Any time you’re thinking “wow, we could never have done this on TV!” that’s a sign that you shouldn’t be doing it.I have trouble disagreeing with that statement more.
I think it defeats the whole purpose of adapting a story from one medium to another if the adaptation is limited strictly to doing what the earlier version has already done, and better.
It seems to me that the only reason to adapt a show to comics (or a comic to movies, or whatever) is specifically to do what could not be done (or done well) in the previous medium.
The law office drama (with occasional fights) that was Angel season 5 worked with live actors, television length episodes and pacing, and, honestly, better dialog writers. It would have been deathly boring to repeat that on the page, where snappy banter is harder to communicate and actors' charisma doesn't come through the pencil and inks.
On the other hand, "Angel fights a dragon", exciting as that is and hinted at in the series finale, would have looked terrible with television quality special effects, but makes terrific comics.
Arguably, too many changes lose the intangible essence of the original, and that's terrible too. But an adaptation that does nothing but repeat what has come before, what was designed for the strengths and weaknesses of its previous form, is an adaptation that should not be done.