Gotham Knights didn’t stand a chance. The show was announced as a new superhero venture, but its arrival coincided with the end of the CW’s Arrowverse as well as the changing of the guard for DC Studios, leaving the show in a stateless limbo among its DC universe peers. Add to that, the show borrowed its name from a familiar comic series run, and a hyped video game title, but it was connected to neither of them. Gotham Knights also featured a mostly unknown cast of actors playing a mostly unknown cast of characters. The show was doomed to be unwatched and unloved. And, eventually, the show was cancelled after only one season.
Like many others, I was apathetic towards the show. I wasn’t expecting much apart from some light entertainment. The pilot episode introduced us to the central premise of Gotham Knights—Batman is found murdered, and his true identity as Bruce Wayne is revealed. A group of young criminals is implicated in his murder, as is Bruce’s adopted son, Turner Hayes (Oscar Morgan). The fugitives band together and hide out in the city hoping to clear their names. With the help of some friends, they discover that Batman’s death is tied to an old conspiracy that could herald the end of Gotham City.
The pilot has all the hallmarks of a CW series—young characters fighting the system, love triangles, high school hi-jinks, and overcoming trauma. But the show becomes so much more with each episode, ending on a twist or a cliffhanger that keeps you coming back for more. I found myself racing through the screeners I received, and looking forward to each new episode as it came out after. We keep hearing about superhero fatigue, but I found this show intriguing and enjoyable, and I wish it was coming back. The first season has a contained story that will satisfy you, with a teaser at the end that promises the story continues beyond the screen. But I’m still going to miss tuning back into this world.
Some elements of the show may feel derivative. The score sounds like it’s from The Dark Knight trilogy—I thought I was listening to placeholder music in the screeners, but the final episodes had the same issue. Parts of Turner Hayes’ storyline is also an amalgamation of several Robin origin stories. From all the episodes, the finale feels most reminiscent of stories that have come before, especially (unfortunately) the Christopher Nolan trilogy. But again, there are a few twists to keep you guessing.
What works in the show’s favor is the story; comics have always loved secret societies, and the Court of Owls is a surefire way to grab the audience’s attention. The way the show unpacks who the Court is and how long they’ve had their talons in Gotham is compelling. I was invested in these revelations right alongside the main characters, especially because the show’s writers messed with our expectations throughout. If you thought it was weird that Harvey Dent’s (Misha Collins) identity dysmorphia was too convenient, that’s because it was triggered by the Court for their own purposes. Did you think there was something suspicious about Lincoln March (Damon Dayoub) and his wife Rebecca (Lauren Stamile)? You have a point, but you don’t know the half of it. Every time I thought I knew exactly how the story would pan out, the writers added another twist that left me shocked and excited. And they’re able to do that because Gotham Knights plays fast and loose with canon.
We get hints of established characters and Batman’s Rogues Gallery, without retreading the same old characters and storylines. The show also moves away from being Bruce Wayne/Batman’s story, which is a trend that I love. Stories set in Gotham City that aren’t about the city’s richest white boy are so refreshing, and Gotham Knights shows us why. We have a group of youngsters who have to use their street smarts and resourcefulness (plus the use of the school library) to get by.
Stories can’t work without a good set of characters, and despite some early hiccups, the main cast is engaging enough to buoy the story. Their banter and interactions, and their subsequent connection with one another worked beautifully.
The show introduced us to a brand new character, Turner Hayes, Bruce’s adopted son. He doesn’t exist in the comics—Bruce has a lot of sons, his former ward Dick Grayson, his ward-turned adopted son Jason Todd, his foster son (of sorts) Tim Drake, and his biological son Damian Wayne. There’s a reason why none of these characters appear on the show; it’s because they were all, at some point Batman’s sidekick Robin. They knew about Bruce’s secret life as the Caped Crusader and fought crime alongside him. Turner, on Gotham Knights, is shielded from Batman. He’s trained to fight, but not to be a crimefighter. He also starts off the show as incorrigibly privileged and arrogant. So, yeah, none of Bruce’s comic book sons would have fit the bill. For the longest time, Turner was the show’s weakest link, and it didn’t help that Oscar Morgan’s performance was severely lacking for the first half of the season. But he got better; I felt bad for hating on Turner so much, because he grows into a very likeable character by the end of the season. Did we need him? No. Turner felt like the cis white guy the showrunners hinged their hopes on, the audience stand-in that supposedly represents the majority of comic book lovers.
