Gotham The Official Gotham News and discussion thread - Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
[YT]FBah_uo9rY0[/YT]

Guys I'm beginning to think that red hair kid is The Joker. Am I wrong? Am I seeing things? :o
 
Last edited:
I just can't seem to get behind this show, but is the red head kid Jerome? From some of the stuff I've been reading they're pushing it that way. They even told IGN that they're telling the origin of the Joker which I think is a huge mistake.
 
I like that new promo I hope season 2 gets better than season 1.
 
They do seem to have completely overhauled the format for eh series into episodic serial arcs over the mish mash from last year. Time will tell if that works.

James Frain's got the charisma to play a major mover and shaker antagonist. Here's hoping that works; he and his family are tied to every other major character, and not just tangentially.
 
[YT]FBah_uo9rY0[/YT]

Guys I'm beginning to think that red hair kid is The Joker. Am I wrong? Am I seeing things? :o

That's what you're supposed to think. Whether or not he actually is, is another story. Don't forget, the producers did say before the show started how they were gonna troll the audience about The Joker, by presenting a number of characters that look like they could be the Joker, but never coming out and saying "yes, this is the guy who will become the Joker".
 
I just can't seem to get behind this show, but is the red head kid Jerome? From some of the stuff I've been reading they're pushing it that way. They even told IGN that they're telling the origin of the Joker which I think is a huge mistake.
Doing it isn't a mistake. But it is certainly a storyline that they will be under lots of pressure from fans to do well and to tell an interesting story with.
 
This show's concept is a mistake.

If it was Bruce growing up/training, while seeing Gotham go from old school crime to costumed rogues it would be fine... or a Gotham Central show where we get the villains of the week though a CSI/L&O filter with Batman barely showing up or on the outskirts of the show, just like how GC would only have a panel every 3 comics with Batman in shadow.

They're trying to do best of both and utterly failing because they don't mix.
 
I still don't think the concept is any weaker than the other two you've mentioned; the issue with season one was its execution of the two aspects. Either the Bruce Origins story was put on hold and strung out so long that it's few moment of forward momentum were wasted, or the procedural stuff was hit and miss. The former soared the few times they actively moved the plot along, like when Copperhead came hunting Selina and we got to see Bruce learn a few of her tricks, or really any time they had him do something besides sit around and give one or two lines of dialogue. Similarly, the procedural episodes did their best when they embraced the idea of a comic crime, and kind of floundered when they had more normal crimes.

This season has the potential to right the ship; they lost Fish, who while initially fun wound up being a plot cul-de-sac, and their approaching the entire thing with a much larger arc-structure. And I would argue that if Gotham's concept is executed competently, it would outshine both a Gotham Central and Bruce Wayne origins show. The former, while original and fun, does unfortunately hang in the shadow of Batman, while the latter is strong but requires a huge amount of patience to reach the climax.
 
I still don't think the concept is any weaker than the other two you've mentioned; the issue with season one was its execution of the two aspects. Either the Bruce Origins story was put on hold and strung out so long that it's few moment of forward momentum were wasted, or the procedural stuff was hit and miss. The former soared the few times they actively moved the plot along, like when Copperhead came hunting Selina and we got to see Bruce learn a few of her tricks, or really any time they had him do something besides sit around and give one or two lines of dialogue. Similarly, the procedural episodes did their best when they embraced the idea of a comic crime, and kind of floundered when they had more normal crimes.

This season has the potential to right the ship; they lost Fish, who while initially fun wound up being a plot cul-de-sac, and their approaching the entire thing with a much larger arc-structure. And I would argue that if Gotham's concept is executed competently, it would outshine both a Gotham Central and Bruce Wayne origins show. The former, while original and fun, does unfortunately hang in the shadow of Batman, while the latter is strong but requires a huge amount of patience to reach the climax.


A plot cul-de-sac? Good one!

On terms of story telling and acting ability Gotham can rate as high a network show.

They only need to learn that less characters to focus on = a better show.

I would like to see more back to back episodes that feature the Penguin, The Riddler, Bullock ( Who in my opinion is more interesting than Gordon ), and Bruce's development as Bat Man. Now that the bat cave is in play I hope to see him training with the best money can buy.

Also, even though this is a PG 13 show, I'd love to see the Riddler take
Ms. Kringle on a date as well as young Bruce have a coming of age moment.

The directors and producers will need to handle the Joker very carefully as he needs to be at least on par with the Penguin and the Riddler....and the actors that play the later are brilliant.

I actually think the Penguin can clean up the lesser characters and end dead end characters.
 
That's what you're supposed to think. Whether or not he actually is, is another story. Don't forget, the producers did say before the show started how they were gonna troll the audience about The Joker, by presenting a number of characters that look like they could be the Joker, but never coming out and saying "yes, this is the guy who will become the Joker".


