Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I agree that was a very strong episode. Although...

 

Jonz' sudden inability to read the guy's mind when it counted felt a tad contrived. (And why didn't he try to scan the dad?) I actually liked Rhea, tho you're not wrong about her Brazil-face. I thought it made for a nice change of pace to have her working on subverting Earth rather than trying to conquer it.

 

Did I think Alex's life was actually in jeopardy? No, not really. But they played it well enough that my brain was able to forget about the meta level and just "OMG will they get there in time?" Especially after the tearful don't-say-goodbye scene with Maggie; it would've been a helluva send-off. (Glad they didn't, obviously!)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

That's a good point about Jonz' inability to read the guy's mind. They never did explain that, leaving it as a dangling plot hook that just made it feel contrived, you're right.

 

I am cursed to almost never be capable of ignoring the meta level. Too many years working in post-production, I guess.

 

 

 

BTW, is it wrong for me to ship Lena and Kara?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the feeling the writers and actors are playing this as close as they can to a romance without actually stating it. Maybe they plan to introduce this as a plot point in future, or perhaps they're just gauging audience response to it.

 

A spurned love would make an interesting motivation for a nemesis for Supergirl. And Luthors have a tradition to uphold. :eg:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they won't turn Kara/Lena into a full-on romance for two reasons: first, they already cover that ground with Alex and doing so with Kara would overshadow what they've done (quite well) already, and secondly, Supergirl is viewed by the world at large as just too "wholesome" for that.

 

But an intensely close, almost sisterly, friendship is definitely an option. And I think that they are trying to build such an intensely close friendship merely so that when Lena does betray Kara, it cuts especially deeply. But even with as much chemistry as they seem to have, they still aren't very close yet. They'll need to be as close as Kara and Alex before the betrayal really will pay off dramatically the way the writers want it to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they won't turn Kara/Lena into a full-on romance for two reasons: first, they already cover that ground with Alex and doing so with Kara would overshadow what they've done (quite well) already, and secondly, Supergirl is viewed by the world at large as just too "wholesome" for that.

 

But an intensely close, almost sisterly, friendship is definitely an option. And I think that they are trying to build such an intensely close friendship merely so that when Lena does betray Kara, it cuts especially deeply. But even with as much chemistry as they seem to have, they still aren't very close yet. They'll need to be as close as Kara and Alex before the betrayal really will pay off dramatically the way the writers want it to.

 

I concur with the likely buildup of the Kara/Lena relationship, and that they're unlikely to actually present a romance between them. But my suggestion was that unrequited feelings by Lena for Kara might well spur the betrayal you anticipate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I concur with the likely buildup of the Kara/Lena relationship, and that they're unlikely to actually present a romance between them. But my suggestion was that unrequited feelings by Lena for Kara might well spur the betrayal you anticipate.

 

I concur with your concurrence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope not, but it seems it is just the type of thing the writers would do. 1) because it is CW and aimed at a 20-something audience, and 2) because writers on Arrowverse shows have repeatedly employed this technique before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think keeping Kara & Lena as "besties" works better than trying to turn it into a romantic thing, one-sided or otherwise. Even on the CW, not everything has to be about sex.

Totally agree.

 

It seems like Hollywood has all but forgotten the concept of platonic love (modern terminology BFF or bromance). The best example I can think of from recent history is MCU's Steve & Bucky, and to a lesser extent Steve & Tony after Civil War.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry though, in terms of whose feelings matter more, sister-of-13-years trumps girlfriend-of-13-months.

I agree but would a court of law? If this was presented to a judge would the judge side with a romantic girlfriend of 13 months or family member of 13 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree but would a court of law? If this was presented to a judge would the judge side with a romantic girlfriend of 13 months or family member of 13 years?

Not to mention in reality, how often does the feelings of a sibling seem more important then a significant other. Especially in the initial time period (I dont get the impression its been 13 months, or even more then 4-5. Truth is, how often have we had a friend/family member who will drop everything, including pre set appointments for a "new" significant other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like Hollywood has all but forgotten the concept of platonic love (modern terminology BFF or bromance).

It's not just Hollywood. The very prevalence of the word bromance indicates just how effed up our society is, because god knows men can't just have genuine close friendships.

 

I agree but would a court of law? If this was presented to a judge would the judge side with a romantic girlfriend of 13 months or family member of 13 years?

Family member will trump girlfriend/boyfriend in most any court I can think of, even if the relationship is a lot longer than 13 months. That's partly why marriage equality is such a button issue for the LGBT community, because without legal marriage they can be banned from their long-term partner's hospital room in favor of a cousin the patient hasn't seen in years. (Not trying to re-open a debate on marriage equality; just using it as an example.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get the impression its been 13 months, or even more then 4-5.

 

I thought I heard Alex say something in the episode about them being together for a year now. Maybe I misheard or misinterpreted that line of dialog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Family member will trump girlfriend/boyfriend in most any court I can think of, even if the relationship is a lot longer than 13 months. That's partly why marriage equality is such a button issue for the LGBT community, because without legal marriage they can be banned from their long-term partner's hospital room in favor of a cousin the patient hasn't seen in years. (Not trying to re-open a debate on marriage equality; just using it as an example.)

Yeah, until quite recently most judges would have been siding with the family member of 13 years over a WIFE of 13 years if the romantic couple were both women.

 

I do think it's an apples and oranges comparison though. Until a romantic relationship has proven the test of time with several years together, a wedding, or a shared child, I think the default is to assume a sibling or other close familial relationship is going to be more fundamental. Even if it goes on the back burner in terms of shared socializing time; most close non-romantic relationships aren't nearly as high maintenance as having a significant other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, that was a massively fun episode! Supergirl's balance of action, humor, and genuine emotional moments has always been what makes it a step above the rest of the Arrowverse IMO, and this episode brought all three of those together strongly.

