when he was there and when he was not.

.....Really? Because he wasn't fired (for sexually harassing women and men) until season 3, so he was in charge during that Alex story you seem to hate so much.

 

[Kirk Prime]

Really? Because he wasn't fired (for sexually harassing women and men) until season 3, so he was in charge during that Alex story you seem to hate so much.

I wasn't a fan of that storyline, but that doesn't negate all the great work he did.

And he was never accused of anything physical. I don't believe he was accused of sexually harassing MEN, and I also believe while he may have blurred a line and I say MAY because he was never given a chance to defend himself, he wasn't exactly a Weinstein or a Clinton type.

I think his firing was as weak as Sawyer on Flash. If Nick Cannon can still be on Masked Singer, Andrew Kreisberg can still work. It could have been handled better and less public.