Though Turner is the lead, the show’s stars are the rest of the Gotham Knights. The scene-stealer for many will be Olivia Rose Keegan‘s Duela Doe, the Joker’s daughter. Keegan is so unhinged, yet vulnerable, she’ll win over hearts easily. Her character has a wonderful arc, and though it hinges on romance, I found the chemistry and the thawing of Duela’s heart extremely believable.
The only character who gets short shrift is Carrie Kelley. As the first live-action Carrie, that too played by an actor of colour, Navia Robinson, she deserved a cool supersuit and to be in the limelight. After all, she’s the only character who has actual superhero experience. Granted, Carrie is younger than the rest of the Knights (she’s only fifteen), but her connection to Bruce Wayne/Batman was often sidelined in favor of Turner’s. I wanted her to headline more of the fights, but she was relegated to being a lookout.
The shining lights of the series, for me at least, are the Row siblings. Fallon Smythe as Harper Row and Tyler DiChiara as her twin Cullen Row are the best. They play siblings so convincingly—down to facial expressions and gestures—it’s eerie. Harper is bisexual and Cullen is trans, and they grew up in an abusive household. Harper is especially overprotective of her brother because she feels he’s had a tougher journey than her, and Cullen keeps trying to break out of her coddling hold. I liked that they don’t have an unnecessary bust up over this; instead, it’s an act of growth and understanding that Harper gives Cullen the chance to take risks on his own. Harper is whip-smart but not precocious; she’s also cautious because she has to look out for Cullen. Harper is an established superhero in the comics, Bluebird, but Cullen is a veritable blank slate, so the writers wrote him as unapologetically empathetic and courageous. He’s my favourite, and I’d love to see this version of Cullen make the jump to comics.
Buy the Book
The Jinn Bot of Shantiport
One of the characters who surprised me was Stephanie Brown (Anna Lore). I thought I knew exactly what the writers were doing with this character—she’s the supersmart blonde who is Turner’s secret love and helps the fugitives despite the risk. That’s what the pilot would have you think. But Stephanie turns into this multidimensional character who brings a completely different perspective to how we view the wealthy in Gotham. She also breaks away from the love triangle storyline pretty quickly, and instead paves her own way to romantic happiness. If you enjoy the enemies to friends to lovers storyline, you are going to love Stephanie’s arc. The romance works because the chemistry between the characters is palpable. I didn’t think Gotham Knights would go down the route it did with Stephanie, but I’m so glad they did.
Misha Collins is probably the most recognizable name on the show. I felt he was far too restrained as Harvey Dent, and really only came to life when the evil Harvey came to the fore. He was positively exuberant in the finale when Harvey becomes Two-Face; where was all that energy in the rest of the season? Harvey could have been controlled without being so unemotive throughout.
Gotham Knights proved to be better, smarter and far more compelling than it had any right to be. The story didn’t rely on established knowledge of the Bat-Universe, though there were a few Easter Eggs to keep fans happy. The creators developed the lore along the way, and hooked us in with twists that compelled the audience to tune in again. By the time the finale came around and the Gotham Knights revealed themselves, I was applauding their audacity and cheering them on. The found family dynamic of the central cast was heart-warming, and the characters were different enough to feel fresh.
I wouldn’t have thought I would even like Gotham Knights, let alone love and genuinely miss this show. It deserved better than to be treated like a D-list villain; and it certainly deserved to deliver more twist-filled stories. But we won’t get that. Let’s keep the love for these hidden heroes of Gotham alive by (re)watching it whenever and wherever we can.
Monita Mohan champions diversity, inclusivity, and representation through her writing at Collider.com, Women Write About Comics, HuffPost, Bam Smack Pow, and Show Snob.
I had a very similar reaction. Gotham Knights was far more engaging and satisfying than Yet Another Batman Series Minus Batman had any business being. I couldn’t care less about the Court of Owls; I deeply hate stories about vast conspiracies that are somehow simultaneously 1) all-encompassing, ancient, and in control of all things yet 2) completely secret. (If they already control everything, why the hell do they have to hide?) But I really liked the characters and their interplay, even if Oscar Morgan’s acting was very much the weak link in the show. And I liked the way the story kept twisting in unexpected directions.
