EDITORIAL: Reality Check- Iron Man vs. Batman Begins

Will an in-depth look into the stand-alone universes of both films reveal which one is truly more realistic? That's the question I pose in this article, for your consideration and healthy debate.

Follow BattlinMurdock:
By BattlinMurdock - 9/19/2012
Hey, folks. Been a while. I'm actually rewriting this article of mine on this site to get the input of some of my comicbookmovie brethren. If you'd like to see the original article, you can head here .



If you’ve been too busy looking for stone furniture for the rock you live under, then I’ll let you in on a debate the comic book movie fanbase has been having about Marvel Studios’ films and Warner Brothers’ DC stable, particularly in Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight trilogy. Many, though certainly not all, claim that Nolan’s Batman films are “more realistic” than the Marvel Studios movies and that gives them some credibility over their rival that cannot be touched by the likes of the Avengers roster. I’m here to dispute and analyze that argument with a look into Jon Favreau’s Iron Man with Christopher Nolan’s Batman Begins.

So, as we start, we’ll take a look at our protagonists; men of the same ilk with a great gap in philosophy, morals, and personality. In Iron Man, we find billionaire and technological prodigy Tony Stark (portrayed by Robert Downey Jr.), who, when not creating virtual and mechanical mayhem, is busy getting mileage on the bedsheets with the likes of any woman he so pleases, save his loyal secretary Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow). In the other corner, we have brooding, obsessive, and impromptly-charming Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale), whose determination and dedication to the job at hand rules over his life with an iron fist. One, a citizen of real-life Malibu, California (Stark), the other housing in fictional Gotham City (Wayne). With that in mind, we’ll look at Tony Stark and the plot of Iron Man before we get into Batman Begins.

Tony Stark is the son of a brilliant technological magician, who ruled the weapons industry in the 1940s and on, creating an empire that would eventually be Tony’s by birthright. After a demonstration of his newest creation, The Jericho Missile, in Afghanistan, Tony is captured by terrorists and forced, in a cave, to create a weapon of mass destruction to be used at the kidnappers’ own discretion. Tony is mortally wounded in the process, and proceeds to build a weapon…for himself. So, the birth of Iron Man begins as he breaks free and begins to live a double-life as a playboy, vigilante with a new heart of gold. However, Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges) wants the energy source created by Tony on a much larger scale, and is willing to double-cross his business partner for the ticket to streets of gold. In the end, Stane creates a (much larger) Iron Man-esque machine and battles with Tony in LA streets. He doesn’t get too far and by the time the credits roll for the film, Tony Stark reveals to the public that he is, indeed, Iron Man, before we’re treated to Black Sabbath’s Iron Man.

So, in a nutshell, Iron Man is about a billionaire weapons designer who creates a suit of armor to defeat terrorists and weapons manufacturers. The film takes place in real-life locations (Malibu, Afghanistan) and features heavy US military involvement. As far as non-realism goes, the major aspects include Tony Stark’s Iron Man suit (in form, design, and weapons affiliation), Obadiah Stane’s enormous suit, and, debatably, the progressions of technology in the movie in contrast to the advancements made at that time. In essence, Iron Man is incredibly grounded in premise, but jumps into a world of fantasy in execution, with the larger-than-life machines battling publicly and Tony Stark’s uncompromising brilliance and altogether demeanor. While not completely out of the realm of possibility, these elements certainly push the limits of what we can consider grounded. But at length, Iron Man is still pretty darn “realistic” in the sense that it uses almost complete referential devices and themes such as terrorism, weapons manufacturing, big business, and propaganda.

It’s pompous thinking, but the argument exists that because Iron Man is lighter in tone and nature than Batman Begins, the former is “less realistic.” That really speaks volumes about the perception of reality by those making that argument, does it not?

On to Batman Begins.



