Superhero Origin Stories

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Hey guys, just wondering something here. How many origin story movies do heroes need before we can just start over with a reboot with a new actor and not retell it? If the next Spiderman movie has the origin story rehashed, I think I will audibly groan in the audience.

So is it true to say that, unlike in the early 2000's, the vast majority of people going to see superhero movies are going to have a little bit of an origin already known to them? Or will we still see characters reintroduced so people can get to know how Batman became Batman again?

Mind you, I'm not against a very summarized version of who a character is to introduce their past. Max from Fury road explained who he was, where he came from, and how we was haunted in a very brief time on screen before the title. People who hadn't seen any of the previous Mad Max movies got to get to know him pretty dang quick, not bad for a character who hasn't been in theaters in 30 years.

So I guess what I'm asking, is what is the origin movie limit on popular characters in your mind? Actors change all the time but total rebooting of origin stories every single time that happens is a trend I've never liked with superhero movies. My opinion? Two movies where the origin story plays a big part. Tops. People are unlikely to forget Batman's parents died for his sins anytime soon.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

So is it true to say that, unlike in the early 2000's, the vast majority of people going to see superhero movies are going to have a little bit of an origin already known to them? Or will we still see characters reintroduced so people can get to know how Batman became Batman again?

How many movies are about Batman's origin story?

Tim Burton's 1989 Batman movie wasn't an origin story. Bruce Wayne is already Batman from the first scene, and while he hasn't been operating for very long (he's still considered an urban legend) it's definitely not an origin story.

The only one that I can think of is Batman Begins, which actually changed his origin story so that he had been trained by the league of assassin's.

So yeah...your point, kind of not valid.

People keep complaining about Superhero origin stories constantly being retold, but the only superheros that seems to be happening to are Spiderman and the Fantastic 4 (and really, who cares about the Fantastic 4, REALLY), and that's because Fox has no idea what to do with them, not because it's a problem that's endemic to superhero movies.

 

[shrekfan246]

So is it true to say that, unlike in the early 2000's, the vast majority of people going to see superhero movies are going to have a little bit of an origin already known to them? Or will we still see characters reintroduced so people can get to know how Batman became Batman again?

How many movies are about Batman's origin story?

Tim Burton's 1989 Batman movie wasn't an origin story. Bruce Wayne is already Batman from the first scene, and while he hasn't been operating for very long (he's still considered an urban legend) it's definitely not an origin story.

The only one that I can think of is Batman Begins, which actually changed his origin story so that he had been trained by the league of assassin's.

So yeah...your point, kind of not valid.

The movie doesn't have to be specifically about a character's origin to shove their origin story into the audience's face. You're pretty hard-pressed to find a piece of Batman media that doesn't repeatedly bring his dead parents up.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

So is it true to say that, unlike in the early 2000's, the vast majority of people going to see superhero movies are going to have a little bit of an origin already known to them? Or will we still see characters reintroduced so people can get to know how Batman became Batman again?

How many movies are about Batman's origin story?

Tim Burton's 1989 Batman movie wasn't an origin story. Bruce Wayne is already Batman from the first scene, and while he hasn't been operating for very long (he's still considered an urban legend) it's definitely not an origin story.

The only one that I can think of is Batman Begins, which actually changed his origin story so that he had been trained by the league of assassin's.

So yeah...your point, kind of not valid.

The movie doesn't have to be specifically about a character's origin to shove their origin story into the audience's face. You're pretty hard-pressed to find a piece of Batman media that doesn't repeatedly bring his dead parents up.

IT'S HIS CHARACTER MOTIVATION.

It's like saying that the fact that Superman is an alien from Krypton should never be mentioned because then it's an origin story. Sometimes it has plot relevance.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

It depends, we get a rehash of the Spiderman, Batman and Superman regularly. That said all three are popular enough that people who don't read comic books know their origin stories. Doing it is kind of pointless unless you're rebooting, which needs to be done every time you switch actors. Especially because publishers and filmmakers like to assume the moving going audience is stupid.

On the other hand, some superheroes needed their origin story done because they're less known. Like Thor, Captain America, and Iron Man. Although our current Iron Man/Tony Stark in the form of Robert Downey Jr. is so perfect, once he can no longer do the role we'll probably have to retire the character for a decade or more. It's like with the Christopher Reeve as Superman, no one can replicate that perfection currently.

 

[shrekfan246]

So is it true to say that, unlike in the early 2000's, the vast majority of people going to see superhero movies are going to have a little bit of an origin already known to them? Or will we still see characters reintroduced so people can get to know how Batman became Batman again?

How many movies are about Batman's origin story?

Tim Burton's 1989 Batman movie wasn't an origin story. Bruce Wayne is already Batman from the first scene, and while he hasn't been operating for very long (he's still considered an urban legend) it's definitely not an origin story.

