PDA

View Full Version : Keaton's Best Batman performance?


Sabotage8475
05-20-2006, 03:39 AM
Batman? OR Batman Returns?

captain_jimbo
05-20-2006, 05:28 AM
Wow, good question, that's tricky!

I'd have to say Batman...no, Returns...no, Batman.

...s**t!

El Payaso
05-20-2006, 06:36 AM
Both

captain_jimbo
05-20-2006, 06:44 AM
Yeah f**k it. Both.

The Kid
05-20-2006, 07:16 AM
IN something I read about Returns, he said he felt weird trying to play batman again because he felt like this time he was trying to play himself acting as batman since its a sequel and I guess he had forgotten what he did to make himself act the way he did last time... (or something like that) Anyway, they're both good so its hard to say which was best dammit.

I loved both... can't see them as that different either so he's just best in both... heh..

The Chairman
05-20-2006, 10:23 AM
Both

Dr. Fate
05-20-2006, 12:35 PM
Batman? OR Batman Returns?
Weren't they pretty much the same?

D'Artagnan
05-20-2006, 01:10 PM
The first one was WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY better. He was focused and he was a badass.

In Returns, he looks confused much of the time, too much of Keaton's comedy backup comes through.

Bat Attack
05-20-2006, 02:00 PM
Both.

Whack Arnolds
05-20-2006, 02:44 PM
B89, hands down. In B89, it was just natural, and he was going with the character. In Returns, he is kind of bland and seems to be a shell of his former performance. In B89, he has an edge and an aura. I don't think he has that at ALL in Returns. He's just "there". In B89, he has a mighty presense, but in Returns he doesn't.

MaskedManJRK
05-20-2006, 03:08 PM
The first one was WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY better. He was focused and he was a badass.

In Returns, he looks confused much of the time, too much of Keaton's comedy backup comes through.

I don't know about you, but I think his taking out the Fat Man in Returns was pretty badass. :up:

Whack Arnolds
05-20-2006, 03:10 PM
Yeah, he couldn't physically kick his ass....so he killed him.

MaskedManJRK
05-20-2006, 03:21 PM
B89, hands down. In B89, it was just natural, and he was going with the character. In Returns, he is kind of bland and seems to be a shell of his former performance. In B89, he has an edge and an aura. I don't think he has that at ALL in Returns. He's just "there". In B89, he has a mighty presense, but in Returns he doesn't.

I think that was what Keaton was trying to do.

Looking at the events that happened before in '89 and looking at Returns, I see it as Batman lost in the mess of murder and mayhem that he created when he murdered The Joker and his men to try and stop the pain that comes from his parent's murder by taking out the murderer. This obviously didn't happen, and the pain seemed to be even more intesified.

It's only near the second half of the movie, when he's considering discarding the Batman persona to be with Selina, handling the final job, where he seems fairly whole again, and that collapses at the end when Selina refuses and sets herself up in the same exact emptyness that he created for himself at the end of the first movie.

MaskedManJRK
05-20-2006, 03:24 PM
Yeah, he couldn't physically kick his ass....so he killed him.

It's the f**ked-up grin that Batman gives the Fat Man that does it for me. Funny and badass at the same time. :)

Bat Attack
05-20-2006, 05:25 PM
I found that grin chilling...eek!

The BatDude
05-20-2006, 05:32 PM
I'll have to go with the 89 movie

The Chairman
05-20-2006, 05:40 PM
I found that grin chilling...eek!

Me too.

Soap
05-20-2006, 05:58 PM
I think I'd have to go with B89, though it is very close.

batmaluco
05-20-2006, 06:06 PM
He was great in both films.

Cain
05-21-2006, 12:20 AM
It's only near the second half of the movie, when he's considering discarding the Batman persona to be with Selina, handling the final job, where he seems fairly whole again, and that collapses at the end when Selina refuses and sets herself up in the same exact emptyness that he created for himself at the end of the first movie.

Agreed

James"007"Bond
05-21-2006, 09:14 AM
Both but B89 was an awesome movie and keaton really captured what batman was all about, he scared the s hit out of me......on nother note keaton is the only actor to play batman who actually looks badass and a tad monstrous in the batsuit.

SHADOWBAT69
05-21-2006, 11:49 AM
you know, this is an interesting topic. I actually had to think about this. I loved him in both movies, i think his performance was brilliant in both. He did play the character a bit differently tho in Returns than in 89. He played a more mysterious Batman than he did in Returns. I love his interaction with both Penguin and Catwoman in Returns, especially his "youre not the mayor" confrontation as well as his attempt to redeem Selina at the end. There hasnt been any hero/villain interaction in any Batman movie that can touch those 2 scenes. He also played Bruce Wayne as a more evolved character because we got to see the business side of him as well as the playboy and brooding man.

