Talk:Doom Patrol (TV series)/Archive 1

Archive 1

October 2018

It's also not part of the DC Extended Universe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.255.216.208 (talk) 22:34, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Who says that it is? -- Alex^TW 22:43, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Why Doom Patrol is not a spinoff of Titans

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I'm getting really tired of people making edits to both this article and the Titans article to refer to Doom Patrol as being a spinoff of Titans when the two series are not connected despite sharing actors and characters, but since it's not likely to stop, I'm going to spell out exactly why Doom Patrol is not a spinoff of Titans and why referring to it as such is peddling false information.

The definition of the term spinoff, as per this very site, is "a radio program, television program, video game, film, or any narrative work, derived from already existing works that focus on more details and different aspects from the original work (e.g. particular topics, characters or events)."

The Doom Patrol series does not fit this definition because the characters in it do not share the same narrative histories and experiences as the Doom Patrol characters who appeared in the "Doom Patrol" episode of Titans, as per the producers of the Doom Patrol series and actress April Bowlby.

It does not matter that Bowlby plays Rita in both the Doom Patrol series and the "Doom Patrol" episode of Titans. The events of the "Doom Patrol" episode of Titans have absolutely no bearing on or connection to the events of the Doom Patrol series.

If one plays out the logic of the argument that Doom Patrol is a spinoff of Titans because it features the same characters and some of the same actors and because it was originally announced as being connected to the Titans series to its ultimate conclusion, it, for example, opens up the door for the false claim of a film like Spider-Man: Far From Home being a spinoff of the Sam Raimi Spider-Man films due to J.K. Simmons appearing in both that trilogy and Far From Home as J. Jonah Jameson despite the fact that the Raimi films have zero narrative connections to Far From Home.DigificWriter (talk) 01:21, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I think it is WP:UNDUE to emphasize this supposed separation in the article lead. Comics can and will retcon as they see fit. That the shows aren't actively trying to keep continuity and directly follow from each other or overlap for now doesn't allow us to jump to the conclusion that they are in entirely separate universes.

(At the risk of repeating the other discussion) Bowlby is able to say Doom Patrol "a completely separate thing than Titans" but that merely seems like a sensible production move. We cannot predict what might happen later any more than she can. The Carver interview again only shows that they are being creative and flexible and doing their own thing, not that Doom Patrol is necessarily a whole separate universe or that it wont cross over later. The lack of continuity doesn't make it suddenly not a spin off.

Either way I don't think the article lead needs to make any claims that it is a spin-off or in a whole separate universe, ultimately it is based on the comics and that's what matters. -- 109.79.168.251 (talk) 15:55, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

This is not a comic. It's a television series, that was initially introduced publicly as a direct spin-off from another series, before the producers saw fit to change that. The content is also reliably sourced. (Also, don't reply to a closed discussion when the original discussion of the duplication is linked.) -- /Alex/₂₁ 12:03, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Although it does relate to the old discussion, my point is a response to a recent edit that removed details from the lead. Alex21 reverted that edit but after taking some time to consider it I happen to think that edit was appropriate.

I (and several comments in the old linked discussion) don't agree that the sources actually say as much as is being inferred from them. Direct or indirect, with or without continuity, it is still a spin-off (the Titans article uses the section heading Spin-off), but that is not important. I simply think it is better to not emphasize this information at all and it would be better to not include it in the lead of this article. -- 109.79.169.24 (talk) 14:03, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

We highlight the most important part of the body in the lead. A spin-off is traditionally always in the same continuity (e.g. The Flash with Arrow). However, Doom Patrol is not in the same continuity as Titans, and thus is needs to be included to prevent any misbelief that it is a traditional same-continuity spin-off. -- /Alex/₂₁ 14:07, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Spin-offs don't have to have the same continuity. See Simpsons and The Tracy Ullman Show, TV Funhouse and Saturday Night Live, and Absolutely Fabulous and The French and Saunders Show. DonQuixote (talk) 14:09, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

I never said they have to. Please do read the replies properly. I said traditionally. So, when they're not, it should be noted with reliable sources. -- /Alex/₂₁ 14:18, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

"Traditionally" spin-offs are spun-off from a parent show and that's it. See The Stephen Colbert Show and The Daily Show. DonQuixote (talk) 14:27, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

When talking about "continuity" in the manner of this discussion, it typically means a fictional continuity, neither of which The Stephen Colbert Show and The Daily Show are. -- /Alex/₂₁ 14:30, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

That was actually the point. Spin-offs don't have to have a continuity (ie real-world vs in-universe). DonQuixote (talk) 14:32, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

See Empty Nest which had no continuity with its backdoor pilot on The Golden Girls. DonQuixote (talk) 14:33, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Should definitely say it's a separate continuity. And sigh, again: I never said they have to, I said that they traditionally do. -- /Alex/₂₁ 14:35, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Being persnickety here, but it's not "traditionally" because historically it isn't true. DonQuixote (talk) 14:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

I still think it is WP:UNDUE and unnecessary to emphasize this claim that there are two separate continuities right up in the article intro. My reading of the sources is that they weren't trying to keep them in the same continuity, not that they were explicitly in two entirely separate continuities. The sources are vague, they are not clear and definitive. Mentioning that indirection and the development in the article body is one thing, just it is weird to put so much emphasis on it by putting it right there in the lead section. -- 109.77.255.9 (talk) 20:51, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Spoilers

At the moment, the section "Premise" includes a major plot twist from later in the series. I suggest it should either be re-titled "Plot" or split into separate "Premise" and "Plot" sections.

The same spoiler is included in the cast list, would suggest this is either removed or the section retitled "plot and character arcs" or somesuch, or the entry for NIles Caulder be altered to a hint only such as "although he helped save their lives, complications are revealed later in series 1"

JamesGerund2972 (talk) 11:29, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

¬¬¬¬ — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesGerund2972 (talk • contribs) 11:25, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

We do not filter spoilers per WP:SPOILER. -- /Alex/₂₁ 13:17, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

"plot summaries, episode lists, character descriptions, etc.—were already clearly named to indicate that they contain plot details"

While the point is taken about character descriptions, I see "Premise" as indicating information about the start of the series only

JamesGerund2972 (talk) 15:06, 10 March 2020 (UTC)