I think it looks fine, but then again I could watch Melissa Benoist read the phone book, so perhaps I'm not the best person to ask...
My only concern are the... well they're not knee-pads... well whatever they are - they're going to constantly stick out whenever she bends her legs. That could get annoying.
cincydooley wrote: I like everything but the tights....they seem...odd. She's already got above the knee boots. Really need tights to cover that 6 inches of leg?
Imagine they were uncovered. Now imagine the social justice outcry about objectification and over-sexualisation and blah blah blah.
This nips that right in the bud before we even start. Good move.
Something seems off about it. Too much red I think. The Skirt is red, the stockings are red, and the boots are red. Way too red heavy.
I also can't help but feel, much like Wonder Woman, there was some bad casting here. She just seems too old to be Super Girl. Is super girl not a teenager in the upcoming film? I know it's typical to have adults play teenagers on TV and Movies, but surely they could find someone who looks the age of the character. How about Clarke from The 100? That's a woman in her mid 20s who can pass for a 16 year old.
LordofHats wrote: Something seems off about it. Too much red I think. The Skirt is red, the stockings are red, and the boots are red. Way too red heavy.
I also can't help but feel, much like Wonder Woman, there was some bad casting here. She just seems too old to be Super Girl. Is super girl not a teenager in the upcoming film?
No, she's not. She's supposed to be 24, so there's really nothing wrong with the casting.
Regarding the costume, it looks really solid, and she looks good in it. It's very much a classic Supergirl look but with taller boots, somewhat New 52 style but without the cutout knees. I really don't know what people want, other than the half-shirt. And that wasn't happening...they're going after a female audience with this show.
I just wonder how many hundreds or thousands (or hundreds of thousands) of humans she is going to allow to die to make her character "gritty" or "realistic". Then maybe 45 odd minutes of punching things through other things.
Paradigm wrote: What is this for? Superbat? Superman 2? Her own spin-off? I recall seeing the film was being made, but can't think by who.
TV show. CBS. Same guy who made Arrow and Flash on CW. Indeterminate whether it will cross over with those two.
My interest is piqued then. If they can carry over the same production quality of Arrow and presumably Flash (I've not seen either current series) then that should be good.
I do wonder how they will do Supergirl without having Superman (unless they do at least mention him and crossover with MoS or have 2 separate settings). Then again, I am utterly ignorant on the character so that might not even be needed.
From what WB/DC have said, the TV world and Movie world do not cross. It's part of the reason why they can't use Batman on Arrow (so just made Arrow Batman-by-another-name, not that I'm complaining). That said, it has been seen in audition tapes/audition scripts that Kara's cousin does get some non-oblique references. Seems you can do Arrow without ever mentioning Gotham (the place, not that stupid show), but you can't do Superman's cousin without mentioning Superman.
The interviews I've read recently about Arrow and Batman refer more to the series Gotham than any issues because the films are doing stuff. Wayne Enterprises has cropped up in The Flash once or twice too. But yeah, we won't see Batman in Arrow, but maybe Nightwing will turn up one day and mention him, for example.
I saw the full body picture of Supergirl and was underwhelmed too.
However... The top picture there, the headshot, looks pretty good to me.
Compel wrote: The interviews I've read recently about Arrow and Batman refer more to the series Gotham than any issues because the films are doing stuff. Wayne Enterprises has cropped up in The Flash once or twice too. But yeah, we won't see Batman in Arrow, but maybe Nightwing will turn up one day and mention him, for example.
I would love to see a Nightwing series done in the style/setting of Arrow. Dodges the 'no Batman/Gotham issue' (just set it post-Batman, after Wayne has died/retired), and could be very awesome indeed.
Why? Why the skirt? Why isn't she wearing the same suit Superman does in MoS? Is it because DC is keeping the TV and big screen stuff completely separate?
H.B.M.C. wrote: From what WB/DC have said, the TV world and Movie world do not cross. It's part of the reason why they can't use Batman on Arrow (so just made Arrow Batman-by-another-name, not that I'm complaining). That said, it has been seen in audition tapes/audition scripts that Kara's cousin does get some non-oblique references. Seems you can do Arrow without ever mentioning Gotham (the place, not that stupid show), but you can't do Superman's cousin without mentioning Superman.
They have mentioned that vigilante in a batsuit in Gotham in Arrow though. I wanna say it was season 1. Might have been two but Laurel's dad says it at one point. Also I disagree that Arrow is Batman by another name but that's a whole other discussion.
Regarding the Super Girl she looks fine. Not sure I like it not being on CW so lack of crossing over plus other channels have a tendency to pull things because they don't understand the audience or put them at weird time slots. But we'll see.
Not sure what to expect from the series. Superman light with university / college drama? What's special about Supergirl? Is she just a female version of the most bland and boring superhero there is?
Paradigm wrote:
I do wonder how they will do Supergirl without having Superman (unless they do at least mention him and crossover with MoS or have 2 separate settings). Then again, I am utterly ignorant on the character so that might not even be needed.
Pretty sure that they've mentioned that Superman will in fact make an appearance in the series - and that they're currently trying to cast him?
Barksdale wrote:Agreed. I'd destroy Melissa Benoist don't get me wrong. But I'm not feeling that.
Classy!
Sigvatr wrote: Not sure what to expect from the series. Superman light with university / college drama? What's special about Supergirl? Is she just a female version of the most bland and boring superhero there is?
Checks thread title.
Tries to determine what Sigvatr's point is.
Determines there isn't one, beyond a classic Swoop -n- Poop, of course!
Paradigm wrote: What is this for? Superbat? Superman 2? Her own spin-off? I recall seeing the film was being made, but can't think by who.
TV show. CBS. Same guy who made Arrow and Flash on CW. Indeterminate whether it will cross over with those two.
H.B.M.C. wrote: From what WB/DC have said, the TV world and Movie world do not cross. It's part of the reason why they can't use Batman on Arrow (so just made Arrow Batman-by-another-name, not that I'm complaining). That said, it has been seen in audition tapes/audition scripts that Kara's cousin does get some non-oblique references. Seems you can do Arrow without ever mentioning Gotham (the place, not that stupid show), but you can't do Superman's cousin without mentioning Superman.
That Dakka Dakka hasn't lost its gak regarding Jimmy Olson being her love interest and being played by a black guy with the build of a football player is testament to how apathetic people are toward the show.
The show was originally floated to CW but they declined because it had a female lead. CW's advertisers were not happy that CW's line up appealed to mostly women, and has been trying to get more shows like Arrow and Flash, with male leads, because they do well with both genders. Which is why we'll be getting another Arrow spin off with Atom, and possibly Firestorm, instead of Supergirl on CW.
BlaxicanX wrote: That Dakka Dakka hasn't lost its gak regarding Jimmy Olson being her love interest and being played by a black guy with the build of a football player is testament to how apathetic people are toward the show.
Perhaps, they want to avoid the accusations of unfounded nerd rage, and/or straight up racism ?
Maybe they just don't care what liberties the show has taken with a non supe supporting character, in a show with it's own continuity outside of the comics, movies, and other TV series ?
Although, I have to admit I thought it was an odd choice, but 10 seconds later I realised I had more important things to deal with and let it go.
Perhaps, they want to avoid the accusations of unfounded nerd rage, and/or straight up racism ?
Maybe they just don't care what liberties the show has taken with a non supe supporting character, in a show with it's own continuity outside of the comics, movies, and other TV series ?
Alpharius wrote: And perhaps it isn't a big deal as maybe BlaxicanX wants it to be?
If only they would have a show with an actually interesting female superhero...like Jean Grey? Storm? She-Hulk? Supergirl just seems so...bland from reading her entry on Wikipedia. She basically is Superman just with boobs? How is that "empowering" at all? It just seems like a cheap "Look we have a woman!" effort to me.
...oh dear lord, but please, don't let us have another Electra...or...Catwoman...movie...dear lord...
Jean Grey, for example, would be awesome. Strong woman that doesn't go into feminazi territory, but is both a loving wife and a strong woman on her own, with immense powers and frequently saving the world's butt, rich background etc. You could even start with a young Jean Grey who is unaware of the full scope of her powers and then her character slowly developing alongside her powers and the struggle she frequently is in...I'd watch it.
