LvV suggests playing villain on Supergirl

I still think she should play the title role. She could pass for 24 without working too hard at it. Sounds like they aren't talking to her though. Maybe they want a completely different perspective and persona from what we saw on Smallville.

lfan wrote: Cool if it happens.....

www.digitalspy.com/tv/news/a603140/laura...html#~oSD5aau0W6C7Sr

ElF

shadar wrote: I still think she should play the title role. She could pass for 24 without working too hard at it. Sounds like they aren't talking to her though. Maybe they want a completely different perspective and persona from what we saw on Smallville.

You are right...she could play Kara....

But i think they both probabbly want a very differnt persona for her, and don't want any contiunity with a TV show that was on another network-and if they cast her whether continuity exists or not people are going to assume it.

I am kind of curious if Helen Slater does anything on the show. Shes had a mixed relationship from what i understand with Supergirls over the years, but who knows. I don't think she was really great in the part--but she grew into a decent actress.

Woodclaw wrote:
As Castor said Laura can still be credible Supergirl especially if they're going for something different from the old "teenager outsider" vibe. Of course Warner seem keen on using low profile actors for their TV productions, which is a viable tactic.

the Unknown actor rule aside, i suspect where going to get at least one actor on the show people have heard of-though not necessarily in a lead role- I think one of older TV star or Movie actor is going to be on the show somewhere-mention, villian something like that. If its that expensive There going to want someone to ground the show. Smallville after all had John Schnieder, and John Glover.



Castor

Helen Slater had potential at age 18 (when she did the movie) to play a rather innocent Supergirl. Unfortunately she was working to a really, really terrible script. But with good writing, she could have done something amazing with the role.

We need another bright-eyed young ingenue for the role who has the legs to do a multi-season show. And good writing. Casting the actress is FAR less of an issue than getting a good script. But the fact that it may leverage off Arrow and Flash writers is a plus.

I don't want another goofy 1984 Supergirl movie, or the smothering teenage angst of Smallville (which Kara/Laura thankfully cut through like a knife). That was the brilliance of LV in Smallville role. She was kind of a bad good girl. And she got to play some really fun roles like the Braniac version of her tearing that private jet apart in mid-flight.)

One really interesting question is whether she will be written with the traditional Superman constraint (never take a life) or whether they will adopt the MOS concept of some villains being bad enough to kill in desperation to save innocent lives. That will be one of the key sub-themes I'll be looking for.

I always thought the argument of taking one life to save thousands/millions was reasonable for Superman, especially given the slippery slope plot implications. But the comics always gave him a way out of that trap so he never took a life. I don't think the Supergirl TV series should have a way out of the trap. Classic case -- she comes upon a suicide bomber about to detonate himself in a crowded place. She can't get him away fast enough or protect the innocents, of if she did, the force of acceleration would kill him.

Should she wrap herself and cape around him to smother or redirect the explosion, even if her crushing embrace is what sets it off?

Would the TV writers ever go there? Should they?

(Of course, I also have this vision of her standing there afterward, wearing only the scraps of her blasted-away costume as she helps the injured. Not sure that would make it on TV, even with strategically placed strips of torn fabric. But that would be in MY movie.)

NSFW.... NSFW...

castor wrote:

shadar wrote: I still think she should play the title role. She could pass for 24 without working too hard at it. Sounds like they aren't talking to her though. Maybe they want a completely different perspective and persona from what we saw on Smallville.

You are right...she could play Kara....

But i think they both probabbly want a very differnt persona for her, and don't want any contiunity with a TV show that was on another network-and if they cast her whether continuity exists or not people are going to assume it.

I am kind of curious if Helen Slater does anything on the show. Shes had a mixed relationship from what i understand with Supergirls over the years, but who knows. I don't think she was really great in the part--but she grew into a decent actress.

shadar wrote: le.

We need another bright-eyed young ingenue for the role who has the legs to do a multi-season show. And good writing. Casting the actress is FAR less of an issue than getting a good script. But the fact that it may leverage off Arrow and Flash writers is a plus.

