Out of curiosity, is there anyone around here who disliked Michael Keaton's Batman?

[Dr. Fate]

I'm not asking for comparisons to his fellow Batmen, I'm just asking straight up is there anyone around here who did not like Keaton as Batman? Anyone? Anyone at all? No fear or reprisal here, just a simple yes or no for a simple question.

[Robin91939]

No, I did not like Micheal Keaton's Batman.

Physically, he was the wrong choice. I realize that Burton wanted him to be the "everyman". But, this just shows that Burton didn't understand the character of Batman. Batman IS NOT the "everyman". He is the ULTIMATE athlete, the ULTIMATE fighter, he is the pinnacle, he is quintesential man. The DRAW to Batman, is that with ENOUGH TRAINING, you can become this perfect fighting/thinking machine. Not that just any short, middle aged, balding man can put on a suit and save the city.

Acting wise, he was okay. He wasn't anything particulary great. He had some stupid scenes, mostly as Wayne, and his actual fighting wasn't that good. He delivered some lines very well ("I'm Batman" "Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moon light", "I made you? You made me first".) But he wasn't anything terrific. He was a little less than solid Batman.

His acting brought him slightly above par, it was just his physical look that made him overall unconvincing in the role of the worlds greatest martialartist/detective.

-R

[Whack Arnolds]

I wasn't AS big of a fan as his Returns potrayl, but I always had a fondness for his Batman. He wasn't a great Bruce though.

[El Payaso]

No, I did not like Micheal Keaton's Batman.

Well, your name is Robin. :down

[titan101]

keaton's batman is AWESOME!!!it reminds me of the old 1930's batman and DKR batman!!!!

[atomicbattery]

It's informal, it's anecdotal, but the people I know who like Keaton's Bruce/Batman either were very young when they saw 'Batman' (therefore, he was their first exposure to the character), or they had no real knowledge of or investment in Batman comics.

At my comic shop, no one was happy when he was cast, and no one- NO ONE- had their opinion changed after the movie came out.

The agony was compounded a year later when I saw Alec Baldwin in 'The Hunt For Red October', an actor who could play the intelligence, intensity, physicality- and he looked like Bruce Wayne brought to life. And he had the voice without having to force it. And I realized that he'd been in 'Beetlejuice', the film Burton had shot just before 'Batman'. Unbelievable.

[Dr. Fate]

It's informal, it's anecdotal, but the people I know who like Keaton's Bruce/Batman either were very young when they saw 'Batman' (therefore, he was their first exposure to the character), or they had no real knowledge of or investment in Batman comics.

At my comic shop, no one was happy when he was cast, and no one- NO ONE- had their opinion changed after the movie came out.

The agony was compounded a year later when I saw Alec Baldwin in 'The Hunt For Red October', an actor who could play the intelligence, intensity, physicality- and he looked like Bruce Wayne brought to life. And he had the voice without having to force it. And I realized that he'd been in 'Beetlejuice', the film Burton had shot just before 'Batman'. Unbelievable.
Wasn't Baldwin a candidate for the part of Batman in "Batman Forever" when Keaton left before Kilmer came on board?

[atomicbattery]

Wasn't Baldwin a candidate for the part of Batman in "Batman Forever" when Keaton left before Kilmer came on board?

I actually read way back then in Movieline that Billy Baldwin was a candidate. I've subsequently heard that about Alec, but it seems unlikely since he'd just done the unsuccessful 'The Shadow' the year before.

[Dark Guardian]

Sorry, but Keaton pulled it off with style and little effort. Sorry.

[El Payaso]

It's informal, it's anecdotal, but the people I know who like Keaton's Bruce/Batman either were very young when they saw 'Batman' (therefore, he was their first exposure to the character), or they had no real knowledge of or investment in Batman comics.

At my comic shop, no one was happy when he was cast, and no one- NO ONE- had their opinion changed after the movie came out.

Conclusion, comic geeks knows little of moviemaking and acting. Their opinions on those matters usually stink.

Luckily enough, most audiences are not comic geeks.

The agony was compounded a year later when I saw Alec Baldwin in 'The Hunt For Red October', an actor who could play the intelligence, intensity, physicality- and he looked like Bruce Wayne brought to life. And he had the voice without having to force it. And I realized that he'd been in 'Beetlejuice', the film Burton had shot just before 'Batman'. Unbelievable.

Conclusion, Keaton can pull off crazy comedic characters or dark superheroes with the same success. That's called talent and that's something Baldwin can't do. Watch The Shadow.

[Mee]

He was good. Not as good as Bale, but he was good.:up:

[atomicbattery]

Conclusion, Keaton can pull off crazy comedic characters or dark superheroes with the same success. That's called talent and that's something Baldwin can't do. Watch The Shadow.[/quote]

That's like blaming Michael Keaton for 'Johnny Dangerously'.
'The Shadow', like 'Johnny Dangerously', was a mediocrity that had little to do with the ability of the lead actor to pull off either a crazy comedic character or a dark superhero.

As for acting chops, Baldwin left the Jack Ryan role for a Tony nominated turn in 'A Streetcar Named Desire' with Jessica Lange. We've yet to see Keaton grace the Broadway stage.

As for range, Baldwin's near record number of hosting performances on Saturday Night Live attest to his versatility.

Michael Keaton is a fine actor. But there is an undeniable physical component to the role of Bruce Wayne/Batman. Alec Baldwin had it. Michael Keaton did not.

[captain_jimbo]

keaton's batman is AWESOME!!!it reminds me of the old 1930's batman and DKR batman!!!!

Too right! He was the best Batman ever and I don't think anyone will ever match him.:up:

[Bat Attack]

He's still my favorite Batman/Bruce Wayne.

[The Chairman]

He's still my favorite Batman/Bruce Wayne.

Mine too. :up:

[Bruce_Wayne29]

Michael Keaton is a fine actor. But there is an undeniable physical component to the role of Bruce Wayne/Batman. Alec Baldwin had it. Michael Keaton did not.

Baldwinn was never in that good of a shape, he even had to walk curved alot of times on screen because of it. And proof of that is how much he let himself go in years after The Shadow. Keaton on the other hand was and still is in good shape. Atested by all his martial arts and kickboxing teachers for both Batman movies who said that they never had a student that had learned so much and so fast as Keaton.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/theartist29/Keaton_DesperateMeasures.jpg

[El Payaso]

Baldwinn was never in that good of a shape, he even had to walk curved alot of times on screen because of it. And proof of that is how much he let himself go in years after The Shadow. Keaton on the other hand was and still is in good shape. Atested by all his martial arts and kickboxing teachers for both Batman movies who said that they never had a student that had learned so much and so fast as Keaton.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/theartist29/Keaton_DesperateMeasures.jpg

Oh, I see Keaton is not on good shape.

Those smart people and their thoughts...


EDIT: Btw, I'm saving this pic and take the freedom of posting it in some other places where this "brilliant" Keaton's shape argument is somehow used to bash him as Batman.

[LongDong]

Keaton sucks as Batman

[titan101]

Keaton sucks as Batmani do hope you are joking.

[El Payaso]

Keaton sucks as Batman

You suck at life.

[Dr. Fate]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/theartist29/Keaton_DesperateMeasures.jpg
Holy crap, he's in better shape there than he was in either Batman film. Creepy.

Michael Keaton is a fine actor. But there is an undeniable physical component to Bruce Wayne/Batman. Alec Baldwin had it. Michael Keaton did not.
Did Val Kilmer have it?;)

[The Kid]

Clooney did I guess And boy oh boy he was great!


http://barefoot.provocateuse.com/images/photos/george_clooney_03.jpg

Keaton doesn't have huge muscles... so what? he captured the soul of the character perfectly in my open onion. That's more important to me than muscles. I don't care if batman has big muscles anyway. His main weapon is in his head. And that's what keaton portrayed. Not only a batman who could hand your balls to you on a plate served with a side dish of green beans, but one who was patient and calculating. yeah.

[LongDong]

You suck at life.

WHat are you 12? Oh I have a different opinion than you so I suck. Grow up

[Bathead]

I didn't dislike him at in the role at all. I thought he was good. Good, not great, as a lot of fans think. I still think Burton could have found someone better.

[LongDong]

Now don't get me wrong, I ove Keaton as an actor, he is great, very entertaining.

What he lacks for the Batman is pretty obvious. He does not have the forboding presence, he does not have the physical stature and he does not have the element of danger or power that batman must possess. he was wrong for the part in every way.

[The Kid]

wtf he had all that stuff... he was kicking badguy butt, and the physical stature was helped by his suit of course and he made his voice sound alto, very cool.

[El Payaso]

Now don't get me wrong, I ove Keaton as an actor, he is great, very entertaining.

What he lacks for the Batman is pretty obvious. He does not have the forboding presence, he does not have the physical stature and he does not have the element of danger or power that batman must possess. he was wrong for the part in every way.

What are you 12?

Keaton learnt all the others bat-dudes, what a Batman presence is.

[LongDong]

What are you 12?

Keaton learnt all the others bat-dudes, what a Batman presence is.

What a convincing argument you make. Wow, I am blown away.

[LongDong]

Oh, I see Keaton is not on good shape.

Those smart people and their thoughts...


EDIT: Btw, I'm saving this pic and take the freedom of posting it in some other places where this "brilliant" Keaton's shape argument is somehow used to bash him as Batman.

Go ahead, save that pic. Show the world what a scrawny Batman looks like. That guy would get eaten alive by even an average bad guy.

[DCW]

He was good. Not as good as Bale, but he was good.:up:

I agree. :)

[LongDong]

wtf he had all that stuff... he was kicking badguy butt, and the physical stature was helped by his suit of course and he made his voice sound alto, very cool.

There was nothing threatening about him, at all.

[The Kid]

of course nothing threatening. yeah... I'd definitely see this guy in a dark alley and not feel threatened at all either.

http://batman.ugo.com/images/galleries/batman_1989_filmtv/batman_1989_9.jpg

http://keatontribute.tripod.com/batman/batman47.jpg

http://vatzhol.club.fr/img/batman005.jpg

look at those sinister eyes.

http://www.latinoreview.com/films_2005/disney/herbie/images/beet40.jpg
look at those grisly features.

He looks like the opposite side of the superman coin 100%

that's batman, baby

[James"007"Bond]

Sorry, but Keaton pulled it off with style and little effort. Sorry.

Agreed.:up:

and Keaton looked the most menacing as bats so....

[Bat Attack]

Here is my new official saying,

Keaton is badass™

[LongDong]

of course nothing threatening. yeah... I'd definitely see this guy in a dark alley and not feel threatened at all either.

http://batman.ugo.com/images/galleries/batman_1989_filmtv/batman_1989_9.jpg

http://keatontribute.tripod.com/batman/batman47.jpg

http://vatzhol.club.fr/img/batman005.jpg

look at those sinister eyes.

http://www.latinoreview.com/films_2005/disney/herbie/images/beet40.jpg
look at those grisly features.

He looks like the opposite side of the superman coin 100%

that's batman, baby

Hardly. He is PUNY. Nothing imposing about him at all. Even with his padded suit. If I saw him in a dark alley I would not run the other way at all.

To each his own I guess. Glad you like him for the part, as I sure don't.

[Bruce_Wayne29]

Clooney did I guess And boy oh boy he was great!


http://barefoot.provocateuse.com/images/photos/george_clooney_03.jpg

Keaton doesn't have huge muscles... so what? he captured the soul of the character perfectly in my open onion. That's more important to me than muscles. I don't care if batman has big muscles anyway. His main weapon is in his head. And that's what keaton portrayed. Not only a batman who could hand your balls to you on a plate served with a side dish of green beans, but one who was patient and calculating. yeah.

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

[Two-Face]

The second one screams:

Evil Batman:down

[El Payaso]

Hardly. He is PUNY. Nothing imposing about him at all. Even with his padded suit. If I saw him in a dark alley I would not run the other way at all.

To each his own I guess. Glad you like him for the part, as I sure don't.

It is not the Keaton, but your mind that is being puny.

[Dr. Weir]

Keaton doesn't have huge muscles... so what? he captured the soul of the character perfectly in my open onion. That's more important to me than muscles. I don't care if batman has big muscles anyway. His main weapon is in his head. And that's what keaton portrayed. Not only a batman who could hand your balls to you on a plate served with a side dish of green beans, but one who was patient and calculating. yeah.

Excellent way of putting it. Keaton is Batman!:up:

[TheGrayGhost]

It is not the Keaton, but your mind that is being puny.

Huh? Look, I respect your defense of Keaton, but that has to be the strangest comeback ever. :(

I don't have anything against Keaton, but I didn't think his portrayal of Batman was true to the spirit of the character. Some of the most important elements of the Batman mythos were glossed over. Namely, "the mission." Still, I suppose the Keaton Batman worked for what Burton was trying to accomplish, but the lack of the fundamental mechanics of the Batman characterization hindered Keaton's performance as Batman. He's performance wasn't Batman for me. It was something else.

[The Kid]

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

badass

[SHADOWBAT69]

Hardly. He is PUNY. Nothing imposing about him at all. Even with his padded suit. If I saw him in a dark alley I would not run the other way at all.

To each his own I guess. Glad you like him for the part, as I sure don't.


his suit wasnt padded, it was sculpted muscles and was made of latex just like the rest of the movie batsuits, including Bales. It doesnt really matter if any of the actors were ripped or not, you put the suit on and all youre going to see is the suit.

If i saw this swooping down at me in an alley, i would run:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y25/niteshade2244/007.jpg

[Whack Arnolds]

Even if that Bat is only 5'10...pushing it?

[El Payaso]

Huh? Look, I respect your defense of Keaton, but that has to be the strangest comeback ever.
Thanks, man.
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/606033/2/istockphoto_606033_friendly_giraffe.jpg

Even if that Bat is only 5'10...pushing it?

Remember that thread where we spent like 20 pages making conclusions about Christian Bale's height and whether if Michael caine/Alfred was an inch taller or shorter and all that crap?

Wanna bring all that here once more? Because at the time we concluded that the inches didn't prevent the actor to make a brilliant role.

[Whack Arnolds]

I'm not being serious, and I wasn't even addressing you, Sparky....

[blind_fury]

Keaton was da bomb yo! It's all about the eyes!!!

http://vatzhol.club.fr/img/batman005.jpg

[El Payaso]

I'm not being serious, and I wasn't even addressing you, Sparky....

http://www.southmanchesterreporter.co.uk/ContentResources/957.$plit/C_58_article_209385_body_articleblock_0_bodyimage. jpg

ulp?

[LongDong]

It is not the Keaton, but your mind that is being puny.

If you can't actually debate and make valid points then maybe you should just keep your mouth shut.

[LongDong]

his suit wasnt padded, it was sculpted muscles and was made of latex just like the rest of the movie batsuits, including Bales. It doesnt really matter if any of the actors were ripped or not, you put the suit on and all youre going to see is the suit.

If i saw this swooping down at me in an alley, i would run:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y25/niteshade2244/007.jpg

It DOES matter as even with a padded suit he is SCRAWNY!!! Just because someone is "ripped" does not mean they are strong. I have known many guys from my old wrestling team who were built like Keaton was with his suit, short skinny and you could see every muscle, however these guys were not able to lift much more than their own body weight. If you are going to do the things Batman does you will need to be strong and bad to the bone. Keaton obviously is not. He does not even convey danger when he walks or talks, he was not right for the role. For the record he is only 5'7", not 5'10". I have met the man, he is short and friggin small.

Dont get me wrong, love him as an actor he is great. As Batman, no.

[Bruce_Wayne29]

He does not even convey danger when he walks or talks, he was not right for the role.



Neither did Kilmer, Clooney or Bale for that matter.

[DocLathropBrown]

Can we just be mature people here? Stop bickering about other people's opinions. Let. It. Go. People liked Keaton, others didn't. You're not going to change anyone's mind. I'll call the authorities in if I have to. The last thing we need is for this thread to turn into a flamewar, or, worse, a Keaton vs. Bale thread.

That said, Michael Keaton is Batman to me. I admit, I have a bias. He's my favorite actor, and actually my second exposure to Batman after Adam West (Though I was born in '87, my first brush with Batman was the reruns of the 60's series circa 1989). Keaton he made me a bona-fide fan.

The thing is.... he's not the perfect Batman. Bale's the right man for the job, Keaton, for all intents and purposes, should have never been cast. He's my favorite over Bale, and I'm mature enough to admit that.

But you know what? Who cares? I've been reading Batman comics off and on for as long as I can remember, only now have I become a stedfast follower of them. Only now because years before, I didn't have the resources to do so. And even as a young child, I didn't care about bulging muscles. I wanted to believe in the character. You don't have to have rippling biceps to make people believe you're a superhero.

What makes Keaton so awesome is that I believed he was Batman. I still do. If anything, accuracy to the comics can sometimes be overrated. You want a certain level of fidelity, yes. But I have no qualms with some artistic decisions. Unlike some people, I don't get freaked out if something doesn't look like it was lifted from the pages.