But female Superman and LassoOfTruth-TotallyNotSuperman-Woman? Come on.
Jean Grey is held firmly in a Death Grip by FOX. You won't see any X-Men related Characters on TV until they give up on making movies. That's why Marvel, and Agents of Shield in particular, are moving towards Inhumans to fill the gap previously filled my mutants.
Sigvatr wrote: If only they would have a show with an actually interesting female superhero...like Jean Grey? Storm? She-Hulk? Supergirl just seems so...bland from reading her entry on Wikipedia. She basically is Superman just with boobs? How is that "empowering" at all? It just seems like a cheap "Look we have a woman!" effort to me.
...oh dear lord, but please, don't let us have another Electra...or...Catwoman...movie...dear lord...
Jean Grey, for example, would be awesome. Strong woman that doesn't go into feminazi territory, but is both a loving wife and a strong woman on her own, with immense powers and frequently saving the world's butt, rich background etc. You could even start with a young Jean Grey who is unaware of the full scope of her powers and then her character slowly developing alongside her powers and the struggle she frequently is in...I'd watch it.
But female Superman and LassoOfTruth-TotallyNotSuperman-Woman? Come on.
Well, Storm and Jean Grey, as mentioned, have been done (and done pretty well, to be honest) by Fox under their liscence, and both have new 'versions' of their characters coming in Apocalpse next year. Marvel are working on AKA Jessica Jones as one of their Netflix series, and have a Ms/Captain Marvel film in the works. I also wouldn't be surprised to see She-hulk in Phase 4, or maybe even showing up in future series of Daredevil (first as an opposing lawyer to DD, then being revealed as Banner's cousin and having powers ect).
Must admit (from the very little I know) I'm not fussed about Supergirl, but then, Man of Steel made me take Superman seriously for the first time, maybe this will do the same.
LordofHats wrote: Something seems off about it. Too much red I think. The Skirt is red, the stockings are red, and the boots are red. Way too red heavy.
I also can't help but feel, much like Wonder Woman, there was some bad casting here. She just seems too old to be Super Girl. Is super girl not a teenager in the upcoming film?
No, she's not. She's supposed to be 24, so there's really nothing wrong with the casting.
Regarding the costume, it looks really solid, and she looks good in it. It's very much a classic Supergirl look but with taller boots, somewhat New 52 style but without the cutout knees. I really don't know what people want, other than the half-shirt. And that wasn't happening...they're going after a female audience with this show.
I wonder why no one is complaining about a 24 year old being called "girl". Not being Mr. Social Justice or anything, I could care less, but are there complaints?
Sigvatr wrote: If only they would have a show with an actually interesting female superhero...like Jean Grey? Storm? She-Hulk? Supergirl just seems so...bland from reading her entry on Wikipedia. She basically is Superman just with boobs? How is that "empowering" at all? It just seems like a cheap "Look we have a woman!" effort to me.
...oh dear lord, but please, don't let us have another Electra...or...Catwoman...movie...dear lord...
Jean Grey, for example, would be awesome. Strong woman that doesn't go into feminazi territory, but is both a loving wife and a strong woman on her own, with immense powers and frequently saving the world's butt, rich background etc. You could even start with a young Jean Grey who is unaware of the full scope of her powers and then her character slowly developing alongside her powers and the struggle she frequently is in...I'd watch it.
But female Superman and LassoOfTruth-TotallyNotSuperman-Woman? Come on.
Wait. Jean Grey is interesting? I'm fairly sure the most interesting thing involving her was her death. The permanent one. Even Cyclops would be a better female lead!
From what little I've seen of Supergirl - Smallville, Superman / Batman Apocalypse and Superman / Batman Unbound - I actually found Supergirl to actually be an interesting character.
There's interesting things actually in there, from her actually living as a Kryptonian, not actually just being a survivor from her home being destroyed, but actually seeing its last days.
The point of this post I was going to make as going to be: "but all this just makes her an interesting supporting character, not a lead." But, actually seeing what I typed there in that last paragraph... If they go with what I'm imagining, flipping heck, this could actually be a good show.
I'm thinking something like a crossover between Continuum and Arrow's flashbacks with a dash of life in occupied France...
So, if you were to show , say, 3 themes of her life and how they interact.
Firstly, her life in her mid-late teens on Krypton before Brainiac's invasion. - The good, happy, carefree life, basically.
Secondly, various flashbacks of Brainiac's invasion (I don't think it's always Brainiac, is it? Anyway, I'm just going from my memories of seeing Unbound.) - You could probably get some quite 'dark' character development-ish stories in there, in a very similar way to the Arrow 'Island' flashbacks. - Just how much BS would be needed for Brainiac's 'bottling' of Kandor to take several years as a form of a 'siege?' - Something long enough to give some seasons worth of storyarc in it?
But you then juxtapose this with the main story of her modern day Earth home (that's similar to Central City on the Flash show in 'feel'). Kara's needing to be to grow to this superhero type person with a capital S, exemplified by her cousin, but still working through the trauma she's already suffered in her previous years.
I'm fairly certain that in the DC universe(I hesitate to say continuity), that if you think of one horrific disaster, and claim it's Brainiac's fault, you've got a 90% chance of being right.
Personally I would've put a little more yellow into it, but sometimes what works in a comic doesn't work on screen (compare Kurse from Marvel comics to Kurse from Thor: The Dark World to see what I mean). Even he Flash costume is still a little silly (it's the lightning bolt really - there's no practical reason why it'd be there, not that everything needs to be practical, but you know what I mean).
I think it's going to be hard enough having a super-hero that can fly and punch holes in the Earth's crust work on a TV budget, so really the suit is the least of their problems.
Sigvatr wrote: If only they would have a show with an actually interesting female superhero...like Jean Grey?
Jean Grey interesting? That's funny.
Storm?
She's never worked well outside of the X-Men. I actually find most X-Men characters barring a few (Wolverine, Gambit, Quick Silver/Scarlet Witch for example) to be rather boring on their own. They really do work best as an ensemble. How long has it been since we had a good XMen tv series anyway? Like 10 years now?
She-Hulk?
I'd watch it.
Supergirl just seems so...bland from reading her entry on Wikipedia.
While I disagree that Supergirl is bland, I do admit I find the choice of her, of all DC heroes for a solo series odd. Huntress. Vixen. Hell even Cat Woman as long as we avoided Halle Berry. They tried a Birds of Prey series a couple years ago, and honestly it wasn't a bad idea. The writing just sucked. I totally watch a series about Oracle. Legion of Super Heroes? There's an underrated franchise. There are a lot of things I'd rather see than Super Girl. Hell. I'll go for Power Girl. Power Girl has always been cool. EDIT: Or Question. Question is awesome (the guy or girl variant) as long as Question acts like he/she did on Justice League;
At least power-girl had a little something to her story. I have to agree with Sigvatr here, what exactly is the pull supposed to be other than a female superman? I was never really interested in supergirl as a character because she'd already been done in another gender. I just don't get where the interest is supposed to come from.
Wonder woman was a better idea for a tv series, although i heard they messed it up pretty badly.
The Wonder Woman TV Pilot was terrible. It was like the writer had never read a Wonder Woman comic in his life, and decided to make up all the details he didn't know.
Wonder Woman has this curse about her, not just in other media but the comics as well. Things just seem to have this habit of going horribly wrong and the work just comes out terrible.
Torga_DW wrote: At least power-girl had a little something to her story. I have to agree with Sigvatr here, what exactly is the pull supposed to be other than a female superman? I was never really interested in supergirl as a character because she'd already been done in another gender. I just don't get where the interest is supposed to come from.
Wonder woman was a better idea for a tv series, although i heard they messed it up pretty badly.
The best female solo series would be a non Alist hero TBH. Black Cat. Nothing related at all to superhumans. She is just really good burglar.
Make her a robin hood type char or something, She steals to fund an animal shelter that also houses sick dying orphans IDK.
Yeah, but at least (before the series) she had a good, interesting and original story. Supergirl from the get-go is a story about a kryptonian orphan learning to live amongst humanity - and its been done to death already. I just don't have great expectations for a series based on this particular character.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hotsauceman1 wrote: The best female solo series would be a non Alist hero TBH. Black Cat. Nothing related at all to superhumans. She is just really good burglar.
