I enjoyed it too. While I didn't find the sister that convincing, the upbeat and likable Melissa Benoist carries the show. There was a lot to go through in 45 minutes, several expository moments that were necessary, so while I felt it was a bit overstuffed I still liked the episode overall.
So refreshing to see a superhero who actually enjoys using their powers, and this looks like a great portrait of female strength and solidarity that girls of all ages ought to be inspired by.
But, can we explain why Vartox is a bad-guy here? I've only know Vartox to be a Sean Connery lookalike (Zardoz), a chest hair enthusiast, and a friend and equal to Superman. LOL
So is this where we lost @Matt and @grannygeekness ? Haven't seem them around these parts since...
When I see bull shit interpretations of what my point was, I cut bait on this thread. When I discussed the notion with my long time friend & he saw the point I was making, I knew it wasn't the picture being painted here.
When I watch Hayley Atwell articulate the point I was striving for in a panel, I realized I just didn't relay the point clearly enough. That was a fail on my point.
Matt, I don't think that you think women can't do anything men can do, and I don't believe I said anything to imply that. I simply am questioning why female characters can't have female voices. And since I do find the characters you listed very much female characters, I'm trying to understand what characteristics would make you think that a particular female character could be played by males with minor tweaking, and what exactly makes that a good thing.
As the anecdote with my granddaughter was meant to show, the attitude that a female character who is feminine is somehow not as positive as a female character who is genderless or has more of an "essentially male voice" is pretty widespread, even among my own family, so I'm not making this a personal attack. I'm just trying to understand the thinking, and you're the first person who has ever articulated the preference for female characters without female voices. I would prefer my grandchildren to grow up believing that "feminine" characteristics are just as valid and positive as characteristics that conventional wisdom says are gender neutral or masculine.
I don't take it as a personal attack, rather an indication I need to tighten up my explanations for clarity.
When I see this Supergirl clip, these are immediately what I thought:
It's not that I want females voiceless, just portrayed in the same fashion as the males. In the new Terminator movie trIler, my favorite moment is Sarah telling Reese "come with me if you want to live", then shooting a terminator.
M
What does "same fashion as males" mean? Because portraying a female who is interchangeable with a male is basically the same as making them voiceless. Good representations of female protagonists show women with agency and ability but still gives their story and perspective as much validity as any male counterpart, without shaming or double-standard type judgments. Supergirl should not be Superman in a skirt. Reskinning an essentially male character as a woman is the same as neutering a male character.
You have a clip from Aliens there, and that's actually a great example of the opposite of what you are talking about. Ripley was originally written as a man and wasn't really changed at all for Alien. I love that movie, more than Aliens, but she was a paper thin character. In Aliens, she's a much richer, more deeply realized character and a lot of that comes from her being written as a woman. Her maternal guilt underlies most of her actions, and her ability to defy the expectations of those around her and the audience makes it one of the all time best action-scifi performances ever. I mean she got an Oscar nomination for it. You put a man in that exact same role and it just would not have the same impact.
As long as Supergirl is portrayed in a way where she's the one making the decisions in her life and she's capable of solving different crisis through her own ability there is nothing wrong with her also being feminine, or occasionally flighty or girly. Those things aren't anti-feminist. Saying those characteristics are less valid than toughness and masculinity is. Showing women without agency, as passive participants or victims is. Showing the experiences of women as less equal to that of a man is.
I put this in the same perspective as I do casting Michael Clarke Duncan & Lawrence Fishburne in roles for characters have been traditionally Caucasian; lateral moves. If preferring female characters be lateral moves neuters their voice, then I'll just file this is the same 'misogyny' drawer as the accusations I'm slut-shaming Black Widow because I used "promiscuous" as a trait to describe her character just as I do for James Bond.
This trailer/clip came off more the Kuzui version of Buffy then the original version Whedon created. I'm glad this portrayal made everyone else feel gushy inside.
M...
Nobody used the word misogyny. I can't presume to know how you feel about the role of women in life but it seems like you respect them as equals. But not knowing the difference between calling a male character promiscuous and calling a female character promiscuous is ridiculous. It's like saying you don't know the difference between the sentence "He's a bitch" and "She's a bitch". Also, while there might be grounds in the comics, I don't really know, and that maybe what you were referring to at the time (I'm not aware of the context) if you were referring to the MCU version, I'd like to point out that she's never been seen to have a sexual relationship with anyone so to assume that her leveraging her sexuality means she sleeps with a lot of people is a form of slut-shaming.
