Why does Clark have more success on the small screen than the big one?

[daBronzeBomma]

It's kinda baffling.

Clark Kent, aka Kal-El, aka Superman is among the most physically powerful characters ever created in fiction, and yet he seems to find comparatively more success on the small screen with their smaller budgets than he does on the big screen with their bigger budgets.

You'd think, outside looking in, that it would be the opposite: he'd mostly flounder on the small screen and thrive on the big screen where he could let loose.

I think it comes down to Clark's massive (and mostly human) supporting cast, which lend themselves better for long-form storytelling that TV offers.

What do you think?

[superduperman]

Because they can't seem to do a movie about him without trying to "fix" him. Someone up top at Warners who doesn't like him is put in charge of the movie division and seems to think that he's too simplistic or not interesting enough and they want to add their own gimmick to him. We saw this with John Peters. We saw this with Returns. We saw this with the Snyder-verse. Whereas the TV shows seem to be made by people who actually want to work with Superman. Instead of just handing him off to another Batman fan.

[PCN24454]

Because small screen is allowed to take more time than big screen stuff. They’re allowed to showcase his big and his small adventures. His romance with Lois can be built over a season rather than rushed in two hours.

All in all, it allows the events to feel more natural than trying to cram it all into a movie.

[9th.]

Small screen gives you more time with the character

[Jon Clark]

Because if done right the appeal of Superman isn't in winning a fight, it's in the never ending battle.

It's hard to come up with a foe Superman can cut loose against in a two to three hour plot. Either it's Lex and no one really feels Superman is challenged or it's Zod where the collateral damage makes everything feel like a pyrrhic victory. There is no movie length story where Superman can build up to a fight. You either have an hour long plot where Superman faces an equally powerful foe or hours long plot showing Superman working his way physically or mentally towards a climax with enough time to flesh out Superman's challenges.

[titansupes]

Because they can't seem to do a movie about him without trying to "fix" him. Someone up top at Warners who doesn't like him is put in charge of the movie division and seems to think that he's too simplistic or not interesting enough and they want to add their own gimmick to him. We saw this with John Peters. We saw this with Returns. We saw this with the Snyder-verse. Whereas the TV shows seem to be made by people who actually want to work with Superman. Instead of just handing him off to another Batman fan.

It's exactly this. Nothing to do with screentime. Supes is a complex character sure, but nothing a two hour movie can't handle. And no, nothing to do with being too powerful or any of that nonsense. If the entire MCU can have all these big adventures with big and diverse powersets individually and as a group, Supes is just fine. It's just that the boneheads at WB falsely think they need to fix him, and hire filmmakers who think the same and/or are just ouright poor storytellers.

On TV, for whatever reason, he's had people who have genuine affection for him and find their own angle on it (L&C being a romantic comedy, SV an extended coming of age and now S&L being a husband and father)... And they've all been hits for that reason.

Post-Donner/Reeve, in film the boneheads angle is "He's broken, how do we fix him"... And they've all been movies that have had numerous, specific and obvious deficiencies. And they've all failed for that reason.

[HsssH]

Aren't they really all hits? Looking at Superman/Lois ratings it doesn't look like that many people are watching it.

[titansupes]

Aren't they really all hits? Looking at Superman/Lois ratings it doesn't look like that many people are watching it.

Somebody else who knows more about TV ratings could say more, but cliffnotes-- CW is a small network that attracts a fairly set audience, but it's the biggest (or top two) thing on it, plus it gets a ton of next-day streaming views, and just recently debuted on a large network in the UK and rocketed to the top. And this isn't taking into account critical reception, Season 1 sitting pretty on 88% RT for critics and 72% audience, and S2 on 82% audience so far. Even looking through fan forums and/or social media, the only real criticism the show faces is from those who are... overly passionate about their preferred pre-existing version.

If it were on a bigger network that got more eyes on it in general... it'd be the best advertisement for the character in such a long time.

[Marvel Man]

Because they can't seem to do a movie about him without trying to "fix" him. Someone up top at Warners who doesn't like him is put in charge of the movie division and seems to think that he's too simplistic or not interesting enough and they want to add their own gimmick to him. We saw this with John Peters. We saw this with Returns. We saw this with the Snyder-verse. Whereas the TV shows seem to be made by people who actually want to work with Superman. Instead of just handing him off to another Batman fan.

You had me until you wrote that last line. I don't understand that discourse about being a Superman fan or a Batman fan, but you cannot like both characters. I love Superman, for example, but Batman is one of my favourite characters too. My brother loves Batman, but Superman is also one of his favourite characters. Being a Batman fan does not exclude being a Superman fan, even if you like one more than the other.

[JAK]

Because they can't seem to do a movie about him without trying to "fix" him. Someone up top at Warners who doesn't like him is put in charge of the movie division and seems to think that he's too simplistic or not interesting enough and they want to add their own gimmick to him. We saw this with John Peters. We saw this with Returns. We saw this with the Snyder-verse. Whereas the TV shows seem to be made by people who actually want to work with Superman. Instead of just handing him off to another Batman fan.

This.

It's exactly this. Nothing to do with screentime. Supes is a complex character sure, but nothing a two hour movie can't handle. And no, nothing to do with being too powerful or any of that nonsense. If the entire MCU can have all these big adventures with big and diverse powersets individually and as a group, Supes is just fine. It's just that the boneheads at WB falsely think they need to fix him, and hire filmmakers who think the same and/or are just ouright poor storytellers.

