Watch a "Movie Trailer" for 'Gotham'

I'm cautiously optimistic. Hopefully it'll be good

Light in Gotham? hahahahahahaha, ain't never gonna happen:P

Lol

Wait, shouldn't Carmine Falcone be in this?

I'll give the first few eps a shot, at least.

Definitely the cheesiest weakest trailer of the bunch, but I'm looking forward to it.

Donal Logue as Harvey Bullock has me interested, but I still haven't seen anything yet that tells me that this show is going to be good, especially since it's from the FOX camp.

I'll watch the first episode or two, but if it fails to grab me, I won't stick with it.

These trailers have been pretty solid. I'm excited for the show.

I think this show well be great!

"There will be light". Once again, DC's screen adaptions prove why they're so much better than the print. I know I say that a lot, but that's because it's true.

Sweet! Arkham gets name-dropped!

But still, so far my favorite screenshot:

Wait, did I just see an exciting trailer for Gotham? Yes, I think this actually looks good! And I've never really been excited about this show!

I wouldn't really call it a "Movie Trailer" but solid bit of marketing overall. Continues to hit the same notes with a bit of new stuff. Love the casting of Meckenzie an Logue as Gordon and Bullock. The visuals of the show continue to itrigue me.

Leggo!!

@amazingwebhead said:

"There will be light". Once again, DC's screen adaptions prove why they're so much better than the print. I know I say that a lot, but that's because it's true.

Sweet! Arkham gets name-dropped!

But still, so far my favorite screenshot:

If anything, DC's on screen adaptations fall flat on their face compared to the print. The current DC Cinematic Universe is all gloomy realism taken to the extreme with none of the charm or originality of the source material. So really, it's as far away from the truth as possible that DC's on screen adaptations are better than the print versions. They're worse more often than not as even the best versions like the Nolan trilogy miss crucial aspects of the source material.

I cringe every time when I hear him shriek.

@lvenger: Did you fall asleep during Jor-El's whole speech about hope or something? Or the fact that this Superman is actually a decent guy as opposed to the jackass in the New 52? And don't even get me started about what's happened to Kara...

Actions speak louder than words and in no way did Superman come close to replicating or acting like Jor-El's speech indicated he should. I also find it laughable that the neck snapping, destruction causing MOS Superman is more decent than the New 52 version who at least has actual moments when he acts like Superman should. Give me one example in MOS that beats the better moments in The New 52, let alone Pre New 52 Superman. I haven't been given an irrefutable moment yet and I doubt you'll be able to either.

@lvenger: Sheesh, People really don't understand the whole death thing do they?

It is correct that Superman in the Comics does not kill people. Why should that be a thing in the movie? Superman decides not to kill Zod. Why? Why shouldn't he kill this threat to his home?

People will state is the morals of Pa and Ma Kent. That does not mesh with the current modern culture of Kansas. People on a farm like that will typically be all for Gun Rights and while they might not like it...they view a soldier killing an enemy as the right thing to do.

So how does Clark Kent as Superman raised by this kind of mentality make the decision not to kill a huge threat to his home? Simple. He doesn't. He makes the decision that rends his heart in two. He in mental anguish kills the last of his race to protect humanity.

You want to talk about hope? This is it. Clark put aside his own desire to belong for humanity. Because he hopes that the human race will be better.

On a final note...it is the fact that Clark killed the 'last' of his race that will make the no killing thing an integral part of his character. He has destroyed the 'last' of his race and the pain that causes will make him decide to never kill again.

@lvenger: Oh, so of corse we should hate him for being thrown around a city that was already half-destroyed by a guy who's not only just as strong as him but a more experienced fighter, followed by a shot-for-shot re-enactment of Batman killing Two-Face in the dark knight.

OH, and saving the kids on the bus, right after being bullied, knowing that it would blow his secret. Hell of a lot more heroism than that new 52 dick ever had.

Never thought i'd like this. But I cant help it. Trailer wise.. I LOVE IT!!

@amazingwebhead: Yes we should dislike him for causing more trouble than he's worth, blindly ignoring the civilian casualties in Metropolis, failing to take his fights with the Kryptonians out of populated areas like Smallville and Metropolis not to mention needlessly killing when there were other ways to subdue Zod. In contrast, New 52 Superman has stopped a train just to save a little boy, repaired an apartment block that was destroyed in his fight with a giant robot, saved the Burj Khalifa from toppling over and more actual good, destruction managing deeds. If you think the destructive and clumsy Cavill Superman is better than the admittedly brash and jerkish but still good natured New 52 Superman, you're missing which version is more representative to the source material and which one is the better depiction of Superman.

@lvenger: The entire premise of your argument is flawed. You are arguing this on a basis of decades of comic book history that states that these things are integral to his character. Why should they be integral to his character? What reason do we have other than, 'oh it's superman.' There has to be a logical reasoning for him not to kill in this timeline. If it was written with all that back story then yes I would disagree with it, but quite frankly there has to be a logical reason other than some esoteric morality that is flawed even in the comic books.

Also I am appalled that you call Clark killing Zod murder and 'compromising his morals'. By that logic every soldier who has fought in the defense of their country and killed someone should be in prison for "murder." There is a huge difference between killing someone and murdering someone.

Just because you kill someone in self-defense (For example: a police-officer, or a person on a street defending themselves, Or Clark killing Zod to save that family) does not mean that you are not a good person. Your argument is an insult to the people who defend innocent civilians.

