Um... that's kindve stupid. Just my personal opinion of course. The initial trailer had hints of potential and looked interesting in ways at points, but the overall concept is still full of problems. This villains trailer not only looks silly but emphasizes at least one of the problems. "They turn into the worst villains in the world. It's our job to stop them". Huh?! 1st, We know you fail at that job and 2nd, you just explained you fail.
From his personal Facebook page (if you don't want to read the links)....
"WHY I WON’T BE WATCHING FOX’S “GOTHAM” THIS FALL:
Back in 1981, in a story called “To Kill a Legend” in DETECTIVE COMICS #500, artist Dick Giordano and I created a character named Barbara Kean, the fiancée of Lt. James Gordon. (This was set on a parallel Earth where counterparts of the “real” Batman and his cast were twenty years younger.) A Golden Age “Mrs. James Gordon” (no first or maiden name) had appeared in 1951, mother of a son named Tony, but my character, later picked up by talented writers like Frank Miller and Barbara Randall Kesel, was clearly the prototype (with the same first name) for the “Post-Crisis” first wife of Lt. James Gordon, and—as Barbara Kean Gordon—became a supporting player in Batman continuity, and even made two movie appearances in BATMAN BEGINS and THE DARK KNIGHT.
And this fall on GOTHAM, Fox’s prequel to the Batman mythos, one of the supporting characters will be…Barbara Kean, fiancée of Lt. James Gordon.
Ironically enough, on the same day that DC’s online news site listed the results of a fan poll in which I was chosen one of “the 75 greatest Batman artists/writers,” an executive at DC Entertainment—let’s call him “Johnny DC”—dismissed my request for “equity” (a percentage of income received when a character you create is used in other media) in the character. The justification? Because I had given her the same name, profession, and appearance as her daughter (at the time, just a sly wink to the reader), she was “derivative” of her daughter Barbara (Batgirl) Gordon and equity “is not generally granted” in derivative characters like wives, husbands, daughters, sons, etc., of existing characters: “this is the criteria by which all equity requests are measured.”
I then pointed out to him that writer Mark Waid had been told by then-DC management that DC did, in fact, give equity in “derivative” characters, just a smaller percentage—and indeed Mark and artist/co-creator Mike Wieringo received equity in the “derivative” character of Bart Allen/Impulse (grandson of Barry Allen/Flash) and received payments when he was used on SMALLVILLE. I suggested DC grant a similar reduced percentage on Barbara Kean, and I was willing to limit this to her appearances on GOTHAM and forget the movies.
How did Johnny DC respond to this? Did he rebut my argument? Nope. When confronted with the, shall we say, lack of veracity of his statement, he simply stopped responding to my emails.
Classy, right?
Now, let me be clear: I’ve since learned that the amount of money involved here can be as little as $45 an episode for a full equity character. So clearly I’m not in this for the money, but the principle. This is small change compared to the fact that the estate of Jack Kirby receives no share of the billions in dollars that Marvel/Disney makes from movies based on characters he co-created. But I suspect DC counts on the fact that the money is low enough that hiring an attorney to pursue it would cost more than you’d ever receive in equity payments. They also count on the fact that their freelancers depend on DC for work and thus will not publicly call them out. (And sometimes these freelancers are the very ones for whom that little bit of extra money would mean a lot.)
But as a novelist I depend in no way on DC for my livelihood, and have no problem recounting the bad faith they have demonstrated to me. But I take little satisfaction in it. There was a time—under the management of Jenette Kahn, Paul Levitz, and Dick Giordano—when DC went to great lengths to credit and compensate creators. They felt it was money well spent, because it brought other creators to the company and everyone benefited. I was actually proud to be associated with a comics company with a conscience. I hope my experience with the “new” DC is not typical, and that they still have a conscience. But I sure don’t see it from where I sit.
(If you’re a fan of my comics work, feel free to share.)"
Isn't this whole thing kinda BS though? Not Alan's story, but what DC is doing? Didn't Gerry Conway get credit and compensation for Felicity Smoak being used on Arrow? Wasn't she just Ronnie Raymond (Firestorms) step mother before then? How can they do this? To ANYONE, let alone Alan?!
Just saw the first episode. My guess is that the Court of Owls may appear this season and behind the Wayne's murder. Personally, I like the idea that the Waynes died due to a random act of violence but I see how the Owls would work for an episodic series.
I watched the first episode, and I was surprised to see it was more Gotham Central then Batman Begins. As fan of that comic series I hope they learn delve more into those kind of stories.
I liked it I thought both Jim and Harvey where pretty good. I liked the Penguin some of the other comic characters even though the some of the references where kinda to forced in some places.
I liked the little change in Bruce's origin that Selina witnessed the murder. I really liked the acting out of Bruce and Gordon. And my favorite scene was that last scene with Bruce and Gordon. Bruce already feels like the Bruce that will become Batman.
