Comics on television

Until very recently, it wasn't possible to show superheroes on film. The feats of the comic books (and the costumes) were so incredible that there was really no way to reproduce it effectively without advanced CGI. Although wirework had been around in 1975's Superman, you can't use wires to convey Spider-Man's acrobatic swinging or Iron Man's jet boots. This is still the primary factor preventing superhero TV shows, but that is starting to go away.

It has recently been announced that Heroes is being cancelled, but two new superhero shows have already been developed for the next season. The Cape is an antihero story somewhere between Batman and Spawn while No Ordinary Family is about a family that gains superpowers, similar to Fantastic Four or The Incredibles. I'm not sure that either of these will last, but it shows me that there is a big interest in bringing superheroes to the small screen.





Personally, I think this is fantastic because the story progression of comic books lend themselves better to the episodic nature of television rather than the blockbuster style of film. Case in point, a comic series, like a television series, is based entirely on the premise which is shown in the first issue (or pilot). In Cheers, the premise was of a Harvard educated woman working as a waitress in a sport's bar. In Arrested Development, the premise was of a responsible single father trying to save a failing family business as well as a failing family. Likewise, superheroes are defined by their origin - which is both how they got their unique abilities and how they came to use those abilities for the general good. For this reason, the first superhero movie has a much greater possibility for success because it has the most engaging aspect of the story - the premise.

However, in order to develop this premise slowly, you need to be able to show it from many different perspectives. This cannot be easily done in a few short films because unlike, say, Star Wars which had an obvious conclusion in Luke becoming a Jedi master and the destruction of the Empire, comics do not have an obvious conclusion, so there is nothing to build toward.

Think about it. What is "the end" of the Hulk? Does he find the cure for the Hulk? Does he die? How about Fantastic Four? Or Spider-Man? Or Superman? Or Batman? I'm willing to bet that I know these characters better than you, but even I don't know what the logical conclusion of these stories would be.

In large part, they are designed not to be concluded. As the Superman announcer used to say, its a "never-ending battle" that they are on and that is part of the charm. This is why television would lend itself better to adapting comics.

Television has a long-running, open-ended format that is very similar to comics, but different in a few crucial ways. First, television is finite. Every show is canceled at some point, so this forces the writers to work toward some sort of conclusion eventually. Second, television comes in seasons with each season (usually) representing a year in the life of the character. This would add a lot more structure to superhero concepts because a season premiere/finale serves as a natural transition point.

Of course, there have been several great superhero cartoons - X-Men, Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, The Tick, Wolverine & the X-Men, Justice League, Spectacular Spider-Man... but few have managed to make it into live action drama. Of course, the most notorious example is the 1966 Batman series. While his lack of powers would seem to lend itself well to television, his costume, resources, and privacy are an impediment to that, so it works best in film (although, I have no doubt that there will someday be a great live action Batman TV show).

One superhero who has succeeded in live action television better than any other is Superman. On the surface, you would think that Superman has too many powers to represent him on film, but all of his powers are easy to do on a budget - super-strength, super-speed, invulnerability, heat vision, super-hearing, X-ray vision... The hardest one is flight, which is why Smallville intentionally left that power out. Additionally, Superman has a lot of elements that just lend itself to good television drama. First, there is the romantic tension between him and Lois. Second, they work in a newspaper - which is an easy way to write them into all sorts of situations.

So what other superheroes would lend themselves well to the little screen? Well, if you've read my previous posts, you know that I would put the X-Men and Daredevil at the top of that list. The X-Men is going to be more difficult for several reasons, but it is insanely popular especially amongst young women so it has possibly the best chance for wide appeal. Daredevil, on the other hand, would be a lot more gritty and grounded, but when seen as a legal drama, the cross-genre potential is obvious.

Probably the character most suited to live action drama is Spider-Man. He starts off as a teenager and is constantly conflicted between the demands of superheroing, school, work, relationships, and family. He is an absolutely identifiable figure and it is virtual impossible not to get caught up in his problems. The big problem is the aforementioned web swinging. This is very difficult to do without CGI, so it would mostly depend on tricky editing and sound effects to minimize the actual acrobatics and focus on the emotional moments.

Another big problem with Spider-Man would be the villains. These are not characters that lend themselves easily to low budget interpretations. Some would work very well like Punisher, Kraven, Silver Sable, Hammerhead, Kingpin, the Enforcers, maybe even Mysterio... but the big ones, Dr. Octopus, Green Goblin, the Lizard, Rhino, Sandman... these would be really hard to do on a TV budget.

I'm not sure what else would work. Fantastic Four? Probably not. Hulk? I could easily see a new Hulk series taking off, as long as they could afford the obvious CGI necessary.

Food for thought.