Originally Posted by WarriorDreamer
Yes. Movie's have a bigger production, the top, highly paid writers are hired to write it. They play out epic stories. Actresses on television don't have that luxury, they have to deal with comedy, bad storylines and crap episodes a lot of the time. The writers are more low pay and there's no guarantee they are any good. In television the schedule is very difficult. They normally have to work 8-10 hours a day, 6 days a week to bring out 45 minute episodes week-by-week. They aren't paid much. In movies actors and actresses take out months just to film something worth 2 hours. They are paid a gold mine. There are lots of reasons why actors/ actresses in films have it easier than in television. There are lots of reasons why actors/ actresses seem more epic in films, than they would in television. There are millions of dollars which goes into making them look good and seem exciting. In television there is a few thousand. In my opinion sometimes it's a case of actors who rise to what they have more than actors who were given lots to work with. You have to take that into consideration.
I think one season vs one movie is a somewhat fair comparison. What happens in movies is epic. What happens in television is not to epic, this makes television actors look bad. If not, when I said or one episode, if you don't think that is a fair comparison perhaps their first two episodes. So for Teri Hatcher, Pilot and Strange Visitor (From Another Planet) and for Erica, Crusade and Gone. Both total the time of the movies.
If you don't want to compare/ actors/ actresses that's fine, but it isn't ridiculous and if you are to compare them, you need to measure accurately, so that both actors have equal opportuny.
With LnC it was "Lois and Clark". Lois has top billing. She appears first. We don't have a half hour at the start where we see neither Lois nor Clark.
I am not going to say whether I though Hatcher or Adams did a better Lois Lane. That question is a mine field. The chracters were different, dealing with different things. True, they are both first saved by a Clark not in the suit, but in LnC Clark has a believable, at least by TV standards, excuse of why things worked. In MOS, Clark really either lets Lois die or reveals his power.
I wish they had given Adams more lines and hope they do so in the sequel, but Lois Lane not being a stronger character was not her fault. In fact, I think in some ways Goyer tried too hard. He seems to have said "if we have Lois shot something, she will be a strong character", ignoring that stronger characters are ones who develop. Still, I think she does that. She goes from being willing to expose anything at any cost, to accepting there is a higher good, and some stories are worth not telling. Perry is glad she learns this even.