The only one that I can think of is Batman Begins, which actually changed his origin story so that he had been trained by the league of assassin's.

So yeah...your point, kind of not valid.

The movie doesn't have to be specifically about a character's origin to shove their origin story into the audience's face. You're pretty hard-pressed to find a piece of Batman media that doesn't repeatedly bring his dead parents up.

IT'S HIS CHARACTER MOTIVATION.

It's like saying that the fact that Superman is an alien from Krypton should never be mentioned because then it's an origin story. Sometimes it has plot relevance.

Sometimes it does.

However, a great many times it does not, and is more a lazy attempt at using his single best-established childhood trauma as a shorthand for why he needs to go out and punch the baddie of the day.

Batman in particular has a very colorful rogues gallery. A great many of them have done horrifying things to either Batman himself or people he cares about, or have their own tragic back-stories (Two-Face and Mr. Freeze). His character motivation doesn't always need to come back to "his parents died".

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

We've reached the point where there's no need to tell Superman's or Batman's origin story anymore.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

We've reached the point where there's no need to tell Superman's or Batman's origin story anymore.

You forgot to mention Spiderman there, his origin story is ubiquitous as all heck too. So no need to tell Spiderman's origin story either.

 

[FoolKiller]

I'm with Dirty Hipster on this one.

Yes, Spidey has been done twice in a decade, but that is Sony just desperately trying to hold onto the rights.

Batman:
Only had Batman Begins. This nonsense that it was an origin story because the death of his parents is mentioned is ridiculous. His life experiences are important to the decisions the character makes. And really, 1989 Batman rewrote what actually happens. The Joker was not the killer of his parents. Even if you argue that this counts, it's 16 years apart.

Superman:
The movie continuity ran from 1978 to 2006. That's nearly 30 years. Man of Steel did tell the (different) story again, but 35 years after the previous origin movie.

Captain America:
Two movies 21 years apart... and really, does anyone remember the one from 1990 starring Matt Salinger? Has anyone even seen it?

The Punisher:
15 years apart, and once again, does anyone remember the Dolph Lundgren one?

The truth is that once comic book movies became popular again in 1998, and took off in 2000, we have been paying much more attention to it. Batman is remembered because the Burton one was exceptionally cool for its time.

I think I'm okay with seeing an origin story as long as they aren't just rehashed like Spider-man was.

So, OP, you've brought up the idea of two movies max. But that doesn't really make sense when the movies are generations apart. Well now I'm asking you for your opinion. How long is acceptable? How many have really seen all those movies from the late 80's and early 90's?

 

[WhiteFangofWhoa]

You're not alone in that. Unfortunately, recent events have left Spider-Man in a peculiar dilemma where a reboot is pretty much needed to link him to the MCU despite Amazing Spider-Man having come out what feels like 5 years ago leaving audiences lukewarm at best, and the easiest path when rebooting a franchise in any form is to start with the 'new' origin story and build from there.

Among other things I liked Spectacular Spider-Man for that- it only went into the background story involving Uncle Ben and Peter getting his powers etc. during a flashback sequence 12 episodes in when Peter was fighting a battle for his own mind against the Venom symbiote. More relevantly and recommended, Spidey was first introduced in the Avengers cartoon as a photographer/urban legend when the Daily Bugle was running a smear campaign on Captain America in lieu of events in the previous season (resulting in a great moment where young Peter vents how angry being slandered makes him, and why the older Steve Rogers doesn't let it get to him), but he only gave small hints in his dialogue and reactions as to what made him that way until near the end.

Tangents aside, I wouldn't mind a new Spidey skipping the origin story or shoving most of it aside until later like Spectacular or Earth's Mightiest Heroes, but what do you build the film around then?

 

[Scarim Coral]

From the look of it, two is seen to be the limit at the most. Dpn't forget the upcoming Fantastic Four will be another reboot origin changing from outer space to interdemension.

 

[WolfThomas]

Spoiler: All Star Superman condensed origin of Superman into eight words. I'm of the opinion that characters like Batman and Spiderman could easily be done the same way.

From the look of it, two is seen to be the limit at the most. Dpn't forget the upcoming Fantastic Four will be another reboot origin changing from outer space to interdemension.

As far as the FF goes that's not straying too wildly. They did discover the negative zone after all.

 

[FPLOON]

The only reason the origin story exist is to believe that whoever's watching it has never seen that character before in their life... which is a huge assumption, but these executives will spare no expense to make sure no one is left confused for all the wrong reasons...

Other than that, flashbacks... Flashbacks everywhere!

 

[Starik20X6]

I quite liked the way Spider-Man 2 and 3 showed key frames from the previous film(s) during the opening credits to summarise the plots and get the audience up to speed.

I remember reading somewhere that Marvel have officially declared they won't be doing any more 'origin' films, instead starting with any new characters already operating. Presumably it'll be the Batman '89 route of explaining their origins throughout the story.