Topic: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Maybe we never archived our last discussion.

I've only seen the premiere of season 2 of Gotham (subtitled Rise of the Villains).  The show is definitely becoming Batman without Batman as opposed to a prequel.  Penguin is already (the main?) boss in the Gotham mob.  Two-Face, Riddler, Joker, Zsasz, Catwoman are just younger versions of their eventual-villain characters (with Riddler, Two-Face, and Zsasz we're just talking about slightly younger).  We're basically already ready for Batman to show up, which makes the Bruce story seem slower than usual.

It's a fun show to watch, but I think it's so far from what I was expecting/hoping it to be.  Would a fairly-standard police procedural set in Gotham just not work?  Young veteran of the police force Gordon working with younger Harvey Bullock who dabbles in the occasional fit of corruption trying to take down the traditional mob in Gotham.  The only villain character around is Cobblepot, who is young and reckless.  His story has been good, but it needs to have been slower.

The way I see it, Bruce is in the first episode as a catalyst but doesn't show up for years.  Every season takes place over the course of a year or two, with Gordon taking down crime and corruption.  As soon as he takes one guy down (Maroni), another is shown to be pulling his strings (Falcone).  When he gets to Falcone, corruption in his own precinct prevents Gordon from doing his job.  Season 3 is Jim fighting the police themselves as Falcone gets desperate.  With Gordon/Dent decimating his ranks, he starts turning to lunatics as his soldiers.  And those soldiers become lieutenants. 

Meanwhile, Gordon doesn't notice any of this.  By season 4, he's risen to almost-commissioner, he's cleaned up the department, and he's ready to go after Falcone.  He finally gets his man by the end, and there's a big celebration.  He's taken down the mob in Gotham.

But then he looks around.  The new head of the Falcone family is that weird-looking guy named Penguin (maybe an old CI of his - that angle is interesting).  Around the city, there are crimes attributed to guys named Riddler and Freeze and Scarecrow.  In cleaning up Gotham, he's exposed a layer of madness that no one knew was there. 

Season 5 either introduces a 21-22 year-old Bruce Wayne ready to fight this maddening city, has Gordon investigating a masked vigilante (that ends up being a never-seen Bruce), or ends with Gordon wondering whether or not taking down Falcone was worth it.

To me, it'd be procedural.  Gordon takes down random criminals, all tied to Maroni.  And then Falcone.  To get the crime-side of things, Penguin slowly rises up the ranks, learning things with Gordon about how deep crime goes.  And while Gordon is too focused to really notice, the weekly crimes start becoming a bit more elaborate.  Laughing gas.  Fear toxin.  Booby traps.  Henchmen in costumes.  Fewer men Gordon catches are going to jail - more are going to Arkham.

The main characters would be Gordon and Penguin.  The side characters like Riddler/Dent/Catwoman would show up as one-off/recurring characters that serve a logical purpose (criminal informants, allies to Penguin or Gordon, one-off criminals).  Bruce doesn't appear at all after the Pilot until he's grown or already Batman (although Alfred could show up every once in a while too).

The main character in my Gotham would be the city.  It's sick from crime, but the sickness is covering up the insanity that's underneath.  And as Gordon cures the city of crime, he exposes the insanity.  Season one would be Law and Order: Gotham.  Season 3 would be closer to season one of our version of Gotham.  It wouldn't be until season 5 that we'd even get close to where we are in "Rise of the Villains"

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I am just taking the show as it comes, trying not to think too hard about what needs to happen in order to line up with what I know about Batman. Granted, I sometimes theorize about why Jim would name his daughter after a psycho ex, but I try not to get too caught up in it.

For what it is, I think the show is going pretty well. Jerome is a great villain (though I hesitate to call him Joker, because they could pull that rug out from under us at any moment. Right now, he is just a crazy kid). Barbara is more interesting as a villain. Jim's mission is interesting to watch.

So far, I don't have any real complaints. I even kinda like the idea that Batman is the product of the city, rather than the usual idea that Batman brings out the crazies himself.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Yeah.  I think the show is basically supposed to be one big tease (as a prequel tends to be) and so it's hard not to look forward and think about how this show is supposed to be built. 

As it is, it's still a good show.  I agree with your comments - Barbara is much better as a villain than as a nagging fiance.  Jerome is fun but almost has to be Joker, right?  Might be too much for it to be a curve ball to pull that rug out.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

So, I guess Jerome wasn't the Joker... Unless they're playing the Joker as an idea or a spirit rather than one character. Is he one person, or is he many people?

Yeah, I guess Jerome just wasn't the Joker :-)

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Yeah I was relieved to see that, but the end montage sorta spoiled it for me.  I read in a review that said that, no matter what, the Joker ends up being a Jerome copycat more than an original character.  Or, in a way, a coincidence.  I've always sorta liked the "Killing Joke" version of Joker who is driven to madness by "one bad day."  Any version of Joker who's already crazy, or worse, inspired by someone else - is just sorta weak to me.

But they were true to their word, and I have to give that to them.

By the way, whatever happened to the Ivy character?  She was on all the promotional materials, played a big part in the pilot, randomly showed up again in season one, and she hasn't been seen/mentioned since.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I don't think that it necessarily takes away from the Joker story. He has always had many backstories and has always been a sort of demon that haunts the city. This story just plays a different version of that concept. The Joker can't make sense, so telling a sensible backstory here would probably feel wrong.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Yeah it just sorta feels false that there was another Joker-like villain before the Joker, who feels genuinely unique.  I think it was pretty cool for Jerome to be on the show, and I thought the actor was *spectacular*.  But wouldn't Gordon (and to a lesser extent, Bruce) get Jerome flashbacks when the Joker shows up?  Like "wow, another Jerome!" instead of "holy crap, what is that?"

