an essay about the hypnotic powers of gotham.

i have literally never met a person who believed gotham to actually be quality tv. 

that is because it is not. its just not good. in the slightest. 

so why did so many of us sit through 100 episodes, each 40 minutes long?

well first, we need to look at a very important aspect of story. 

stakes. 

stakes are needed in some types of story, especially high stake tv shows like gotham,  to fuel the plot, to motivate the characters, to keep things going. stakes can be small, maybe a relationship, an object, an event. the trick is to slowly raise these stakes as the show progresses to keep it interesting.

in episode one of gotham, everyone is pointing guns at each other.

gotham very quickly ends up at a very high stake zone. with lives constantly at risk. season one only really has the stakes of life and death. 

however, not only are the stakes high, since theres an ensemble, most characters have their own plot lines going on. these plot lines also need to escalate in order to keep it interesting.

however, the rate that they escalate is so wacky you cannot look away. you have to keep putting on the next episode to see what the fuck is happening. why does everyone have beef with a 12 year old. why does everyone keep coming back to life. WHY ARE THEY BUILDING A SUBMARINE TOGETHER?

you just need to know. you need to know how batshit it can get. you need to know how far they’ll go. you need to see how much bullshit happens.

by the time you realise youre watching a group of aristocrats be forced to eat human pies, youre already on season 4 and in too deep.

a point i’d like to make, cause i was actually thinking about this the other day

the stakes have to twist and contort into insane shit because the stakes can never be “oh this character might die”, not REALLY. well, it IS if you’re *not* a known dc batman character. because the shows a prequel. a side character could die, obviously, but bruce, selina, edward, jim, oswald, alfred etc etc. all the known characters need to make it to the end of the series so they can become the characters everyone knows, so they’re functionally safe from the threat of death for the most part.

so, how else do you raise stakes? you just make increasingly insane shit happen to the characters. sure, they’re not going to die, exactly, but they’ll be traumatized for sure

(examples that happen to the characters i listed above) watch a friend fall down a hole, have a friend who loses her memory and doesn’t remember you anymore, get kidnapped by some weird court and threatened into ceasing investigation into your own company’s crimes, have your father figure get stabbed, be an accomplice in a murder, lose your mother, lose your sanity, lose your father, betray the love of your life and get psychologically tortured before being shot and pushed into a river but live because nobody dies, be frozen in a block of ice but live cause nobody dies, lose your girlfriend, lose a second girlfriend, stab your third and get stabbed back but live because nobody dies, be forced to eat human meat, be betrayed for the millionth time, die and then come back again cause nobody dies for real etc etc etc etc etc.

bar death, almost anything could happen to these characters so they kinda had to make themselves of insane shit they could do without directly killing any major characters. if a character “dies” but they’re a major player in the batman cast of characters then it’s kind of a given that they’re going to come back. oswald can’t stay dead, he needs to be the penguin, ed can’t stay frozen, he needs to be the riddler, etc

so basically it’s all abt stakes that aren’t death which is why things get so crazy . at least that’s what i think

stakes but trapped within their very own little containment field of the characters having to survive creating a little batshit bonkers petri dish of absurdity and escalation is a fantastic point!   I´d like to add another perspective here because I´ve had a very different experience, for me it´s not these stakes that got the hypno powers ... I´d gladly watch a whole season of them just drinking tea :D (and tea without guns .. I know they did tea party with guns that´s not what I mean here :D)  I can´t say I´ve a full working theory for where the hypnosis happens for me but I do know that two things are crucial there: the visuals and the acting!  In these two regards gotham imho actually IS quality TV   The plot ... well often got out of hand, some of the characterizations are just increasingly frustrating to me (and from what I understand part of it is because they sometimes didn´t really know how much episodes they get (? citation needed) and that sure must make plot planning difficult)   but there is  ... I want to say not one single frame that is not interesting to look at... the cinematography, the costumes, the set design .. everything of that is just stellar!  and so are the actors .. there´s like a couple of lines where, would I see them written I´d say there´s no way to say that out loud without sounding dumb and ridiculous .. but they make it work ... magic ..... 

