slym2none Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Maybe I missed something, or maybe not - when it was revealed that Gordon didn't kill Cobblepot, was it shown anywhere that he withheld information about Bullock's role in that scenario? Remember, if Gordon hadn't killed Cobblepot, Bullock was supposed to put a bullet in Gordon's head. Now, if that had come out after Cobblepot revealed himself, especially right in front of Montoya & her partner, wouldn't Bullock be hung out to dry? Not like it wasn't shown at the time, and later on in the locker room scene, that Bullock was SUPREMELY pissed off at Gordon... Again, maybe I somehow missed that scene, but if not, either nothing was ever said about it or that's a plot-hole large enough to stuff a mountain into, no matter how corrupt the GCPD is. If it was missed or implied, I am guessing Gordon didn't want to throw Bullock under the bus, maybe to give him another chance? IDK :shrug: -slym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sd2416 Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Maybe I missed something, or maybe not - when it was revealed that Gordon didn't kill Cobblepot, was it shown anywhere that he withheld information about Bullock's role in that scenario? Remember, if Gordon hadn't killed Cobblepot, Bullock was supposed to put a bullet in Gordon's head. Now, if that had come out after Cobblepot revealed himself, especially right in front of Montoya & her partner, wouldn't Bullock be hung out to dry? Not like it wasn't shown at the time, and later on in the locker room scene, that Bullock was SUPREMELY pissed off at Gordon... Again, maybe I somehow missed that scene, but if not, either nothing was ever said about it or that's a plot-hole large enough to stuff a mountain into, no matter how corrupt the GCPD is. If it was missed or implied, I am guessing Gordon didn't want to throw Bullock under the bus, maybe to give him another chance? IDK :shrug: -slym I think hes giving him another chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davenport Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Maybe I missed something, or maybe not - when it was revealed that Gordon didn't kill Cobblepot, was it shown anywhere that he withheld information about Bullock's role in that scenario? Remember, if Gordon hadn't killed Cobblepot, Bullock was supposed to put a bullet in Gordon's head. Now, if that had come out after Cobblepot revealed himself, especially right in front of Montoya & her partner, wouldn't Bullock be hung out to dry? Not like it wasn't shown at the time, and later on in the locker room scene, that Bullock was SUPREMELY pissed off at Gordon... Again, maybe I somehow missed that scene, but if not, either nothing was ever said about it or that's a plot-hole large enough to stuff a mountain into, no matter how corrupt the GCPD is. If it was missed or implied, I am guessing Gordon didn't want to throw Bullock under the bus, maybe to give him another chance? And to partner with someone who would've killed him? Crazy. IDK :shrug: -slym You bring up something I have trouble with when watching Gotham. I don't know how Gordon ever comes back from letting Cobblepot go. Cobblepot is shown to be prolific serial killer, with every Cobblepot murder from that point forward being on Gordon's head. And that's not even getting into Gordon leaving a murderous Bullock on the police force. It really is a gigantic plot hole, if Gotham is supposed to be Gordon's hero tale. How many lives has Cobblepot snuffed thanks to Jim Gordon's choices? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slym2none Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Maybe I missed something, or maybe not - when it was revealed that Gordon didn't kill Cobblepot, was it shown anywhere that he withheld information about Bullock's role in that scenario? Remember, if Gordon hadn't killed Cobblepot, Bullock was supposed to put a bullet in Gordon's head. Now, if that had come out after Cobblepot revealed himself, especially right in front of Montoya & her partner, wouldn't Bullock be hung out to dry? Not like it wasn't shown at the time, and later on in the locker room scene, that Bullock was SUPREMELY pissed off at Gordon... Again, maybe I somehow missed that scene, but if not, either nothing was ever said about it or that's a plot-hole large enough to stuff a mountain into, no matter how corrupt the GCPD is. If it was missed or implied, I am guessing Gordon didn't want to throw Bullock under the bus, maybe to give him another chance? IDK :shrug: I think hes giving him another chance That's a given, I said as much in my post. I am trying to figure out if this was ever brought out, or being glossed over in the story. -slym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slym2none Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Dav, at the time, Cobblepot was an innocent man. Plus, Gordon was being forced by the mob to do a hit for them. He doesn't like being told what to do by the mafia. I don't see that as much of a problem, personally. -slym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman399 Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Maybe I missed something, or maybe not - when it was revealed that Gordon didn't kill Cobblepot, was it shown anywhere that he withheld information about Bullock's role in that scenario? Remember, if Gordon hadn't killed Cobblepot, Bullock was supposed to put a bullet in Gordon's head. Now, if that had come out after Cobblepot revealed himself, especially right in front of Montoya & her partner, wouldn't Bullock be hung out to dry? Not like it wasn't shown at the time, and later on in the locker room scene, that Bullock was SUPREMELY pissed off at Gordon... Again, maybe I somehow missed that scene, but if not, either nothing was ever said about it or that's a plot-hole large enough to stuff a mountain into, no matter how corrupt the GCPD is. If it was missed or implied, I am guessing Gordon didn't want to throw Bullock under the bus, maybe to give him another chance? And to partner with someone who would've killed him? Crazy. IDK :shrug: -slym You bring up something I have trouble with when watching Gotham. I don't know how Gordon ever comes back from letting Cobblepot go. Cobblepot is shown to be prolific serial killer, with every Cobblepot murder from that point forward being on Gordon's head. And that's not even getting into Gordon leaving a murderous Bullock on the police force. It really is a gigantic plot hole, if Gotham is supposed to be Gordon's hero tale. How many lives has Cobblepot snuffed thanks to Jim Gordon's choices? I don't think Gordon knows what he has been up to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KPR Comics Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Cobblepot hadn't killed anyone up to that point, though, had he? Not sure it's fair to saddle Gordon with that