The problem with the whole "lateral move" statement isn't that lateral moves are bad, if a gender or race switch leads to a better performance that's great. It's that the existing mold of the "white male hero" seems to be the yard stick you are measuring as greatest amount of agency and ability any character can have. This assumes that characters that don't fit that mold are somehow less valid as role models or positive characterization. Lateral move characters often don't have there own voice, they have the voice of whatever the original role was. It's not as genuine. It's a narrow range of experience that palette-swapping doesn't change or add anything to except maybe making other kinds of stories with a wider range of influences more palatable. Non white or female characters don't have to be portrayed as being the same as white male characters for them to be portrayed as equals, they just need to be portrayed as being owed the same amount of respect.
I do know the difference between calling one gender promiscuous as opposed to the other; none. Society makes there a difference, I don't. Its one of many misconceptions society has on things. It's not too far a stretch MCU Widow & her source material. She was sterilized to prevent birth...and something more important then the mission.
Your last paragraph is a whole lot of inaccurate assumptions. THATS a ridiculous conclusion to my opinion on genderless characterizations.
Perfect example of why I stopped looking at this thread. Once I get another "30 new posts" appear, I'll clear the notification out again.
Matt, I don't think that you think women can't do anything men can do, and I don't believe I said anything to imply that. I simply am questioning why female characters can't have female voices. And since I do find the characters you listed very much female characters, I'm trying to understand what characteristics would make you think that a particular female character could be played by males with minor tweaking, and what exactly makes that a good thing.
As the anecdote with my granddaughter was meant to show, the attitude that a female character who is feminine is somehow not as positive as a female character who is genderless or has more of an "essentially male voice" is pretty widespread, even among my own family, so I'm not making this a personal attack. I'm just trying to understand the thinking, and you're the first person who has ever articulated the preference for female characters without female voices. I would prefer my grandchildren to grow up believing that "feminine" characteristics are just as valid and positive as characteristics that conventional wisdom says are gender neutral or masculine.
I don't take it as a personal attack, rather an indication I need to tighten up my explanations for clarity.
When I see this Supergirl clip, these are immediately what I thought:
It's not that I want females voiceless, just portrayed in the same fashion as the males. In the new Terminator movie trIler, my favorite moment is Sarah telling Reese "come with me if you want to live", then shooting a terminator.
M
What does "same fashion as males" mean? Because portraying a female who is interchangeable with a male is basically the same as making them voiceless. Good representations of female protagonists show women with agency and ability but still gives their story and perspective as much validity as any male counterpart, without shaming or double-standard type judgments. Supergirl should not be Superman in a skirt. Reskinning an essentially male character as a woman is the same as neutering a male character.
You have a clip from Aliens there, and that's actually a great example of the opposite of what you are talking about. Ripley was originally written as a man and wasn't really changed at all for Alien. I love that movie, more than Aliens, but she was a paper thin character. In Aliens, she's a much richer, more deeply realized character and a lot of that comes from her being written as a woman. Her maternal guilt underlies most of her actions, and her ability to defy the expectations of those around her and the audience makes it one of the all time best action-scifi performances ever. I mean she got an Oscar nomination for it. You put a man in that exact same role and it just would not have the same impact.
As long as Supergirl is portrayed in a way where she's the one making the decisions in her life and she's capable of solving different crisis through her own ability there is nothing wrong with her also being feminine, or occasionally flighty or girly. Those things aren't anti-feminist. Saying those characteristics are less valid than toughness and masculinity is. Showing women without agency, as passive participants or victims is. Showing the experiences of women as less equal to that of a man is.
I put this in the same perspective as I do casting Michael Clarke Duncan & Lawrence Fishburne in roles for characters have been traditionally Caucasian; lateral moves. If preferring female characters be lateral moves neuters their voice, then I'll just file this is the same 'misogyny' drawer as the accusations I'm slut-shaming Black Widow because I used "promiscuous" as a trait to describe her character just as I do for James Bond.
