Indeed. It jettisoned the dry humor and political slant in favor of Rob Schneider and a huge plastic codpiece.
I should not have used that word because it is still a loaded one, much like “nerd” and “geek” used to be, and I apologize if anyone was insulted.
That said, hell yeah there were fans back then who knew everything about various parts of popular culture. I don’t doubt there were Superman vs The Bat-Man (if he was prepared) discussions.
I think some people are overestimating the retention power of the average person. Even if they came across said origin at some point in their childhood, they didn’t have the storage capacity to retain the info. Let alone recall it.
I don’t know many of the origins at all, just your basic super-men and various-animal-men. But the thing is I don’t need to know their origins. I would be perfectly capable of enjoying the hell out of a superhero movie that started with something like:
“Ok, so there’s this guy right, and he’s impervious to bullets and super strong, but he’s weak to this green rock. Oh and this is the villain, he’s an evil genius and super wealthy, and he most people aren’t aware the he’s a villain so we can’t just go kick his ass. Ok, credit roll is over time for some action.”
Even that might be overkill, you could just show it to me along the way. What’s so damn important about making sure everyone knows their stupid origins? I don’t need an hour long primer on the life and work of John McClane to watch Die Hard, why would I need one for Batman?
[quote=“Chronos, post:34, topic:528669”]
For fun, here’s as much as I know, as a nerd who picks up a lot by hanging out with other nerds, but doesn’t actually read comic books:
DC:
Huh–what’s interesting is that for everything else, you’ve got the classic Silver Age origin…except for Batman, where a really, REALLY late piece of the mythology has crept in.
The whole “They were coming home from seeing a movie (usually Zorro) and the movie inspired Bruce to put on the mask and cape” thing didn’t appear in the mythology until about the mid-'80s. I’m about 95% it was a Frank Miller thing, as is the now-iconic image of the mugger tearing Martha Wayne’s pearls off.
It’s weird how that little tweak (which I like, by the way) seems to have become a basic part of Bat’s accepted origin.
Exactly. James Bond - a superhero if there ever was one - did just fine for over 40 years without even a hint of an origin story (at least onscreen).
Interesting… I guess I just sort of figured that that was a nice enough detail that it ought to have been in from the beginning. I didn’t realize it was recent.
Don’t agree. The big difference is that Bond never had any super powers so there was never any need to suggest how he might have acquired them.
He’s certainly not an “superhero” in the modern conventional sense. Though Batman is perhaps rarer in that he didn’t have any superpowers - then he was in a less crowded field then - early superheroes were modelled on circus acrobats and strongmen -still with the trunks etc
If you’re not an alien but have extra ordinary powers. or appearance, then there is the quite understandable question of how you became that way.
Hence the “origin”
Piggybacking off Rrose Selavy, there is more need to explain why a person can crawl up walls or why they would wear a bat mask.
People join a police force every day. There is a clear need for spies in modern society.
Those are more straight forward.
Also, some of us just find origin stories entertaining. Even when we have seen them before, we like to see new takes on them. Maybe different canonical details will be revealed or emphasized. Maybe even new canon will be invented. Rigid adherence to comic book canon is not a benefit, but I understand that the Comicbook Guy’s of the world would be shocked. What works on a page doesn’t necessarily work best on the big screen.
I was maybe vaguely aware of them before the movies. Maybe not even that.
Not at all.
I agree.
Before the movies, I think the only origin story I could’ve told you was Superman’s.
But why does it matter? What’s important is what they can do, not why. They’re not documentaries.
Furthermore, you can explain why spiderman can climb walls or why batman wears a mask in less than 5 seconds. He got bit by a radioactive spider. Why does that give him superpowers? Who knows. Probably the same reason he’s been the same age for 50 years. But it did, and that’s all I really need to know to enjoy a spiderman movie.
If they feel they can tell an entertaining origin story that will make an interesting movie, ok. But they shouldn’t feel that they have to spend a whole hour diddling about in a science lab just because some people might not know his origins.
But remember the point of the OP, the longer a movie spends telling the origin , the more likely it will be in the consciousness of the general audience , rather than comic fans.
How “entertaining” that is told is another matter, for some people endless fight scenes get boring and its the human interest and character etc that engages.
It matters because drama is often about character, history , motivation , desire, etc and not just about “what someone can do”. That’s basic fiction writing not documentary.
But yes make it entertaining otherwise nobody will watch.
I actually agree. I am just arguing the origin should be included. I think, however, it can be done much quicker than a whole film.
Honestly, “first” comic book films bore me, as I know everyone’s origin. But, I understand that there are kids, international audiences, and general interest viewers who want/need the info dump. I even liked Spiderman 3 better than part 1!
All of my comic book reading is in the dim past. I did remember Superman’s back story, and to a lesser extent, Batman’s beginnings but that was about it. Being an old geezer, I remember when comic book prices went from a dime to twelve cents. About this time, I discovered Edgar Rice Burroughs and his John Carter of Mars series, then Robert A. Heinlein’s juvenile novels and I was off to the library rather than the corner drug store for my literature.
I have no idea of the origins of the icons of the comic book world.
My personal feeling is that unless the superhero is getting all or almost all of the screen time, his mundane background needs some set up. Iron Man is cool and all, but it’s Tony Stark’s personal demons that make the story. Same for Batman. Unless you want a world of people asking "Why the frakking bats? when they exit the theater, you need that origin story.
I think it would take Terry Gilliam to capture that peculiary British style of dystopian pitch-black humor to make a good Judge Dredd movie.
Hmmm…maybe it seems more of a knockoff to me because I discovered Bolan first, reading the earlier books while I was in high school, and I didn’t start reading comics until college.