I don't want another goofy 1984 Supergirl movie, or the smothering teenage angst of Smallville (which Kara/Laura thankfully cut through like a knife). That was the brilliance of LV in Smallville role. She was kind of a bad good girl. And she got to play some really fun roles like the Braniac version of her tearing that private jet apart in mid-flight.)

Amen to the writing comment brother. That will kill it pretty quick.

That said--i am not sure an ingeine bright eyed bushy tail aproach is a wrong approach. After a decade of female action heroines who are just tough non nsense badasses who only occasionally emote with angst-it might be interesting to see someone who looks at the world with bright eyes and wonder.

The original supergirl-it wasn't a great script, but at least it wasn't angsty. Yeah it had a lot of weak elements, and Fay Dunnaway seemed in a completely different movie, but i think the basic approach was a valid one. I am not sure that could work for a dozen seasons but it was something.

But what ever approach they take, they need to find an actress who can do it. Vanderoot i think was very talented at doing a semi bad girl, not just by showing power---but by playing it weak, of showing the insecurities underneath it all. Thats tricky. It was something that i never thought Tom Weaving as clark was all that great at(he frequently seemed to whinny). Helen Slater would have been terrible at that.

So casting to a degree must match script. As i have said before- i suspect in the best episode its going to be mostly about her, with ocasional bits of superstrength whatever-so she needs to be able to carrying it and make it watchable..or well..nope.

castor wrote:
So casting to a degree must match script. As i have said before- i suspect in the best episode its going to be mostly about her, with ocasional bits of superstrength whatever-so she needs to be able to carrying it and make it watchable..or well..nope.

My expectations are about the same as yours. This will be a story about Linda and the challenges she has to face in her daily life when she tries to venture out as Supergirl, following in her cousin's footsteps. But the thrust of the narrative will likely be her job, her friends, her boyfriend, her foster parents maybe, all the things that make LInda Danvers (or Lee) tick. Trying to fill those red boots will be portrayed mainly as a complication to her established life. A life she wants to protect first and foremost.

In other words, LInda is the real Kara, and Supergirl is something she's trying to do without screwing up her real life. Which of course it will, with infinite complications and risks to the people around her, etc. Starting off, I suspect we'll only see a hint of SG in the episodes, but that may grow over time as she gets more into it.

It might also be interesting if she kind of sucks at being Supergirl at first. Screws things up because she's not practiced or skillful given she's been hiding her abilities for nearly a decade (assuming the original idea of her coming to Earth when she's 15 is supported). Does that bit of Kryptonian red and blue clothing that she wore when she arrived (and presumably hasn't since) even still fit her?

I'm a little puzzled also how they will explain not showing Superman, Batman and WW on screen (I suspect they won't have the rights, not to mention access and budget to use the MOS2 actors). Can they substitute Flash and Green Arrow and maybe a few others that they do have rights to? Or will this be Linda living in a world where she's the only superheroine? These would not be complications in the comic book world, but TV production rights to characters are complicated and expensive. Business that can get in the way of good storytelling.

lfan wrote:

shadar wrote: I don't want another goofy 1984 Supergirl movie, or the smothering teenage angst of Smallville (which Kara/Laura thankfully cut through like a knife). That was the brilliance of LV in Smallville role. She was kind of a bad good girl. And she got to play some really fun roles like the Braniac version of her tearing that private jet apart in mid-flight.)

While I agree (with a somewhat biased opinion) that Kara was the highlight of the series, don't be surprised when/if its got "smothering teenage angst". Its funny that everyone on forums disses the formula and "angsty-ness" of Smallville with such passion, but it's fairly obvious that it had a big following. If CBS could parlay ANY formula into half as many seasons as Smallville had, I think they'd take it.

That said, I think it's also fair to assume that ratings on an angsty CW show will not translate enough for a CBS show and will probably get it pulled quickly. Smallville pulled anywhere from 1.5M - 3M per households whereas hour long dramas (e.g. CSI, Medium, Flashpoint) for CBS usually grab 4M - 7M households *

ElF

* Yes, I did a full 3 minutes of extensive statistical research on Google for the numbers

You might be right. What I need to do is to watch a bunch of Green Arrow and Flash episodes to see what formula they are using. We're talking the same producer and probably some writing staff. That's probably the closest predictor, as opposed to Smallville.

