Snarky: Adjective - Any language that contains quips or comments containing sarcastic or satirical witticisms intended as blunt irony. Usually delivered in a manner that is somewhat abrupt and out of context and intended to stun and amuse.
It's not actually that odd. Just using myself as an example, I don't watch those other shows because they look like shit. From what I've seen of them, they are roughly equally shit to Batwoman, agreed. But this one got caught up in a media frenzy so I thought I'd watch it to see if it really was shit, or if people were being sensitive assholes. It really is shit. There are better hills to fight on.
2nd episode was down 36% from the first, the 3rd episode is down a further 15% . Batwoman debuted at 1.8 million, the other Arrow verse shows debuted in the 4.5-6 million viewer range . No matter how you spin in Batwoman is a train wreck
- - - Updated - - -
Bwhahahahaha...wait are you serious?
- - - Updated - - -
The bat signal was also tiny as fuck yet lit up the sky? That light used would barely make it to the next building. And the fucking Vesper Fairchild raido voice overs between scenes....Jesus they are terrible.
And Foxx tells Kate These weapons are for Batman, only he knows how to use them correctly, so of course with out any training , she is using them.
And and she is flying down the raod on her motorcycle in the bat suit, the cape is barely moving. But its the same exact fucking motorcycle she drives around town in . No one notices. And since when did Chicago become Gotham?
Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam
After that Birds of Prey extended trailer, OOF, can't blame you. At this point, I'd want Disney to buy DC or Time Warner, whatever it would take to put Kevin Feige in charge of adapting DC movies. DC is so out of touch and missing the comic book movie adaptations gravy train that it's not even funny.
It looks kinda average. Which, in context, is probably a better position for a live action DC movie since I don't think they can ever recapture the beautiful ridiculous cheese of Aquaman.
But please don't joke about Disney acquiring them. I'm already scared that they'll buy Hasbro in the future and somehow fuck up DnD.
I've watched the episodes so far and it's mind boggling they used that line to promote the show so hard. The show itself, she's made no claim of being better than a man nor even that she's better than Batman. She's actually suggested otherwise. Just the line that the suit will be perfect when it fits a woman (since she can't wear it if it's sized for Bruce).
She's keeping a journal where she's writing FOR Bruce, so she can explain herself when he presumably one day returns. She's stated she can't be Batman, she can't do what he did. She even adopts the red emblem and hair so it's clear she's not Batman, but not for the "I want credit for what I do" but moreso to make it clear Batman isn't back out of concern for what his villains might do if they think it's really him.
Yet the commercials and promos continue to give a totally different vibe.
Bruce arguably does try. How many stories does he try to give Harley a second chance? Try to help Freeze? It's more of a glaring black mark on Gotham itself that Arkham is just so horribly inept at its job for rehabilitation. Well, that and the need for new stories with iconic villains...
I interpreted that as knowing how they work and their simple use is one thing, but Bruce knows how to employ them to their full ability. Using the grappling hook versus using it to anchor a car properly so its secured (y'know, if said car isn't faulty) in an instant while still pursuing someone, for instance.
Hasn't Gotham always been a blend of Chicago and Detroit while Metropolis is kind of an entire city akin to Manhattan?And since when did Chicago become Gotham?
This thread has gone way off-topic with talks about agendas and social politics. Those topics are more appropriate for GenOT. Keep discussion here civil and about the actual media itself.
As an aside, I don't understand people's problem with this show. It's been obvious for about 5 years that the CW Arrowverse shows have been aiming themselves at a millennial, under-25 audience. I compare it to the Netflix Chilling Adventures of Sabrina, and Riverdale, in terms of intended audience. To continue to complain that these superhero shows that are obviously trying to bring in what has always been the most important demo in television, instead of catering to characters who were invented in the 60s and who most of you encountered in the 80s and 90s is.....well, silly as hell. When I was a teenager/young 20s, it was shows like the OC, and Dawson's Creek that filled that gap - nowadays, because of the popularity of the MCU, those shows often have a superhero skin over them.
I don't think Batwoman is a good show. It certainly isn't aimed at me. Guess what - I don't watch it. There's too much good cinema and television in the world to give a shit about a bad CW show, which, hint, all of them are.
I'm in that age range and it certainly doesn't appeal to me or anyone else I know, but that's just anecdotal I suppose. And at this point, most millennials are over 25, so I think it's more accurate to say it's aimed at Gen zers. Granted, it hasn't been well established exactly where that age range is yet.
I'm 38, I have no idea the difference between millennials and gen Z.
Not exactly an apt comparison. The new Batwoman is a different character to Katherine Kane that simply happens to share a name with her. While Batman Who Laughs is an AU doppelganger of Bruce Wane that got fucked up by the Joker of his universe.
Weren't you open to change?
Not in the slightest?
They brought in the original so they could say "look Batman's not gay!" then deleted her from continuity and brought in the new one who is his cousin.
I guess Mr. Freeze is in this category. I don't even remember what his origin was before then BTAS made the greatest episode of a cartoon ever and the comics changed his origin.