This trailer/clip came off more the Kuzui version of Buffy then the original version Whedon created. I'm glad this portrayal made everyone else feel gushy inside.
M...
Nobody used the word misogyny. I can't presume to know how you feel about the role of women in life but it seems like you respect them as equals. But not knowing the difference between calling a male character promiscuous and calling a female character promiscuous is ridiculous. It's like saying you don't know the difference between the sentence "He's a bitch" and "She's a bitch". Also, while there might be grounds in the comics, I don't really know, and that maybe what you were referring to at the time (I'm not aware of the context) if you were referring to the MCU version, I'd like to point out that she's never been seen to have a sexual relationship with anyone so to assume that her leveraging her sexuality means she sleeps with a lot of people is a form of slut-shaming.
The problem with the whole "lateral move" statement isn't that lateral moves are bad, if a gender or race switch leads to a better performance that's great. It's that the existing mold of the "white male hero" seems to be the yard stick you are measuring as greatest amount of agency and ability any character can have. This assumes that characters that don't fit that mold are somehow less valid as role models or positive characterization. Lateral move characters often don't have there own voice, they have the voice of whatever the original role was. It's not as genuine. It's a narrow range of experience that palette-swapping doesn't change or add anything to except maybe making other kinds of stories with a wider range of influences more palatable. Non white or female characters don't have to be portrayed as being the same as white male characters for them to be portrayed as equals, they just need to be portrayed as being owed the same amount of respect.
I do know the difference between calling one gender promiscuous as opposed to the other; none. Society makes there a difference, I don't. Its one of many misconceptions society has on things.
Your last paragraph is a whole lot of inaccurate assumptions. THATS a ridiculous conclusion to my opinion on genderless characterizations.
M
Well, you shared your opinion, and I shared mine. I'm not arguing with you about what you should like, just offering a different viewpoint. Since I don't know any genderless people in my life and the I don't believe that "equal" means "same as" but rather "different but with the same value", I'm going to have a very different interpretation of what good characterization is. And you can go on believing that words only defined by the dictionary and have no external context in the society that uses them. You'll just have to accept that you'll be misunderstood all the time.
That said, I did not enjoy the pilot. Way too many cliches, Too much bad acting, and writing that was occasionally cringeworthy. I watched with my wife and she repeatedly asked if we could change the channel to just about anything else.
Confining this to my opinion of the show: overall very, very good. I would have preferred that the pilot was extended to an hour and a half, because there were a few things (mostly origin) that I feel were rushed. The sister dynamic was spot on. I don't know if anyone caught this but me, but the sister was actually subtly undermining Kara from the start (that line about being cute, etc., was actually a confidence breaker in the guise of a supportive comment.) The decision to just fit in, since Kal El was now an adult, made sense in the context of being a 13 year old girl (believe me, fitting in is very important for a 13 year old girl), and one gets the sense that Alexis had unconsciously been making sure Kara was not "the Star" all the time they were growing up. The reveal at the end genuinely shocked me--I was expecting someone else entirely. All in all, I loved it. I will be watching this and taping Gotham from here on out.
Supergirl was good, but not great. I think greatness *may* come in time, but we'll have to keep watching to see if that happens.
(All commentary from this point on is by a person who grew up loving all things Kara/Supergirl and is going to like it regardless but who also realizes that the target audience for the show is not and probably shouldn't be 46-year old men. So treat my words with any suspicion you want.)
(Spoilers abound beyond) (Sorry for length)
What I liked: - The DEO. I wished they'd gone ahead and made Bones the director instead of Henshaw, but CGI budgeting probably prohibits it and they probably didn't want to scare the crap out of any younger viewers (that "target audience" I was referring to above). - Was that Parasite or Despero I saw on the screen in the background? Either way, boo-yah! - Callista Flockhart. Look, Cat Grant is a bitch...and she's an aging bitch...and Flockhart nailed that. I think she's going to end up as J. Jonah Jameson to Kara's Peter Parker. - The guy playing Olsen is a damn good actor. Probably too good for this show, to be honest. - Helen Slater as Ms. Danvers. Nice nod to the original movie. And Dean Cain in the background as Mr. Danvers. - Liked the special effects and the fights. Good to see they're not shying away from Kara getting punchy with the villains. - Kara's aunt at the end had a NICE ass. Now before you go pointing fingers...my WIFE said that. Granted she said it right while I was thinking it but either way...it was an assterpiece, we agreed.