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I don't like how they have gone off the comics with Barbara's character. Looks like she will not be the wife of Jim Gordon afterall. She has embraced her "dark side" and will probably come to a violent end before the show is done. 
I do like the addition of Jessica Lucas on the cast as Gavalan's sidekick and sister.  She is so pretty and smoking hot.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

If I remember correctly, Jim's wife had a number of backstories in the comics, depending on who was writing it and what the era was. If that's true, I'm not sure that there would be a point in trying to stick to comic book canon. She and Jim did have a villain son, so this is probably a take on that.

I am curious to see how Jim comes to have a daughter named Barbara though.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

So I guess my big question now is: how does Gordon bounce back from the mid-season finale?  I'm still surprised at the choice the writers had him make.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I had to look up what even happened.

I am excited to see what they do with Mr. Freeze, though.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

It will be interesting to see what happens. I like that they're not afraid to take the characters and stories to some dark places. Any show about Gotham needs that. I guess it's TV, so things can eventually just fade into the past. But it is still a pretty big moment.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Yeah, they could fade it.  Definitely right about them having to go to some dark places by the nature of the show.  For Gordon, that may - may- be about as dark as he can get.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

So apparently the second half of season two is subtitled "Wrath of the Villains" - answering my question of whether or not "Rise of the Villains" was the official subtitle of the show or not.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Okay so the show continues to just be completely impatient.  I like how Bruce is hitting the streets and learning about crime.  It's way too early for it, but if Bruce is going to be a major character on this show....fine.  But now Edward is basically already the Riddler.  Penguin is Penguin.  Mr. Freeze is Mr. Freeze.  And Batman is still.....what....10 years away?  Gotham is basically saying that Batman is going to start fighting villains that have already been active for 10 years?

The show is fun.  I get it.  But if they wanted to go this route (and there's no evidence to say this wasn't the plan from the beginning), it needed to be set when Bruce is 18. 

At this rate, Bruce showing up as Batman is going to barely going to be news.  "Hey look, another costumed crazy.  This one is good, huh?  Well, we'll see.  Gotham has been doing this a long time."

And I don't see how Gordon gets passed any of this murder stuff.  I assume Galavan will show up "alive" so there's no way he can be guilty of murder.  But...still....Gordon seems as guilty as any cop in Gotham.  Dirtier than Harvey, it seems.  I get that they want Gordon to be a conflicted character, but he's been a bit darker than I think most of us expected.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I wonder if they will be doing a flash-forward at some point.

I don't mind how it's playing out. People always ask if the villains created Batman or if Batman created the villains. Now we know. And I don't necessarily dislike that the big crime lords during the Batman years are getting their start now. It takes time to get there. And then you have to consider that Penguin and Riddler both more or less retire from their crime careers during Batman's time.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I continue to be impressed with Gotham. They do a great job of making this feel like the Gotham City that I grew up with. The city that will need Batman. And Bruce is developing nicely.

I've come to realize that they could easily cross over with The Flash, since Earth-2 is very similar to the world of Gotham.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Can I just say that it is super annoying that people are still complaining about Batman not being on the show? It is the end of season 2 and Bruce is a teenager. Batman is not going to be on the show. Give it up! This isn't a Batman story! How do people not get this after two full seasons?!

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I still get annoyed that Bruce is on the show.  I don't think Bruce should be doing any of this stuff now.  He should be off trying to live a normal life.  He needs to decide all this stuff later. 

At this rate, he'll have zero education and will be Batman by the time he's 16.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I'm happy with what they're doing with Bruce on the show. They're allowing him to explore those parts of his personality that would just be in him naturally, and would drive him to become Batman. They're making progress toward his becoming Batman, but they're not just jumping to the end of that story the way most TV shows would do. I like that they're allowing Bruce to be a kid on the show. Where he is now explains why he could rationalize having teenagers as sidekicks later on (though I'd still say that they should be toward the older side of their teenage years).

I love that the series isn't being pressured to become a Batman series. They're letting the city speak for itself, and all of the people who inhabit it are really interesting.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Yeah but where does the show take him after he's solved his parents' murder?  Does he just go back to school?  My problem is what's going to happen between what happens now and what happens when he actually starts being Batman.  Because, from my understanding, these years are supposed to be boring for Bruce.  He's supposed to hang out with rich kids and go to rich schools and realize how much he hates that stuff.  How little all that matters. 

Right now, I don't know how he ever gets back to a normal life.  He's basically already on the road to being Batman, but he's too young to do anything about it.  And he will be for years. So it's just kinda awkward to have him already abandoning school, already living among criminals, already being Young Batman.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

He's not really young Batman yet. Not even close. He is learning how to be a detective, which is something that comes naturally to him. He asks questions and needs answers. He refuses to give up. That's Bruce. Batman is something else.

He has missed some school, but for most of the series, he has lived among the rich kids and he's been bored with them. He finds that world frustrating and boring, but it's something that he has to deal with. There is a lot of ground to cover between now and his leaving to be properly trained. He is emotional and reckless, like most teenagers. That could lead him into a lot of trouble that he isn't capable of fighting. This will eventually be his reason for leaving, but not for a while. Right now, he is more concerned with solving his parents' murder and saving their legacy. That is an arc that will take a long time to be resolved.

I really don't know what season 7 of this show looks like for Bruce. Will they flash forward at some point? A show called "Gotham" can't really explore Bruce's training elsewhere in the world, so I don't know. But right now, he's in a good place. Right now, they're on track with him. That could very well change by season 5, but that's something that we'll have to worry about later. For the moment, the show is very strong.

The feel of this show is probably more along the lines of what Arrow should have been (but with less cops and more vigilante heroes). They take this show seriously. They pay attention to characters and keep their eye on where they're heading. It's very comic-booky, but not cartoonish. I like it a lot.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Gotham is such a bizarre show.  I mean, they had a character die via point-blank rocket launcher in the last episode.  It's definitely found it's tone - which is a bizarre mix of realism and comic book feel.  And I do love the costuming and feel of the show, where you aren't really sure which era it takes place in.  Do they have cell phones.

