5 Ways Iron Man Was Better Than Batman Begins

Batman Begins is not only a great comic book movie, nor is it merely a great movie overall… it’s also a very important film. It took the comic book genre film into a darker more serious tone (while still being quite fun) that previously hadn’t really been done with mainstream comic movie fare. It opened the doors for further diversity in the genre that had previously been only dreamed about by comic geeks, but thought unrealistic by much of Hollywood.

However, I think there is also a tendency in some people (me included) to confuse “darker” with “deeper”. Following my viewing of Iron Man (which I really enjoyed) I got involved in some discussions with people where comparisons were made between Iron and Bat. And in most of those conversations at least one person would usually mention “Yes, but Batman Begins was a deeper film”. And at first, I just agreed with that without thinking about it… but upon further reflection, I don’t agree with that statement at all. Yes Batman Begins was a darker more serious movie… but I disagree that it was intrinsically a deeper movie. When you really look at all the elements, I think an argument could be made that the story in the Iron Man movie was every bit as deep as Batman Begins… it just clearly wasn’t as dark.

That got me thinking about both of these movies that I enjoyed so much. There was a starting assumption (by me as well) that the Iron Man movie, no matter how good, wouldn’t be as good as Batman Begins. I think there is a worth while debate to be had on that creative and subjective issue… but for now I would just like to propose 5 ways that Iron Man was actually better than Batman Begins (yes, there are ways Batman was better, but that’s for another conversation).

If you inquired all Batman Begins fans around the world about what one thing they DIDN’T like about the movie, almost universally (with exceptions) the answer coming back with be “The damn love story with the wooden walking Tom Cruise baby incubator”. It felt like every time Rachel Dawes was on screen the pace and motion of the movie ground to a complete halt… and the love interest was never sold. It felt forced and unnatural. Iron Man on the other hand had a very minimalist approach to the love interest story line… the two never even kiss. Not to mention, Gwyneth Paltrow fit in with the movie much better and never got in the way. She, and her relationship with Tony Stark actually HELPED the story as opposed to hinder it.

My one critique of Christopher Nolan’s direction when it came to Batman Begins was how he choose to shoot the action sequences. Whenever Batman was going to do something really cool (like beat the hell out of the henchmen at the docks), Nolan either choose to have the camera cut away to something else so you only HEAR Batman doing his thing, or committed the heinous sin of shaking the bloody camera around like an German midget having an epileptic seizure to create a fake and artificial sense of “action” or “intensity”. This drove me nuts. Iron Man on the other had generally always had him in frame, in the shot allowing us to see what he was doing. Thank you Mr. Favreau!

There’s something about brining the fantastic into the mundane that makes the fantastic all the more awe inspiring. Prior to Jurassic Park, I had seen lots of movies with Dinosaurs, but they were usually back in time (where you would expect to see Dinosaurs). But when Jurassic Park brought those creatures into the the world and time we live in, there was something far more magical and awe inspiring about it. Batman Begins doesn’t really exist in our world totally. The styles, technology (better and worse) and atmosphere of “Gotham City” (which is also fictional) are all slightly off from the real world. And so, when the environment is a fictional world, the fictional characters dwelling in it seem a TOUCH less fantastic because they’re not in the world we inhabit. Iron Man on the other hand takes place in the context of our world… which for me personally, made it engage my imagination all the more. Some people won’t agree with this point, and that’s fair since it is subjective.

Please note I’m not saying Tony Stark is a BETTER character than Bruce Wayne. I don’t think he is… but there’s no denying that when sitting in a movie theater, the moments that Tony Stark is on screen are more entertaining to watch than Bruce Wayne. In Iron Man, Stark is a funny, quick tonged character who almost always said or did something on screen that made you laugh or love him even more. His quick one liners and general disposition made watching him on screen almost as fun as watching Iron Man on screen. Same can’t really be said for Bruce.

Say what you will, but man… that little speech Rachel Dawes gives Bruce as they’re driving in the car in front of Falcone’s was nauseating. “Who will stand for justice… yadda yadda yadda”. There were actually several monologues in the film that had a high cheese factor to them… some awesome ones too. Iron Man just seemed to have tighter dialog. Sillier sometimes for certain… but rarely diving into the deep blue cheese. It was usually witty and with the wink of an Iron eye at times… but for what it was it was pretty tight.

Once again, I’m not here saying Iron Man was a BETTER movie that Batman Begins (although I might later). Both are fantastic movies, and both have their strengths and weaknesses. These are just some of the areas where I though Iron Man was superior. Are there other ways in which you thought Iron Man had the upper hand?

Comment with Facebook

116 thoughts on “5 Ways Iron Man Was Better Than Batman Begins

  1. Hey there, I jumped over to your web-site via Facebook. Not an item I regularly read through, although I really like your ideas nevertheless. Thank you very much for putting together something worthy of reading!

  2. Nice points but i think me and my friends still prefer batman begins over iron man & IMO the dark knight topped every super hero movie out there.

  3. I agree Iron Man is a better film than Batman Begins, i also agree with the point that Iron man does not have as many Villans as Batman does BUT are we forgetting the many cross overs in the marvel universe, most recent being in the new incredibale hulk film where Tony provides the means to take down the hulk and apears in it personaly at the end. Instantly here we have a potential new iron man film. Also the leader of the ten rings strikes me as a potential Madarin candidate, 1) He leads the ten rings 2) how he seems to like his ring and play with it throughout the film (like the mandarin played with his rings in the cartoon). Again here we have another potential Iron Man film.

    As for Batman having so many villans, i think we’ve established that to many superhero films can kill it, Spiderman being a prime example, after the first 2 films i felt it was begining to go downhill and the X-men films, they were good but i felt after the third film the justice had been done and another would kill it. To much of a good thing is a bad thing and i fear that this will happen with Batman but not Iron Man although granted the new batman film (The Dark Knight) is a true masterpiece played out perfectly, but give it a few more batman films and the air will become stail and we will be sat here discusing how it all failed and new comic book films coming out soon.

  4. i believe iron man was agood film but kind of overated.i think it borrowed alot from batman begins but it had a lame villan and very few actin scenes with stark in the iron man suit.

    BB was way more enjoyable and realistic.can’t wait for the dark knight

  5. I think that the original poster has some very good points.
    But I also think there are many points to be made i favor of Batman Begins over Iron Man, and I’m inclined to agree with a lot of Joe’s points.

    There are so many good things to Iron Man, and I must admit that while watching it at the theater, there were many moments in which I felt that this was going to be the superhero movie to beat from this point. But I have to judge the movies in their totality.

    The most glaring weakness of Iron Man is the climax between the hero and villain. When we reach this point, Iron Man succumbs to that obligatory, cgi-driven, “clash-of-the-titans”-setting which is present in every single Marvel I have ever seen. I was disappointed, because I felt what had come before was so special, and expected the conflict between hero and villain would be solved differently as well.

    We both agree that Rachel was undoubtedly a horribly miscast and weak link of Batman Begins. She induced embarrassing moments. But to be honest, so did the “clash of the titans” in Iron Man as well… Perhaps even to a bigger extent. None of the two movies are perfect, it’s just a matter of picking out which one is most “perfect”, and that’s a completely subjective process, I think…

  6. My List: Top Comic Book Movies(superHero)
    so doesn’t include Incredibles,300,Road to Perdition or Sin City

    1A. Batman Begins -slight edge over Iron Man
    1B. Iron Man – but barely beating…
    2. X2: Xmen United
    3. Spider-Man 2
    4. Spider-Man
    5. Batman 1989
    6. Superman II richard donner cut
    7. Blade
    8A. Batman Returns
    8B. Superman Returns
    9. Daredevil Director’s Cut
    10A. Fantastic Four Rise of the Silver Surfer
    10B. Spider-Man 3
    10C. X3: the last stand

  7. (Type your comment here. Make sure you’ve read the commenting rules before doing so)

    I don’t understand all the hype about Iron Man. When I saw Iron Man, I was checking my watch in the theater, whereas Batman actually had pathos. I liked a lot of things about Iron Man but to me it was just “check,” another good comic movie, nothing quite like this post is hyping it up to be.

    I also couldn’t shake how unrealistic the military scenes were and the way the military officers behaved (I’ve worked at some of the most important military locations), and it really effected the whole movie for me.

  8. John,

    Having carefully considered your article, here is my rebuttal to your argument.


    You state that:

    ‘It felt like every time Rachel Dawes was on screen the pace and motion of the movie ground to a complete halt… and the love interest was never sold. It felt forced and unnatural.’

    Rachel Dawes, as an Assistant District Attorney, acts as a parallel to Batman. She has dedicated her life to ridding Gotham of crime by legitimate means, while Batman acts as a vigilante. As such rather than grinding the film to a halt, she is essential to it. That Rachel is unable to succeed in stopping crime and is targeted by Falcone and later Crane, illustrates why Wayne choose not to become a police officer or a D.A. and why he had to become Batman.

    As Bruce Wayne’s childhood friend, she is the one person, with whom he could share a relationship that knows the real Bruce, the frightened boy who lies beneath the playboy image and behind the cowl. The tragedy is that so long as that façade remains in place and he continues to lead a double life, Rachel cannot be with Bruce.

    At the end of the film, despite Rachel knowing Bruce’s secret and despite their mutual affection for one another they still go their separate ways because so long as Bruce is Batman they cannot be together and Bruce will always be Batman.

    Certainly there is a similarity between Rachel Dawes and Pepper Potts, both of whom are the only women who get close enough to the heroes to truly understand them, but the connection between Rachel Dawes and Bruce Wayne is considerably more complex and developed at the end of Batman Begins than the rather one-note will-they-won’t they relationship between Tony Stark and Pepper Potts established by the end of Iron Man. While you cite this as a good thing, it adds an important layer to the hero, a loner status and emotional turmoil.