The show was surprisingly faithful to the modern comics continuity, aside from inventing its lead character out of whole cloth, and also expanding and reworking the role of the character who turned out to be the final boss. Although it went back to something closer to the original 1970s version of Duela, a character introduced as “The Joker’s Daughter” and then turning out to be someone else’s, while putting its own twist on it. I agree, Duela’s arc was a highlight of the series, and especially of the finale.
I would’ve liked to see more, though I wonder if they could’ve afforded to keep Two-Face as a regular given that elaborate makeup (CGI?). Still, the finale did resolve the season’s main arcs pretty well, so GK is pretty satsifying as a standalone miniseries. I hope it gains cult popularity on home video, assuming it actually gets marketed for home viewing instead of buried as a tax write-off.
GOTHAM KNIGHTS’ audience share was pretty well screwed when the fan boys/girls had a hissy fit at the very early first trailer. The producers decided to retool the series, not that that would help against the more toxic fans. Most who actually watched the first few episodes were expecting a pile of poop they could laugh at, but that didn’t happen. A pity the numbers didn’t pick up at this revelation.
According to insiders workings at the CW, GOTHAM KNIGHTS was one of the two DC series in the running for the final slot for next year’s fall season. Its main virtue to the CW was that it was as cheap as crap. The cheapest ARROWverse show, ever. SUPERMAN & LOIS won that slot by promising to pare down the cast to only the Kent family.
@2/MByerly: “The cheapest ARROWverse show, ever.”
Correction: While Gotham Knights was from Berlanti Productions, it had no story connection to the Arrowverse, taking place in a separate continuity with a different version of Batman and Gotham City.
“SUPERMAN & LOIS won that slot by promising to pare down the cast to only the Kent family.”
Allegedly. But given the politics of Warner Bros. Discovery’s current owner, I find it suspicious that they cancelled the show with several LGBTQ lead characters while keeping the show that’s been entirely heteronormative aside from a girl kissing Sarah off-camera between seasons. It’s also suspicious that the only actors S&L is keeping as regulars next season are all white ones.
@3. S&L and GK were ARROWverse shows since they were the same production company. They wiggled around the term with S&L later by using Crisis as an excuse. They will always be ARROWverse to me.
YouTuber Pagey kept up with all the trade articles, etc., I kept up with Pagey, and it was money. That’s all the CW and its new owners cared about. They certainly didn’t care about quality since S&L is arguably the best ARROWverse show ever done. From a financial perspective, getting rid of the people in Smallville and moving the cast to Metropolis made great sense. The “Kent farm’s” rent becoming much more expensive also hastened the choices.
@4/MByerly: “S&L and GK were ARROWverse shows since they were the same production company.”
That’s not correct. Berlanti Productions makes numerous shows that aren’t in the Arrowverse continuity, including Stargirl, Titans, and Doom Patrol (which all three exist in different universes despite an alternate version of the Doom Patrol existing in Titans‘ universe) as well as non-DC shows such as Riverdale, The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina, Katy Keene, the two All American series, the Kung Fu reboot, and quite a few more.
Superman & Lois is on a separate Earth from Earth-Prime, but is narratively connected to the Arrowverse by using the Crisis as the Irons’ origin story (largely because it was originally meant to be an Earth-Prime show and was retroactively retconned as a separate reality in season 2). Gotham Knights has no narrative connection to the Arrowverse and its version of Gotham City and Batman is incompatible with the Earth-Prime version from Batwoman as well as the version presented in Titans.
“From a financial perspective, getting rid of the people in Smallville and moving the cast to Metropolis made great sense. The “Kent farm’s” rent becoming much more expensive also hastened the choices.”
No such thing has been announced; it’s nothing but speculation and rumor. The producers say they hope to include the dropped regulars in recurring guest appearances where possible, and a couple of cast members have revealed on social media that they’ll be back for at least a few episodes. That suggests they won’t change the setting. It just means, probably, that the focus on the supporting characters will be spread out over the ten episodes, rather than having most or all of them in every episode.