I do have another complaint - just like with the future Joker getting his inspiration from "Jerome" - is it bizarre that Bruce is inspired by Theo Galavan / Azrael?  It just seems a bit cheap if these two iconic characters are basically copying someone they saw when they were children.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

It is a pretty cool show. I was thinking about what Smallville would have been like if they could have made the show about Bruce Wayne instead. While Gotham perfectly sets the tone, I think that the Smallville version would have been about teenage love and a much lighter tone. Gotham has such great character work. Penguin's work in the last couple of episodes has been really cool. Having him feed those two snobby kids to their mother was disturbing and gross, but hilarious at the same time. The rocket launcher was also really inspired. Agents of SHIELD used a rocket launcher last week too, and it kinda fizzled as a plot point. This was great.

I love how the show is twisted, but just grounded enough to feel real-ish. I like the fact that it could take place in a few different eras (they do have cell phones, I think... but flip phones). Batman TAS was like that too. I still say that this could be Earth-2 from The Flash, just because it's fun in my head.

I don't really have a problem with Bruce getting that spark of an idea from Azrael. The comic established that Azrael is something that is passed down from person to person, so I don't mind the character appearing. But he was a villain, so it isn't just a proto-Batman. I was thinking that they could actually go down that road with something like Grey Ghost from the animated series (who was a TV character, I know, but they could still use him). I don't mind Bruce picking up the ingredients for Batman here and there, as long as he doesn't make the Batman soup until it's the right time.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Yeah I know he's inspired by Zorro and Grey Ghost type stuff.  Even Clark was inspired by Warrior Angel in Smallville.

But my issue with both the Jerome and the Azrael stuff is that it wasn't so much "inspiration" as it was "mostly copying."  If Bruce had heard "Azrael was fast and sleek and used the shadows to his advantage" and had to use his imagination, I think that could've worked.  But to have Azrael basically be Batman fighting against those cops and for Bruce to actually see it, I feel like Bruce would be thinking "man, I'm just like Azrael" instead of being his own thing.  Cops that see Batman for the first time that also faced Azrael would think Batman was an Azrael copycat.  Just like Joker would basically be a Jerome copycat to anyone who saw his televised performance.

But those are just minor problems. With Flash and Arrow sorta lagging, Gotham might be the best comic TV show on right now.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I always saw Joker as sort of an entity in a way. Like in The Dark Knight, he wasn't any one thing. He kept making up new backstories. He was just this strange force of chaos and evil that made him more twisted and scary. So in that sense, I don't mind Jerome (who could come back from the dead, I suppose, right? Maybe deformed and twisted), since he would be a part of that same force of nature.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

So with Hugo Strange bringing the dead back as super villains, I watched the previews after this week's episode (a rarity for me) and I see that with two episodes left, they are bringing Fish Mooney (Jada Pinkett Smith) back to life. I wonder how that's gonna turn out.

I did like the cliffhanger that the episode ended on with Firefly and Serena.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I also thought it was cool that they gave us a glimpse of Killer Croc.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

So what are you feelings about the direction of the show? It seems to have lapsed into the realm of Sci Fi with the "monsters" that Hugo Strange is creating.
With the technology that he has  it is starting to look  like Joker will be the original character that we saw die off. I mean any thing is possible now.
Will Jim end up with Barbara or the ME who is carrying his child? Will she return?

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

So they're recasting Poison Ivy with a sexy young actress - now 19 years old instead of the 12(?) year old she was before.

The show has done a decent job of planning and foreshadowing, but their characterization of Poison Ivy has been all over the place.  She was really important in the Pilot, showed up a few times, completely disappeared, and now she's jumping a few years in age so they can hire another hot young actress.  Oh well.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/37976 … y#/slide/1

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I know they wanted the advertising hook of it being a prequel, but they should have really just done Gotham Central.  They're using Batman villains anyway, and Central was designed to not use Batman directly.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Well, they wanted Young Batman.  The problem is that they didn't seemingly want any of his villains to be young.  Outside of Penguin, I sorta assumed that all Batman's villains were his contemporaries.  In this series, it'll basically only be Catwoman.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Penguin should be older. Riddler can be a decade older without issue. Mr. Freeze should probably be older too. Joker isn't around really, but Jerome wasn't much older than Bruce. A lot of the villains aren't really the comic book versions anyway (Firefly).

I think Batman is more of a hangup than he should be with the audience. This isn't the story we know, it is an alternate reality for those characters. For what it is, it is really good.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

My problem is how the show is sorta changing a fundamental aspect of the Batman character.  There's a thought that runs in stories like Batman Begins and Year One that Batman is sorta responsible for the craziness in Gotham.  That he shows up in this garish outfit, and that is what sets Gotham on the path to craziness.  That if Bruce had never shown up back in Gotham, that his villains wouldn't exist.

That Batman, more than anything else, created his own villains.  Gotham (the show) implies that Gotham was already crazy and that many of its villains were already the way they were.  And that Batman is a reaction to Gotham and not the other way around.

And while it's not a terrible change, I think it's a less-interesting one.  The idea that Batman might not actually be good for Gotham - that he might create as many villains as he puts down, just by existing in the city.  The idea that, if he quit, maybe the city would go back to "normal."  That's a pretty cool concept, and it's something that a lot of Batman stories sorta leave ambiguous.

Gotham answers the question pretty clearly - Gotham goes crazy with big colorful villains way before Bruce ever gets on the scene.  Even if Bruce waits another 6-10 years to show up as Batman, he's absolutely reacting to something that had been going on in the city for years.  In fact, almost none of Batman's villains would've been a reaction to Batman.  Even Joker would've simply been a reaction to Jerome.

It's definitely an alternate reality.  I'm just worried it's a less interesting reality.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I agree, I wish Gotham would have just had other gangsters and villains on the show instead of actually introducing us to our favorites. But then it would not have been "Gotham".....

that being said, I thought the season was interesting as a whole but I did not know what the hell was going on in that finale.
Are we going to see Barbara and Jim finally end up as a loving couple?
What of the ME who is carrying his child?

