Screen Spotlight- Bat TV

Earlier this week, I was watching some older episodes of Smallville and as soon as Green Arrow showed up it got me thinking, how come Superman and Green Arrow both currently have live action TV Series yet Batman doesn't. Batman is arguably DC's most popular hero, so it would make a lot of sense.

Because of the fact for the most part the entire Bat Family and the majority of their villains are unpowered, it would probably be easier to make than a Superman live action TV series and you could probably get more for the money because of it. This would be the same sort of argument for the Green Arrow series, but because Batman is so much more popular there would be a bigger return. So why has Batman been stuck in cartoon land since the 70's?

Of course, Batman did make a small appearance in the 2002 Birds Of Prey series but that didn't focus on him, and there's my point. Even Birds Of Prey can get a series, al-be-it a very short lived one. So why hasn't Batman?

Not that I have anything against the Batman cartoons, some of them are the best in the medium. But considering how Batman has always been a more realistic superhero and cartoons are always best at showing the unrealistic (such as a man who can fly, shoot lasers from his eyes and restart a planet by flying counter-rotationally around it), why is his only TV representation still only on Saturday mornings?

About JR19759

Email: Twitter: @jr19759 Deviantart: JR19759 Deviantart HM Group: Heromachine-Art

11 Responses to Screen Spotlight- Bat TV

  1. William Peterson says:

    One word… Movies! I’m NOT saying it’s the right way to do things, but Batman has been pretty good Box Office, and I presume the IP holders feel he’s much better used on the Big Screen… Television is more for the second raters (yeah, Smallville is about Superman, but it’s about Superman back when he’s still mostly Clark Kent). And, let’s face it…You put Batman on TV as a live-action program, and people are STILL going to think it’s Adam West and Burt Ward, and not even bother to tune in… And the way TV executives think, that just might be the case!
    Do you know what the sixties show was supposed to be? It was supposed to be like the old forties movies, but with sensibilities more like “Man from UNCLE”…
    THAT would have been a cool show! But the producer they got ‘just knew’ that Superheroes had to be dumbed down for small children, and the rest, as they say, is history… {Le Sigh!}

  2. Gene says:

    They won’t do a Batman series because it is raking in so much money on the big screen. First of all they cannot get the cast of the big screen movies to do a TV show – tit would be far too expensive, and second of all they are convinced that a small screen adaption with a different cast and story arch would ‘confuse’ their fan base, and maybe splinter it.

    I feel the same way about Star Trek; I know as long as Paramount is making money at the theaters, they will never do a TV show again.

  3. Frevoli says:

    I think Batman is only going to be on tv in animated form… with varying results.

    But yeah – the otherwise tv Bat-embargo is due to the movie presence. It’s why he wasn’t allowed in smallville, and also why Justice League Unlimited wasn’t allowed to use any Batman villains

  4. Katmir says:

    I vote for the production co$t$…

  5. djuby says:

    The CW wanted to introduce Bruce Wayne into their Smallville world, but DC would not sign off on it, knowing the big bucks would be with the new Chris Nolan version.

  6. Herr D says:

    Money and the risks involved HAVE changed our nation for the worse. No one wants to risk it and everyone wants more of it. People are afraid and have to tread more lightly now.
    –Don’t get me wrong; I’m glad it’s harder to step on people now. Unfortunately too much caution means bad things in a capitalist nation. It is just as bad as too much corporate waste, too much legislation, too much stepping around law, and too much dependence on outdated business models and outdated traditions in general. It probably won’t be long before the United States is going to need a ridiculous amount of genius-level thinking to get us back on track. We have a government where revolution is outdated–but the appropriate substitutes are always hard to find in correct measures. Vigilance, diligence, responsibility, and genius are not majority virtues. I hope someday to be able to cultivate them more effectively.

  7. Timedrop23 says:

    A quick word on the whole flying-backwards-around-the-Earth thing:
    The Earth is spinning at somewhere around 1,000 mph and circling the sun at about 67 times that, so if Superman so much as slowed the Earth down, best case scenario would be giant tidal waves, earthquakes, and possible volcanic eruptions from plate shift. Worst case scenario, we’d all be flung into the ozone layer with a sizzling splat. Some hero he is. πŸ™‚

  8. Arioch says:

    That’s why it’s called super dickery πŸ˜‰

  9. Rendu says:

    Um.. Superman didn’t make the Earth turn backwards- he flew around the Earth to build up enough speed to go backwards in time, which was shown by the Earth turning backwards, like a reversed film. If you’re going to mock, at least get it right. πŸ™‚

  10. Timedrop23 says:

    Doesn’t change the fact that the Earth turned backwards though, does it?
    Therefore we all die.

    More logic for you:
    (Two wrongs don’t make a right) && (Four rights make a circle) -> (Eight wrongs don’t make a circle).