So, i guess ill have to say Returns was the better performance for me.

Kevin Roegele
05-21-2006, 02:08 PM
I don't know about you, but I think his taking out the Fat Man in Returns was pretty badass. :up:

It was, but that just highlights the difference between the two movies. In the first one, he wouldn't have grinned as he smacked the guy into the hole. To me, that's more badass.

A lot of it down to the direction. In Batman, the character is cloaked in mystery and often hidden in the shadows. He's usually silent, he appears, kicks ass, vanishes. In Returns, Burton doesn't try to make Batman mysterious, so we follow him around, we know everything he does, he makes some one-liners, he talks more, and so on.

Catman
05-21-2006, 05:08 PM
Yeah. . .this is an interesting question. The reason is because he was great in both films. Of course the character evolved, so it had to be played differently. In B89 he was motivated by the death of his parents. In Returns since he got his revenge he wasn't sure if he wanted to continue. I guess he felt he could continue contributing to society by just being Bruce Wayne, which explains that whole meeting with Max Schrek where he wants to stop the whole power plant thing.

But. . .with that being said. . .I liked how in Returns he actually did most of his own stunts. That's what bothers me a bit about B89. One second you have Keaton being a badass and the next you have a stunt guy kicking or punishing someone. Atleast here it's Keaton kicking some ass. I guess he felt he had to do it since Michelle Phieffer was doing most of the stunts. For instance that scene in the rooftop was awesome. That's Keaton and Michelle going at it. How awesome is that? Even though it wasn't the best cherography I liked it a lot more than Daredevil and Electra fighting at the rooftop.

Bruce_Wayne29
05-21-2006, 09:50 PM
I found that grin chilling...eek!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/theartist29/Returns19.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/theartist29/Returns21.jpg

Try and beat that one Val Kilmer...lol Even smiling Keaton is badass !

He was great in both. His performance in the first one was so special and mysterious but in the second one he seemed to be more confortable in the character.

Dr. Fate
05-21-2006, 10:41 PM
B89, hands down. In B89, it was just natural, and he was going with the character. In Returns, he is kind of bland and seems to be a shell of his former performance. In B89, he has an edge and an aura. I don't think he has that at ALL in Returns. He's just "there". In B89, he has a mighty presense, but in Returns he doesn't.
I seem to remember Keaton saying in an interview that he found working on "Returns" to be a lot harder than the original because in "Returns" he felt like he was impersonating himself, which, to quote Keaton, "besides being next to impossible, is really weird." Furthermore, he said he thought Returns would be easier because him and his director buddy Tim Burton spent so much time talking about it in depth, discussing and dissecting the first movie, what they had done, didn't do, should do again, should not do again, etc, so he figured they had it pretty well wired, but once he started working on the film, he kept getting these actor blocks where he'd step back and say "Well this seems like what the character would do, but it doesn't feel right."

That, my friends, is far and away one of the most interesting actor insights into the realm of sequels I've ever heard. Perhaps THE most interesting.

SHADOWBAT69
05-21-2006, 11:29 PM
I seem to remember Keaton saying in an interview that he found working on "Returns" to be a lot harder than the original because in "Returns" he felt like he was impersonating himself, which, to quote Keaton, "besides being next to impossible, is really weird." Furthermore, he said he thought Returns would be easier because him and his director buddy Tim Burton spent so much time talking about it in depth, discussing and dissecting the first movie, what they had done, didn't do, should do again, should not do again, etc, so he figured they had it pretty well wired, but once he started working on the film, he kept getting these actor blocks where he'd step back and say "Well this seems like what the character would do, but it doesn't feel right."

That, my friends, is far and away one of the most interesting actor insights into the realm of sequels I've ever heard. Perhaps THE most interesting.


Because Keaton is God.

Whack Arnolds
05-22-2006, 01:36 AM
I seem to remember Keaton saying in an interview that he found working on "Returns" to be a lot harder than the original because in "Returns" he felt like he was impersonating himself, which, to quote Keaton, "besides being next to impossible, is really weird." Furthermore, he said he thought Returns would be easier because him and his director buddy Tim Burton spent so much time talking about it in depth, discussing and dissecting the first movie, what they had done, didn't do, should do again, should not do again, etc, so he figured they had it pretty well wired, but once he started working on the film, he kept getting these actor blocks where he'd step back and say "Well this seems like what the character would do, but it doesn't feel right."

That, my friends, is far and away one of the most interesting actor insights into the realm of sequels I've ever heard. Perhaps THE most interesting.Yeah, I remember hearing him say that on the Returns dvd. I just felt his performance doesn't stack up even close to B89 in terms of how BATMAN would act or be potrayed. Not to say that his potrayl wasn't interesting, or that the man himself isn't an interesting actor...I just felt it didn't have that 'kick' his original performance had.