On TV, for whatever reason, he's had people who have genuine affection for him and find their own angle on it (L&C being a romantic comedy, SV an extended coming of age and now S&L being a husband and father)... And they've all been hits for that reason.

Post-Donner/Reeve, in film the boneheads angle is "He's broken, how do we fix him"... And they've all been movies that have had numerous, specific and obvious deficiencies. And they've all failed for that reason.

It does have to do with time, technically.. but honestly it's because a movie is a larger and "faster" project - you can "put your name/stamp on it" and walk away in a 2-3 years ("Snyderverse," "Nolan's Batman," etc). With TV, you better love what you're doing or have a damn good spin on it, because if you don't - it's a looong slog and unless it's a huge hit, nobody cares who's involved other than who's in the starring roles. The only reason the CWTV crew (Berlanti, etc) is known is because they built a whole universe/multiverse and made it *all* work; one show wouldn't have put them on the map to the general public.

It's true that Superman is a more nuanced and that takes longer to properly flesh out (which is easier with TV). It's also true that a movie *can* do it, but there's a lot more ego(s) involved at that level.

You had me until you wrote that last line. I don't understand that discourse about being a Superman fan or a Batman fan, but you cannot like both characters. I love Superman, for example, but Batman is one of my favourite characters too. My brother loves Batman, but Superman is also one of his favourite characters. Being a Batman fan does not exclude being a Superman fan, even if you like one more than the other.

I also love both characters, but it's plain to see that most of the higher-ups at WB, for the past few decades, knew less about Superman than your average two year old - while at the same time raving and throwing themselves on Batman. They're the original worshippers of the BatGod - or, they were when he started making them money and getting DC more "mature" acclaim. As soon as that happened, Superman became something they had to pay respect to, but that was about it. They've had such a horrible grasp on the character that the last set of movies that held up at all (at least the first two) weren't even made by them, and their next idea was to (poorly and shoving "it must be darker because Batman had a black costume to everything must be serious even if it doesn't fit the tone") copy the first film that they had no hand in making (looking at SR here). They couldn't even copy the movie correctly or understand (at ALL) what made it work, but while they've definitely screwed up the Batman franchise, they've put enough dollars behind him to understand that "dark" is an easy sell. They literally said that they were looking to "make the other heroes more like Nolan's 'The Dark Knight' " due to it's popularity.

So, while I certainly understand and agree that it's not one or the other and you absolutely can like both - WB just doesn't, which is why the point is made by superduperman and so many others.. myself included.

[rpmaluki]

Aren't they really all hits? Looking at Superman/Lois ratings it doesn't look like that many people are watching it.

I heard it was one of the biggest DC shows on HBOMax and is top 10 most pirated show in the world or something so make that what you will. People these days have non traditional viewing options, it doesn't mean the show isn't well liked by the general audience simply because the tabulated numbers are on the lesser side of what's "expected".

[Prime]

Cause they can't seem to embrace the character. Idk why is it so hard. You guys have come up with go plots on the go. Are you telling me a multi million dollar company can't?

[Rightoya]

It's kinda baffling.

Clark Kent, aka Kal-El, aka Superman is among the most physically powerful characters ever created in fiction, and yet he seems to find comparatively more success on the small screen with their smaller budgets than he does on the big screen with their bigger budgets.


You'd think, outside looking in, that it would be the opposite: he'd mostly flounder on the small screen and thrive on the big screen where he could let loose.

I don't think this plays even a big role in the moviies currently, DCEU Superman is not truly super-powerful, he just looks overpowered because they have nerfed Flash and especially Wonder Woman down to hell and turned the Justice League into a joke.

I think it comes down to Clark's massive (and mostly human) supporting cast, which lend themselves better for long-form storytelling that TV offers.

What do you think?

It is probably that, in combination with a more classical approach at Superman. But another important factor is that series are also kind of a bigger deal than movies nowadays, something like Squid Game as example had basically as much hype as the biggest blockbusters.

[DochaDocha]

Because the small screen shows aim lower. Hollywood movies are made to be super-duper blockbusters that rake in a billion dollars (none succeeded, yet). The TV shows aim for like 800k weekly viewers. It's an easier target to hit.

EDIT: The TV shows also stick to their intended goals. The recent DCEU Superman stuff is disorganized AF.

[superduperman]

You had me until you wrote that last line. I don't understand that discourse about being a Superman fan or a Batman fan, but you cannot like both characters. I love Superman, for example, but Batman is one of my favourite characters too. My brother loves Batman, but Superman is also one of his favourite characters. Being a Batman fan does not exclude being a Superman fan, even if you like one more than the other.

I don't think all Batman fans hate Superman. But the history here suggests that when a Batman franchise does well (BTAS, the Nolan movies) they hand Superman over to the same people. Those people choose to work on Batman. Because they like him and wanted to play in that universe. That's fine. But it seems like before you just hand them another character whose personality is the opposite of Batman, perhaps you should check and see what they plan to do with them first and ask if that works for this other character as well. Bruce Timm and co. wanted to nerf his power levels. Snyder, who was recommended by Nolan, wanted to make him grim and indifferent. I don't think these work well for Superman. The Arrow-verse guys genuinely wanted to write a love letter to the history of Superman. Ditto the Smallville guys. These are guys who chose to work on a Superman franchise.