The playboy facade ideas for Batman go all the way back to the character's inception, and frankly, in this day and age, being an outcast from the general public myself, I find that Burton and Keaton delivered a more psychologically realistic portrayal of Batman. And especially Bruce Wayne. I know that if I'd seen my parents gunned down in front of me, I would definitely be anti-social like Keaton's Wayne... unintentionally aloof in public and nervous or mousy.

Keaton's acting, above all else, gave the character a fidelity to itself that overcame the obstacles such as phsyique and height. He felt real.

The only problem with anti-Keaton people are that they chose not to give Keaton credit that he does indeed deserve. The man was in fantastic shape, he trained to get into shape and he had physique equal to the picture of him already in this thread. He wasn't Batman size, but he wasn't out-of-shape like so many people like to claim. And he was an impeccable fighter... still is. Just because you don't look like Batman doesn't mean you can't be as tough as the real thing. The guy did the best job for who he was.

As for the debate on intimidation and others, that's all strictly opinion. I would definitely be scared of Michael Keaton and Christian Bale. If I had to choose one of them specifically, I'd probably go with Keaton. He had a more psychotic edge with an undertone of unpredictability.

Anyway, just respect others' opinions, people. Even if they express those opinions like jackasses, just ignore them. Michael Keaton, simply, is Batman to me. He mops the floor with Chirstian Bale in my mind's eye, even if Christian is the correct Batman through-and-through. When I think of Bale and his film, it's excellent, yes.... but when I think of Bale's Batman, it just doesn't have "it", if anyone knows what I mean. Fidelity to the comics isn't always the be-all end-all.

[Bat Attack]

Can we just be mature people here? Stop bickering about other people's opinions. Let. It. Go. People liked Keaton, others didn't. You're not going to change anyone's mind. I'll call the authorities in if I have to. The last thing we need is for this thread to turn into a flamewar, or, worse, a Keaton vs. Bale thread.

That said, Michael Keaton is Batman to me. I admit, I have a bias. He's my favorite actor, and actually my second exposure to Batman after Adam West (Though I was born in '87, my first brush with Batman was the reruns of the 60's series circa 1989). Keaton he made me a bona-fide fan.

The thing is.... he's not the perfect Batman. Bale's the right man for the job, Keaton, for all intents and purposes, should have never been cast. He's my favorite over Bale, and I'm mature enough to admit that.

But you know what? Who cares? I've been reading Batman comics off and on for as long as I can remember, only now have I become a stedfast follower of them. Only now because years before, I didn't have the resources to do so. And even as a young child, I didn't care about bulging muscles. I wanted to believe in the character. You don't have to have rippling biceps to make people believe you're a superhero.

What makes Keaton so awesome is that I believed he was Batman. I still do. If anything, accuracy to the comics can sometimes be overrated. You want a certain level of fidelity, yes. But I have no qualms with some artistic decisions. Unlike some people, I don't get freaked out if something doesn't look like it was lifted from the pages.

The playboy facade ideas for Batman go all the way back to the character's inception, and frankly, in this day and age, being an outcast from the general public myself, I find that Burton and Keaton delivered a more psychologically realistic portrayal of Batman. And especially Bruce Wayne. I know that if I'd seen my parents gunned down in front of me, I would definitely be anti-social like Keaton's Wayne... unintentionally aloof in public and nervous or mousy.

Keaton's acting, above all else, gave the character a fidelity to itself that overcame the obstacles such as phsyique and height. He felt real.

The only problem with anti-Keaton people are that they chose not to give Keaton credit that he does indeed deserve. The man was in fantastic shape, he trained to get into shape and he had physique equal to the picture of him already in this thread. He wasn't Batman size, but he wasn't out-of-shape like so many people like to claim. And he was an impeccable fighter... still is. Just because you don't look like Batman doesn't mean you can't be as tough as the real thing. The guy did the best job for who he was.

As for the debate on intimidation and others, that's all strictly opinion. I would definitely be scared of Michael Keaton and Christian Bale. If I had to choose one of them specifically, I'd probably go with Keaton. He had a more psychotic edge with an undertone of unpredictability.

Anyway, just respect others' opinions, people. Even if they express those opinions like jackasses, just ignore them. Michael Keaton, simply, is Batman to me. He mops the floor with Chirstian Bale in my mind's eye, even if Christian is the correct Batman through-and-through. When I think of Bale and his film, it's excellent, yes.... but when I think of Bale's Batman, it just doesn't have "it", if anyone knows what I mean. Fidelity to the comics isn't always the be-all end-all.
*Claps*:up: :up: :up: :up: I agree 100%!

[SHADOWBAT69]

Anyway, just respect others' opinions, people. Even if they express those opinions like jackasses, just ignore them. Michael Keaton, simply, is Batman to me. He mops the floor with Chirstian Bale in my mind's eye, even if Christian is the correct Batman through-and-through. When I think of Bale and his film, it's excellent, yes.... but when I think of Bale's Batman, it just doesn't have "it", if anyone knows what I mean. Fidelity to the comics isn't always the be-all end-all.


I know exactly what you mean when you say "it". Actually, i felt the entire movie lacked "it". I always refer to it as "atmosphere". I agree with everything you said.

[LongDong]

Neither did Kilmer, Clooney or Bale for that matter.

That is not the topic at hand now is it?

[mister Lennon]

I thought that those forums were free and with freedom of speech. Some signs in this thread are saying the oppossite.

I mean, someone is posting " micheael keaton was bad as batman....." and in two seconds or less someone says " you are an idiot and you suck". Dudes, this is a forum of discussion, not a children room or a nazi field or something like that.

By the way, in my opinion, Keaton sucked as batman because he didnt look the part and his Bruce Wayne was the oppositte as the character is. If someone will reply " you are an idiot and you suck", to the hell with him. If someone will discuss it with at least 1% of maturity, im ready.

[Jack O Lantern]

just about the size issue

http://webfantasy.info/Bruce_Lee/Images/Bruce_Lee_01.jpg

[captain_jimbo]

Can we just be mature people here? Stop bickering about other people's opinions. Let. It. Go. People liked Keaton, others didn't. You're not going to change anyone's mind. I'll call the authorities in if I have to. The last thing we need is for this thread to turn into a flamewar, or, worse, a Keaton vs. Bale thread.

That said, Michael Keaton is Batman to me. I admit, I have a bias. He's my favorite actor, and actually my second exposure to Batman after Adam West (Though I was born in '87, my first brush with Batman was the reruns of the 60's series circa 1989). Keaton he made me a bona-fide fan.

The thing is.... he's not the perfect Batman. Bale's the right man for the job, Keaton, for all intents and purposes, should have never been cast. He's my favorite over Bale, and I'm mature enough to admit that.

But you know what? Who cares? I've been reading Batman comics off and on for as long as I can remember, only now have I become a stedfast follower of them. Only now because years before, I didn't have the resources to do so. And even as a young child, I didn't care about bulging muscles. I wanted to believe in the character. You don't have to have rippling biceps to make people believe you're a superhero.

What makes Keaton so awesome is that I believed he was Batman. I still do. If anything, accuracy to the comics can sometimes be overrated. You want a certain level of fidelity, yes. But I have no qualms with some artistic decisions. Unlike some people, I don't get freaked out if something doesn't look like it was lifted from the pages.

The playboy facade ideas for Batman go all the way back to the character's inception, and frankly, in this day and age, being an outcast from the general public myself, I find that Burton and Keaton delivered a more psychologically realistic portrayal of Batman. And especially Bruce Wayne. I know that if I'd seen my parents gunned down in front of me, I would definitely be anti-social like Keaton's Wayne... unintentionally aloof in public and nervous or mousy.

Keaton's acting, above all else, gave the character a fidelity to itself that overcame the obstacles such as phsyique and height. He felt real.

The only problem with anti-Keaton people are that they chose not to give Keaton credit that he does indeed deserve. The man was in fantastic shape, he trained to get into shape and he had physique equal to the picture of him already in this thread. He wasn't Batman size, but he wasn't out-of-shape like so many people like to claim. And he was an impeccable fighter... still is. Just because you don't look like Batman doesn't mean you can't be as tough as the real thing. The guy did the best job for who he was.

As for the debate on intimidation and others, that's all strictly opinion. I would definitely be scared of Michael Keaton and Christian Bale. If I had to choose one of them specifically, I'd probably go with Keaton. He had a more psychotic edge with an undertone of unpredictability.

Anyway, just respect others' opinions, people. Even if they express those opinions like jackasses, just ignore them. Michael Keaton, simply, is Batman to me. He mops the floor with Chirstian Bale in my mind's eye, even if Christian is the correct Batman through-and-through. When I think of Bale and his film, it's excellent, yes.... but when I think of Bale's Batman, it just doesn't have "it", if anyone knows what I mean. Fidelity to the comics isn't always the be-all end-all.

Well said, I know what you mean. As for the fact that Keaton didn't have rippling muscles, (which is why many people criticise him,) that doesn't mean he wouldn't have been able to kick bad guy's asses, if you're a martial arts and fighting expert, you don't need them. You should see my Karate Sensei, not the most imposing person, but he'd wipe the floor with just about anyone.:up:

[mister Lennon]

My main problem with that is that Batman is supposed to be Tall and muscular, beasides a great martial arts master. Keaton wasnt any of those things. I mean, i dont know if is him or is a double, but his fights succked.

In my point of view, Bale mops the floor with Keaton or clooney or kilmer in everyway.

[Bruce_Wayne29]

Can we just be mature people here? Stop bickering about other people's opinions. Let. It. Go. People liked Keaton, others didn't. You're not going to change anyone's mind. I'll call the authorities in if I have to. The last thing we need is for this thread to turn into a flamewar, or, worse, a Keaton vs. Bale thread.

That said, Michael Keaton is Batman to me. I admit, I have a bias. He's my favorite actor, and actually my second exposure to Batman after Adam West (Though I was born in '87, my first brush with Batman was the reruns of the 60's series circa 1989). Keaton he made me a bona-fide fan.

The thing is.... he's not the perfect Batman. Bale's the right man for the job, Keaton, for all intents and purposes, should have never been cast. He's my favorite over Bale, and I'm mature enough to admit that.

But you know what? Who cares? I've been reading Batman comics off and on for as long as I can remember, only now have I become a stedfast follower of them. Only now because years before, I didn't have the resources to do so. And even as a young child, I didn't care about bulging muscles. I wanted to believe in the character. You don't have to have rippling biceps to make people believe you're a superhero.

What makes Keaton so awesome is that I believed he was Batman. I still do. If anything, accuracy to the comics can sometimes be overrated. You want a certain level of fidelity, yes. But I have no qualms with some artistic decisions. Unlike some people, I don't get freaked out if something doesn't look like it was lifted from the pages.

The playboy facade ideas for Batman go all the way back to the character's inception, and frankly, in this day and age, being an outcast from the general public myself, I find that Burton and Keaton delivered a more psychologically realistic portrayal of Batman. And especially Bruce Wayne. I know that if I'd seen my parents gunned down in front of me, I would definitely be anti-social like Keaton's Wayne... unintentionally aloof in public and nervous or mousy.

Keaton's acting, above all else, gave the character a fidelity to itself that overcame the obstacles such as phsyique and height. He felt real.

The only problem with anti-Keaton people are that they chose not to give Keaton credit that he does indeed deserve. The man was in fantastic shape, he trained to get into shape and he had physique equal to the picture of him already in this thread. He wasn't Batman size, but he wasn't out-of-shape like so many people like to claim. And he was an impeccable fighter... still is. Just because you don't look like Batman doesn't mean you can't be as tough as the real thing. The guy did the best job for who he was.

As for the debate on intimidation and others, that's all strictly opinion. I would definitely be scared of Michael Keaton and Christian Bale. If I had to choose one of them specifically, I'd probably go with Keaton. He had a more psychotic edge with an undertone of unpredictability.

Anyway, just respect others' opinions, people. Even if they express those opinions like jackasses, just ignore them. Michael Keaton, simply, is Batman to me. He mops the floor with Chirstian Bale in my mind's eye, even if Christian is the correct Batman through-and-through. When I think of Bale and his film, it's excellent, yes.... but when I think of Bale's Batman, it just doesn't have "it", if anyone knows what I mean. Fidelity to the comics isn't always the be-all end-all.

I agree with everything you said. What makes him so special is that he's not the first person you would think of when it comes to casting such a character and yet he took the challenge head on and made us believe. His Bruce was the last person you would ever think was the guy that was patrolling the city at night dressed as a giant Bat. He just became larger than life, almost mythic in that suit and he was extremely bad ass. His look said everything.

[SHADOWBAT69]

Just a discussion point here, the fight scenes in the first couple Batman movies were limited because of the way the suit was made. There isnt much mobility in them. It was thru the transition of the movies and different found techniques that mobility was made easier.

[mister Lennon]

Only a question for the people who liked Michael Keaton as batman. Imagine that that they are doing a movie about captain america in the 80s and they choose Dustin Hoffman as Cap. They say that their version of captain america in the movie will be an everyman and they think that dustin hoffman is a great actor and could play this role very well and fifh the character, in a more psychologically take of the character. Will you acept it?

Another question. Sam Raimi chooses Al Pacino as Peter Parker because his version is the everyolderman and his problems and this is a different take of the character in his own vision. Will you acept it?

[DocLathropBrown]

I mean, i dont know if is him or is a double, but his fights succked.

That would be Tim Burton's fault if you think the fights sucked. Keaton wasn't the one staging them.

[DocLathropBrown]

Only a question for the people who liked Michael Keaton as batman. Imagine that that they are doing a movie about captain america in the 80s and they choose Dustin Hoffman as Cap. They say that their version of captain america in the movie will be an everyman and they think that dustin hoffman is a great actor and could play this role very well and fifh the character, in a more psychologically take of the character. Will you acept it?

Another question. Sam Raimi chooses Al Pacino as Peter Parker because his version is the everyolderman and his problems and this is a different take of the character in his own vision. Will you acept it?

What are you, trying to convert people? You said your piece, now clam-up. We don't need some piece of evidence on why Keaton "sucked" every three-or-four posts.

And on your point.... Batman is the only choice when it comes to unconventional casting that works, because he's a human being without powers. That's the only reason you could get away with casting Keaton as Batman. Were you to cast Keaton as Superman or Captain America? Forget it.

[mister Lennon]

I think that is Tim Burton fault, the fights trainer fault and the double or keaton or the person who is fighting because i dont see any martial arts master in those figths. Only a man doing the same stuff that you and me could do.

[mister Lennon]

What are you, trying to convert people? You said your piece, now clam-up. We don't need some piece of evidence on why Keaton "sucked" every three-or-four posts.

And on your point.... Batman is the only choice when it comes to unconventional casting that works, because he's a human being without powers. That's the only reason you could get away with casting Keaton as Batman. Were you to cast Keaton as Superman or Captain America? Forget it.

Im not trying to convert people in any way. I respect that the people liked keaton as batman, is an opinion as valid as my opinion. But im triying to discuss with the people who thinks that the look isnt that important in a comic character only to understand and see their points of view.

And i dont think that is a power issue, is more a look issue. I mean, there are an stablished character, with a certain look. If you acept the change in batman with keaton could you acept the same with another characters?

[SHADOWBAT69]

some poeple will accept the change. Look at the Kingpin, they made him African American, but it worked. This went agaisnt the comic. Look at Chris Reeves, sure, he was tall and had some muscle, but he wasnt built like Superman, but it worked. It all comes down to the performance, and Keaton, in this movie version that Burton created, worked.

[Kritish]

Tim Burton was and is the worst director in the world.

[El Payaso]

I thought that those forums were free and with freedom of speech. Some signs in this thread are saying the oppossite.

I mean, someone is posting " micheael keaton was bad as batman....." and in two seconds or less someone says " you are an idiot and you suck". Dudes, this is a forum of discussion, not a children room or a nazi field or something like that.

Hahaha. Yeah, Nazis modus operandi was that. "You say something, we'll say you suck."

Poor try to make an opinion seem wrong.

By the way, in my opinion, Keaton sucked as batman because he didnt look the part and his Bruce Wayne was the oppositte as the character is. If someone will reply " you are an idiot and you suck", to the hell with him. If someone will discuss it with at least 1% of maturity, im ready.

Yo don't have any idea of what a good acting or movie is. You just stcick pathetically to some old well worn clichés.

My main problem with that is that Batman is supposed to be Tall and muscular, beasides a great martial arts master. Keaton wasnt any of those things. I mean, i dont know if is him or is a double, but his fights succked.

In my point of view, Bale mops the floor with Keaton or clooney or kilmer in everyway.

That's like saying Christopher Reeve was a bad Superman because he couldn't actually fly. Keaton, in spite of his look, was a convincing Batman.