I like this. IT is a solid start. Way better first ep than Agents of Shield. The character designeds are good, selena Kyle, Penguin and Ed Nigma are all fun interpretations. Donal Logue is excellent as expected. My concern is Gordon. IF the series is to revolve around him he needs to be a compellig character to stand amidst all this corruption and weirdness. I'm not sold on this guy. He is a little too vanilla for me at this point. Now part of that could be deliberate in this first episiode making him all fresh faced and clean. He isn't world weary, rumpled, ragged and gaunt yet. If the character arc is to get him to that place. i'm in.
The good - The kid playing young Bruce, The 3rd Doctor's kid playing Alfred, Catgirl, the Penguin (shoot, just call the show the Penguin and I'd watch it).
The bad - Logue as Bullock. Love Logue. Love Bullock. They're not meshing, though. Also, they can't kill off Fish Mooney fast enough.
Only got to watch about the first 20-30 minutes so far. I've got mixed feelings. Ben McKenzie was terrific in Southland so I'm good with him as young idealistic cop dealing with a bunch of cynics. Donal Logue does a great job as the senior cynic/partner.
Cobblepott seemed to work well where they have him placed.
Felt like some of the other elements were really crowbarred in:
* Martha complies and hands "Joe Chill" the necklace only to have it break in the handover so that we can get the iconic falling pearls scene.
* Edward Nigma as forensic specialist
Otherwise, I felt like Selena's goggles took me out of it. She's a pickpocket and sneak thief that wears an utterly unique identifier on top of her hood so that she stands out in a crowd when running away from a mark. It may, ultimately make sense, but it bugs the hell out of me given the first scene.
Regardless, I'm still going to give it multiple episodes to get it's legs.
Sean Pertwee looks more and more like his old man every time I see him. At this point you could put him in costume and have him show up in an episode of Who as the 3rd Doctor and be spot on.
I liked Nigma as the forensic nerd, that worked for me.
Fish Mooney is the worst imaginable female character name. There is no good connotation there at all. In 75 years of Bat history is there no existing female criminal that could have held that position? Given all the characters that they've shoved into this pilot I have a hard time believing THIS is the one they chose to cut out of whole cloth.
I think if you object to fan service, easter eggs and "crowbarred" references than Gotham will not be for you. Ivy, Catwoman, Penguin, Riddler all out there in the first episode. It was exactly what I was expecting and seemed to have strong production value. I am a Donal Logue fan and Bullock is a perfect role for him. This feels different thanArrow and Smallville in that I always felt those were more YA orientated and this not so much. I just do not trust Fox to let this simmer and not force feed too much in too little time. Gotham before Batman seems fertile ground, I do not want to see the Bat for a long time, if ever.
saw it... felt very been there done that... none of the actors were great... the only one with instant charisma was catgirl... she was cute... not really interested in a convoluted corrupt cop/crime lord/drama with no real superhero action... why was everything so shiny and not grimy? not going to watch it... looking forward to Flash!
Agreed on Pertwee. I was excited as soon as I saw him in the preliminary info.
When I say crowbarred, I mean that there seems, from the first 30 minutes, like a concerted effort to jam everything into the first episode rather than let it develop more organically.
Not sure where I see the Arrow as YA coming from. Certainly, it's Star City 90210, but the characters and world feel far more organically developed to me.
Comments
NOT a Batman fan.. but this.. I would watch weekly.. 8->
http://comicsbeat.com/trouble-in-gotham-writer-alan-brennert-says-wb-is-stiffing-him-over-45-an-episode/
http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/128165-dc-refuses-to-pay-alan-brennert-45-in-royalties-for-barbara-kean.html?utm_content=buffere2409&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
From his personal Facebook page (if you don't want to read the links)....
"WHY I WON’T BE WATCHING FOX’S “GOTHAM” THIS FALL:
Back in 1981, in a story called “To Kill a Legend” in DETECTIVE COMICS #500, artist Dick Giordano and I created a character named Barbara Kean, the fiancée of Lt. James Gordon. (This was set on a parallel Earth where counterparts of the “real” Batman and his cast were twenty years younger.) A Golden Age “Mrs. James Gordon” (no first or maiden name) had appeared in 1951, mother of a son named Tony, but my character, later picked up by talented writers like Frank Miller and Barbara Randall Kesel, was clearly the prototype (with the same first name) for the “Post-Crisis” first wife of Lt. James Gordon, and—as Barbara Kean Gordon—became a supporting player in Batman continuity, and even made two movie appearances in BATMAN BEGINS and THE DARK KNIGHT.
And this fall on GOTHAM, Fox’s prequel to the Batman mythos, one of the supporting characters will be…Barbara Kean, fiancée of Lt. James Gordon.
