• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Gotham S2 |OT| Dawn of Altruism - Mondays 8/7c

Platy

Member
This show is so bad and so good at the same time.

I love how they are doing so much of "so how this work ? ...don't work ? so ... reboot this character and lets try again"
 

Veelk

Banned
This show is so bad and so good at the same time.

I love how they are doing so much of "so how this work ? ...don't work ? so ... reboot this character and lets try again"

Who did they do that with besides Barbara and maybe Nygma?
 

Platy

Member
Who did they do that with besides Barbara and maybe Nygma?

Everyone.

Even gordon had some kind of reboot. And the way to do it doesn't even make sense.

Alfred kinda had a reboot. Jerone totaly got rebooted as totaly joker.

You can even count bullock as a reboot =P
 

Chariot

Member
That's not how "reboot" works. I think the word you're looking for is retconned. And even then I think it's not that, just weird progression.
 

Veelk

Banned
Everyone.

Even gordon had some kind of reboot. And the way to do it doesn't even make sense.

Alfred kinda had a reboot. Jerone totaly got rebooted as totaly joker.

You can even count bullock as a reboot =P

I don't see it. Everyone's characters developed, but that's not a reboot. Only Barbara and Nygma changed radically enough and fast enough with less justification than most, but I'd concede to the above poster that Nygma is debatable.

So explain what you see as reboots, because the likes of Gordon and Alfred are more just people growing into their roles. It'd be like arguing that Walter White character rebooted as the series went along.

That's not how "reboot" works. I think the word you're looking for is retconned. And even then I think it's not that, just weird progression.

No, a retcon is to say that something changed from the outside perspective, but in universe the change has always been there. Barbara wouldn't be considered to be retconned because her change is explicitely stated to be a development of her character. The only reason to call it a 'reboot' is to say that the shift between 'displeased fiance' to 'psycho girlfriend' is jarring enough to be considered unbelievable, which I can sort of accept, but not for anyone else in the case, whose development was more incremental and deliberate.
 

Mariolee

Member
Everyone.

Even gordon had some kind of reboot. And the way to do it doesn't even make sense.

Alfred kinda had a reboot. Jerone totaly got rebooted as totaly joker.

You can even count bullock as a reboot =P

Princess-bride-image.jpg
 

Platy

Member
I don't see it. Everyone's characters developed, but that's not a reboot. Only Barbara and Nygma changed radically enough and fast enough with less justification than most, but I'd concede to the above poster that Nygma is debatable.

So explain what you see as reboots, because the likes of Gordon and Alfred are more just people growing into their roles. It'd be like arguing that Walter White character rebooted as the series went along.

I mean gordon became a comissioner again, alfred suports bruce again, bullock is gordon parner again ...

They tryed to shift the status quo and "rebooted" (ok maybe not the best word) to the default status quo
 

Veelk

Banned
I mean gordon became a comissioner again, alfred suports bruce again, bullock is gordon parner again ...

They tryed to shift the status quo and "rebooted" (ok maybe not the best word) to the default status quo

I don't think it's even that. Trying to create a new status quo means that they have to stick with it for more than 2 episodes before falling back. This is more of the narrative leaving them for when they aren't doing police force things (since there was a 3 month time skip) and coming back when they're brought together again. It was a strain that threatened to break it, but then pulled back.
 

Chariot

Member
I mean gordon became a comissioner again, alfred suports bruce again, bullock is gordon parner again ...

They tryed to shift the status quo and "rebooted" (ok maybe not the best word) to the default status quo
Stop using reboot if you know it's wrong. A reboot is a complete restart, not the progression of the story that goes into similar gear like it was at some point before. Bullock came back after he was gone. In a reboot he would just be there again and was never gone in the first place. Germany's unification 1990 wasn't a reboot of 1871, it was a natural progress.
 

Oddduck

Member
I love how they are doing so much of "so how this work ? ...don't work ? so ... reboot this character and lets try again"

Look at Laurel from Arrow. Many fans considered her to be the weak link in both Season 1 + 2.

It takes writers and producers a season or two to figure out the strengths of each actor and character. And then they start writing to those strengths.
 

davepoobond

you can't put a price on sparks
man, here i was thinking Penguin was the best actor, and then they pull out Jerome from nowhere. that guy is fucking great.

good episode. hopefully they keep it going.


as far as the character discussion goes, it seems like they made the decision that what they wrote before was crap and then just went a whole new direction with 3 or 4 characters.
 
One of my pet peeves for shows is when you waste my time. Gotham seems to do this in spades:

  • Bullock is out, only to be brought back in again.
  • Essen is made Commissioner,
    only to be killed in the next episode
    .
  • Alfred breaks the computer, only to try to fix it again.
  • Bruce tells Alfred to leave, only to go after him.
  • Black Mask is brought back only to be killed as an 'example.'

The list goes on. I really want to like Gotham and for the most part I do, I like the look of the show and some of the characters are quite well done. Just, guh, some of the plot and story seems so meandering at times like they're just trying to wind down the clock.
 

Hex

Banned
One of my pet peeves for shows is when you waste my time. Gotham seems to do this in spades:

  • Bullock is out, only to be brought back in again.
  • Essen is made Commissioner,
    only to be killed in the next episode
    .
  • Alfred breaks the computer, only to try to fix it again.
  • Bruce tells Alfred to leave, only to go after him.
  • Black Mask is brought back only to be killed as an 'example.'

The list goes on. I really want to like Gotham and for the most part I do, I like the look of the show and some of the characters are quite well done. Just, guh, some of the plot and story seems so meandering at times like they're just trying to wind down the clock.