Make her a robin hood type char or something, She steals to fund an animal shelter that also houses sick dying orphans IDK.
I think there's a fair few superheroines they could do better than supergirl. The superhuman part isn't the issue to me, its the fact that its already been done with another gender.
Yeah, i do get what you mean. Too much superpower and the suspense is gone because nothing can stop them. Which ends in kryptonite being the most common element on the planet to try and bring back a credible threat.
Torga_DW wrote: Supergirl from the get-go is a story about a kryptonian orphan learning to live amongst humanity - and its been done to death already.
I kinda hoped I had already covered this with my theory but... In Superman Unbound at least, she wasn't really an orphan, she had had a childhood, actually had a life.
That carries in her general story. She isn't Super Man but a girl. Supes grew up on Earth, with no actual life experience of being Kryptonian. Super Girl on the other hand knew very much what it was like to be Kryptonian, and had a very different struggle from Clark on Earth.
Sigvatr wrote: Jean Grey, for example, would be awesome. Strong woman that doesn't go into feminazi territory, but is both a loving wife and a strong woman on her own, with immense powers and frequently saving the world's butt, rich background etc. You could even start with a young Jean Grey who is unaware of the full scope of her powers and then her character slowly developing alongside her powers and the struggle she frequently is in...I'd watch it.
You know what character I would like? Glory! But I guess it my taste are not mainstream enough for this .
(Spoilered for a bit of violence)
Spoiler:
Did I mention that this is just her Bruce Banner form? She can change quite a bit.
(Spoilered for moar violence and the subtle hint of a nipple)
Spoiler:
I guess she does go into “feminazi territory” though, because
(spoilered because it is an actual spoiler)
Spoiler:
she never married as her only real love was a woman before gay marriage was allowed, and she just has casual sex with men.
Also not sure how well the monsters and spaceships and all that could translate with live actors and CGI rather than just drawings, but seeing her battering down something with her fists like that in a movie/tv-show would be so damn sweet!
H.B.M.C. wrote: Imagine they were uncovered. Now imagine the social justice outcry about objectification and over-sexualisation and blah blah blah.
This nips that right in the bud before we even start. Good move.
Right up till this...
and, yes, as DC found in New 52, changing Power Girl's outfit to make her less sexy tends to cause epic rage on a scale that Social Justice Warriors wish they could cause. DC rolled back the change with (for them) startling speed.
and I will almost guarantee the writers try and get PeeGee here on the show somehow.
A sexy costume can work well if the character is written well. The problem is if the woman has a sexy costume and the personality of a librarian. Er, schoolmarm. Uh, lawyer? I mean if she doesn't have the bravado for it. Yeah.
Tannhauser42 wrote: What's with making everything dark, dark, dark? I like the design, but would prefer the colors to be a bit brighter.
Darker schemes look better on screen.
Would you (or someone else) expound on that - why is that?
They tried the comic-book-bright lycra look in various Superhero productions through the '80s and '90s. It almost universally winds up looking cheesy.
There's probably all sorts of scientific reasoning out there for why it is, but it just seems that people view comic books or cartoons differently to live-action stuff, and so what works in the former just doesn't look as good in the latter.
Computron wrote: Kind of meh, a bit too soft around the face for a supergirl, looks more like a cosplayer than the "real" thing.
This should be Supergirl.
Spoiler:
So much hotter than the OP as is the Laura V who was gorgeous in Smallviile and also to me at least looks like I want her to do
and I guess if you are as powerful as she is - the look of the clothes don't really matter - you just need something that can survive the hell you will put it through - something like GP wears in Iron Man 3
So I guess the "consensus" is that an edgier Supergirl would be bad, but they should have cast a barbarian-looking chick. And maybe it shouldn't be Supergirl at all but a bloodthirsty warrior woman. But wearing bright colors. Because not too edgy. And bewbs.
The best female solo series would be a non Alist hero TBH. Black Cat. Nothing related at all to superhumans. She is just really good burglar.
Make her a robin hood type char or something, She steals to fund an animal shelter that also houses sick dying orphans IDK.
Black Cat? Naw.
Their best option, if they really want to have some room to do some groundbreaking super hero stuff founding in a great source material is the present day Kate Kane Batwoman. It would also give them the potential to tie it in to a Gotham Central TV show---you know, they show they SHOULD have done instead of Gotham.
It checks plenty of boxes:
--Big name with the "Bat" series.
--Super diversity with the lesbian protagonist.
--rich source material to farm from.
gorgon wrote: And maybe it shouldn't be Supergirl at all but a bloodthirsty warrior woman.
Is that about me? Glory is not really bloodthirsty, she is merely very brutal when fighting. And relatively quick to anger. But (spoilered for spoiler)
Spoiler:
she has a very nice love story too! She can be tender and caring. And also she has an awesome dad.
And I never said that edgy is bad. Also boobs are okay for eventual sex scene, but when fighting they should never get the hint of a focus imho.
I'd prefer to see Huntress, honestly. Zatanna is my favorite, but I think her stuff would be more than tv could do without a huge budget, plus she's more of a team player. Huntress is a solo act. And they could add in the Question later, and have a killer duo. Seriously, almost anyone would be better than Supergirl. But Huntress is my (realistic) #1.
I think Huntress would be prime material for a solo series, but I think her appearance on Arrow kind of forms a road block. The depiction of the character on that series is a lot darker with far fewer redeeming virtues than the comic counterpart.
timetowaste85 wrote: I'd prefer to see Huntress, honestly. Zatanna is my favorite, but I think her stuff would be more than tv could do without a huge budget, plus she's more of a team player. Huntress is a solo act. And they could add in the Question later, and have a killer duo. Seriously, almost anyone would be better than Supergirl. But Huntress is my (realistic) #1.
Huntress features pretty heavily in Arrow, though (well, series 1 and 2 at least. Not seen 3 yet, and I'm avoiding any info on it), and while she was good enough that I honestly wouldn't mind her getting her own show spun off from that, it seems unlikely.
I think, depending on how it's handled, SG could be interesting enough as a character/plot, especially if they work in some Arrow-'Island'-style flashbacks to the last days of Krypton (which looked amazing in MoS. I doubt they could do quite as well with a TV budget, but the odd flashback would certainly add some 'awesome factor')
timetowaste85 wrote: of Krypton (which looked amazing in MoS. I doubt they could do quite as well with a TV budget, but the odd flashback would certainly add some 'awesome factor')
They could always just use Simon Fraser University in Canada like all the other science fiction shows hat need an advanced alien city. :p
But yeah, this discussion has got me watching Superman Unbound again now.
timetowaste85 wrote: I forgot all about her in season 1. Time to go back and rewatch. Dammit. Well, at least I get to see her on the screen anyway. Job well done.
Since when did one need an excuse to rewatch Arrow?
I think she just has the one episode in series 2 (the one where she fights Canary), but in S1 she has her initial 2-parter (which is great, two of the best episodes) and one later on. Put all 4 together and you have a pretty awesome arc to watch.
TBH, I find most female heroines to be prety lame and uninspired, whereas the female antiheros/villains tend to be fairly interesting. I find it odd that both DC and Marvel keep trying to push characters that nobody really cares about instead of Harley Quinn and Black Widow (respectively).
The best female solo series would be a non Alist hero TBH. Black Cat. Nothing related at all to superhumans. She is just really good burglar.
Make her a robin hood type char or something, She steals to fund an animal shelter that also houses sick dying orphans IDK.
Black Cat? Naw.
Their best option, if they really want to have some room to do some groundbreaking super hero stuff founding in a great source material is the present day Kate Kane Batwoman. It would also give them the potential to tie it in to a Gotham Central TV show---you know, they show they SHOULD have done instead of Gotham.
It checks plenty of boxes:
--Big name with the "Bat" series.
--Super diversity with the lesbian protagonist.
--rich source material to farm from.
What about the mute Batgirl who was a trained assasin? Cassandra Cain. Fits in the the grittyness AND she is asian so DIVERSITY.
And make her a mute protagonist.
What about the mute Batgirl who was a trained assasin? Cassandra Cain. Fits in the the grittyness AND she is asian so DIVERSITY.