    I can see where you’re coming from. Personally, I enjoyed the action sequences in Batman Begins and liked what Nolan was trying to achieve with his frenetic, brutal, and deliberately disorienting fight scenes. And contrary to what some critics believe this WAS Nolan’s intention and not simply the result of a lack of experience in staging action, as he discusses roughly 9 minutes into this interview: http://www.kcrw.com/etc/programs/tt/tt050615christopher_nolan.

    However, I do think the action sequences in Iron Man are far superior. The Iron Man vs. Fighter Jets sequence in particular is one of the most beautifully staged action scenes I’ve seen in a long time and was truly thrilling to watch.


    I’m not entirely sure I understand your reasoning here. You argue that since Iron Man is set in a world which more closely resembles our own, that this makes Iron Man ‘all the more awe inspiring’ and suggest that the ‘style, technology and atmosphere’ of the fictional Gotham City somehow make Batman less fantastical.

    However, stylistically, Batman Begins had a very naturalistic look. And with regard to the technology, the film was universally praised for its grounded and realistic approach to Batman’s arsenal of gadgets.

    Gotham City itself is clearly a composite of many modern cities, the skyscrapers of New York, the monorails of Tokyo, the now-demolished slums of Kowloon. Gotham is clearly an exaggeration of the modern city but nonetheless very much grounded in reality. The Afghani village of Gulmira in Iron Man is fictitious, the terrorist cave-base a stereotype but, nevertheless, you accepted it as reality.

    Ultimately, even if you can’t move beyond the fact that Gotham is a fictional city, I fail to see why this makes Batman any less fantastical. Is Gandalf any less ‘fantastical’ because the Lord of the Rings is set in Middle Earth? Is Superman any less ‘awe-inspiring’ because Superman Returns is set in the Metropolis? So long as you buy into the world that the film creates for its characters, what does it matter whether it’s set it Gotham City or New York City?


    Your argument here seems to hinge on the notion that humour is the sole prerequisite to entertainment. You argue that Tony Stark is ‘funny, quick tonged[sic]’ and cite his ‘quick one liners’ as the reason why the character is more entertaining than Bruce Wayne. However humour isn’t the sole prerequisite to entertainment. I found the internal struggle of the Wayne character to be highly entertaining.

    You praised Iron Man for being set in the ‘real world’ but Bruce Wayne is a far more nuanced, fully realised and ‘real’ character than Tony Stark, and real emotionally engaging characters ARE entertaining.


    Your argument again seems to hinge on Iron Man being funnier and therefore better. You argue that the monologues in Batman Begins are cheesy, while the dialogue in Iron Man is ‘usually witty and with the wink of an Iron eye’. However Iron Man was not without its own naff monologues, Jeff Bridges ‘Tony Stark is a golden goose’ speech immediately springs to mind. Furthermore, while Batman Begins wasn’t entirely bereft of witty one-liners, the darker tone of the film means that it was never intended to be as frequently funny as Iron Man. Ultimately both films have very strong scripts and pointing out the odd weakness in either seems a fairly pointless exercise.

  9. The main reason i would say begins is ‘deeper’ than iron man is the themes in begins were caked on much more than in iron man.

    begins focuses on fear in humanity and examines it on every level, through the hero, the villain, the criminal, the philanthropist, and in general the average joe. like Ducard says “feel its power to distort.” The film focuses on how corruptible we all are due to our own fears and how the defining characteristics of someone can be judged by their courage over their own fear, not just over some maniac nemesis…

    fear can distort justice to vengeance, give you an empty feeling when you lose something/someone but it is the essence of all humanity…in a way, Batman seperates himself from humanity on the level that he seems fearless and also EVOKES fear in others but this is all because of his own fears that he his this drive.talk about Iron man being heavy on the existentialism…batman truely is his own worst enemy…it is this OTHER villian inside him that makes it so much more interesting to watch him take on the physical criminals outside…

  10. All of this is irrelevant, in two months movie blog is going to have to make a new article….title:


  11. Iron Man was a fantasy at levels which doesn’t really appeal to some. An iron willed millionaire ridding evil at the street level is may SEEM more digestible than a lone alcoholic inventor fighting terrorism. Terrorism but its a much bigger and complicated situation. A lot of times I found it stupid but then I realized Tony Stark IS stupid! Okay, so he’s a genius inventor, graduated from MIT at 17 blah blah, but many mathematical intellectuals in real life lack a stable social outlook. Stark was oblivious to the damage he was causing for so long. He thinks he can. But he’s equally blind to the gravity of his venture. So yeah, Iron Man was deep.

    But if I had to pick I’d say Batman Begins.

  12. If something is “almost universally” doesn’t it automatically mean there are exceptions?

    Anyway good read, the reasons are a bit flakey but it’s cool. It’s funny how many people are putting in their top Comic Book movies and even including Graphic Novels. Yet no one mentioned what could be THE best comic book / Graphic Novel of all time..

    Road To Perdition

    It’s surprising how many don’t realize that movie is a Graphic Novel. It’s a great flick and it’s usually over looked. Sad, not every comic book movie needs a costume..

  13. This is absolutely ludicrous. IRON MAN was the typical generic superhero film – nothing more. The only thing about that it could have possibly made it better than average was Downey’s performance. BATMAN BEGINS was infinitely stronger; capturing the dark universe of Batman without a reliance on CGI and popcorn, stock-room cut-outs.

    BATMAN BEGINS is miles ahead of IRON MAN. This is insulting.

  14. I think JOHN is absolutely right here. Nobody even read his article. Please people, skip reading the comments section until AFTER you read his article. This is important, start at the top.

  15. Iron Man was good, but not better than BB.

    I don’t think that the relationship between Rachel and Bruce can be called a “love” story. Actually i never thought that either feel love about each other. In the film their relationship is a childhood affection that becomes a fixation (maybe eventually an obsession). Wayne is haunted by memories and trauma, Rachel is one of the things close to the memory of his life before the tragic events that changed his life.

    Every time i see a fight in BB i feel being beaten by the bat. I’m sure many people were dissapointed by this, hoping to see “action” (which is given by certain standards and conventions of american filmmaking) . The idea behind is giving the feeling of confusion under attack.

    IM’s world is at least (to not say MORE) as “fantastic” as BB. There are many examples of devices that don’t belong to “our world” (Tony’s generator, for instance) which are just as fantastic as the microwave weapon in BB.

    It’s more “entretaining” because it’s more shallow and frivolous, like the cliché of “billionaire playboys”.

    I agree with the fact that some lines in BB sounded cheessy, but that was because of the interpretation. I couldn’t stand Holmes’ performance. You can see that sometimes she doesn’t even understand the lines she’s supposed to say (“you enjoy the reversal”, for example). The whole articulating subject in BB (which is – in short – fear as a weapon that can be used either for good or evil) is much deeper than iron man’s “morality” (which is : “technical progress can deliver us from the problems technical progress has created”) and closer to our societies. The whole Wayne’s quest is much substantious than Stark’s “epiphany”and Nolan and Co. translated it very well to the screen.

    I believe Iron Man is a good superhero film, well cast, very well acted, well made and all, but most of its success is owed to the fact that it keeps closer to certain standards (actually it has more in common with Spiderman, which was a very conventional superhero movie). BB is more ambitious and philosophical, and that’s why it’s superior.

  16. Best comic book movies.
    1. Spider-Man 2 (Obvious)
    2. X2 (Hell yeah!)
    3. Iron Man (Definitely a good use of my $7)
    4. Batman Begins (Nolan brought back this franchise after Joel Schumander, or whatever the hell his name is, fucked it up, dumbshit)
    5. 300 (Okay, maybe I shoulda put Batman at #5 instead of 4)
    6. Superman Returns (Not a Superman fan, but this is definitely a good movie)
    7. Spider-Man (I can compare Iron Man to this favorably)
    8. X-men (Which brought back that the superhero franchise after Batman turned it into shit)
    9. Hulk (I thought this was good)
    10. The Incredibles (Look, up in the sky! Is it Dreamworks? Is it Blue Sky? No, it’s Pixar!)

    Also, I agree with Servant of Krom. Robert is a fucking Idiot fucktard. Oh and Joel Schumander, Fuck your momma, bitch.

  17. Well all i know is that Dark Knight will whoop Iron Man.

    The one debate I have is the realistic world thing. Iron Man can just fly around doing these tests and nobody is noticing or caring that a random object flew around the city today. There is only the one scene with the military. What about the times at night?

    Gotham is realistic. It’s basically a beat down city. Have you ever seen one of those? Probably not. If anything, Nolan’s universe has been praised for being realistic. Everything from how he gets his bat-equipment to Scarecrow not actually being a scarecrow. Both movies have their fantastical world issues, so I can’t say Iron Man is more realistic at all.

    You’re telling me that these terrorists, who were getting suspicious of what Stark was doing, didn’t eventually decide – Hey, let’s put someone IN the room with him watching him with a gun, instead of some camera. I mean he is the best weapons maker in the world. You don’t think he MIGHT make something to kill you? But I forgot, it’s an American movie where Arabs or terrorists are made to look like idiots. Aren’t these the terrorists threats the likes of people who sent two airplanes into two buildings? Why do movies make terrorists always look like idiots instead of actual threats to be afraid of. It’s just weak storytelling and not believable at all. I mean really, why are you watching a camera. He knows he’s a prisoner.