I can't say anything aout Bale's fights because all I saw about them were a bunch of blurs.

Only a question for the people who liked Michael Keaton as batman. Imagine that that they are doing a movie about captain america in the 80s and they choose Dustin Hoffman as Cap. They say that their version of captain america in the movie will be an everyman and they think that dustin hoffman is a great actor and could play this role very well and fifh the character, in a more psychologically take of the character. Will you acept it?

I would need to actually see the movies because I was against Keaton before I saw the movie.

Another question. Sam Raimi chooses Al Pacino as Peter Parker because his version is the everyolderman and his problems and this is a different take of the character in his own vision. Will you acept it?

Read the above question.

I think that is Tim Burton fault, the fights trainer fault and the double or keaton or the person who is fighting because i dont see any martial arts master in those figths. Only a man doing the same stuff that you and me could do.

Yeah, I can put myself an harness and pretend I'm flying. Therefore I'm the same as Reeve.

Im not trying to convert people in any way. I respect that the people liked keaton as batman, is an opinion as valid as my opinion. But im triying to discuss with the people who thinks that the look isnt that important in a comic character only to understand and see their points of view.

You are the same you critisize. Any post you start repeating the same crap.

And btw, you won't convert anyone here.

And i dont think that is a power issue, is more a look issue. I mean, there are an stablished character, with a certain look. If you acept the change in batman with keaton could you acept the same with another characters?

Yes.

Tim Burton was and is the worst director in the world.

The. Sky. Is. Geeen.




and no... it is not like that even if I type it.

[Bat Attack]

Tim Burton was and is the worst director in the world.
Thats so ridiculous, even this cat is laughing,
http://badgas.co.uk/animals/cats/cat_037.jpg

[The-Dark-Knight]

Keaton was quite simply a brilliant batman, every actor to blay batman sice has done pretty much the keaton version, just cos the guy wasent built like a house doesent make him 'puny' the idea is that from his apperance alone your scared, and keaton definetly had a pressence on screen,

if hes so awful as some posters say then why is he the bench mark for wot we measure all other batmen. is keaton better than bale? who knows to each there own for me i cant decide who was better as they both have points that i love. i have never heard 1 person say 'whos better clooney or bale' because there is no competition,

keaton may not be the bruce wayne in the comics, but does that make him a bad batman, no the guy was great and if i saw him in a street i'd be scared, and the people who say they wouldent be are saying it because they know keaton is in the suit, but remember, the joker, bob and any other thugs dont see keaton they see a nutter in a muscular batsuit beating the crap outta the scum on the streets, you see keaton but they havent a clue wots in thesuit (or even if this thing is human)

keaton was and always will be the benchmark, he is a brilliant batman and always will be, end off:)

[DocLathropBrown]

Payaso... all you do in being so stubborn is add fuel to the fires of fights. Please cut it out.

As for Siva... you're forgetting one thing.... Joel Schumacher!

[El Payaso]

Good lord, stop telling me what to do.

[Sandman138]

The second one screams:

Evil Batman:down

What, you mean like this?

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/albums/userpics/10001/BatmanTDKR2-078_The_Dark_Knight_Triumphant.jpg

Cause that's my Batman.

[Sandman138]

Can we just be mature people here? Stop bickering about other people's opinions. Let. It. Go. People liked Keaton, others didn't. You're not going to change anyone's mind. I'll call the authorities in if I have to. The last thing we need is for this thread to turn into a flamewar, or, worse, a Keaton vs. Bale thread.

That said, Michael Keaton is Batman to me. I admit, I have a bias. He's my favorite actor, and actually my second exposure to Batman after Adam West (Though I was born in '87, my first brush with Batman was the reruns of the 60's series circa 1989). Keaton he made me a bona-fide fan.

The thing is.... he's not the perfect Batman. Bale's the right man for the job, Keaton, for all intents and purposes, should have never been cast. He's my favorite over Bale, and I'm mature enough to admit that.

But you know what? Who cares? I've been reading Batman comics off and on for as long as I can remember, only now have I become a stedfast follower of them. Only now because years before, I didn't have the resources to do so. And even as a young child, I didn't care about bulging muscles. I wanted to believe in the character. You don't have to have rippling biceps to make people believe you're a superhero.

What makes Keaton so awesome is that I believed he was Batman. I still do. If anything, accuracy to the comics can sometimes be overrated. You want a certain level of fidelity, yes. But I have no qualms with some artistic decisions. Unlike some people, I don't get freaked out if something doesn't look like it was lifted from the pages.

The playboy facade ideas for Batman go all the way back to the character's inception, and frankly, in this day and age, being an outcast from the general public myself, I find that Burton and Keaton delivered a more psychologically realistic portrayal of Batman. And especially Bruce Wayne. I know that if I'd seen my parents gunned down in front of me, I would definitely be anti-social like Keaton's Wayne... unintentionally aloof in public and nervous or mousy.

Keaton's acting, above all else, gave the character a fidelity to itself that overcame the obstacles such as phsyique and height. He felt real.

The only problem with anti-Keaton people are that they chose not to give Keaton credit that he does indeed deserve. The man was in fantastic shape, he trained to get into shape and he had physique equal to the picture of him already in this thread. He wasn't Batman size, but he wasn't out-of-shape like so many people like to claim. And he was an impeccable fighter... still is. Just because you don't look like Batman doesn't mean you can't be as tough as the real thing. The guy did the best job for who he was.

As for the debate on intimidation and others, that's all strictly opinion. I would definitely be scared of Michael Keaton and Christian Bale. If I had to choose one of them specifically, I'd probably go with Keaton. He had a more psychotic edge with an undertone of unpredictability.

Anyway, just respect others' opinions, people. Even if they express those opinions like jackasses, just ignore them. Michael Keaton, simply, is Batman to me. He mops the floor with Chirstian Bale in my mind's eye, even if Christian is the correct Batman through-and-through. When I think of Bale and his film, it's excellent, yes.... but when I think of Bale's Batman, it just doesn't have "it", if anyone knows what I mean. Fidelity to the comics isn't always the be-all end-all.

You said everything that needed to be said, and you did so eloquently. Thank you.

[LongDong]

I thought that those forums were free and with freedom of speech. Some signs in this thread are saying the oppossite.

I mean, someone is posting " micheael keaton was bad as batman....." and in two seconds or less someone says " you are an idiot and you suck". Dudes, this is a forum of discussion, not a children room or a nazi field or something like that.

By the way, in my opinion, Keaton sucked as batman because he didnt look the part and his Bruce Wayne was the oppositte as the character is. If someone will reply " you are an idiot and you suck", to the hell with him. If someone will discuss it with at least 1% of maturity, im ready.

Hahaha. Yeah, Nazis modus operandi was that. "You say something, we'll say you suck."

Poor try to make an opinion seem wrong..

I wonder who he was talking about

Keaton sucks as Batman

You suck at life.

[DocLathropBrown]

You said everything that needed to be said, and you did so eloquently. Thank you.

I honestly try. Thanks. :)

[The Kid]

Slight height difference is negligable to me. Especially when put against acting ability for a character who IS a costume. without that batman's nothing but man who knows karate. Supes, other characters who you see unmasked are surely supposed to come very close to their comic look or the character won't be much like the comic at all visually. But batman is all about his suit and mask if we're talking strictly about appearance.

Out of all the mr. muscles out there, keaton was chosen instead because he could actually get nuts. Yes. Get NUTS. He has that passion in him that makes him seem somewhat off the ball, by that I mean someone you'd actually believe would dress up like a bat and go fight crime. Muscle-bound jock guy would have looked the part, yes, but could he get nuts? How many big buff guys would have played that scene as intensely as keaton did?

... crickets chirping....

And that's what batman has to do in my mind. Be 'insanely' dedicated.... I'll point out bale portrayed this well too so you know I acknowledge he also had that quality to his batman, but not as strongly as Keaton did. I just feel he was too methodological following a code of justice and using the so much rationality and sanity in his approach rather than pathological, my preferred type of motivation. Although the swear to me thing was up there in a way. It's hard for me to really get there at the core of what I'm thinking. sigh... it's really about one line and the way he says it. "This is just something I have to do." It's like he's unable to heal that scar from his childhood and is doomed by it forever to be batman and he expresses that being batman is painful, not a thrill... not cool... not fun... he was bitten as a kid and now he's a vampire and keaton really does convey a vampire like essence in his performance. And those devilish eyes worked so well under the mask... yes I know the mask was pretty ****ty fitting but whatever.

His face is also a key part. He has a rugged look just like someone who's been over stressed by some deep issues for a loooooooong time, like abe lincoln.

And
Here's something I want to be answered. What was so wrong with his bruce wayne? Please tell me? It won't change how I feel about what's there in the movie, but enlighten me as to why it's been said many times he didn't do wayne right?

I never get it when people say he got bruce wrong.

Here's what I understand about why some think he did it wrong though:

In the comics, bruce is a playboy.

Is this essential to the batman character somehow. I don't even know what a playboy is... my best guess is party guy or something like what we saw in begins with bruce acting foolish and jumping in pools like an ass.

I don't know why it's important for bruce to be an ass but I'm glad he wasn't. I like the kind, reserved, courteous gentleman that we saw in 89 and don't see anything wrong with it. Bruce is just a mask afterall, so it never came up as an alarming change that deserved complaints to me.

One more thing.

http://www.dafyd.me.uk/blog/docs/yoda.jpg

"Size matters not. Judge me by my size do you?" Wise words

[captain_jimbo]

Yeah, I thought Keaton's Bruce Wayne was awesome too.

[TheGrayGhost]

I think size does matter with Batman. That said, that's not the reason why I think Keaton's performance was very bad.

[mister Lennon]

For the clown or el payaso: nothing because he keeps that childish discussion with insults and that kind of stuff. As i said before, im not interested in that kind of discussion.

For the other people with i desagree but i respect them because they post their opinions in a friendly and educated way. Well, i dont know, but in movies, first rule for me is crediblilty. If the movie doesnt give me that credibility, the movie doesnt work for me. And that happenned with Michael Keaton as batman. He wasnt Batman or Bruce Wayne for me, and the whole thing didnt work for me. I couldnt believe that a so short guy as Keaton was could be scary and impossing as batman is supposed to be. Same as Wayne, his abstedminded and goofy behaving simple wasnt Bruce Wayne.

[SHADOWBAT69]

Same as Wayne, his abstedminded and goofy behaving simple wasnt Bruce Wayne.

But thats a part of his mask as Bruce Wayne, he, for the most part, has always been portrayed as a carefree playboy type. So him behaving in that way was nothing out of the ordinary. Its meant to throw people way off from thinking this guy couldnt be anything more than a typical high society socialite. I know were discussing Keaton, but Bale acted in the same manner and people loved it. Im not sure if you mentioned who you do prefer as Bats/Bruce, but what did you think they did differently than Keaton?

[Whack Arnolds]

I think Alec Baldwin could have been JUST as 'nuts' as Keaton, yet he had the look, and DAMN SURE had the voice.

[The Kid]

ok i don't know much about baldwin so I'll take your word for him.

[El Payaso]

I think Alec Baldwin could have been JUST as 'nuts' as Keaton, yet he had the look, and DAMN SURE had the voice.

The point is that Keaton was that without the square jaw or the handsome look.

[Timstuff]

I'm not asking for comparisons to his fellow Batmen, I'm just asking straight up is there anyone around here who did not like Keaton as Batman? Anyone? Anyone at all? No fear or reprisal here, just a simple yes or no for a simple question.

I didn't like him as Batman. He was too short and fat to be intimidating as Batman, and he wasn't handsom enough to be Bruce Wayne.

[DocLathropBrown]

I didn't like him as Batman. He was too short and fat to be intimidating as Batman, and he wasn't handsom enough to be Bruce Wayne.

Whatever you want to think.... but he wasn't fat, or even pudgy.

[El Payaso]

I didn't like him as Batman. He was too short and fat to be intimidating as Batman, and he wasn't handsom enough to be Bruce Wayne.

That's why he was more Batman than Batman.

[LongDong]

Batman is not supposed to be "nuts" so that argument makes no sense. Batman is cool, calm collected and dangerous. Not nuts.

[The Kid]

But a man who dresses up as a bat clearly has issues.

[VaderRISE]

Did I like Keaton as Batman? Yes.

Do I think he is/was THE Batman and the ONLY Batman since? No way.

[mister Lennon]

But thats a part of his mask as Bruce Wayne, he, for the most part, has always been portrayed as a carefree playboy type. So him behaving in that way was nothing out of the ordinary. Its meant to throw people way off from thinking this guy couldnt be anything more than a typical high society socialite. I know were discussing Keaton, but Bale acted in the same manner and people loved it. Im not sure if you mentioned who you do prefer as Bats/Bruce, but what did you think they did differently than Keaton?

Nope, i dont think that. Bruce Wayne, as Bale's performance, is an airhead, a partyguy and seductive playboy. Keaton wasnt that, he was an abstedminded and goofy guy with memory problems. A la Clark Kent. That was the difference. I you see at Bale's wayne, you think " one richman more". But if you see at Keaton's wayne, you think" what happens with this guy?". For that reason, in think that Bale's Wayne was far superior to Keaton's.


And agree with one thing, Batman isnt nuts. Yeah, a guy who is dressed as a bat has some issues, but he hasnt to show it. Batman is cool and calm and creepy. Not nuts.

And about the antoher actors. West was campy as that tv show was supposed to be in that time and that kind of 60s comics. I preffer the darker batman. Clooney was the worst because he was just playing himself as batman and as Wayne. He was terrible . And Kilmer was an ok Bruce Wayne and an ok batman. Nothing bad , nothing great.

[SHADOWBAT69]

Nope, i dont think that. Bruce Wayne, as Bale's performance, is an airhead, a partyguy and seductive playboy. Keaton wasnt that, he was an abstedminded and goofy guy with memory problems. A la Clark Kent. That was the difference. I you see at Bale's wayne, you think " one richman more". But if you see at Keaton's wayne, you think" what happens with this guy?". For that reason, in think that Bale's Wayne was far superior to Keaton's.


And agree with one thing, Batman isnt nuts. Yeah, a guy who is dressed as a bat has some issues, but he hasnt to show it. Batman is cool and calm and creepy. Not nuts.

And about the antoher actors. West was campy as that tv show was supposed to be in that time and that kind of 60s comics. I preffer the darker batman. Clooney was the worst because he was just playing himself as batman and as Wayne. He was terrible . And Kilmer was an ok Bruce Wayne and an ok batman. Nothing bad , nothing great.


well, i dont see a difference. I guess we can agree to disagree.:up:



About the other topic in a couple of the posts about him being "nuts". I thought this funny:

http://pics.livejournal.com/hoolifan/pic/0000tcdx[/

[Morgoth]

Micheal Keaton may not have been as big as Bale, but, Keaton is the BEST Batman ever!!! He just got the voice and spirit of Batman right.

[captain_jimbo]

I think Alec Baldwin could have been JUST as 'nuts' as Keaton, yet he had the look, and DAMN SURE had the voice.

Are you kidding?

[LongDong]

well, i dont see a difference. I guess we can agree to disagree.:up:



About the other topic in a couple of the posts about him being "nuts". I thought this funny:

http://pics.livejournal.com/hoolifan/pic/0000tcdx[/

A panel of a comic taken totally out of context to try and prove a point. tsk tsk tsk

[Whack Arnolds]

Are you kidding?How do you know it couldn't be done? :confused:

Have you seen the Shadow? He owned in that, imagine with an even more serious character with better characterization and story arc. He was WB's top choice, but Burton and Baldwin had a falling out on the set of Beetlejuice, so Burton wouldn't pick him. Keaton was great, I think Baldwin could have been better. It's all theoretical, so chill out.:up:

[mister Lennon]

About the photo. I can post a pic with the joker crying and that doesnt proove that the joker should be all the time crying.

[SHADOWBAT69]

How is the picture taken out of context? It shows how he can "get nuts" to get a reation from someone, thats exactly what Keaton did in Batman. I thought it was funny that the topic was brought up and how "thats not Batman". However in the so called greatest reinvention of the character, the All Star comic, its okay.

I think plain and simple that some poeple just dont like Keaton, and no matter what is said, he will never be good enough in some poeples eyes.


About the photo. I can post a pic with the joker crying and that doesnt proove that the joker should be all the time crying.


Keaton didnt act nuts all the time, just when the circumstances called for it.

[SUPERSEBAS]

Michael Keaton was GREAT as Batman, what I dont like to much is his Bruce Wayne, but I dont like the others 2, the only one that I like, is the Bale Bruce in B.B and his batman to of course!

[LongDong]

The argument has been Batman being nuts not getting nuts when needed to get a reaction. Batman is not nuts.

[Whack Arnolds]

Batman definetely has a few screws loose.