And make her a mute protagonist.
Yeah.
Nothing says "successful television show" like "protagonist that can't speak."
Or, make her a sidekick to Nightwing and have her learning to speak a main plotpoint.
I dont know, if done right, a character who doesnt speak can be done right
adamsouza wrote: Harley Quinn will be featured in the upcoming Suicide Squad movie.
Black Widow is the Avengers Movie franchise.
TV is for seconds stringers
Yeah, theyre essentially giving Harley the Black Widow treatment, stick her in a show with a bunch of male characters so as to pay lip service to diversity. Then when she inevitably outshines her costars (as ScarJo has done in the Black Widow role) inexplicably refuse to give her a standalone show/film.
As for "TV being for second stringers", Superman had smallville, second stringer? Batman has Gotham, second stringer (and dont give me that gak about it not being a Batman show. Thus far Bruce Wayne and/or some form of Batman supervillain has managed to make it into every fething episode)? hell, The Flash is getting a film.
Lets look at some of the "first stringers" that are getting films:
Guardians of the Galaxy. That like 90 issue comic series from like 30 years ago that nobody had ever heard of.
Antman. Most people never heard of the dude and those that did dont even like him.
Black Panther. Lol, okay. I get it, first mainstream black comic hero, I respect that, but the number of people that really care about the character? hah
Doctor Strange? Solidly B-list.
Inhumans? If it wasnt for the feud over the X-Men, the Inhumans wouldnt he getting the exposure theyve been receiving.
Aquaman. The least popular and most niche member of the Justice League is getting a film.
Shazam and Cyborg too, granted their more popular than half of the Marvel entries Ive listed.
timetowaste85 wrote: I'd prefer to see Huntress, honestly. Zatanna is my favorite, but I think her stuff would be more than tv could do without a huge budget, plus she's more of a team player. Huntress is a solo act. And they could add in the Question later, and have a killer duo. Seriously, almost anyone would be better than Supergirl. But Huntress is my (realistic) #1.
Huntress features pretty heavily in Arrow, though (well, series 1 and 2 at least. Not seen 3 yet, and I'm avoiding any info on it), and while she was good enough that I honestly wouldn't mind her getting her own show spun off from that, it seems unlikely.
Also, y'know, she was on Birds of Prey. There's plenty of TV Huntress.
"The robots were everywhere, our army threw everything we had at them but they were unstoppable. They killed people randomly at first, then... They downloaded our knowledge and learned about us. They figured out who to keep and who to kill. Who they found... redundant."
"We never saw the being inside the ship. The thing in charge. I don't think there's anyone outside of there that has.
Fearing he would return, my parents sent me to Earth, after my father and other scientists decoded the memories of the robots left behind. That's how they found out he was called Brainiac, they planned to find him, fight him. Get back the people of Kandor.
We were all so... powerless. I never wanted to feel that way again, noone should."
From that youtube video, it sounds like they're going a different way, but really, Battlestar Galactica / Falling Skies style flashbacks, adjusting from powerless to powers and dealing with returning to 'normal life' again after surviving hell-on-Krypton.
adamsouza wrote: Harley Quinn will be featured in the upcoming Suicide Squad movie.
Black Widow is the Avengers Movie franchise.
TV is for seconds stringers
Yeah, theyre essentially giving Harley the Black Widow treatment, stick her in a show with a bunch of male characters so as to pay lip service to diversity. Then when she inevitably outshines her costars (as ScarJo has done in the Black Widow role) inexplicably refuse to give her a standalone show/film.
As for "TV being for second stringers", Superman had smallville, second stringer? Batman has Gotham, second stringer (and dont give me that gak about it not being a Batman show. Thus far Bruce Wayne and/or some form of Batman supervillain has managed to make it into every fething episode)? hell, The Flash is getting a film.
Lets look at some of the "first stringers" that are getting films:
Guardians of the Galaxy. That like 90 issue comic series from like 30 years ago that nobody had ever heard of.
Antman. Most people never heard of the dude and those that did dont even like him.
Black Panther. Lol, okay. I get it, first mainstream black comic hero, I respect that, but the number of people that really care about the character? hah
Doctor Strange? Solidly B-list.
Inhumans? If it wasnt for the feud over the X-Men, the Inhumans wouldnt he getting the exposure theyve been receiving.
Aquaman. The least popular and most niche member of the Justice League is getting a film.
Shazam and Cyborg too, granted their more popular than half of the Marvel entries Ive listed.
ScarJo outshone her costars? Hahahahaha, what friggin planet are you living on?! RDJ, Hulk, and Loki OWNED that film. ScarJo was just a nice piece of ass to watch. Her acting chops are only slightly better than Jessica Alba and Halle Berry (who both suck, but are hot). Outshone her colleagues indeed...
To be honest, I thought Scarlett Johansson was pretty good. Enjoyable enough, doesn't do anything I'd class as 'bad acting', was fun etc. But yeah, Halle Berry seems a bit one-hit-wonder (I actually haven't seen Monsters Ball, to be honest).
Anyhow, back to Supergirl... I've finished watching Superman: Unbound now and yeah, my thoughts from earlier in the thread weren't wrong. There's a whole load of good stuff there about Kara and Krypton / Kandor / Earth / Brainiac, that if you tweaked a bit, fleshed out some stuff, really would make a pretty darn awesome basis for a TV show.
As to female (and male) sexuality and still tying it in with superheroes, there's a Canadian TV show called 'Lost Girl' with female leads, female showrunners, mostly female driven overall, to be honest and it actually does dovetail quite nicely with that blogpost from HBMC. Oh, and is sexy as all heck (hurr, hurr, hurr, that's a pun if you've seen the show). - Both for male and female fans.
adamsouza wrote: Harley Quinn will be featured in the upcoming Suicide Squad movie.
Black Widow is the Avengers Movie franchise.
TV is for seconds stringers
Speaking of which, for those that watch Gotham. The female bank worker with the glasses in the Red Hood episode, Harley maybe?
I disagree about second stringers for tv btw...speaking of which....I think the tv Arrow guy is every bit as good if not more than the Avengers Hawkeye.
I disagree about second stringers for tv btw...speaking of which....I think the tv Arrow guy is every bit as good if not more than the Avengers Hawkeye.
Jeremy Renner is literally the worst part of the movie.
I'd rather see a Maria Hill movie than a Hawkeye movie.
I disagree about second stringers for tv btw...speaking of which....I think the tv Arrow guy is every bit as good if not more than the Avengers Hawkeye.
Jeremy Renner is literally the worst part of the movie.
I'd rather see a Maria Hill movie than a Hawkeye movie.
GOD YES.
Everything he does seems forced. Like the BW and HE love thingie.
adamsouza wrote: Harley Quinn will be featured in the upcoming Suicide Squad movie.
Black Widow is the Avengers Movie franchise.
TV is for seconds stringers
Yeah, theyre essentially giving Harley the Black Widow treatment, stick her in a show with a bunch of male characters so as to pay lip service to diversity. Then when she inevitably outshines her costars (as ScarJo has done in the Black Widow role) inexplicably refuse to give her a standalone show/film.
As for "TV being for second stringers", Superman had smallville, second stringer? Batman has Gotham, second stringer (and dont give me that gak about it not being a Batman show. Thus far Bruce Wayne and/or some form of Batman supervillain has managed to make it into every fething episode)? hell, The Flash is getting a film.
Lets look at some of the "first stringers" that are getting films:
Guardians of the Galaxy. That like 90 issue comic series from like 30 years ago that nobody had ever heard of.
Antman. Most people never heard of the dude and those that did dont even like him.
Black Panther. Lol, okay. I get it, first mainstream black comic hero, I respect that, but the number of people that really care about the character? hah
Doctor Strange? Solidly B-list.
Inhumans? If it wasnt for the feud over the X-Men, the Inhumans wouldnt he getting the exposure theyve been receiving.
Aquaman. The least popular and most niche member of the Justice League is getting a film.
Shazam and Cyborg too, granted their more popular than half of the Marvel entries Ive listed.