XCharlieX
05-22-2006, 01:59 AM
Keaton is the master of old school batman. I love 89's Batman but Burton got kinda odd with Batman Returns. If they reworked the penguin it wouldve been fantastic. Still it was very good. Keaton delivered each time.

Whack Arnolds
05-22-2006, 02:03 AM
Keaton is the master of old school batman. I love 89's Batman but Burton got kinda odd with Batman Returns. If they reworked the penguin it wouldve been fantastic. Still it was very good. Keaton delivered each time.Exactly. While an interesting film, it just doesn't feel like Batman. You should have seen how psycho he was going to go with Superman Lives. He was going to can the aspect of Superman flying, and make it so he can teleport instead... plus he looks like a zombie. Burton is a weird bird, but is incredible with visuals.

XCharlieX
05-22-2006, 02:12 AM
lol exactly... Burton is a sucker for the gothic look everytime..eh... by part 2 he overwhelmed the movie with it.

Keaton though... i like the calm method he used for batman. Hed stand there expressionless until the right time and then BAM lol And theres Bruce Wayne wasnt the ideal looking guy to be Gothams defender... he was clumsy! :D all cool stuff.

Whack Arnolds
05-22-2006, 02:16 AM
The reason why B89 was so good...was cause Burton was kept in check, so he couldn't completely over run things with his ultra gothic and weird imagination. Burton was the first to bring the naked men statues to Gotham, via Batman Returns.

Dr. Fate
05-22-2006, 08:45 AM
The reason why B89 was so good...was cause Burton was kept in check, so he couldn't completely over run things with his ultra gothic and weird imagination. Burton was the first to bring the naked men statues to Gotham, via Batman Returns.
So is that one less complaint to throw at Joel Schumacher?

El Payaso
05-22-2006, 09:24 AM
One less merit to take out of Joel Schumacher.

batmaluco
05-22-2006, 11:40 AM
lol

XCharlieX
05-22-2006, 12:00 PM
Truthfully i do think Burton sort of nudged Schumacher into of the wall territory true..but schumacher took it all the way to town hehe. I think Nolan has effectively spotted this pattern and smartly started with a super realistic setting.

Sabotage8475
05-22-2006, 12:17 PM
You people seriously harp over the dumbest things. Ah yes, the naked statues, Joel Schumacher's sexuality, and Burton's gothic
tendencies.. Is this the limit of your vision? No wonder I stopped posting here. You people are nothing but brainless bigots. Good day.. :)

Whack Arnolds
05-22-2006, 02:07 PM
You people seriously harp over the dumbest things. Ah yes, the naked statues, Joel Schumacher's sexuality, and Burton's gothic
tendencies.. Is this the limit of your vision? No wonder I stopped posting here. You people are nothing but brainless bigots. Good day.. :)No, you got it entirely wrong...


BURTON STARTED THE NAKED MEN GRASPING PHALLIC OBJECT STATUES... :o

Jack Napier
05-22-2006, 02:26 PM
In Batman Returns, he got to balance his act with Michelle Pfeiffer's Catwoman instead of playing second fiddle to Nicholson's Joker from the first one. However, for all of Nicholson's scene-chewing in Batman '89, Keaton evokes an omnipotent presence in that movie. The scene where he straps on the utility belt, sways the cape back to reveal the symbol, and looks upward captured the essence of Batman.

Batman '89.

Whack Arnolds
05-22-2006, 02:48 PM
Yeah, good scene. B89 was the best of the first four, by far and away. Captures the essence of Batman, perfectly.

Superman79
05-22-2006, 04:20 PM
Keaton WAS Batman for two whole movies...I can't call one better than the other...I can only say they were fantastic

ab38416
09-23-2007, 01:09 AM
edit

Eagle_23
09-23-2007, 09:21 AM
He gives the same performance in the 2 movies.

Gianakin_
09-23-2007, 09:26 AM
I'll have to say Batman Returns, although there is not much difference in his performance between films. However, I strongly believe that his chemistry with Pfeiffer really assisted his performance, especially as Wayne.

GoogleMe94
09-23-2007, 10:52 AM
i actually thought he was more interesting in Returns, although he was very badass in Batman. i....dont....know!!!

Cassandra
09-26-2007, 07:46 AM
I think he gives strong performences in both, though B89 naturally feels fresher as it was the first.

Keaton's Wayne is still my favourite. He makes Bruce seem so real and human to me. I can just feel Bruce's despair and inner drive oozing out whenever Michael Keaton is on screen.

November Rain
09-26-2007, 10:00 AM
returns for me, i'm a big returns fan...

Two-Face
09-26-2007, 01:47 PM
I say both.