(x)

Chapters: 13/? Fandom: Gotham (TV) Rating: Explicit Warnings: Graphic Depictions Of Violence, Rape/Non-Con, Major Character Death Relationships: Jim Gordon/Victor Zsasz, Oswald Cobblepot/Victor Zsasz Characters: Victor Zsasz, Oswald Cobblepot, Jim Gordon, Harvey Bullock, Gertrud Kapelput, Frank Gordon (Gotham), Barbara Kean Additional Tags: Alternate Universe - Historical, Alternate Universe - Fantasy, Vikings, Old Norse, Languages and Linguistics, Old Norse Culture and Customs, Other Additional Tags to Be Added, Ancient Scandinavia - Freeform, Implied/Referenced Homophobia, Period-Typical Homophobia, Not Beta Read, Secret Relationship, Explicit Sexual Content, Hand Jobs, Blow Jobs, Anal Fingering, Pining, Assault, Sexual Assault, Sexual Violence, Stabbing, Panic, Rape, Rape Recovery, Shame, Visions, Prophecy, Secrets, Reveal, Suicide Attempt, Intervention, Jealousy, Slow Burn, Angst, Accidental Voyeurism, Additional Characters to be added, Exhibitionism, Rimming, Intercrural Sex, Revenge

Story Summary: A group of Northmen from a small village embark upon different paths to fulfill their destinies.

卌

Chapter Summary: Earl Frár hosts Elof and his entourage during his village’s summer solstice festivities.

Though Jarl feels more hopeful about his future after meeting his betrothed, he is haunted by a ghost from his past.

always such a pleasure to visit that viking village again!

we as a fandom have not decided yet whether or not we believe oswald is pro cannibalism or anti.

in the span of two seasons, he went from killing and cooking his step siblings, to nearly vomiting while trying pygs mystery people pie.

so like?? was he just pretending??? like, acting disgusted so people wouldnt wonder why their ex mayor is so casual about eating human flesh.

or did he... change his mind about the whole eating people thing.

I don’t think Oswald is pro cannibalism more as I think he’s pro “doing whatever it takes to benefit me specifically”

Like he definitely isn’t just casually eating people in his free time - but he is petty and spiteful and is clearly not above feeding people to other people if they’ve personally wronged him

Plus Pyg made it clear that his pies were made of homeless people and we know Oswalds kind of a snob (I mean just look at him in season 5) so he may have just been disgusted at the concept of eating meat that may be “unclean” either metaphorically or literally

So I don’t really think he’s pro cannibalism, I think he’s just pro petty violent spiteful revenge no matter what cost lol

I don´t think there´s much to decide? Oswald is pro getting revenge on people that have harmed him and willing to go for drastic methods to reach that, but he´s not pro getting forced by someone else to do something and be a cog in their schemes 

As for the the disgust there´s plenty possibilities outside of moral rejection of cannibalism .. * pretending as mentioned, this was certainly the kind of setting he might want to keep some reputation intact in and not show his full crime committing self, murder is well enough for one dinner ...  * I don´t want to believe that it´s a matter of  “cleanliness” or people choice (Trish), he´s not been afraid to get dirty in the past, [hell earlier season kind of put him in the realm of nasty, with what they threw him in, and I lowkey miss his more intense earlier makeup yellowed teeth and all]  also it´s (probably) not like he really ate and enjoyed eating the “wealthy” person meat he cooked, at least they didn´t show that (The little taste in front of Grace barely counts, and I´m starting to sincerely believe his claim he tasted both siblings as in actually eating them the moment I see it :D)  * he was showcasing not so much his disgust about the food but his disgust about Pyg and the role he´s forced to play in his show aka. “you might be able to make me eat it but you sure can´t make me enjoy it, nor can you make me eat it with proper table manners” spite * my personal pet headcannon ;D ... the pies just simply tasted bad, regardless of their meat source, not everyone can be a good cook like Os  * his fear for Martin´s life might have affected his stomach and no food would have become him in that moment

Tldr: I agree on not pro or anti cannibalism, it´s certainly a pro opportunism and pragmatism  [Edit: Yellow tint in teeth ofc isn´t (necessarily) a sign of lack of hygiene, I didn´t realize this sounds like I was implying that being part of the nasty/unclean] 

love reading oswald x edward fanfiction and seeing oswald being described as the anti y/n. yes, yes, yes that is why we love him.

fuck 'porcelain skin' describe how clammy and sickly pale he looks.