Bruce Wayne is the son of the famous surgeon Thomas Wayne, whose philanthropic endeavors have kept rays of hope alive in the corrupt, gloomy Gotham City, where mobs and criminals run wild in a town watched by corrupt cops and public officials. After his parents are murdered in his childhood by a common street thug, Wayne educates himself in the best schools and then becomes a criminal himself, eventually ending up in the east and being trained in the art of the shadows by the head of a ninja academy aptly named The League of Shadows. After refusing to execute a criminal for his crimes, Wayne turns his back on the League, destroying their monastery in the process, while saving the life of his teacher (Liam Neeson). Bruce returns to Gotham as Batman, a creation and personification of his own fear of bats, to save the city from its despair in the hands of criminals. He finds refuge in Lieutenant Gordon (Gary Oldman) and his butler, Alfred (Michael Caine). We’re also shown the dastardly plans of Johnathon Crane (Cillian Murphy) who runs the Arkham Asylum for the mentally insane, who, he himself, keeps the inmates insane with a fear toxin. Through a series of events, Batman takes down the mob, fights off a plan by the return of the League of Shadows to destroy Gotham City, and begins to inspire the people of Gotham as a masked vigilante.

Right off the bat, we’re introduced to a fictional arena with Gotham City. Not only is it made up from the source material of the comic world, but in a story that mirrors the Biblical tale of Sodom and Gomorrah. It’s literally so bad, that The League of Shadows, a brotherhood of assassins responsible for the sacking of all major societies in history, become obsessed with destroying it (playing the role of God to Bruce Wayne’s Abraham). Here, we’re given the idea that a city is so digested with evil that it is beyond saving; an idea that while truly terrifying, is fairly fictitious in today’s society of what we perceive to be a city in the United States of America (while Gotham is fictitious, the movie does imply that it exists in the States). We’re also introduced to villains who are responsible not only for the imminent doom of Gotham, but for the legendary destruction of Rome and the like. A play on organizations like The Illuminati, the League isn’t completely out of the realm of possibility, but is highly unlikely.

While Batman doesn’t use jet boosters and fire projector beams out of his palms, he does acquire quite a bit of technological doozies from Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman) that doesn’t help the “realism” factor, even though we’re told the suits and prototypes were intended for military use. Just like in Iron Man, we can’t realistically picture tanks being decked out with motorcycles without slamming a fist up in the air and shouting, “Hell, yeah!” The technology isn’t out of the realm of possibility, but it doesn’t sit well with 2005′s standard by any means, either.

While I think Wayne is a “more realistic” character than Tony Stark, it comes down to character vs. world. The fact is, the universe of Iron Man (excluding the Marvel Cinematic Universe that followed) is a real-life place, where characters may be larger than life, but the realm of possibility is pushed without teetering over the edge. We’re given the fantastical elements because the film is a superhero movie and its source material calls for it. On the flip side, Batman Begins presents a realistic protagonist in a fairly fictional world where cities’ sins are being judged by the great forces at work responsible for the destruction and take down of elder and rigorous societies.



I don’t want this article to come off as if it’s bashing Nolan’s movie, because I really enjoy Batman Begins and it’s my personal favorite of the trilogy. But I think people misunderstand Nolan’s take on the material when they hear him talk about making a superhero movie grounded in reality. What Nolan, as a screenwriter and director does, is explain why things are the way they are in an interpretation that mirrors and homages both the source material and the tone and narrative of past crime-thrillers. He’s not out to make Batman “realistic” as much as he’s out to give it sensible footing and take it in a new direction, with a planned character and story arc defined to a universe that plays by our real world’s rules and utilizes personal themes (courage, faith, hope, fear). With that comes the darker tone of Batman Begins. The film is grounded in its own realities and merits and abides by the rules and standards set by its own story. It’s as fictitious as possible while having “real-world” results. In a city like Gotham, being opposed by villains like The League of Shadows, many debaters attest that “a man who dresses up like a bat and fights crime” seems to be what stands out, when (excuse the play on words) in reality, it’s a reversal. Anyone can dress up like Batman and fight crime; they’ll have trouble finding a doomed city like Gotham and villains like The League of Shadows, though.

Both movies succeed in providing different and exciting interpretations of superheroes, and both were greatly successful because of it. Hopefully, this helped distinguish some of the elements of the films that people so blindly attack with arguments of “realism.”
DISCLAIMER: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under "safe harbor" provisions and will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. For expeditious removal, contact us HERE.
2
LIKE!
34 Comments
DarkGrifter - 9/19/2012, 9:59 AM
I haven't read the whole thing yet but I definitely agree when you say Iron Man is realistic. Realism doesn't necessarily mean everyone's powers are grounded, it just means put them in a real world, something Iron Man did very well.
BattlinMurdock - 9/19/2012, 10:41 AM
@starscream

Yes, but I'm looking at Iron Man as a stand-alone feature in this article. While I agree with what you're saying, considering how the battle is ultimately the climax, there's not enough screen time to develop that psychology.