Possibly the most unnecessary show ever made, with the possible exception of ‘Pennyworth’. I mean, it was instantly dismissable when we discovered that it would star a character made up for the show – a sure sign it’s being made as cheaply as possible – and feature unrecognizable versions of third- and fourth-string characters. Basically, as thin a veneer of ‘Batman’ as possible while doing standard teen drama.
I watched the first two episodes and they stank on ice. Also combined with the ‘Titans’-like cinematography that dictates that none of these people can afford light bulbs in their homes.
At this point, I just hope I can live long enough to get past the era of making shows about villains and every minor hanger-on and supporting cast character, and maybe, just maybe, I’ll get a show about Batman and Robin.
@6/Wayne Ligon: Since when was it a bad thing to create original characters? Agent Phil Coulson was created for Iron Man, but he was such a breakout hit character that he got his own spinoff series, one whose season-1 cast consisted almost entirely of newly created characters (plus one comics character that we initially believed was a new character), and they were great. Harley Quinn and Renee Montoya were created for Batman: The Animated Series and have both gone on to become highly popular characters in comics and other media. For that matter, Jimmy Olsen and Perry White were created for the 1940s Superman radio series.
It’s absurd to think that there’s some fundamental difference in worth between original and pre-existing characters. After all, every pre-existing character was newly created once.
I actually thought they were going to do a “Skye”-like fakeout with Turner Hayes, that it would turn out he was actually Dick Grayson or Damien Wayne or something, and Bruce had been concealing his identity. Instead, they went in a different direction, one that gave him a different connection to the Batman mythos.
Regardless of anything else, Gotham Knights was the first Batman-related product to actually make me care about Harvey Dent as a character rather than just ‘the guy who turns into Two-Face.” We’ve always heard what an important ally and friend he was, but most versions of the story skip over that. This is the first time we’ve really seen him as a genuine upstanding-but-flawed hero (making his fall all the more tragic).
Also, as an alternate timeline (within the established DC multiverse), this makes for a fascinating tragic irony; at some point, Bruce apparently had to choose between Dick Grayson and Turner Hayes. In the traditional timeline(s), Bruce tries to shelter Dick, but Dick insists on becoming a vigilante, initially against Bruce’s better judgment. Turner was apparently more malleable –he had the easy, happy life Bruce wanted to give his adopted son, but because he never became Robin, no one was there to save Bruce from the Court of Owls (Carrie clearly lacks Dick’s round-the-clock access –that’s why she didn’t have a “real” batsuit).
@8/Cybersnark: “…the first Batman-related product to actually make me care about Harvey Dent…”
Not even Batman: The Animated Series? I still consider that one of the best portrayals of Harvey & Two-Face. Indeed, this version rather reminded me of it.
“at some point, Bruce apparently had to choose between Dick Grayson and Turner Hayes.”
Not necessarily. Batman was surprisingly old in this version — 58 at the time of his death, according to the Joe Chill episode. Which means he was 48 when he adopted Turner. And we know Batman and the Joker were around before Duela was born, meaning Batman was active for at least around a decade before he adopted Turner. So Dick could’ve already been Robin, grown up, and moved on by that point. Maybe that’s why Bruce wanted to keep Turner more sheltered from the vigilante life.
I had no idea this show was in the offing until I happened across it. I also had never heard of the video game, since that’s not something I do. I do watch Superman & Lois now and again (with ever diminishing enthusiasm), and I just happened in on the show that followed it. With ever-increasing enthusiasm. Well, low expectations never hurt, and I had none.
Correction, please. This was never a superhero show. It’s a detective show. The late Caped Crusader is repeatedly referred to here as The World’s Greatest Detective, and he did after all make his debut in Detective Comics #27. While there clearly are beings of odd capabilities in this ‘verse (Killer Croc is name checked, never seen), we never really meet any of them, other than the faceless and dialogue-free Talons, increasingly disposable henchmen of the main villain. There are mysteries Batman was unable to solve, which led to his death. A group of young adepts framed for his murder pool their wits, and succeed where he failed. Many of the best Batman stories don’t involve super-beings at all. Why should it be any different for stories about Batman’s heirs?