'the subtle scent of cedarwood' he probably crawled out of another lake after cheating death again.

'his hair was soft' no. it crunched loudly under edwards hand. or covered it in a layer of gel and stabbed him. we as a fandom havent decided whether he uses hairspray or gel yet.

'his perfect smile' his teeth are probably sharpened from biting people and that is why we LOVE HIM!

preach ...  also aside from behind the scenes footage showing hairspray my watsonian in universe bet is on old fashioned pomade, at least for his early look   (it might just be every kind of hair product known and unknown to mankind at the same time tho ... :D some unholy concoction )

This is all fantastic and really hits home for me, @the-house-of-abrasax.

A massive yes to the bizarre plot twists.  Why did Falcone just meekly call the hit off?  That made no sense at all.  And this too:

I think that while Mario might have been intended as the disposable rebound guy – there was actually so much scope for him to be really interesting, for the reasons you give above. In fact, a man who has gone into a profession that’s all about helping people, who has a conflicted relationship with his family, who’s consciously chosen not to follow in his father’s footsteps, who might fear his own propensity for violence… gee – you’d almost think that he’d have been an interesting guy for Jim to develop a friendship with?  But no – sacrificed for the dullest love triangle ever.

This is fascinating.  I feel like they just swept a bunch of stuff under the carpet to push on to the next part of the season.  Jim was in a dark place psychologically, and drinking incredibly heavily.  He just put all that to one side and also stopped drinking because he went back to work?  Not buying that.  He was having whiskey for breakfast.  

This would have been so much better, and so much more meaningful – because it would actually have been rooted in characterisation.   In retrospect, it’s completely baffling that more wasn’t done with this.  We were essentially told that our protagonist is riddled with guilt, that he’s depressed and drinking heavily, that he beats himself up for not living up to his idealised (and false) image of his dead father – and that he is suicidal.   That’s massive.  But it was just sort of glossed over, and outright forgotten when it came to the Tetch virus – when we were served up ooc-ness instead.  Such a waste.

ETA - Alfred’s love of quiche is the worst of all.  

@sunlitroom​ Well said!

I think that while Mario might have been intended as the disposable rebound guy – there was actually so much scope for him to be really interesting, for the reasons you give above. In fact, a man who has gone into a profession that’s all about helping people, who has a conflicted relationship with his family, who’s consciously chosen not to follow in his father’s footsteps, who might fear his own propensity for violence… gee – you’d almost think that he’d have been an interesting guy for Jim to develop a friendship with?  I love this idea!

You are so right. Jim and Mario could have had an interesting friendship and thinking back on it, the interactions they did have were fairly engaging. If the writers really wanted to use the jealousy angle they could have gone about it in a completely different and far more compelling way. Remember, after Mario’s death when Falcone orders the hit on Jim and says the following to Lee: “I cared for Jim Gordon. In some ways he was more like my son than Mario. His life is mine to take.” Okayyyy. For the moment lets set aside the incredibly bad taste shown in saying this the day after his child’s funeral, to Mario’s widow no-less, and the hypocrisy in the statement which actually gives Lee far more entitlement to Jim’s life than Carmine.

There are some genuinely interesting potential dynamics here: Does Falcone think that being the loaded gun, if not the trigger finger, that killed Peter Gordon gives him the right to step into Peter’s shoes as Jim’s father? As I’ve said, there is something very nasty about smarming up to Jim as a father figure while simultaneously being the instrument for Peter’s death. Anyway, Falcone’s words imply that Carmine was disappointed with Mario in a manner that he wasn’t disappointed with Jim. Why? Imagine if this was something that had been discussed before Mario died. It would have avoided using Lee as a plot device and the boring love-triangle troupe! We could have had the build up of a friendship that was genuine then have the virus act as a catalyst to the faultlines that Falcone had bred between his two “sons”. When Mario finally gave into the virus he could have gone after Jim rather than Lee with the outcome still being the same.It would have added much more weight (to what was already a good plot point) when it was revealed that Carmine had Peter killed.

Of course, I’m biased. There’s nothing like family dynamics escalated to the levels of Greek Tragedy to guarantee my interest, far more than any lukewarm romance. Who cares about Antigone/Haemon Jim/Lee when we can watch Antigone Jim and Uncle Creon Carmine tear each other to shreds over prolapsed family loyalties?

