Gotham

[Orrex]

Of the many weak points in 1989 disastrous Batman film, I've always been particularly annoyed by Burton's stupid decision to have Bruce Wayne orphaned by the Joker. Aside from pissing on decades of continuity (which, frankly, isn't that big a deal for me), it's a preposterously trite effort to impose soms sort of half-assed dramatic symmetry (which, frankly, also describes most of Burton's film-making career).

Terrible. Terrible. Terrible.

There is no benefit to forcibly linking origin stories in this way. None. It invariably comes across as incestuous and a ham-fisted attempt at pseudo-depth, and nothing is gained as a result.


So then I start in on Gotham last night, lately streaming on NetFlix. Opening shot looks good, atmosphere seems effective, young Selena Kyle is a convincing pickpocket with a suitably acrobatic style.

And then she conveniently winds up with a front row seat for the Wayne family murder?

[font size=13]GARBAGE![/font]

I immediately lost 100% of my desire to watch this show that I barely wanted to watch anyway. Prequels bore me, and I find the city of Gotham's back story slightly less interesting than the fine print on fast food game-cards.

I already couldn't care less about the adventures of L'il Catwoman or proto-Penguin or juvie-Joker, and when they deploy this hackneyed plot device before the opening credits, I say count me out.


YMMV

[Dr. Strange]

1. Prequels are risky business anyway.

Are there any truly successful prequels?

I mean, other than The Phantom Menace?

[Orrex]

2. What about all those books written by Dune Jr?

[Dr. Strange]

3. Mediocre at best.

They were fun to read if for no other reason than the fact that they took place in the Dune universe, but I don't see myself reading any of them a second time.

So the question still stands: are there any examples of good prequels?

[Goblinmonger]

4. I think it got better (but I did stop watching after half the season)

but I had a similar reaction to the first season that they were trying WAY too hard to introduce as many characters as possible.

[Orrex]

5. I read a good article about next year's Dawn of Justice

Wish I could find it again, but...

The article drew a sharp contrast between the Marvel and DC cinematic models.

Marvel released a bunch of individual films and then drawing the characters together in one team-based blockbuster, but DC appears to be aiming for a team-based blockbuster from which they'll spin off a bunch of individual films. It sounds like a recipe for disaster, but it matches to what you're describing about DC's habit of shoehorning too many characters into a limited format.

[Goblinmonger]

6. That's kind of how Sony f'ed up the Spiderman movies

Could you possibly put more villains in one single movie?

I hope that Suicide Squad and Justice League are good. I really do. But, like you indicated with Marvel, they aren't doing enough to get us to care about the characters other than Batman and Superman before throwing them all at us.

[Orrex]

7. Exactly

I don't care how cool Aquaman is; if anyone in the general audience remembers him at all, they remember the useless orange-suited guy from The Superfriends. Cyborg will seem like some random anonymous Terminator-esque knockoff, too.

Wonder Woman's not a bad addition, but she could probably carry her own film. I'm guessing that if the average non-comic-fan movie-goer can name three DC heroes, they'll be Superman, Batman & Wonder Woman.


Speaking of which, when the hell is Marvel going to give The Black Widow her own film?!? The character is solidly established, and Johanssen has proven that she has wide audience appeal, and she can open a successful film. Come on, Marvel!

[Goblinmonger]

8. I agree completely with Black Widow

And her back story is crazy interesting. It would be a nice addition to the characters they have. Someone overcoming doing some horrible shit in their life to make it right.

[Dr. Strange]

9. Oh look! They're trying to draw you back in!

Paul Reubens Joins ‘Gotham’ as Penguin’s Dad!