Still, the Mystery is the McGuffin. The real story is them forging relationships by way of being confined in a relatively small space most of the time (The Belfry, no more implausible than the Batcave, rather less), becoming adults, and facing the question of how to respond to the varyingly moral and immoral legacies of their parents–whether they can follow in their forebears’ footsteps, and to what extent they really want to. Can they forge their own paths, avoiding the mistakes their parents made, while still learning (in some cases) from the best of what they had to offer. They also have to learn about trust–when to give and withhold it. Many of the plot complications stemmed from trusting the wrong person, while misunderstanding someone else’s motivations).
There were no love triangles. There were some early hints at that, but they all proved to be red herrings, based on misunderstandings. Turner and Duela’s developing romance mirrored that of Harper and Stephanie. (Some people were shipping Carrie and Turner, which is nuts, since Carrie is 15 on the show (Navia Robinson is about five years younger than the rest of the main cast), and her only reaction to learning The Joker’s Daughter had it on with the Son of Batman was a mix of amusement and delight. She had a warm if at times fraught friendship with both, and was just bemused that they had connected that way. (Cullen might have had a crush on Turner, but it was never really spelled out, and we don’t even know if he’s gay–or anything at all about Carrie’s orientation, which is just how she likes it).
So the real problem perhaps is if you describe it to someone, it’s going to sound like the usual soapy CW fare, when it’s something rather new, and to me, far preferable. And far from reaching its full potential, because they had a limited budget, which meant limited time to iron out script problems, and there were a fair few. I saw a lot of fairly sloppy transitions, that could have been fixed with just a few more minutes of conversation, that the 43 minute eps didn’t allow for.
And Misha Collins’ journey towards Two-Face had to be serviced. I get it. But I have to confess, I didn’t always enjoy it. This isn’t a show about adults, and they didn’t need that much time to tell us how he got where he was going, since he’s gotten there multiple times before (just like we don’t need to see Batman’s or Superman’s origin ever again). But it’s Misha Collins. They had to give him his screen time. I understand it. Just a few more eps, or the eps a bit longer, and it would have been no problem at all.
The cliffhanger hurt, because it damages the unity of the group, separates one of the two key couples, and there’s no reason to think we’ll ever see that resolved. If it happened years from now, they wouldn’t be kids anymore.
Turner was intentionally a bit off-putting and callow to start with (his arc is to accept the life he had is gone, and the one he got in its place is on the whole preferable), but I didn’t find him arrogant (he apologized abjectly to Duela a short while after meeting her, when her estimation of the GCPD’s honesty was vindicated, then insisted the group save her, because he realized her value to them. How could he be Bruce Wayne’s son without being privileged? Stephanie was from a rich family too, but that’s okay because she turned out to be gay? (For the record, Oscar Morgan is gay, and it’s a bit much to say the diversity of a show with six central characters was somehow diminished by one of them being a ‘cis’ male). Turner was needed to be the glue that held them together, the point of unity, and the show would have been much less without Oscar Morgan’s performance–and none of them were wholly on point the first couple of eps, including Ms. Keegan, though she got there the fastest. It was a revelation to see the way she committed to Duela’s divided nature, and made a character first introduced in the 70’s come vividly to life for the first time ever. (They tried on Batwoman. It did not work out. Well, neither did Batwoman).
I agree it was a really well-balanced cast, and they’d have only gotten better in a second season. So would the scripts, with many of the problems solved. But as the article says, there were so many strikes against it before it even premiered, the odds of that happening were nearly zero. All the more with a vocal section of the DC fanbase treating it as heresy. As if CW could afford a Batman show, and as if it wouldn’t be unfavorably compared to the movies if they had shelled out for the rights. (They shelled out for Superman, and the results have been ratings that fell every single season to date).
My hope is that some kind of TV movie or miniseries can be arranged to tie up the loose ends. I’d advise everyone who loves it to watch it on Max, let the people there know you’re doing that, and be grateful for for at least a few weeks we had something worth watching.
I’ve certainly seen far better-produced shows (with many times the budget), but nothing in a long time has gotten me this excited. Or depressed, to see it end before it had a chance to finish the story. Somebody has to do that. Hopefully somebody will.
@10/Fred Fitch: “The cliffhanger hurt, because it damages the unity of the group, separates one of the two key couples, and there’s no reason to think we’ll ever see that resolved.”