(As a side note, I want to know more about the relationship between Falcone and Gordon Sr. It mirrors the relationship between Hugo Strange and Thomas Wayne in interesting ways.) This would have been so much better, and so much more meaningful – because it would actually have been rooted in characterisation.   In retrospect, it’s completely baffling that more wasn’t done with this.  We were essentially told that our protagonist is riddled with guilt, that he’s depressed and drinking heavily, that he beats himself up for not living up to his idealised (and false) image of his dead father – and that he is suicidal.   That’s massive.  I agree. Jim is a walking stereotype of masculine tropes, this could have been a chance to deconstruct those tropes and explore all the fissures that trying to keep up the illusion of strength was creating both emotionally and psychologically in his character. And it still could have made for an uplifting ending for the season… at least, I know I cheered a bit when Jim found the strength to turn away from Jervis’ compulsion early on in S3. They could have done something similar to this in the finale and it would have been dialed up to 11 because the anticipation would have been stewing all year. 

ETA - Alfred’s love of quiche is the worst of all.  

Never forgive. Never forget.

oh so much good points  “imply that Carmine was disappointed with Mario in a manner that he wasn’t disappointed with Jim. Why? “ I kinda got hung up on how much a shame it is, that the show never gave more answer to that.  I´m somewhat operating on the headcanon that it´s perhaps simply the “Calvi” thing, Mario not being part of the family business. Perhaps it was not just about heeding a wish but Mario himself rejecting mob life on moral principle?  [This could also have influenced Victor Zsasz´s opinion on him (“Also, nice shot on Mario, I never liked him” (3x12)) On the one side you´ve got a fiercely loyal henchman and on the other a biological son that rejects and casts away the Falcone name and what made that name “great”. Perhaps Zsasz could have even seen Mario as hypocritical, if Mario (in/directly) profited from his father´s wealth and connections while outwardly distancing himself and pursuing a civil career.] After all there´s only so much ties you can cut with related family, Mario obviously still sees Carmine as father, and in a life or death scenario he´s ready to utilize crime related resources but his choice of surname and profession might have been influenced by a rejection of crime. Perhaps Mario was seeing through the mob propaganda and perceiving them as the violent leeches on a community that they are;   meanwhile Jim, contrary to his initial ambition, was ready to accept Falcone as part of Gotham, perhaps not only because he lacked the means for fundamental change but because he started to believe that Falcone and the mob were (a necessary) part of the ecosystem? In some way Jim was more collaborating with what Carmine built than his own son? 

I got a feeling there´s more than one chara the would benefit from “ letting him be [...] outside of “[.....] to Gordon” arc.” ;D oh the hatt&crow ship ... I get that one in the way I get ships that e.g have characters from different media that even never interacted but as far as shipable moments between those two go on gotham I barely can recall anything and don´t see where that came from, I was surprised that this really got a thing :D 

for the “what´s up with people....” I mean I have read posts about purity wank in fandom that got some analysis on that, but in the end I really don´t get those ppl  ^^  

“I would never want to meet them” < not even with a thick safety glass barrier tho? Shark cave dive style .....  Barnes really was the only one “crime shouldn´t pay”ing Carmine ....  Full agreement on Mario!  (and uh I think I never saw that post .. gotta bookmark that for later)

Okay, okay, so...

I see a lot of new people in the ship tags don't like the ship name "nygmobblepot." Y'all think it sounds dumb and it does, but the guy who came up with it was none other than Cory Michael Smith. That's right, the actor who plays Ed on Gotham decided the ship name and the rest of us went along with it. That's where our dumb sounding ship name came from.

Also, back when the show was still running, we used to flood the tags with Gotham content. Like so much content. A lot of us chose not to use "riddlebird" to tag Gotham content as a courtesy to those looking for Ed/Os content that wasn't from the show Gotham. For a lot of us who were there back then, there is now a distinction between "riddlebird" and "nygmobblepot." It was useful in helping people find what they were looking for. The distinction probably isn't as important now (we don't flood the tags like we used to), but that's why we did it.