As far as psychology with Batman, I agree with you, but it's also important to note that that is something that directly stems from the comics as well. It's brought to light by Nolan in a way not done before with Batman, but psychological realism was done in Spider-Man 1 & 2, Hulk, and The X-Men as well.
MoonDoggyX - 9/19/2012, 10:57 AM
@BattlinMurdock - Awesome Article! Great points. Definiteloy the best editorial in along time! Iron Man = Realistic World/Situations with fantastic characters inserted. On the flipside, Nolan's Batman = Fantastic World/Situations with real people inserted.

@starscream9289 - If they had a comment of the week award on here, you might have just earned it. Not that I just agree with you, but you pointed out something I had overlooked myself.

I'm an action nut, myself. I always thought that Nolan, and Marvel for that matter, could stand to amp up the action in their movies a bit. Still, on the mad dash to the Avengers, it would have been nice if marvel had stopped and showed some of the emotional scenery. Looking back now, it seems like such a waste that they didn't. They had some great opportunities to do so as starscream9289 mentioned above. Especially with the caliber of actor/actresses they had at their disposal...
ellispart3 - 9/19/2012, 10:59 AM
its really kind of silly arguing realism with movies about a man who creates a flying iron suit and a business man who moonlights as a vigilante ninja. but with the idea of the charater vs world aspect of realism, batman would win.

Iron man's universe is not more realistic just because it's in LA. Iron man lives in a world where he can create military grade weaponary (which is a pretty big understatement when we are talking about the iron man armor) in his home, take it for a test drive in LA without anyone questioning it, then have a massive robot fight with another businessman, then admits to it on television ("I am Iron Man") without being arrested for reckless endangerment. look at it this way, if some one starts a gun fight with me and i also have a gun and join in the fight, i'm likely to be arrested. These guys did the same thing with advanced and secret weaponry.

Batman was a film about a man who joins an organization that turns out to be a terrorist group. They have been active for many years and attack cities they deem "evil". It's not far fetched to think that crime is getting out of control in a major city (and just because the city is fictional doesn't make it less realistic). After discovering their plot to attack Gotham for being too ridden with crime, he decides to stop them. He does so by allying himself with a cop who hasn't become as corrupt as his peers. Using weapons and tech that he as gathered from his own R&D department for military use, he stood up against the league of shadows (again, they are simply a successful and experienced terrorist organization). i will say this, after the world sees the new batmobile, i was surprised no one in the military said "hey, isn't that something that wayne guy was trying to develop for us?" but hey, it's a movie.
MoonDoggyX - 9/19/2012, 11:17 AM
@Ellis - "i will say this, after the world sees the new batmobile, i was surprised no one in the military said "hey, isn't that something that wayne guy was trying to develop for us?" but hey, it's a movie."

Don't get me wrong, I hands down like Batman Begins better than ANYTHING that Marvel studios has released thus far, but that is just as unrealistic as anything in Iron Man. Though I do agree with yo that BB is the more realistic movie overall...
BattlinMurdock - 9/19/2012, 11:20 AM
@ellis

But you seem to forget that in Iron Man, only Tony, Pepper, Stane, and Rhodey know who Iron Man is. And the country does seek out to obliterate the threat. They only do not do so because Rhodey calls off the attack. Once again, Stark reveals himself to be Iron Man as the last line of the film, so we never see the consequences of that in the film itself. And lets not forget, Tony IS a weapons manufacturer, so people wouldn't bat an eye at prototypes of his weapons that he has schematics of in his home. It's his job.

As far as technology goes, the whole idea of Iron Man is that he's a genius-level prodigy above that of the highest mechanical intellect. The film makes no reservations as to the fantastical sense of Stark's character, and because so, the technology makes sense.

I can believe advanced technology over Illumaniti theories any day.

I think when you talk about the plot of Batman Begins, you're being far too general. The League of Shadows haven't been around just for a few years; they're responsible for the destruction of major cities throughout time...complete historical turning points. And now, they're focused on Gotham City because...it's...so evil. Add that in with the idea that they're planning on destroying Gotham with a fear toxin is incredibly outrageous.