All of these had direct purpose, none were time wasters.
Bullock was out making Gordon on his own when things went down and also making a reason for him not to be at the station when everyone got blitzed.
Alfred broke the computer, now went to Fox to fix it bringing him in. Would not have happened otherwise.
The wannabe Mask was brought in and killed to show the aim and focus of the team being put together and an example. He was also the most useless of them.
Essen was made commissoner to give the beginning of maybe things are turning around, that bit of lift before pulling the carpet out from beneath.
Alfred leaving was to show that Bruce is determined. He is brought back to show that Bruce is still a kid at the end of it all and is not Batman.
 
All of these had direct purpose, none were time wasters.
Bullock was out making Gordon on his own when things went down and also making a reason for him not to be at the station when everyone got blitzed.
Alfred broke the computer, now went to Fox to fix it bringing him in. Would not have happened otherwise.
The wannabe Mask was brought in and killed to show the aim and focus of the team being put together and an example. He was also the most useless of them.
Essen was made commissoner to give the beginning of maybe things are turning around, that bit of lift before pulling the carpet out from beneath.
Alfred leaving was to show that Bruce is determined. He is brought back to show that Bruce is still a kid at the end of it all and is not Batman.

While I get that and it did bring them to places they wouldn't of been otherwise it's done in such a quick fashion that it feels hollow and unearned. There's no time for it to breath and dwell. Like at least give me an episode of Bruce trying to do things on his own and realising he can't. We see no actual character development happening just plot points being run off one after the other. Give me a hint of how Bullock has got his life together and how it's a tough decision for him to make to go back to the force. But no, both these things just happen in the blink of an eye that the how they got there and why doesn't really matter, when it should. Perfect example of this is Barbara. She's crazy. Why? Because we say she is. Okay.
 

Alpende

Member
One of my pet peeves for shows is when you waste my time. Gotham seems to do this in spades:

  • Bullock is out, only to be brought back in again.
  • Essen is made Commissioner,
    only to be killed in the next episode
    .
  • Alfred breaks the computer, only to try to fix it again.
  • Bruce tells Alfred to leave, only to go after him.
  • Black Mask is brought back only to be killed as an 'example.'

The list goes on. I really want to like Gotham and for the most part I do, I like the look of the show and some of the characters are quite well done. Just, guh, some of the plot and story seems so meandering at times like they're just trying to wind down the clock.

That wasn't
Black Mask right? Roman Sionis is Black Mask, the guy that got killed is Richard Sionis.
 
That wasn't
Black Mask right? Roman Sionis is Black Mask, the guy that got killed is Richard Sionis.

I presumed it was him, just a different version of him.
Either way it's a waste of a character just to be plot bait.

From a wiki -
Richard Sionis, as indicated by his last name, is partly based on Roman Sionis a.k.a. Black Mask, a famous villain of Batman. Richard's fascination with masks is also a reference to Black Mask.
 
I presumed it was him, just a different version of him.
Either way it's a waste of a character just to be plot bait.

From a wiki -
Richard Sionis, as indicated by his last name, is partly based on Roman Sionis a.k.a. Black Mask, a famous villain of Batman. Richard's fascination with masks is also a reference to Black Mask.

He's his dad. Roman Sionis is presumably still kicking around somewhere.
 

TheOddOne

Member
New episode today:
Season 2: episode 3 "The Last Laugh"

Gordon and Bullock track down a nemesis from the past, leading to a standoff between Jerome and Gordon. Meanwhile, a magic show at the Gotham Children’s Hospital gala turns into a hostage situation.
 

davepoobond

you can't put a price on sparks
One of my pet peeves for shows is when you waste my time. Gotham seems to do this in spades:

  • Bullock is out, only to be brought back in again.
  • Essen is made Commissioner,
    only to be killed in the next episode
    .
  • Alfred breaks the computer, only to try to fix it again.
  • Bruce tells Alfred to leave, only to go after him.
  • Black Mask is brought back only to be killed as an 'example.'

The list goes on. I really want to like Gotham and for the most part I do, I like the look of the show and some of the characters are quite well done. Just, guh, some of the plot and story seems so meandering at times like they're just trying to wind down the clock.


i noticed that too. basically none of those plot points are given time to breathe and are just used as cheap ways to accelerate the story for whatever reason.

i would have liked to see the lady be commissioner for like half of the season at least.
 

Haines

Banned
Season 1 is on netflix. Is it worth watching? I realise im asking obvious fans of the show but i assume you will give it to me straight
 

coolasj19

Why are you reading my tag instead of the title of my post?
Im so freaking bad at this. 8 minutes behind.
I think they're going loose can-
What? Oh yeah Barabara is bi. I totally forgot.
 
Season 1 is on netflix. Is it worth watching? I realise im asking obvious fans of the show but i assume you will give it to me straight

It starts out a little shaky & to me anyway, they tried a little too hard to drop in comic references. But after a the first handful of episodes, the show turned itself around & finished really strong. But, there was a definite hump to get over at the beginning. Again, that was just for me though.
 

coolasj19

Why are you reading my tag instead of the title of my post?
Season 1 is on netflix. Is it worth watching? I realise im asking obvious fans of the show but i assume you will give it to me straight
It's one of those shows you have to want to watch.

Is Jim de facto boss now?
 

Nokagi

Unconfirmed Member
Season 1 is on netflix. Is it worth watching? I realise im asking obvious fans of the show but i assume you will give it to me straight

Never assume that! But I dunno. Season 1 was kinda bad. Not unwatchable but not very good either. Season 2 seems a lot better so far.
 

coolasj19

Why are you reading my tag instead of the title of my post?
Ohhhh Alfred. Please. Don't.
Bruce. Don't hate just cause you struck out.
 

coolasj19

Why are you reading my tag instead of the title of my post?
8 minutes behind. Caught up at 33. Once again. Just for the record.
 
Top Bottom