Anway, you can still think the ship name sounds dumb (cause it does), but there are reasons so many of still use it and are still fond of it.

hands down it is a fantastic ship name  * the history (as illustrated here) * the precision ... like if you type in “nygmobblepot“ that´s the content you´re gonna get * it´s so consistent ... it´s fitting right into gotham penguin ship name tradition and follows the gobblepot, zsaszlepot, gablepot form  * it´s dumb (yes that´s a pro) * and still it´s a cool name 

damn that looks good,  that´s really well put together *.*

@honestmrdual: “i remembered this scene and moment before where azrael threatens to kill barnes and his men if barnes’ not gonna give up gordon and how in 3x02 gordon says “barnes would happy to see me dead lol” which is just not true considering that he had a chance to give up gordon twice in one episode and he wasnt thinking even a second about that its interesting contrast to gordon in 3x09 when symon tells that barnes attacked him and gordon doesnt doubt it for a second and immideitly starts the whole process of getting barnes arrested without even any proof that barnes could possibly done something like this this says pretty much everything about these characters” 

I´m rusty on the time lines but wasn´t Barnes well infected with the Tetch Virus at that point, I´d like to cut him some slack due to tha :D but arguably there could have been a better attitude about it,  I really wish they´d not gone the Virus route for Barnes, or at least much later, with said contrast between these characters there´d be so much to do with, Barnes “there is no line only the law” approach clashing with Jim´s collaboration with criminals to keep within a certain lin …. that alone could fill seasons  .. at least they had fantastic moments like Barnes straight up glaring at Carmine Falcone being like “You belong behind bars”  which hits different after having seen Jim tying to suicide missioning “arresting” Falcone in the earlier season  ….. it´s just these two with the same proclaimed goal but principles that diverge, I wish we´d seen more of that aligning, clashing and rattling along the way  ^^  

not sure why i typed such a  long answer, too much rambling 

Keep reading

adding more too much rambling ..... ^^°  

 oh that´s a good one, that could have been really interesting if they had gone more into this, especially considering how Jim is so going to judge that “necessity” very differently depending on if it´s about him or someone else (and I should really go into a rewatch to get a better grasp on the TetchVirusTimeline, this post really makes me feel like there´s so much more to their dynamic / or a possible dynamic if they´d done more with it there ^^)

you´re right and you should say it, that´s a more than convincing summary of that situation

If those are the two options yes, but with adaptions,  like ... I´d say he was underused which did not let the well written come through fully, and I would not say going a infection & villain route ruins him per se but that they did it so “early” wasted a lot of (for me) more interesting potential  mostly this:  “can´t let Barnes be right for once, because it means damaging Gordon’s status quo as Only Good Cop. it also means having an actual conflict between Barnes and Gordon” I´d have loved it if they had just been digging into this dynamic. I´d also really would have loved to see if Barnes (without the Virus) would have keept his path, or if there would have been a point where he would have gone off it like Jim. In case the city gets to him, what would it be that makes him sway? If the city does not get to him, how would he deal with the challenges? What would he do differently than Jim?  (I know having a “Penguin in the trunk” situation with Barnes is unrealistic, but how would Barnes have handled that? )

s3Barnes: “because whump“  ha, I can fully support that :D  “i also think it wasn’t only the virus that ruined him, there was a lot of things: Gordon-vigilante, losing trust of public in GCPD […], Bullock running off […]” Phrased that way the Virus actually aligns with my preferences :D ....  like I´d watch a whole season just on these precise things, … I feel like I can barely let it count cause, it just takes a really close eye and analysis to pick up on the “not only the virus” … but then again I probably should do that rewatch to see how much I missed of these issues being incorporated into his struggle on screen 