So, we have Batman villains whose motives are not only to destroy because Gotham is evil, but choose to do so in a pretty extreme, off-the-wall way. As opposed to Iron Man's antagonist whose motives are pretty reality-based; he's a business man seeking to get rich and will do anything to get there. His motives aren't original, but they're sound.
BattlinMurdock - 9/19/2012, 11:23 AM
And even though this suit can't fly and shoot beams, I will just put this here:



If an anybody could make that in the real world, I wouldn't be surprised that someone like Stark (if he existed) could make the Iron Man suit.
ellispart3 - 9/19/2012, 11:35 AM
@BattlinMurdock
As far as the final line being his admittance of being iron man and the movie ending, i'll let that go since we are dealing with iron man I. And the scene where there is military action was actually pretty refreshing, also the fact that he is a well known weapons manufacturer with blueprints in his home isn't unbelievable. I wasn't referring any of that though. You've made very good points, but i was thinking about the scene where tony takes his silver mach II armor out and flies it around, then crashes back down and no one is aware or comes by to question it. I maybe forgetting anyone mentioning that.

as far as advanced tech vs Illuminati, i think that was a bit much. i may be wrong, but i thought the idea of Illuminati was a group that ran the world secretly. the league of shadows operates more like a terrorist organization. which is pretty believable. adding the aspect that they operate quietly and have had a hand in bringing down large cities isn't an outlandish idea. honestly, it's easier to believe a terrorist organization plans on attacking a city over a genius created impossible technology because he's a genius. both are over used movie tropes, but when the science isn't really explained for the advanced, it pushes it more to the realm of fantasy. the idea of "trust us, he's a genius" makes it harder to believe.
ellispart3 - 9/19/2012, 11:39 AM
@BattlinMurdock
love that video, but there's a huge jump from a man who can make a suit that has mechanized flaps, to a man who makes a suit that keeps him safe from concussive blasts, falls from great heights, fire an energy beam, and is run by a energy source that is, even in Iron Man, damn near impossible to create.

again, i feel i need to reiterate, i effing love both of these films.
BattlinMurdock - 9/19/2012, 11:44 AM
@ellis

I suppose I'm the opposite. The Illumanti is a group of people who basically run the world, but the actions of The League of Shadows do just that as they crumble socities down once they get "out of hand."

It's much more easy for me to believe that in a world where we can make computers the size of a pore on your skin, music storage devices that can hold years of music, x-rays that can find and trigger disease in the body, that weapons like the Iron Man suit aren't completely irrational. I suppose I'll put it this way:

To be Batman, you have to have the villains and Gotham City. Those are two pretty expansive things and practically impossible to find.

But as we've seen with the Iron Man mythos, to be Iron Man...you need a suit.

I don't even have to make the suit, myself, to really be Iron Man. I don't need Tony's home or job to be Iron Man. That's what the whole second movie is about: the government wants more Iron Men.

And while Nolan's Batman movies are about how "anyone can be Batman," that works in those films because Gotham City exists as it is and because of the extreme rogues gallery of villains.

It's universe vs. world, and in that respect, I find Iron Man to be far more plausible. That's not knocking Batman; Batman's a great work of fiction. But it's what Marvel capitalizes on. A real world with ordinary heroes.
ellispart3 - 9/19/2012, 11:44 AM
@MoonDoggyX
oh they are both very far fetched plots and stories, there's no doubt about it. they are pretty similar, a billionaire takes it upon himself to fight crime/terrorism. I just think batman begins handed it a bit more realistically (really hate using that word when talking about fictional films based on comic book superheroes).
BattlinMurdock - 9/19/2012, 11:46 AM
@ellis

"love that video, but there's a huge jump from a man who can make a suit that has mechanized flaps, to a man who makes a suit that keeps him safe from concussive blasts, falls from great heights, fire an energy beam, and is run by a energy source that is, even in Iron Man, damn near impossible to create."

That's the point I'm making. I have no idea who made that suit. None whatsoever. I don't know his credentials. I certainly don't mean to call that person a "nobody" (I'm not even sure if he made the suit himself) but if someone I've never heard of can make that suit, then I have no problem believing a highly intelligent, bored billionaire could go that extra mile.
ellispart3 - 9/19/2012, 11:55 AM
@BattlinMurdock
fair enough. the league from what i understand never wanted to run the world, just wanted to clean it up to their standards. a really odd comparison would be an exterminator killing the bugs in your house, then telling you that he is now head of the household. the league has an extreme ideology, and when it comes to terrorist, extreme ideology isn't too outlandish. with iron man tech, it is not completely upsurd. we are doing some impossible things with technology, and what we see in the coming years will probably seem more sci-fi then real life. but when you toss in the film that the tech created is so advanced that no one can recreate it and the one who did was able to do it in a cave with limited resources while under supervision because he's really really smart, it falls more into fantasy for me.