  18. WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You think that iron man had better dialog than what movie!!!!!! Come on, name one movie. Even Fantastic Four had better dialog. A witty, smart-ass script does not make a movie good. I think the excessive comedy put the movie out of the real world and into the comic book world. But hey, that’s good. I really enjoyed this movie for being a good comic book adaption, one of the best yet. But dude, your article is hurting iron man real bad. It’s trying to make it a serious, thoughtful, hardcore drama/action insted of what it really is : A fun loving, terrorist smashing, great summer action flick, and one for the books too. Iron Man and Batman belong in two different categories, don’t try to compare them. (By the way, the action in Batman Begins was perfect if you don’t have lazy eyes.)

  19. The acting is much better as a whole in Iron Man simply because Rachel Dawes is miscast in Batman Begins. I won’t judge Katie Holmes acting but she was not right for this part- Maggie Gylenhall will be better at this character.
    The Microwave Emitter was a little too much in suspension of belief especially since this Batman trilogy is cemented in realism.
    Yes Tony Stark is much more interesting than Bruce Wayne- there were moments like when he had to get rid of his party guests for their own safety but Bruce Wayne is so tortured that it is sometimes hard to watch.
    Iron Man hints at an entire Marvel Universe with Nick Fury and the Avenger Initiative and the shield of Captain America easter egg.
    With Batman you get the feeling he is the only hero in his universe- not even a mention of Metropolis even though Warners knew Superman Returns was next up in the theaters…thats why Justice League isn’t coming soon and the Avengers are.
    This will all flip flop though because Nolan will have touched up anything ‘off’ from Begins and The Dark Knight will be the all time best Comic Book film until Iron Man 2 or Avengers. Hulk looks good but its a wait and see- Wolverine Origins has potential if it admits to being part of Marvel Universe like Iron Man and Hulk. Superman Man of Steel will only be as good as the script- Singer created a great movie with X2 so there is hope although I liked the ‘homage’ Superman Returns.
    If WB will just take the voice of the fans to heart they have the potential to knock Marvel around at the Box Office because Batman,Superman,Wonder Woman,Flash,Green Lantern and Hawkgirl vs Grod,Parasite,Shade,Sinestro,Luthor and Toyman just feels like a Mega Movie if set up properly,cast properly and with a die hard fan of a director like Favreau. They already have Batman and Superman cast- now find the rest.

  20. well I agree with the action sequence….but i Disagree with everything else….

    First of all….maybe Tony Stark is entertaining…but that’s his character…
    Bruce Wayne is a different man….and we can’t say someone is better than someone else if they are different…

    about the reality thing.,…man u screwed up…..u saying that Batman is unreal……and the arc reaktor…and the flying Titanium suit is???i disagree with that…

    I never felt the love though in Batman Begins…maybe because Katie Holmes wasn’t in love with bruce…this kinda relation….old ones…only seems like that……in my opinion it was perfect…it was a mixture of love and a brother sister thing…….

    Man….u say Iron Man had better Dialogue…..well it was funnier…but was Batman Begins near to funny???
    and there were some Silly Dialogue….in Iron Man…but once again Batman Begins Dialog…was….as dark as it had to be….it wasn’t Bla Bla Bla…..it came from the depths of the characters….That why Rasz Al’gul…was talkin in a sophisticated way!! Falconi also did in a way…

    that’s all

  21. Minimal Love Interest Storyline: In itself not an advantage, but the Katie ‘wooden’ Holmes gone and Maggie in this should get better. Therefore the problem rests with Mrs Cruise, not the plot.

    You Can See The Damn Action: A thought it was more the editing than the camera work which was annoying in Begins, but yeah, I basically agree.

    Iron Man Happens In The Real World: This sat uneasily for me, I honestly felt more comfortable watching Begins in this respect, but as you said, subjective. Though Iron Man kicking Talib- sorry, ‘Ten Rings’ arse was very fun.

    Tony Stark Is A More Entertaining Character Than Bruce Wayne: As someone else has said: apples and oranges. They are way too different to compare for me. Wayne’s purpose isn’t to be entertaining in Begins, generally speaking.

    Iron Men Had Better Dialogue: Without a doubt. Some of the stuff in the action scenes was annoying, as was most of the polemical stuff in the monologues. Alfred is just Mr Exposition for the most part. And there’s all the repetition because Goyer clearly doesn’t do originality. Not Star Wars Episode II bad by an stretch of the imagination but poor compared to Iron Man (and most of the other elements of Begins).

  22. Hey Ian,

    You really need to learn how to read man. I never said Iron Man himself was realistic. On the contrary, Iron Man is the “Fantastic in the Mundane”. In other words, the world in which Iron Man lives is the real world. He himself, and the things he does are not “realisitc”, but rather the world in which he lives is more true to our real world.

    Gotham is something out of fiction. Not just because it’s not a real city.. but as you look at it, you see it’s a reality all it’s own.

  23. John,
    Yeah building an arc reactor in a cave is completely realistic, gotta hate the water vaporizing thing in Batman, but you’re cool with his character building an arc reactor in a cave….. riight….. oh and one thing that made Iron Man so much better was the Afghanistan part, gotta love showing the audience our A typical terrorist, very scary. GO AMERICA! Stupid terrorists would never figure out he is building a leg, then an arm, how bout a chest piece, good ol’ tony stark, so clever.

    And last point, Jeff Bridges played a GREAT Lex Luthor, I mean probably the best Lex Luthor in history, I mean he wasnt trying to take over some real-estate, but still he played a great LEx Lut……. “what…. what was that? His name wasn’t Lex….. it was obadiah?? Damn, coulda fooled me…..”

    So again John, Iron Man was based in reality, with a minimal love interest, with realistic elements to the stories, and the character creation/development came up with some truly ORIGINAL character design.

    There is no way Iron Man was better, all of you have to get off the Iron Man high horse, it was good, but not the best.


  24. My only real gripe with Batman Begins is that the return of Neeson and the Ra’s story felt really tacked on because Scarecrow obviously was not large enough of an antagonist to deliver the movie’s final conflict. Iron Man’s relationship/conflict with Stane was not a huge part of the film until the end but it was present from the beginning.

  25. and why is BB more “believable”?

    There is aboslutely no way that a rich gym rat who subscribes to “kung Fu Today” can jump off buildings (in a fictional city), have radar targeting gadgets that the 20-trillion or whatever American free enterpruise economy can not come up with before him, because he’s kinda smart and kinda rich. Now of course this is comic book stuff, but ONCE AGAIN, u speak of BB like “welllll, this actually happened or something”….the science behind Iron Man is actually way more believable than Steve Forbes learning karate and kicking but because of daddy issues. I’ll take a Davinci (which comes every few hundred years and leaps science by the same century mark) who’s self centered and capricious nature, staying in character inside the mask rather than juggling mental energy with silly false personalities, with a weaponized, mechanized suit (that logically can perform functions that a human body cannot, ala’ BB) anyday.

    SO….IRON MAN is the pitcher….BB is the catcher.

  26. “Buster”-Buster

    Buster, not that I am a fat dude sitting around (between dungeon and dragon get togethers or something) I would like to tell u why your subjective logic is flawed, in my subjective superior opinion.

    You discount Iron Man’s more believable “gadgetry” as unimportant – later in your novella u suggest that BB is more believable because Iron Man just “came up with the idea of a suit?”.

    Actually, u dissprove your own point. I personally think that a “Davinci of weapons of death” is far more likely to be able to turn trash can lids and napalm into a mechanized battle armor to save his own self absorbed [email protected]@! then a rich playboy whio studies with monk/ninjas in Tibet or whatever (who, in REAL life are not living in monestaries studying combat and eating rice but in reality currently selling fighting-monk bobble-head dolls to tourists…and sneaking Plumper hot-dogs with a Big Gulp….lol)

    Another point….once again u have dropped the “gritty” argument. You know what, anyone can take the musical “Annie”, stick her in a pair of stilleto heels and make her a street walker and some goof-ball, low rank critics will say “Wow, Genius!”.

    Iron man keeps the roots, combines it with a little swing (which was always there in the real comic) without degenrating into let’s put lipstick on a pig mentality.

    Buster, you’re dead wrong.

  27. I will agree with you on all these points. I loved that Robert Downey Jr. played Tony Stark. I think he did a very good job! The dialog was quick and funny. It was a more realistic type of movie.

    I would say “Iron Man” is probably my favorite superhero movie to come out.

  28. I just think that Batman Begins was a better film overall. The characters were deeper, Bruce Wayne/Batman faces a few tough decisions, and has more of an internal suggle than Tony Stark/Iron Man did. Not to say that Iron Man was a bad film, because i really did enjoy it, but the characters were just too shallow for me.
    I think that #4 really had a good point. Tony Stark is a more ENTERTAINING character. He’s witty character whose going to make you laugh, which i thought was great; but I also found it refreshing to have a character in a comic book movie that made you THINK. I always thought that Tony Stark, in reality was just Marvel’s answer to DC’s Batman. Both wealthy industrialists, born through tragedy, and their only powers stem from their devotion and wealth. Of course, to me, Tony Stark is basically that guy that Bruce Wayne pretends he is in front of other people. This brings me to another reason that u enjoyed BB more than Iron Man: Bruce Wayne is effectively 3 different characters; the playboy public persona, the dark and disturbed Bruce Wayne who made a promise to his parents, and then the brooding terror of the night, Batman. Tony Stark seems to maintain his one persona throughout the entire film, even when he is Iron Man. This is not a knock on Robert Downey, Jr., this is just the way the character was conceived. In fact, i loved RDJ in the role, and i am not sure that any other actor would fill the role nearly as well as he did, so here’s hoping that he comes back for the next few Iron Man films (not to mention the Aveners pic).
    Another major reason that i felt that Iron Man was a weaker film (although, not by much) was that the villain was simply not fleshed out enough. Obadiah Staine, a very personal friend of Tony’s, and they faced off as if they had just met. Batman also had a personal villain in Ra’s Al Ghul, and the writers had more fun with that and it certainly showed in the final product.
    Further, Batman just made more sense to me. Forget the microwave emitter, in a movie based on a comic book, it’s understood that a few liberties are going to be taken when it comes to the gritty realness of it, but i think that despite that, and despite the fact that BB took place in a fictional city, it still maintained more of a sense of realism than Iron Man. I’m not even talking about gadgets and technology, I’m talking about things like what made Tony do the things that he did in the movie? Everything Batman did in BB was motivated, but Iron Man lacked that at some points, some things were not explained, and just jumped into. Sure, we know that he wants to rid the world of the weapons that his company created, that’s the general idea of the plot. But how about all the other things? He just decided to build a suit while terrorists were holding him captive? Niow, where in the hell did he get that idea from? Obadiah using his suit, correct me if I’m wrong, but there is no way he could have operated that Iron Monger suit as well as he did with so little actual practice.
    In my opinion, both of these movies transcended from great comic book movies to great movies, period. Obviously, to me at least, Batman Begins was the groundbreaking, landmark film in the genre, and set the stage for films like Iron Man. I want it to be clear that I am not taking anything away from Iron Man, it was a very, very entertaining movie, but for my personal taste, Batman Begins just had more substance to it, and was just a better movie.