“BARNES’ IDEOLOGY” the “There is no line. There's just the law.” (2x9) one? Cause like I´ve spent too much time thinking about that line, going back and forth :D (It also does not help that that scene was just so incredibly well acted from the both of them.)   I think it´s perhaps agonizingly realistic in some way. It recognizes that likely any given person being put in the right (or rather very wrong) situation is capable of crossing any line. Making “lines”, as in the rules any individual gives themselves is kind of malleable. I´d take it as Barnes perhaps viewing someone who hasn´t crossed their personal line not so much as a strong virtuous person but rather someone lucky who just hasn´t been brought to a point, thrown into a situation where they´d overstep. Not to diminish the strife and accomplishment of people that keep within their individual lines even in the most dire situations … but you know, what if the situation had been worse, what if it had been even much more worse than that. The individual line is always at risk. The line, no matter how deeply you carve it into the sand, could be washed away if the next wave happens to just go a bit much further into the land. The law on the other hand is a broader choice, not only by individuals but by a whole society. (As flawed as actual laws might be, but let´s put that can of rotten worms aside.) The law says that we all adhere to a certain conduct, one that ideally would benefit everyone involved. It also says what to do if someone oversteps. There is action and consequence.   The laws sees that the line is malleable (or consequently does not exist, in the words of Barnes) and it gives a framework for how to deal with that fact. (I´m realizing I´m taking “the law” as somewhat of a metaphor here and perhaps not so much the actually paragraphs and whatever jurisdiction of the area one finds themselves to be in but that´s kind of how I´m making sense of it … *stuffing the worms back into the can) I´ve been kind of taken aback by the “That's what separates us from the animals.” part, because why would you trash talk an individual’s “own” moral choices or just at least the good honest attempt to stay within a line like that …but applying it less to “a human” and more to “humanity” makes it work better for me. As in “shit happens” but humanity established something to deal with that. And that is real, that is something more concrete than “a line.” Arguably in practice the law isn´t real either in the sense that it always leads to a consequence but that´s (a) due to poor implementation, that Barnes does try to fix and (b) I think it´s not so much about the actual practice, and more that mere concept of law? .. law as the concept that deals with the fact that lines get crossed (and perhaps moreover the fact that individuals can really come up with some weird justifications why any given bad behaviour is within the line they drew for themselves.. law again being a concept and attempt to do better in that area .. at least in theory)  ……. if that makes any sense [I´m fairly certain though that animals got some social behaviours that lead to consequences for animals being out of line?  … not sure if the separation holds up in that regard :D]  .... so I think I´d extend the “having law as a moral guide” interpretation with a  having a “plan of action” for when the guide falters and fails perhaps? 

on a side note: “it’s not bad, it’s not good, it’s just is.” really should be peoples approach to more things more often ^^

VIRUS TANGENT “you didn’t like virus storyline?” I think my bigger beef is less with the plot and more with how they presented the TetchVirus in terms of its consequences for characterisation. What really drives me up the wall are comments that actually imply the behaviour while infected (*) says something about that person. Like .. no .. we´re not who we are when some magic/science blubbery takes over, even IF that blubbery genuinely would reveal “our darkness”. Humans are not their darkest thoughts, they are the way how they deal with them. People are the choice they make to not act upon them and if a virus robs a person of that choice, that´s the virus not the person.  (* Excluding voluntary infection, like Lee .. which .. SIGH)   BARNES & FALCONE Love the point on the height difference with Carmine and Nathaniel, and I don´t recall if the scene was consistent with that or if that´s just a really well taken screenshot but: Barnes´ face being in the light but Carmine´s almost completely in the dark! The cinematography of that show really is on another level …

( On a humours side note … “(with Barnes’ height being 170cm it’s not hard, but still)” gave me my daily short person reality check :D *insert the Plankton “I can deny it no longer…” meme

Found a slow mo one (not mine -> @frostgiant4life )

*glares some more*

@tinchentitri the question is, where are you glaring at most, hmm? 🤔

Uhm. Corky has a nice watch and a very nice ring… @thehumming6ird … … Also… there’s a lot of movement in #7.

WHY DID YOU HAVE TO POINT OUT #7?!

Because if I die you die.

What a way to go though…

(the nipple poking against the desperate shirt in #8 isn’t bad either, for when my eyes need a bit of rest from all that interesting…movement)

War Horse (2011) — BEHIND THE SCENES

 THANK YOU!

good lord

2019 Wimbledon Tennis Championships

@high-functioning-lokipath @lovesmesomehiddles @vbecker10 . THE BLUE! The blue on this gorgeous Man!

Gobblepot Fic Recs

Hi everyone! We’re back with a fic rec event!

All you need to do to take part in it is submit a link to you favourite Gobblepot fanfic via this form. You can submit as many times or as many fics as you like, no limits exist! It’s all to spread the love!

The event will close on June 30 and the list of all your recommendations will be posted shortly after.

So have fun reading and don’t forget to share the ones you liked!