Ironically enough, on the same day that DC’s online news site listed the results of a fan poll in which I was chosen one of “the 75 greatest Batman artists/writers,” an executive at DC Entertainment—let’s call him “Johnny DC”—dismissed my request for “equity” (a percentage of income received when a character you create is used in other media) in the character. The justification? Because I had given her the same name, profession, and appearance as her daughter (at the time, just a sly wink to the reader), she was “derivative” of her daughter Barbara (Batgirl) Gordon and equity “is not generally granted” in derivative characters like wives, husbands, daughters, sons, etc., of existing characters: “this is the criteria by which all equity requests are measured.”
I then pointed out to him that writer Mark Waid had been told by then-DC management that DC did, in fact, give equity in “derivative” characters, just a smaller percentage—and indeed Mark and artist/co-creator Mike Wieringo received equity in the “derivative” character of Bart Allen/Impulse (grandson of Barry Allen/Flash) and received payments when he was used on SMALLVILLE. I suggested DC grant a similar reduced percentage on Barbara Kean, and I was willing to limit this to her appearances on GOTHAM and forget the movies.
How did Johnny DC respond to this? Did he rebut my argument? Nope. When confronted with the, shall we say, lack of veracity of his statement, he simply stopped responding to my emails.
Classy, right?
Now, let me be clear: I’ve since learned that the amount of money involved here can be as little as $45 an episode for a full equity character. So clearly I’m not in this for the money, but the principle. This is small change compared to the fact that the estate of Jack Kirby receives no share of the billions in dollars that Marvel/Disney makes from movies based on characters he co-created. But I suspect DC counts on the fact that the money is low enough that hiring an attorney to pursue it would cost more than you’d ever receive in equity payments. They also count on the fact that their freelancers depend on DC for work and thus will not publicly call them out. (And sometimes these freelancers are the very ones for whom that little bit of extra money would mean a lot.)
But as a novelist I depend in no way on DC for my livelihood, and have no problem recounting the bad faith they have demonstrated to me. But I take little satisfaction in it. There was a time—under the management of Jenette Kahn, Paul Levitz, and Dick Giordano—when DC went to great lengths to credit and compensate creators. They felt it was money well spent, because it brought other creators to the company and everyone benefited. I was actually proud to be associated with a comics company with a conscience. I hope my experience with the “new” DC is not typical, and that they still have a conscience. But I sure don’t see it from where I sit.
(If you’re a fan of my comics work, feel free to share.)"
Isn't this whole thing kinda BS though? Not Alan's story, but what DC is doing? Didn't Gerry Conway get credit and compensation for Felicity Smoak being used on Arrow? Wasn't she just Ronnie Raymond (Firestorms) step mother before then? How can they do this? To ANYONE, let alone Alan?!
http://comicsalliance.com/batman-writer-alan-brennert-gotham-and-the-truth-about-dc-comics-media-royalties/
Also - I'm liking the idea that the show might have multiple characters, any of which might become the Joker! Nice little twist if that happens!
M
I liked the little change in Bruce's origin that Selina witnessed the murder. I really liked the acting out of Bruce and Gordon. And my favorite scene was that last scene with Bruce and Gordon. Bruce already feels like the Bruce that will become Batman.
I also loved that Alfred is a hard-ass. :-)
...however, I see Gotham is being repeated later this week, and since there's nothing more interesting up against it, I might check it out.
The good - The kid playing young Bruce, The 3rd Doctor's kid playing Alfred, Catgirl, the Penguin (shoot, just call the show the Penguin and I'd watch it).
The bad - Logue as Bullock. Love Logue. Love Bullock. They're not meshing, though. Also, they can't kill off Fish Mooney fast enough.
Good enough to bring me back next week, for sure.
Cobblepott seemed to work well where they have him placed.
Felt like some of the other elements were really crowbarred in:
* Martha complies and hands "Joe Chill" the necklace only to have it break in the handover so that we can get the iconic falling pearls scene.
* Edward Nigma as forensic specialist
Otherwise, I felt like Selena's goggles took me out of it. She's a pickpocket and sneak thief that wears an utterly unique identifier on top of her hood so that she stands out in a crowd when running away from a mark. It may, ultimately make sense, but it bugs the hell out of me given the first scene.
Regardless, I'm still going to give it multiple episodes to get it's legs.
I liked Nigma as the forensic nerd, that worked for me.
Fish Mooney is the worst imaginable female character name. There is no good connotation there at all. In 75 years of Bat history is there no existing female criminal that could have held that position? Given all the characters that they've shoved into this pilot I have a hard time believing THIS is the one they chose to cut out of whole cloth.
felt very been there done that...
none of the actors were great... the only one with instant charisma was catgirl... she was cute...
not really interested in a convoluted corrupt cop/crime lord/drama with no real superhero action...
why was everything so shiny and not grimy?
not going to watch it...
looking forward to Flash!
:-?
When I say crowbarred, I mean that there seems, from the first 30 minutes, like a concerted effort to jam everything into the first episode rather than let it develop more organically.
Not sure where I see the Arrow as YA coming from. Certainly, it's Star City 90210, but the characters and world feel far more organically developed to me.