I think it did have a resolution. Duela’s journey here was not about ending up with Turner romantically; it was about coming to terms with herself and becoming a better person. Learning to care about Turner was her catalyst for becoming a more selfless person in general. That’s the real resolution: Duela resolving to carry on Turner’s legacy and lead the Gotham Knights, embracing the heroic mission she always scorned before. It’s a complete and very satisfying character arc even if Turner never comes back.
Chris, I agree the cliffhanger wasn’t just about Turner and Duela, obviously. I also saw very well that Duela’s grief over losing Turner was part of her overall growth. But the grief is still there, and grief is an open wound. She’s still bleeding inside, and that’s not going away. She doesn’t even have a grave to visit. Because there’s no body. Because he’s alive. And seemingly in Switzerland. If that was the point, why not just kill him off, or at least leave it open-ended? We’re told very clearly “The story is not done” when Ducard tells Turner his life in Gotham is over. Turner looks at him as if to say “Oh yeah?”
She’s not all that much better a person. She still thinks most people are idiots (well…..). She still thinks heroism is lame. She’s only doing it for Turner, as a way of keeping him alive, feeling his presence. And as a way of keeping the family she’s found together, precisely because she knows she has a long way to go in terms of being socialized.
But no, she’s not embracing it. She’s just grudgingly going along with it. She’s a very long way from a total convert, and frankly, I doubt she ever could be. It would go against the grain of her divided nature (and remember–both her father and her grandfather suffered from ‘identity dysmorphia’, which tends to suggest that potential is there in her as well–“Nature/Nurture”). Harvey, now Two-Face, seems to now fully accept her as his daughter, care about her–meaning he’s going to want to lure his over to his side, even as she wrestles with good Harvey’s final request (that she didn’t promise she’d grant) to bring him back. Probably we’d have seen Harper and Cullen’s father return, and certainly Stephanie’s parents would have been another complicating factor.
If the point of the finale was “Duela’s journey is now complete” then the episode (and the series, for now at least) wouldn’t end with Turner facing yet another powerful man who wants to control him. And we know how Turner reacts to that. He’s going back to Gotham. And he’s certainly going back to Duela, because there’s an irresistible attraction of opposites there. Even though this was written with the knowledge that the show MIGHT not be renewed, it’s not a satisfying finish, and couldn’t have been. Because there was just too much potential there to tell the story in 13 episodes.
It’s not at all satisfying for those of us who felt the potential of that relationship of opposites, each representing polar ends of the spectrum, hero attracted to outlawry, outlaw attracted to heroism, was nowhere near realized. But they filmed 100% of the show before the pilot aired (no, the writers were not tinkering in response to initial reactions from disgruntled DC fans).
If by some chance the show returned, but without Turner–I wouldn’t watch. The more I watch it, the more I realize how vital and underrated Oscar Morgan’s low key performance was–Turner is the glue that holds the group together. Without him, they’d eventually drift apart, because he’s the one who connects with all of them. There are all kinds of potential conflicts looming.
And ‘The Jock’ aka Brody, is a poor substitute. Frankly, that was what I liked least. That character never gelled, somehow. And he really is an idiot. :)
@12/fred fitch: “If that was the point, why not just kill him off, or at least leave it open-ended?”
Because they didn’t know if they’d get a second season or not. Naturally the thing to do in that situation is to come up with a finale that can work either as a season ender or a series ender — something that has enough closure to be an ending if it has to be, but not so much closure that you can’t come back from it in case of renewal.
So I’m not saying it’s a perfect ending. I’m saying that, since it is the series ending after all, there’s enough closure for it to be a reasonably satisfying ending, even though there are still lingering threads.
Besides, plenty of stories end in ways that leave room for continuation. We want the characters’ lives to go on after the story ends, after all. So it’s rare that a story settles absolutely everything. An ending doesn’t have to be a definitive conclusion to a character’s entire life journey, just the resolution of the specific part of it they were on during the story. For instance, Casablanca ends with Rick deciding to join the good fight against the Nazis, but he’s still Rick Blaine with all the baggage, cynicism, and moral ambiguity that goes with that. So the end of the movie is only the beginning of his journey toward heroism. But the crucial thing is that he’s made the choice to try, as the payoff to his relationship with the person he loved and lost. Which is pretty similar to Duela’s position at the end of Gotham Knights.