Clark Kent gets his morals his parents. Ma and Pa Kent are from Kansas farmland which most likely means they support soldiers and police officers etc. Clark has no reason to think otherwise that it is wrong to kill in self-defense based on these morals.

@josai21: I can't be bothered to refute all your poor arguments but on the killing front, I didn't mean any disrespect to soldiers or police officers. Whilst I disagree with murder and taking life entirely, I can at least understand why soldiers and police officers are allowed to kill in tight situations. It's just that I disagree with that and wouldn't be a soldier or police officer for that reason. Don't speak ignorantly about things you know nothing of. I was not insulting those who defend innocent civilians, I was pointing out that Superman should not kill ever. Your argument that they support soldiers and police officers is highly illogical because Superman is not a soldier or a police officer. He does not have the legal right to kill anyone. Therefore it is murder I'm afraid as he was not deputised to kill Zod in the first place. And the fact that Superman kills is a disgrace to his character does not mean it's a disgrace to soldiers or police officers who are willing to kill. They are two different things and you have blindly and irrationally condemned my post for saying nothing of what you thought I said. Try reading between the lines next time.

@lvenger: He actually does have the legal right. This was self-defense. It was not like he could just hold Zod back. Zod was about to kill that family.

Superman does not have the deputized right to kill in the same way as a police-officer or soldier. You are correct in that; however self-defense is allowed. It's not like he had any other choice.

I understand where you are coming from in terms of it not fitting previous incarnations of his character. I do understand that. I just don't think that the movie should get all the hatred it does because of this point. This is a Superman for the modern era. And while it is not true for all, to many this movie made Superman interesting again. It appealed to the common audience.

Don't get me wrong, there were plenty of things wrong with this movie (Pa kent's whole spiel about hiding things; why didn't jor-el tell them about the phantom zone thing from the beginning; product placement)...but the killing thing is not something wrong with the movie. It is highly different, but not wrong.

My apologies for my frustrated earlier sentiments. It had been a rough day, but I should not have taken it out on you. My point comes from long irritation from the whole "killing makes us just as bad as them" train of thought. My apologies.

Oh NOES not this again.

For now, I'll only stick with Arrow and The Flash. If Gotham does well and get renewed for a second season, I'll watch it.

@lvenger: Cavill's Superman is just starting out, and that will all be fixed in "Dawn of Justice". And again, he really didn't have a lot of say in those fights. He was facing multiple opponents who were every bit as strong as him, so he couldn't help that they kept throwing him through buildings. And most of Metropolis had already been destroyed by Zod's ship before he even got there. Meanwhile New 52 Superman called Superboy a monster and an abomination, then told Kara to go f*ck off when she became a Red Lantern. Some surrogate father he makes.

And that's not even the point I was originally trying to make. My point was that New 52 makes absolutely no attempt to hide how everything is absolutely, completely, and so totally freaking hopeless! Darkness over here, cynicism over there, angst f*cking everywhere! Only an idiot would still bother to care about what happens anymore, because the only remaining consistency is that everything is just going to keep getting worse. Meanwhile, Man of Steel was more serious, but not darker! And the entire message is about Superman being a shining example of hope for the world to follow. Which actually works, if you remember the flashback where Pete Ross helped him up.

Y'know what bugs me most of all? For years, people have been hating Superman for being too perfect, and now that there's a movie where's he's not totally perfect, everyone hates him for that. Face it world, you'll all just look for any excuse to hate Superman!

Gallery

@amazingwebhead: I do agree to a point. The world has generally disliked Superman for being too perfect. However I feel Man of Steel changed that for a lot of people. At least in terms of the general populace. Superman was still an inherently good character, but he's not perfect. He can be killed. He can make mistakes, but ultimately he persevered and survived.

I didn't dislike Superman before this movie...but I certainly had no desire to know more about him or care about his character. Man of Steel changed that for me.

Looking forward to this

@josai21: :D I'm glad you think that

@amazingwebhead: I wish I had your hope that Dawn of Justice could fix this monstrosity of a depiction of Superman. Unfortunately I see it for the desecration it really is. I'm not looking for excuses to hate this version of Superman nor do I want to. But when a film gets a depiction of a character so wrong that happens to be my all time favourite fictional character, I can get passionately worked up about it. At least the New 52 is making Superman more of a light in the darkness now. Not that I have fond feelings about the New 52 but at least it's better than the depressing facade that Man of Steel is. Don't try and paint my views in totally the wrong light when you don't know how I think or feel about these moves.

It's ironic that your statement "the New 52 makes absolutely no attempt to hide how everything is absolutely, completely, and so totally freaking hopeless! Darkness over here, cynicism over there, angst f*ckingeverywhere! Only an idiot would still bother to care about what happens anymore, because the only remaining consistency is that everything is just going to keep getting worse" is exactly what I'd use to describe Man of Steel. It was soulless, joyless and utterly heart breaking to see my favourite superhero ruined on the big screen. MOS is a bigger crime than The New 52 and I'd still take the arrogant jerk over the soulless destroyer thank you very much. It saddens me that this is the version of Superman people are coming to know, a version that is so wrong and so utterly out of character that doesn't resemble how Superman acts at all.

Gosh, the girl that plays Catwoman make's me gag, she just has that type of look and attitude that makes me soooo mad, I love catwoman in Injustice, not a fan of her fanservicey comic or outfit for that matter, but gosh, Bruce Wayne looks like a dumb ass child, which he is, Selina some stuck up and unrealistic kid, Selina turned Bruce into a man? What sad joke is this?? Is the Joker making this show?

@lvenger: *sigh* I guess we can't all agree on everything.