[The Kid]

The argument has been Batman being nuts not getting nuts when needed to get a reaction. Batman is not nuts.

not crazy nuts, but I think he's the edgar allen poe of superheros.

[Whack Arnolds]

Good analogy Wesyeed.

[batmaluco]

"You wanna get nuts? C'mon, let's get nuts!"
http://terryxart.com/Batman%20357.jpg

[spiderwear]

Keaton was the best bat. His cold calculating voice would send shivers down your spine in a dark alley. It's easy to say it wouldn't but noone truly knows how they would react in a situation until that situation presents itself.

As for his size and it's effect on ability to be a bad a$$. Buce lee period. Jacky Chan period.

Size means nothing in a fight. There are so many variables in a fight, and size only really comes into play durring grappleing. It dosn't make anyone here less of a man if you havn't been in a fight, but it's allways people who haven't been in one that think size means you are a good fighter or not. And I tell you from experience that size has very little to do with it. I have both had my a$$ handed to me by someone smaller, and I have handed bigger guys their a$$es.

As far as I'm concerend Batman can be 5'1" for all I care as long as he is cool, calculating, can fight, and can peice together clues to solve the mystery.

Was keaton the best batman??? Maybe not but he has yet to be surpassed by anyother in the role. Bale had Bruce down pat, but his Bat was forced.

[The Kid]

Good analogy Wesyeed.

omg, reely? I hoped it'd be... thnks.

Maybe pathological was too strong a word to describe batman... I do believe he has his issues though. Fear was one in begins that he overcame and used against bad guys. And as in most batman I know, the traumatic murder of mom and dad probably had a deep impact on why he's who he is...

heh. that's the way I see it anyway...

[Whack Arnolds]

Well he has OCD, is eccentric, and has many issues...

[LongDong]

Keaton was the best bat. His cold calculating voice would send shivers down your spine in a dark alley. It's easy to say it wouldn't but noone truly knows how they would react in a situation until that situation presents itself.

As for his size and it's effect on ability to be a bad a$$. Buce lee period. Jacky Chan period.

Size means nothing in a fight. There are so many variables in a fight, and size only really comes into play durring grappleing. It dosn't make anyone here less of a man if you havn't been in a fight, but it's allways people who haven't been in one that think size means you are a good fighter or not. And I tell you from experience that size has very little to do with it. I have both had my a$$ handed to me by someone smaller, and I have handed bigger guys their a$$es.

As far as I'm concerend Batman can be 5'1" for all I care as long as he is cool, calculating, can fight, and can peice together clues to solve the mystery.

Was keaton the best batman??? Maybe not but he has yet to be surpassed by anyother in the role. Bale had Bruce down pat, but his Bat was forced.


Wrong wrong wrong. I am 5 foot 9 185 and have beatup bigger people yes, but someone my size, and I am bigger than Keaton, in a group fight against multiple thugs would get my ass kicked. Sorry but I am nowhere near strong enough to be able to hold off that many people that Batman routinely fights. In a one on one fight sure, you make sense but in the Batman type of situation you are way off.

[El Payaso]

In fact your problems have little to do with your height.

Keaton doesn't have to have lost his parents at 6 y.o. to play Batman either.

[LongDong]

In fact your problems have little to do with your height.

Keaton doesn't have to have lost his parents at 6 y.o. to play Batman either.

You really shold stop posting. You have yet to make a lick of sense. All you do is troll the boards.

[El Payaso]

Not as you, insisting in the same point about Keaton's height for dozens of posts.

Yeah, I'll stop because you say.

[DocLathropBrown]

I agree with LongDong. I'm a Keaton supporter and you really irk me, Payaso.

[Bruce_Wayne29]

Was keaton the best batman??? Maybe not but he has yet to be surpassed by anyother in the role. Bale had Bruce down pat, but his Bat was forced.

Which makes sense even because Begins was more of a Bruce Wayne film. But I agree with everything you said.

[Bathead]

Why does height matter? Because in the comics, he is tall, and as far as I'm concerned, that source material is to be respected a little bit more than has been up until now. Burton could have found an actor more suitable, physically as well as acting-skill wise, he just didn't bother because of that lack of respect for said source material. Still made a hell of a movie. Could have been an even better movie.

[LongDong]

Why does height matter? Because in the comics, he is tall, and as far as I'm concerned, that source material is to be respected a little bit more than has been up until now. Burton could have found an actor more suitable, physically as well as acting-skill wise, he just didn't bother because of that lack of respect for said source material. Still made a hell of a movie. Could have been an even better movie.

he also had an established relationship with keaton and wanted to make the movie HIS way, which part of that was casting someone nobody else would have.

[LongDong]

Not as you, insisting in the same point about Keaton's height for dozens of posts.

Yeah, I'll stop because you say.

Dozens? more like 2 or 3 and also more of the build, not height.

[El Payaso]

I agree with LongDong. I'm a Keaton supporter and you really irk me, Payaso.

Life ain't easy. We can't go through whining though.

Why does height matter? Because in the comics, he is tall, and as far as I'm concerned, that source material is to be respected a little bit more than has been up until now. Burton could have found an actor more suitable, physically as well as acting-skill wise, he just didn't bother because of that lack of respect for said source material. Still made a hell of a movie. Could have been an even better movie.

Oh yes. That's the only important part at the end.

And every movie could have been better.

[LongDong]

Life ain't easy. We can't go through whining though.



Oh yes. That's the only important part at the end.

And every movie could have been better.

So true, except Predator, that movie was perfection!!!

[mister Lennon]

Why does height matter? Because in the comics, he is tall, and as far as I'm concerned, that source material is to be respected a little bit more than has been up until now. Burton could have found an actor more suitable, physically as well as acting-skill wise, he just didn't bother because of that lack of respect for said source material. Still made a hell of a movie. Could have been an even better movie.

Totally agree except the part of a hell of a movie.

[Whack Arnolds]

I still love Keaton's performance in B89 though. His Returns potrayl was lackluster at best.

[WhiteRat]

No, I did not like Micheal Keaton's Batman.

Physically, he was the wrong choice. I realize that Burton wanted him to be the "everyman". But, this just shows that Burton didn't understand the character of Batman. Batman IS NOT the "everyman". He is the ULTIMATE athlete, the ULTIMATE fighter, he is the pinnacle, he is quintesential man. The DRAW to Batman, is that with ENOUGH TRAINING, you can become this perfect fighting/thinking machine. Not that just any short, middle aged, balding man can put on a suit and save the city.

Acting wise, he was okay. He wasn't anything particulary great. He had some stupid scenes, mostly as Wayne, and his actual fighting wasn't that good. He delivered some lines very well ("I'm Batman" "Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moon light", "I made you? You made me first".) But he wasn't anything terrific. He was a little less than solid Batman.

His acting brought him slightly above par, it was just his physical look that made him overall unconvincing in the role of the worlds greatest martialartist/detective.

-R

Brilliantly said Robin.I could not have said it better myself.:up: Because of those great points you make I have got to say that Michael Keaton has got to be the worst casting choice in comicbook history-Well Clooney was equally as horrible and I would say he was worse,he just acted like George Clooney.But Burton started it all off with his horrific choice of Keaton.That being said, Tim Burton should NEVER have been allowed near a batman franchise for making such a disgraceful choice.Thank God for Nolan.

[WhiteRat]

Too right! He was the best Batman ever and I don't think anyone will ever match him.:up:

:down Err no,that would be Bale that was the best Batman ever where nobody will probably ever match him.

[Timstuff]

"You wanna get nuts? C'mon, let's get nuts!"
http://terryxart.com/Batman%20357.jpg

He looks like he should have been playing a high school basketball coach, not a billionare playboy.

[LongDong]

Looking back at the actors who were around and fairly popular back then, who should have been cast instead of out of his element Keaton?

Honestly, Dolph Lundgren would have made a better choice. He has the physical presence and fighting ability. They could have done the movie without that padded suit which frankly looked cool at first but fell apart upon further viewings.

Anybody else have some suggestions?

[WhiteRat]

I wouldnt want Lungren he cant act.But as others said,Aleck Baldwin would have been a far much better choice.He so much looks the role which is critical and he is a great actor as well as others pointed out.But Burton did not care,he only cast Keaton because he felt confortable working with him and was friends with him.He did not care about making a credible casting choice for the role.

[DocLathropBrown]

But Burton did not care,he only cast Keaton because he felt confortable working with him and was friends with him.He did not care about making a credible casting choice for the role.

Get a clue before you troll. Burton cast Keaton because he felt you could believe that he would be disturbed enough to dress up like a Bat. Like the reason or not, he had a valid one.

Yes, that's what happens when you let someone quirky make your film. And you know what? The audiences in 1989 didn't have their heads so far up their asses that they cared that much. If you don't like the Burton films, go lurk in the Begins forums.

[El Payaso]

I wouldnt want Lungren he cant act.But as others said,Aleck Baldwin would have been a far much better choice.He so much looks the role which is critical and he is a great actor as well as others pointed out.But Burton did not care,he only cast Keaton because he felt confortable working with him and was friends with him.He did not care about making a credible casting choice for the role.

Alec Baldwin's acting skills are not very good for a starter.

And being the film about a man in a mask, the looks are not critical. Acting skills are.

[LongDong]

Alec Baldwin's acting skills are not very good for a starter.

And being the film about a man in a mask, the looks are not critical. Acting skills are.

Baldwin is a solid actor dude. You should watch more of his movies. Rent Malice for one, he was great in that.

[Whack Arnolds]

Baldwin is a good actor, Payaso isn't really good at judging much of anything.

[captain_jimbo]

Alec Baldwin is not that great an actor and would have been a bloody awful Batman. Michael Keaton was a fantastic choice, and was so good that anyone who has been cast as Batman ever since, has been compared to him and has always been in his shadow!

[mister Lennon]

Alec Baldwin is a great actor. See movies like malice or glengarry glen rose or his last indie films, beasides his excellent work on stage with excellent reviews.

Also, Batman is character who needs both good acting and good physichal. Lundgren wouldnt work because he is a bad actor with a bad physichal. Keaton didnt work because he is a good actor with a bad phsichal. Bale worked because he has both qualities.

[Spoarz™]

I think Alec is an absolutely terrific actor, just watch Thomas & The Magic Railroad. Every time I see that movie, I think, "He should be Batman!"

:D

Keaton is the daddy! ;):up:

[Whack Arnolds]

Alec Baldwin is not that great an actor and would have been a bloody awful Batman. Michael Keaton was a fantastic choice, and was so good that anyone who has been cast as Batman ever since, has been compared to him and has always been in his shadow!Everyone is compared to him, cause he was the first. Some think Val Kilmer was better, Christian Bale CERTAINLY holds the standard as being the best. B/c there is a difference between acknowledging who is the best, and seperating that from WHO YOU like best. Bale beats Keaton for the simple fact that Bale was having to carry the story in his film, as opposed to Keaton who had taken a back seat to many of the actors surrounding him. And Alec Baldwin is a pretty good actor, you obviously are ignorant to that fact. Dude would have made a pretty darn good Batman. His "Shadow" character was almost at the same level as Keaton's Batman. If he was allowed to play the Dark Knight, he could definetly pull it off.:o

[Whack Arnolds]

Don't feel so threatned captain_jimbo, just because someone is compared to or considered better than Keaton.

[captain_jimbo]

Don't feel so threatned captain_jimbo, just because someone is compared to or considered better than Keaton.

Threatened? Threatened? Oh my God, don't take it so seriously!:confused:

[El Payaso]

Glengarry was the best Baldwin role.

When I see a comic book movie like The Shadow I see he's not THE choice.

And even if he could have been good as Batman, that does nothing against Keaton.

[LongDong]

Alec Baldwin is a great actor. See movies like malice or glengarry glen rose or his last indie films, beasides his excellent work on stage with excellent reviews.

Also, Batman is character who needs both good acting and good physichal. Lundgren wouldnt work because he is a bad actor with a bad physichal. Keaton didnt work because he is a good actor with a bad phsichal. Bale worked because he has both qualities.

Did you know that crack kills? Lundgren, bad physical? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA you have obviously never sen one of his movies. The dude has always been ne GREAT shape, there has never been anyone cast as Batman who is better suited for the role LOOKS and Stature wise. No offense to Bale, he looked Great as Bats, but not as good as Lundgren would have looked. Now Lundgren might not be a great actor but he is far from a bad actor. He would have done just fine. Shame Burton did not go after him and instead went with the very mousy but much loved actor Keaton
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/oregondude/lundgren42.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/oregondude/dolph_lundgren.jpg
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/oregondude/lundgren29.jpg

[WhiteRat]

It's informal, it's anecdotal, but the people I know who like Keaton's Bruce/Batman either were very young when they saw 'Batman' (therefore, he was their first exposure to the character), or they had no real knowledge of or investment in Batman comics.

At my comic shop, no one was happy when he was cast, and no one- NO ONE- had their opinion changed after the movie came out.

The agony was compounded a year later when I saw Alec Baldwin in 'The Hunt For Red October', an actor who could play the intelligence, intensity, physicality- and he looked like Bruce Wayne brought to life. And he had the voice without having to force it. And I realized that he'd been in 'Beetlejuice', the film Burton had shot just before 'Batman'. Unbelievable.

:up: Same here.the majority of people at my workplace back then were as pissed as I was about the horrible casting choice of keaton back then and did not change their minds about him after seeing the movie since he was so physically wrong for the role.I mean come on,pudgy gut,receding hairline,half bald short runt Michael keaton for tall,muscular,handsome,full set of hair Bruce wayne? that was an insult and a spit in the face to me and my fellow co worker batman fans.

Like you said,Keaton is a fine actor no doubt,but he was so miscast in Batman because like you said,there is an undeniable physical component to the role of Bruce Wayne/Batman and Alec Baldwin had it.Michael Keaton did not.For those reasons and the one Robin posted in the beginning,and ALSO what Long Dong said is that what he lacks for the role of Batman is pretty obvious in that he does not have the foreboding presence,he does not have the physical stature and he does not have the element of danger or power that Batman possess.He was wrong for the part in every way.I like keaton as an actor,he was perfect for those roles in Night Shift,Desperate measures and Jack Frost but yeah he was wrong for the part of Batman in everyway and was horribly miscast.Because of that,Keaton sucks as Batman.

[Robin91939]

No, I did not like Micheal Keaton's Batman.

Physically, he was the wrong choice. I realize that Burton wanted him to be the "everyman". But, this just shows that Burton didn't understand the character of Batman. Batman IS NOT the "everyman". He is the ULTIMATE athlete, the ULTIMATE fighter, he is the pinnacle, he is quintesential man. The DRAW to Batman, is that with ENOUGH TRAINING, you can become this perfect fighting/thinking machine. Not that just any short, middle aged, balding man can put on a suit and save the city.

Acting wise, he was okay. He wasn't anything particulary great. He had some stupid scenes, mostly as Wayne, and his actual fighting wasn't that good. He delivered some lines very well ("I'm Batman" "Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moon light", "I made you? You made me first".) But he wasn't anything terrific. He was a little less than solid Batman.

His acting brought him slightly above par, it was just his physical look that made him overall unconvincing in the role of the worlds greatest martialartist/detective.

-R


:o

-R

[WhiteRat]

Go ahead, save that pic. Show the world what a scrawny Batman looks like. That guy would get eaten alive by even an average bad guy.

Well said.yeah go ahead and show the world that pic.Like he said so well,all that pic shows is a guy that would get eaten alive by even an average bad guy.That pic is irrelevent in the first place because it was from Desperate Measures AFTER the Batman movies,not during when the Batman movies were made.I even remember reading somewhere back then that Keaton never took his shirt off for closeups in those films because at that point in time,he WAS out of shape at that time and did not have the right physical build.Kilmer at least was not afraid to show that he was in shape and had the right build for the role by being available for a closeup with his shirt off.The only time you ever see keaton in the Batman films with his shirt off is a far off shot in the distance in the first one when he is hanging upside down on his exercise machine and the shot is so far off that there is no way of judging if he is in good shape or not.

[WhiteRat]

Hardly. He is PUNY. Nothing imposing about him at all. Even with his padded suit. If I saw him in a dark alley I would not run the other way at all.

To each his own I guess. Glad you like him for the part, as I sure don't.

:up: Very well said again dude.Sorry Keaton fans,but he "IS" PUNY.:D I find it funny that that photo doesnt show how short keaton really is in real life.I have no doubt that one guy is correct who said he has meant him and that he is only 5'7".Just take a look at him opposite Henry Winkler who is 5'6" in the movie Night Shift and you will see that they are the same height in that movie.A short puny runt like that? Yeah Even with that padded suit I also would not feel intimidated and would not run the other way.I also for sure would not feel intimidated by him after watching him display such poor fighting skills that he showed with that Jokers goon at the end in Batman 89.I would laugh at what a wimp he was and not be afraid to fight him at all after that.Looking at that short puny runt in a dark alley would hardly make me feel threatened or intimidated.Bale on the other hand I would.HE is tall and muscular the way Batman is SUPPOSE to be.