But of course we all dealing with "riddles in the dark" as Gandalf would say.

lfan wrote:

shadar wrote: I don't want another goofy 1984 Supergirl movie, or the smothering teenage angst of Smallville (which Kara/Laura thankfully cut through like a knife). That was the brilliance of LV in Smallville role. She was kind of a bad good girl. And she got to play some really fun roles like the Braniac version of her tearing that private jet apart in mid-flight.)

While I agree (with a somewhat biased opinion) that Kara was the highlight of the series, don't be surprised when/if its got "smothering teenage angst". Its funny that everyone on forums disses the formula and "angsty-ness" of Smallville with such passion, but it's fairly obvious that it had a big following. If CBS could parlay ANY formula into half as many seasons as Smallville had, I think they'd take it.

That said, I think it's also fair to assume that ratings on an angsty CW show will not translate enough for a CBS show and will probably get it pulled quickly. Smallville pulled anywhere from 1.5M - 3M per households whereas hour long dramas (e.g. CSI, Medium, Flashpoint) for CBS usually grab 4M - 7M households *

ElF

* Yes, I did a full 3 minutes of extensive statistical research on Google for the numbers

True, but

a. This is less true then it used to be the CW doesn't have as many stations and as reach then traditional networks-the old rule used to be that if they did you can add a point or two.

b. The CW audience is a lot younger then most CBS shows(which is famously kind of old). Demographically audiences that are older at a certain point are worthless --they are much more set in there buying paterns and don't try new things.

c.i suspect that Supergirl will attract a fairly large female audience-and females since statistically they do more shopping then men(for things like food and everything else) are a more desirable demographic.

d) There audiences aren't just getting older but so are there shows-Things like Big Bang Theroy, CSI, 2 and a half men-these are all shows that are probabbly going to go away in a couple of years. TV needs new shows.

So a bigger reach with a demographic that attract younger female viewers-yeah i could see it being well worth CBS time.

But who knows. As has been said its all about finding the write script and concept and matching it to an actress-and also the other actors as well-it should be said LvV would make a pretty good villian actually-Supergirl fighting an other equally powered, but morally bankrupt character could be a lot of fun.

castor wrote:

lfan wrote:

shadar wrote: I don't want another goofy 1984 Supergirl movie, or the smothering teenage angst of Smallville (which Kara/Laura thankfully cut through like a knife). That was the brilliance of LV in Smallville role. She was kind of a bad good girl. And she got to play some really fun roles like the Braniac version of her tearing that private jet apart in mid-flight.)

While I agree (with a somewhat biased opinion) that Kara was the highlight of the series, don't be surprised when/if its got "smothering teenage angst". Its funny that everyone on forums disses the formula and "angsty-ness" of Smallville with such passion, but it's fairly obvious that it had a big following. If CBS could parlay ANY formula into half as many seasons as Smallville had, I think they'd take it.

That said, I think it's also fair to assume that ratings on an angsty CW show will not translate enough for a CBS show and will probably get it pulled quickly. Smallville pulled anywhere from 1.5M - 3M per households whereas hour long dramas (e.g. CSI, Medium, Flashpoint) for CBS usually grab 4M - 7M households *

ElF

* Yes, I did a full 3 minutes of extensive statistical research on Google for the numbers

True, but

a. This is less true then it used to be the CW doesn't have as many stations and as reach then traditional networks-the old rule used to be that if they did you can add a point or two.

b. The CW audience is a lot younger then most CBS shows(which is famously kind of old). Demographically audiences that are older at a certain point are worthless --they are much more set in there buying paterns and don't try new things.

c.i suspect that Supergirl will attract a fairly large female audience-and females since statistically they do more shopping then men(for things like food and everything else) are a more desirable demographic.

d) There audiences aren't just getting older but so are there shows-Things like Big Bang Theroy, CSI, 2 and a half men-these are all shows that are probabbly going to go away in a couple of years. TV needs new shows.