ScarJo outshone her costars? Hahahahaha, what friggin planet are you living on?! RDJ, Hulk, and Loki OWNED that film. ScarJo was just a nice piece of ass to watch. Her acting chops are only slightly better than Jessica Alba and Halle Berry (who both suck, but are hot). Outshone her colleagues indeed...
What movie were you watching? I'm talking about the latest Captain America Everyone I know personally, as well as most critics, agree that ScarJo ran away with that film and Marvel is idiotic for not giving her her own film (and lord knows she has more than a few interesting and relevant storylines they can produce).
adamsouza wrote: Harley Quinn will be featured in the upcoming Suicide Squad movie.
Black Widow is the Avengers Movie franchise.
TV is for seconds stringers
Yeah, theyre essentially giving Harley the Black Widow treatment, stick her in a show with a bunch of male characters so as to pay lip service to diversity. Then when she inevitably outshines her costars (as ScarJo has done in the Black Widow role) inexplicably refuse to give her a standalone show/film.
As for "TV being for second stringers", Superman had smallville, second stringer? Batman has Gotham, second stringer (and dont give me that gak about it not being a Batman show. Thus far Bruce Wayne and/or some form of Batman supervillain has managed to make it into every fething episode)? hell, The Flash is getting a film.
Lets look at some of the "first stringers" that are getting films:
Guardians of the Galaxy. That like 90 issue comic series from like 30 years ago that nobody had ever heard of.
Antman. Most people never heard of the dude and those that did dont even like him.
Black Panther. Lol, okay. I get it, first mainstream black comic hero, I respect that, but the number of people that really care about the character? hah
Doctor Strange? Solidly B-list.
Inhumans? If it wasnt for the feud over the X-Men, the Inhumans wouldnt he getting the exposure theyve been receiving.
Aquaman. The least popular and most niche member of the Justice League is getting a film.
Shazam and Cyborg too, granted their more popular than half of the Marvel entries Ive listed.
ScarJo outshone her costars? Hahahahaha, what friggin planet are you living on?! RDJ, Hulk, and Loki OWNED that film. ScarJo was just a nice piece of ass to watch. Her acting chops are only slightly better than Jessica Alba and Halle Berry (who both suck, but are hot). Outshone her colleagues indeed...
What movie were you watching? I'm talking about the latest Captain America Everyone I know personally, as well as most critics, agree that ScarJo ran away with that film and Marvel is idiotic for not giving her her own film (and lord knows she has more than a few interesting and relevant storylines they can produce).
I thought everyone was great in the Avengers and CA2 - that and Thor 2 were simply wonderful Superhero films......
Tried Lost Girl and couldn't get on with it - much prefer Vamp Diaries and Originals - better looking girls (IMO) and fun plots that they resolve ...........but then I didn't like Arrow......
adamsouza wrote: Harley Quinn will be featured in the upcoming Suicide Squad movie.
Black Widow is the Avengers Movie franchise.
TV is for seconds stringers
Yeah, theyre essentially giving Harley the Black Widow treatment, stick her in a show with a bunch of male characters so as to pay lip service to diversity. Then when she inevitably outshines her costars (as ScarJo has done in the Black Widow role) inexplicably refuse to give her a standalone show/film.
As for "TV being for second stringers", Superman had smallville, second stringer? Batman has Gotham, second stringer (and dont give me that gak about it not being a Batman show. Thus far Bruce Wayne and/or some form of Batman supervillain has managed to make it into every fething episode)? hell, The Flash is getting a film.
Lets look at some of the "first stringers" that are getting films:
Guardians of the Galaxy. That like 90 issue comic series from like 30 years ago that nobody had ever heard of.
Antman. Most people never heard of the dude and those that did dont even like him.
Black Panther. Lol, okay. I get it, first mainstream black comic hero, I respect that, but the number of people that really care about the character? hah
Doctor Strange? Solidly B-list.
Inhumans? If it wasnt for the feud over the X-Men, the Inhumans wouldnt he getting the exposure theyve been receiving.
Aquaman. The least popular and most niche member of the Justice League is getting a film.
Shazam and Cyborg too, granted their more popular than half of the Marvel entries Ive listed.
I agree with your 1st/2nd string assessments. And honestly, pretty much all the MCU characters were Marvel's second or third tier before the movies got made. Spidey and Logan are the only characters that can hang with Supes, Bats, and WW in terms of general cultural awareness.
Regarding Widow, Harley, etc...I think it's important to note that TV and film are FILLED with great characters who steal scenes like crazy, but don't deserve their own film.
Now, I agree that Widow and ScarJo probably deserve a film, and *much more* than the Carol Danvers Captain Marvel. Perhaps it's a case where ScarJo doesn't want to commit to it or something. Otherwise the CM project seems like one part "us too!" on the heels of WB's WW movie announcement, and another part "we have the formula to make a hit movie out of any character" hubris from Marvel.
Personally, I trust talent over formula in pretty much any industry or endeavor. We'll see if Marvel gets what has actually made its films successful.
But here I am helping the Marvel heads (intentionally?) derail another DC thread.
Compel wrote: From that youtube video, it sounds like they're going a different way, but really, Battlestar Galactica / Falling Skies style flashbacks, adjusting from powerless to powers and dealing with returning to 'normal life' again after surviving hell-on-Krypton.
That could be awesome.
It could shake out a lot of different ways, but yeah, there's plenty of potential here.
chaos0xomega wrote: Yeah, theyre essentially giving Harley the Black Widow treatment, stick her in a show with a bunch of male characters so as to pay lip service to diversity.
Or, maybe they included Widow because she's an interesting character and they have a fairly well known actress playing her.
gorgon wrote: Now, I agree that Widow and ScarJo probably deserve a film, and *much more* than the Carol Danvers Captain Marvel. Perhaps it's a case where ScarJo doesn't want to commit to it or something. Otherwise the CM project seems like one part "us too!" on the heels of WB's WW movie announcement, and another part "we have the formula to make a hit movie out of any character" hubris from Marvel.
Or, maybe they decided to do Captain Marvel because she's an interesting character and they can get a fairly well known actress to play her.
And if Marvel has any hubris then they've earned it. They turned a movie with a talking tree into one of the biggest hits of last year.
Manchu wrote:I assumed this was for a movie and felt super let down.
I agree with your 1st/2nd string assessments. And honestly, pretty much all the MCU characters were Marvel's second or third tier before the movies got made. Spidey and Logan are the only characters that can hang with Supes, Bats, and WW in terms of general cultural awareness.
I dunno, growing up the major characters/"settings" (based almost entirely on things other than comic books, it wasnt something we got into until our late teens) for my friends and I were Superman, Batman, Spiderman, Ironman, Captain America (so basically the main male elements of the Avengers), and the X-men (as a whole rather than just Wolverine. In fact, most of us didn't really like Wolverine that much and leaned more towards Rogue/Storm/Cyclops/Gambit). Closely behind them would have been Green Lantern, Flash, Thor, Punisher (personal favorite at the time) and Hulk (these were characters we were familiar with, but not as popular as the previous 5 I mentioned). Aquaman was derided as useless (I always thought he was cool), Wonder Woman was for girls (and thus in 'who cares' territory), and Fantastic Four was basically "Seriously, who gives a feth?" (they had a tv show and exposure, but god I always hated them for some reason). Outside of that were a random assortment of heroes that we could maybe recognize on name or sight, but didn't have any real knowledge of.
Outside of the Marvel/DC realm there was Space Ghost, Birdman, and Spawn (and probably some others that I cant remember), which I think were arguably more popular amongst my circle of friends then all except for Batman and Spiderman.
I agree with your 1st/2nd string assessments. And honestly, pretty much all the MCU characters were Marvel's second or third tier before the movies got made. Spidey and Logan are the only characters that can hang with Supes, Bats, and WW in terms of general cultural awareness.
I dunno, growing up the major characters/"settings" (based almost entirely on things other than comic books, it wasnt something we got into until our late teens) for my friends and I were Superman, Batman, Spiderman, Ironman, Captain America (so basically the main male elements of the Avengers), and the X-men (as a whole rather than just Wolverine. In fact, most of us didn't really like Wolverine that much and leaned more towards Rogue/Storm/Cyclops/Gambit). Closely behind them would have been Green Lantern, Flash, Thor, Punisher (personal favorite at the time) and Hulk (these were characters we were familiar with, but not as popular as the previous 5 I mentioned). Aquaman was derided as useless (I always thought he was cool), Wonder Woman was for girls (and thus in 'who cares' territory), and Fantastic Four was basically "Seriously, who gives a feth?" (they had a tv show and exposure, but god I always hated them for some reason). Outside of that were a random assortment of heroes that we could maybe recognize on name or sight, but didn't have any real knowledge of.
