Gotham was not a great series

[kcomics]

The Gotham TV show was not a great series perhaps.

They had so much Batman lore to work with, and instead they resorted to contrived plots that left characters severely underdeveloped.

Need examples?

Edward Nygma / Riddler --the character just snapped one day and committed murder. There was no slow build and no focus on his above average intelligence. Also, very little thought was put into showcasing his love for puzzles. Oddly, though, he was probably one of the better developed characters on the series.

Pamala Isly / Poison Ivy--she even had her body changed and was inexplicably aged up, instead of something more subtle like maybe say a flashback scene.

They did stupid things like this with many of Batman's famous rogues in the Gotham series. It left the whole thing feeling very disjointed and off.

Hugo Strange--they used this guy as a plot device to kill and resurrect characters on a whim. There's a right way to use plot devices like this, and then there's a wrong way, and Gotham definitely used them the wrong way. I can buy a character or two with regenerative or special healing properties but just being able to kill, resurrect, and change characters on a whim without any rule or logic behind it leaves a hole or two in the plot and doesn't give the viewer a chance to empathize with the characters.

Jack Napier / John Doe / Joe Kurr / The Joker--this was probably one of the worst portrayals of the character ever. Of all of the interesting Joker lore they could have explored, they chose to go with the new 52 comics, and they didn't even follow any of the established story lines! The Valaska brothers were terrible Jokers because they were introduced to us as sociopathic monsters out of the gate. The show could have followed Joker lore, not used the name of the character, and given us a much stronger more interesting take on the villain and his origin story. With the Joker, there's a lot to work with--abusive parents, bullying, redemption, etc. The Joker character could have been a troubled young boy who joined the mob in self defense, learned to be a ruthless killer, and then, when he encountered Batman and finally broke, it would have been somewhat tragic. That would have made an excellent story if executed properly. Very few stories in popular Joker lore have him begin life as a monster; he begins life as a regular human being in most of them. Instead, we got Jerome and Jeremiah Valaska, and, in a world already populated by mad sociopaths and serial killers, they were almost nothing special.

Do you agree with my list? What were your main complaints with the Gotham TV series?

[RickWJ324]

GOTHAM is a far-from-perfect show. My biggest gripe with it early on was the fact that most of Batman's villains were all being created while Bruce was still a child. Still... as quirky as it is, I do enjoy it. It's absolutely bonkers and taken as an alternate tale it's pretty entertaining. No, it's definitely not accurate to anything before it, but as a standalone story it's definitely fun to watch.
I'm definitely NOT enjoying their version of Bane though. He looks absolutely ridiculous!!

[Mutant 77]

The actor they picked for Bruce Wayne is the first bad choice. Terrible, terrible, terrible miscasting. One of the worst in TV history.

Too many villains developed during the series, decades before a mature Batman would operate. It's so stupid. So in the future we will get a 30 years old Batman fighting super-old supervillains. Not good, not cool.

The "No Man's Land" arc is the jump of the shark. TOTALLY.

And I would say that they messed up the Joker with those two twin brothers. Screenplayers should be fired.


It started as a good series, even. They should have recast Bruce in Season 2 or 3, making a little time jump.

[kcomics]

I don't really understand why we can't get good accurate portrayals of Batman's villains in movies and TV shows. If they weren't allowed to use certain names, they could have just used the fake names those characters sometimes operate under. They didn't need to invent completely new characters and totally ruin their cool origin stories (or lack thereof)!

[Mutant 77]

I don't really understand why we can't get good accurate portrayals of Batman's villains in movies and TV shows. If they weren't allowed to use certain names, they could have just used the fake names those characters sometimes operate under. They didn't need to invent completely new characters and totally ruin their cool origin stories (or lack thereof)!

That's not even close to the fact they are using a not attractive kid as lead character, making him being a detective and a crimefighter without muscles or skills or the right age to do that.

The "No Man's Land" arc story is just the nail in the coffin. So over the top and unbelievable.

[kcomics]

Agreed, but Batman's villains define him. Without believable tragic villains, Batman's story become equally fantastical and foolish.

[Arctic Cyclist]

That's not even close to the fact they are using a not attractive kid as lead character, making him being a detective and a crimefighter without muscles or skills or the right age to do that.

The "No Man's Land" arc story is just the nail in the coffin. So over the top and unbelievable.

He looks like Bruce does in most comic flashbacks, and has excellent bone structure. He'll be attractive enough once he's in his late 20s and 30s. Until then, yes, he looks weird. Teenagers look, sound, and smell weird. It's biology, the only people who should find teenagers attractive are other teenagers. If you're an adult who expects to be attracted to teenagers there's something fundamentally wrong with you. I personally enjoyed watching him grow up and start evolving into a person. He's exactly what I would have expected Bruce to be based on various comics, although Gotham's Bruce is considerably tamer and more considerate than most comic versions of Bruce as a teen.

Why would you expect a show based on Batman to be believable...outside of Florida where Bat villains and schemes are normal, everyday occurrences. Except instead of the insane asylum, Florida shrugs and fires up old sparky because crazy is as crazy does and crazy is no excuse to eat someone's face.

[sunofdarkchild]

Of course it's not 'great.' I don't think I've ever heard anyone claim it was. It's definitely a flawed show, but it also has a lot of charm.

