Gotham

Yes indeed

Will be there.

---

Very good.

The only problem is doing it in current time. It does not make any sense as far as the start of Batman

---

I was amazed and delighted by how entertaining that first episode was! Kudos to all involved. I AM biased though-- I have 2 friends in the Art Dept. But even without having a dog in the race, I thought the show was edgy and dangerous and a hoot without being dumbed down for the lowest common denominator. Oh and I thought the look of the show was superb, and a worthy successor to the comic legend after those overwrought feature films from Christopher Nolan.

My only question is why a show this violent is on at 8pm?

Although, Ben McKenzie is not a very good actor. You can see the wheels turning, using all the tricks his High School Drama teacher taught him...the faces he pulls, mugging doesn't begin to describe.

I actually thought he was fine. His performance isn't airtight yet, but he's in the same zone as everyone else. His girlfriend, on the other hand...

"The only problem is doing it in current time. It does not make any sense as far as the start of Batman"

Mr. Roxy, I was prepared to not like it based on your post alone.

But, I was pleasantly surprised. The grittier retelling of the story in a contemporary setting just works. Like what I've seen so far but agree that the premiere seemed front-loaded with the back story of the villains.

---

I'd say they're playing fast and loose with the time periods. If you disregard the cell phones (which are 10-year-old flip phones by the way), most of the show could happen anytime since the 60's. The picture cars seem to be chiefly 70's -80's models. Fish Mooney's club looks like it takes place in 1930's Harlem and the grand police precinct set seems to owe a lot to 1910 Beaux-Artes New York. Something for everyone.

The time period is not crucial to the Batman story. Different versions have set it in all kinds of decades and the future. It's not like there is a back story, like a specific war or time event, that can affect the way it is developed.

Also, we must take note that this Batman stands on its own. By how fast the Pilot was moving, I was thinking that Barbara was going to give birth to her daughter and turn into Batgirl in 2 seconds.

This version connects the younger version of the villains to each other like I have never seen before. Their back stories tend to be isolated from each other, which I was hoping the series would take advantage of in order to create excitement as to when we will see one character or the other appear. Now we have been introduced to most of the famous ones and I'm scared that the show will get dense if they become try to make them more interesting as youngsters than the adult psychos.

---

From what I've read, the series will focus more on the villains individually, instead of this episode's "There's Catwoman! And the Penguin! And the Riddler! And Poison Ivy!" maniacal menagerie.

I did think this episode was really solid. I like Ben's approach to Jim Gordon. I'm not completely sold on Donal Logue's Harvey Bullock; he seems almost incomplete or too little of what is needed. I was skeptical of how they would do creating a character with Fish Mooney, but I liked her as a different piece in the puzzle.

I can't believe how much I like Jada Pinkett-Smith in this. I usually don't care for her, as all her characters are so similar. She's very different in the pilot.

---

I'm with JerseyGirl2 on this one... i was ready to hate Jada Pinkett-Smith because something about her rubs the me the wrong way... but I actually really enjoyed her character in this show (my friend agrees to and felt the same way)

I also really liked the guy who played Oswald.. and I hope to see more of Edward Nygma

Young Bruce was also very good

Considering she was shown feeding stray cats... you are very clever to guess that.

It's still trying to accomplish too much in an hour long episode. Would be nice to get even more focus from the writers.

---