But that's you, and look where you're posting.
Most non-comics fans weren't very familiar with most of those Marvel characters before the movies. People know that Superman is Clark Kent, loves Lois, and that he fights Lex Luthor, and people know about rich guy Bruce Wayne who dresses like a bat and fights clowns with the Batmobile and various gadgets. But they didn't know about Tony Stark and Iron Man. They might have been generally familiar with Cap, but only as a guy with a shield and not that he's Steve Rogers, a laboratory-created super-soldier from WWII. They didn't know who Nick Fury is, or about Hawkeye or Black Widow.
Give Marvel credit...they elevated those characters. They had to, because they didn't have Spidey or Wolverine. And that's why they had to do all the introductory origin films, and WB doesn't.
I'd argue that The Hulk would traditionally have been an A list too, as the Lou Ferrigno show really was in the public consciousness back in the day. But yeah, seriously, if you can check out superman unbound cheaply, do so.
DC had Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman.
Marvel had Spider-Man, Hulk, and then Wolverine broke out. People also knew who Captain America was.
Fact of that matter is now all of this is moot. They can take D listers and make big films out of them (GoTG), and A-listers can be on TV (TV only for C-listers? I guess that's why Batman has had so many shows over the years...).
I'm just waiting to see DC elevate itself above network programming..........
The old joke about marvel making a blockbuster movie with a space-ent and a racoon applies. At this rate we'll see two seasons of Supergirl before a full-on Justice League movie.
I agree with your 1st/2nd string assessments. And honestly, pretty much all the MCU characters were Marvel's second or third tier before the movies got made. Spidey and Logan are the only characters that can hang with Supes, Bats, and WW in terms of general cultural awareness.
I dunno, growing up the major characters/"settings" (based almost entirely on things other than comic books, it wasnt something we got into until our late teens) for my friends and I were Superman, Batman, Spiderman, Ironman, Captain America (so basically the main male elements of the Avengers), and the X-men (as a whole rather than just Wolverine. In fact, most of us didn't really like Wolverine that much and leaned more towards Rogue/Storm/Cyclops/Gambit). Closely behind them would have been Green Lantern, Flash, Thor, Punisher (personal favorite at the time) and Hulk (these were characters we were familiar with, but not as popular as the previous 5 I mentioned). Aquaman was derided as useless (I always thought he was cool), Wonder Woman was for girls (and thus in 'who cares' territory), and Fantastic Four was basically "Seriously, who gives a feth?" (they had a tv show and exposure, but god I always hated them for some reason). Outside of that were a random assortment of heroes that we could maybe recognize on name or sight, but didn't have any real knowledge of.
But that's you, and look where you're posting.
Most non-comics fans weren't very familiar with most of those Marvel characters before the movies. People know that Superman is Clark Kent, loves Lois, and that he fights Lex Luthor, and people know about rich guy Bruce Wayne who dresses like a bat and fights clowns with the Batmobile and various gadgets. But they didn't know about Tony Stark and Iron Man. They might have been generally familiar with Cap, but only as a guy with a shield and not that he's Steve Rogers, a laboratory-created super-soldier from WWII. They didn't know who Nick Fury is, or about Hawkeye or Black Widow.
Give Marvel credit...they elevated those characters. They had to, because they didn't have Spidey or Wolverine. And that's why they had to do all the introductory origin films, and WB doesn't.
You missed the part where I said that I wasnt into comics until much later. In fact Ive only really been reading comics for the past 3 or 4 years now. Maybe youre too old to remember or you didnt watch enough tv or whatever, but Ironman did have a cartoon series, as did several of those other characters (or they were part of other characters series). I think the general public is a bit better versed in comic heroes then you realize or give credit for.
It looks like it's going for a closer market to Smallville than Arrow which is fine with me. Not everything has to be at the same audience after all.
The actress seems to fit in well, I've got no complaints about her.
I do find it quite funny that her buddy seems to fit closer to what I thought of as Jimmy Olsen than the actor who is. In saying that, the actual 'James' Olsen actor seems good. He doesn't look like he's going to be the romance angle either people were saying. Instead, he seems to be more of a mentorish role.
I hope it's successful, it could do good things for opening up comics more for girls.
I will say the Jimmy Olsen doesn't look right for a Jimmy Olsen. Too hunky, not geeky enough.
But yeah, the mix of what names they will/will not say on the tv shows amuse me. We can say Super Girl and Kalel, but not Super Man. The Flash has no problem calling him The Flash, but they still refuse to say Green Arrow and just use Arrow.
"Shouldn't she be called Super... woman?"
"What do you think is so bad about 'girl'? I'm a girl. And your boss. And powerful. And rich. And hot. And smart. So if you perceive Supergirl as anything less than excellent isn't the real problem... you?"
Glad someone said it. Thank you, Ms. McBeal.
BlaxicanX wrote: I'm hoping it's successful and serves as a gateway for more female heroes on the screens, both silver and otherwise.
Why?
Female superheroes are worthless unless they're good characters to begin with. Same applies to male superheroes. Would Armless Tiger Man be any more or less awesome if he were Armless Tiger Woman? I doubt it. It's the character - their personality, history, abilities and perhaps even their costume that make superheroes compelling - not their gender. And if gender is their most defining trait, or the trait they are most defined by, then they're a pretty shallow character.
To put it another way:
We don't need more female characters. We don't need fewer female charactrs either. Or male characters. We need good characters.
BlaxicanX wrote: I'm hoping it's successful and serves as a gateway for more female heroes on the screens, both silver and otherwise.
Why?
Female superheroes are worthless unless they're good characters to begin with. Same applies to male superheroes. Would Armless Tiger Man be any more or less awesome if he were Armless Tiger Woman? I doubt it. It's the character - their personality, history, abilities and perhaps even their costume that make superheroes compelling - not their gender. And if gender is their most defining trait, or the trait they are most defined by, then they're a pretty shallow character.
To put it another way:
We don't need more female characters. We don't need fewer female charactrs either. Or male characters. We need good characters.
What does any of this have to do what with I said?
H.B.M.C. wrote: Same reason they can't say Batman on Arrow/killed off Deadshot on Arrow/can't say Gotham on Arrow:
DC are weird.
I think the reason they're not calling him Green Arrow is because it's part of the story-arc. EG "The Vigilante" > "Arrow" > "Green Arrow."
To be honest, I think it's a different cause this time. I remember reading about the 'Birds of Prey' show from the early 2000's, one of the things that its fanbase turned against the show was that they were constantly teasing 'Batman' turning up in it. So by avoiding specifically saying 'Superman' they're probably trying to avoid that issue. Like they said at the start, this isn't his story.
Hmm, not really convinced by that video. If, like the trailer, the show ends up being 70:30 ratio of soap drama:superheroic ass-kicking, then I doubt I'll be watching.
Which is a shame, as the brief shots of said ass-kicking looks awesome, but if I have sit through hours of teen drama, bad jokes and costume design to get to that, then it'll get boring quickly...
H.B.M.C. wrote: Same reason they can't say Batman on Arrow/killed off Deadshot on Arrow/can't say Gotham on Arrow:
DC are weird.
I think the reason they're not calling him Green Arrow is because it's part of the story-arc. EG "The Vigilante" > "Arrow" > "Green Arrow."
To be honest, I think it's a different cause this time. I remember reading about the 'Birds of Prey' show from the early 2000's, one of the things that its fanbase turned against the show was that they were constantly teasing 'Batman' turning up in it. So by avoiding specifically saying 'Superman' they're probably trying to avoid that issue. Like they said at the start, this isn't his story.
They actually make a reference to calling him Green Arrow right at the beginning of the series and someone, I forget if it was Oliver himself, said that was a stupid name.
