• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Replacing Smallville...

According to Warner Brothers they will never authorize a live action Batman television show. I remember reading that they were pissed when he was shown for five seconds on Birds of Prey and when Alfred called him on the phone in the final scene of the series finale.

Why won't they allow a live action Batman series? It would be a money maker (presumably) for them, and I can't see a studio turning down a chance to make money.
Because they figure they'll make more money with the Nolan film series, and any dodgy television show (because, let's face it, this is the CW) will only harm the brand (and potential box office).

Is this the logic for why Superman Returns tanked? The exsistence of Smallville on TV? I always thought it failed simply because it was a bad film.
 
(I still can't see them ever allowing Bruce on SMALLVILLE, though. The BATMAN movies are too much of a golden goose to risk hurting them.)

I just don't understand the logic. I mean, I get how they may not want a live-action Batman series that might retread similar ground the current films are covering.

But, how would one appearance on Smallville really hurt the Nolan film series? I don't see how that would "hurt the brand" anymore than the current Batman cartoon or the direct-to-DVD animated features would.

Cartoons are a different audience.

I'm sorry, but I don't fully buy into that.
 
Why won't they allow a live action Batman series? It would be a money maker (presumably) for them, and I can't see a studio turning down a chance to make money.
Because they figure they'll make more money with the Nolan film series, and any dodgy television show (because, let's face it, this is the CW) will only harm the brand (and potential box office).

Is this the logic for why Superman Returns tanked? The exsistence of Smallville on TV? I always thought it failed simply because it was a bad film.
I do recall reading that there was some belief put to Smallville may have weakened the film because of people going by the same reason Berman had TNG cancelled after season seven: why would people go see it if they can watch it from home for free?
 
Another possibility: how about THE ROSE AND THE THORN. A hot chick with two personalities fights crimes while engaging in GOSSIP GIRL style soap opera action.

Seems perfect for the CW!
 
Smallville was only supposed to last for 4 years, and it has gone on way too long, renewed season after season and continually changing cast members like soiled underwear. Please let it drop and as Christopher (it really was him this time) said, let's try something different and not retread old ground.

I'm all for a new superhero-type series, but why not go in for the Unbreakable-style hero. Something understated that really works well. Hancock may even work well as a series, if it doesn't go on for too long. The CW is a crap network with crap shows being watched by the dumbest people, and I make no apologies for that assertion as the fact that they continue to watch a series that jumped the shark five years earlier proves my point.

If we want to replace Smallville, then let's replace it with a superhero, or even a hero, who hasn't had much screen time if any. Someone new. Surely the writers out there aren't that devoid of talent?

Anyone second a motion for David Mack's The Calling to be made into a TV show? On CBS or ABC?
 
I do recall reading that there was some belief put to Smallville may have weakened the film because of people going by the same reason Berman had TNG cancelled after season seven: why would people go see it if they can watch it from home for free?

What???? Ending TNG was Paramount's decision because it got costlier to produce each season. Ending one show and starting another let them make new, more profitable deals, and a new cast meant smaller salaries. Actors get raises every season, so the longer a show stays on, the costlier it gets. That's why very few shows go beyond seven seasons, and those that do almost always have heavy cast turnaround (including Smallville, which has only two original cast members remaining).
 
I do recall reading that there was some belief put to Smallville may have weakened the film because of people going by the same reason Berman had TNG cancelled after season seven: why would people go see it if they can watch it from home for free?

What???? Ending TNG was Paramount's decision because it got costlier to produce each season. Ending one show and starting another let them make new, more profitable deals, and a new cast meant smaller salaries. Actors get raises every season, so the longer a show stays on, the costlier it gets. That's why very few shows go beyond seven seasons, and those that do almost always have heavy cast turnaround (including Smallville, which has only two original cast members remaining).
I remember where I heard it. It was on that Behind the Scenes program E! used to way back when they first started. I just found the video (being a packrat is insane) and Berman says one of the reasons that TNG ended was they wanted to make it into a movie property and they were worried that being able to watch it on television would hurt ticket sales. It's during a scene where they show a behind the scenes clip from Lessons.
 
Nothing, especially if it will be like Smallvile - always dancing on the edges of the myth, but never fulfilling the fans dreams.
 
The end of TNG was probably a combination of a bunch of things, creative and financial, with several people involved in the decision.
 
I remember where I heard it. It was on that Behind the Scenes program E! used to way back when they first started. I just found the video (being a packrat is insane) and Berman says one of the reasons that TNG ended was they wanted to make it into a movie property and they were worried that being able to watch it on television would hurt ticket sales.

A, that was just one of the considerations that went into the decision. And B, it wasn't just Berman's decision, it was the decision of the studio executives he worked for. I get sick of people online assuming that every single thing they don't like about Star Trek is the fault of either Berman or Braga or both rather than actually trying to get their facts straight.
 
I remember where I heard it. It was on that Behind the Scenes program E! used to way back when they first started. I just found the video (being a packrat is insane) and Berman says one of the reasons that TNG ended was they wanted to make it into a movie property and they were worried that being able to watch it on television would hurt ticket sales.

A, that was just one of the considerations that went into the decision. And B, it wasn't just Berman's decision, it was the decision of the studio executives he worked for. I get sick of people online assuming that every single thing they don't like about Star Trek is the fault of either Berman or Braga or both rather than actually trying to get their facts straight.
You make an assumption about me: I don't blame Berman or Braga for anything that happened with Trek unlike many people first off. I also never say that was the only reason it was cancelled - if you read what I put he said one of the reasons - not the only one.

I did, however, just reread my original post which does make it sound like I pinned it entirely on Berman to which I apologize.
 
I've always thought adapting the Manhunter DC Comics character from the 1970s, written by Archie Goodwin and drawn by a then little-known Walt Simonson would be cool. He was one of the first Silver Age characters that killed, predating Wolverine by a few years.

Nothing cool about that.


But it could be fun if it's set during World War II, like the first series of Wonder Woman TV-movies back in the '70s.

Actually that was the entire first season of the weekly hourlong series. The only movie was the pilot, unless you count the dreadful Cathy Lee Crosby pilot movie in 1974 (which wasn't a WWII period piece).

To your first point: Realistically, I'm sure that some heroes would kill if they existed in the real world. And if you're familiar with the Manhunter series I spoke of, you'd see why it was a necessary evil for his character -- as well as odd, since many of the people he killed were his clones.

As for Wonder Woman, you're right about the first season set in WWII. I do remember that first awful Wonder Woman flick with Cathy Lee Crosby -- Ricardo Montalban was the villain, too. I dug the WWII milieu for Wonder Woman, and thought they were a bit stronger than the modern-day eps.

Red Rum!
 
I wouldn't mind a series where Phil Morris as Martian Manhunter (speaking of which he's been absent this season so far) plays mentor to a young Justice League. The Justice League would be comprised of Chloe (Watchtower), Green Arrow, Black Canary, Flash (Bart Allen who is revealed to be a young Bary Allen), Cyborg (Victor Stone), and Wonder Woman (who is introduced in the two hour pilot and is convinced by Olliver to join the League as a way to learn more about the nature of mansworld). They are funded primarily by Queen Industires but also from another mysterious benficator who is revealed at the season one finale as being Snapper Carr.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top