What's wrong with onscreen superheroines?

What are the things that drive you crazy about the way super girl types are portrayed in tv and on film? Too cheesy? What is it that's so often disappointing?

I myself really like Tomb Raider for it's mostly straight ahead storytelling mixed with a small percentage of smirky humor. Of course Lara Croft isn't "super". She's just really cool.

My big complaint is when the character is empty. Regardless of powers, I want the character's stakes to be high.

I think there are several reasons why getting a good portrayal of a superwoman on American TV is difficult. And all of them have to deal with how American television works and how Americans see the superhero genre in general.

1) Expensive FX. One of the big differences between supers (and science fiction)on American TV compared to elsewhere is the high quality of the visual fx. American series tend to be more visually fx oriented and the quality is close, if not equal to, big budget movie quality. This is fine in a movie series where one 'story' is made and the next one comes along a few years later, but it's hideously expensive for regular TV. IIRC, the average cost per episode of Star Trek TNG was around $6 million. Multiply that by about 15 to 20 episodes in an American TV season and you're spending $90 to $120 million each year.

This isn't so much of an issue with other countries such as Britain and Japan where the seasons tend to be shorter (10 to 15 eps max), and a year or two can pass between the production of a season. Also, other countries don't hold themselves tot he extremely high standards fo American network TV when it comes to fx. Look back at all the Dr. Who episodes over 40+ years of production and you'll see an emphasis on story and drama, with fx far down the list of priorities. Even the exceptional re-boot Russ Davies started a few years ago has fx that look just a step or two above a quality fan-film production, instead of trying to match a big budget Hollywood sci-fi epic. The same goes for Japan where there are plenty of superhero style live action shows.

2) Sexism. Sad to say but I feel this is also a major issue in getting good superwomen stories to the small screen. The general American public just isn't interested in the idea of a woman being stronger or better than a man. Maybe in the more cosmopolitan cities like New york or San Francisco, there's more interest and acceptance in the general public, but in the midwest and old south, no way. Remember that the original Bionic Woman was moderately successful because it was a spin-off of the Six Million Dollar Man, and seen a as subordinate or at times an equal. And Wonder Woman came out as an attempt of a rival network to capture some of the success of that series, rather than on the strength (no pun intended) of the character.

There are, of course, some success stories. Buffy was a relatively strong series, but I think she's the exception rather than the rule because the WB was just starting up and needed anything that even smacked of a hit series. Buffy's viewing numbers were good and consistant, but I don't believe they were anything near where a major network would consider acceptable for a 'flagship' series the way Buffy was for the WB.

3) Social stigma against comics. Let's be honest here. Comics and comic book fans do not get a whole lot of respect from the general public. Despite the quality work of creators like Neil Gaiman, Alan Moore, et al., comic books are still seen as a media for children and adult fans are stereotyped as 'Comic Book Guy' from the Simpsons. We all know that a fan that can list every comic book appearance of a character will be ridiculed while a fan that can list every stat for an athelete will get a sweet broadcasting job. A fan that dresses up as Darth Vader for a con will be laughed at while a fan that dresses up in a Darth Vader costume with spikes on the shoulders to go to a Raiders game will be applauded.

4) The changing nature of TV. The other issue is how drasticly TV and the way shows are produced has chaned in the last decade. With the invention of new ways of watching shows like TiVo, Netflix, OnDemand, and the Internet as a whole, how can the 'success' of a series be measured? TV execs seem to be answering that question now, but the facts remain that viewership numbers are no longer a sole indicator of success, and if a show doesn't 'pop' right off the bat, it gets cancelled and the production money allocated to another series with the same sword of Damocles hanging over it. Combined with the expense of a show of the superhero nature, only 'proven' concepts like Superman tend to get the leeway needed for a small screen series to establish itself.

The sad fact is that shows take a long time to establish and put out quality. One of the most legendary American TV series, Seinfeld, would never have lasted in the new millennium because the ratings of the first few years were abysmal. It was only because a network exec believed in the show that Seinfeld was given the chance to establish itself and go on to become the cultural icon it was. If you look at the two most successful super series airing on network TV, one is based off Superman (the comics icon to end all comics icons) and Heroes started off with a slow burn and very minimal special effects until NBC greenlit the rest of the season.


Sorry if this is all too gloomy, but I think the fact is that American TV is currently set up to be unfriendly to supergirls, and superheroes in general. The good news is that times are changing as more comics films bring in big money and bring the genre into the mainstream. So, we have hope, but we also have a long road ahead as we wait for mainstream America to change enough and become accepting enough to have a heroine of quality we can tune into each week.

Some really good posts there Taliesan - well thought out and I agree with everything you've said.

You're right about executive interference. That, above anything else was what really destroyed BW 2007.

Well, as an American from a place other than San Fran or NYC I feel like dog meat. Haha.

I don't believe sexism is the biggest problem for network super heroines. In comic book stores I agree that may be a problem. However, I don't blame the end user so much as I blame comic book execs. They have driven super heroines into the ground. Good artists and writers have all too often been pulled of heroine books for other male characters. I also think the current editors are an older generation. I think there has been a shift in the general public.

Let's look at how many shows have solid heroines: Medium, Bones, CSI, Trauma, Mercy, (Every Hospital Drama On TV), Cold Case, Law And Order aka What Constitution?, Fringe, Doll House.

Why not super heroines? Bad luck, bad writing. How many male superhero shows do you see on TV?

If anything I've thought network TV has been sexist against men for a decade now. Men are after all something it's okay to make fun of.

One thing I think we can all agree on is that there is just a lot of bad TV out there.

Thanks for the nice comments about PSW ~ I'm doing my best ~ and with each short I build up a bit more of a slush fund to get new equipment or take more time with the actors etc etc. As the FX get bigger and better I'm also trying to build up the characters since as you've pointed out it's hard to cheer for a hero with no substance that you don't also like.

Fortunately I've always liked working with the women on set and during down in-between time. From Sierra to Michaela to Shay and more than ever Ashley on this last go around.

To summarize: Some Comic Editors Bad, Some TV Execs Bad, Catwoman Everything Bad, Independent film types from outside SF or NYC sometimes good.