butterfly effect. Sort of off topic, but is anyone else creeped out by every scene involving Cobblepot and his mom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davenport Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Dav, at the time, Cobblepot was an innocent man. Plus, Gordon was being forced by the mob to do a hit for them. He doesn't like being told what to do by the mafia. I don't see that as much of a problem, personally. -slym I'll have to go back an re-watch the 1st episodes Slym. I'm remembering Cobblepot murdering for a ride as soon as he climbed from the water. Then murdering again for a place to stay. Very casually, as if killing was just Cobblepot's way of being in the world. That it wasn't his first rodeo was the impression it gave. Maybe looking again will close that plothole and make Gotham a bit more enjoyable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sd2416 Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Maybe I missed something, or maybe not - when it was revealed that Gordon didn't kill Cobblepot, was it shown anywhere that he withheld information about Bullock's role in that scenario? Remember, if Gordon hadn't killed Cobblepot, Bullock was supposed to put a bullet in Gordon's head. Now, if that had come out after Cobblepot revealed himself, especially right in front of Montoya & her partner, wouldn't Bullock be hung out to dry? Not like it wasn't shown at the time, and later on in the locker room scene, that Bullock was SUPREMELY pissed off at Gordon... Again, maybe I somehow missed that scene, but if not, either nothing was ever said about it or that's a plot-hole large enough to stuff a mountain into, no matter how corrupt the GCPD is. If it was missed or implied, I am guessing Gordon didn't want to throw Bullock under the bus, maybe to give him another chance? IDK :shrug: I think hes giving him another chance That's a given, I said as much in my post. I am trying to figure out if this was ever brought out, or being glossed over in the story. -slym Bullock told Gordon that he (Bullock) is screwed now that everyone knows Gordon didn't kill Cobblepot and he was going to jojn the good guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slym2none Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 But do the police know? That is what I am getting at. That's what my whole point is. Do the police that matter, as in Montoya & her forgettable partner's name, know that Bullock was going to kill Gordon? Sorry if my first post wasn't clear enough. -slym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slym2none Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Maybe I missed something, or maybe not - when it was revealed that Gordon didn't kill Cobblepot, was it shown anywhere that he withheld information about Bullock's role in that scenario? Remember, if Gordon hadn't killed Cobblepot, Bullock was supposed to put a bullet in Gordon's head. Now, if that had come out after Cobblepot revealed himself, especially right in front of Montoya & her partner, wouldn't Bullock be hung out to dry? Not like it wasn't shown at the time, and later on in the locker room scene, that Bullock was SUPREMELY pissed off at Gordon... Again, maybe I somehow missed that scene, but if not, either nothing was ever said about it or that's a plot-hole large enough to stuff a mountain into, no matter how corrupt the GCPD is. If it was missed or implied, I am guessing Gordon didn't want to throw Bullock under the bus, maybe to give him another chance? IDK :shrug: -slym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sd2416 Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 But do the police know? That is what I am getting at. That's what my whole point is. Do the police that matter, as in Montoya & her forgettable partner's name, know that Bullock was going to kill Gordon? Sorry if my first post wasn't clear enough. -slym No, they dont know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psithyrus Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Never saw Firefly. I rarely watch TV and haven't for over a decade. There are a ton of great shows out there but I don't want to get addicted to them. Life has too much going on to just watch TV. I'm giving Gotham a try because of the source material. Only other show I will watch is Walking Dead. Other than that, it's a movie once in a while. Luckily, you can watch Firefly in a weekend and be done! It only lasted one season. Ha ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidcolt Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 (edited) I think a lot of the times comics, tv shows and movies are over analyzed. Edited November 12, 2014 by kidcolt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delekkerste Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I think this actress is probably 5 years older than Ryan Atwood. So its seems about right. "Ryan Atwood" Ben McKenzie is actually a year older than Baccarin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revat Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I think this actress is probably 5 years older than Ryan Atwood. So its seems about right. "Ryan Atwood" Ben McKenzie is actually a year older than Baccarin. whaaa?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jking3437 Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 (edited) Cobblepot killed the guy in the episode in which he returned to gotham, the guy was dragging him in a alley saying " fish would pay to see him " And second thought I'm sure he killed the guy in the car when he was hitch hiking, and held the other kid hostage. Then he killed his 3 friends that robbed Maroney, with the poison dessert Edited November 12, 2014 by Jking3437 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slym2none Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Cobblepot killed the guy in the episode in which he returned to gotham, the guy was dragging him in a alley saying " fish would pay to see him " And second thought I'm sure he killed the guy in the car when he was hitch hiking, and held the other kid hostage. Then he killed his 3 friends that robbed Maroney, with the poison dessert Right - but that was after he was supposed to be killed. Before that, he was just a cruel little man, but not a killer. You can't hang any of that on Gordon not killing him. -slym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nearmint Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Lame villain this week. At least the B subplot with Alfred and Bruce was halfway decent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jking3437 Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I'm calling it now, going out on a limb and saying that the kid little Bruce beat up is the joker. Figuring the watch that Bruce used almost as brass knuckles gave that kid a nasty scar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
