I don't like Gotham.

I didn't like Gotham. And I'll be very, very honest with you.

I watched the first four episodes. Then I got bored.

In fact, I didn't even watch all four. I only watched the first half of episode four. Three and a half episodes of mind-numbingly boring Batman prequel which probably isn't canon in the new Batman movies being made,

I like Batman. I got the Batman t-shirts, I've seen the full Dark Knight trilogy numerous times, got a Batman poster, seen the 60's Batman movie which was fantastic and awful, and of course The Dark Knight is one of my favourite movies ever. While I don't read/have read the Batman comics of yore, I have a fairly standard understanding of Batman, his origins, his trusty Butler and of course his child sidekick.

Start with the good I suppose. The violence while sometimes excessive is well done, acting is great, and the ambiguous time period it quite cool as well. 80's computers, with 50's cars and 2000's phones? Now, that's some clever screenplay.

Maybe it's because I'm British, so I just don't 'get' American television. I mean, hour long episodes and about twenty episodes in each series? I thought Torchwood had a long series (please don't get me started on the terrible Miracle Day, it's a miracle it made *ha ha ha*).

I think Gotham's biggest flaw is quite simply the source material it's based off of. Ignoring popular culture's fascination with Batman, no matter what you make about Batman, everyone's going to compare it to something prior. Gotham  genuinely feels like something new and fantastic, a Batman prequel! But everything feels like it's been made on borrowed ideas and time. The city of Gotham looks like the city from The Dark Knight trilogy mixed with Tim Burton's Gotham of the 80's and 90's. None of the characters are particurly interesting however, no matter how well acted they are. Gordon is standard, a copy of every single Gordon before him in anything. His partner in the force...um...whatever his name was, is standard corrupt, lazy cop guy. All the characters all feel standard. Fish Mooney could be replaced by Maroni or Falcone, the only difference of course being a lady.

I would rather have it not be Batman. Allow me to explain. While the odd nod to Edward Nigma as the Riddler and the Penguin and Catwoman is nice, it's just frustrating. You just want it to be mother fuckin' BATMAN ALREADY. There's just this niggling feeling, in the background. You just want it be Batman properly, not taking winks at it's own source material. "Hey Batfans. Look, this guy's call Edward Nigma, isn't THAT a coincedence! *giggle* ". If it wasn't Batman related, at all, it would be so, so,  so much better. Just a crime drama in corrupt city of an ambiguous time Period.. Yeah, it might not the views, but at least it would be more structurally stable.

You see this? Yeah, Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Now that's a good show. Wanna know why?

1-New premise in an established universe. And a damn good one. THE Marvel Cinematic universe, the one we all know and love from Iron Man 2.

2-New characters in an established universe, that can appear somewhere else. After it finishes, it's pretty bloody unlikely any of Gotham's characters will be seen in Batman vs. Superman.

3-Solid foundations. The Marvel cinematic universe is a wonder to behold, and Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D occasionally dipping into that time line, such as post avengers, and Thor: The Dark World.

See this? If you want Batman in not-book form, just watch these. Begins is a very solid introduction to Batman. If you haven't seen The Dark Knight, quite clearly you're allergic is fantasticness. Rises isn't as good, but what were we expecting after The Dark Knight ?  Of course it's not as good. Good, yes. But The Dark Knight was lightning in a bottle, masterpiece, 10/10 would watch again. It didn't stand a chance, but at least they tried their best.