 

I had forgotten how much I missed Cat! (Even if the political allegory speechifying got a little more heavy-handed than usual.) The reveal that the President is an Amazon alien seemed a bit anticlimactic to me - and seriously WTF was up with her charging the alien armada in an unarmed passenger plane? But those are nitpicks. And I really didn't see the Big Reveal with Supes at the end coming, so major points there. Really looking forward to next week's season finale!

 

 

Edit: Oh, and I loved that Kara & Winn were not even remotely surprised by

Lillian's sudden but inevitable betrayal!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an aside: I do feel like the Arrowverse shows are playing the Death Only Counts If It's A Named Character trope a little too heavily lately. Aliens attack the DEO and there's "no time" to get everyone out, but Alex makes it out so that's cool; we're not even going to try and save the others. Air Force One gets blown up, but the only two named characters aboard survive, so yay. (Contrast with the same scene in IM3 when Stark busts his ass to save everyone on AF1 even after the Pres has flown.) Etc, etc. Just like in early seasons of Arrow where Ollie would mow down armies of nameless security guards and only get moralistic when it came time to kill the Main Villain or not. I know it's a pretty common comics trope, but it bugs me.

 

I think it's also a symptom on Berlanti's completely individualistic take on morality. (I ranted about this a couple weeks ago on the Arrow thread.) Killing is bad not because the victim has a right to live or because it's bad for society, but because "it stains the killer's soul." Of course Kara should prioritize her friends' lives over the lives of thousands of others, because "our relationships define us as individuals." It's all just a very shallow, self-centered way of looking at the world, especially for people who consider themselves heroes. I mean

 

of course Kara is going to try to rescue Mon-El and Lena; refusing to accept the no-win scenario is part of the job description.

 

But this overall "Bad things only matter when they happen to people I personally care about" vibe is kindof wearing on me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an aside: I do feel like the Arrowverse shows are playing the Death Only Counts If It's A Named Character trope a little too heavily lately. Aliens attack the DEO and there's "no time" to get everyone out, but Alex makes it out so that's cool; we're not even going to try and save the others. Air Force One gets blown up, but the only two named characters aboard survive, so yay. (Contrast with the same scene in IM3 when Stark busts his ass to save everyone on AF1 even after the Pres has flown.) Etc, etc. Just like in early seasons of Arrow where Ollie would mow down armies of nameless security guards and only get moralistic when it came time to kill the Main Villain or not. I know it's a pretty common comics trope, but it bugs me.

 

I think it's also a symptom on Berlanti's completely individualistic take on morality. (I ranted about this a couple weeks ago on the Arrow thread.) Killing is bad not because the victim has a right to live or because it's bad for society, but because "it stains the killer's soul." Of course Kara should prioritize her friends' lives over the lives of thousands of others, because "our relationships define us as individuals." It's all just a very shallow, self-centered way of looking at the world, especially for people who consider themselves heroes. I mean

 

of course Kara is going to try to rescue Mon-El and Lena; refusing to accept the no-win scenario is part of the job description.

 

But this overall "Bad things only matter when they happen to people I personally care about" vibe is kindof wearing on me.

 

Agree with your issues about morality and the named character thing. I'm not sure I'd call it 'postmodern' because I don't understand enough of what it is to apply the label. Maybe you can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I had forgotten how much I missed Cat! (Even if the political allegory speechifying got a little more heavy-handed than usual.

 

Yeah, that sort of no-escape-from-liberal-politics BS will drive me away when not much else could if it gets too frequent.

 

I concur with the apparent utter lack of concern for all the DEO redshirts, as well as the pilots, staff, and media pool (well, okay, not so much them...) of Air Force One. The very idea that a) the President would swoop into a warzone on Air Force One in the first place, or B) that the Secret Service would LET her is suspension-of-disbelief breaking in a big way. But, eh, I've seen worse.

 

Plus, HOW LONG has the DEO had the Invincible Maguffin? It seems to me like it could have been used in a lot of episodes prior to this one...unless it's so unwieldy it can only be aimed at city-sized spaceships or something....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seemed to take about 30 minutes to get it up, running, and aimed, so it might very well only be useful against invaders who considerately leave their spaceships in a parking orbit for long periods of time.

 

I will give them props for picking a weapon (anti-matter particle beam as opposed to a laser) that would believably present a threat to even Kryptonian invulnerability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with your issues about morality and the named character thing. I'm not sure I'd call it 'postmodern' because I don't understand enough of what it is to apply the label. Maybe you can.

Ethical Egoism probably comes the closest, the idea that the first ethical principle is self-interest, except here they explicitly extend it to cover "...or the interests of people I care about." Which is an interesting position to take for people who are allegedly driven to help others.

 

I actually think someone could make an awesome series of YouTube videos examining the moral choices of movie & TV characters from an ethical viewpoint, but that someone would need to have put more points into KS: Philosophy than I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was never a huge fan of Cat Grant. I can see how she might appeal to some folks, and why, but I guess at my age I'm just not receiving on her frequency. Too much of her BS dialog (especially when directed at others as a sort of snarky attack) is cringeworthy bad.

 

The ethical egoism thing is an interesting observation, particularly in the context of an episode that features Callista Flockhart so heavily. I remember an episode of Ally McBeal in which she went on this whiny tirade about her problems, and then when someone called her out on it by asking, "Hey, we all have problems. What makes your so damn important?" And her answer was, "Because their mine." That seems to be the mantra of post-modern narcissism.

 

My main gripe against this episode is that Lena and Kara didn't spend any quality time together. The rest of it was so stuffed with cheese (and what passed for feminine aggression) that I just sort of gave up and went along for the big, dumb ride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...