[Robin91939]

:up: Very well said again dude.Sorry Keaton fans,but he "IS" PUNY.:D I find it funny that that photo doesnt show how short keaton really is in real life.I have no doubt that one guy is correct who said he has meant him and that he is only 5'7".Just take a look at him opposite Henry Winkler who is 5'6" in the movie Night Shift and you will see that they are the same height in that movie.A short puny runt like that? Yeah Even with that padded suit I also would not feel intimidated and would not run the other way.I also for sure would not feel intimidated by him after watching him display such poor fighting skills that he showed with that Jokers goon at the end in Batman 89.I would laugh at what a wimp he was and not be afraid to fight him at all after that.Looking at that short puny runt in a dark alley would hardly make me feel threatened or intimidated.Bale on the other hand I would.HE is tall and muscular the way Batman is SUPPOSE to be.
I wouldn't run either.

I am 6'2" 180 lbs and a college athlete. I am pretty strong and in good shape, MUCH better than Keaton. And you know what? I couldn't come close to being as intimidating or as imposing as Batman should be......and I could eat a pie off of Keaton's head. Now, Christian Bale, who is 6'1" 210 lbs of packed solid muscle, different story.

-R

[spiderwear]

Wrong wrong wrong. I am 5 foot 9 185 and have beatup bigger people yes, but someone my size, and I am bigger than Keaton, in a group fight against multiple thugs would get my ass kicked. Sorry but I am nowhere near strong enough to be able to hold off that many people that Batman routinely fights. In a one on one fight sure, you make sense but in the Batman type of situation you are way off.

Okay, before I even coment on this.....Dolph? Dolph???? Can you say Punisher? Yeah he is a fine choice.

There is just so much to say on the fighting comment, where to start?

Let me begin by saying that I'm comparing the abilities of a larger person to that of a smaller person to stand up in a fight. In the real world.

What do you have to back up your argument? I know of many great fighters who are not muscle heads. I have allready listed two and I can go into UCF fighters if you like, boxers, there are plenty.

Again I pose the question, what does physical size have to do with a fight? It's about technique period. No you could not hold off ten people, I don't know of anyone people could. Why? Because in a real fight ten people jump on you and beat you. In a funny book one maybe two come in at time.

Aikido is a perfect example. It is a disapline based on the transfer of kinetic energy. So, when you through your 250lbs punch at me I will just turn your own energy back on you.

Lets say I'm 150 and I'm fighting a 300lbs guy. First, I have the speed advantage. Second you do realize that both of our noses break the same. So if I'm faster, and can break his nose before his fists are even up, how will he win while he's choking on his blood, and I'm continually beating him because his eyes are filled with water and he can't even see me?

Do you see what I'm saying? And if you trully have fought for your life you do. Now I will say that if a lop sided fight like that were to go to grappling then the larger fighter has the advantage.

In short, the larger fighter has only one advantage. That is he is intimidating because of his size. But again, once you've been in a fight,if you know how to fight, that intimidation no longer exists.

[Dr. Fate]

Did you know that crack kills? Lundgren, bad physical? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA you have obviously never sen one of his movies. The dude has always been ne GREAT shape, there has never been anyone cast as Batman who is better suited for the role LOOKS and Stature wise. No offense to Bale, he looked Great as Bats, but not as good as Lundgren would have looked. Now Lundgren might not be a great actor but he is far from a bad actor. He would have done just fine. Shame Burton did not go after him and instead went with the very mousy but much loved actor Keaton
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/oregondude/lundgren42.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/oregondude/dolph_lundgren.jpg
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/oregondude/lundgren29.jpg
Dolph Lundgren should have been The Mighty Thor! Or Aquaman.

[spiderwear]

Well said.yeah go ahead and show the world that pic.Like he said so well,all that pic shows is a guy that would get eaten alive by even an average bad guy.That pic is irrelevent in the first place because it was from Desperate Measures AFTER the Batman movies,not during when the Batman movies were made.I even remember reading somewhere back then that Keaton never took his shirt off for closeups in those films because at that point in time,he WAS out of shape at that time and did not have the right physical build.Kilmer at least was not afraid to show that he was in shape and had the right build for the role by being available for a closeup with his shirt off.The only time you ever see keaton in the Batman films with his shirt off is a far off shot in the distance in the first one when he is hanging upside down on his exercise machine and the shot is so far off that there is no way of judging if he is in good shape or not.

What is an "average bad guy". Did he get C's in bad guy school? Was he always zigging when he should have zagged?

See my above posts on size and fighting ability because I just can't go into that agian.

You guys are really blinded and hung up on size. Batman isn't about "size" it's about his training, his skills and his agression. I just find it weird that you guys feel anyone under 6'2" can't fight.

Why does Batman dress like a bat? Beacuse even at 6'2" and 250lbs he couldn't intimidate anyone. But he had the skills so he dressed like a bat to have the fear advantage, it's not his size that scares people, it's his rep and the suit.

[Dr. Fate]

What is an "average bad guy". Did he get C's in bad guy school? Was he always zigging when he should have zagged?

See my above posts on size and fighting ability because I just can't go into that agian.

You guys are really blinded and hung up on size. Batman isn't about "size" it's about his training, his skills and his agression. I just find it weird that you guys feel anyone under 6'2" can't fight.

Why does Batman dress like a bat? Beacuse even at 6'2" and 250lbs he couldn't intimidate anyone. But he had the skills so he dressed like a bat to have the fear advantage, it's not his size that scares people, it's his rep and the suit.
That reminds me of something Burton's been saying in interviews for years whenever the Batman subject comes up, that he went with slender, 5'10" Keaton because "I could see him putting on a bat-suit." Burton keeps saying that he couldn't imagine a big muscular square jawed guy needing the intimidation factor of the bat-suit, that only an average looking guy like Keaton would neat that. Now I enjoy the 1989 Batman film as much as anyone else, but even big brawny men like Schwarzenegger and Dolph Lundgren need (or needed) the element of surprise.

[LongDong]

Okay, before I even coment on this.....Dolph? Dolph???? Can you say Punisher? Yeah he is a fine choice.

There is just so much to say on the fighting comment, where to start?

Let me begin by saying that I'm comparing the abilities of a larger person to that of a smaller person to stand up in a fight. In the real world.

What do you have to back up your argument? I know of many great fighters who are not muscle heads. I have allready listed two and I can go into UCF fighters if you like, boxers, there are plenty.

Again I pose the question, what does physical size have to do with a fight? It's about technique period. No you could not hold off ten people, I don't know of anyone people could. Why? Because in a real fight ten people jump on you and beat you. In a funny book one maybe two come in at time.

Aikido is a perfect example. It is a disapline based on the transfer of kinetic energy. So, when you through your 250lbs punch at me I will just turn your own energy back on you.

Lets say I'm 150 and I'm fighting a 300lbs guy. First, I have the speed advantage. Second you do realize that both of our noses break the same. So if I'm faster, and can break his nose before his fists are even up, how will he win while he's choking on his blood, and I'm continually beating him because his eyes are filled with water and he can't even see me?

Do you see what I'm saying? And if you trully have fought for your life you do. Now I will say that if a lop sided fight like that were to go to grappling then the larger fighter has the advantage.

In short, the larger fighter has only one advantage. That is he is intimidating because of his size. But again, once you've been in a fight,if you know how to fight, that intimidation no longer exists.

Yeah obviously Dolph would have made a fine choice. Anyone saying otherwise is not being honest. So what he was in that Punisher movie. Big deal. He was not the reason that movie was not very good. Even the best and oscar worthy actor can be directed into turning in a **** performance, just ask Sam jackson who was in Revenge of the Sith.

You have obviously never been in a fight dude. Those UFC guys all fight someone of lke size and skill. You NEVER see someones Keatons size going up against even someone my size. EVER. Most fights end up on the ground. Sure someone my size can hold off someone bigger due to my experience and toughness yes. Someone Keaton's size who is nowhere near strong enough to be able to manipulate or control someone even my size, that will not happen. He would get chewed up. YES strength is very needed in fights 90% of the time, especially in a position that Batman is in, fighting night in and night out usually fighting many times a night. Keaton would be dead tired after the first fight unless he was up against some 14 year old kid or little old lady. Technique can ONLY take you SO FAR buddy.

[LongDong]

What is an "average bad guy". Did he get C's in bad guy school? Was he always zigging when he should have zagged?

See my above posts on size and fighting ability because I just can't go into that agian.

You guys are really blinded and hung up on size. Batman isn't about "size" it's about his training, his skills and his agression. I just find it weird that you guys feel anyone under 6'2" can't fight.

Why does Batman dress like a bat? Beacuse even at 6'2" and 250lbs he couldn't intimidate anyone. But he had the skills so he dressed like a bat to have the fear advantage, it's not his size that scares people, it's his rep and the suit.

You realize you are fighting a losing battle here so you starting to redirect and be a smart ass and also by putting words in other mouths. Nobody ever said someone under 6'2" could not fight. What was said that Keaton is VASTLY undersized and would be no match for the people he would be facing. Look at him, he has NO MUSCLE WHATSOEVER. My sister at 13 years old was stronger than him. (tis true she wa sbench pressing 140 pounds at that age, gymnastics will do that to you)

The average thug is a career criminal who has spent a good deal of time in prison. Have you seen what these guys look like? Strong and very aggressive. Keaton is small at 5'7" (yes 5'7" as I have met the man) and maybe weighing 140 pounds. He would get picked up and tossed around like crazy by these guys. One at a time and if he was a real bad ass sure, he could drop a few of them maybe but not more, he would tire out and be done.

I understand the fanboy nature to Burton's movie and the need to defend who you grew up picturing as Batman, but look at the situation on a realistic basis, and you wil understand why Keaton could never be Batman.

[LongDong]

Dolph Lundgren should have been The Mighty Thor! Or Aquaman.

So very true...........He would have made a GREAT Thor

[spiderwear]

You realize you are fighting a losing battle here so you starting to redirect and be a smart ass and also by putting words in other mouths. Nobody ever said someone under 6'2" could not fight. What was said that Keaton is VASTLY undersized and would be no match for the people he would be facing. Look at him, he has NO MUSCLE WHATSOEVER. My sister at 13 years old was stronger than him. (tis true she wa sbench pressing 140 pounds at that age, gymnastics will do that to you)

The average thug is a career criminal who has spent a good deal of time in prison. Have you seen what these guys look like? Strong and very aggressive. Keaton is small at 5'7" (yes 5'7" as I have met the man) and maybe weighing 140 pounds. He would get picked up and tossed around like crazy by these guys. One at a time and if he was a real bad ass sure, he could drop a few of them maybe but not more, he would tire out and be done.

I understand the fanboy nature to Burton's movie and the need to defend who you grew up picturing as Batman, but look at the situation on a realistic basis, and you wil understand why Keaton could never be Batman.

Well first I'm not being a smart a$$ I'm having a conversation. Grow some skin Sherely!

You should take an anatomy class. If a thirteen year old were lifting one fourty, their growth plates would be messed up bad. People don't start serious lifting until until about sixteen. No coach would allow such over training on a young person. Do some research before you make statments like this.

Actually there is no "losing" here. This is called opinion, atleast in terms of how good Keaton was in the role.

Have I seen what a criminal looks like? Yeah I used to run with them until I wised up. You are obviously basing your opions on what you see on T.V.

I hate to break it to you but most "criminals" are no stronger than ordinary guys bud. Being a body builder is not prerequisit to be a criminal and most criminals are to lazy or doped up to work out. This isn't the comic world were the criminals are statuesqe men in suits. They are lazy bums who live on the streets because they don't want to be productive members of society.

Are their criminals who are huge? Yeah I'm not saying there aren't, but you are making a misgerneralization by saying most of them are.

[Whack Arnolds]

Glengarry was the best Baldwin role.

When I see a comic book movie like The Shadow I see he's not THE choice.

And even if he could have been good as Batman, that does nothing against Keaton.No one said it did. And that shows just how you Keaton nut riders feel so threatned. It doesn't take away from what Keaton did. Just saying Baldwin could have been just as good, or better. By saing someone is better, isn't demeaning what the other person did. Baldwin actually was pretty good in the Shadow, for it being such a sloppy/generic/and overly cliched movie flick.

[spiderwear]

Yeah obviously Dolph would have made a fine choice. Anyone saying otherwise is not being honest. So what he was in that Punisher movie. Big deal. He was not the reason that movie was not very good. Even the best and oscar worthy actor can be directed into turning in a **** performance, just ask Sam jackson who was in Revenge of the Sith.

You have obviously never been in a fight dude. Those UFC guys all fight someone of lke size and skill. You NEVER see someones Keatons size going up against even someone my size. EVER. Most fights end up on the ground. Sure someone my size can hold off someone bigger due to my experience and toughness yes. Someone Keaton's size who is nowhere near strong enough to be able to manipulate or control someone even my size, that will not happen. He would get chewed up. YES strength is very needed in fights 90% of the time, especially in a position that Batman is in, fighting night in and night out usually fighting many times a night. Keaton would be dead tired after the first fight unless he was up against some 14 year old kid or little old lady. Technique can ONLY take you SO FAR buddy.

Well I'm not going to argue about who I am, where I've been and done with you but, when did I say that UFC fighters were mismatched? I said that there are many great yet small UFC fighters. Please read posts before you comment.

And I'm sorry Dolph is the most one demensional actor I've personally seen. Every line he utters is gut wrenching to me. Obviously I'm onto somthing with this because he didn't do much work in Hollywood, unless you concider his B flicks.

I guess the only thing I can say is come on out with me for a night. I can take you some places to show you how real fights go. Not two kids who end up rolling around on the ground, a true steet fight. PM me if you're interested.

[Bathead]

Regardless of how well a person can fight in real life, and whether or not they are big or small is irrelevant. The point is, that Batman has always been portrayed as a very big man. The look *is* important, as important as acting ability. If Keaton didn't have a sculpted rubber costume to make him look more intimidating, he would have looked ridiculous and would have been completely unbelievable, no matter how skilled an actor he is. If size was totally irrelevant, perhaps in the next movie they should hire Warwick Davis to play Bats.

[spiderwear]

Regardless of how well a person can fight in real life, and whether or not they are big or small is irrelevant. The point is, that Batman has always been portrayed as a very big man. The look *is* important, as important as acting ability. If Keaton didn't have a sculpted rubber costume to make him look more intimidating, he would have looked ridiculous and would have been completely unbelievable, no matter how skilled an actor he is. If size was totally irrelevant, perhaps in the next movie they should hire Warwick Davis to play Bats.

I completely agree with that. The suit made up for what Keaton was lacking. But because of the suit I say it was fine.

Like you said if he didn't have the rubber suit then I would be saying the same thing. Hell he's probrably the reason the rubber hero suits got their start. The producer may very well have said something like...hey you want keaton then we need to change the suit. Which now that I'm thinking of it kind of makes me mad about keaton casting becasue I hate the rubber suits. But on the same token Bale looked better but still had rubber.

My point is this, Keaton could very well not be the best choice, but for now he is my favorite actor to tackle the role. His size ment nothing because I know that with Batamns' training he would have done fine. One day he may be surpassed but Bale didn't do it.

[LongDong]

Well first I'm not being a smart a$$ I'm having a conversation. Grow some skin Sherely!

You should take an anatomy class. If a thirteen year old were lifting one fourty, their growth plates would be messed up bad. People don't start serious lifting until until about sixteen. No coach would allow such over training on a young person. Do some research before you make statments like this.

Actually there is no "losing" here. This is called opinion, atleast in terms of how good Keaton was in the role.

Have I seen what a criminal looks like? Yeah I used to run with them until I wised up. You are obviously basing your opions on what you see on T.V.

I hate to break it to you but most "criminals" are no stronger than ordinary guys bud. Being a body builder is not prerequisit to be a criminal and most criminals are to lazy or doped up to work out. This isn't the comic world were the criminals are statuesqe men in suits. They are lazy bums who live on the streets because they don't want to be productive members of society.

Are their criminals who are huge? Yeah I'm not saying there aren't, but you are making a misgerneralization by saying most of them are.

You are ignorant as anyone I have eve spoken with. My sister was in Gymnastics from the age of 7 to the age of 14. She did not get into any weight training until she hit Jr High and joined the track team. She was bench pressing more than her male teammates. She had never lifted wights before in he rlife. You might not comprehend this, but FACT is you can grow muscle and strength from regular excersize. Weight training is not the only thing that can build muscle.

Copy that Shemp?

[LongDong]

Well I'm not going to argue about who I am, where I've been and done with you but, when did I say that UFC fighters were mismatched? I said that there are many great yet small UFC fighters. Please read posts before you comment.