    Last note … i swear before sleep

    You said:

    “i’ts just ma movie about Iron man with some cheesy lines.”

    Yes it is….uh, so is BB

    “At least Batman has a real villain in all his movies.”

    yyyyeah, the Joker…etc…the ARE REAL. lol.

    “Iron man just has another verson of himself.”
    You mean like he wears a metal shell ….ummm…kinda like Batman wears a MASK and a blue body stocking?

    “I rate this movie rental. I wouldnt buy it.
    Its just some Cheesy Kid movie.”

    Unlike the weighty Citizen Kane-like value of Batman Begins, right? It’s BATMAN, lol. There are no pearls of wisdom or pithy insights into the universe nesteled behind the caped crusaders point rubber ears. Batman IS for kids. Real kids and the KID in all of us.

  30. One more note…all the Batman Begins zombie seem to think is that more gritty, darker, more violent, nastier, edgier is somehow better. To tell the truth, I’d probably argue that one of the first two Superman movies was probably the best of all time – they were very soda pop and bubblegum, but they were probably the most fun of any given time to the widest audience and probably represent the true spirit of a superhero better than any other. Now, I liked Iron Man a lot a few days ago – way more than BB, but the “pleasure-jolt” I can faintly remember getting from Superman II at the age of seven years old or whatever, when it came out in theaters was bigger than Iron Man. Now part of that is the fact that I was a kid, but part of it also was that Superman was real clean fun and really well done also. But if I had to choose a movie that my 1 1/2 year old daughter would love, I’d choose Superman not the others. There was more built into the fiber of the characters in early 1980’s. There was a more serious, less serious, genuine quality to it. And I am sorry, I understand that comic books have “grown up” but let’s face it – if you are 30 years old and reading comic books every day – you may have a more grown up appetite for story line and theme; but if u were any real genius you might just check out some books by guys like Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Doestovsky or what have you. The person who grows from childhood comic addict to adult comic addict – is a bit – just a bit – like the kid who gows from popeye cartoons addict to pornography addict. Fantasy is fun for all of us; but it is a kid/teens game and an adult’s occasional luxury of rememberence.
    Iron Man, for those of us grown up enough to type in these blogs – is a better cross between what a comic hero is truly meant to be (fun and straightforward) and should be – with enough smarts and theme to make an adult enjoy twists, tech, and story.
    But it is not mired in the “tragic darkness” “grief” yada yada yada that works a lot better for undeveloped adults than the grown up who likes a bit of kink and fun, but remembers the heart of what a super hero is and what such a film should encompass.
    So I’ll take my cocky fun loving, slightly boozy Tony starcks who is not a metaphor for dark yada (ala The Cure lyrics or something) with better story, more class, sharper corners and simply more fun ….over the continually downhill racing Batman direction which appears headed towards Grand Theft Auto 3 mentality (hey, i’m no puritan … i got a kick of seeing naked gals in a video game and running over people too …for about 15 minutes … but then it lost it’s thrill)…ala edgier means better. Truth is, I’ll take the state of the USA’s mentality in 1984 over it’s current mentality any time.

  31. I think Iron man really sucked, through my perspective anyway.
    Its just ma movie about Iron man with some cheesy lines.
    At least Batman has a real villain in all his movies.
    Iron man just has another verson of himself.
    I rate this movie rental. I wouldnt buy it.
    Its just some Cheesy Kid movie.

  32. You know what, Batman Begins was not that good. BB’s “darkness” and “deepness” is one of the psuedo-hip clicko, non-thinking man’s wannabee thinking man type. Like buying an Ipod for a hundred bucks more because it’s SUPPOSED to be techier, hipper, whatever – fact is there is a lesser known model out there for less with three times the features. And they were both mass produced on the same sweaty assembly line, same parts, somewhere in Hung Fat China.

    Batman is the story of a rich guy in leotards jumping off buildings in a cape and whispering hushy goth-phrases. Barf! Unless yer a twit, you realize that it’s a super hero flick and has about as much depth as a bag of peanuts. DC was always less sophisticated than Marvel heroes.

    Iron man is not “deep” either. It’s about a guy in a metal suit flying off buildings. But it is smarter, better written, far more charming – and much better acted.

  33. I think that Iron Man is receiving to much praise. It was certainly not darker (given) and it was not even close to being as deep or intricate. Also the actions scenes were not emotionally gripping, we were not set up for them like in begins. Yes, at the docks you could not see the action but that was meant to exemplify the way batman fights. Also not every fight was even like that.

  34. I have to agree with the article that Dark does not equal Deeper. Dark is easy.
    I can come up with make believe super dark, scary, violent stories in my sleep… not enough to be movie worthy :) but interesting. Coming up with a story that has comedy, drama, emotion (other than anger) is almost always far more deeply creative and inspiring than those that rely on major elements of shock factor scary or deeply dark brooding acting. One of the EASIEST emotions to portray is anger and tends to get the attention from those viewing it, unlike trying to get a desired response from someone using witty elements or good storytelling – it’s too easy to just rely on one or two angry moments to keep someone’s attention – you should have to keep it interesting over the lengh of your story.

    I’ve never been a Batman fan (maybe you can tell) but I’ve never been a Spiderman fan either, and I would put Spiderman 2 way ahead of Batman Begins, Iron Man then ranks somewhere near the top.
    My biggest issue with some superheroes Batman in particular has always been… anger and darkness are way too easy and not deep enough to keep my attention for the long haul.

  35. Insanity

    Iron Man was good, but people are exagerating about it in a big way. We went a year or two with mostly bad superhero movies and as soon as one comes out that doesn’t suck, everyone gets carried away.

  36. IMO I thought BB was not that good…couldn’t see the fascination others had with it. My biggest beef with it was Batman is supposed to be Batman, not hi im Bruce Wayne oh by the way i dress up as a freak and fight crime. Even in the comics it was always Batman even when hiding behind Bruce Wayne. And dont even get me started on the tank (batmobile) that drives on top of houses?!?!?!

    With that said i am anxious to see TDK to see if the sequel can fix the mistakes i felt they made. Personally when i watch movies im looking for character, its what i watch for, and in this way Iron Man more than destroyed BB. Other than Freeman, Caine, & Neeson (sp?) no chacters worth watching in BB. But im repeating self again so…

    Just wanted to say John keep u[p the good work. Your the only critic i seem to agree with with just a few differences aside. But have to say thanks for being here to keep the fans informed on all entertainment aspects and being willing to mix it up with the webers, even the ones that are complete morons and ya have to wonder how they can use a keyboard.

    Keep it up laters man

  37. Hey Goodbar1979

    Thanks for the kind words man.

    So… are you saying that being balanced is a bad thing?

    Look at Transformers. Everyone knows how much I love that movie… but if you read my stuff and listen to the Transformer Commentary we did, I’ll always point out the faults and the “buts” for that as well.

    I think you can like something, and still be honest about the shortcomings or possible downsides.

  38. maybe shitting was the wrong word….id say more along the lines of it always being:

    “Batman looks/sounds/feels good….BUT…..”

    always seems to be a but

    like Heath looks great but….
    Batman Begins was good but…..
    Dark Knight will be awesome but….

    I have no doubt John likes Begins and isnt saying it sucks..but just looking over all the post-Begins stuff its seems to be a trend….

    But good call on the Post John…sure have alot of discussions…..which is always good :)

  39. I liked Iron man, but seriously, every time I watch a movie from Marvel,including Iron man, I feel like a little kid. Maybe that’s not such a bad thing all the time, but Batman is more adult, and feels like an actual movie, not a cartoon. I think the dialouge in BM was actually better, and more mature, and more clever. The characters felt more real,and authentic, especially the villians. The action was also very authentic, including the fight scenes, which makes it look like an actual fight, not glorified by people flying back 5 feet from a punch. There’s no flying, no leaping 15 feet in the air, no huge CGI explosions. No this isn’t Superman. It feels like your actually watching a man. Just a man in a cool suit with cool gadgets, and elite fighting skills. And Christian Bale is just Bad ass, come one. Robert Downey Jr is a brilliant, but who would you rather face in a dark alley, Tony, or Bruce. Yeah… I mean were talking about the guy from American Pshyco here. Robert brings more comedy to the character, where Bale brings more grit to his. And ofcourse it’s written and made by the guy behind Memento, and Prestige. (As opposed to Elf, and Made. LOL. ) No , I think Batman outdoes this one.

