Rob Bricken over at io9 has posted another letter and his response, this one about Batman and why we haven’t, and probably won’t ever, see another Batman tv series. I don’t really agree with him completely about the Superman Returns/Smallville thing but he raises some important points. See the post below in its entirety. (I also included another letter he posted about Yoda cause I could.)
Batshit Crazy
Paul C.: I was wondering why there haven’t been any live-action Batman TV series since the campy ‘60s Adam West Batman. There have been two versions of Superman (Lois & Clark and Smallville) which I assume require more special effects than a Batman show would. There is [Green] Arrow who is essentially Batman, but not the same. There was even that show “The Cape” which was a Batman rip-off and not nearly as interesting. With the success of the recent grittier Nolan Batman films, and our love for police procedurals, couldn’t there be a 60-minute time slot there for a Batman TV show?
There could, but there won’t. Batman is too big for TV. By which I mean that Batman is one of Warner Bros.’ biggest, most lucrative, most reliable movie franchises, and they are absolutely terrified at the idea of somehow screwing up the potential revenue of the Batman movies by making a Batman TV series — either by diluting the public’s desire for Bat-entertainment, confusing the public (two people playing Batmen? My mind cannot comprehend such a thing!), or somehow diminishing Batman’s appeal (by the TV series sucking, which, since it would likely end up being a show on The CW, is a very real possibility).
I know what you’re going to say — Lois and Clark aired only six years after Superman IV, and Smallville was airing when Superman Returns hit theaters. But the truth is that the Superman movie franchise is not nearly as big as the Batman movies. WB felt okay taking those risks for Superman. The worst Superman movie, Superman IV, made $15 million; Batman and Robin still made $105. Which is why it took WB nearly 30 years to get around to relaunching Superman in theaters, but it only took them eight for Batman.
In reality, the public would like all the Batman it can get. I sincerely doubt anyone would cry foul if two different people played two different versions of Batman on TV and in the movies, and there would especially be no problem if the TV show was a Smallville-esque, Batman: Year One TV series and the movies featured an older, most standard, in-his-prime Batman. What can I say? Hollywood is dumb.
That Is Why They Fail
LM: Dear Mr. Postman, I’m a Star Wars fan, but I realized yesterday with the rumor one of the new Star Wars movie was going to be about Yoda is that I don’t want a Yoda movie. Does this make me a bad fan?
Not at all, you just have Yoda fatigue. Same thing as Boba Fett fatigue. It’s a problem many creators create, but that George Lucas is very susceptible to; he learns audiences find such-and-such cool, so he keeps bringing them back until they’ve lost all their appeal.
The other problem is that in the original trilogy Yoda was wise and mysterious, and we could only imagine his power. But in the prequels, he was just as big a doofus as all the other Jedi, and his power was being a green bouncy ball that could hold a lightsaber. Honestly, a little bit of Yoda goes a looong way.
I wouldn’t worry about it, though, because I don’t think it’s true. First of all, half the sites on the internet are claiming they know what Disney is doing, And while AICN certainly gets its scoops, but they’re hardly batting 1.000% rumor-wise. Honestly, I think the waters are so muddied at this point we can’t trust any Star Wars news until Disney genuinely announces it.
X-Men: The (fan fic) Series 
I don’t know if I fully agree that its because WB doesn’t want to dilute Batman. I think if they could think of something that would be an instant hit and make them money they’d do it no matter what. I think the problem is that Batman just doesn’t work well for TV anymore. Remember, its not like they haven’t tried to create live action Batman shows in the past.
Superman works because Superman has the kind of supporting cast and background that works well for a TV series. In the case of Smallville, you had the idea of a pre-Superman and what it would be like to be learning such powers and finding your place in this world. With shows like Lois and Clark as well as Adventures of Superman you have the supporting cast of Lois, Perry, and Jimmy.
Superman is a very social hero. Batman is not. Sure, there is the Bat-family but I think execs are scared of using a live action Robin given that the two live action appearances he has had have been campy (the 1960s tv show and the 90s films). And well, Gordon and Alfred work great as the supporting cast in a film but not in a TV show as the only people Batman really talks to.
I think that is why Batman works better in cartoons because you can get away with so much more than a live action show.
There is definitely something to the argument that Batman isn’t so much a great character, it’s his rogue’s gallery and those around him that make him interesting. He does have the best villains.
I’m interested in seeing how Gotham is going to do since it will focus on those around Batman, and not Batman himself.