also to say you need villains and gotham to be batman is really simplifying the character. batman at his core is a man willing to give everything to change his environment. may it be a man who joins the police force to protect his city, a doctor who chooses to work in an under privileged area to help the people, or a teacher who is driven to do their part in improving education. all of those things require sacrifice and devotion to a task.

now that's not a slight at iron man who i always saw as a redemption story. a weapons manufacturer who chooses to rectify and improve the world he has helped creating is a great story. and again, anyone who has hit a rough patch in life and strives to improve it is living out the iron man ideal.

...i don't know where i was going with all of that, but long story short, i guess i agree to disagree when it comes to sci-fi tech vs a secret terrorist group. nice talk brotha.
BattlinMurdock - 9/19/2012, 12:01 PM
@ellis

I don't mean to say that LoS "runs" the world, but they're pivotal in the way it turns. I think they could care less about running it. The fact is, they're a brotherhood responsible for pivotal changes in history and now, they target Gotham.

Psychologically, there is more to Batman, but if you take away Gotham and his rouges, he isn't really different (as a man, not what he does for a living) than Daredevil or any other street-level vigilante. And in the comics, he's incredibly smart. But my point is that Batman is Batman because of Gotham City. And he is so illuminated in the world of comics because of how dastardly Gotham City is. Frank Miller didn't re-create Batman without re-constructing Gotham and the rogues gallery. Everything went hand-in-hand and compliment each other.

As much as I like RDJ as Tony Stark, I would give just as much attention to a War Machine movie as I would IM.

But I enjoyed this talk as well. You have yourself a fine day/night, cap'n.
ellispart3 - 9/19/2012, 12:22 PM
@BattlinMurdock
LoS were pivotal in changing the world, but that's not enough to call them illuminati-like. I feel if there is desire to run the world, then it would be valid. Without that key factor, they are a successful terrorist organization.

that's a fair assessment of the comic book character. In the funny pages, Batman is a brilliant detective, a savvy businessman, an expert hand to hand combatant, and possess genius intellect. to be that guy does take quite a bit (then again, i also kind of described doc savage). Batman treats gotham as a possession, it is HIS city. His villains are competing with him for control. So in that regard, yes you need a lot more than drive and the willingness to change things to be Batman. In the films, he is a man driven by revenge to save the city from destruction. He was a symbol to inspire others to change. That role can be placed on anyone. I always felt that Batman was illuminated due to his level of drive to fix the dastardly city. Frank Miller did a great job at making Gotham seem more like a simple crime ridden city of america during the 80s. it, to me, felt like a de-construction to a city that was more relatable.

saw this article and i thought about science for tomorrow looks like our sci-fiction today. other than that, it doesn't have much to do with anything.
Warp Drive Might Actually Be Possible

at the end of the day, we got some great films so i guess it's all good.
MoonDoggyX - 9/19/2012, 12:26 PM
ellispart3 and BattlinMurdock - That might have seriously been the best, most civilized, exchange of opposing ideas I have ever seen on this site! lol

GoILL - 9/19/2012, 12:40 PM
@MoonDoggyX

agreed.
Preston - 9/19/2012, 1:52 PM
I'm with Black and Yellow :
If you want reality, watch a [frick]ing documentary.

However, here is some real world Math: Iron Man > Batman Begins

Iron Man succeeds at every level. It had a strong central villain, a quick yet emotional origin story, it was fun, and it appealed to people of all ages. Most walked out of Iron Man with a “hell yeah.”

On the other hand in Batman Begins, Batman wasn't in the movie for 2/3 (kids in the movie theater were asking where Batman was), the origin was emotional yet long, the c-list villain was weak (the b-list villain [Scarecrow] was stuck in a cameo), and (yet better than the Schumacher films) crowds demanded more.

