Wednesday, September 24, 2014

Bright Lights, Dark City - 'Gotham' (A Polite 'N Prefatory Review)

Riddlers, Penguins and maybe-Jokers (oh my!), but not a Two-Face to been seen. Odd, really, considering the schizophrenic nature of Gotham's premiere episode; ex-D.A. Harvey Dent would definitely be of two minds on the subject. On the one hand there's a passable cop story of corruption and betrayal (soft-boiled but pushing the 8 p.m. envelope for sure), focusing on young Jim Gordon, a newbie do-gooder, and his partner Harvey Bullock, a nihilist drunk, chasing the man who killed the Waynes. On the other you've got a Batman story that does not actually feature Batman, nor will it even should the show run many seasons. On the surface Gotham is a transparent try by DC Comics to milk more cash from their one sure-fire property and to win a timeslot with a wider draw than Arrow can offer. Underneath, however, I detect a genuinely good-hearted attempt to put old wine in new bottles by repackaging the Dark Knight's sacred canon, melding comic mythos and serial sensibilities into a show that wasn't awful and may very well get better.

So, back to the past we go. Just like Smallville, just like Star Trek, just like Terminator, just like the hated Prequels, to scratch the surface. Comedian Patton Oswalt lambasted Hollywood's baffling obsession with backstories with a theory called Jon Voight's Ballsack, i.e. if you like looking at something (Angelina Jolie), it follows that you will equally love the forbearer of that thing (the pink, glistening ball sack of actor Jon Voight from which Ms. Jolie emerged). Ergo, seeing where the things you love came from is just as good as seeing the things you love. Obviously Mr. Oswalt is a detractor, as am I, though I am willing to acknowledge those few exceptions that have proven the rule such as Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater and, yes, Batman Begins. But if Begins was a retelling of Batman's origins, what is Gotham?

In as much as it can be judged from a single episode, it is less of a strict retelling of a pre-Bats Gotham and more of a selective re-imagining of the events and people that birthed him, a sort of 'what if...?' scenario fueled by the grimmest kind of whimsy. If you're a member of the Orthodox Church of the Batman and pillory any departures from immutable Dark Knight lore, this series may be more trouble for you than it's worth. I admit over 48 minutes to eliciting many a harumph myself and rolling my eyes more than a little. There are too many liberties both big and small for this to be considered an adaptation of existing work and the show rips it's britches more than once reconciling the ages, roles, backgrounds and personalities of the characters. Neophytes won't complain, but traditionalists will likely balk at the fuzzy math and blunt characterizations. 

Rather than expound for paragraphs on each detail I thought I'd share a sampling of my notepad from the debut episode - truly, first impressions are the most telling:
  • “Rich city detail, furbelows and visual flare of Gotham – grit, lights, color, sound, steam, skyways(!)...how many composites, how much CG?”
  • “Interesting: Wayne murder off-canon - deliberate handing of pearl necklace, shooting is COLD, INTENTIONAL, not panicked but calm and calculated...”
  • Gordon's cocky, has a backstory (ugh!), shouldn't have made him a soldier – PTSD bordering on trite...tells B. Wayne 'I know how you feel right now'...NO! NO, HE DOESN'T – HE NEVER HAS – THAT'S WHY JIM GORDON NEVER BECAME BATMAN HIMSELF.” [original caps and underlines from notes]
  • “B. Wayne child actor seems very good.”
  • “Alfred as a Guy Ritchie caricature-slash-soccer hooligan ('Mate' and 'oy!' with a RAISED VOICE!?!?) Not the lessons B-Man needs to learn from him..."
  • “Dire need to hook audience ASAP...abandons subtlety, straight for the carrot – Riddler especially...slow down boy, we've got more episodes...
  • “Jada P. Smith terrible as usual, chewing – gnashing – every goddamn scene...overdone...overdone...3 accents in 3 lines, or just awful at her job?"
  • "Fish Mooney: understand need for non-white faces but Falcone employing non-family turf bosses is way outta character...”
  • “Why is Cobblepot tall? Funny nose/milky complexion not half as important as small stature, dammit!!!”
  • “Good job putting various cops at loggerheads...this is the most believable part...not overbearing, smart...”
  • “They use old cellphones...BECAUSE IT'S THE PAST, GET IT???”
  • “Supermodel wife, free r&b in a high-rise apartment w/a Hell of a view...how much of a sympathetic everyman is JG really??”
  • “End: Don't think Gordon would've played Bullock's 'game', but can see the need to stretch conflict, tension, shows, and was that shot of TOXIC WASTE barrels at the docks supposed to be a hint???"

There's little I despise more than armchair quarterbacking – except maybe premature armchair quarterbacking – so I'll leave it at that. One episode is hardly enough to render a final judgment much less come down on the series for anything worse than quibbles. I will say I am a huge fan of showrunner Bruno Heller's series Rome, and it shouldn't be lost on anyone who followed that series how Heller vaulted the narrative ahead ten years from one episode to another almost without a wrinkle. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw something similar with Gotham should the show survive the ratings crucible; audiences will want to see the seeds sown in these early episodes bear fruit in less time than it will actually take for Wayne to don the cape and cowl. How long do you let a super-villain simmer before he's ready to pop?  We'll see.

And I'll be watching.    

No comments:

Post a Comment