What I was meh about: - Benoist herself. She's channeling her inner Christopher Reeve to give us a dorky, awkward Kara Danvers. Thing is, Kara was never really portrayed that way in the comics, so this is a new angle on the character. Time will tell if that works out or not. She did a decent job as Supergirl herself, though.
What I didn't like: - I'm either getting old or the times-they-are-a-changin' but the pacing on this sucker was all over the place. Basically if I'd spliced together every preview they showed and slapped in maybe one or two more scenes, I'd have had this first episode. It had the same basic problem Marvel's Age of Ultron Movie had...it was short attention span theater. Might have come off better if they'd let it be an hour and a half or two-hour premiere and they'd taken their time to really build the background. Again, maybe this is what today's audiences are more ready for and I'm the old duffer. - The "friend" character. Didn't even catch his name. He's unneeded and his lines were REALLY forced out there. - Waste of a really fun villain, guys. Don't kill them off each episode, okay?
Bottom Line: Like I said, it's "Good...not great". 3 outta 5. Would still watch this over Gotham, even if I wasn't a slobbering fanboy for the character (because I'm just as bad about Batman where that's concerned). It's got potential...and it needs a few episodes to really find its audience (which again...isn't and shouldn't be me). Wife's take: "This show is boring!" - but bear in mind she did like Aunt Astra's Ass (say that five times fast!
Thought it was just ok. Which is what I expected and what everything like this seems to be anymore. Pretty predictable and unoriginal. Lots of nit picks. Some good things/moments. Some bad things/moments. the biggest and best thing about it was the star. She was unexpectedly good and likeable. If not for her I probably wouldnt be too interested in seeing any more or care if I do or not. As is I'm willing to watch a couple more eps but I'm not anxious about it.
It seems to have just as much of a possibility of having a freak of the week as The Flash did.
I enjoyed it. It started off with at least one cliche I wasn't crazy about, but they nipped that in the bud. It is already set to record on my DVR for every episode. We'll see if it remains high on my viewing order.
The sister saying Kara shouldn't be a superhero because of the danger. Now that I think about it, it's more of a cliche for the superhero to be to not want to do it in fear of danger to loved ones.
I would have preferred that the pilot was extended to an hour and a half, because there were a few things (mostly origin) that I feel were rushed.
What do you think the "origin" of a superhero is? The whole show (and probably, at least the first several episodes) was the "origin." All the crap about why she has super powers, and a yellow sun doesn't make sense anyway. The destruction of Krypton is old news and spending more time on putting a baby with no dialogue on a ship would have been a waste of time.
I would have preferred that the pilot was extended to an hour and a half, because there were a few things (mostly origin) that I feel were rushed.
What do you think the "origin" of a superhero is? The whole show (and probably, at least the first several episodes) was the "origin." All the crap about why she has super powers, and a yellow sun doesn't make sense anyway. The destruction of Krypton is old news and spending more time on putting a baby with no dialogue on a ship would have been a waste of time.
It's old news to you and me - the audience I'm betting they're probably not trying to reach. Bear in mind they're trying to cast a wider net with this show than to catch people who've read every comic book. Y'know, that elusive female audience that people don't think read comics? Or those younger viewers who may eventually turn into younger readers and eventually become older readers? And for a lot of those people, this could very well be their first exposure to the character, her history, etc. outside of knowing that yes, there's a character called Superman and yes, he has a female counterpart.
For that young or unfamiliar audience, yes...there needs to be some time invested in the origin story.
I would have preferred that the pilot was extended to an hour and a half, because there were a few things (mostly origin) that I feel were rushed.
What do you think the "origin" of a superhero is? The whole show (and probably, at least the first several episodes) was the "origin." All the crap about why she has super powers, and a yellow sun doesn't make sense anyway. The destruction of Krypton is old news and spending more time on putting a baby with no dialogue on a ship would have been a waste of time.