And I'm sorry Dolph is the most one demensional actor I've personally seen. Every line he utters is gut wrenching to me. Obviously I'm onto somthing with this because he didn't do much work in Hollywood, unless you concider his B flicks.

I guess the only thing I can say is come on out with me for a night. I can take you some places to show you how real fights go. Not two kids who end up rolling around on the ground, a true steet fight. PM me if you're interested.

lol, yeah ok dude. I am going to fly across the country to sit in your dorm room with you watching you smoke weed and play smackdown on your xbox

[El Payaso]

No one said it did. And that shows just how you Keaton nut riders feel so threatned. It doesn't take away from what Keaton did. Just saying Baldwin could have been just as good, or better. By saing someone is better, isn't demeaning what the other person did. Baldwin actually was pretty good in the Shadow, for it being such a sloppy/generic/and overly cliched movie flick.

If that was good, then Keaton was better. That said, there's no point in the Baldwin motion.

You are ignorant as anyone I have eve spoken with. My sister was in Gymnastics from the age of 7 to the age of 14. She did not get into any weight training until she hit Jr High and joined the track team. She was bench pressing more than her male teammates. She had never lifted wights before in he rlife. You might not comprehend this, but FACT is you can grow muscle and strength from regular excersize. Weight training is not the only thing that can build muscle.

Copy that Shemp?

Waiting for Doclathrop manners class.

[LongDong]

If that was good, then Keaton was better. That said, there's no point in the Baldwin motion.



Waiting for Doclathrop manners class.

You shold just stay out of it. Really you have no business in the conversation and your trolling is getting VERY old. You only ever say something negative about someone with a different point of view than you have even if someone sharing your p.o.v. has said something rude or wroong as well.

Just go away payaso.

[El Payaso]

You shold just stay out of it. Really you have no business in the conversation and your trolling is getting VERY old. You only ever say something negative about someone with a different point of view than you have even if someone sharing your p.o.v. has said something rude or wroong as well.

Just go away payaso.

You only ever say something negative about someone with the same old point of view.

Stay please.

[LongDong]

You only ever say something negative about someone with the same old point of view.

Stay please.

Hardly, we could take a poll of the users in this thread and I am pretty certain there would be more agreeing with me my friend. I am pretty objective and hardly ever attack anyone. Now if someone comes at me yes I will come back, to a fault. You have never seen me just flat out insult someone without cause.

[El Payaso]

Make he poll.

FF was a terrible movie and still did great with popularity.

Last word is yours:

[WhiteRat]

Hardly, we could take a poll of the users in this thread and I am pretty certain there would be more agreeing with me my friend. I am pretty objective and hardly ever attack anyone. Now if someone comes at me yes I will come back, to a fault. You have never seen me just flat out insult someone without cause.

Yeah him I wont bother reading the posts of.He just insults people with no reason.Nobody on this thread is taking him seriously and he should be on everybodys ignore list.

[WhiteRat]

Alec Baldwin's acting skills are not very good for a starter.

And being the film about a man in a mask, the looks are not critical. Acting skills are.

you cripple your arguments and you have no credibilty in your posts.For one thing Baldwin went on stage to star in a streetcar named desiree and played the lead role which is quite a difficult role to do especially when its on stage and you dont have the luxuary that you have in films where if you screw up a line you can just redo it and reshoot it,in a play you cant afford to screw up a line or the show is wrecked. You are cluess by saying Alec Baldwins acting skills are not very good and I wont waste my time with such ignorant comments like that,this will be my only post to you since you act like a child when people rightly criticise Keaton as batman.

[WhiteRat]

Alec Baldwin is not that great an actor and would have been a bloody awful Batman. Michael Keaton was a fantastic choice, and was so good that anyone who has been cast as Batman ever since, has been compared to him and has always been in his shadow!

Wow the comments here just keep getting more ignorant by the dozen.Now this kind of comment I would expect out of Elpaso,is he like a relative of yours because this post is as dumb as his logic.He is a far more proven actor than keaton is as others here have pointed out and would not have been near as bloody awful as Keaton was.Even Kilmer was better than Keaton.Keaton acted nothing at like Bruce wayne.Bruce wayne isnt the dork that keaton made him out to be,being nervous around women saying-Yes I am bruce wayne.This time I am sure.Kilmer at least acted calm and suave around the women like Bruce wayne is suppose to.Keaton was hardly a fantastic choice.:down

[Bruce_Wayne29]

All 4 actors (Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney and Bale) trained for the part. That was a requirement. The first three did it mostly with martial arts/kickboxing teachers. Bale maybe took it one step further and started weight training (even because he had to coming from the Machinist). But regardless what any of these haters up here want to say, Keaton was never out of shape. He trained with these teachers just like all the rest. There's more to being in shape than just looking buff.
Anyway, before this goes out of control, remember it's just movies. None of these actors are going to be fighting bad guys on the street and no one expects us any of them (and that includes Bale) to win fights with anybody out there. It's just frickin' movies. They only have to make sense in their universe.
One thing I will say about Keaton: just the fact that he incites such passion in discussing his Batman, whether it commands love or hate - it's a testament to his greatness and the quality of his work.

[El Payaso]

Yeah him I wont bother reading the posts of.He just insults people with no reason.Nobody on this thread is taking him seriously and he should be on everybodys ignore list.

If you lack of arguments, ignoring is your way.

I'd ask you to post where I have insulted you, but you're going to ignore me right?

Hasta la vista baby.


you cripple your arguments and you have no credibilty in your posts.For one thing Baldwin went on stage to star in a streetcar named desiree and played the lead role which is quite a difficult role to do especially when its on stage and you dont have the luxuary that you have in films where if you screw up a line you can just redo it and reshoot it,in a play you cant afford to screw up a line or the show is wrecked. You are cluess by saying Alec Baldwins acting skills are not very good and I wont waste my time with such ignorant comments like that,this will be my only post to you since you act like a child when people rightly criticise Keaton as batman.

What???

I thought you weren't reading my posts???
I thought you were going to ignore me???

You little liar. :)

And I suspect you won't ignore this post either.

Wow the comments here just keep getting more ignorant by the dozen.Now this kind of comment I would expect out of Elpaso,is he like a relative of yours because this post is as dumb as his logic.He is a far more proven actor than keaton is as others here have pointed out and would not have been near as bloody awful as Keaton was.Even Kilmer was better than Keaton.Keaton acted nothing at like Bruce wayne.Bruce wayne isnt the dork that keaton made him out to be,being nervous around women saying-Yes I am bruce wayne.This time I am sure.Kilmer at least acted calm and suave around the women like Bruce wayne is suppose to.Keaton was hardly a fantastic choice.:down

Zippity-doo-de-dah!!!

Again not ignoring me??? :eek: :eek: :eek:

Please, take a chill pill and try to follow your own advice, FunkyRat (you mispelled my name so I think you won't be mad at me for doing the same because a tough guy like you can play his own games right?)

I'll be really dissapointed if you don't put me in your ignore list this time baby. And try and make that poll against me with Long Dong. If you both don't my heart will be double-hurt.


Just one more thing: God, Keaton just blew me up as Batman.

[captain_jimbo]

All 4 actors (Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney and Bale) trained for the part. That was a requirement. The first three did it mostly with martial arts/kickboxing teachers. Bale maybe took it one step further and started weight training (even because he had to coming from the Machinist). But regardless what any of these haters up here want to say, Keaton was never out of shape. He trained with these teachers just like all the rest. There's more to being in shape than just looking buff.
Anyway, before this goes out of control, remember it's just movies. None of these actors are going to be fighting bad guys on the street and no one expects us any of them (and that includes Bale) to win fights with anybody out there. It's just frickin' movies. They only have to make sense in their universe.
One thing I will say about Keaton: just the fact that he incites such passion in discussing his Batman, whether it commands love or hate - it's a testament to his greatness and the quality of his work.

Well said pal, shame more people on this site aren't like you.
:up:

[El Payaso]

All 4 actors (Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney and Bale) trained for the part. That was a requirement. The first three did it mostly with martial arts/kickboxing teachers. Bale maybe took it one step further and started weight training (even because he had to coming from the Machinist). But regardless what any of these haters up here want to say, Keaton was never out of shape. He trained with these teachers just like all the rest. There's more to being in shape than just looking buff.
Anyway, before this goes out of control, remember it's just movies. None of these actors are going to be fighting bad guys on the street and no one expects us any of them (and that includes Bale) to win fights with anybody out there. It's just frickin' movies. They only have to make sense in their universe.
One thing I will say about Keaton: just the fact that he incites such passion in discussing his Batman, whether it commands love or hate - it's a testament to his greatness and the quality of his work.

Oh, thanks for the info about the bat-actors.

When you stop ignorance about the subject everything's much more clear.

But everyone's free to ignore.

[captain_jimbo]

Wow the comments here just keep getting more ignorant by the dozen.Now this kind of comment I would expect out of Elpaso,is he like a relative of yours because this post is as dumb as his logic.He is a far more proven actor than keaton is as others here have pointed out and would not have been near as bloody awful as Keaton was.Even Kilmer was better than Keaton.Keaton acted nothing at like Bruce wayne.Bruce wayne isnt the dork that keaton made him out to be,being nervous around women saying-Yes I am bruce wayne.This time I am sure.Kilmer at least acted calm and suave around the women like Bruce wayne is suppose to.Keaton was hardly a fantastic choice.:down

You have your opinion, I have mine, but don't insult me, both of us could start shouting our mouths off.

[El Payaso]

Well, and talking about not ignoring things, this is the first post here:

I'm not asking for comparisons to his fellow Batmen, I'm just asking straight up is there anyone around here who did not like Keaton as Batman? Anyone? Anyone at all? No fear or reprisal here, just a simple yes or no for a simple question.

Just a reminder for all those annoying people starting to compare names to Keaton in order to prove... mhhh... they can compare people.

You have your opinion, I have mine, but don't insult me, both of us could start shouting our mouths off.

I think you're wrong, captain. I am the insulter here. I insult. For no reason I might add. Keep that in mind.

[Whack Arnolds]

Enough with the F'ing arguing. Opinions are opinions. Keaton ruled, as did Bale...and let us leave it at that. No better, no worse...just opinion.

[LongDong]

All 4 actors (Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney and Bale) trained for the part. That was a requirement. The first three did it mostly with martial arts/kickboxing teachers. Bale maybe took it one step further and started weight training (even because he had to coming from the Machinist). But regardless what any of these haters up here want to say, Keaton was never out of shape. He trained with these teachers just like all the rest. There's more to being in shape than just looking buff.
Anyway, before this goes out of control, remember it's just movies. None of these actors are going to be fighting bad guys on the street and no one expects us any of them (and that includes Bale) to win fights with anybody out there. It's just frickin' movies. They only have to make sense in their universe.
One thing I will say about Keaton: just the fact that he incites such passion in discussing his Batman, whether it commands love or hate - it's a testament to his greatness and the quality of his work.

the most laughable thing I have read in this debate so far. Not a testament to his work, don't get me wroong Keaton is a very likable guy and actor, but arguing over his casting choice for Batman as wrong or right as each individual sees it, is not a testament to the quality of his work.

[spiderwear]

lol, yeah ok dude. I am going to fly across the country to sit in your dorm room with you watching you smoke weed and play smackdown on your xbox

1-You need to learn to have civil conversations. Your reported!
2-I'm not only to old to be in a dorm room, but I'm also to old for your childish behavior. Another reason you're reported.
3-Sorry normal exercise does not get a 14 year old girl benching 140, Go to the gym son and you'll learn better numbers to use in your make beleive world.

[WhiteRat]

I completely agree with that. The suit made up for what Keaton was lacking. But because of the suit I say it was fine.

Like you said if he didn't have the rubber suit then I would be saying the same thing. Hell he's probrably the reason the rubber hero suits got their start. The producer may very well have said something like...hey you want keaton then we need to change the suit. Which now that I'm thinking of it kind of makes me mad about keaton casting becasue I hate the rubber suits. But on the same token Bale looked better but still had rubber.

My point is this, Keaton could very well not be the best choice, but for now he is my favorite actor to tackle the role. His size ment nothing because I know that with Batamns' training he would have done fine. One day he may be surpassed but Bale didn't do it.

Nope Bale passed him as the best Batman easily.

[LongDong]

1-You need to learn to have civil conversations. Your reported!
2-I'm not only to old to be in a dorm room, but I'm also to old for your childish behavior. Another reason you're reported.
3-Sorry normal exercise does not get a 14 year old girl benching 140, Go to the gym son and you'll learn better numbers to use in your make beleive world.

I am reported? Grow up dork. Normal excersize? Dude, maybe you need some reading lessons but I stated she was in gymnastics from the age of 7. that is not normal excersize. Have ANY idea what a gymnast puts their body through? You build so much muscle, DENSE and strong muscle, doing gymnastics nearly every day of your life.

You are clueless, report away buddy, report away. You will only bring a red flag down on yourself as well.

So many children around here

[spiderwear]

You shold just stay out of it. Really you have no business in the conversation and your trolling is getting VERY old. You only ever say something negative about someone with a different point of view than you have even if someone sharing your p.o.v. has said something rude or wroong as well.

Just go away payaso.

You havn't any room to talk about people saying negative things. You seem to be out of your depth due to the fact that name calling is what you result too.

Just grow up son!

[WhiteRat]

1-You need to learn to have civil conversations. Your reported!
2-I'm not only to old to be in a dorm room, but I'm also to old for your childish behavior. Another reason you're reported.
3-Sorry normal exercise does not get a 14 year old girl benching 140, Go to the gym son and you'll learn better numbers to use in your make beleive world.

I find it funny that you think HE needs to learn to have civil conversations while you did not say one negative thing about El payso who goes around insulting people for no reason at all simply because they dont have the same agreements as him.

[spiderwear]

Hardly, we could take a poll of the users in this thread and I am pretty certain there would be more agreeing with me my friend. I am pretty objective and hardly ever attack anyone. Now if someone comes at me yes I will come back, to a fault. You have never seen me just flat out insult someone without cause.

Funny, I don't remember insulting you. Man you should really read your posts.

[LongDong]

Funny, I don't remember insulting you. Man you should really read your posts.

Why don't you point them out to me. Could you be talking about this one?

You are ignorant as anyone I have eve spoken with. My sister was in Gymnastics from the age of 7 to the age of 14. She did not get into any weight training until she hit Jr High and joined the track team. She was bench pressing more than her male teammates. She had never lifted wights before in her life. You might not comprehend this, but FACT is you can grow muscle and strength from regular excersize. Weight training is not the only thing that can build muscle.

[spiderwear]

I find it funny that you think HE needs to learn to have civil conversations while you did not say one negative thing about El payso who goes around insulting people for no reason at all simply because they dont have the same agreements as him.

I'm not conversing with El Payso. I'm trying to speak to him about a subject, and because he dosn't agree he turns to insults.

Don't worry if El and I were to have something similar I would resonpd to him in the same manner.

This tread isn't about how El acts. It's about Keaton, I'm on topic here. The person who is conversing with me dosn't like what I say which is fine. But we should agree to disagree instead of acting like children.

[LongDong]

I'm not conversing with El Payso. I'm trying to speak to him about a subject, and because he dosn't agree he turns to insults.

Don't worry if El and I were to have something similar I would resonpd to him in the same manner.

This tread isn't about how El acts. It's about Keaton, I'm on topic here. The person who is conversing with me dosn't like what I say which is fine. But we should agree to disagree instead of acting like children.

I do not mean this in a negative way, but your name reminds me of my underoos I had as a kid. My name is the reason I can no longer fit in them.

[spiderwear]

Why don't you point them out to me. Could you be talking about this one?

No no, calling me shemp? who do you think you are? And my point is fact. Go to any gym and you will find it to be fact. Now if you had said your sister was eighteen I may believe you. But because you seem ignorant on the subject of muscle, I called you on it. Plain and simple a fourteen year old is not putting up 140, espeacially in gymnastics.

[spiderwear]

I do not mean this in a negative way, but your name reminds me of my underoos I had as a kid. My name is the reason I can no longer fit in them.

LOL your cute.

[LongDong]

No no, calling me shemp? who do you think you are? And my point is fact. Go to any gym and you will find it to be fact. Now if you had said your sister was eighteen I may believe you. But because you seem ignorant on the subject of muscle, I called you on it. Plain and simple a fourteen year old is not putting up 140, espeacially in gymnastics.

Well you are dead wrong dude, dead wrong. You should really go watch some gymnastics practices sometime and see what these people do. You not being part of the family or her school, you are ignorant as to what you speak where as I have first hand knowledge. **EDIT** agai i do not mean this as an insult, honestly, you just do not have first hand knowledge on this as I do**

I am 5 foot 9 185, maybe 4% body fat on a good day. I know a thing or two of muscle. I grew up wrestling and taking judo, I know a thing or two of grappling.

