Ruby Rose Leaves Batwoman

Looks like the CW will be pulling a Dick York/Dick Sargent. For as yet undisclosed reasons, Ruby Rose is leaving Batwoman. All we know for now is that the role of Kate Kane will be recast during the hiatus.
 
www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/batw...8Xcu_Y0CA-O51oqvAAH4

Well that doesn't say good things about them relying on her as one of the new pillar's of the Arrowverse.

Stephanie Beatriz has put herself forward for the role of Batwoman...

comicbook.com/tv-shows/amp/news/batwoman...e-stephanie-beatriz/

I would much rather her Brooklyn Nine-Nine co-star Melissa Fumero (on the right) be considered for the role!

(E.T.A. Melissa is much more beautiful, younger and fresher looking, AND she can be as feisty as a hellcat!)

I hope it's not Ruby's back issues that caused her to leave.

From what I have heard it was a combination of factors, but her back issue was not one of them.  And the decision was mutual in that, she wanted to leave, and the studio were fine with letting her go.

Peace.

/K

Stephanie Beatriz would be a terrible choice imo.  Out of the two, Melissa Fumero would certainly be the better option.  (Brooklyn 99 Fan btw <- )

Peace.

/K

From what it sounds like she didn't like living in Vancouver and was unprepared for just how rough filming would be. So with that and the potential filming restrictions for Covid she asked to leave, and CW was fine with it. Which might sound shocknig but the ratings for the finale were AWFUL and Ruby is the weakest link of the actors for the most part and it sounds like the LGBT crowd, who they were really banking on being the primary audience of the show dosn't really like Ruby all that much. So my guess is they're trying a second a shot at selling the show with a new lead, because they need Batwoman to work because it's going to be one of their main shows in a couple years when Flash and Supergirl end.

Jade Tailor would be a great choice, nice shout Fats.

Loved her in The Magicians.  She can definatley do feisty, and is damn sexy as well as being a pretty good actress

Certainly better then Ruby Rose lol   Glad she's gone tbh.

Now the show just need to replace Caroline Dries (the crappy showrunner who has no clue what she is doing), and clean out the writing room.  Get ppl in with talent who know their stuff.

AT&T won't put up with the BS at CW, DC or any of the other WB crap.

They want to make MONEY!  Shown by their decision to #releasethesnydercut.

I couldn't care less for Zack Snyder's vision of JL.  But as shown, there is certainly a market for it.  And if that gets "bums on seats", or in this case, subs for HBO Max, they will do it.

Peace.

/K

So instead of pulling a Dick York/Dick Sargent ie recasting a character, they're replacing the character of Kate Kane entirely. Which means all the character development and relationships from this past year and a half are now meaningless. Great....

ew.com/tv/batwoman-new-character-ryan-wi...ff-PAqSnnGGFvjbCne6w

They don't care.

They just want a LESBIAN superhero, played by a LESBIAN ACTRESS, getting into GAY adventures with other lesbians (lesbian pirates are the villains for the next season btw).

That's all they want.

Peace.

/K

kikass2014 wrote: They don't care.

They just want a LESBIAN superhero, played by a LESBIAN ACTRESS, getting into GAY adventures with other lesbians (lesbian pirates are the villains for the next season btw).

That's all they want.

Peace.

/K

That seems plausible, K. But given there have been plenty of shows and movies made for straight men and women, why not a few aimed at lesbians? 

I'm thinking of the old meme that "if two hot women are getting it on, maybe there is also room for a man to slip in there to add a little oomph."  Which of course is rubbish, but that doesn't mean such thoughts don't rattle around in men's heads. 

Can Batwoman survive as a show for lesbians and the curious? Who knows. But the only thing I kind of enjoyed was the Ruby/Batwoman chemistry with Melissa/Supergirl. That could have been interesting if taken further. 

I recall writing an old story in the 90's (that I never shared) where Supergirl had girlfriends because men didn't/couldn't handle being sexual with her. Between her fantastic strength (which gives a new definition to "tight") and that irrepressible male drive for penetration, human men were awkward and unsatisfying as sexual partners.

