Ruby Rose IS the CW's Batwoman: huzzah or hiss?

[daBronzeBomma]

Poll forthcoming.

What do you think of the recent casting of Ruby Rose as Kate Kane in the Berlantiverse on the C.W.?

Happy, angry, disappointed, indifferent, or something else entirely?

Me, well I kinda "nothing" Batwoman. I don't strongly dislike her like I do, say, Booster Gold (, for example, but I also don't feel compelled to read any of her stories either, like I do with other heroes. On a scale of -10 (pure hate) to +10 (pure love), she is a straight 0 (pure apathy) to me.

But not to others. And there does my interest lie. So, fans of Batwoman and Batverse fans in general, what do you think of Ruby Rose as Kate Kane, at this point?

[Kurisu]

It’s unfortunate Kate’s first foray into live action is at the hands of another Instagram model turned bad actress, but it’s not as though I expected much with Berlanti at the helm.

Unenthused, I guess? Hoping for best, but expecting the worse.

[Caivu]

She was not in the top 10 of my picks for a live-action Kate, but she's always been on that list somewhere as soon as I heard her suggested. I'm satisfied with both her acting and stunt abilities. I'm more worried about her ability to hide her accent than anything, and more worried still about the actual writing for her. But as far as acting, I think she'll do just fine.

I am a little bummed that this means that one of the actresses who impressed me with her audition, Ashley Platz, is out.

[okiedokiewo]

I physically recoiled at the news. One of the worst casting decisions I've ever heard of.

[Caivu]

I physically recoiled at the news. One of the worst casting decisions I've ever heard of.

Why?

Also, unrelated to the above quote, most of Kate's writers support this casting, for whatever that's worth:

Screenshot_20180807-222150.jpg

Screenshot_20180807-222251.jpg

Screenshot_20180807-222342.jpg

[Killerbee911]

People are acting like the CW brand of Superhero show requires high level actors .Ruby Rose has enough charisma , decent enough actor(watch orange is the new black) to pull off whatever the scenes at this level of show, and can more than fill the action part. This is actually a good casting. If she was going to be acting in The Handmaid's Tale ,This is us or Homeland. I would be worried but for CW light acting and cheesy soap opera stuff she is perfect fine. Ruby brings the same type of credible physicality that Stephen Amell brought to Arrow.

[SixSpeedSamurai]

I think it's a good fit. She needs to put on some muscle to play Kate though.

[Oberon]

Not really familiar with her but I agree mostly with SixSpeedSamurai; just needs to be more filled out, for the costume or uniform at least. I'm not really sure who I would have suggested in place of her either.

[jump]

The only thing I've seen her in is John Wick 2 but I don't remember her from it. I did ask my girlfriend if she is a good actress as she watches Orange Is The Black and she think she's ok.

[okiedokiewo]

Why?

Also, unrelated to the above quote, most of Kate's writers support this casting, for whatever that's worth:

Because it's terrible casting. Ruby Rose cannot carry a show, on acting or charisma.

And I don't think those writers would speak out against it, whatever their feelings. They have to err on professionalism and not rocking the boat. And two of those tweets are pretty much the definition of that. Generic responses they would have written about anyone and hardly enthusiastic endorsements.

[Vworp Vworp]

Because it's terrible casting. Ruby Rose cannot carry a show, on acting or charisma.

This.

Understand, I'm not someone for whom Emmy award winning acting is a must. Of course when someone is knocking it out of the park on a show, I'll notice it and appreciate it (Hello Tatiana Maslany) but as long as someone is getting the job done, I'm happy. And with that in mind, it's very rare for me to see a performance that I don't rate, that I can see is legitimately lacking. And Ruby Rose in OitNB was one of those performances. There was just nothing there, no character, no charisma, nothing.

As for her other roles I've seen her in, she played an android on Dark Matter and a mute in John Wick 3. Which are probably within her range. Oh, and she was apparently in Resident Evil, which I have seen but completely forgot she was in.

Are there worse actors employed today? Probably. But they haven't been cast as one of my favourite DC characters, a woman who is defined by her complex and engaging personality, by her intensity and by her presence. And those are just some of the qualities I'm struggling to see Rose bring to life.

[Frontier]

I can't say I'm very familiar with Ms. Rose, but while I wouldn't say the CW's casting is always on-point they usually cast well for the interpretation of the character they are going with.

I am very interested to see if Ruby/the show will be able to capture Kate's visuals, both as Kate Kane and as Batwoman, straight from the comics.

[Caivu]

Because it's terrible casting. Ruby Rose cannot carry a show, on acting or charisma.

Feh. Says you.

(And yes, about 98% of the Internet, but whatever. You can all be wrong. )

And I don't think those writers would speak out against it, whatever their feelings. They have to err on professionalism and not rocking the boat. And two of those tweets are pretty much the definition of that. Generic responses they would have written about anyone and hardly enthusiastic endorsements.

Are we reading the same tweets?
And I don't see why they would have to be concerned about "rocking the boat"; none of them are affiliated with the CW at all and have no plans to be. And they could still express disagreement without being unprofessional.

(General side note, but I don't like this kind of refusal to take people at their word when they support something, as if they just have to be doing so with ulterior motives. It's cynical and bizarre.)

[okiedokiewo]

Are we reading the same tweets?
And I don't see why they would have to be concerned about "rocking the boat"; none of them are affiliated with the CW at all and have no plans to be. And they could still express disagreement without being unprofessional.

(General side note, but I don't like this kind of refusal to take people at their word when they support something, as if they just have to be doing so with ulterior motives. It's cynical and bizarre.)

Are you reading the same tweets? "Her Kate will be down to what the writers do" and "Interesting casting" are generic sentiments that, again, would be said about anyone. They are being supportive in a vague sense without actually being too supportive. They likely don't care. "Interesting" is especially a word people use when they don't want to commit either way to how they feel. Reading it again, I'm not actually sure why you would even include that second tweet as evidence of anything.

I'm not refusing to take their word. I'm just not pretending their tweets are including something that isn't actually there.

[Caivu]

Are you reading the same tweets? "Her Kate will be down to what the writers do" and "Interesting casting" are generic sentiments that, again, would be said about anyone. They are being supportive in a vague sense without actually being too supportive.

What are you talking about? Rucka said he likes her and Williams said she's talented. Those are not vague or generic statements.