This is TV 'meh' not TV 'Good'. Remember that the bar has been raised on TV special effects in the last three years. What used to be Movie 'Good' is now TV 'OK' because you can download luxrender for free (meaning, if you have the modeling software and staff, and a big enough render farm, you can make Guardians of the Galaxy, or the latest Jurassic Park in your basement. It's the processing power that's the expensive and time consuming part now).
H.B.M.C. wrote: Same reason they can't say Batman on Arrow/killed off Deadshot on Arrow/can't say Gotham on Arrow:
DC are weird.
I think the reason they're not calling him Green Arrow is because it's part of the story-arc. EG "The Vigilante" > "Arrow" > "Green Arrow."
To be honest, I think it's a different cause this time. I remember reading about the 'Birds of Prey' show from the early 2000's, one of the things that its fanbase turned against the show was that they were constantly teasing 'Batman' turning up in it. So by avoiding specifically saying 'Superman' they're probably trying to avoid that issue. Like they said at the start, this isn't his story.
They actually make a reference to calling him Green Arrow right at the beginning of the series and someone, I forget if it was Oliver himself, said that was a stupid name.
Heh, and one of the recent episodes of "The Flash" we got to read the by-line on the newspaper which called him "Green Arrow"
It has been a big point of "Arrow" this season that Oliver has to shift his identity and style from "The Vigilante"/"The Arrow" to become something different and new--again.
I feel like we're building towards "Green Arrow" in the next season though.
I dunno, I thought it looked ok.
I'll keep an open mind until I've seen a few episodes.
I've never been a huge fan of Kryptonians as a whole, but this looks watchable so far
H.B.M.C. wrote: Same reason they can't say Batman on Arrow/killed off Deadshot on Arrow/can't say Gotham on Arrow:
DC are weird.
I think the reason they're not calling him Green Arrow is because it's part of the story-arc. EG "The Vigilante" > "Arrow" > "Green Arrow."
To be honest, I think it's a different cause this time. I remember reading about the 'Birds of Prey' show from the early 2000's, one of the things that its fanbase turned against the show was that they were constantly teasing 'Batman' turning up in it. So by avoiding specifically saying 'Superman' they're probably trying to avoid that issue. Like they said at the start, this isn't his story.
They actually make a reference to calling him Green Arrow right at the beginning of the series and someone, I forget if it was Oliver himself, said that was a stupid name.
Heh, and one of the recent episodes of "The Flash" we got to read the by-line on the newspaper which called him "Green Arrow"
It has been a big point of "Arrow" this season that Oliver has to shift his identity and style from "The Vigilante"/"The Arrow" to become something different and new--again.
I feel like we're building towards "Green Arrow" in the next season though.
I did think for sure he was going to use that name in the season finale. Instead we got Red Arrow. But yeah, maybe next season.
I liked the bits in this trailer when she is excited about being a Superpowered person and when she is doing stuff, the references to the at best Average Man of Steel film were ok.
Her boss is fun - but I had hoped they would not do the whole secret identity stuff as I find that whole thing tiresome for the most part.
Just watched the pilot/first episode. I liked it. Kind of Flash-esque in its tone. I hope they move past the repeated "Hah! You're just a Girl!" stuff and let her be a hero who happens to be a girl rather than a girl who's a hero. It's the same thing that bugs me about the She-Thor comics. Also I still say the guy they have playing James is way too hunky and suave to be Jimmy Olsen.
They leaked the first episode online apparently and it showed up on the site I catch all my tv shows on. Television premier in November? That's a heck of a wait for episode two.
AduroT wrote: Just watched the pilot/first episode. I liked it. Kind of Flash-esque in its tone. I hope they move past the repeated "Hah! You're just a Girl!" stuff and let her be a hero who happens to be a girl rather than a girl who's a hero. It's the same thing that bugs me about the She-Thor comics. Also I still say the guy they have playing James is way too hunky and suave to be Jimmy Olsen.
It's why, I think, they went out of their way to have him correct Kara when she calls him "Jimmy".
"Jimmy Olsen" is the awkward, gawky teenager with a camera following Clark Kent and Lois Lane around.
"James Olsen" is the man who grew up with a personal relationship with Superman.
Trailer killed all interest. Be prepared for an angsty drama about a teen girl and teen problems who struggles to deal with being a teen girl and a superhero.
Meh, guess it's just trying to cater to women who want their superhero movie too. I'll pass.
No teen drama really in the pilot at least. She's more young adult. Lives on her own, has a job, no mention of school. Maybe some romance triangle drama later as she crushes on James and her friend crushes on her.
Teen, to me, goes up in the early 20s. Young adult is more appropriate. Expecting lots of on-off relationships, typical teenage problems and growing up pains.
It will be interesting, though, how, and if, they manage to get her out of the "an inferior Superman" zone.
Sigvatr wrote: Trailer killed all interest. Be prepared for an angsty drama about a teen girl and teen problems who struggles to deal with being a teen girl and a superhero.
Except she's not a teen. And this show isn't on the CW.
Alpharius wrote: Also - how did you get to watch the pilot already?!?
Because some clever clogs over at CBS leaked it. I cannot imagine that this was by accident either, and I'm normally the guy who doesn't believe in intentional leaks. This leak was part damage control, part "Shut up about the rom-com stuff already" control, and part "Fine, let's just show them what the show is about!" control.
I think that's kind of the point. Alien being Kara wants desperately to fit in as a human woman, so she embraces the lifestyle she believes is normal or ideal for a human woman. Then she becomes a hero by being herself and embracing her alien powers. So, yeah, similar take on stereotypical gender roles, but from a different direction. Of course, I could be giving the show way too much credit.
I think that's kind of the point. Alien being Kara wants desperately to fit in as a human woman, so she embraces the lifestyle she believes is normal or ideal for a human woman. Then she becomes a hero by being herself and embracing her alien powers. So, yeah, similar take on stereotypical gender roles, but from a different direction. Of course, I could be giving the show way too much credit.
Close. While she didn't start out as young as Clark, she doesn't go Supergirl here until some years after landing, going thru her teen years on Earth. She's not doing the job she has because she thinks she's supposed to or to blend in but because it was the life she was living and grew into. It's not that she Wants to fit in, but that she Does fit in. However she Also wants to be like big cousin Clark and help people, so she dons the cape and starts to do that as well.
I watched the leaked first episode. I feel deeply let down by their version of Vartox. A fight between pretty much any kryptonian and Vartox should be epic. This...... was not.
Maybe they just didn't bother to look up what his powers were, or only knew him from his brief appearance in Powergirl... but...
This was a character who *Superman* has flat out stated was harder to kill than Superman is. He once took an exploding planet to the face and was unharmed.
Alpharius wrote: Sounds like your expectations of a somewhat obscure villain weren't met - if that's the only 'problem' you had, I'd say they're off to a good start!
My other problem being that he wasn't a villain (per se) in the comics. Or obscure, except to you young whipper snappers who think that Tony Stark became Iron Man in Afghanistan....
If it was, say, Red Fang, or Lumberjack (who will be fighting Supergirl as well) who only made appearances in a single issue of Wonder Woman in the early 1980's, i can see your point. But Vartox has been in more issues than Doomsday, so....
the special effects were inconsistent, they run into the issue of digital and photographic effects not being quite on par. The 'pure' CGI effects (punching Kara through a building) are good, but any time they mix 'live' images with CGi (a lot of the 'flying fast' shots) it's sub par [as in i can do better with my PC at home].
I'm used enough to bad plots to ignore it, but it wasn't very good, and ... frankly left me going 'now wait a min'... that and faceless Superman irritates me. How hard would it have been to get the new guy to do a cameo? Is the budget REALLY that small?
Actually, you hit the nail on the head mentioning Iron Man in Afghansistan. Whatever you know about the comic, stop referencing it. This isn't the comics, it's not going to be the comics and the characters aren't going to do the same thing as the comics. Anything in the comics is source material only, and will be changed anytime for any reason and the key to enjoying it is to take it as it is and not as it was elsewhere. Same issue as every comic based media... Helps to just forget it and look with fresh eyes or slightly knowing nods at names and ideas.
Since I don't read the comics, the villain was still friggin weak and pathetic, but oh well.