Um, wow. I'm going to pretend that you just politely asked me to clarify what I meant and what I found rushed. So, I would have liked to have seen more of Kara and Alexis' relationship and her relationship with her adoptive parents, to clarify why Kara is so diminished at the beginning of the actual action. She's not pretending to be that way, she really is, and I think it would have been easier to accept if I could have seen some of their interactions. There's also some violations of "show don't tell"--we're told that she has flown before, but we don't see it. Now, that might be shown in flashback, but it would have been nice to see it in the pilot. The whole introduction to her adoptive family was done in dumb show, for goodness sake. Yes, I know why they did it up to a point, but after "He" left, we could have had some clue why Kara was left with this particular family. Helen Slater and Dean Cain are capable of speaking, as far as I know. In addition, I thought the whole sequence between her telling her coworker that she's the woman who saved the plane and her coming out with the S shield seemed a bit choppy, though it also contained one of my favorite bits (Kara walking towards the bank robbers with bullets bouncing off of her and just grinning.) Like I said, to me it seemed rushed. Just my opinion. I'm sorry my use of the term "origin" when I actually meant the prologue and her development of her suit and discovery of the range of her powers confused you.
Also, her origin in the comics (Argo City, 16 years old on arrival, Linda Lee in the orphanage for several years, Superman's "secret weapon", adoption by the Danvers out of the orphanage) is very different than her origin in the show.
Btw @Torchsong they've gone back and forth over the years on whether Kara is to be portrayed as geeky. She had a lot more of that going on when she adopted the Linda Lang secret identity during Sterling Gates and Jamal Igle's run. Which, from the looks of it, they're going to pulling from a lot in this adaptation.
Which is also fine by me, because that is to this day my definitive Supergirl run. And no, I'm not just saying that because I know where Jamal lives. ;)
Btw @Torchsong they've gone back and forth over the years on whether Kara is to be portrayed as geeky. She had a lot more of that going on when she adopted the Linda Lang secret identity during Sterling Gates and Jamal Igle's run. Which, from the looks of it, they're going to pulling from a lot in this adaptation.
Which is also fine by me, because that is to this day my definitive Supergirl run. And no, I'm not just saying that because I know where Jamal lives. ;)
They're drawing heavily from Gates and Igle, which is also fine by me. Still, that aspect of her character came in towards the end of that run. Maybe this is an extension of that concept?
I grew up with "career-woman" Kara of the late 70s and early 80s. There are elements of that here, but without the awkwardness. Not that there's anything wrong with trying something different with the character, I'm just glad we have her in any format. And of course, that was about 35 years ago...urgh... :)
And I've got Jamal's number too...although I'm a Peter David's version fan myself. :)
It was the pilot episode. I think we'll see Kara grow and develop into a competent and independent woman both in and out of the cape. I also think we're going to see Kat play a big part of that.
I don't think there's anyway you do that in a one hour premiere, without making it a total bore or, at the very least, misleading people about what the show is about. Twenty years of her not being super doesn't sound like a good way to hook viewers. I wouldn't be surprised to see lots of flashbacks.
I don't think there's anyway you do that in a one hour premiere, without making it a total bore or, at the very least, misleading people about what the show is about. Twenty years of her not being super doesn't sound like a good way to hook viewers. I wouldn't be surprised to see lots of flashbacks.
I'm sorry, when exactly did I call for 20 years of her not being super? I wanted a little more development and a little less choppiness, something that could be accomplished in the, I don't know, half hour more I felt it needed. Why in the world would you distort what I actually said to something so totally ridiculous? And I did say that I thought the pilot should have been an hour and a half, not an hour.
Comments
So refreshing to see a superhero who actually enjoys using their powers, and this looks like a great portrait of female strength and solidarity that girls of all ages ought to be inspired by.
But, can we explain why Vartox is a bad-guy here? I've only know Vartox to be a Sean Connery lookalike (Zardoz), a chest hair enthusiast, and a friend and equal to Superman. LOL
When I watch Hayley Atwell articulate the point I was striving for in a panel, I realized I just didn't relay the point clearly enough. That was a fail on my point.
M
Your last paragraph is a whole lot of inaccurate assumptions. THATS a ridiculous conclusion to my opinion on genderless characterizations.