And, the box office take for both movies

Iron Man: Budget - $140 million/ Box Office - $585,174,222

Batman Begins: Budget - $150 million/ Box Office- $372,710,015

Let me explain the Box Office, WB spent more money on a movie than did Marvel Studios, yet The Marvel Studios movies is superior in every way, and it (Iron Man) kicked Batman Begin's ass at the Box Office by $212,464,207 (and cost $10,000,000 less).
BattlinMurdock - 9/19/2012, 2:56 PM
The documentary comment is a juvenile way to put yourself above the argument at hand. For decades cinema has, for all intensive purposes, been an art form to mirror truth and reality with a specific narrative. You can represent realism in any film you so choose, without it being a documentary.

And you'd have to be completely ignorant to think all documentaries provide unbiased representations of reality.

Get off the high horse, folks. This is meant for healthy debate; not to begrudgingly throw out opinions to appear more intelligent or above anyone else posting.
Tainted87 - 9/19/2012, 3:10 PM
You know, regardless of what I've had to say about Nolan's direction and story-telling in TDKR, I LOVE Batman Begins. It's my second-favorite right up along with the 89 Batman (to me, you can't beat the atmosphere).

Do I like Iron Man better? Would it matter if I did? That's not what BattlinMurdock is trying to establish. He likes Mark Waid's Daredevil more than either one, so it's a moot point.

My brother and his fiancé, who both work for the DOD and met while employed by NASA, LOVE Iron Man. His fiancé deemed the suit only unsuitable for its' sound barrier-breaking capabilities - not because the thrusters are too small, but because Tony would not be able to bank, turn, or move any part of his body without causing instant paralysis.

Still, that's pretty mild compared to a lot of things that are meant to pass off as "realistic" in any Hollywood film. I think the scariest bit, is that the toy Stane uses to paralyze his victims is actually quite real, although paralysis would not be quite as instantaneous as in the movie - and it would be kind of forgettable compared to the other symptoms.
---

Batman Begins is actually one of the most passable CBMs... with the biggest exception being the suit. Where Tony's suits are powered with hydraulics, Batman has to use his muscles to move all of that around. This would greatly limit his movement speed as well as the range of motion - he wouldn't be able to throw much more than a haymaker. Also, as noted during production - the suit gets hot really fast.

Bruce would have said: "yeah, I'm not sure about the whole Bat motif, Alfred". Why would someone who trained so extensively, willingly hamper his movement THAT much? There's no way on God's green Earth that he would have had a snowball's chance at beating Ra's on the train (although yeah, physically, he didn't).

Also, the whole idea that every gadget or high-tech device comes from Wayne Enterprises - specifically the microwave emitter powerful enough to vaporize water... being used without a gigantic power source.

Since we're only really talking about the first of the two trilogies, I'm not going to get into TDK, and why the FBI, CIA, DEA, etc didn't feel it was necessary to figure out why there's a tank pancaking cop cars in Gotham.

I think Iron Man is enjoyable fantasy with some elements of bendable reality to guide the viewer's perspective between action shots, while Batman Begins is kind of the opposite.
Preston - 9/19/2012, 3:29 PM
@BM

I think the term "realistic" is misused.

What people mean to say is that “it doesn't mock the source material.”

For example, Star Wars [episodes 4, 5, and 6] aren't realistic, but the writer and director (George Lucas) make you believe that the Star Wars Universe is plausible. He painstakingly created a universe and story that made you care about the characters and universe.

It doesn't even have to be serious, mature, and raped of fun (like Batman Begins/ Rises) as Nolanites proclaim. Marvel Studios has cut it's niche of the hero movie business by catering to the whole family and making movies fun.

Now, what a movie can't do is turn into a one dimensional toy commercial like: Batman Forever, Batman and Robin, Green Lantern, (Iron Man 2 – came close), etc.

OR, turn the movie into the cliff-notes/ADHD version of the comics like Green Lantern; where most of the movie is like “previously on Green Lantern …” and they move through 30 years of character history, multiple villains/heroes, etc. They had about three movies of material abridged to 90 minutes (the same goes for Daredevil). In other words, slow it down. Don't sacrifice the story to jam pack as much material as possible.

Film makers need to respect the source-material. It's why fans are relived when the director/ writer/ actors geeks out over the comics (ex: Guillermo del Torro). The last thing that a fan wants is a hack writing or directing movies looking for a paycheck; we get ideas like but not limited to “Jack Black as Green Lantern.”