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I think it could've been about Penguin's rise and crazy sort of things happening.  That there was a level of insanity on the brink of erupting, and that Batman was the catalyst for things to change.  I was cool with the beginning - Nygma is in the police force but going a little nutty.  Penguin as a foot soldier with ambition.  Selina and Ivy as kids.

But they got impatient.  Added Harvey Dent and Mr. Freeze and pseudo-Joker and a bunch of others.  So it's basically Batman without Batman.  Which is fine, except for the reasons I said.

For the record, I still like the show a lot.  I just think they could've done it better.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I get that point of view, but I think we've seen it and explored it enough by this point. There isn't much left to ponder when it comes to the question of whether Batman is responsible for the craziness of Gotham. But there is something interesting about exploring the idea of the city itself being a living creature that drives people into darkness.

I just don't see why we always need to be bogged down by the way things "should" be done, based on how they've been done before. Comic books get to play with these ideas all the time, creating new twists on the reality within that world. Why shouldn't TV shows and movies do the same thing? I like watching the show and getting a hint of what's to come, just based on the name of a character. But at the same time, I like that I don't really know how this is going to play out. Bruce will become Batman, but when and how? Penguin and Riddler have a long road ahead of them... Both of them go through their wacky criminal careers and come out the other side (more or less) in the comics, while other Batman villains are still starting out.

I was shocked by what they did with Mr. Freeze and his wife, and the fact that it didn't line up with the comics did cross my mind. But that doesn't make it a bad thing.

In the comics (to the best of my knowledge), Jim Gordon and Leslie Thompkins never got involved or had a kid together.  That doesn't make the TV show wrong or bad. It's just one of man, many interpretations of the material. Saying that the writers got impatient implies that there is a more proper way to tell this story, and that it can't just be what it is. I disagree with that.

How many of the comic books shows really follow the comic book storylines?


If at the end of the day the story that's told on the show is bad, that will be a perfectly fine opinion to have. It's fine to discuss how things could have been handled differently. But I don't think we can ding a show for not being something that it's not trying to be. The show is about Gotham. It's not a Batman origin story.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I respect that.  And I really do like the show.  I just would've done things a bit differently if I were in charge smile

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

This is why it's dangerous to have a writer's brain.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

A lot of people are going crazy because Penguin seems to be gay this season.  I don't see a) how that's a problem or b) how they didn't see this coming.

41 (edited by KerrAvon 2016-11-25 01:59:59)

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

There are shows that have a plan, or an arc and they follow it to the letter (Babylon 5) then we have shows where the writers and the suits seem to make it up as they go (Lost) 
This new season of Gotham falls in the latter category...

I have no idea what the hell is going on or the reason for the madness. Has the show "jumped" ? or Come off the Rails?  They just forgot all about Fish Mooney and Hugo Strange. All the monsters, and contaminated blood...WTF?

As for Penguin, I have no problem with his sexual orientation but I just don't get why they went thru all that trouble to introduce E Nigna's new love interest then just kill her off so quickly. I would have wanted to see more of the two and their relationship. Like I said, making it up as they go along....

Erin Richards is too talented an actress to be given such little screen time
Jessica Lucas is just too hot to have her scenes cut drastically

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

However they're writing it, I'm liking it. The great thing about Gotham is that they took away the character that always grabs the spotlight. Without Batman, all of these other great characters get to shine. Even Bruce, who will eventually be consumed by Batman, is just Bruce here. I don't see it as a prequel or anything like that. I'm just viewing it as what it is, which is a great, insane series with cool characters doing insane things.

Penguin... I don't care if he's gay. I'd be more surprised if any of these characters were mentally capable of caring for any other human life.

It was a weird choice to bring on Isabella, only to kill her off so quickly. It's weird, but in a way that fits there series. Still, it'd be funny if the actress pops up again, as another character. smile

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

43 (edited by Grizzlor 2016-11-25 23:16:19)

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I saw a little bit of Gotham during S1, fell behind, and kind of gave up.  Then I decided to binge and catch up awhile back.  I wound up really enjoying S1, and didn't really get put off by the haters who had bashed it at the time.  S2 was really good, I thought the characters and the actors were terrific.  So far S3 I've also enjoyed, particularly the growing team of Bruce and Selina.  Chiklis and Jada Pinkett have been great guests/recurring. 

Now I'm a bit biased, because I've met these actors a few times, and they were nothing but awesome in person.....Robin Lord Taylor alone keeps me watching.  The guys is both hilarious and nutso!  Corey Michael Smith is devious, one of the best Riddlers I've ever seen post-Gorshin, and Drew Powell and Sean Pertwee are great too.  Drew in particular was great, I met him at a con in NJ, and he didn't have a big line, so we traded Indy 500 memories (he's from there) for awhile.

Then there's the women!  Jessica Lucas and Erin Richards, wow, wow, wow, those two alone would make for a great series!  Erin is just plain terrific as the maniac Barbara Kean. 

Because they shoot in New York, I feel this show can incorporate so many of the local character and stage actors, many with a substantial resume, like Peter Scolari, Richard Kind, John Doman, David Zayas, BD Wong, and more.  Then to spring in with Paul Reubens and Melinda Clarke, also great.

I don't know where the show goes from here, in terms of its production future.  The ratings are not exactly great.  I hope it keeps going.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I'm not usually a fan of using stage acting for film or television. It's a whole different animal. But I think that with Gotham, every character is so grand that mixing a little of that stage acting into the show has helped. Honestly, I'm not a big Fish Mooney fan. I am glad that she hasn't been around too much. But yeah, I really enjoy everyone else a lot. Great cast.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I have no idea wth is up with Gotham. I mean first we had to endure that nonsense with Hugo Strange and his monsters now dead being brought back to life; cutting off faces, gratuitous violence to the extreme... WHERE THE HELL ARE STRANGE AND FISH?  .I mean has the show finally jumped or flown off the rails?

