If that's all these TV adaptations are about, they're not worth hurrying home for
I've been doing some research on the latest comic-to-TV adaptations like Archie's Riverdale and Supergirl, and have to wonder what the point really is. First, let's take a look at this sugary Forbes article that doesn't give the whole picture:
Even the Supergirl series, besides the gun control standings already advocated in episodes from a few months prior, is going out of its way to push the LGBT agenda on everyone:
All that aside, it makes little difference if the Maggie Sawyer character was already lesbian herself when John Byrne introduced her in the Superman comics in the late 80s; it's pretty apparent this TV show and its use of her as a cast member is for little more than LGBT propaganda (and let's not forget the gun control/open borders propaganda from earlier!). In that case, I hesitate to think what the Marvel TV shows are like. I wouldn't be shocked if they've got similar themes to boot, which at this point are quite political.
In the end, it's apparent these TV shows are run by entitled producers with no interest in making a series free of the very issues that are alienating audiences, family or otherwise, and would rather lecture everybody with their phony tolerance and diversity idiocy than ensure they'll be making a show that entertains a wider audience rather than just SJWs. I really don't see the use of giving them audience, because they're not doing the source material any favors.
Determining whether to not Riverdale is worth watching boils down to the individual viewer’s taste for over-the-top, primetime soaps. There’s nothing supernatural. There’s not even that big a hook when it comes to the murder mystery portrayed in the trailers. It’s just a colorful hyper-reality put on screen for anyone into such a thing to enjoy. In fact, it might be the ultimate example of the genre.Well at least they note this sadly isn't exactly the family friendly fare it could've been (murder mysteries aren't something I consider inherently suited for families, no matter the tone they're filmed with). But, they haven't told everything, and this TV Line posting tells what they fail to:
There’s sex. There’s drama. There’s scandal. There’s violence. There’s angst. There’s more sex. There’s everything a fan of primetime soaps could want. Unfortunately, if one isn’t into such things, the show isn’t going to appeal. It goes so far into the direction of 90s stylings that it will turn away anyone that doesn’t have a predisposition for such material.
As for how it stacks up as an adaptation of the comics the show uses as sources material… it doesn’t. Riverdale is not the classic, goofy comics that filled audiences with glee throughout the 40s and 50s. It’s very much an over-the-top drama putting a new span on some truly classic, American characters.
Newcomer Casey Cott — brother of Broadway star Corey Cott (Newsies) — has been cast in The CW’s Archie comics-inspired drama pilot.Because that's all we need besides murderous mayhem. It would not be possible to make CHiPs, the Dukes of Hazzard and the A-Team today and refrain from corpses falling down at nearly every turn as the setup for the stories in this live action Archie TV show apparently uses. As if that's not bad enough, Movie Pilot notes how Betty and Veronica appear to have been turned into lesbians:
Cott will play Kevin Keller, the first openly gay character in the Archie universe, who was introduced in the comic-book series in 2010.
EP Roberto Aguirre Sacasa (Supegirl, Looking) announced the news via Twitter.
Riverdale, which hails from writer Aguirre Sacasa and über-producer Greg Berlanti, is described as a “subversive” take on the famous characters and the darkness and weirdness bubbling beneath Riverdale’s wholesome façade.
From zombie attacks to encounters with Sonic and even the Predator, Archie and his friends have dealt with their fair share of unusual plot developments in recent years, but none shocked the world more than the introduction of #LGBT issues to the quiet town of #Riverdale.Because that's all we need too. Namely, cheap sensationalism. Yet what's really dismaying here is the news site's resorting to the disrespectful claim that most of the older takes on sexuality/identity are "outdated". This is exactly the problem with today's PC crowd. They have no respect for older products or the people who wrote them.
For decades, comics set in Riverdale High School continued to perpetuate outdated concepts of sexuality and identity, failing to move on from Archie's heyday in the '50s — but that all changed in 2014 when Archie died (?!) taking a bullet meant for Kevin Keller, the first openly #gay character in the series.
Since then, Archie's best friend Jughead has openly revealed himself to be asexual, and now it appears that the small screen adaptation Riverdale will continue this progressive trend for the franchise, as the latest trailer depicts Betty and Veronica sharing a kiss with each other.
Even the Supergirl series, besides the gun control standings already advocated in episodes from a few months prior, is going out of its way to push the LGBT agenda on everyone:
Now that Supergirl‘s Alex Danvers (played by Chyler Leigh) has come to a realization about her sexual identity, sparked by new partner-in-crimefighting Maggie Sawyer (Floriana Lima), her journey will not be without one small hiccup.Or, one big yawn. Because this is getting very obviously forced. So much in fact, that, according to some commenters:
Big deal. The sexual preferences of characters is getting to be quite boring. Much more interested in how they perform in the show than their sexual appetite. Also see it as the circle changing from Ozzie and Harriet which was just as boring.And:
Agreed. How about we start making Supergirl the focus of the show instead of all the side characters. It seems the writers are so busy with Superman, J’onn J’onzz, M’ghan, James, Mon-El, and Alex they forgot to include some stories about SupergirlNo kidding! This reminds me of the 2005 series written by Jeph Loeb, whose first several issues all seemed to feature guest superheroes roles and no stand-alone tales for Kara Zor-El. If you need a valid complaint about sexuality being used embarrassingly, the artwork on the covers alone was, absurdly making Kara's skirt look like it was falling off her hip. Indeed, that was ludicrous, and one could easily argue it gave SJWs ammunition to use for railing against depicting sexy illustrations even tastefully. In any case, the ensuing stories were mostly botched and didn't add up to much in the long run.
All that aside, it makes little difference if the Maggie Sawyer character was already lesbian herself when John Byrne introduced her in the Superman comics in the late 80s; it's pretty apparent this TV show and its use of her as a cast member is for little more than LGBT propaganda (and let's not forget the gun control/open borders propaganda from earlier!). In that case, I hesitate to think what the Marvel TV shows are like. I wouldn't be shocked if they've got similar themes to boot, which at this point are quite political.
In the end, it's apparent these TV shows are run by entitled producers with no interest in making a series free of the very issues that are alienating audiences, family or otherwise, and would rather lecture everybody with their phony tolerance and diversity idiocy than ensure they'll be making a show that entertains a wider audience rather than just SJWs. I really don't see the use of giving them audience, because they're not doing the source material any favors.
Labels: Archie, dc comics, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, politics, Supergirl
The Movie Pilot OP tried to cover some bets, this way:
"Unfortunately for fans shipping Betty and Veronica as a #lesbian couple on Riverdale, it seems more likely that the girls make out session is just for show. After all, the two are both clad in cheerleader outfits, and there's an audience watching behind them in the gymnasium. Any genuine connection that could develop into something more platonic would arguably occur behind closed doors, although there's a chance that this could still happen later, as the season continues to unfold."
I'll go "just for show," but the rest of the paragraph is all second-rate wishful thinking.
The second TVLine OP jabbing Ozzie and Harriet was annoying but typical, while true present edginess would be saying that Ozzie and Harriet don't suck. They had a TV series for 14 seasons, had to do something right.
Love all "these concepts are outdated, so they should just go away", what happens when future generations had enough of the endless LGBTQWERTY or SJW promotion and wishes to move on? Jettisoning the past does cut both ways, or present to future.
Posted by
Killer Moth |
10:42 AM