Spoiler:
He's dead now and prolly isn't going to show up again, so he can be as weak as they wanted. They might do better on the next one. Pilots are notoriously one-offs that introduce the main characters but wrap up any villain that appears so the full concept of the show is told in one episode.
I expect the show to be entertaining as a TV show. Just like X-Men is entertaining as a movie franchise, or Avengers. Since the show is meant to appeal to a wide audience that DOESN'T read the decades of comic books, they did just fine in making something entertaining.
I'm actually really liking the actress that plays Kara. Somehow she is less attractive when she's human in a sort of 'wouldn't look twice' kind of way but is more eye catching as Supergirl. I'm sure that isn't an accident and they work towards it, but just the plain fact that it worked is impressive when it's strictly visual and not something more imaginative.
SharkoutofWata wrote: Whatever you know about the comic, stop referencing it. This isn't the comics, it's not going to be the comics and the characters aren't going to do the same thing as the comics. .
Yes, but good comic based material respects the source material. Otherwise the only people it appeals to are the ones who have never read the comic. Particularly when the character in question was a big part of the comedic relief for Amanda Conner's legendary run on Powergirl. and appearently will be appearing again in the first run of Conner's new PG book coming up post Convergence.
Except, mainstream media isn't expected to respect the source material. Look at Whiplash (I think that's the name) from Iron Man 2. That wasn't a set of purple tights. Look at Deadpool from X-Men Origins. Look at the new Fantastic Four movie with the black Human Torch. Look at the Tobey Maguire Spider-Man, and we're not even going to include 3 in that because that was just not good by any stretch of the imagination. Look at the Iron Man origin story you referenced. Look at the Mandarin in Iron Man 3. I don't know much about comics so I can't name more but I know for a fact there are many more simply because of all the times that someone that knows the comics are vocal about the differences.
It's mainstream media, not niche entertainment anymore. Pandering to a comic fan isn't what they're trying to do. They're trying to expand the audience, capture people with a passing interest in a comic character, make money, entertain the general population and take as little risk as possible. It absolutely doesn't matter what a character USED to be. It has no place when discussing the show. It's a bastardization of the original, but that's just what people that love the original material are going to have to deal with.
Alpharius wrote: Sounds like your expectations of a somewhat obscure villain weren't met - if that's the only 'problem' you had, I'd say they're off to a good start!
My other problem being that he wasn't a villain (per se) in the comics. Or obscure, except to you young whipper snappers who think that Tony Stark became Iron Man in Afghanistan....
I've been reading comics since...yikes!...the 70's, and I'll admit to being more of a Marvel fan than a DC fan, for the most part, especially 'back then' - but yeah, Vartox was and is a really obscure character!
But as already noted - this serious isn't for stoggy old grognards - it is for the next generation, mostly, whoever they may be!
SharkoutofWata wrote: Except, mainstream media isn't expected to respect the source material. Look at Whiplash (I think that's the name) from Iron Man 2. That wasn't a set of purple tights.
That's a pretty superficial comparison in this case. He was still a whip wielding villain who had a serious personal grudge against Tony Stark. Changing the costume is understandable, as something that look good in comics look horrible on film (thus, Wolverine's lack of yellow tights). that's something that had to change for a practical reason.
Look how Ryan Reynolds has been begging to make a Deadpool movie that was true to the comics to make up for that. AND THEY GAVE ITTO HIM.
SharkoutofWata wrote: Look at the new Fantastic Four movie with the black Human Torch.
That's not actually much of a change. He's also been an android (original human torch), a woman, (Marvel Mangaverse), a zombie (Marvel Zombies/Ultimate Fantastic Four), and Deadpool (Deadpool regular series).
However, in each incarnation, they made a point that he remain identifiably the Human Torch.
You may want to go over and watch the Marvel One Shot that came with Thor-The Dark world before using this as an example. It got retconned.
SharkoutofWata wrote: It has no place when discussing the show. It's a bastardization of the original, but that's just what people that love the original material are going to have to deal with.
And this viewpoint is why we had to deal with things like Batman and Robin, Most of Sony's Spiderman offerings, and X-Men Origins: Wolverine and that God Awful Green Lantern. It's also the attitude that WB seems to have, and why quite a few of it's superhero movies have been panned, and bombed at the box office. Contrasting the Man of Steel with Batman Begins allows tyou to really see it. Nolan tried hard to stay close to the themes and feel of the comics, even if he wasn't spot on. With Man of Steel, they showed they just didn't understand what made Batman good, and tried to make it more like Nolan's batman movies without understanding WHY they worked.
BaronIveagh wrote: Contrasting the Man of Steel with Batman Begins allows tyou to really see it. Nolan tried hard to stay close to the themes and feel of the comics, even if he wasn't spot on. With Man of Steel, they showed they just didn't understand what made Batman good, and tried to make it more like Nolan's batman movies without understanding WHY they worked.
Well, Man of Steel WAS a Nolan movie, even if he didn't direct it. His idea, his story, and he called most of the shots, including signing off on Zod's death. Man of Steel had more nods to the source material than any representation of Supes that we've seen on screen. Most of the criticism came from people WHO DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW the source material, other than some vague idea formed by the Reeve movies and Silver Age-type material.
And this entire "Marvel good, Sony and WB bad" trope is both incredibly lazy and empty-headed. At least two-thirds of the Marvel movies have been utterly forgettable, TV-quality writing, churned out factory-style with all the flavor of unseasoned egg whites.
BaronIveagh wrote: Contrasting the Man of Steel with Batman Begins allows tyou to really see it. Nolan tried hard to stay close to the themes and feel of the comics, even if he wasn't spot on. With Man of Steel, they showed they just didn't understand what made Batman good, and tried to make it more like Nolan's batman movies without understanding WHY they worked.
Well, Man of Steel WAS a Nolan movie, even if he didn't direct it. His idea, his story, and he called most of the shots, including signing off on Zod's death. Man of Steel had more nods to the source material than any representation of Supes that we've seen on screen. Most of the criticism came from people WHO DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW the source material, other than some vague idea formed by the Reeve movies and Silver Age-type material.
And this entire "Marvel good, Sony and WB bad" trope is both incredibly lazy and empty-headed. At least two-thirds of the Marvel movies have been utterly forgettable, TV-quality writing, churned out factory-style with all the flavor of unseasoned egg whites.
Iron Man : Really good
Iron Man 2 : Mediocre - which I guess would be the threshold for 'forgettable'?
Iron Man 3 : Didn't see it because of spoilers and reviews, but supposedly pretty bad
Thor : Good
Cap : Mediocre
Avengers : Good
Thor 2 : Good
Cap 2 :Really good
Guardians of the Galaxy : Really good
Avengers 2 : Haven't seen it yet, probably better than mediocre.
And I'm sorry, there really hasn't been an objectively good Supes movie, ever.
The Reeves ones were campy fun, but mostly not very good. Superman Returns was garbage and MoS had some fairly wooden acting and a complete misunderstanding of how to make action interesting. Plus they had no idea how tornadoes work.
Having looked into Karlan, yeah, they dropped the ball there. I mean not sticking 100% with the comics is one thing, but taking a superman equivalent hero in the comics, and making him a weaker than axe wielding criminal isn't really reimagining, it's making someone entirely new and slapping someone else's name on them. It's stupid and pointless.
Bromsy wrote: and MoS had some fairly wooden acting and a complete misunderstanding of how to make action interesting. Plus they had no idea how tornadoes work.
I mean, come on...
I do not understand. The wind is strong enough to make car flies but not strong enough that this guy has trouble standing straight?
Silver Banshee, Cyborg Superman (Zor-El), The Bizzaro version of herself, Reign, Psycho-Pirate, Brainiac, Clayface, Dollmaker, Gorilla Grodd, Harley Quinn, a selection of Darkseid's minions, Lava Girl, Killer Croc, Live Wire, Metallo, Mongul, Solomon Grundy, and the MAIN MAN, Lobo.
Other possible contenders include Giganta, Killer Frost, Bizzaro, Lex Luthor, Drax (not to be confused with Marvel's Drax), Jax-Ur, Nadira, Zora Vi-Lar. All are either earrth villians who would put up a good fight, or are known kryptonian prisoners in the phantom zone.
.