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I don't understand the Jerome stuff.  I thought his story ended on a cool note.  If he'd inspired someone who inspired someone who inspired the Joker that might be fine....but is this guy the Joker or not?

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

They've been jumping around pretty badly, yes.  There doesn't seem to be a great arc to follow either, just characters being angry with each other.  Strange.  Jessica Lucas/Erin Richards continue to have my attention though!

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

And FOX isn't doing the show any favors.  They took almost two months off between episodes 11 and 12, and after only being back three episodes, they're going to be off almost *three more* months.

FOX's primetime lineup is bizarre.  Shows are going off the air for months so that entire shows can be shown in between the gaps.  Why not just run shows continuously and uninterrupted?  It doesn't seem to be affecting ratings (the show has been remarkably consistent this year, while down around a million viewers from season two), but it just seems like a really confusing strategy.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Twenty years later, we're all still trying to figure out why FOX does the things they do. The world may never know.

Maybe the show is difficult to produce and they need a break to catch up? I don't know. But I still think the show is going strong. I love the characters and the world they've built for the series. Great cast too.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Yeah the show goes dark again after tonight.  Something I just found out from a tweet by one of the actors!

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Informant wrote:

Twenty years later, we're all still trying to figure out why FOX does the things they do. The world may never know.

Maybe the show is difficult to produce and they need a break to catch up? I don't know. But I still think the show is going strong. I love the characters and the world they've built for the series. Great cast too.

Well, it's something that goes across the board.  Brooklyn Nine-Nine aired their 10th episode December 13th, then aired a one-hour episode on January 1, and is now off until April.  Last Man on Earth's last episode aired December 11 and they're off until March.  It even happened to the Simpsons:

Ep 28x10 - 12/11/16
Ep 28x11 - 1/8/17
2 part Ep 28x12/28x13 - 1/15/17
Ep 28x14 - 2/12/17

I know most people have DVR settings for new episodes so it doesn't really matter, but it's basically impossible to know when FOX shows are airing new episodes.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Probably explains some of their ratings issues.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

This week's episode was pretty great. I love the twisted humor of this show. I still can't believe that they beat Jerome until his face fell off and plopped into a puddle. Hilarious.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Definitely a good one, felt like one of the old cartoons.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Informant wrote:

Probably explains some of their ratings issues.

That's the interesting thing - or at least the sign of the times.  The ratings, while dropped from last year, aren't really dropping with all the craziness.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_G … .9317.29_2

The premiere had 3.9 million viewers (the apex of the season).  Episode 7 had 3.16 million, and that's the low.  Outside of a couple outliers, most of the 14 episodes were between 3.4 million and 3.6 million viewers.  Even the DVR numbers are remarkably consistent.  This show has a pretty strong following, it seems.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Yeah, DVRs and online streaming really make a difference. Most of what I watch is through Roku channels.

But if you look at CBS, the ratings are way higher, and usually for far inferior shows. Why? Because CBS skews older. Old people watch TV live.

I really couldn't tell you what their programming schedule is like. I could check it out, but I'd probably fall asleep just reading the titles of their shows.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

CBS also has a stronger affiliate network.  Frankly they could air 30 minutes of Info on the toilet reading a comic book, and it would get better ratings than a Fox show winning Emmy's.  It's a flawed system.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I'd watch that.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I am done with Gotham. I am going to miss the bright spots: Erin Richards and Jessica Lucas but I just can't take it anymore. They lost me with the bringing back the dead and the cutting off of faces.
The violence is borderline OTT, plotlines just down right STUPID.
Gotham has become a lot of half assed writing, poor construction, inconsistencies and all around a ton of stupidity.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Gotham renewed for Season 4!

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

That is really good news. When it was on hiatus, I found myself really missing those new episodes.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Gotham is still impressing me. The show is a crazy blend of drama, action, comedy and comic book insanity. They've somehow managed to capture so many aspects of Gotham City from comic books, cartoons, movies, etc, and bring it all together in a way that feels perfect... While still creating it's own canon. They depict truly horrible violence, but in a way that makes me laugh, rather than barf. Similar to what Supernatural used to do each week, when they'd usually have some sort of bloody explosion.

If the show does get canceled soon, I hope that it is saved by either the CW, or the DC streaming service.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I don't think Gotham would be Gotham on the CW.  As we've talked about, the budget would be slashed to the point where it wouldn't feel right.  I know it'd probably be a small-time renewal just to get a finale....but it would still feel cheap.

I'm hoping it's just renewed, and they don't take any chances.  I think they're close enough to the end that Bruce could technically be Batman by the end of next season.  I just don't buy him as being physically imposing enough....even if he sorta looks the part in his face and in his acting.  But I think it'd be unfair to recast him at this point.

I've read on different sites that it's likely to come back and that it's unlikely to come back.  Maybe they'd renew it for 13 episodes or something.  I don't know why more bubble shows don't get smaller orders for a definite finale.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

It is a challenge, because David Mazouz is only 17, so even if he started training heavily and bulking up, it could be hard for him to look Batman-ish right now. Unless they go with more of a Terry McGinnis look. He is really good in the role though, so I'd rather not see him replaced.

Buy yeah, the budget would be an issue.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

65 (edited by Grizzlor 2018-05-12 11:02:13)

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I've really enjoyed it.  Cameron Monaghan (Shameless) is fantastic.  The showrunner has said that once Fox gives the word on the show ending, he would write a 6 episode arc to close with David as Batman/proto-Batman.  Obviously they didn't have that chance this season, and it was too soon.  Camren (Selina) shaved her head last month (whatever), which immediately had a lot of fans worried about cancellation. 