You were called Shemp as you insinuated I was a liar, which frankly to me is a major insult. Telling me to do some research when I need not do research, I saw my sister grow up, saw how friggin ripped she was as a kid, watched her run over my buddies 16 year old brother when she was 14 and we were playing football. Watched her drill him to the ground. Worked the farm bucking hay with her. I know how strong she was, just because you cannot fathom that or feel a need to be put others down you called me a liar so to speak. I was insulted and if I took it wrong I apologize, I can be a bit hot headed if I feel perosnally attacked or if someone is talking of my brothers and sister. For that I apologize. You are no Shemp, obviously larry not Shemp ;)

Kidding bro, heh heh

[WhiteRat]

I'm not conversing with El Payso. I'm trying to speak to him about a subject, and because he dosn't agree he turns to insults.

Don't worry if El and I were to have something similar I would resonpd to him in the same manner.

This tread isn't about how El acts. It's about Keaton, I'm on topic here. The person who is conversing with me dosn't like what I say which is fine. But we should agree to disagree instead of acting like children.


Strange,I read through all his posts to you and I didnt see any insults thrown at you.on the other hand,El Payso has done nothing but insult everybody that disagrees with him in all his posts.

[LongDong]

In HONOR of this thread, I am going to do a scavenger hunt and the winner gets my MINT CONDITION OFFICIAL BATMAN 89 Comic adaption. Hell I may even toss in the Movie Magazine and the Batman Forever Movie Magazine

[WhiteRat]

What is an "average bad guy". Did he get C's in bad guy school? Was he always zigging when he should have zagged?

See my above posts on size and fighting ability because I just can't go into that agian.

You guys are really blinded and hung up on size. Batman isn't about "size" it's about his training, his skills and his agression. I just find it weird that you guys feel anyone under 6'2" can't fight.

Why does Batman dress like a bat? Beacuse even at 6'2" and 250lbs he couldn't intimidate anyone. But he had the skills so he dressed like a bat to have the fear advantage, it's not his size that scares people, it's his rep and the suit.

Dude the reason Bob Kane made Bruce Wayne into a 6 foot 2 dude is because size DOES matter.Batman is suppose to be intimidating to criminals when they see him because of his size,NOT because of how good a fighter he is.if a criminal saw the michael keaton Batman from the films in the dark,they would laugh their ass off because of what a short runt he is and hardly be afraid to fight him.criminals are suppose to be afraid to fight him though because of how intimidating he is wheich keaton was not.:rolleyes: I also find it funny that while you are defending his size that while you bring up that you mention his fighting skills which were extremely poor in the first batman movie.:D sorry but you really are losing the debate here.

[WhiteRat]

I think size does matter with Batman. That said, that's not the reason why I think Keaton's performance was very bad.

Hell yeah it DOES matter when it comes to Batman.I also dont think that thats why his performace was bad either.I already posted why his performace was so bad in my previous posts so no need to do so again.

[El Payaso]

Now, please someone say Keaton sucked because of the color of his tie.

And I mean PLEASE.

[LongDong]

Now, please someone say Keaton sucked because of the color of his tie.

And I mean PLEASE.

Keaton sucked because of his tie.

[El Payaso]

Your best post here... thanks to me.

[Whack Arnolds]

I thought Keaton wore a bow tie?

[LongDong]

Your best post here... thanks to me.

Ummmmmmmmm ok

[El Payaso]

I thought Keaton wore a bow tie?

He... wore a tie in several other scenes.

But... isn't the bow tie a tie nevertheless?

[Whack Arnolds]

I'm not saying it isn't...just asking.

[LongDong]

Bow ties are for virgins and mega nerds which Bruce Wayne is not either one, so why put him in the tie?

[El Payaso]

Are you wearing one?

[Bat Attack]

This thread keeps getting even more pointless and stupid...

[Bruce_Wayne29]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/theartist29/keatonthinking.jpg

[LongDong]

Are you wearing one? This is exactly why nobody likes you

[WhiteRat]

This thread keeps getting even more pointless and stupid...

Indeed it has.yeah how the hell did this thread turn into a discussion about if Michael Keaton wore a bowtie in Batman?:confused: :confused: :D

[El Payaso]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/theartist29/keatonthinking.jpg

The thinking is nothing. The will is everything.

[captain_jimbo]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/theartist29/keatonthinking.jpg

KEATON FOR JIGSAW IN PUNISHER 2 !
KEATON AND CAVIEZEL FOR DARK KNIGHT RETURNS !

Now you're talking bud!
:up:

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I love Keaton. He's one of the greatest over achievers anywhere....and I admite that.

Apart from physically....there were a few things that bothered me about his Batman. The fact that he hardly spoke, and when he spoke...his voice.

[captain_jimbo]

I love Keaton. He's one of the greatest over achievers anywhere....and I admite that.

Apart from physically....there were a few things that bothered me about his Batman. The fact that he hardly spoke, and when he spoke...his voice.

Just out of curiosity, what didn't you like about his voice?

[Bat Attack]

Oh no...

[captain_jimbo]

Oh no...

No I'm not trying to start anything, seriously, I just wondered.:O

[LongDong]

Indeed it has.yeah how the hell did this thread turn into a discussion about if Michael Keaton wore a bowtie in Batman?:confused: :confused: :D

ONE guess my friend, one guess.

[TheGrayGhost]

Micheal Keaton may not have been as big as Bale, but, Keaton is the BEST Batman ever!!! He just got the voice and spirit of Batman right.

Really...? I think he got Burton's Batman right. Which is not necessarily a bad thing thing. It worked for the movie.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Just out of curiosity, what didn't you like about his voice?

Just to let everyone know.....I'm not here to be a prick or anything. Just putting that out there.......

Keaton's voice sounded more like a whisper to me......it seemed like if it wasn't very quiet, it could be hard to hear him. He did speak up, though, but when he did...I felt his voice was too recognizable. One scene that comes to mind is the scene after the chase with Joker's henchmen. After Vicki comes down, it sounded like Bruce with the "You weigh a little more..." line.

That would be my only gripe with his performance, honestly. I'm a huge fan of Keaton......he was the first Real Batman, I think.

Which, is why I don't make such a big deal about it.....before Keaton, there never was a "Batman" voice.....just Bruce in a mask. That's one of the reason's it's not a big deal to me. I know through Tim's commentary on the SE that the voice was something they had to think about.

I guess I'm saying it'd be hard for me to see Mike use the voice with another type of dialouge.

Really...? I think he got Burton's Batman right. Which is not necessarily a bad thing thing. It worked for the movie.

I'll say this....Bale is exactly like the Batman I know from the comics.

[mister Lennon]

Serioulsy, i dont know what the people see in Keaton's performance. The guy played another thing , not Bruce Wayne. I want see a Bruce Wayne with two or three super models in a party and that kind of things, not some dork insecure with women.

And totally agree with whiterat. He is totally right. Batman is supposed to be tall and scary and impossing, not some short guy in a bat costume. Keaton was totally misscasted.

[El Payaso]

Serioulsy, i dont know what the people see in Keaton's performance. The guy played another thing , not Bruce Wayne. I want see a Bruce Wayne with two or three super models in a party and that kind of things, not some dork insecure with women.

Why?

Bruce spent his whole life training and never had a normal life dating women and such until he was an adult, therefore he most probably is insecure about social skills.

The thing with Bale's Bruce is that he must pretend he's a womanizer and a playboy and such.

That doesn't destroy the excellent Burton/Keaton approach.

And totally agree with whiterat. He is totally right. Batman is supposed to be tall and scary and impossing, not some short guy in a bat costume. Keaton was totally misscasted.

That's like saying, Batman should wear an bullet-proof suit, not some rubber suit. It is rubber in real life. In the movies is bullet-proof.

Your reasoning reminds me that SNL gag where Donner (Belushi) was casting a Superman and the actors should have x-rays in their eyes and being able to actually catch a bullet in mid air to fit the role.

If I see Bale in his bat-suit in the middle of the city I'd probably laugh. Thanks to movie making magic, he looks scary.

Keaton's Batman was all what you say the same way Chris Reeve was able to fly.

[Whack Arnolds]

Well there is a balance. Keaton doesn't have to be imposing in real life, to be intimidating and scary in a Batman movie...but what I think the TRUE argument is...is that you want the LOOK of character from the source to be true to the on screen version of the character. Would it be totally acceptable with you, Payaso, if they put a middle aged fat guy, who can act...and told him to play Peter Parker? People want, and deserve the look of the character to be similar to the character of the comics. It's like casting a short blonde hair dude, as Superman. It doesn't seem right, and doesn't seem TOTALLY believeable.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Serioulsy, i dont know what the people see in Keaton's performance. The guy played another thing , not Bruce Wayne. I want see a Bruce Wayne with two or three super models in a party and that kind of things, not some dork insecure with women.


See....that's the thing. His Bruce Wayne.....it's alot like Micahel is. He's a funny guy, and his "lighter" Bruce showed that. His darker Bruce, though, was pretty cool....although....seemed very much crazy. IMO.

And totally agree with whiterat. He is totally right. Batman is supposed to be tall and scary and impossing, not some short guy in a bat costume. Keaton was totally misscasted.

Well, listening to the commentary from Burton.....it's part of the reason he cast Keaton.

The way Tim saw it, Bruce NEEDS the batsuit for a reason.....to scare people. His concept wasn't as deep as Nolan's......but he got the idea right. Bruce needs the suit to intimidate people. Tim saw that idea as an opportunity to cast someone who would REALLY REALLY need the suit badly......which, a 5'9 140 lbs (soaking wet) Keaton fit into.

I agree though...Bats should be atleast 6'0....but, listening to Tim plead his case on the SE....sense for what he was approaching.

Why?

Bruce spent his whole life training and never had a normal life dating women and such until he was an adult, therefore he most probably is insecure about social skills.

Try and understand where he's coming from.......the Bruce Wayne from the source material doesn't behave that way. It seemed more in tune with Clark Kent, than Bruce Wayne. That's all.

The thing with Bale's Bruce is that he must pretend he's a womanizer and a playboy and such.

Yup. That's the way.

That doesn't destroy the excellent Burton/Keaton approach.


Agreedd......but, it does not make it faitful to the source either.

That's like saying, Batman should wear an bullet-proof suit, not some rubber suit. It is rubber in real life. In the movies is bullet-proof.


You might have a point there. Mike's height/size didn't really bother me throughout the film......it bothered me sometimes....but the film was shot in a way that it didn't really matter.

If I see Bale in his bat-suit in the middle of the city I'd probably laugh. Thanks to movie making magic, he looks scary.


In the middle of the city.....yeah.

But, at 3 am in a dark dampy, ill lighted alley.....that's another.....
:)


Well there is a balance. Keaton doesn't have to be imposing in real life, to be intimidating and scary in a Batman movie...but what I think the TRUE argument is...is that you want the LOOK of character from the source to be true to the on screen version of the character. Would it be totally acceptable with you, Payaso, if they put a middle aged fat guy, who can act...and told him to play Peter Parker? People want, and deserve the look of the character to be similar to the character of the comics. It's like casting a short blonde hair dude, as Superman. It doesn't seem right, and doesn't seem TOTALLY believeable.


Yes, your right.

[WhiteRat]

Well there is a balance. Keaton doesn't have to be imposing in real life, to be intimidating and scary in a Batman movie...but what I think the TRUE argument is...is that you want the LOOK of character from the source to be true to the on screen version of the character. Would it be totally acceptable with you, Payaso, if they put a middle aged fat guy, who can act...and told him to play Peter Parker? People want, and deserve the look of the character to be similar to the character of the comics. It's like casting a short blonde hair dude, as Superman. It doesn't seem right, and doesn't seem TOTALLY believeable.

:up: Well said,that doesnt seem to be a concept that Payaso seems to be able to grasp though.:rolleyes:

[The Kid]

Well I see it as being dependent on how they do it in the movie. Ian Mckellen is a old man who loves men, and you'd think he wasn't a threat, but in the movies i've seen him in, he's imposing, powerful, even scary at times, unrecognizable from his pink sweater-wearing real self. So if they cast a chunky guy to play spidey and somehow on film he didn't seem so chunky and exactly captured the spirit of our sharp witted webhead, that's cool with me. Most of his part's really played by a stunt double or computer graphic anyway, heh... ;-)

[Whack Arnolds]

You are a lying bastard Wesyeed(j/k)...

You are lying through your teeth if you say you'd completely believe that. Let's get Drew Carey or another heavy, wrong aged person to to play Spider-Man...and let's say he actually played him decently... you know damn well no one would believe it (including you). And it would be a direct slap in the face of the true fans of the character by not even trying to have someone cast that represents the look of the character. Ian Mckellen's sexuality has nothing to do with ANYTHING. Ian Mckellen LOOKS like your typical Magneto drawing...he doesn't LOOK like someone completely different. Regardless of how good the actor is, you have to have a balance when potraying these characters on screen. Good actor? Yes... but he also has to at least resemble the character, and Michael Keaton's Bruce Wayne / Batman (while being pretty cool)...didn't resemble the character in the slightest. Michael Keaton looked like the only battle he SHOULD be fighting is the traffic to get to his 10 year old's soccer game. He didn't look like a young, handsome, strapping, athletic playboy who just spent years honing his body and skills in an effort to wage an all out "War on Crime" in the most corrupt city IN THE WORLD.

There is a difference, please believe that. No can argue about Keaton's performance, itself. It was actually pretty good, but he still can't entirely represent the character, without having ANY simalrities in terms of look to the comic book counterpart.

[The Kid]

eehh... i'm not lying or even trying to. OK it'd be a really looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooong stretch to believe a fat spidey could do whatever a fat spider can, but it's not cumpletely impossible... I think...That's what my opinion is. The fatness can be somehow made to look less fat on film like mckellen's old age and body (who doesn't very much look like the big guy with the bulging muscles in the comics and has so many wrinkles...) and we'd see him come close enough, I'd be ok with it. That's my personal view. I'm ok if others don't share it. I wouldn't say Keaton from 89 looked too far off from wayne or bats in the books. His biggest lack was the bulging biceps and such, but I didn't care. He acted like batman, had the jaw and the suit had the muscles so it was fine for me. I don't know what more I can say.

[Dr. Fate]

And now for something completely different - can you imagine Christopher Reeve wearing the black body armor Batman suit?

[DocLathropBrown]

"Arguing on the internet is just like winning the special olympics. Either way, you're still retarded."

That's a quote you should all keep in mind.

[El Payaso]

Well there is a balance. Keaton doesn't have to be imposing in real life, to be intimidating and scary in a Batman movie...but what I think the TRUE argument is...is that you want the LOOK of character from the source to be true to the on screen version of the character. Would it be totally acceptable with you, Payaso, if they put a middle aged fat guy, who can act...and told him to play Peter Parker? People want, and deserve the look of the character to be similar to the character of the comics. It's like casting a short blonde hair dude, as Superman. It doesn't seem right, and doesn't seem TOTALLY believeable.

Yes, you have to keep the basics. Don't hire a woman for Superman, don't hire a dead guy for Wonder Woman, etc. Keaton was a 30 something guy as Batman is suppsoed to be. He just lacks of the handsome look. That can be surpassed in the context of the narrative.

Now... I didn't like Tobey's Peter Parker. It was nothing like the Peter I see in Spiderman comics. It was more like the 'universal' nerd. But the acting was opk, and Raimi did movies about nerds with those movies. He got really in the nerd vibe there and in that context, Maguire was right.

Same with Burton/Keaton.

Anyway, faithfulness woth the main source has proven to have no relationship with the quality of the movie once and again.

Well said,that doesnt seem to be a concept that Payaso seems to be able to grasp though.

Too good for you there was someone else able to articulate some ideas.

"Arguing on the internet is just like winning the special olympics. Either way, you're still retarded."

That's a quote you should all keep in mind.

I'll memorize that if you keep in mind this:

"If you have nothing to do, don't do it here."

[Dcknight]

The thinking is nothing. The will is everything.



j't'ai cassé!

[mister Lennon]

Lets see, first of all, i want to clear something that i posted before. I wanted to say that Dolph Lundgren had a good Physchal and bad acting skills. And for the person who said that He was a good actor, only show me a movie with a good performance of Dolph Lundgren, only one.

Second of all, for me , the ian mackellen example is totally wrong because his sexuality doesnt matter, his phsichal yes. And he looked like magneto , he is little older as magneto is, but he looked the part much more than keaton did.

Third and about the main issue of the thread, for me, to say that Keaton and Burton wanted to do his own thing and version of batman isnt valid. For me, and for a lot of fans batman and bruce wayne should be tall and athletich and handsome, and if they dont bring me that, that character isnt batman or isnt bruce wayne. I dont want to see a tim burton version of batman and a michael keaton playing batman, i want to see batman on screen and batman himself. That was what nolan did and christian bale did, not burton and keaton.