But lesbian sex was gentle and can be less penetrative and was simply more satisfying, with delicate nuances that worked for both partners. And everyone needs some human companionship, especially a lost and lonely survivor of Krypton's destruction.. So Kara started dating some extraordinary women (as Supergirl, not Linda), much to Jimmy Olsen's chagrin since he had the hots for her. 

Seeing the chemistry between those actresses/characters during the crossover made me think of that old story. 

Shadar

That's not the problem Shadar, the problem is this new characters sounds like basically just Lesbian Supergirl with no powers. Which not only is not something any member of the Bat family should act like (the all-American thing not the gay) but also will clash entirely with the setting, writing, other characters and basically everything else about the show.

Them wanting to do this shows that the only thing they prioritize is having a Lesbian lead to try to get woke points and bring in a Lesbian audience. Apparantly the problem with the ratings was that a Ruby Rose/Kate Kane type character wasn't gay enough for that crowd and not all the actual problems with the show. And that means they'll never get anything out of this show.

It's stunning how stupid a decision this is. They might as well just give up and make a brand new show because nothing from season 1 will be able to carry over with a new star.

But given there have been plenty of shows and movies made for straight men and women, why not a few aimed at lesbians?

Sure, if you want to make a show aimed at lesbians, go for it.

But its clear in this instance, they are just using the "Batwoman" and Batman brand.  They don't care about it though.

Like I say, if they really had the courage of their conviction (making a show for a lesbian audience), then make your own show.  Call it Lesbo or something.  Whatever.

The truth is, that would not fly.  That audience just isn't that big.  Season 1's ratings prove that (especially the demo score).  So they try and rope in the comic fan - "look its a batman show".

Kate Kane/Batwoman in the show, wasn't gay for the sake of the show.  She was gay because thats what she was when she was created 15 years ago or so in comics.

It makes NO sense that the "next" Batwoman would also be gay.  I understand that the "Bat-mantle" is something that can be passed on, but it seems like to be Batwoman, a pre-requisite is, you have to be an out lesbian.

Which, when you think about it, is idiotic.

If you are gonna make a season 2, make Barbara Gordon Batwoman (a slight twist on the lore, but not so much).  Or Huntress, who has a history with the bat family.  Something that makes sense.

This just stinks of virtue signaling.  They don't care about the lore, they don't care what stories they tell, they just want lesbians on screen doing heroic shit.

Peace.

/K

kikass2014 wrote:

But given there have been plenty of shows and movies made for straight men and women, why not a few aimed at lesbians?

Sure, if you want to make a show aimed at lesbians, go for it.

This just stinks of virtue signaling.  They don't care about the lore, they don't care what stories they tell, they just want lesbians on screen doing heroic shit.

Peace.

/K

I think you may have hit the nail on the head, K. "Lesbians on screen doing heroic shit." That's likely the #1 motivation. They are just using Batwoman so they can ride on the superhero bandwagon. I can see some folks not liking that. 

But the NEW 52 issues made it clear some time ago that Batwoman (as in Katherine "Kate" Kane )
was lesbian.  

But of course, the original Batwoman, Kathrine Kane, first appeared in the 50's, when homosexuality was illegal and against the Comics Code, so she couldn't be then. The real hoot is that many believe that introducing Batgirl and Batwoman way back then was a way for DC to prove that Batman and Robin weren't gay, as some critics had charged. I mean, by 50's standards, they acted and looked VERY gay, and the good old American way to prove a man wasn't gay was to give him a girlfriend. So they did. 

But otherwise, I think its very fair to view the show as "Lesbians on screen doing heroic shit" with a Batwoman wrapper that sits on the NEW 52 foundation and the usual tie-in to the larger CW cast of characters.

There is no way in hell in this day and age to portray that EXCEPT by casting another lesbian actress. And this time, one who is very gay, probably a lipstick lesbian, unlike Ruby who wasn't that well liked by many lesbians, and then amp up the sexual side of things a few notches.  