Here's the scoop.  Warners fired Clayne Crawford from Lethal Weapon, and if they can't recast his Riggs part by I assume Monday, that show is toast, and Gotham is renewed.  Unfortunately I don't think Fox will take both.  Fox has already canned a ton of shows, partly to make room for Thursday NFL.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Recasting Lethal Weapon would just be dumb. Fox should have edited the finale to end a few seconds earlier, and it would have been a solid finale.

I think the fuss with Camren's hair has been a little over blown. In the comics Selina has had short hair, so it isn't a deal killer. Barbara's hair has changed quite a bit. Ivy's face keeps changing! I don't think a haircut is a big deal.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Grizzlor wrote:

The showrunner has said that once Fox gives the word on the show ending, he would write a 6 episode arc to close with David as Batman/proto-Batman.

Gotham has been on life support for a couple of seasons now.  It's crazy when these shows roll the dice when they know it could be their last season.  I know they weren't definitively told that it was the end, but the ratings haven't been great for a while.  It's been a bubble show all year.  It's crazy if they don't finish because they assumed they'd be renewed.

Same thing happened with the Last Man on Earth.  That show barely made it last season and ended this season on another cliffhanger.  I don't know why shows like that don't write a simple finale that would serve as a good series finale if things don't work out.  If they get renewed, it's always possible to create more story.  It's not possible to continue a show after a cliffhanger if your show is (predictably) cancelled.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

The thing about Gotham is that it has a very specific end point, like Smallville, and once you get there, you can't unring that bell.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I get that....but is that even true?

Smallville always said that it'd end the way that it ended....with Clark stepping into the light and being Superman.  I think Gotham wants to do something similar...with the last shot being Bruce putting on the cowl and going out to fight all these crazies.

But here's the thing.  Clark was essentially Superman for, at least, two seasons on Smallville.  He didn't have the suit on, but he was Superman - he even had the logo.  Bruce was essentially Batman for a portion of this season.  He's put on a mask and fought random crime.  He has a Batmobile.  The only thing missing is the ears and the logo.

So if Season Four ended with Bruce putting on the cowl with the Batman logo and hitting the streets, and then FOX decides to renew it, there's still stuff they can do.  Putting on the suit and hitting the streets doesn't make him Batman....there's still more story that they could tell about him.  Maybe they show Bruce's first times out.  Maybe they're a disaster, and he decides to travel the world and train.  Or they could frame the end of season four as a flashback and go into more detail about how he decides to go out.  Or even build up a new villain that drives him out.

Or they could just say "screw it" and air their version of Season 11 of Smallville.  Just keep the story going even after it's done - it's worked for almost 10 seasons of Supernatural.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Talk has been that it was an either/or situation with Lethal Weapon and Gotham, and Lethal Weapon just got renewed:

http://deadline.com/2018/05/seann-willi … 202388143/

So likely the end of Gotham.  No official word yet.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

And a surprise - Gotham renewed for a fifth and final season:

http://deadline.com/2018/05/gotham-rene … 202384012/

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Very cool!  The show's not perfect, but they seem to have a great vision.  I'm glad they're going to get the chance to see it through.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I'm happy! The show has maintained a steady style and quality, unlike most shows of it's genre. I'll be sad to see it go, but I'm happy that they will get a proper goodbye.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Yeah I'm not 100% how much more traction they could get on the show after this, and I'm glad they're wrapping things up instead of pushing the envelope any more.  They've already leveraged so much of Batman's Rogues' Gallery, and they've kept Bruce right at the cusp of going full Batman for so long that I don't think it could've survived at this pace for 7+ seasons.

Although I'll give them credit.  I've always said, since season one, that the show was going to have to get desperate and do a time jump where they could hire a sexy mid-20s guy to play Bruce.  They stuck with their guy, and it's worked out.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

How do they make this show? AoS looks like it was filmed in someone's basement, in the 1990's, while Gotham looks like a movie. It has spectacular visuals of the city. I'm sure a lot of it is shot against a green screen, but you'd never know it. The visuals in the finale were excellent. The characters are great. The general vibe of the show is perfect.

I am impressed with this series. The stories are great, and exactly what they should be for this series. There's not a whole lot for me to discuss about the actual storylines, because they speak for themselves. But as I was watching the finale, I was struck by how beautifully this world has been brought to life on the show.

And at the end, when they showed us glimpses of the city falling into chaos and we saw glimpses of Man-Bat, and Morgaine le Fey with Mordred (I'm assuming that's who they were), it just felt natural. That says a lot.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

They did No Man's Land in a way that even Christopher Nolan wasn't able to.  It feels so comic booky, yet it still feels very grounded.  I still don't buy this version of Bruce as Batman because he's just not very big, but they've done a great job with just about everything else.

The only thing about this show that bothers me is Barbara....she's so irritating and over-acts in every scene (moreso than everyone else).  I think her type of character fits, but the actress bothers me.  Her "no boys allowed" storyline might be fun, though.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Toxic femininity!

Yeah, Barbara is a bit much. I think it doesn't bother me as much as it could, just because she's usually surrounded by characters that contrast that personality a lot. On her own, she is very annoying, but as part of the overall picture, she doesn't bother me too much.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

So Lethal Weapon was recast with Stiffler, and Gotham WILL return!

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

The Lethal Weapon drama had been fascinating to watch. The studio totally made the wrong call on that one.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

http://tvline.com/2018/06/04/gotham-fin … bicondova/

Might be a 10 episode season.  Which is fine with me....since this should, essentially, just be the finale.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

That makes sense.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Ehhh, that sucks, only 10.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Considering how close it came to dying, I think 10 will be great.  I'm actually a little surprised that they didn't simply renew it for the 6-episode arc that you mentioned they could write to wrap things up.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Gotham is the most fun show on television.  Period.  I watch a lot of shows while I do something else, but Gotham has my eyes glued most of the time.

And while I still do not buy David Mazouz as a future Batman (I think he's just too small, frame-wise), I think he does about as well as you can.  I think he has the personality down, and I think he has very Batman-like eyes.  I think, like with the rest of the show, I just need to accept that this version of Batman is going to be 5'8, and it'll work like the rest of the show.