So a bigger reach with a demographic that attract younger female viewers-yeah i could see it being well worth CBS time.

But who knows. As has been said its all about finding the write script and concept and matching it to an actress-and also the other actors as well-it should be said LvV would make a pretty good villian actually-Supergirl fighting an other equally powered, but morally bankrupt character could be a lot of fun.

You are painting with too broad a brush when it comes to older people. People from late sixties and up may be a decent fit to your description but not most of the Boomers, who are now entering their sixties in a huge wave. Most of us are little changed from our 40's when it comes to things of interest or activities. I know in my case (and most of my friends), HBO is #1. If I only had two channels I could watch the rest of my life, I would want HBO and COMEDY channels.

I do agree with you, however, that some advertising is much more effective with young audiences. People whose interests and tastes are still developing and are persuadable (otherwise called gullible). Second would be parents with children at home.

Will CBS Supergirl be aimed at teens and twenties? At women of all ages? At 30 and 40's? Or older. An awful lot of Boomers were into comic books in the 1970's.

Even more importantly, what Kara in the comics are they mostly drawing inspiration from? The current DC52? Ugh. The previous series? Ugh. None of those were anything like Supergirl in Smallville. They portray very alien, non-integrated in the culture, immature teenagers.

You have to go back to the 80's before you find a Supergirl character in her 20's who has a real life established as LInda, and who is living a thoroughly human, normal life. Unlike Kal El, who has been constantly active in living two lives, Superman and Clark Kent, Linda has only lived LInda's life. Nobody even knows there is a Supergirl (presumably) and certainly not that she's an alien born as Kara Zor El.

Even in those comics, she was always active as Supergirl. But now we'd got a new Kara who has never done anything as Supergirl (presumably). She's probably never even thought of herself that way. She only has this one life, but now she wants to start this other one that is completely insane. Putting on skimpy costumes? Flying around stopping criminals and maybe even wars. Getting shot and attacked in many ways. Performing amazing feats of strength and endurance in the public eye. None of which she has any training for. That would blow anyone's mind.

It is also (by the way) very similar in concept to an awful lot of stories on SWM. Someone living a normal life who becomes super, and all that entails, mentally and physically. As I see it, the series will boil down to this central thread: a girl who has always been normal (and wants to continue to live her normal life) but who is now using her super powers to change the world.

I mean, hell, how much is this different than Elsa in Frozen?

It certainly wasn't the first thing I thought of when I heard about this series, but it makes sense to me now.

The argument is interesting, but don't hold your breath on the series. I will be surprised if it makes it through 1 or 2 seasons. Superhero shows seem to be the new rage thanks to the Marvel movies, and success of shows like Arrow and Agents of SHIELD. I am not sure where the show will go exactly. Female version of Smallville, fully embrace the comic like The Flash, or shoe-horn the Superman mythos into their own story like Gotham does with Batman. However, the major networks are wrought with big ideas that fail to go anywhere or get cancelled the moment they are not instant hits. See Firefly, Revolution, Jericho, Wonder Woman pilot, and a bunch of others that I am likely forgetting.

Just be prepared for a "Make It Up as We Go" type series like Lost with no clear end goal or overarching story like the more successful series they are imitating.

shadar wrote: It is also (by the way) very similar in concept to an awful lot of stories on SWM. Someone living a normal life who becomes super, and all that entails, mentally and physically. As I see it, the series will boil down to this central thread: a girl who has always been normal (and wants to continue to live her normal life) but who is now using her super powers to change the world.

I mean, hell, how much is this different than Elsa in Frozen?

It certainly wasn't the first thing I thought of when I heard about this series, but it makes sense to me now.

I actually don't dislike the New 52 version of Supergirl- but that said I suspect character wise where not going to see much of any particular version of the character. Probabbly some version of the girl trying to make sence of earth that she wants to be her home but can't quite do it... The details i think will be diffrent then any particular character but the idea the same-just like Arrow is the basic idea of Oliver Queen without being super relevent to any one version of the character or his back story.

as for the details of the costume I suspect at the end of the first episode is when she is going to put on the costume. The rest of the series is the backlash from it.

as for her being imature teenager....but shes 24!!! Well in modern fiction people in there 20s are characterized usually as if they where teenagers.


