Supergirl pilot has leaked and it's absolutely terrible

[Yuuki]

Welcome to what happens when SJW idiots create something, a generic and boring steaming pile of shit aimed at stupid tumblrinas as the target audience.

And for that it will be hailed as a success. Just watch...

 

[tyriless]

Found this in another site and couldn't agree more with the impressions. The episode is absolutely awful and full of not so well disguised preachy feminist bullshit.

[/quote]
Love how the OP is framing this as some sort of SJW attempt at girrrrrl powah, when it more along the lines of some clueless writer trying to put on feminist affectations without having any idea what that really is.
But hey, feminism isn't a monolith. Some think it's a wonderful opportunity to have a female protag, while others, (my particular camp) see it like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_5KgpN38hM

 

[iLikeHippos]

I think my favorite part of that little, leaked, condensed episode, was when Supergirl was inquiring to help some generic army commander or whatever he was, and he's all like "If you want to help, you should go back to making coffee".

A normal human - a serviceman for defense no less,
asking a SUPERHERO
TO GO BACK
MAKING COFFEE!

AND SHE JUST STORMS THE FUCK OUT?!

*****, SHE CAN FLY AND LIFT TONNES, IS IMPENETRABLE TO BULLETS, AND YOU JUST CALL HER AWAY WHEN SHE WANTS TO HELP?! GENIUS!
Not to mention she is far more qualified than his ass from her natural strength alone, but whatever. Soap movie gotta be soapy.

 

[AgedGrunt]

The lack of female superheroes or action protagonists is simply because of the fact that the main audiences for action/superhero movies are men.

I don't think it fully explains the void. Animated series and gaming have proven many times over that gender isn't as important as people might think.

Even in film testosterone zones, the movie Aliens showed how to portray a badass female soldier and a protagonist (even if there was a significant female/motherly symbolism with Ripley). People still go back to a film like this and can appreciate women in these roles; I know I do.

Whether it's screenplays, directors, film studios or shallow audiences, I think we're mostly seeing some of the worst film production (main attraction, anyway) in history. People want to see more female superhero/action protagonists? How about more movies that are actually good?

 

[iLikeHippos]

Not to mention she is far more qualified than his ass from her natural strength alone, but whatever. Soap movie gotta be soapy.

Well, actually, that scene could be viewed as a rational look at how dangerous AND useless superheroes are at solving actual violent conflicts, and their help is the LAST thing actual military wants. A way to show that a flying lady is nothing against a ZSU-23-4 "Shilka", that laser sight cannot stop tank advance and freezing breath will not save anyone from a high-caliber multiple rocket launcher salvo. A cold and mature outlook on a much too safe ideal of ours, not displayed in fiction since Garth Ennis' "The Boys"...

BWWWAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! AAAAA HAHAHAHAH! HAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHA!

Dude.

I can see the point in it being hazardous to enlist potentially incompetent personnel. And sure enough, she sure sells that aspect quite well.

But she's stronger than a locomotive, and faster than a speeding bullet. She can pretty much steamroll anything human-made. And she is asking to be put to use.

And you're telling me the army has no way of making use of that? I just find the whole scenario laughable. It's like a commander is being offered a budget increase of 10 billion dollars, something any military commander would gleefully jump at, and he's all like "Uh, no thanks! I don't need my job to suddenly solve itself so my guys and I can go home." or whatever.

 

[happyninja42]

Even in film testosterone zones, the movie Aliens showed how to portray a badass female soldier and a protagonist (even if there was a significant female/motherly symbolism with Ripley). People still go back to a film like this and can appreciate women in these roles; I know I do.

The interesting thing is those two concepts "Badass female soldier" and "female/motherly symbol" or not mutually exclusive. Just like you can easily depict a man as being a loving, and caring father, but when pushed he turns into a homicidal death machine. Now if we could just convince directors and writers of this fact, we might actually have more 3 dimensional female characters in entertainment.

Whether it's screenplays, directors, film studios or shallow audiences, I think we're mostly seeing some of the worst film production (main attraction, anyway) in history. People want to see more female superhero/action protagonists? How about more movies that are actually good?

Yep, I agree. I don't need someone to shovel feed me equality, just show me real characters that act like real people, and I'll be fine.

 

[Guerilla]

The lack of female superheroes or action protagonists is simply because of the fact that the main audiences for action/superhero movies are men.

I don't think it fully explains the void. Animated series and gaming have proven many times over that gender isn't as important as people might think.

Even in film testosterone zones, the movie Aliens showed how to portray a badass female soldier and a protagonist (even if there was a significant female/motherly symbolism with Ripley). People still go back to a film like this and can appreciate women in these roles; I know I do.

Whether it's screenplays, directors, film studios or shallow audiences, I think we're mostly seeing some of the worst film production (main attraction, anyway) in history. People want to see more female superhero/action protagonists? How about more movies that are actually good?

So you're trying to argue against the void by mentioning entertainment with female leads which btw happens to be the vast minority? You're basically arguing against yourself. The problem with your fallacy is that the movie with a female lead has to be really really good to be both convincing and successful.