Because, obviously, this version of Batman will be very different.  Gordon will know that Bruce is Batman, maybe from the very beginning.  Selina will know.  There's a decent chance most of the GCPD will know.  I think some of the villains will know.  And, yet, it really won't matter.  Instead of the billionaire playboy cover, I think Bruce will be a recluse (like he was in the Dark Knight Rises).  And, honestly, I think this version of Alfred will be in the field with him...if only for a few years.  Maybe even as the first Robin?

I hope the show doesn't try too hard to pivot the show to match the comics.  Because what they've created is its own thing.  And it's great.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Season 5 will be 12 episodes, though it's started a bit meh so far.  I think Monaghan's "Joker" has become the new star of the show, though Gordon, Penguin, and Riddler continue to be very interesting.  Honestly, Bruce/Selina have become very lousy this year.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I don't know why FOX scheduled Gotham the way they did.  It should've just been the 12 episodes in a row.  But it was finally back last night, and the finale is next week.

I'm not going to lie - I think the Gotham finale might be what I'm looking forward to the most this spring.  Maybe more than the Game of Thrones finale.  With the flashforward finale and the track record of the writers, it might be the most fun episode of TV we see all year.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

So, having not seen GOTHAM, how about Slider_Quinn21 offers a GOTHAM/SMALLVILLE comparison as superhero prequels?

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Oh gosh....

I wouldn't even know where to begin.  First of all because I don't think I've seen a whole episode of Smallville since the finale aired.  And secondly because it's like comparing apples and the concept of dark matter.  That's not a commentary on anything but the fact that Gotham is the most unique show on television as far as I'm concerned.

Gotham takes itself both 100% seriously and 100% unseriously.  It's both a gritty, realistic street-level cop procedural, and a show where a boy and a crazy woman can stab an immortal being with a magic knife and make him turn to dust.  It's about the life of a cop trying to save a city from real-life corruption, and a show where there's a mad scientist who is regularly turning human beings into monsters.

The best way I can describe it is that they took unused scripts for Batman: the Animated Series and threw them in a blender with Law and Order: Gotham, and then they took the Batman parts and divided them between Gordon and a Bruce Wayne that 1) was de-aged and 2) didn't remember he was Batman.

The show is either the most perfect 5-season run since Supernatural, or it's a show that stumbled into being absolutely insane by pure happenstance.  The show is either written by the most devoted comic book fans on TV, or it's actually written by the criminally insane.  Neither would surprise me.

Even when you look at modern superhero shows, it doesn't have anything to compare to.  I guess I'd say it's like Arrow....except if Arrow both took itself as seriously as Netflix's Daredevil and existed in the bright colorful world of Legends of Tomorrow.  And instead of focusing on a superhero, it was about Captain Singh.  That's Gotham.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

I have only ever watched six episodes of GOTHAM and decided it wasn't for me. And yet -- I am curious about it and have some questions for Slider_Quinn21.

Did Wayne Manor ever expand its set beyond the living room? The living room reminded me of Lex's office in SMALLVILLE; he ate there, worked out there, had his medical examinations there, held every meeting there, sat around with Clark there -- I honestly think he may have even slept there and that his bedroom was a corner of the Luthor mansion's office set with a bed shoved against the wall.

What was up with recasting Poison Ivy? What was up with recasting her AGAIN? Did that make sense to you? And was there ever any rationale for why Pamela Isley was given the name "Ivy Pepper" in the first season?

What was up with recasting Selina Kyle for the series finale? Did that make sense to you?

Did Batman as played by David Mamouz work for you in the finale?

Did you feel compelled to watch PENNYWORTH and is that anything to do with GOTHAM?

Were there any spin-off media tie in materials that you didn't consider canon?

Were their any mythology-legacy oriented cameos that you liked or didn't like (in the way Teri Hatcher, Dean Cain, Sam Witwer and Helen Slater were on SUPERGIRL)?

Was there ever any difficulty handling the sexuality of the Poison Ivy and Catwoman characters given the extremely young age of the actors playing these extremely sexualized-in-comics roles?

Were you happy with the origin of the Joker? What did you like? What didn't you like?

Was there ever the SMALLVILLE sense of the characters experiencing every major event of the SUPERMAN/BATMAN mythos before they ever even became their costumed selves?

Were you happy with the show?

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

ireactions wrote:

Did Wayne Manor ever expand its set beyond the living room? The living room reminded me of Lex's office in SMALLVILLE; he ate there, worked out there, had his medical examinations there, held every meeting there, sat around with Clark there -- I honestly think he may have even slept there and that his bedroom was a corner of the Luthor mansion's office set with a bed shoved against the wall.

My memory of this is a struggle, but I don't remember a single scene set in Wayne Manor that isn't in that same room.  I think sometimes they'd film in the other direction so *everything* wouldn't be in front of the fireplace, but that might've been their best shot at that.  I also remember a Court of Owls boardroom (?) set and a Cobblepot mansion, and they might've just redressed the Wayne set.

What was up with recasting Poison Ivy? What was up with recasting her AGAIN? Did that make sense to you? And was there ever any rationale for why Pamela Isley was given the name "Ivy Pepper" in the first season?

I think the Ivy character is the most bizarre one of the series, and it had the oddest sense of course-correction when the rest of the show just went crazy in a more natural way.  I haven't read any behind the scenes things, but my guess is that someone on the show (or, more likely, someone at FOX) wanted a "sexy" character and that required Ivy to be aged up.  Maybe they didn't go far enough the first time and decided to course-correct?

The craziest thing is that I remember the pre-pilot advertising making a big deal about Ivy.  She's in the Pilot in a major capacity.  But for much of the first season, Ivy is nowhere to be seen.  Even when she's aged up, she's never a regular.  Even when they finally got a sexy, adult Ivy, they never really used her outside of an episode here or there.