Marvel Studios is winning because they have a production company that knows how to bring comic book movies to life. They don't sell themselves as artsy-fartsy high-brow fare. They sell their movies as “fun for the whole family and true to the source material.”
calin88 - 9/19/2012, 3:44 PM
Great article BM, I love both movies and will watch them over and over again, realistic or not
MoonDoggyX - 9/19/2012, 3:51 PM
Batman Begins is my favorite DC movie so far. The Same with Iron Man 1 and Marvel. If you guys want to get all technical, neither on is any more realistic than the other.

Realism? Real world???
In the real world, Iron Man would have been arrested after the Mark 2 test scene and forced to turn over his research to the government, voluntarily or otherwise. The end. The whole last half of the movie would've never had a chance to happen. In fact, even If the initial escape from captivity happened, Tony stark would have died crashing into the desert!
Batman would have been caught as soon as any advanced tech was shown. Last I knew, patents are public record. What? Bruce Wayne is back and now there's this guy running around using all of this tech from Wayne Enterprises??? hmmm. In the real world, Bruce would've been arrested and probably killed while in custody. Whole police department was corrupt in BB, remember. Or he'd be in Hiding for the rest of his life. Even in a last ditch effort no tech, no guns, no killing. Poor Bruce would not make it far, at all!

I believe the realism that Nolan was reaching for is motivational and emotional. I think that we can all agree that Batman Begins has the edge in that category. That does not at all take away from the fact that Iron Man was one awesome ass movie and a lot of fun! They are just different, and its OK to appreciate both of them for what they are...
Zoidberg115 - 9/19/2012, 4:05 PM
@BattlinMurdock lol random Creeper in the backround.SSSSSSSSSSS BOOM!
Tainted87 - 9/19/2012, 4:20 PM
Also going to point out that if a microwave emitter is capable of vaporizing water from a conservative estimate of 20 feet, what would it do to the blood of anyone aboard the train?
BattlinMurdock - 9/19/2012, 4:46 PM
@Wormwood

I don't believe I'm misusing "realistic." To quote Pushing Daisies, the facts were these:

Every film sets itself up in a universe of plausibility from the start, and stretches or restrains itself to specific elements. For example, we know that Stormtroopers in the Star Wars universe are commonplace militia, even though in the audience's world, they're unheard of. If you'll notice in those films, no one is turned off by the idea of a laser blaster; they're commonplace and no one is shocked when one is pulled out and used in defense. These are all elements in a universe that lends itself to its own plausibility. When someone is stabbed with a lightsaber, they likely die. In that universe, we only know the effects of a lightsaber as it's shown on screen, but the characters know the lightsaber as a weapon and that it is used by the Jedi.

Likewise, in Iron Man we're treated to a universe and world very much like our own. The people and characters in Iron Man are just as enamored with the superhero as we are. He is not commonplace. The film abides by our real world standards. In essence, the Iron Man suit is the most fantastical element in the movie and is also acknowledged by the characters of that film.

In Begins, we're treated to the same effect; people are enamored and confused by the appearance of Batman. Both films feature elements that stand out to the life inside the film itself. That is a sense of referential realism used to connect the audience watching. In contrast, you have films like Desperado, where characters are killed by guns, but the physics are altogether screwed up. However, no one in that movie ever comments about how a handgun threw back a villain thirty feet, into a breaking pool table. The "realism" of that film is understood and re-interpreted by the audience based on how the characters in the movie react to the situation at hand.

@MoonDoggy

"In the real world, Iron Man would have been arrested after the Mark 2 test scene and forced to turn over his research to the government, voluntarily or otherwise. The end. The whole last half of the movie would've never had a chance to happen. In fact, even If the initial escape from captivity happened, Tony stark would have died crashing into the desert!"

You're discussing things that happen in the narrative, which I am not. I am not applying realism to narrative and story, but to cinematic universe. You are correct in what you say, but the purpose of this debate is to look at the elements and worlds over what "can and can't" happen.

Preston - 9/19/2012, 7:36 PM
@BM


You wrote:

Every film sets itself up in a universe of plausibility from the start, and stretches or restrains itself to specific elements.



I agree. A good writer can make us believe anything if they write a solid story.


Furthermore, the best writers:
1. Show us, they don't tell us. An example of a bad movie would be Jonah Hex; it spends most of the movie telling us instead of showing us. The Avengers and Serenity, both get it right; they show us instead of telling us.

