Characters who work best on film and characters who work best on TV

[The Overlord]

Since we have seen many comic book based movies and TV shows recently, I think its interesting to ask which characters work best on film and which characters work best in on a TV show?

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

Since we have seen many comic book based movies and TV shows recently, I think its interesting to ask which characters work best on film and which characters work best in on a TV show?

Funnily enough I think Green Arrow, Gotham PD, and Constantine are perfect for TV, shame about the results though.

Similar to Green Arrow, Batman would also be perfect for tv, but that'll never happen as long as his movies are making money. Same with Captain America, Black Widow, and Hawkeye. Though the actors' paychecks would be tbe main reason there.

Daredevil, JJones, Luke Cage, Iron Fist, and Preacher are all great picks for TV.

So in general, I think the characters that require the least amount of cg are best suited for tv.

Havent seen Supergirl to judge the quality. Flash sometimes bites off more than it can chew with cg, though I still think it was a smart pick for tv since there wasnt a 'superhero' show on the air, colorful costume, superpowers and all.

As much as I like Watchmen, an HBO miniseries would have been even better probably.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I think most of them could work fairly well on TV, but Spider-man comes to mind, which his huge supporting cast.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Hmm... I am not sure there are any hard and fast rules here. I think the context of the adaptation is what matters more than just the characters themselves. Even the level of powers is less a factor these days.

Are we talking about adapting a specific story and doing it with minimal deviation? Are we talking about coming up with something whole cloth separate from the specifics of any arc in the books? Are you casting a wide net or do you budget this to be a niche thing that can prosper because it's not costing blockbuster movie/GOT money?

I do think that there are some characters that I would love to see in a long form, more serialized format but I don't think that means they are necessarily better suited to be on a TV/Cable/Streaming show. Take the Question. Absolutely, you could do a very good 13 episode, hour long each show with him. Cover the origin, have him weave through some small mysteries each episode while having some main arc humming along. Heck, I think that if you wanted to do Question by straight up adapting the 36 issues of O'neil's version from the 80's/90's that you could get probably 2 to 3 seasons out of it. But... I could also see a satisfying film made of The Question, cover the origin ect., and have it work that way as well.

 

[The Overlord]

I think most of them could work fairly well on TV, but Spider-man comes to mind, which his huge supporting cast.

I think Spidey would tricky budget wise though, his web swinging would be hard to do on a TV budget and many of his best villains (Green Goblin, Dr. Octopus, Venom, etc) would be almost impossible to do well on a TV budget.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

Also, there are some characters who I just dont see appearing in the films anytime soon who could be pulled off on tv. Batwoman comes to mind.

 

[Spike014]

Always thought Nightwing could be decent, and maybe Hellboy for TV.

 

[Airwings]

Among the characters who have appeared both in films and on TV, the film versions are always the best. Superheroes require a lot of special effects to be done justice.

Character development is another question. There's more room for it in a TV series, that's a fact. But on the other hand, TV stuff tend to slow down and have too much "filler stuff". Between the action scenes, there's always that drama going on about relationship problems and the same issue is brought up repeatedly.
It's quite evident on Arrow. While it's a really good show and the best fighting skills I've seen in a DC hero (live action), it relies very much on slow stuff just to fill the running time of each episode.
Smallville did the same back in its time too. And it had poor effects, unfortunately. The costumes weren't that great either. Hawkman wasn't handled good there. A character like him needs a blockbuster to really work the way the he's meant to do.

We haven't seen Emerald Archer in an expensive, cinematic adventure yet. There's nothing to compare the TV version with. But if a solo flic is greenlighted (no pun intended) by WB in the future, I have no doubt the hero will be even better than in the show. The mistake with Daredevil won't be repeated, lol

 

[Flint Marko]

To kind of answer the question, I find myself relatively uninterested in superheroes on network TV with a network TV budget. I'd prefer a movie for most characters simply because I prefer that medium.

 

[Quasimod0]

I've always thought Batman and Spider-Man would be perfect for TV shows. They both have the best rogues galleries in comics, imo. Plus tons of supporting cast members and storylines to adapt.
Arrow is sort of like a Batman show already, and Flash is similar to Spider-Man. (I think Grant Gustin would've made a great Peter)

Also, the Malcolm/Tommy stuff was totally a Norman/Harry type thing. Made me even hungrier for a Spidey show.

 

[The Batman]

Generally, I think pulp characters like The Shadow, The Spirit, etc. would be much better suited for the small screen.

Netflix is the perfect medium for Daredevil. I still think he deserves a great movie, but if he had to be on TV, Netflix or Cable was the ideal place for the character.

I support Flash being on network TV, because it gives the character more exposure. Also, it helps that he's still getting a movie too.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I think Judge Dredd could be perfect for TV myself, would love to see a show happen with Urban in the role.

At the same time 2 of my favourite characters, Hulk and Ghost Rider, are absolutely not suited to TV IMO. They need a movie budget to be done justice.

 

[Erzengel]

Spider-Man and X-Men with extended budgets could be on TV for years. So many different storylines and characters.

 

[DrCosmic]

I think virtually all superheroes with lots of story and history and supporting cast and villains would be ideal in a weekly serialized format. Even just 12 eps a year would be awesome, and saving the movies for team ups and such could be really really cool to me. Alas, there are *some* heroes who don't fare well visually on TV due to the budget. Though that number is shrinking as the gap between TV and movies shrinks (both financially and otherwise), there are still some that wouldn't quite work.

Spider-Man and the X-Men come to mind as characters whose stories are MUUUUUCH better suited to tv style storytelling than film, but who have some heroes and villains who just don't quite sing on TV the way they can on film. Spidey himself can't do web swinging the way we know and love without the movies and a few of the X-Men become unwieldly on TV budgets. That's a bit closer as there are so many characters you can flub and shoot around some of the more difficult aspects to visualize. There's certainly nothing in the 2000 X-Men film that can't be done on TV with high quality.

I think Batman would be insanely cool on TV, and while he may not have everyhting he does in the films on TV, he'd still have all the important stuff for Batman, ie, detective work, gadgets, martial arts, cars, badarseness. Batman is soooo good for TV that they made a Batman show using Green Arrow and it was still awesome, at least in season 1. Batman is so good for TV they could make a Nightwing or heck, a Robin TV show and it still be awesome. Batman is so good for TV, they can make a Batman show without Batman and just have a young Commissioner Gordon dealing with his enemies, and still be awesome. You almost can't go wrong with Batman on TV.

 

[O_B_Juan]

I liked young Indiania Jones better in the movies than on TV.