Was looking over screencaps for 3.15, and noticed these lovely shots when Ed has Harvey captured, and demands that Lucius answer his riddles

His shadow here magnifies his poise throughout the whole scene: posture upright but relaxed, hands loosely clasped in front of him.  Even despite the extreme provocation offered by Ed - Lucius maintains this manner throughout.  He never loses his temper, or panics, or throws insults.  He’s calm and assured - offering a counterpoint to Ed’s febrile manner.

You can see this in this next one, too.  This is a moment of extreme duress.  Lucius has just confronted Ed - asking him if he killed Oswald.  Ed was manic enough at the outset of this game, but we can see his grasp on himself worsening even more by the end: rubbing his eyes, and getting the words of his own riddle muddled. Lucius knows Ed is dangerous and fully capable of letting Harvey fall - yet again there’s that sense of stillness from him: hand resting lightly on the banister.

The next one is maybe the most striking.  Ed loses his composure, and runs at Lucius with his gun trained on him.  He wanted Lucius to be able to give the exact responses he wanted to his riddles, even though Lucius’ answers were correct in their own way.  Lucius steps back, but still remains remarkably composed - one hand raised in an attempt to keep a defined distance between them.  It’s authoritative in a non-confrontational way: this far and no further, but it’s also placatory - trying to calm Ed.

What’s really lovely is that we see this pose continued in the next shot:

This is maybe the best image.  We see Ed retreating further up the stairs, clearly agitated.  We can’t see Lucius himself behind him now, but we do see his shadow, hand still outstretched, calm and even elegant.  Ed - for all he’s wearing his fancy new suit, is sweaty and scattered - talking to himself and clearly distressed.

I just thought it was a really nice example of using visuals to underscore a message.  Throughout the whole encounter, Lucius is just the perfect counterpoint.  He’s calm, despite the situation.  He remains calm even as he gives the ‘wrong’ answer and Ed becomes more agitated.  He’s genuinely authoritative.  While Ed needs to resort to these games for a sense of power, Lucius establishes his authority from the outset - rejecting Ed’s claim that Harvey is fine, and telling him clearly that he wants to hear that from Harvey himself - to which Ed submits. He also calmly states the case for why his riddle answers are correct.

Lastly, he’s compassionate - and we’ll see that again later in their scene in the car.  Ed is cruel here.  He’s tormenting a terrified Harvey and tormenting Lucius.  He continues to insult Harvey intermittently.  He yells at Lucius for not giving him the answer he wants, and then threatens him - telling him he’s not ‘good enough’ to be his enemy.

In contrast, Lucius remains calm and non-judgmental.  He’s obviously not pleased at what’s happening, but whereas every other characters would resort to impatience and anger and insults - he doesn’t do that.  He’s measured and courteous, but never obsequious or flattering.  He doesn’t patronise or insult him - we don’t hear the word ‘freak’ here. When he finally realises that Ed is responsible for Oswald’s disappearance, his tone is questioning, and then resigned.  It’s not accusatory in the same way that Jim’s would be - it’s more calm, almost rooted in a knowledge of him

What did you do, Ed?…..Did you kill him?….You did, didn’t you

His face after this doesn’t suggest disgust or anger, either.  It’s calm, sad, regretful.

The answer to Ed’s big riddle in this episode is ‘reflection’.  Throughout the episode, Ed is trying to stage manage another phase of his ‘becoming’ - looking for his nemesis.  He decides it’s Jim, but Jim - pretty hilariously - just isn’t about town this week to play the role Ed ordained for him. 

 Instead, he has to deal with Lucius - calm, thoughtful Lucius, who consistently refuses to behave in the way Ed has come to expect, who doesn’t exhibit fear, irritation, anger, or disgust, and who can answer his riddles in ways that are perfectly correct but that he did not anticipate.  

Jim, Oswald, Harvey - these are all people that Ed is confident he can predict and use.  Jim can be provoked, Oswald manipulated, Harvey insulted. They’re puzzles, in a way: he’s ‘solved’ their nature and can now use them for his own ends as a prize.

 Lucius, though, refuses to be puppeteered in this way, and remains his own man - not a puzzle, or a projection, or a reflection.  Ed recognises and appreciates this at the end of his spree.

okay .. if someone asks why gotham is good ... that´s the post to point to 

honestly that set design and cinematography I´ll never be over that