  40. @ Robert – Oh, and TMB was the first site to post the new TwoFace picture but WB told them to take it down moron. “Do some research”

    Oh, and everyone knows Nolan shook the camera on purpose. Just because you do something on purpose doesn’t mean it was right or good. If he raped your grandma in the ass on purpose would that make it ok?


  41. @Robert – What kind of retarded moron are you? Seriously?

    You said John is shitting on Batman. Do you know how to read? In this blog he said

    – “Batman Begins is not only a great comic book movie, nor is it merely a great movie overall… it’s also a very important film.”

    – “It opened the doors for further diversity in the genre that had previously been only dreamed about by comic geeks, but thought unrealistic by much of Hollywood.”

    – “I’m not here saying Iron Man was a BETTER movie that Batman”

    – “Both are fantastic movies”

    You’re a fucking idiot fucktard. Learn to read.

  42. I agree, goodbar, I think John doesn’t like the fact that Batman is so popular. Don’t know why anyone would want to shit on Batman. Why couldn’t he compare the immensely over rated Ironman to some other movie? Ironman is just a more grown up version of spider-man; it’s of the same quality. Batman Begins did not fell like a comic book. I don’t know how you can compare the two.

  43. I think John is just channeling his frustration for Batman fans through these posts. Please, John, leave the Bat fans alone. This year is a huge year for them; The Dark Knight will introduce two major villains into nolan’s Bat-univirse, this movie is gonna be huge, and just let them celebrate it instead of trying to shoot this great character down. Nolan is more talented than most filmmakers put together, so I wouldn’t worry about The Dark Knight not blowing Ironman away.

  44. i dont know John

    It seems you like to occasionally shit on Batman whenever u get a chance….

    maybe im just crazy

    did you at least see that new kick-ass trailer released on Sunday?

  45. the shaky cam was used intentionally. Batman had to be seen as an animal, a beast in the wild; you only get glimpses of it. This is what Nolan said. Do your research, John, before you accuse a director of being bad at action.

  46. I tend to think that the whole shaky cam thing in Batman Begins was used to convey Batman getting used to himself, the suit and fighting crime in general.

    We are seeing Batman “grow up” on screen, from his “base jumping” snafu after speaking to Gordon, to his first encounter with Scarecrow and on to him busting up Falcones crew.

    The shaky cam, to me, helps you to feel Batman coming into his own and getting used to what hes doing. Only at the very end has he really fully become BATMAN.

    So I would think they would abandon the shaky cam in TDK and Batman will be more fluid and precise and so will his fighting.

    Favreau went a whole different route with handling the same thing in Iron Mans case. Stark worked all the kinks out either in the garage or flying solo.

    Both worked well in my opinion, just different styles.

  47. We need a better listing of the top Comic Book Flicks….I’m going to include GRAPHIC NOVEL material as well!!!


    2…Spiderman 2


    4…Superman 2

    5…The Incredibles

    6…Batman Begins

    7…Superman Returns


    9…X-Men 2

    10 X-Men 3

    I expect Watchmen to be at or near the top of the list after its release next year…

  48. I don’t think that it matters much where (ie. in “reality” or a fictional place/universe) a character/movie takes place. But that the settings have a direct result on the what the readers/audience feels.

    Take Gotham for instance. In the Batman comics and Chris Nolan was able to convey this even more so in Batman Begins, the city its self is a character. It is the mirror to the internal struggle that is on going in the psyche of Bruce Wayne. The fact that isn’t anchored in our “reality”, I think is irrelevant, because it is so closely tied to the character of Batman/Bruce. The audience/reader is able to suspend their own sense of reality because Bruce Wayne doesn’t have superpowers. He IS only human. This is what humanizes the Batman, and makes the reader able to “relate” to the character/story, regardless of the fact is it’s not set in New York or Chicago.

    With Iron Man, Tony Stark is also “only human” however the Iron Man suit gives the wearer superhuman powers. The setting has to be in our “reality” so as to ground the character in believability. The actual setting is irrelevant in Iron Man. It never becomes a character in it’s own rite. Because the story doesn’t require it to be.

    I’m not saying that Batman Begins is better than Iron Man. I just want to present a different point of view to the (the fantasic in our reality is somehow more fantasic) point of view of John. I think the only similarities between the two are that the source material are comics. Both are vastly different films. Both equal, but shifted laterally.

  49. Yes John, we still love you and by extension your writing. Some of us even love your writing enough to read the entire article. Some of us.


  50. John, dude, we still love you. Like you said, it’s all subjective anyways dude. I still totally don’t agree with #3

  51. 1. I respectfully disagree. I feel the love stories were pretty much equal in both movies. In fact, Rachel Dawes perhaps had more of a point, as she actually figured into the overall plot in terms of being one of the few people to actually have the balls to start going after the criminals. Pepper was just a house keeper in essence. That’s not to say I didn’t like Pepper. I, in fact, really enjoyed their relationship. They both love each other, more so because they only have each other. It’s really sweet actually. And yes, Pepper helped out in the end by helping Tony (although, you must admit, she did get really ditzy at the end: “but you said not to push the button!” JUST FUCKING PUSH THE BUTTON DAMNIT!… Sorry, just thought it was a cheap way to enhance the tension). but, they both were essentially damsels in distress.

    2. Christopher Nolan knows what he’s doing. I think it’s unfair to state that his decision to film Batman beating up people in a chaotic fashion created a “fake and artificial sense of ‘action’ or ‘intensity.'” It was a creative decision Nolan made, and what I took from it is that Batman is so quick, frightening, and disorienting that this is what the bad guys felt like whenever they were being attacked. And I think it was effective. Whether or not you liked the artistic choice is up to you, but it definitely did not seem like a lazy trick to create a false sense of action or intensity.

    3. This is purely subjective. To me, just because Tony lives in Malibu doesn’t necessarily make it more awe inspiring. The technology he used is far, far, far more advanced, and – to me – seems like a less plausible “real world.” I think Gotham City was realistic, and the technology Batman used was more realistic – or at least seemed plausible. The AI, the holographic display, the armor in Iron Man (although insanely cool) is just not plausible TODAY. For me, the reasons for the existence of fantastical things needs to be rooted in some sort of plausibility WITHIN THE WORLD OF THE STORY. Batman takes place in a fictional city, and therefore has certain liberties. Iron Man exists in the “real world” and it’s liberties MAY be limited (although I really don’t care). By the way, if Tony Stark is so damn smart that he graduated from MIT at like, what, age 12 or something? How could he not remember his social security number… Granted, it was a funny joke – but it didn’t play by the rules within the world of this story (that he was a super genius and probably has a photographic memory).

    4. 100% agree. Stark is more fun to watch. But, just like any funny guy who always cracks jokes, you don’t know him as much. We really got to know Bruce and really got to see his inner conflict (such a touching story with his father!). So yes, Stark is more fun to watch, but I connected more with Bruce.

    5. I have the sense you don’t particularly care for the roles of women in superhero movies… (I remember your, or someone’s, rant about how you hate love stories in comic book movies). But, she was a reason Bruce left and traveled the world. She has a purpose. That’s not to say Pepper didn’t have one either, but Pepper wasn’t as influential in causing Tony to become Iron man as Rachel was with Bruce . And, dude, guys like girls – and, dare I say, love them! In terms of dialog though, I suppose that’s subjective. I thought they were both good, as neither had any bad dialog (to me). I think The Dark Knight will have excellent dialog as Nolan’s brother wrote it and not David Goyer (Blade Trinity anybody?) albeit Begin’s was good as Christopher Nolan co-wrote it.

    Lastly, the climax was much better in Batman Begins. It’s not to say Iron Man wasn’t good, but Batman just had a more intense (emotionally) climax and resounded better, more cathartic – as Ra’s al Gul was a father figure for Bruce and taught him everything he learned to fight for justice (yet, he had to kill him). Obadiah was just a greedy baby who wanted to kill Tony just so he can own Stark Industries.

    – Keith

  52. ” Batman is all martial arts and hand to hand so to make it look good and fast they have to shake the camera a little otherwise it will look slow and sloppy.”

    An odd statement by Norcal. Did director Robert Clouse use the shaky cam to film Bruce Lee in the classic “Enter The Dragon”?

    Did Andrew Davis shake the camera while filming Chuck Norris or Steven Seagal in their best films?

    How many Jet Li films have shaky cam syndrome?

  53. Hey Sahil,

    It’s cool to disagree… the whole point if subjective art (like movies) is that we see different things when we look at them… so disagreement and debate is a GOOD thing.

    However… I’m a bit confused. You said:

    “I liked Iron Man alot and would give it a 4/5. I think it was a great super hero action movie but I have no intension of watching it until it comes out on dvd”

    So did you or did you not see it already. If you didn’t see it, how can you disagree with me?

    You also said:

    “I mean why cant we just enjoy both movies instead of comparing the two. Can we agree that both movies were damn good and just move on?”

    Well, no. Whenever we talk about film we compare. Whenever we say one film is good or one film is bad we are essentially comparing film. That’s what we do. You think one film is good? Good compared to what? Bad? Bad compared to what?

  54. John
    Nine out of ten times I completly agree with you but unfortunately this is one of those times I dont. I liked Iron Man alot and would give it a 4/5. I think it was a great super hero action movie but I have no intension of watching it until it comes out on dvd. I dont think it had enough action in it. I watched your video review on it and agree it would have helped if it had one or two more action scenes.
    With Batman Begins I didnt even care about the action because the script was so good.
    I also think the cast was so much better in Batman Begins than in Ironman. Not that I dont like Downey Jr. but I love Christain Bale and he is one of my favorite actors of all time.
    I also dont like how we have to compare everything now days. I mean why cant we just enjoy both movies instead of comparing the two. Can we agree that both movies were damn good and just move on?