Castor

P.s sorry about the age line-its not me talking its the Demographer who buy ads. If people are set in there intrests you can't sell them new stuff.

p.p. s As i have said before Frozen is a pretty good female superhero movie

Woodclaw wrote:

willow wrote: The argument is interesting, but don't hold your breath on the series. I will be surprised if it makes it through 1 or 2 seasons. Superhero shows seem to be the new rage thanks to the Marvel movies, and success of shows like Arrow and Agents of SHIELD. I am not sure where the show will go exactly. Female version of Smallville, fully embrace the comic like The Flash, or shoe-horn the Superman mythos into their own story like Gotham does with Batman. However, the major networks are wrought with big ideas that fail to go anywhere or get cancelled the moment they are not instant hits. See Firefly, Revolution, Jericho, Wonder Woman pilot, and a bunch of others that I am likely forgetting.

Just be prepared for a "Make It Up as We Go" type series like Lost with no clear end goal or overarching story like the more successful series they are imitating.

While I want this series to succeed, I have to agree with some of Willow's points. So far the DC-based TV shows seem to be very hit or miss and we should all remember that this won't be aimed for us comic fans, but rather for a broader audience. I really hope that they would find a way to make this Supergirl show a good middle ground between the two, but it looks very hard.

The thing that's perhaps different at this time is that superhero shows are rising in popularity. There is a change going on with the audience (or as others claim, a paucity of ideas by the producers for new story ideas) which makes the success of superhero movies more likely.

When you see the same network launching new series that are based on tired but successful concepts (I'm thinking Forever, which replicates the formula from Castle), then you know they don't have any new ideas. They just take a working concept and change the faces a bit. Doesn't mean a show like Forever is bad (its mildly entertaining), but it shows there is an opening for something new.

Also, vampire themes keep getting regurgitated in infinite forms, but they are clearly starting to run out of steam and having to get more radical to keep an audience. Their heyday is passed. Wearing out.

We saw that years ago with all the myriad kinds of SciFi that was on TV, but most of that is gone. Worn out for a given audience.

So whether its a change in viewers or a lack of original thinking and the search for something new, the comic book pantheon of characters seems to be viewed as a way to go forward. That's moderately encouraging and I think it gives shows like Supergirl a slightly better chance than history would say.

Take the Castle show for instance. As much as I love Nathan Fillion for Fireflly (my all time favorite show), this show has grown tedious and unwatchable. But in the first season, the concept of a tough, strong but very pretty female cop lead and a non-cop male lead who seems out to left field yet becomes pivotal in helping her solve cases actually worked. Its doing the same in Forever. We also saw that same formula in the SciFi-oriented Continuum. We saw that with Piper Perabo in Covert Affairs, an action-filled CIA thriller series, except she was an inexperienced, young ingenue of an agent with amazing abilities and he was a blind tech geek who got her the information and access that allowed her to be successful.

But what if that tough, strong but very pretty female lead was Linda Danvers, who is trying to solve crimes that nobody else could by using her abilities as Supergirl. And the male lead, who also gradually becomes the romantic lead, was someone who was helping her. Someone who suspects she's not what she seems, but it takes a while for him to actually discover that (or for her to trust him, whatever). That would replicate the current "tough female cop with a less physical but talented male assisting her" theme that seems to work, except this tough cop (or whatever) is an alien superhuman who wants to use but also hide her abilities. The man would bring special talents and knowledge that she didn't have. He could be a former CIA agent, whatever.

In fact, the Covert Affairs setup but built around Linda might be the closest to working in my book. If she's young and inexperienced as they'd hinted, she'll need a more experienced guide, a cross between the archetypal "foil" and the "mentor" characters, but also gradually becoming the romantic interest. A lot of men would want to be that mentor (I'm sure we would all volunteer for the job), yet its still a story about a uniquely capable female lead.