Batman Begins Best Origin Movie ever ?

[BatLobsterRises]

I would call Batman 89 a "Rise of the Batman" story. It's the origin of how he comes to prominence in Gotham early in his career, but not THE origin of how he came to be.

Batman Begins is probably the best representation of a Batman origin story in any medium, IMO.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by BH/HHH

Yeah and Superman Returns and Spider-man 3

If you think about it...TDKR had somewhat of a flashback moment with Alfred going to Italy when he was talking to Bruce...could TDKR have been an origin film as well?

Lol, okay maybe THAT'S a bit of a stretch

[Anno_Domini]

Obviously Keaton agrees Batman '89 wasn't an origin film.

Back to Keaton's plans for a third film in which he would play Batman, the actor reveals that he wanted the movie to be an origin story, a la Frank Miller's Batman: Year One. "You look at where he [Nolan] went, which is exactly what I wanted to do when I was having meetings about the third one. I said you want to see how this guy started. We’ve got a chance here to fix whatever we kind of maybe went off. This could be brilliant. Didn’t want to do it, so I didn’t want to do it." In 2000, Warner Bros. hired Darren Aronofsky (The Wrestler) to direct an adaptation of Year One, despite Batman Forever and Batman & Robin helmer Joel Schumacher's interest in the project. However, the production was abandoned when WB decided to move forward with a Batman Vs. Superman film, which of course was also canned. The studio finally produced a reboot in the form of 2005's Batman Begins, which was heavily influenced by Year One.

[BH/HHH]

Originally Posted by TheGuy

That's not the point. lol. B89 followed Batman's first months in crime fighting and ended with him being recognized by the city, just like in BB. So in some ways it's an origin, with the training skipped.

Therefore it's a rookie story not an origin one

[TheGuy]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

I would call Batman 89 a "Rise of the Batman" story. It's the origin of how he comes to prominence in Gotham early in his career, but not THE origin of how he came to be.

That's a better way to put it.

[the last son]

I have a real problem with people who think Iron Man was a better movie than Begins. It really makes me sick.

[Anno_Domini]

Iron Man is a better film when it's a better standalone film. Batman Begins is better at creating a magnificent trilogy to come, with TDK and TDKR.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by the last son

I have a real problem with people who think Iron Man was a better movie than Begins. It really makes me sick.

You take opinions too seriously. It's not as though they're saying Batman and Robin is a better movie than Begins.

Iron Man is a great origin movie, too.

[Fox]

^Agreed.

When Batman Begins came out I found it to be one of the most satisfying Comic Book flicks to come out, and certainly the best origin movie. Since then we've had a bunch of very well done comic book movies come out, and (as far as origins go) Iron Man's was one of the strongest. Obviously it's a completely different feel than BB, but that's a good thing.

To me, the strongest origin movies are (in no particular order)...

Batman Begins
Iron Man
The Amazing Spider-man (although I know a lot of people will disagree with me on that one).

I also thought Thor had a pretty good Origin movie, but I did find the final confrontation just a tiny bit anticlimactic.

I know a lot of people thought 'Spider-man' had one of the greatest Origin stories put to film ever, but after repeated viewings I find it just doesn't hold up.

[Anno_Domini]

Batman Begins and Iron Man for sure as the strongest origin films. I'd obviously take out TAS-M and add Spider-Man and Superman: The Movie, though.

[the last son]

Iron Man was no where near as good as begins. The crap music in that movie. The tone. The horrible villain. The first 30 minutes were good but after that it was just average.

[Anno_Domini]

The tone was fine. Did you expect any of Marvel Studios' films to be as dark as Nolan's trilogy?

And as someone who listens to classic rock more then anything else, no...the music was not crap.

The only thing I can agree with is Iron Monger, but before Stane put on the suit, he was a pretty decent developed villain. The third act just dropped in quality when it became Iron Man vs Iron Monger.

[The Joker]

There was nothing wrong with the music, the tone was perfect for Iron Man, and Obidiah was a great villain. Jeff Bridges was terrific.

[the last son]

Sitting here listening to Lasiurus. Now this is music. I've also recently come to the conclusion that Nolans trilogy is the best out there. For a while I was kind of on the fence but really loved how It all came down to Begins. Beautiful.

[Fox]

Originally Posted by the last son

Iron Man was no where near as good as begins. The crap music in that movie. The tone. The horrible villain.

Gotta to side with Anno on this one. I thought the music felt very appropriate considering who the main character is. The Tone was great, there was was wit, drama, action and intrigue. I agree the Iron Monger ended up being a BIT anti-climactic, but I thought the character of Obadiah was pretty solid, and I never thought it was BAD, per se.

The first 30 minutes were good but after that it was just average.

Yeah. we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

[RustyCage]

I feel like Batman Begins had more gravity and drama, which personally appeals to me, but Iron Man kicked a lot of ass in it's own way. Let's not deny it it's due credit.

[BatLobsterRises]

Lasiurus is a beautiful track, that's for sure.

Iron Man is definitely a cool movie. I personally like it more than The Avengers. However, it's tough for me throw it up there with what I consider to be the titans: Batman Begins and Superman. I think a lot of this comes from the fact that, because Tony is such a snarky SOB, it loses a lot of the warmth that make the aforementioned movies such timeless adventures. I realize that there is a moral there and Tony does change over the course of the story, but I just think Begins and STM have an earnestness about them that Iron Man has less of because a lot of it plays as very cheeky. In short, Iron Man is kind of the superhero film where Han Solo is the lead character rather than Luke, if that makes sense. It shakes things up, and that's exactly what made Iron Man stand out at the time. I think it's a great superhero film, one of the best, it's just not the first thing that pops into my head when I think "superhero origin film".