  55. Heh, it cracks me up how many people come in here and in other posts on this site and absolutely fail to read what John is actually saying.

    He didn’t say one film is better than the other.

    He didn’t say he enjoyed Iron Man more than Batman Begins.

    If you agree or disagree with something said, then comment on that. Get off the soapboxes, stop being so damn defensive and use your f’n brains.


  56. Hey Salem,

    I think you should re-read my post and stop putting words in my mouth. I never said Iron Man is better than TDK would be… as a matter of fact I specifically said in the post that I’m NOT saying that.

    Sounds to me like you have a bias and are just trying to skew my post

  57. John’s trying to downplay Batman just because he enjoyed Iron Man. I guess you already made up your mind about TDK… I’m guessing it’s going to get a 3/10 since it didn’t feature a REAL drunken playboy who likes real American Cheese Burgers (Burger King). Honestly John, I’ve been coming to this site for like a little over 2 years now and I don’t think I’ve ever read such a farce post. You liking Iron Man more because it had “better action” doesn’t mean you should go as far as to say it was deeper.

  58. Yes, as a character, Bruce Wayne was DEEPER than Stark. And your 3rd point can’t count because they’re given. You know before going to the movies and Batman would be set in Gotham, what, did you want them to go ahead and put Batman in a city like New York to make you feel that it was better? Stark had two personas, and that’s it. I’m not saying Iron Man was bad, it was VERY enjoyable, and you know what? The action was MUCH better than Batman Begins. That said, everything else you said is a matter of opinion…

  59. I disagree with number 2 and 4. Both are different characters and different techniques. One is not better than the other, IMO. Just, different.

  60. Yeah, the thing that always really bugged me about Batman Begins was that Plot-Device Device, the water vaporizer thing. Seriously, what is this, the 60’s TV show? I’m surprised that Batman didn’t pull out his trusty Anti-Microwave-Water-Vaporizer Gun. This plot is eerily similar to the episode where the Joker turns Gotham’s water supply into jelly (I kid you not). But really, I don’t mind wacky technology that much, both these films have those in abundance, if only they explain the thing and make a big deal about it. They explained the existence of everything in batman’s suit, and they explained why Iron Man’s arc-generator was so powerful, but with the vaporizer they just kind of dropped it in there to move things along, and it seems like everyone barely knows or cares what it is. “Oh, there’s this vaporizer thing missing…” “Huh?” What’s wrong with just gassing everyone in a conventional fashion…the way they did it in the1989 Batman with the money and the parade was way cooler.

  61. Well i do think Batman Begins is a better movie but i do agree with the first four points John. I understand Nolan’s asthetic for shooting the action in his film the way he did (though i think the Batmobile chase doesn’t suffer from it at all) but that doesn’t make it pleasant on the eyes, though that was probably the point. I cut Nolan some slack for that but he’s made his point with that now. If he does it again in TDK then i’ll be a little peeved.

    I do disagree with point 5 but i suppose it depends on how you like your dialogue. I love the monologues and the almost poetic dialogue in Begins. I think i can recite the entire script of that film because it sticks with me. I’d certainly take Ra’s Al Ghul’s villainous monologuing over Iron Monger’s anyday. I think a lot of Iron Man’s dialogue has a looser more improvised feel to it and maybe that’s just a preference. Personally, there’s only one or two lines i remember from the film.

  62. Hey John, just saw Iron Man the other day. I think your post has a lot of valid points, although I gotta disagree with your third point.

    What I loved about BB was the fact that Gotham was pulled from a lot of real different places and re-assembled into what became eventually Gotham City. Sure, Gotham doesn’t really exist, but that doesn’t make it any less real when you see the number of shots culled from Chicago, London or even Iceland. If anything, Nolan pulled all the style, technology(ok, maybe an exception with the vaporizer) and atmosphere from real life. For me that gave Gotham a real identity and brought the world of BB into the real world. Now if it was the same Gotham from the first four Burton, Schumaker flicks which lacked any true believability, I would totally agree with you(especially friggin’ neon Gotham, ugh).

    If anything, Iron Man felt unbelievable in many ways BECAUSE of the technology, or hell, even the number of times he crashed. In an iron suit. Into the ground. And got up totally fine. Mind you, if he’s in the Mark 2 suit, you might be able to explain it, but in the 1st gen suit? He’s dead. And yes, sure it’s a superhero movie and there are things you have to “believe” in. But on the issue of believablity and being in the “real world”, a human Tony Stark Would be dead. Over and over and over again.

    As for a whole movie, I gotta agree with pretty much every single point Nick made. I thought the movie was really good, solely because of Downey Jr, but was just ok in others(the rest of the casting, and Iron Monger/Obadiah Stane. Ugh). Comparably on some points to BB, but definitely not better.

    And hey, let’s be honest. If Garner was in BB, it’d be the greatest movie ever. Times 10. To the power of 10. With the poster hanging over your bed. Oh wait that’s already there…

  63. Though Iron Man’s third act wasn’t perfect, it was better than Batman Begins’.

    Plus, no matter what they do with the bat suit it’ll always look a bit ridiculous.

  64. Hey RDA,

    Wow… I don’t even know where to start. Did you even read the post? I’ll address your point in the same numerical order:

    1) What the holy hell does your point #1 have to do with my article?

    2) I NEVER said Stark was more interesting than Wayne. I simple said (rightly so I might add) that Tony Stark is a more ENTERTAINING character than Bruce Wayne. Not better, not more interesting… more ENTERTAINING. If you want to try to debate with me, at least debate thing things I actually said.

    3) Again, what does your Point #3 have to do with my post? I make the point myself that they are in different universes… which just again leads me to believe you didn’t actually read the post and just decided to start ranting.

    Do yourself and everyone else a favor and actually READ the thing you’re supposed to be responding to.

  65. I knew fanboys would do this comparison shit.

    Take into account I thought Iron Man was a great, fun movie. So, all these Iron Man bandwagon dorks can just chill out.

    1. You wouldn’t have Iron Man without Batman Begins. Favreau’s said that himself, and that Nolan’s Batman redefined the genre in a lot of people’s eyes, and that a superhero movie can be more than just a big, dumbass blockbuster. It can have themes and symbolism.

    2. Tony Stark is only more interesting to you because you’re making uneven comparisons between the two characters. You’re not supposed to relate to Bruce Wayne, because he’s a tragic hero. You’re supposed to feel disconnected from him because that’s how he feels towards everyone else. Tony Stark IS a drunken playboy, while Bruce Wayne only pretends to be. Everything’s on the exterior with Tony Stark, while Bruce Wayne is introverted. Again, even Jon Favreau’s talked about this.

    3. They’re polar opposites. The only way they relate is that Marvel made Iron Man as a rip-off/reaction to DC’s Batman, but the universes the characters exist in are completely unalike.

    This feels like another case of the internet jumping on the newest bandwagon. Like they had a really sweet toy they were playing with, but now they’ve got a shiny new one that’s pretty much the same quality, but it’s got a fresh coat of paint so all they sudden they say, “oooh datz betterz than myy other toyz!1”

  66. Batman was shot in the real world, but it feels like an isolated world. Gotham always felt like another planet to me. Iron Man is clearly in “our” world, aka Pepper watching Mad Money on CNBC(which got a HUGE laugh in my theater), Iron Man going to Afghanistan to serve some terrorists, Stark being kidnapped by terrorists, etc. The movie addresses issues that we are facing today, which makes it seem more like it happens in our universe.

  67. I don’t understand this real world thing you’re talking about, John. Batman Begins was shot on location in Iceland, Chicago, London; this is the real world! In fact, Batman Begins’ world seemed more real to me; the textures were recognizeable and contemporary because they were shot on location. Ironman was shot, mostly on a sound stage in America. So, I don’t really get what you mean of Ironman being in our world, and Batman Begins not being in our world. IT seems you have a grudge against Batman fans, and the Batman himself – one of the coolest characters ever created. I mean, you guys haven’t even posted the new trailer which is now officially online.

  68. I loved that the love story wasn’t really a love story. They even purposely call attention to the comic book movie stereotypical girlfriend in the very end with Tony’s little remark to Pepper, and she shoots him down.

  69. I don’t have to read this article to say that of course Iron Man is better than Batman Begins because anything could be better than Batman Begins.


  70. The problem I have with judging whether or not any part of either movie is better is that I’m still hyped over watching Iron Man whereas Batman…what, two years ago? It’s old and by now I’ve probably seen it a score of times.

  71. I agree with most points John, but the love plot didn’t bother me to much, but Katie Holmes wooden acting did bother me. I do hope they expand the love story a bit more especially since they have a much better actress in my opinion to fill the shoes of Katie Holmes.

    I thought the action scenes were shot that way because that was suppoed to be Batman’s strength. That you aren’t sure what he’s doing, Batman lurks in the shadows, and uses stealth and surprise to defeat you. That being said I wish the fight scene at the end with Ras was shown with a bit more clarity.

    I don’t much have of a problem with your last three points, those are the ones I mainly agree with.

    The dialog might be better with The Dark Knight because Goyer isn’t as involved with the story as much as he was with Batman Begins. So perhaps we might hear less of the comic book cheesiness, and the repetition that we normally hear from Goyer’s work.

  72. Hey Norcal,

    Wow… do you purposefully try to come off as ignorant? There are lots of great action films with directors WHO KNOW WHAT THEY”RE DOING. If you’re incapable of making an action scene look great without shaking the camera all to hell, then you don’t know what you’re doing. Hire people who know what they’re doing and quit ripping off the audience…..


  73. The only reason the fight scenes weren’t shakey in Iron Man is its different kind of fighting. Batman is all martial arts and hand to hand so to make it look good and fast they have to shake the camera a little otherwise it will look slow and sloppy. Which is why good fight scenes are very rare today. Watch more action movies dumbass.