I didn't forget that, and I originally thought that was a great idea, starting with the lousy comedian in Fish's club from the pilot. They should have continued on like that all throughout the series by including small side characters, extras, or scattering around some visual cues that indicate a person could be or become The Joker down the line. A guy with a noticeably pointy nose here, another guy in a purple suit there, a kid pulling a Joker card out of a deck, etc. However, they **** the bed in terms of their Joker teasing.

They now have a recurring character that seems to talk, act, and even look like The Joker on display prominently in promos and the show itself, doing all kinds of seemingly Joker-ish things. Whether the show solidifies that he actually is The Joker or not, there will have been nothing clever or "troll-ish" about it.

Whether this kid is a fake pre-Joker or the real pre-Joker, I really feel that The Joker as a character and concept should have been left off the table for almost the entirety of the series (aside from the kinds of teases I had hoped they'd do). At this point, it mainly seems that he's been included because he's a heavy draw that can (and has been) used in promos.
 
Ya it seems kind of funny how on social media I see "Gotham promo teases the Joker." like is that really a tease? It seems pretty obvious. If he doesn't end up being the Joker it also spoils the actual Joker if he appears, because then he's just a copy cat of this kid in this continuity.
 
Doing it isn't a mistake. But it is certainly a storyline that they will be under lots of pressure from fans to do well and to tell an interesting story with.

Oh, I disagree completely. Demystifying the Joker is a definite mistake. There's a reason they haven't given him a definitive origin in the books. He simply works better as an unknown.
 
Oh, I disagree completely. Demystifying the Joker is a definite mistake. There's a reason they haven't given him a definitive origin in the books. He simply works better as an unknown.


This.
 
Oh, I disagree completely. Demystifying the Joker is a definite mistake. There's a reason they haven't given him a definitive origin in the books. He simply works better as an unknown.

I disagree with this. This doesn't demystify The Joker, it's an alternate universe story line just like any other show or movie and neither will ever be comic book accurate because we already know the story. Comics are it's own thing and even they change. If no one was bold enough to do something different, it would just be the same things over and over. In fact, if it weren't for people like Burton or Nolan, the entire Batman universe would not be the way it is now. It's not like we haven't seen different versions of these characters before. Some like the show and some hate it with a passion, but eventually it will inspire a future writer to do something different in the comics that can turn out to be great as it always happens.
 
Oh, I disagree completely. Demystifying the Joker is a definite mistake. There's a reason they haven't given him a definitive origin in the books. He simply works better as an unknown.
I don't agree (but I completely respect your opinion). The Joker has been around for 75 years. A little change of pace wouldn't hurt anyone IMO. If people don't like the story they tell in regards to his origin then they do not have to accept it as canon. That said I am aware that there are a large amount of comic readers that do not like change. I myself am a comic reader but I welcome change, as long as it is good of course. If they tell a good Joker origin on Gotham then great. If they don't, then at least they tried something different. At the end of the day, this will only be the origin of the Gothamverse Joker and not the one from the comics and Nolan's Batman films. For what it is worth, I agree that the Joker works well as a mystery. But if they think they can tell a good story with Joker's origin then go for it I say.
 
Last edited:
Some cool photos of the cave /office under the manor.

including some weird looking box with hieroglyphics on it. a fancy letter opener and what appears to be something with a bat logo sticker on it.
 
So do most feel they are introducing a Court of Owls element to this?
 
Oh, I disagree completely. Demystifying the Joker is a definite mistake. There's a reason they haven't given him a definitive origin in the books. He simply works better as an unknown.

Exactly :up:
 
Eh, rules are meant to be broken. As long as they give him a good story, I don't care what they do.
 
Eh, rules are meant to be broken. As long as they give him a good story, I don't care what they do.

So you'd support the Jason Todd is the Joker theory in the Suicide Squad movie if it was a good story?
 
No because that's a not a good story to begin with. It's just a lame twist no matter how you slice it. Plus [BLACKOUT]they kinda already did it in Arkham Origins with the Black Mask twist.[/BLACKOUT] And I ****in hated it.
 
No because that's a not a good story to begin with.

You don't know that because you don't know how it would be written. People can and do say the same for it being a bad idea to give Joker a definite origin. You say rules are meant to be broken, and that's definitely breaking a rule, so you can't dismiss it until you see what story they would write for it.

Plus [BLACKOUT]they kinda already did it in Arkham Origins with the Black Mask twist.[/BLACKOUT] And I ****in hated it.

That wasn't the same at all. [BLACKOUT]That was just Joker putting on a costume while the real Black Mask was still very much alive. The Jason Todd Joker theory is him actually being the new Joker. Not dressing up as him while the real Joker is around.[/BLACKOUT]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"