Why they used the name Ivy?  My thought is that the plan was probably to do a slower burn with her character, and since they probably planned on multiple seasons before she actually turned into Poison Ivy, they wanted "non-comics" fans to know who she was going to become.  Everyone knows Bruce and Gordon.  Edward always told riddles at the beginning so it was obvious who he was.  Oswald is called Penguin from the beginning.  My guess is it was a shorthand since there wasn't much of a way to tell the audience who she'd be.

What was up with recasting Selina Kyle for the series finale? Did that make sense to you?

It was weird because she was the only one recast.  Every other character was played by the same actor.  The time-jump wasn't huge, and there's ways to make a 19-year-old actress look 24.  I thought the new actress was fine, but it was a bit silly to me to take away the role from Camren Bicondova.  Especially since she had gained quite the fanbase.

Did Batman as played by David Mamouz work for you in the finale?

The way they used him was kinda bizarre too.  He's filmed mostly in shadow, and the only good look you get at him is sorta awkward CGI.  I thought there'd be more of him, but he's essentially used as a cameo. It was cool to see him in costume, but it's very Smallville in the way they finally use him.

Did you feel compelled to watch PENNYWORTH and is that anything to do with GOTHAM?

I haven't considered it, really.  I thought Sean Pertwee was great as Alfred, and I think I'd watch a show where he was the lead.  Like with Krypton, I don't think watching a show about a superhero's father or grandfather to be all that interesting.  Building up to a few easter eggs doesn't really excite me.

If they did a Gotham spin-off with the Gotham actors (and bring back Camren Bicondova), I'd watch that for sure.

Were there any spin-off media tie in materials that you didn't consider canon?


Probably.  I was thinking maybe I'd read Gotham comics, but I probably would've said the same thing about the Smallville season 11 comics and I didn't read those.  Are they available on TPB?

Were their any mythology-legacy oriented cameos that you liked or didn't like (in the way Teri Hatcher, Dean Cain, Sam Witwer and Helen Slater were on SUPERGIRL)?

I don't think I remember a single mythology-legacy cameo.  I don't think they had a single "prominent" actor show up in any sort of cameo.  The show made its own legacy, which is something I respected about it.  It was balls-to-the-walls crazy most weeks, but it owned it.  I don't think it ever betrayed itself, even when it decided to fully embrace fully wacky concepts.  Despite struggling with ratings, it never went for stunt casting.  I respect that now that I think about it.

Was there ever any difficulty handling the sexuality of the Poison Ivy and Catwoman characters given the extremely young age of the actors playing these extremely sexualized-in-comics roles?

I talked about this a bit with Ivy.  I think they wanted someone to be a bit of a sexpot, and that's why they aged Ivy.  Both times they did it, they made little jokes about how Ivy was now older than Bruce and Selina.  Ivy relished going to nightclubs and being an adult, and she definitely starts to manipulate men with her sexuality almost immediately.

But I guess the "sexy" characters were also filled with Gordon's various love interests.  Barbara Keane and Dr. Lee Thompkins went through various "sexy" stages, and there were characters like Sofia Falcone that also filled that role. 

Catwoman had a thing with Bruce, and she'd occasionally hang out in Barbara's nightclub.  And as she got older, she'd wear sexier outfits and dresses to the various Gotham fancy parties.  But I feel like they generally let her be a kid and even an older teenager without exploiting her as a sex symbol of any kind.

Were you happy with the origin of the Joker? What did you like? What didn't you like?

I don't like that they kept teasing it.  If they were going to do it, they needed to do it.  They kept saying that he wasn't the Joker, but Jerome Valeska kept being more and more the Joker.  To be fair to them, it was his twin brother Jeremiah that ended up *actually* becoming the Joker.

I thought Cameron Monaghan was wonderful in the role, and I think he did the best he could.  I think my biggest issue was that I thought the Joker should've been off-limits.  I didn't want a teenage Joker fighting a teenage Batman.  I wanted Batman and Joker to rise from the insanity of Gotham...not be born at the same time as everything else.

There was actually a really great scene where Jerome Valeska died for the first time, and he'd done this big wild display on Gotham-wide television.  And when he died, they showed a variety of random Gothamites acting like Jerome.  And I think the idea was that Jerome had sewn a seed into the soul of Gotham that would eventually lead to the Joker.  That the Joker was out there somewhere and we'd never know where he was.  I thought that was a great idea, and it made the whole Jerome story (at that time) feel like a great idea.

But like Sylar before him, Jerome and then Jeremiah kept coming back.  They'd die and be resurrected.  Or die and it's a fake out.  I kinda got tired of that.

They embraced him in the finale, and I thought it was pretty good.

Was there ever the SMALLVILLE sense of the characters experiencing every major event of the SUPERMAN/BATMAN mythos before they ever even became their costumed selves?

100%.  They did a bunch of Batman storylines  (the Court of Owls, No Man's Land, etc) and I think Bruce came in contact with just about every Batman villain that's ever been.  By season 3, it's essentially a Batman show without Batman.  By the end, it was a Batman show with Batman but he's just not in the suit.  By the finale, it was a Batman show with Batman in the suit but he's in the shadows.

I think the difference between Smallville and Gotham is that Gotham crammed Smallville's first 7 seasons into the first season and then played around with Smallville seasons 8-10 the rest of the series.  In other words, they realized they were a comic book show way earlier than Smallvilled did and fully embraced that for most of the run.

Were you happy with the show?

There were times when the show meandered, and I struggled at times with how fast or slow the show was moving.  But at the end of the day, Gotham was a lot of fun.  It was inconsistent, and I think I always wanted more from it than I was ever going to realistically get from a show with the budget it received....but I thought it was a fun little look into a world before Batman.

Re: Gotham: Rise of the Villains (Spoilers)

Gotham was very flawed, often repetitive, and yet, I enjoyed it and will miss it.  If I had to describe it, frankly it often had the feel of the 1960's Batman of West and Ward, if you swap 80% of the goofiness for serious drama.