  74. One of the things that really made this movie for me was the inspiring lesson underlying the plot. The change in Tony Stark begins when he and Yinsen are about to escape the terrorists camp. Yinsen runs out, guns a-blazin’ to buy Tony more time. Incidentally, he is shot.

    After Tony mops the floor with the minions, he finds Yinsen barely alive. They have their little heartfelt pre-death chat, and Yinsen tells Tony not to waste his life. It’s at that point that Tony really becomes human. He turns from the egotistical, womanizing billionaire to a morally conscious yet still very egotistical humanitarian bent on saving the world from his evil deeds of the past.

    This transformation is similar to that of Bruce Wayne, however I was able to identify more with the change that Stark went through.

  75. The first thing I said after Iron Man was “best superhero movie ever”. But then I mentally backed off that statement and did some serious mental comparison with BB, X2, and Spidey2 (my other faves).

    Know what I decided? Iron Man is my favorite superhero movie ever.

    And to me, the single greatest reason is RDJ.

  76. Hey Mike V

    You said:

    “I seriously hope that implying the world in Ironman is more realistic than the world in Batman Begins was a joke. Especially the technology line.”

    I don’t think you understand the point. The very first sentence in that point was: “There’s something about brining the fantastic into the mundane that makes the fantastic all the more awe inspiring.”

    Iron Man is the “fantastic”, and the real world is the “mundane”. The WORLD in which Iron Man happens is the real world, the world we live in… unlike the unreal Gotham, which isn’t like our real world at all.

    Iron Man, and all HIS technology plays out in our REAL world. Iron Man isn’t more “realistic”, but he’s not supposed to be, he’s the “fantastic in the mundane”.

  77. I seriously hope that implying the world in Ironman is more realistic than the world in Batman Begins was a joke. Especially the technology line.

  78. iron man and batman begins are similar in movies in which the ending blew donkey balls. lame battle scene endings.

  79. All of your points are valid (except for the dialogue) but I don’t think the 5 points you’ve made result in a better movie. Iron Man was mindless fun and didn’t take itself too serious (Terrence Howard looking at the screen and commenting on using the suit in the next movie). Batman Begins is all about being serious and offering the viewer multiple layers to contemplate. Yes the scenes with Katie Holmes dragged but the movie as a whole succeeded in being deeper than Iron Man. Iron Man is a brief enjoyment while Batman Begins is a movie that requires more than just a side glance.

  80. Maybe I need to see Iron Man again, but I came out of the movie with a mild thumbs up, while everyone else seems to have seen the 2nd coming of jesus.

    I admit, Robert Downey Jr. is amazingly cool. This I knew before going in, and was happy to see that he continued to be amazingly cool. And, luckily, this fit extremely well with the established character of Stark (from the comics).

    That said, the movie had several FATAL flaws, in my opinion.

    First, it was just too slapstick. I appreciate good humor as much as the next person, but it went past a line somewhere. Maybe it was when Stark rocketed himself into a concrete wall at 40 mph or maybe it was when he rocketed himself into the wall AGAIN with his hand booster (reusing the exact same joke, sigh) or maybe it was when gwyneth paltrow was LITERALLY playing operation with Iron Man’s heart or maybe it was when he crashed into the sand dune at 400 mph or maybe it was when he crashed through his own house (using the same joke again, again!) but somewhere it lost it for me and became a cartoon with Robert Downey in it.

    Second, the villain was just dumb. The essence of Iron Man/Tony Stark is he is a technological marvel, the pinnacle of genius with all the resources he needs at his finger-tips. This was done very well for most of the movie, and my favorite part was when he crashed down on the terrorist base camp and just laid waste to the place. This was followed up with an incredible chase scene with the two jets. All displaying the amazing abilities of Stark/IM. However, at the end, in the climax of the film, what happens? Iron Man has to fight a bigger badder Iron Man? What?! His partner came up with a nastier version of Iron Man in a half hour? I know he had to steal the power source, but Iron Man should NEVER be out Iron Manned. The final fight was a boxing match, which finished with a ridiculously obvious finally (oh i wonder if he’ll use the ice-over thing we saw an hour ago, which made NO SENSE other than to set it up for us later) and even that got messed up cause they decided to put in another finally so it could be more explody.

    I could go on about ridiculous nonsense like Iron Man finding the EXACT same terrorists that took him captive (wow super convenient they were out the same day I invented my super suit and they didn’t relocate to some other area, terrorists never move to new bases i guess) or the basic pornography of product placement (audi, the i gotta have a Cheeseburger FROM BURGER KING) but that’s almost to be expected (except i cant seem to remember it happening in spider-man x-men or superman).

    Also, was it just me or was everything played out in cliche like terms. OH the helpful doctor has a dead family he earns to die and go see, um why didn’t you just do suicide by terrorist a week and a half ago dude? Or Iron Man plops down just in time to save the devoted husband who has a wife and an adorable child! Phu-lease.

    Don’t get me wrong overall, it’s a decent flick. Good graphics, funny lead actor, and a plot that isn’t filled with holes, but Batman Begins good, it is not.

  81. @Joe: I still don’t think you get it, or maybe I’m not understanding what you’re saying. Batman’s whole deal was that he wanted to turn his city around from the dump it had become because of the rule of the crime lords. Iron Man’s target was the world he, himself, put in danger by selling the weapons he made. Iron Man/Tony Stark took responsibility for his actions by trying to eliminates these threats, no matter who it is. Batman is usually pretty limited to Gotham, as where Iron Man takes it to the whole world.

    Iron Man might not have went to stop the Iron Monger if Potts wasn’t in danger? Where does this reasoning come from? Of COURSE he would’ve tried to go stop him. Not only did he try to kill Tony, but he was funding a terrorist organization by using Stark Industries to double-deal. Either way, Stark would’ve eventually taken on some large public heroic act whether Potts was in danger or not.

    I’ve never understood the whole Batman obsession people have really. He never came off as special to me for any reason other than he was “dark and edgy” and a sort of anti-hero. Sure, Batman gets credit where credit is due, and it IS a lot of credit. But to me he comes off as another overrated superhero like Wolverine. Not that I don’t LIKE Batman, but I feel like he’s a bit overdone for what he should be capable of. On the other hand it’d be pretty awesome to see the worlds richest superheroes team up.

  82. Melbel, Thank you, I can’t believe I didn’t notice that.

    Anyone notice Tom Morello from Rage Against The Machine has a cameo in it?

  83. i find it funny that the SO called lesser known superhero is giving the spideys and batman a run for the money!! and so it should it was a brilliant film! still at 8.4 on imdb with 7k votes!!
    i wasn’t an avid fan of ironman BUT now i am!!

  84. So where was Batman supposed to be set? It’s not a stylistic choice, it’s embedded into the character. Gotham is something he has to save for a multitude of reasons. Tony Stark is in the ‘real world’ because that was how his character was written as well. I don’t understand why that should be a knock on BB (and thankfully he said it was just his subjective point) – the trouble is, I found Batman’s world more of a believable commentary on real life. The subject of fear is handled so superbly, it can’t really be understated. Stark’s world, on the other hand, felt so self-contained (despite having just about as many locations) and simple: basically “Guns & War are bad. We oughta stop that business from happening.” is what i got out of it. One may be more ‘realistic’ than the other, but what’s the motivation behind their settings? that’s what matters.

    This extends to Potts & Rachel – both exist to give the hero someone to save, but Rachel isn’t the most important thing to save – it’s Gotham. Tony Stark may have just barely survived getting his magnet getting ripped out, but do you think he would’ve rushed away to stop Iron Monger if Potts wasn’t in danger? Perhaps. Probably, since it’s a movie. But she was definitely in danger and that right there is what really caused him to go into action. Potts is the catalyst for his major public heroic act. I do like how they downplayed their romance at the end of the film & i can agree, Rachel may get annoying after the 15th viewing, but the two love plots aren’t very comparable.

    That good enough for you, Larry?

  85. Honestly, I could give a shit which movie is better than the other. I enjoyed Batman Begins better because, for me, I have more of a connection to Batman as a character than IronMan.

    That being said, both were fantastic movies, and I also consider it a victory when a comic book movie is well made and avoids being a steaming pile o’ crap a la ‘Fantastic Four’.

  86. IMHO, Batman Begins basically sucked donkey balls from beginning to end,and I can’t see why anyone would find favor with it.

  87. I wouldn’t really bother to play favourites, they’re both excellent films, but I would wholeheartedly agree on point 2, one of my biggest problems with many films today is the shakey cam action, it’s just irritating.

    Oldboy showed us how to do a good fight scene. ;)

  88. @ Joe I don’t think you get it. The point that the post was making is that Pepper is stronger than Rachel, but that thankfully the love story is kept to a minimum. Read it again.

    Also, you don’t get what the post was saying about being “realistic”. The post never said Iron Man was more realistic, it said it happens more in the real world. Gotham City in Batman is like a parallel universe in a lot of ways with the technology, achitecture, style and so on.

    Be careful calling people “stupid” when you’re ranting thing you clearly didn’t understand or read properly. Just a suggestion.

  89. and in reference to depth, here’s the real difference a poster made on another forum that I think you should take a look at:


    It’s all about the complexity of the two movies.

    The characters and plot in BB were complex. Bruce Wayne developed as a character from a pitiful man hellbent on revenge, to somebody who had become lost and looking for a purpose, to somebody who had finally found a purpose, then having to question the morality of that purpose.

    We have the theme of fear. He’s scared of what he might become, whether he is about to become an executioner like the others in the league of shadows, whether he is going to lose himself to becoming a vigalante and he’s also scared of whether he lacks the will to act.