This is the same awful fallacy that SJWs when it comes to comedy. They always mention Amy Poehler or Tina Fey and "forget" they're the vast minority. You're basically both using exceptions to the rule as the example to prove that the exceptions are the rule. Which is preposterous.

 

[iLikeHippos]

Dude.

I can see the point in it being hazardous to enlist potentially incompetent personnel. And sure enough, she sure sells that aspect quite well.

Alright, this is interesting, but needs a disclaimer - we're talking about superheroes period, not about this particular show.

And if we're talking about supers in general and their usefulness it comes to a dichotomy based on their power.
If they are in the main league, i.e. power level of Spider-Man, Batman, Thor, X-Men and the like - then everything they can do, the military (not even contemporary - half a century ago will do as well) can do better, cleaner and safer. Take out an armored company? A gunship wing will do this a lot faster then even Magneto can, and more reliably. No matter how much of a badass Batman is - he cannot secure a city block, while an infantry company can, for a modicum of Batman's manufacturing price. Et cetera. They are not created for combat, while weapons are. Guys like Punisher or Deathstroke give an impression of capable soldiers, but no amount of badassitude of single soldier makes him stronger than a squad of soldiers, and here our fellows suffer because of their lack of teamwork ability and asocial nature. Even as spec-ops operatives - they suck because of horrifyingly low mental stability.

And if we go up to the "steamrolls everything" league of Kryptonians - welp, H-bomb steamrolls everything as well. And it does so accurately, reliably and without questions. And still - 99% of military commanders (1% being the criminally insane ones), should they suddenly get a nuke on their hands, would definitely not use it, but throw it up the chain and out of their responsibility, all the way to the fanciest hats, who would in turn tuck it away for good unless they 1000000000% sure they need it. And that's an unthinking nuke we are talking about. A Kryptonian is a nuke with attitude, which does not need codes from President and Secretary of Defense to go off. Should any responsible military of today get hands on something like that - it would strap it to a dozen H-bombs and either throw it down the Marian Trench or, if they feel REALLY benevolent today, hide in a very deep bunker to use in case of a Darkseid emergency. Just to have something like Supergirl "helping soldiers around" is like literally asking for Men of Steel to happen. That is - an unholy ton of collateral damage, friendly fire and unnecessary losses for a job a few taxpayer-funded cruise missiles would do better. But hey - at least a little girl gets to make up her mind about her place in the world! Surely, an aircraft carrier, three infantry companies and half the Manhatten is not too much a price for that?

Of course, one could try and take the "we believe in him/her"-way that most of comics do. But military keeps their people safe by making sure, not by believing. If any side of the Cold War chose to believe in hope, or humanity or whatever and not to ensure the security - this world would now what a thermonuclear war is.

That's the thing though... It's impossible to counter in human logistics into the use of a Kryptonian. They are infinitely stronger, faster, and more accurate than anything humans have created in history. There is no way to compare military resources to one of these heroes (albeit it's a fair assessment to any other superhero that actually has a mortal limitation).

In fact, now that I think about it... Since Superman is in the movie, and he's been active for God knows how long... How the hell are there ANY military worries AT ALL since he can fix everything in literally a second (and arguably, he shouldn't need to do anything - his reputation as an unstoppable force of justice that acts immediately should speak for itself that military power is useless); he's proven to be this capable in the past.

Like in that one movie (Superman IV), where he basically rounds up all the nukes in the entire world and casts them into the sun - no one stopped him, because he's Superman and there's nothing they can do about it anyways. There is no political worry as long as he doesn't recognize himself as part of any nation, and popular opinion seems to always be in his favor.

Maybe people in this universe are walking cliches of stupid - wouldn't surprise me, seeing that pilot episode... *shudder*.

 

[McMarbles]

I'm not gonna lie, when people start rambling about "SJWs ruinin muh media", it doesn't exactly make me inclined to take their opinions seriously, and actually makes me MORE likely to check out what they're complaining about.

 

[vallorn]

I'll watch the first episode for laughs. It is CBS, after all. Then I'll ignore it.

Still, nothing's worse then that Wonder Woman pilot that leaked a few years ago.

Or that godawful Catwoman movie they made...

And if you keep using it, skin like living marble.

I can appreciate using a beauty company as a villain in the movie but NOTHING ABOUT IT MADE SENSE!

What I'm saying is that in the case of portrayals in fiction all acknowledging the issue gets you is a pandering, token, and stereotypical character who reinforces the bad behavior. Does that make sense? Weaving social and political issues in to plots in a ham-fisted way just alienates people.

There's an important caveat in your last sentence which is needed in your first: "in a ham-fisted way".

There's nothing inherently wrong with putting social and political issues into stories, a lot of fiction is built on it.

You are correct, X-men is a civil rights allegory for example... But it never really gets thrust out as "LOOK! THE X-MEN ARE METAPHORS FOR BLACK/GAY/TRANS PEOPLE" in the comics so it WORKS. That's the thing, when something stands upon it's own merits without having to yell about the allusions, allegories and who portrays what, it works, it's good. People are generally smart enough to get the 'message' but only when it doesn't get in the way of the actual piece of art itself. When the 'message' overpowers the art, that's when people begin to see it as "ham-fisted", "Preachy" or just plain dull.

