NO BATMAN ORIGIN "66" MOVIE ??

[chetchumley]

I can see why the T.V. show never really got into BATMAN,S origin !! ......time,,,of each ep,.. ,,,budget,,,,etc,,,etc,,, but one has to wonder why the 1966 movie never touched upon the origins of BATMAN & ROBIN ???,, maybe they thought it wouldn't fit into the "CAMP" aspect of it all??? ...they could have fit it into one of the BATCAVE sequences !!!or while BRUCE WAYNE was being held captive ???....the movie definitely gave them the budget & time to finally explain their origins,,,especially since it was done to sell the series overseas !! what better time to do it ???? but alas they never did explain how the DYNAMIC DUO came to be.or maybe it was too VIOLENT for the times ??? and didn't want to frighten the young fans ?????????????????we may never know the RIDDLE to this question???????????????????????

[AndyFish]

I remember reading in an interview with Dozier that they touched base on Batman's origin in the pilot episode when Bruce mentions his parents murder by criminals and that was the end of it. It didn't fit into the spirit of what they were trying to do and like the comics of the time (and unlike today) the stories didn't revolve so much around Batman's obsession with finding justice for his parents death.

[Kamdan]

Semple also addressed that in his commentary for the film, staring how depicting that on screen didn't matter and they covered it by having it stated in the pilot's dialogue. There was a depiction of the origin in an episode of the Super Friends animated series when Adam West did the voice for Batman, so you could count that as your origin story.

[BATWINGED HORNET]

I remember reading in an interview with Dozier that they touched base on Batman's origin in the pilot episode when Bruce mentions his parents murder by criminals and that was the end of it. It didn't fit into the spirit of what they were trying to do and like the comics of the time (and unlike today) the stories didn't revolve so much around Batman's obsession with finding justice for his parents death.

Bruce mentioned his parents' murder again (to the Joker) in season two's "The Joker's Epitaph."

[Jaws63]

I can see why the T.V. show never really got into BATMAN,S origin !! ......time,,,of each ep,.. ,,,budget,,,,etc,,,etc,,, but one has to wonder why the 1966 movie never touched upon the origins of BATMAN & ROBIN ???,, maybe they thought it wouldn't fit into the "CAMP" aspect of it all??? ...they could have fit it into one of the BATCAVE sequences !!!or while BRUCE WAYNE was being held captive ???....the movie definitely gave them the budget & time to finally explain their origins,,,especially since it was done to sell the series overseas !! what better time to do it ???? but alas they never did explain how the DYNAMIC DUO came to be.or maybe it was too VIOLENT for the times ??? and didn't want to frighten the young fans ?????????????????we may never know the RIDDLE to this question???????????????????????

I think the real reason that they did not touch upon any Origin in the movie is that the series pretty much set the stage for what the series was to become and I think the writers and producers did not want to stray too far away from what (at that point) was successful. I agree, the movie was the perfect chance to touch upon origins. They had the time, no budget constraints, and at this point in the series the writing was OK. One thing I noticed with the movie is that the movie introduced a lot of props that weren't used that often in the series. I think the movie was used to highlight some of them like the batcopter, the batboat and batcycle. This movie also had to emphasize a lot on the villains(what was their objective? how do you integrate the villains? this was especially true with Catwoman since she was played by a different actress), so there are reasons where I understand why B&R's origin was not emphasized. Origin stories were not that big of a thing back in the 60's, it's not surprising it was not capitalized on.

[BATWINGED HORNET]

Origin stories were not that big of a thing back in the 60's, it's not surprising it was not capitalized on.

I'm not so sure. Some series pilots were more than just a 1st episode, but set the stage / explained the very reason the series exists--essentially an origin story. To name a few, My Favorite Martian, I Dream of Jeannie, Bewitched, Gilligan's Island, The Brady Bunch, The Fugitive, all 4 Irwin Allen sci-fi series and The Mod Squad all has pilots explaining the why and how of the characters & events which established the respective series.

[Jaws63]

True, but in all these cases it was a pilot episode that had an origin story. In the case of Batman, the feature film came out at the end of the first season. You can't very well do an origin story, when the show is already established.

[Jaws63]

Another point I'd like to add is that in the case of My favorite martian, Gilligans Island, Brady bunch and Bewitched...they are all situation comedies, hence the word sit-com comes from. Pilot episodes usually are the situation invention, if you know what I mean. The audience identifies with the situation first, than the characters. Nobody knows or cares who the characters are outside of their invented situation.

Batman is different in the sense that the writers assumed we all knew who the characters were, and there is no need to invent a situation as that's been established, this is a continuation of the comic book.

[Lou Szabo]

Interesting thread.

I have several thoughts on this for Batman. As listed above, Bruce mentions it twice, at the beginning of season 1 and season 2. The writers (just as the DC writers of the 1940's) minimized the origin story, usually 1 comic book page (equivalent of a minute of dialog in a script I've heard). Marvel in the 1960's spent more time, as much as an entire issue (FF1) to a few (6 to 8?) pages (Amazing Spider-man). The rare exceptions are Punisher and Wolverine. I think it just was not important to dwell on it - mention it and move on.

Sometimes the origin episode is a pilot (sitcoms mentioned above) or network rejected pilot (Star Trek).


What I like about the Batman TV series (and those early comics) is they can be watched/read in any order, the exception being part 1/2 of two part episodes (seemingly never in the comics). There's no overarching mystery extending through a season or the length of the series.

To summarize: a brief mention is adequate and probably not worthy of an entire episode or a two-parter, particularly since so many 4 to 8 year olds were watching in that innocent time. Afterall, Bruce was only 10 years old. Can you imagine what effect that would have on those young kids...

[John Mack]

I don't think the origin was kept out of the series because it was too graphic for children. I point to two CHILDREN'S records of the time that contained the "true story" of Batman and Robin and how they came to be.

First, the Golden Records box set. Not only does it have the origin story on it, there's even a comic book that you can follow as the record plays.

Second, is the MGM/Leo the Lion LP that has the graphic of Batman and Robin swinging over the 66 Batmobile on the front cover. That LP has a very realistic account of Bruce's parent's death including gun shots from Joey Chill's gun. The LP further goes into Robin's origin and has screams from the crowd as his parents hit the ground falling from their tightrope.

Another example is a film slide presentation that uses "beeps" to tell you when to advance the film slides or strips. The one I saw in third grade was based on the Golden Records version. My teacher let me check it out from her library and even allowed me to take home the film strip projector.

So, no. I think you guys are on the wrong track with that. I merely think, as was suggested, that they didn't get all bogged down in back stories. Remember, the series played on many different levels. At least, that's what I've heard for 40+ years.

John

[60s TV Fan]

I think it was just a case of a different mind-set in that time. I believe that the show's producers just felt a re-telling of the origin just wasn't necessary. By 1966, Batman and Robin were well-known, established characters, unlike Gilligan's Island, Bewitched, etc. in which case an origin, or introductory type story was needed to introduce us to the characters. Today, the fashionable thing seems to be to re-boot, re-tell, re-invent, or re-imagine each and every character every couple of years, whether they need it or not.

[clavierankh]

I think it was just a case of a different mind-set in that time. I believe that the show's producers just felt a re-telling of the origin just wasn't necessary. .

Agreed Back then the origin story simply set up the scenario. A quick mention in the pilot was all that was necessary. I think the mention in the Joker story was just to explain why Bruce couldn't kill Batman.

Tiday origins are more important because writers like to explore the characters motives and (to use a buzz word) psychological underpinnings.