2. They have a strong central villain for their stories. If you think of the best comic book movies (V for Vendetta, Iron Man, Batman '89), they all have very strong villains. When the movie starts adding to many villains (Batman and Robin, Iron Man 2), the movie always lacks something (it's called character development), and the film feels one dimensional and watered down. There is less of a good vs evil type showdown.

3. They limit the number of characters and details to those that are absolutely necessary for the plot to move forward. If you use tons of incoherent details and worthless characters, you take away from the central story.

4. They don't mock the source material. A good writer isn't a hack who is trying to score a paycheck.

5. They follow the 6 basic parts of a screenplay.

The Setup: 10% of Script – introduction to the characters
New Situation: 15% - something happens to set your hero on a new path
Progress: 25% - the hero commits 100% to the mission at hand
Complication and Higher Stakes: 25% - crap hits the fan
Final Push: 15% - the hero gives it one last push (aka: climax)
Aftermath: 10% - The hero's new life following the events of the climax.

p.s: 'Realistic' is typically misused, only, by Nolanites. I'm almost 100% sure that BlackandYellow wasn't attacking you personally (neither was I). We were just making light of the idea that comic book heroes can be called 'realistic' since the whole concept for comic book heroes/stories is to tell stories that are larger than life (ex: The League of Extraordinary Gentleman, Watchmen, etc); there is nothing 'realistic' about the medium.
MarvelLight - 9/20/2012, 12:02 AM
Realism doesn't automatically equate better. I think it's actually kind of depressing that 'imagination' in movies doesn't get the credit that it deserves. I personally think the world would be better with more imagination. I really like Micheal Mann's films for example, but I'd prefer to have more Steven Spielbergs out there.

Oh and anyone who thinks that the Nolan series is realistic have a screw loose - especially Rises. It's not a fault of the series either.
Squaremaster - 9/20/2012, 7:34 AM
Ras Al Ghul is a far more interesting and threatening villain than Stane, and Scarecrow was more effective than the 10 rings leaders.

Bruce's journey to become Batman was more interesting, and there were moments in the film that were far more iconic and emotionally investing than Iron Man.

"Iron Man" was absent for the same amount of time as "Batman" was.
fangz - 9/20/2012, 10:49 AM
great article, the 'realism' thing has always bugged me. especially how people seem to wanna take it so literally sometimes. but it's really just a hype kinda word for what happens to any story when it's reinterpreted for whatever audience is modern at the time. it's what Marvel did with the Ultimate line, it's what people have done with vampires and werewolves for a long time. you know people see old Dracula movies, and after a while, they become cheesy or campy to them. not cuz of anything wrong with the movies, but becuz they are dated to a certain period and used technology of the time and reflected some quality of the time that the next generation rejects as silly.
so when the next generation makes their own monster movies, they want to update them cuz no one will buy Bela Lugosi creeping along all slow with that look on his face. so they make vampires bloodier or move faster or whatever, but they update to the modern world.

and nothing's wrong with that, it just gets dumb when they get all cute and have them deal with actual issues like 'how do they comb their hair?' or 'why don't they move to Alaska where it's night for 6 months and eat everyone?'. and then everyone's always gotta show how it would look on cable news. what would CNN and Fox say about vampires? that's real important for some reason. it's probably the grossest thing about it all. now every superhero has to get their name from a newspaper headline. the Spider-Man, the Batman...they shouldn't even explain all that stuff, i think

anyways, that's all Nolan means with his whole 'realism' schtick. what an ass. no duh, &then he thinks he was the first person to think of this. i actually like what he did with the movies a lot, even though i'm excited to see the next bunch of fantastical Batman films that are sure to follow.
but all the 'realism' junk is just a fakey word for what's been going on for a long time and there's no reason to pretend like he meant it literally.
batfan175 - 9/20/2012, 2:49 PM
Yeah...i don't think detroit can be saved so Gotham City might not be that implausible after all in the US and if you pay close attention to politics you know that both parties are corrupt to the core. it's not that implausible.
CoughCough - 9/20/2012, 6:29 PM
It is surprising to find that the comment section of an article about CBMs is more educational than an English class in one of the best high school in NYC. SMH.
BattlinMurdock - 9/20/2012, 9:58 PM
@batfan

This is Detroit's crime rate map.

Gotham is only Gotham if that entire map is white.

lokibane2012 - 9/20/2012, 10:10 PM
@starscream9289

You are one of the most deluded Nolan fans.

His films are very good, but stop masturbating to them, its sickening.

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.

.