Most of the casting has been great. David Mazuz is the best live-action Bruce Wayne to date. Bullock is great, Penguin, Hugo Strange, ect. But the show as a whole never reached 'great' status.

'Great' is a description for shows like BTAS, MASH, Game of Thrones, early seasons of 24 or later seasons of Star Trek TNG, Avatar the Last Airbender. That's a height Gotham could never hope to achieve.

[kcomics]

...but why is that? They could have told good stories even with a low budget.

[RickWJ324]

Most of the casting has been great. David Mazuz is the best live-action Bruce Wayne to date. Bullock is great, Penguin, Hugo Strange, ect. But the show as a whole never reached 'great' status.

The show is fun and has had lots of good casting. However, I disagree with you on the casting of David as Bruce. I don't like him as Bruce most of the time, nor can I buy this scrawny kid acting tough and beating up on skilled soldiers, street gangs, etc. It comes across as silly most of the time. Still... I very much enjoy the show!!

[Bat-Meal]

Too many villains developed during the series, decades before a mature Batman would operate. It's so stupid. So in the future we will get a 30 years old Batman fighting super-old supervillains. Not good, not cool.

Like this:



But anyways, I couldn't get into Gotham. I got to about the halfway point of season 2 before I dropped it. I didn't find Jim Gordon to be a compelling lead character, I found him boring.

[oasis1313]

I haven't liked it; it feels boring to me, but that may just be a limited attention span.

[Arctic Cyclist]

I haven't liked it; it feels boring to me, but that may just be a limited attention span.

I found mixing strong drinks and explaining everything to my Baby Boomer housemate who hasn't read comics since the early 1960s made it a quite enjoyable. Alcohol: it can be a solvent or a solution for many of your problems!

[jb681131]

The Gotham TV show was not a great series perhaps.

They had so much Batman lore to work with, and instead they resorted to contrived plots that left characters severely underdeveloped.

Need examples?

Edward Nygma / Riddler --the character just snapped one day and committed murder. There was no slow build and no focus on his above average intelligence. Also, very little thought was put into showcasing his love for puzzles. Oddly, though, he was probably one of the better developed characters on the series.

Pamala Isly / Poison Ivy--she even had her body changed and was inexplicably aged up, instead of something more subtle like maybe say a flashback scene.

They did stupid things like this with many of Batman's famous rogues in the Gotham series. It left the whole thing feeling very disjointed and off.

Hugo Strange--they used this guy as a plot device to kill and resurrect characters on a whim. There's a right way to use plot devices like this, and then there's a wrong way, and Gotham definitely used them the wrong way. I can buy a character or two with regenerative or special healing properties but just being able to kill, resurrect, and change characters on a whim without any rule or logic behind it leaves a hole or two in the plot and doesn't give the viewer a chance to empathize with the characters.

Jack Napier / John Doe / Joe Kurr / The Joker--this was probably one of the worst portrayals of the character ever. Of all of the interesting Joker lore they could have explored, they chose to go with the new 52 comics, and they didn't even follow any of the established story lines! The Valaska brothers were terrible Jokers because they were introduced to us as sociopathic monsters out of the gate. The show could have followed Joker lore, not used the name of the character, and given us a much stronger more interesting take on the villain and his origin story. With the Joker, there's a lot to work with--abusive parents, bullying, redemption, etc. The Joker character could have been a troubled young boy who joined the mob in self defense, learned to be a ruthless killer, and then, when he encountered Batman and finally broke, it would have been somewhat tragic. That would have made an excellent story if executed properly. Very few stories in popular Joker lore have him begin life as a monster; he begins life as a regular human being in most of them. Instead, we got Jerome and Jeremiah Valaska, and, in a world already populated by mad sociopaths and serial killers, they were almost nothing special.

Do you agree with my list? What were your main complaints with the Gotham TV series?

No no no ! You got it all wrong.
On the contrary the caracters are much more realistic than in the comics.
And their is a real build up of the different vilains.

If you look at the first episodes, you'll see that Gotham is controled by the mafia, and that slowly as the episodes go, each vilain emerge.
As you say Ed Nygma doesn't just snap one day. Even before he becomes the Riddler you can guess he's gonna be the Riddler.
And In real life that's how crazy people act. One day they "snap" as you say. If you look at their past you can then see that their were lots of little things that showed they were not normal people.
That's exactly what they did for Nigma. And they did pretty well.

The serie also has fantastic acting, you couldn't have found better actors for Ed Nigma or The Penguin (that you don't even mention by the way !) or Bruce and Alfred.

I thing this serie is underrated because people (like you) don't see the subtle things that have been put in it.

[AzraelOnline]

Actually the show isn't bad if you can just get over the fact that it's not about Batman. People praise the Nolanverse and it's terrible. Nolan picked and chose what he wanted for his movies and people praised it. The people behind Gotham did the same, but since there's no Batman on the show people decide to crap all over it and call it garbage. Way too many people talking crap and boycotting the show because there is no Batman instead of enjoying the show as an Elseworld's type of show. I mean, Rebirth and New 52 writers are pretty godawful but we're still reading the books. Also, the comment about them going with the New 52 Joker, yea, New 52 was still happening when they did that...
What probably killed this show more was the internet. Too many loudmouth's with too much time on their hands made their voices heard. Kind of sad really.