[RustyCage]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

In short, Iron Man is kind of the superhero film where Han Solo is the lead character rather than Luke, if that makes sense.

That's a brilliant analogy.

Agree with your entire post fully, but that right there was poetry.

[Tacit Ronin]

One of the things that makes Iron man better than BB for me comes down to Robert Downey's dynamite performance as Tony Stark. I still think it's the best leading performance in a Superhero film. Just brilliant. Right behind that comes Bale in TDKR. Indeed, I think Bale wasn't as was utilized in BB and TDK as he was in Rises. Bale shines when he is exuding raw emotion. In Batman Begins and TDK he is playing the reserved and contemplative Bruce Wayne, which demands a sort of presence I just don't see Bale exude.

I still think the first 45 minute of Begins is some of the best stretch of filmmaking in the superhero genre, which makes the more "conventional" and light on its foot second half of the film incredibly jarring. Iron Man evades that tonal dissonance which I think is another reason it's a better film. Pepper Potts is also a far better supporting character than Rachel and Paltrow's chemistry with Tony is incredibly genuine. In BB, I cringed when Rachel kissed Bruce Wayne at the end of the film yet I was impatient to see Tony and Pepper kiss, but Favreau, in a brilliant and hilarious stroke, sidesteps that convention entirely.

We all know Iron man didn't even have a script, RDJ and Favreau had to write and improvise all the dialogue in the film. Perhaps it was that improvisation that lent the film an enormously natural presence that I had never seen in a Superhero film before. Far better than Begins' at times terrible dialogue which were little more than thinly veiled theme speak.

Much has been made and still are of Batman's notoriously incomprehensible action sequences, and while Iron Man isn't gonna impress James Cameron with its action, at least it was legible. I also found the scenes of Tony building his suit and arsenal far more entertaining (and sometimes hilarious) than Bruce building his suit.

[TheGuy]

^You read my mind!

[RustyCage]

Originally Posted by Excelsior.

Right behind that comes Bale in TDKR. Indeed, I think Bale wasn't as was utilized in BB and TDK as he was in Rises. Bale shines when he is exuding raw emotion. In Batman Begins and TDK he is playing the reserved and contemplative Bruce Wayne, which demands a sort of presence I just don't see Bale exude.

Whaaat? Bruce in Begins has a lot of outbursts of rage, and moments of huge sadness or despair. He also has a lot of very tense stares in the film, oozing with the desire to lash out, you can tell he's wrestling with something heavy in his eyes. Very bottled up. I thought he was great.

I might give you TDK as far as raw emotion goes, but there's at least the Joker interrogation...

I happen like the smooth, calculated, prep-time Batman/Bruce too in the trilogy though, so that side of things is subjective.

He's way intense in Begins though, seriously.

[Anno_Domini]

I definitely think Bale shined in the more Bruce-centered films of the trilogy with TDKR being the most than BB. Bale's Bruce was only outstanding in TDK during the scene after Rachel's death when he was talking to Alfred.

[Tacit Ronin]

Originally Posted by RustyCage

Whaaat? Bruce in Begins has a lot of outbursts of rage, and moments of huge sadness or despair. He also has a lot of very tense stares in the film, oozing with the desire to lash out, you can tell he's wrestling with something heavy in his eyes. Very bottled up. I thought he was great.

I might give you TDK as far as raw emotion goes, but there's at least the Joker interrogation...

I happen like the smooth, calculated, prep-time Batman/Bruce too in the trilogy though, so that side of things is subjective.

He's way intense in Begins though, seriously.

Whaaat? Bruce in Begins has a lot of outbursts of rage,

I remember when he aggressively took down Liam after Ras insults his father and that's about it. He was good in that scene, I suppose. But there isn't enough of them.

He also has a lot of very tense stares in the film, oozing with the desire to lash out, you can tell he's wrestling with something heavy in his eyes. Very bottled up.

I honestly didn't think he conveyed the full range of those emotions that well. I actually found him more convincing as the reserved Bruce in TDK more than in Begins. Especially in the scene when he is sitting, defeated, with the cowl on his hand after Rachel's death. That scene was convincing than most of Bale's acting in BB for me. In fact, the scene I do love is the scene where he drives away his guest by pretending to be drunk. With that scene and American Psycho, Bale proves he can do the disingenuous, vapid, vacuous, "nothing behind the eyes" extremely well, which might be a hint as to why I thought his plights of emotion didn't feel genuine to me.

[the last son]

Bale I'm Batman> Anything Iron man said or did. The scene where Batman is interrogating Flass was brilliant. Is that enough emotion for you? When it comes to supporting characters, was Potts better than Gordon? Falcone was more intimidating than Stane and he was the third villain behind ras and scarecrow.

[Tacit Ronin]

Bale I'm Batman> Anything Iron man said or did

You mean the scene that Michael Keaton made famous? Perhaps. But Bale's version isn't .

The scene where Batman is interrogating Flass was brilliant. Is that enough emotion for you?

I thought that scene was memorable for its (unintentional) humor than any display of explosive rage? It was like the "WHERE"S THE TRIGGA???" of BB.

hen it comes to supporting characters, was Potts better than Gordon?

Potts was (far) better than Rachel, that's for sure. Those were the characters I originally compared. As for Gordon, I would say yes. Pepper Potts was more integral to Tony's growth, maturity and emotional reliance than Gordon was. Gordon wasn't a big player until The Dark Knight I thought.

Falcone was more intimidating than Stane

I found Falcone and his cliched gangster overacting more humorous than intimidating (seems to be trend with this film). Whereas Stane was genuinely scary in the scene where he paralyzes and takes Starks Arc Reactor.