 

[elvor0]

Not sure what you mean by the usual suspects. Regardless of how large a number you think it is (and isn't it funny how it's always dismissed as a 'vocal minority' when it's something we don't agree with) the lack of female superhero ones present in movies and TV shows is a glaring one that needs to be corrected. This show isn't perfect but it's not the train wreck most people on this board are calling it and it's a step in the right direction.

The lack of female superheroes or action protagonists is simply because of the fact that the main audiences for action/superhero movies are men.

I don't think that holds up to be honest. People were devestated when Supergirl died in Crisis on Infinite Earth. Wonder Woman is held to a very high regard, having her handled properly is a very touchy subject in the comic-sphere. Aliens is a Sci-Fi classic and Ripley is...Sigourney Fuckin' Weaver. Granted the geek-o-sphere isn't the whole audience for action movies, but a good movie is a good movie and people will watch it if its good. The industry tells us that this is a "man" thing, but much like a good childrens movie (pixar, disney etc), if you build it, they will come.

 

[Someone Depressing]

Random waitress:
Can you believe it? A female hero! It's nice for my daughter to have someone like that to look up to!

Isn't that a little bit sexist? Like, how come Superman can't be a role model for her daughter?

I know, right? "How dare my daughter look up to someone who's strong, compassionate and selfless, and worst of all, male!"

I'm a feminist and I couldn't help but laugh at this. This is hilarious... though maybe the worst part about it is that they make everything about her female-ness. If it wasn't annoying SJW crap then it would stop hammering in the fact that she is female. In a less hammy, preachy script nobody would care about her gender. They would regard her as a hero regardless of her masculine or feminine traits.

I still can't decide whether I think this was written by an actual, albeit radical, feminist or some idiot writer trying their hardest to be completely politically correct.

 

[happyninja42]

Even in film testosterone zones, the movie Aliens showed how to portray a badass female soldier and a protagonist (even if there was a significant female/motherly symbolism with Ripley). People still go back to a film like this and can appreciate women in these roles; I know I do.

The interesting thing is those two concepts "Badass female soldier" and "female/motherly symbol" or not mutually exclusive. Just like you can easily depict a man as being a loving, and caring father, but when pushed he turns into a homicidal death machine. Now if we could just convince directors and writers of this fact, we might actually have more 3 dimensional female characters in entertainment.

Whether it's screenplays, directors, film studios or shallow audiences, I think we're mostly seeing some of the worst film production (main attraction, anyway) in history. People want to see more female superhero/action protagonists? How about more movies that are actually good?

Yep, I agree. I don't need someone to shovel feed me equality, just show me real characters that act like real people, and I'll be fine.

*Points to 'The Witcher: Wild Hunt'* Like that, right? I mean, who gives a rat's ass that you can't be Geraltina, or Geralt with blue eyes?

Good games and good narratives don't rely on cheap crap to create immersion. There's more immersion, more quality characters and stories in the haggling element of TW:WH, than most AAA titles in the last decade.

I wouldn't know. I never played Witcher 3 and have no intention of doing so any time soon. I tried Witcher 1, played for like 3 hours, realized I was bored as fuck and didn't give a shit about any of the stuff happening, so I stopped playing. Haven't touched the series since. So no clue how well they portray women in it, though considering how they were portrayed in Witcher 1....well...they have an uphill climb. Maybe they do portray them well now, if so, good for them. I'm still not going to buy their game.

 

[Cicada 5]

The lack of female superheroes or action protagonists is simply because of the fact that the main audiences for action/superhero movies are men.

I don't think it fully explains the void. Animated series and gaming have proven many times over that gender isn't as important as people might think.

Even in film testosterone zones, the movie Aliens showed how to portray a badass female soldier and a protagonist (even if there was a significant female/motherly symbolism with Ripley). People still go back to a film like this and can appreciate women in these roles; I know I do.

Whether it's screenplays, directors, film studios or shallow audiences, I think we're mostly seeing some of the worst film production (main attraction, anyway) in history. People want to see more female superhero/action protagonists? How about more movies that are actually good?

Is there a reason we can't have both?

 

[Cicada 5]

Not to mention she is far more qualified than his ass from her natural strength alone, but whatever. Soap movie gotta be soapy.

Well, actually, that scene could be viewed as a rational look at how dangerous AND useless superheroes are at solving actual violent conflicts, and their help is the LAST thing actual military wants. A way to show that a flying lady is nothing against a ZSU-23-4 "Shilka", that laser sight cannot stop tank advance and freezing breath will not save anyone from a high-caliber multiple rocket launcher salvo. A cold and mature outlook on a much too safe ideal of ours, not displayed in fiction since Garth Ennis' "The Boys"...

BWWWAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! AAAAA HAHAHAHAH! HAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHA!

Mature is not a word I would use to describe Garth Ennis' work when it comes to superheroes.

 

[TitanAtlas]

Bravo.... all your machist and feminist bullsh!t has crawled upon the things i love and in point ruined it, with retard Drama and dialogues.....

For F!! Sake, why wont you all stop with this annoying B.S.!?