Perfect example of why I stopped looking at this thread. Once I get another "30 new posts" appear, I'll clear the notification out again.
M
Well, you shared your opinion, and I shared mine. I'm not arguing with you about what you should like, just offering a different viewpoint. Since I don't know any genderless people in my life and the I don't believe that "equal" means "same as" but rather "different but with the same value", I'm going to have a very different interpretation of what good characterization is. And you can go on believing that words only defined by the dictionary and have no external context in the society that uses them. You'll just have to accept that you'll be misunderstood all the time.
That said, I did not enjoy the pilot. Way too many cliches, Too much bad acting, and writing that was occasionally cringeworthy. I watched with my wife and she repeatedly asked if we could change the channel to just about anything else.
Supergirl was good, but not great. I think greatness *may* come in time, but we'll have to keep watching to see if that happens.
(All commentary from this point on is by a person who grew up loving all things Kara/Supergirl and is going to like it regardless but who also realizes that the target audience for the show is not and probably shouldn't be 46-year old men. So treat my words with any suspicion you want.)
(Spoilers abound beyond) (Sorry for length)
What I liked:
- The DEO. I wished they'd gone ahead and made Bones the director instead of Henshaw, but CGI budgeting probably prohibits it and they probably didn't want to scare the crap out of any younger viewers (that "target audience" I was referring to above).
- Was that Parasite or Despero I saw on the screen in the background? Either way, boo-yah!
- Callista Flockhart. Look, Cat Grant is a bitch...and she's an aging bitch...and Flockhart nailed that. I think she's going to end up as J. Jonah Jameson to Kara's Peter Parker.
- The guy playing Olsen is a damn good actor. Probably too good for this show, to be honest.
- Helen Slater as Ms. Danvers. Nice nod to the original movie. And Dean Cain in the background as Mr. Danvers.
- Liked the special effects and the fights. Good to see they're not shying away from Kara getting punchy with the villains.
- Kara's aunt at the end had a NICE ass. Now before you go pointing fingers...my WIFE said that. Granted she said it right while I was thinking it but either way...it was an assterpiece, we agreed.
What I was meh about:
- Benoist herself. She's channeling her inner Christopher Reeve to give us a dorky, awkward Kara Danvers. Thing is, Kara was never really portrayed that way in the comics, so this is a new angle on the character. Time will tell if that works out or not. She did a decent job as Supergirl herself, though.
What I didn't like:
- I'm either getting old or the times-they-are-a-changin' but the pacing on this sucker was all over the place. Basically if I'd spliced together every preview they showed and slapped in maybe one or two more scenes, I'd have had this first episode. It had the same basic problem Marvel's Age of Ultron Movie had...it was short attention span theater. Might have come off better if they'd let it be an hour and a half or two-hour premiere and they'd taken their time to really build the background. Again, maybe this is what today's audiences are more ready for and I'm the old duffer.
- The "friend" character. Didn't even catch his name. He's unneeded and his lines were REALLY forced out there.
- Waste of a really fun villain, guys. Don't kill them off each episode, okay?
Bottom Line: Like I said, it's "Good...not great". 3 outta 5. Would still watch this over Gotham, even if I wasn't a slobbering fanboy for the character (because I'm just as bad about Batman where that's concerned). It's got potential...and it needs a few episodes to really find its audience (which again...isn't and shouldn't be me). Wife's take: "This show is boring!" - but bear in mind she did like Aunt Astra's Ass (say that five times fast!
For that young or unfamiliar audience, yes...there needs to be some time invested in the origin story.
Which is also fine by me, because that is to this day my definitive Supergirl run. And no, I'm not just saying that because I know where Jamal lives. ;)
I grew up with "career-woman" Kara of the late 70s and early 80s. There are elements of that here, but without the awkwardness. Not that there's anything wrong with trying something different with the character, I'm just glad we have her in any format. And of course, that was about 35 years ago...urgh... :)
And I've got Jamal's number too...although I'm a Peter David's version fan myself. :)
What is my penance?
my 6 year old boys were loving it too! they were sucked in from the get go!
but i was horrified when they had to watch the villain commit suicide at the end... was that necessary?!?!?!?
This almost makes up for him being in Twilight.