I have to admit I harbor a slight fondness for a Supergirl/Batwoman arc where Supergirl explores her bisexual side. Based on the chemistry with Ruby, I think Melissa could pull that act off with the right woman. Who knows what lurks in the minds of CW's writers and showrunners. 

Shadar

I think you may have hit the nail on the head, K. "Lesbians on screen doing heroic shit." That's likely the #1 motivation. They are just using Batwoman so they can ride on the superhero bandwagon. I can see some folks not liking that.

Spot on Shadar.  This is most certainly the number one gripe people have I imagine.

Peace.

/K

kikass2014 wrote:

I think you may have hit the nail on the head, K. "Lesbians on screen doing heroic shit." That's likely the #1 motivation. They are just using Batwoman so they can ride on the superhero bandwagon. I can see some folks not liking that.

Spot on Shadar.  This is most certainly the number one gripe people have I imagine.

Peace.

/K

I wouldn't call it a complaint. Not from my perspective. Given the vast number of various shows on the uncounted number of networks and streaming outlets, etc, I suspect every motivation under the sun exists for shows. 

And given the huge surge in superhero-style shows in the last five or so years, its inevitable that comics-derived characters will get co-opted for many different purposes. It's a side-effect of popularity. 

But where you draw the line is individual. 

For instance, I would have very serious objections if Supergirl was turned into a White Supremacist on some show and went around killing anyone she didn't like. Yet they could do a hundred other things to her character and I would probably find it an "interesting perspective".  Maybe not entertaining, but interesting.

We all have our thresholds for fictional characters where we say, "That's too damn far!"

Shadar

kikass2014 wrote:

If you are gonna make a season 2, make Barbara Gordon Batwoman (a slight twist on the lore, but not so much).  Or Huntress, who has a history with the bat family.  Something that makes sense.

This just stinks of virtue signaling.  They don't care about the lore, they don't care what stories they tell, they just want lesbians on screen doing heroic shit.

Peace.

/K

It would be nice to see Huntress again. Last time we saw her, she was in police custody after trying to kill her father(he caught a stray round during the fight and died anyway) all the way back in Arrow season 2. And it would make any potential crossovers with Legends interesting, given that she and Sara had gone a couple rounds during that episode.

Haven't seen the show, but wouldn't Cassandra Cain make for a good Batwoman? And if they want to have her gay they can have a proper growing relationship.

There i a simple solution to this whole thing.

Have some situation where her body is transformed by magic/science/reality manipulation or whatever. And at the end of the episode reveal it can't be undone

She'd still be gay and all story lines can continue as normal.

This assuming Ruby is willing to do a couple of scenes to set it all up, but even without it could work.

Well it's confirmed. Seems they wanted to avoid "confusion" with the recast. Which is ridiculous. More like Berlanti wanted to make a second attempt to grab the audience that wasn't interested in it the first go around and could care less about how that effects everything else.

So I'm done. I was actually liking where it was going but that's all irrelevant now because without Kate it can't be followed up on. This is stupidity at it's finest. I hope it bombs and season 2 is there last.

jimbob wrote: Well it's confirmed. Seems they wanted to avoid "confusion" with the recast. Which is ridiculous. More like Berlanti wanted to make a second attempt to grab the audience that wasn't interested in it the first go around and could care less about how that effects everything else.

So I'm done. I was actually liking where it was going but that's all irrelevant now because without Kate it can't be followed up on. This is stupidity at it's finest. I hope it bombs and season 2 is there last.

I never wish for any comics-derived superheroine show to bomb or get cancelled. We had FAR too long of a dry period on TV to wish any show ill. 

But clearly this will be a new show with a less intimate connection to New52 comics. Might be better. 

Keeping an open mind applies here, as it does with every aspect of life. Change is the only constant. Greg Berlanti is not an idiot, even if I don’t always agree with him.

Shadar

Maybe they can make it a thing, a new batwoman each season

Haven't seen the series yet so I'm not really invested in the characters yet.

I'm waiting on the bluray to watch it, but the general chatter seems quite negative. So now i/m wondering if it's worth the 20 euro i usually end up paying for dc series.