• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Batwoman - Season 1

To start with:
There could have been several things from my post that we could have been discussing besides their sexuality or relationships. Did you miss them? But, a discussion board is for discussing so...

No, the conundrum is, why are you so hung up on whether the participants in a relationship are the same gender or not?
I'm not.

... considering Fairchild is played by Rachel Maddow...
Which is awesome!

As opposed to the star-crossed romances on pretty much every CW show and television in general?
Barry and Iris took so long to get together that it almost hurt.


vqm86c8.gif
Beautiful!

less time being snarky and more time paying attention reveals that the chuck isn't hiding but he's in Batwoman's custody hence Alice asking Kate to see him.
I was having too much fun with the Gossiper character.

Chances are, Reagan is ...a supervillain. (Odds are, she's Magpie.)
Now that would be interesting. Except IMDB would have already spoiled it, if that were the case.

No they're not.
um...

Nothing says "success" quite like pining for a closeted woman for 5 years. :D
I think that's called "Perseverance".

The two most "stable" relationships in the whole Arrowverse are both on Flash...
That's because they killed off Laurel on Arrow.

No one can see it because it isn’t a real issue.
We'll see.

The course of CW love never does run smooth, no matter the orientation.
Very true!

Happy, successful lives are boring, and it's an affront to interesting characters to make their lives uninteresting.
Batwoman will be anything but boring.
 
IMDb isn't all knowing.

And is often wrong when it comes to stuff that hasn't aired or been released yet. I only use it for reference on older works, not upcoming stuff, and even the older entries are not 100% reliable since IMDB is as vulnerable to fan rumors and misinformation as any other crowd-edited site.

When I'm writing a move novelization, I often snicker at the inaccuracies at IMDB, which can reflect the latest unconfirmed rumor or theory. And then, annoyingly, people cite IMDB as "proof" that some ridiculous fan theory is true, just because IMDB fell for it.

And the frustrating part is, I know the listing is wrong but have to keep my mouth shut because I signed an NDA. :)
 
And is often wrong when it comes to stuff that hasn't aired or been released yet. I only use it for reference on older works, not upcoming stuff, and even the older entries are not 100% reliable since IMDB is as vulnerable to fan rumors and misinformation as any other crowd-edited site.

Oh, wow, yes. Before Star Trek Nemesis came out, IMDb listed virtually every actor who'd ever played a Romulan in a modern Trek series as a member of its cast.

And then, of course, there's our shared pet peeve about Victoria Vetri being wrongly listed as Isis from "Assignment: Earth" based solely on an online speculation whose originator freely admitted that it was a flimsy guess. Thank goodness April Tatro finally confirmed she was the one.
 
Oh, wow, yes. Before Star Trek Nemesis came out, IMDb listed virtually every actor who'd ever played a Romulan in a modern Trek series as a member of its cast.

And then, of course, there's our shared pet peeve about Victoria Vetri being wrongly listed as Isis from "Assignment: Earth" based solely on an online speculation whose originator freely admitted that it was a flimsy guess. Thank goodness April Tatro finally confirmed she was the one.

Yep. IMDB and Wikipedia and Memory Alpha all perpetuated the Vetri thing for years, which made it all the more difficult to debunk. "But IMDB says . . . ."

The Underworld movies suffered from this, with IMDB falsely touting the return of fan-favorite characters every time a new sequel came along, and so did THE DARK KNIGHT RISES. The IMDB listing for the latter had various character names wrong right up to the movie's debut. And, no, those were not last-minute changes. The correct names were in every version of the script I saw while working on the book.

When it comes to upcoming movies and episodes, whoever edits the IMDB listings can be a little gullible and prone to wishful thinking.
 
Bingo. I mean, somehow I doubt that Cisco's or Caitlin's constant romantic travails on THE FLASH are intended to make straight romances look bad. And both Supergirl and her sister have had their hearts broken, even though the former is straight and the latter is gay.

The course of CW love never does run smooth, no matter the orientation.
They have to pad an episode with something.

We'll see.
Given that it doesn't exist outside of your imagination, I sort of doubt it. Representation isn't some pie where someone getting some isn't taking away anything from you. Everyone can have all the pie they want and you're complaining that someone else's being different impacts your pie.

Just enjoy your pie.
 
Yep. IMDB and Wikipedia and Memory Alpha all perpetuated the Vetri thing for years, which made it all the more difficult to debunk. "But IMDB says . . . ."

The Underworld movies suffered from this, with IMDB falsely touting the return of fan-favorite characters every time a new sequel came along, and so did THE DARK KNIGHT RISES. The IMDB listing for the latter had various character names wrong right up to the movie's debut. And, no, those were not last-minute changes. The correct names were in every version of the script I saw while working on the book.

When it comes to upcoming movies and episodes, whoever edits the IMDB listings can be a little gullible and prone to wishful thinking.
Although, interestingly enough. Someone with insider knowledge has been adding stuff to the Picard IMDb page. At least one listing was confirmed by the actor to be true.
 
Reagan and Magpie are not played by the same actress.

Reagan is played by Brianne Howley, and Magpie will be played by Rachel Matthews.
 
Reagan and Magpie are not played by the same actress.

Reagan is played by Brianne Howley, and Magpie will be played by Rachel Matthews.

Ah. My theory was based entirely on the teaser for next week's ep. I don't usually look this stuff up on IMBD unless I'm writing an article or something.
 
Honestly. I thought it was a sub par episode. The dialogue and acting felt a bit stilted to me and the action was lacking. The other CW superhero shows like Arrow, Flash and Supergirl have much more exciting action sequences. The episode needed more Batwoman.
 
My main criticism for the episode would be about situational implausibility, in terms of things like:

- shining the Batsignal onto the side of Wayne Enterprises and having only Kate come in response and as far as we know be the only one who even noticed and

- Kate taking off her cowl on top of a building that was in public crisis and expecting no one to crash that party or espy by mounted camera or drone.

This would be an extension of the problem of someone dressed as Batman driving a motorcycle down a public street under all kinds of streetlights in downtown Gotham and not being caught on camera doing it.
 
- Kate taking off her cowl on top of a building that was in public crisis and expecting no one to crash that party or espy by mounted camera or drone.

Barry on the Flash would do the same thing too. I'm guessing there is a reason for it that is outside of the story. Maybe the mask is uncomfortable to wear or maybe the actor or director want the audience to see the actor's face.
 
Barry on the Flash would do the same thing too. I'm guessing there is a reason for it that is outside of the story. Maybe the mask is uncomfortable to wear or maybe the actor or director want the audience to see the actor's face.
I think it's the latter. Seeing the character's face is important. It's just that a better setting would, well, work better IMO.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top