    These fears are echoed and become pronounced by his support in Alfred. Alfred as a character has had to watch the terrible tragedies that Bruce has had to endure his entire life. He is family. Alfred fears for Bruce when he is lost, he fears that Bruce will become lost inside vigalantism, ‘inside this monster you’ve created’. He echoes and counters the fear that Bruce lacks the will to act, that he will give up too easily. He’s the man who reminds Bruce why we fall – ‘So we can learn to pick ourselves up’. He compliments Bruce completely by echoing the sentiments of his father. Thomas Wayne is who Bruce is trying to live up to. In saving himself, in trying to make himself worthy of his father’s image he’s trying to save Gotham – just as his father had. His father’s last words are the crux of his character and the film. ‘Don’t be afraid’

    In Iron Man, Stark has already exceeded his father based on merit. His father is only referred to as a means of showing what an accomplished engineer Stark is, that he could exceed his father so quickly. The character goes from a man obsessed with his work with little concern for the possible dangers and harm, to a man still obsessed with his work, only far more concerned and involved with how his work affects others. He doesn’t change as a character so much as his opinion changes.

    Pepper’s ‘Tony Stark has a heart’ feels like a forced version of Alfred. We’re given no reason why she should see Tony as anything more than what he appears to be on the surface level. He forgets her birthdays etc. She’s there as a support character who for some reason sees beyond Stark’s ego and chauvinism and as such acts more as a product of the plot’s momentum (he needs a heart, he needs somebody to send to retrieve the files, he needs a reason to rush out in a weaker condition – to save her) than as a fleshed-out character.


    In Batman Begins we’ve got the first act which reveals Gotham as a suffering city, the death of Bruce’s parents as a result of the corruption and desperation and thus the league of shadows and their intentions to destroy Gotham – all of this before Bruce seemingly puts a stop to them and we leave the league for a while. He returns to Gotham – which has gotten worse.

    The second act we get Earle trying to take Wayne’s company public, Falcone’s hold over Gotham still reigning, as a series of drug exchanges take place. The drug exchanges turn out to be a series of hallucinagens linked to Scarecrow, and the water vapouriser is stolen from Gotham.

    Third act brings everything ful circle. Holy shit the whole drug hallucinogen stemmed from the flowers in the first act, scarecrow is working for Ducard and the league of shadows and they plan to finally tear gotham apart.

    Iron Man has Tony captured where he realises his weapons are responsible for the heinous acts of some assholes. He escapes, builds his Iron Man suit and fucks with those fucking with his weapons.

    The friend of Tony’s father is really the mastermind behind it all; the behind-the-back dealings, the capture of Tony – basically just a means of taking over the company. It’s really just about as complex as Earle’s plot in Batman Begins, only more action-oriented. He gets a remake of the suit, which as we all know is just a reason to have the two face off. Nothing wrong with that, that’s what we all want to see.

    I love both films, believe me on that one. I just wanted to try to explain why a lot of people see Begins as more than just a comic-book movie. It has far more depth than Iron Man, which is a great movie.

  90. good article. i agree with your points. mainly the katy holmes point.

    after 15 or so viewing, my wife has gotten to yelling “sanctimonious bitch!” at the screen. highly unusual behaviour for her. (our favourite moment, which she will run from another room to watch, is the shot of batman standing on the skyscraper at dawn. shivers down the spine!)

    i think the role would have been improved with maggie gyllenhal (sp?) in the original cast.

    comparing stark and wayne is like apples and oranges. stark is a charismatic PERSON, bruce wayne is a secret identity therefore, somewhat one dimensional.


    Huh? Did Pepper Potts really come on weaker than Rachel to you people? Really?


    Again, HUH? When is Iron Man more realistic than BB? With the Afgan war business and the world’s top terrorist turning out to be a scared punk who can be readily contacted by American weapons manufaturers at will? I could go on ad nauseum about how stupid this comparison would be.



  92. I loved both Batman Begins and Iron Man.

    Though I admit Batman Begins had a bit bigger impact since it was a long time since a superhero movie really Wowed people like it did.

    I do think though that Stark’s humor combined with his genius ability to invent puts him over the top of Batman Begins for these two movies. Both are ridiculously rich, both are suave. However Stark creates all of his new abilities, Batman in Begins uses previously created components/suits for his superhero persona. Just a bit more of that, I did it myself, that makes it all the sweeter.

    Also, I think Stark’s change of heart about making weapons really gave the character that sympathetic aspect as well. Whereas Bruce Wayne merely refuses to be corrupted, which is still quite noble, but not as much of a change of heart.

  93. OK This is a very opinionated issue. Before we start going on with a Marvel vs DC debate I like to point out that without Robocop1,2, X-men, Batman Begins then Iron-man would not have been as great a film that it turned out to be. Sure I enjoyed Iron-man and Batman Begins. However these movies, and characters are very diffrent from each other in style, manner and tone. So who cares which is better cause if you love one or the other or both then you win. I think its great that Iron-man is getting ahead in the popularity poll in the marvel universe.

  94. Very thoughtful list John. I agree with everything on it. I would put Batman Begins and Iron Man in a virtual tie as far as enjoyability goes. I think I enjoyed the journey from ordinary person to super hero a little more in Batman Begins. Other than that, I think Iron Man was rock solid.

    Oh, and I also agree with your comment in the review about there needing to be one or two more action sequnces but I also think that will lend to an even better sequel.

  95. Having Superman Returns that low on your list de-validates it for me.

    I agree that Iron Man may indeed be better than Batman Begins, but I think Batman Begins lends itself to a number of incredible possibilities with sequels.

    Now Iron Man can as well with the Mandarin in a sequel and an eventual Avengers storyline, but look at the hype TDK is getting and look at where the franchise still can go from there with villains like The Riddler and the Penguin and we still dont know what the fate of Joker and Two-Face is.

    With Iron Man, I will be as excited as anyone for a sequel, but the gallery of villains is nowhere near Batmans.

    So in short, as far as the origin story and first installment, I might grade Iron Man slightly above Batman Begins, but where each franchise goes from there, and the potential for continued success lies more with Nolans Batman Universe, IMO.

  96. Batman Begins, some highlights of Bruce Wayne:

    -Alfred points at TV to show batmobile rampage, Bruce just answers “Damn good television”;
    -Bruce Wayne trying to play the part of a useless partyboy;
    -Pretending to be drunk and insulting the heck out of his guests;
    -Answering back at Wayne Inc’s former CEO, Earle, with “It’s all a bit technical!”;

    Bruce Wayne is essentially 3 personas…
    -The true kind hearted Bruce;
    -The Paris Hilton-like spoiled brat act he puts on to fool people;
    -And finally, the vicious creature of the night, Batman, often referred to as his real persona;

    Pretty easy to tell them apart.

    And as far as “our world” goes… At least Batman puts this show up because he really has people to protect that depend on him, including his closest allies and friends.

    What does Stark do? Reveal his identity to everybody. Yeah that’s certainly put a big bullseye on him and everybody he’s ever known or cared.

  97. handnhalf why is the “good” punisher so far down on this list it was much better than hulk or the abortion that was daredevil oh and you left Ghost rider off the list and all the Blade films also

  98. Intresting points John. I saw Iron Man the other night and was impressed by the film. It has set the bar very high for other summer movies to follow. The main reason that I disagree with some of the stuff you say here is because Iron Man and Batman are two very different characters, the films had differing styles and it is unfair in the first place to compare them. With Batman Begins, Nolan must be credited for trying something completely new with the comic book movie genre. Iron Man is an equally good film but in a different boat to Batman Begins. The film managed to get away without that much action because the story had substance and it all moved along at a good pace. I agree with you on the love interest point. Favreau managed to fix the mistakes that the Spiderman franchise and Nolan’s film fell to: they spent far too much time on unecessary romance. Iron Man gets the balance exactly right.

    I know you already said that you foresaw criticism of the real world point but I do agree with you to a point. With superhero movies it does seem to work better when they are set in the real world. If you take a look at the televsion series Heroes and imagine if it was set in an alterior universe it would not work. Part of the appeal of the show is that you can relate to the characters because it is set in our world. However the world created in Gotham City is amazing, and one of the great things about Nolan’s film was his portrayal of this mysterious city.

    I still prefer Batman Begins and although some good cases could be made on either side in this debate I feel the comparison is unbalanced and not really necessary.

  99. I will agree Iron Man is better for the simple fact that it doesn’t contain reality breaking issue. The ultimate weapon in Batman Begins is a weapon that vaporizes water, but when used around people (people are 90% water) it has no noticeable effect upon them. Yes, I know Gotham is a mythical city in a comic book world, but there are certain physical laws that either must be maintained or explained why they are not. I am good with suspension of disbelief, but the microwave emitter not vaporizing people is just lazy writing.

    I still like Batman Begins (I love the first two-thirds of the movie), but that one little reality-breaking issue always makes the last act of the movie a really tough watch for me.

    PS – I also agree with your 1-5. Number 3 is also the reason I generally prefer Marvel to DC…

  100. some of the comedy in this was what put it over batman begins for me Stan Lee’s cameo and the Nick Fury bit after the credits were all great. Not to mention we got a kick ass look at the mandrian

  101. Superhero Movies best to worst:

    Iron Man

    Batman Begins

    The Incredibles



    Superman II

    The Hulk

    Batman Returns



    Batman and Robin


    Mystery Men

    Punisher (Dolf Version)

    Hero at Large

    Superman III

    Superman IV

    Superman Returns

  102. I thought that there would be some serious limitations to the suit when Iron Man got in subtle hand to hand situations. I still think of Robo Cop when he shot through the girls dress. That was very cool, but, Iron Man one ups that with some far superior (predator like) suit technology. Something that the bat boomerang is just not capable of.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *