CW's Superheroes/DC's Decline

As autumn beckons, my mind turns not only to crusty leaves, crisp air and pumpkins, but to a new batch of CW's DC/WB superhero shows. Alas, as was the case last year, my faith wanes.

The good vibes started to subside a few seasons back when "Supergirl" joined the CW camp. Contrary to the smooth way the show played on stodgy CBS, things got mighty unorthodox on what many presumed was a more fitting network. 

For starters, bad became good, and good became bad, without a smidgen of ironic justification. James Olsen took pride in slanting news reports; Supergirl gushed over a parallel-plane President, despite the woman's flagrant insincerity (why, oh why, couldn't Lynda Carter have won a more respectable part?); and well, you get the dreadful drift.

It didn't take long for "Supergirl'"s stain to infect the other shows, in particular "Legends of Tomorrow". Though the White Canary-led jaunt retained its "Doctor Who" ambiance, its reinterpreted (and therefore, inaccurate) historical staging became more common than sporadic. 

Crackpot history wasn't CW's only DC misstep. The shows' soap-opera trimmings tiered to a nauseating peak: "The Flash" took delight in our hero's sexual relationship with his "sister", and "Arrow'"s focus fell on sappy squabbles and strained relationships. When scripts did tap some needed virility, it was generally penitentiary-based, pushing most traces of time travel, alternate realities and the need to snuff out corruption and deceit to the back burner.   

Please don't misunderstand: I've no objections to planting plebeian seeds within a fantasy plot line, but dear Lord, it's got to be within reason. When episodes of "Supergirl" catered to dating pursuits and wedding bliss (no matter if the participants were "diverse", "straight" or you name it), I took issue. Leave that fluff stuff to "General Hospital" and "Love of Life", not comic-book adaptations where mad scientists, rampaging robots and verbose apes should occupy the adversarial spotlight.

Okay, perhaps there's still a chance that these disconcerting intersections will lose favor among the execs. "Black Lightning" looks like a great way to set things on course, but considering the other series' track records, how long before it also stumbles? The same might be said of Batwoman, Lois Lane and Dreamer's anticipated intros: sensible, maybe, but if their actions are gimmick-driven, cloudy or (like CW's infrequent-flying Kal-El) designed for shameful defeat, why the bloody hell bother?

Indeed, the current situation leaves DC's followers little reason to feel confident. WB's theatrical scene continues to be hit and miss, with matters now further complicated by Ben Affleck and Henry Cavill's departures. In addition, though the DC/WB's direct-to-disc, animated features have proven exemplary, they come way too few and far between. Then, there's the much hyped, DCEU subscription service, which promises to deliver new cartoon and live-action shows in the near future, but it'll cost $75 a year to test its uncertain waters. Ouch!

Despite these good and/or bad insinuations, it hurts to see DC's most prolific, filmic strand go the Disney/Lucasfilm route. Perhaps the reverberations from "Star Wars'" backlash will rattle CW's leadership enough to reinstate the programs' earlier formats, while WB gets its other houses in order. That's probably too much to ask at this far-gone point, but then if worse comes to worse, we still have Fox's "Gotham" and SyFy's "Krypton" to lean on, right? On the other hand, considering the troubling way things have been going, dare we be so certain?