Gotham Knights

[WebLurker]

Wow, looks like I'm the only person who's actually curious about the show.

[Frontier]

Wow, looks like I'm the only person who's actually curious about the show.

Well, it's definitely...a show.

[Shadowedeyes]

In a word



Why is not Damian suspected of killing Batman when cops know he wasn't in the field and found Bruce killed as Batman? Do they suspect he tampered with the utility belt or the Batmobile? Then why are there other suspects? How can a party dude succeed in killing professional hand to hand combatant when the deceased was in the city and his son was far in the outskirts?

I know there are too many jokes about GCPD being incompetent that even cops in other cities in the comics mocked Jim's over-reliance on Batman and forced him to take the force to prove their worth in No Man's Land, but this is ridiculous, even No Man's Land make this show ridiculous by default.

NOTHING will tell me the usual "Wait and see" method will/might work for this show, and I'm glad everyone else is already busy making fun of this garbage as it is.

My guess, based on the trailer, is that they think the 3 kids are the ones who actually killed him, but end up finding some sort of evidence as they look into it that the main character maybe hired them or something. That said, maybe it just is a bad plot point, since everything else does look pretty bad.

[Speed Force League Unlimited]

We've got an older Bruce Wayne/Batman, we have Carrie Kelly, and we have a Harvey that isn't burnt. This starting to feel like an elseworlds The Dark Knight Rises. Bruce paid for Harvey to get his face fixed, Harvey is 'cured' and goes back to work, but secretly is still a criminal mastermind who kills Batman and frames the kids.

I heard the name Harvey and instantly thought of Bullock.
This take might make it more interesting, but CW writing is still so bad I don't want to expect something positive.

Wow, looks like I'm the only person who's actually curious about the show.

Curious, I can say this word applies to me, but I'll stick to reviews like I did with Titans.

My guess, based on the trailer, is that they think the 3 kids are the ones who actually killed him, but end up finding some sort of evidence as they look into it that the main character maybe hired them or something. That said, maybe it just is a bad plot point, since everything else does look pretty bad.

I agree with bad.

[Material Flux]

This show is giving me a real Irregulars vibe, like the people doing it wanted to do a totally different show but they were told to add Batman to it to get people to watch it.

[KabutoRyder]

I.....I.....just got nothing....

[Alan2099]

Wow, looks like I'm the only person who's actually curious about the show.

It's okay. We'll forgive you this time.

[Somecrazyaussie]

This feels way more detached than the ages ago Birds of Prey, which I watched in my youth cause comic shows were few and far between then.
It felt worse than Mutant X, not sure who around here is old enough to have seen that.

Sadly, I am one who remembers both. At least Birds Of Prey had some decent comic ties that were accurate. This? Not so much. Definitely feels like Mutant X in that respect. Let's do a show about the X-men. Except it can't have X-men. Only mutants. None of which matched the comics.

[KabutoRyder]

Sadly, I am one who remembers both. At least Birds Of Prey had some decent comic ties that were accurate. This? Not so much. Definitely feels like Mutant X in that respect. Let's do a show about the X-men. Except it can't have X-men. Only mutants. None of which matched the comics.

Don't you dare besmirch the name of Mutant X against this drivel.

[Vakanai]

Yeah, this feels like a Smallville-era show. Actually, this feels more like Birds of Prey to me.

I had hoped the image we got before meant that they had the cast, but they hadn't filmed anything and so hadn't finalized the costumes. Instead, it looks like we went back to 'No flights, no tights.'

Calling it now- Harvey killed Batman and is setting up the kids with a bunch of dirty cops. Makes me wonder where Gordon is.

Honestly, this looks terrible. And by this point, it's beyond annoying that we can't just get a pure Batman show on TV. Warner Brothers really needs to get those rights sorted out.

It's not about rights. It's the stupid belief that a show would detract from people going to see a film, which is the big money. As long as Batman is good on film, a show is a no go (besides cartoons). Only reason we got Superman & Lois is because no Superman on film currently.

[Captain Craig]

It's not about rights. It's the stupid belief that a show would detract from people going to see a film, which is the big money. As long as Batman is good on film, a show is a no go (besides cartoons). Only reason we got Superman & Lois is because no Superman on film currently.

I'm curious as to what proof there is of this that studios cling to. I've heard this said for decades now. What character has had a concurrent live action TV show where a live action film came out and did poorly?
Some empirical evidence to back this up is long, long overdue.

This is just a broad question since Vakanai mentioned the ole nugget, I'm not asking him to prove this.

[Immortal Weapon]

I'm curious as to what proof there is of this that studios cling to. I've heard this said for decades now. What character has had a concurrent live action TV show where a live action film came out and did poorly?
Some empirical evidence to back this up is long, long overdue.

This is just a broad question since Vakanai mentioned the ole nugget, I'm not asking him to prove this.

Superman. Smallville was still running when Superman Returns was in theaters and WB was disappointed with it's box office.

[skyvolt2000]

I'm curious as to what proof there is of this that studios cling to. I've heard this said for decades now. What character has had a concurrent live action TV show where a live action film came out and did poorly?
Some empirical evidence to back this up is long, long overdue.

This is just a broad question since Vakanai mentioned the ole nugget, I'm not asking him to prove this.

Excluding Smallville-it generally doesn't happen.

Power Rangers is a gray area as Turbo actually lead into the show. Unlike the first one that could NOT take place in mainstream.

Even a bigger gray area is those Ewok movies that took place before Return of the Jedi.

[Captain Craig]

I'm curious as to what proof there is of this that studios cling to. I've heard this said for decades now. What character has had a concurrent live action TV show where a live action film came out and did poorly?
Some empirical evidence to back this up is long, long overdue.

This is just a broad question since Vakanai mentioned the ole nugget, I'm not asking him to prove this.

Superman. Smallville was still running when Superman Returns was in theaters and WB was disappointed with it's box office.

Thanks for the answer. I had already stopped watching Smallville around S6/7 so I guess that is why I didn't realize there was overlap.
Smallville lost me as a regular viewer cause it decided to never be about Superman. No tights/No flights works for awhile. Once your characters are 20 its time to re-evaluate and they never did so I was gone outside the random episodes here/there due to an actual costumed character showing up.

Seems WB doesn't realize that Superman Returns did poorly cause it was poorly written with the worst idea being Lex as the Donner real estate crook. Just didn't work. Didn't help that James Marsden's character Richard was a more relatable and likeable character than Routh's Superman. But sure WB execs, blame it on the overlap of media.

[j9ac9k]

It's not about rights. It's the stupid belief that a show would detract from people going to see a film, which is the big money. As long as Batman is good on film, a show is a no go (besides cartoons). Only reason we got Superman & Lois is because no Superman on film currently.

What about the Flash movie/Flash tv show? Why did they let that happen?