Casablanca is not the ideal point of comparison, though. Because they say goodbye to each other, so there is closure. Each knows where the other is going. And there was a war on. Millions of couples were saying goodbye to each other, and many never saw each other again. And that was a tragedy, every time it happened. It wasn’t life-affirming, and it didn’t necessarily make them better people. Just sadder people.
This is not “Here’s looking at you, kid.” This two young and previously unattached people who have just fallen in love like five minutes ago (pretty obvious it’s the first time for both of them) being torn apart by cruel circumstance, and absolutely no greater good is being served by that. Duela wouldn’t be any less inclined to stick around with the Knights if Turner were there. Rather more so. She puts a brave face on it downstairs–upstairs, she’s crying softly to herself. She is not okay. But she’s just not the type to wear her heart on her sleeve. The others don’t know yet just how hurt she is.
I think they always intended to end the season this way, and all they did differently in light of the poor renewal chances was wrap up the Court of Owls storyline a bit faster than they might otherwise have done. Maybe ‘Sharper’ got together a bit sooner. It all felt very rushed, like they were trying to do too much too fast. (Thirteen episodes was two less than Superman and Lois got lost year, but S&L wasn’t in its first season–there was so much more for GK to set up, and they were on a tighter budget, meaning a tighter shooting schedule).
If the show had continued, Turner and Duela would have been a thing for the entire run of the show, because their relationship defined the ambiguities of hero and villain–whereas Stephanie and Harper are very similar people, which makes for an interesting partnership, but not a very compelling romance, once they get past their initial misunderstandings.
And frankly, without that dynamic of the hero’s son and the villain’s daughter (and she’s still a villain’s daughter, because Harvey), they wouldn’t have had enough of an audience to hang in there for the duration, as would have been possible with the ratings they got, had things been going better at CW.
They had no intention of writing out Turner. They had no intention of saying “Duela has reached full maturity, and doesn’t need Turner anymore”–Turner still needs Duela, because he’s got some growing to do as well. Each was showing the other things they needed to know. They had barely scratched the surface of what was possible there.
I understand perfectly that they wanted to leave room for continuation. But it’s really hard on people who were grooving on a very exciting love story to know we’re never going to get to see how it turns out. There were many other things about the show I liked–that’s what had me tuning in. Because frankly, I don’t care about the Court of Owls. Did you ever look at the comics that inspired that storyline? They truly suck, man. Seriously, it’s been a long time since anybody working on Batman comics had any idea how to write. Or create characters with inner lives. So I don’t care what happens there, but I do here. Because there was so much good writing, and layered characterization.
When you start a good love story, you owe it to your audience to give them some kind of closure on it. Casablanca does that. Gotham Knights doesn’t. So not the best analogy. And not a satisfying ending, which is the consensus reaction from most people who watched it. I don’t blame the writers, they did the best they could with the situation at hand. But high and dry doesn’t half say it.
It’s like 1923 ended with this season, Spencer and Alex permanently separated, and the ranch about to be foreclosed on. Which obviously can’t happen, because prequel. But I don’t care about the ranch (seriously I am over the goddam Yellowstone, give it back to the Indians, or the wolves, same difference). But that’s a huge hit, so there’s no way they don’t finish it, once the strike is over. And Sheridan isn’t going to stretch it out. He may end it tragically, but he won’t end it pointlessly with a new subplot that leads nowhere.
They didn’t need a cliffhanger. If they knew they didn’t have a solid guarantee of another season, and boy did they ever, they could just end on a triumphant note, and bring in the plot complications next season, if it ever happened.
I think it’s really hard to put that much work into something, and accept it’s going to just run one season. So I think they are overstating how sure they were it wasn’t coming back. They knew it was possible, but they went on hoping.
The relationships were the point of this show. Not the mysteries, not the bad guys, interesting as some of them were. And they did let us down there. They owed us more than just one night of passion, and a brief kiss followed by “Not Offended” then Turner does something really really stupid.
The formula got in the way of what really worked. The tropes undermined the truth. And that happens too much on network TV, which is why fewer and fewer people watch it.
It was trying to be something different, but it didn’t go far enough.
@14/fred: “Because they say goodbye to each other, so there is closure.”
And Duela believes Turner is dead and resolves to carry on his dream, which is a major moment of character growth for her. That is closure, or at least it can serve as closure in the absence of a continuation. Closure doesn’t mean an ending so much as a transition, the end of one journey and the beginning of the next.
And Turner has some degree of closure for his arc in season 1 — he found out who his parents were and why Bruce adopted him, and he succeeded in clearing the others and himself. Yes, it led to the start of a new story, but that’s the way stories often work.
“They didn’t need a cliffhanger. If they knew they didn’t have a solid guarantee of another season, and boy did they ever, they could just end on a triumphant note, and bring in the plot complications next season, if it ever happened.”
Often, part of the reason for having a cliffhanger is to give the network an incentive to renew a show that might be on the bubble. If a season has a definitive ending, that makes it easier for the network and viewers to walk away. So producers often gamble by including a cliffhanger. They risk leaving the audience unsatisfied in the event of cancellation because it increases the chances that the show won’t be cancelled — or at least they hope it will.
And that has often led to far more frustrating unresolved cliffhangers, notably the end of Legends of Tomorrow. Compared to something like that, GK’s ending was much more satisfying. So I’m grateful for what we have.
Addendum–I belatedly thought of a much better point of comparison–the first three seasons of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
Joss Whedon has not been one of my favorite people in a very long time now (long before his current woes, going all the way back to the Firefly fiasco and some pretty nasty things I heard about him from people in the biz), but when he made those first three seasons, he knew what he was doing. And he was at WB, in its early stages, which had some of the same problems its successor CW is having, only not so bad.
Season 1 they had no reason to assume there’d be a second season. The movie had flopped. Low budget for that time. Whedon was not a big deal. Nobody had ever heard of Sarah Michelle Gellar. So no cliffhanger–a complete story. Villain vanguished. Lovers united. Friends triumphant together. And scene. If that had been all there was, nobody watching would have any cause for complaint.
But they did get renewed, and they did a really harsh harrowing cliffhanger for S2, knowing S3 was in the bag. Then did another very satisfying finish to the third season, setting up the spinoff, Angel, and ending the Sunnydale High arc by blowing up the school (which frankly, is the end of the show for me, retrospectively speaking–that was a show about high school, it made no sense in the adult world). You could watch those three seasons, beginning to end, and not feel cheated.
That’s how you do it. If you aren’t reasonably sure you can finish the cliffhanger, don’t do one. Period. Leave a few loose threads, sure. Make it clear there’s more story to tell. But don’t leave people hanging over the things they really care about. They did not have to. They chose to. Knowing very well their odds of finishing that story were well under 50/50.
It was a mistake. Period. I hope it’s one they get to rectify someday.
In this case, it’s not likely to make any difference to a dying network reduced to showing reruns of The Chosen (I like that show, but why would I want to watch it with commercials? I mean, what could possibly be more off brand?) what people who probably are never going to watch CW again (and why should we?) feel happy with the defacto series finale. I understand the reasons behind it fine (I’ve been watching TV quite a while now), but they aren’t good enough to justify making people feel unhappy over something that is meant to be entertainment.
I can, however, understand they wanted that big emotional moment for Duela and the others–to have to go on without Turner, believing he’s gone, and they want to carry on with what he started. But it feels awkward, tacked on, even though it was how they originally meant to end it. It doesn’t feel earned, because it happened so fast. (Similar issue with Harvey’s transformation to Two-Face). Turner and Duela’s relationship needed more scenes, and there was just no time. I can’t blame them for what isn’t their fault–but would it have killed them to have Turner tell Ducard that whatever he thinks, he’s going to see his friends again, and his life in Gotham is just beginning?
I think they had too many items on the list to check off in just 13 eps, and the result was an intriguing addictive show that fell well short of the greatness it had the potential of achieving.
Legends of Tomorrow ran seven seasons. 110 eps. (I tried it, did not like it, missed 99% of it). That’s a case of a show that had way more time than it needed to tell the story, so of course they didn’t stick the landing. GK ran 13 eps and gone. Cry me a river, why don’t you?. ;)