[LongDong]

Yes, you have to keep the basics. Don't hire a woman for Superman, don't hire a dead guy for Wonder Woman, etc. Keaton was a 30 something guy as Batman is suppsoed to be. He just lacks of the handsome look. That can be surpassed in the context of the narrative.

Now... I didn't like Tobey's Peter Parker. It was nothing like the Peter I see in Spiderman comics. It was more like the 'universal' nerd. But the acting was opk, and Raimi did movies about nerds with those movies. He got really in the nerd vibe there and in that context, Maguire was right.

Same with Burton/Keaton.

Anyway, faithfulness woth the main source has proven to have no relationship with the quality of the movie once and again.



Too good for you there was someone else able to articulate some ideas.



I'll memorize that if you keep in mind this:

"If you have nothing to do, don't do it here."

Out of curiosity where are you from dude? WHat other languages do you speak?

[LongDong]

"Arguing on the internet is just like winning the special olympics. Either way, you're still retarded."

That's a quote you should all keep in mind.

Come on don't be an ass, this is a place where people are debating and expressing opinions, not a thread like the video game ones where scumbags throw insults at each other. Don't try to stir **** up man, if that is your game just go away and let the debate continue.

[SHADOWBAT69]

Something i think that alot of people are missing here is Batman 1989 was the first live incarnation since the 60's West series. They wanted to get as far away from that idea as possible, they wanted something that went the other direction. Dark, gritty, gothic, thus Tim Burton and his unique vision. As far as the casting of Keaton, it was Tim who ultimately convinced WB to have him play the character. If you look at some of the other choices that were being thrown around at the time, it could have been much worse. This movie clicked. As said by Peter Guber, "it was of its time". I remember 1988 and 1989 like it was yesterday, yeh there was the controversy about casting, but after the movie was released, most of all that quickly went away. And it stayed away until Nolan brought us Begins. Now this new generation of bat fans, who most of which werent born yet or was too young to experience Batman 1989, feel that nothing touches this latest incarnation. Its the same type of thing that happened with 89 when it was being compared to the campy 60's. Those guys were defending West as alot of us are keaton. No one is wrong. Why? Because like Guber said, "its of its time". 20 years from now youll have a new generation of batfans dissing Bale saying his performance lacked, because there will be yet another screen incarnation that they feel is right. Every actor that has put on a bat costume can be debated, not one of them got everything "right", even Bale.

[DocLathropBrown]

Come on don't be an ass, this is a place where people are debating and expressing opinions, not a thread like the video game ones where scumbags throw insults at each other. Don't try to stir **** up man, if that is your game just go away and let the debate continue.

You call this a debate? It's going nowhere because each side is sticking to their opinions like glue. Not to mention the flaming going on, at least several pages back.

[The Kid]

Second of all, for me , the ian mackellen example is totally wrong because his sexuality doesnt matter, his phsichal yes. And he looked like magneto , he is little older as magneto is, but he looked the part much more than keaton did.


That's what I'm getting at with the example. The gayness was just to further, I don't know, show how non-masculine his real life self was compared to who he is in the movies thanks to the magic of good acting that brought the character's personality to life. The magneto I remember is ripped, and not so wrinkley but none of that really mattered because he played it so well and looked close enough to the part. :O. It was the same with keaton for me.

[El Payaso]

Second of all, for me , the ian mackellen example is totally wrong because his sexuality doesnt matter, his phsichal yes. And he looked like magneto , he is little older as magneto is, but he looked the part much more than keaton did.

Why exactly the sexuality is not important and the height it is? Lecture us. Because from here it seems that both aspects are the same in terms of being totally unrelated to a movie quality and the character acting and development.

Ian mcKellen looked like Magneto?

http://oneshot.anifics.com/xmen/magneto.jpghttp://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Film/Pix/pictures/2002/03/25/mckellen.jpg

Yeah right. The shoulders specially.

OH. You said 'looked much more'.

So there's a point where you can nopt look like the part and it's still Ok and another point where is totally wrong. Please show us where that point exactly is. I mean, since this is your own personal invention.

Third and about the main issue of the thread, for me, to say that Keaton and Burton wanted to do his own thing and version of batman isnt valid. For me, and for a lot of fans batman and bruce wayne should be tall and athletich and handsome, and if they dont bring me that, that character isnt batman or isnt bruce wayne. I dont want to see a tim burton version of batman and a michael keaton playing batman, i want to see batman on screen and batman himself. That was what nolan did and christian bale did, not burton and keaton.

Yes.

And change Michael Caine, because Alfred is bald, black-haired and have a tiny moustache. No baldness, No alfred. Your rules.

It seems these damn directors can do their own visions and not asking you a thing about it first. :mad:

Out of curiosity where are you from dude? WHat other languages do you speak?

For a starter, I don't speak english, go figure. Typos are my treat though. :)

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Call me crazy......but didn't Magneto get younger through some giant story arc in X-Men comics?

He WAS old......but I think Marvel realized they couldn't conceivbly keep Magneto a threat, if he was sooo old......so I think there was a story arc where they had him get younger, ala Ra's al Ghul.

That's one of the reasons I heard that they were going to do the same in the X-Men franchise and get a younger Magneto.

I'll look some stuff up and see.....I'll get back to you guys on that.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

All right, I learned that Magneto is indeed a Holocaust survior in the comics, like in the movies.

He was old, but in a story arc concerning gentic tampering....trying to erase his "EVIL" genes.....he had his youth restored by an alien Shi'ar agent Davan Shakari, who normally goes by the code-name "Erik the Red".

So...that's why he's not old in the comics....

[El Payaso]

*still waiting for your point*

[LongDong]

Why exactly the sexuality is not important and the height it is? Lecture us. Because from here it seems that both aspects are the same in terms of being totally unrelated to a movie quality and the character acting and development.

Ian mcKellen looked like Magneto?

http://oneshot.anifics.com/xmen/magneto.jpghttp://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Film/Pix/pictures/2002/03/25/mckellen.jpg

Yeah right. The shoulders specially.

OH. You said 'looked much more'.

So there's a point where you can nopt look like the part and it's still Ok and another point where is totally wrong. Please show us where that point exactly is. I mean, since this is your own personal invention.



Yes.

And change Michael Caine, because Alfred is bald, black-haired and have a tiny moustache. No baldness, No alfred. Your rules.

It seems these damn directors can do their own visions and not asking you a thing about it first. :mad:



For a starter, I don't speak english, go figure. Typos are my treat though. :)

Magneto need not "look the part" as much as Batman as he is a super powered being who does not rely on his body to defeat his enemies. Big difference between the characters.

[LongDong]

You call this a debate? It's going nowhere because each side is sticking to their opinions like glue. Not to mention the flaming going on, at least several pages back.

Then just stay out of it, yes it is a debate on some levels. The flaming has stopped, stop trying to stir it back up.

[El Payaso]

Magneto need not "look the part" as much as Batman as he is a super powered being who does not rely on his body to defeat his enemies. Big difference between the characters.

Magneto wears no mask.

Batman does.

And Magneto is the one not having to look the part?

Stripped of your... "vision" all we can see is that McKellen doesn't look the part but he's a ****ing great Magneto. Which is the truth so we must accept it. That means that Keaton could be a good Batman in spite of how tall he is/isn't. You know, like if that is not related to how good/bad he could be.

[Bat Attack]

Me gusta keaton. My spanish is terrible, but than again I'm only in Spanish I.

[El Payaso]

Si no te gusta Keaton él te volará el trasero.

[The Kid]

que? :P

[Bat Attack]

Hola, me llama Batattack.

[Bat Attack]

Si, my gusta Keaton es Batman. I don't know, lol. :o

[mister Lennon]

you are wrong thinking that all the comic characters needs the same kind of treatment in the movies. Thats is totally wrong. An easy example: does spiderman needs to wear mask in the movie? yes, because he is peter parker, a guy with a public identity. ¿Same with Wolverine? not, because he is only logan, an outsider with any public identity. Now, the magneto and batman issue. ¿ does magneto need to be tall and muscular in a movie? clearly not, the force of this character is the magnetism, he doesnt need to be phischal imppossing. Only a middle aged aged actor with white hair and a powerful voice and great acting skills. Same with batman? clearly not. Batman bases his power in his fighting skills and his impossing precense, plus, the secret identity of batman, bruce wayne , is supposed to be a tall and handsome and atlhetic playboy. Why? because this guy has been training all his life and he needs a great body to do the things that batman does, and because he has to be handsome to get all the woman in parties.

I think that its very clear. The sexuality of Ian Makellen i thing that doesnt matter because one thing is his personal life and the other is his life on screen. And Makellen is a powerful presence on screen.

Here is magneto in the comics:

http://www.mckellen.com/images/misc/magneto.jpg

Here is Ian Makellen as magneto in the movies:

http://www.omelete.com.br/imagens/cinema/news/xmen2/magneto2.jpg

Here is the bruce wayne from the comics:

http://www.thecomicbox.
com/online_store/store/images/comicpics/brucewaynemurderer-tpb.jpg

Here is michael keaton as bruce wayne:

http://www.batman.moviesection.de/v6/cont/bilder/michaelkeaton.jpg

I think that the difference is evident.

[El Payaso]

you are wrong thinking that all the comic characters needs the same kind of treatment in the movies. Thats is totally wrong. An easy example: does spiderman needs to wear mask in the movie? yes, because he is peter parker, a guy with a public identity. ¿Same with Wolverine? not, because he is only logan, an outsider with any public identity. Now, the magneto and batman issue. ¿ does magneto need to be tall and muscular in a movie? clearly not, the force of this character is the magnetism, he doesnt need to be phischal imppossing. Only a middle aged aged actor with white hair and a powerful voice and great acting skills. Same with batman? clearly not. Batman bases his power in his fighting skills and his impossing precense, plus, the secret identity of batman, bruce wayne , is supposed to be a tall and handsome and atlhetic playboy. Why? because this guy has been training all his life and he needs a great body to do the things that batman does, and because he has to be handsome to get all the woman in parties.

I think that its very clear. The sexuality of Ian Makellen i thing that doesnt matter because one thing is his personal life and the other is his life on screen. And Makellen is a powerful presence on screen.


As I thought you're creating new 'rules' as your previous points seem refuted.

[WhiteRat]

you are wrong thinking that all the comic characters needs the same kind of treatment in the movies. Thats is totally wrong. An easy example: does spiderman needs to wear mask in the movie? yes, because he is peter parker, a guy with a public identity. ¿Same with Wolverine? not, because he is only logan, an outsider with any public identity. Now, the magneto and batman issue. ¿ does magneto need to be tall and muscular in a movie? clearly not, the force of this character is the magnetism, he doesnt need to be phischal imppossing. Only a middle aged aged actor with white hair and a powerful voice and great acting skills. Same with batman? clearly not. Batman bases his power in his fighting skills and his impossing precense, plus, the secret identity of batman, bruce wayne , is supposed to be a tall and handsome and atlhetic playboy. Why? because this guy has been training all his life and he needs a great body to do the things that batman does, and because he has to be handsome to get all the woman in parties.

I think that its very clear. The sexuality of Ian Makellen i thing that doesnt matter because one thing is his personal life and the other is his life on screen. And Makellen is a powerful presence on screen.

Here is magneto in the comics:

http://www.mckellen.com/images/misc/magneto.jpg

Here is Ian Makellen as magneto in the movies:

http://www.omelete.com.br/imagens/cinema/news/xmen2/magneto2.jpg

Here is the bruce wayne from the comics:

http://www.thecomicbox.
com/online_store/store/images/comicpics/brucewaynemurderer-tpb.jpg

Here is michael keaton as bruce wayne:

http://www.batman.moviesection.de/v6/cont/bilder/michaelkeaton.jpg

I think that the difference is evident.

Well said Mister Lennon.:up: Like I said before,that seems to be a concept that Payaso seems to fail to grasp though.:rolleyes:

[WhiteRat]

You are a lying bastard Wesyeed(j/k)...

You are lying through your teeth if you say you'd completely believe that. Let's get Drew Carey or another heavy, wrong aged person to to play Spider-Man...and let's say he actually played him decently... you know damn well no one would believe it (including you). And it would be a direct slap in the face of the true fans of the character by not even trying to have someone cast that represents the look of the character. Ian Mckellen's sexuality has nothing to do with ANYTHING. Ian Mckellen LOOKS like your typical Magneto drawing...he doesn't LOOK like someone completely different. Regardless of how good the actor is, you have to have a balance when potraying these characters on screen. Good actor? Yes... but he also has to at least resemble the character, and Michael Keaton's Bruce Wayne / Batman (while being pretty cool)...didn't resemble the character in the slightest. Michael Keaton looked like the only battle he SHOULD be fighting is the traffic to get to his 10 year old's soccer game. He didn't look like a young, handsome, strapping, athletic playboy who just spent years honing his body and skills in an effort to wage an all out "War on Crime" in the most corrupt city IN THE WORLD.

There is a difference, please believe that. No can argue about Keaton's performance, itself. It was actually pretty good, but he still can't entirely represent the character, without having ANY simalrities in terms of look to the comic book counterpart.

Bravo,you just took Payaso to school on that.maybe someday he will grasp that logic and learn something about logic and common sense.something he is not yet privy to.:D

[LongDong]

Magneto wears no mask.

Batman does.

And Magneto is the one not having to look the part?

Stripped of your... "vision" all we can see is that McKellen doesn't look the part but he's a ****ing great Magneto. Which is the truth so we must accept it. That means that Keaton could be a good Batman in spite of how tall he is/isn't. You know, like if that is not related to how good/bad he could be.

You are contradicting what I said. Try reading it again.

[LongDong]

In defense of payaso it seems he is using a translation program to understand english. If any of you have ever tried using those things then you know they sometimes can butcher what was being said. The fact that it appears he is not getting what we are saying can be contributed to this, if it were the case.

[El Payaso]

Bravo,you just took Payaso to school on that.maybe someday he will grasp that logic and learn something about logic and common sense.something he is not yet privy to.:D

Translation: "I cannot against El Payaso by myself, but this guy talk better than I do (whiterat)"

Btw, just out of curiosity:

... and I wont waste my time with such ignorant comments like that,this will be my only post to you since you act like a child when people rightly criticise Keaton as batman.

After 3 or 4 pages... when are you starting the ignoring stuff? Don't tell me you can't find the right button. Or that you can't stand your word.

You are contradicting what I said.

That's the idea.

In defense of payaso it seems he is using a translation program to understand english. If any of you have ever tried using those things then you know they sometimes can butcher what was being said. The fact that it appears he is not getting what we are saying can be contributed to this, if it were the case.

Yes, it must be something.

No no wait. Your arguments are totally debatable!

[LongDong]

Translation: "I cannot do it, but this guy talk better than I do (whiterat)"



That's the idea.



Yes, it must be something.

No no wait. Your arguments are totally debatable!
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/oregondude/TollTroll6.jpg

[El Payaso]

Everyone here knows. Read below my nickname.

[WhiteRat]

Something i think that alot of people are missing here is Batman 1989 was the first live incarnation since the 60's West series. They wanted to get as far away from that idea as possible, they wanted something that went the other direction. Dark, gritty, gothic, thus Tim Burton and his unique vision. As far as the casting of Keaton, it was Tim who ultimately convinced WB to have him play the character. If you look at some of the other choices that were being thrown around at the time, it could have been much worse. This movie clicked. As said by Peter Guber, "it was of its time". I remember 1988 and 1989 like it was yesterday, yeh there was the controversy about casting, but after the movie was released, most of all that quickly went away. And it stayed away until Nolan brought us Begins. Now this new generation of bat fans, who most of which werent born yet or was too young to experience Batman 1989, feel that nothing touches this latest incarnation. Its the same type of thing that happened with 89 when it was being compared to the campy 60's. Those guys were defending West as alot of us are keaton. No one is wrong. Why? Because like Guber said, "its of its time". 20 years from now youll have a new generation of batfans dissing Bale saying his performance lacked, because there will be yet another screen incarnation that they feel is right. Every actor that has put on a bat costume can be debated, not one of them got everything "right", even Bale.

uh dude apparently you have not read through the previous posts because you are incorrect that back then the controversy about keaton being Batman died down after the movie came out.As I said and another poster stated earlier,my coworkers and HIS coworkers were outraged over the casting choice of keaton as batman back then and after the movie came out,most of them did not change their minds about keaton.It is also false to mention that people have only started bashing keaton after Batman Begins came out.I have been blasting away at Keaton ever since back in 89 when Burton made that horrific casting choice of Keaton back then as have many of my friends have over the years.so I dont know WHERE you came up with that false information because it is so incorrect.Many people here already ALSO mentioned and pointed out how Alec Baldwin would easily have been a much better far superiour choice for batman then keaton was.Bale may get some flack as the old batman when a new batman series is made 20 years from now,but I guarantee you,he WONT get anywhere the amount that Keaton has gotten over the years.Yeah People might have still preferred west over keaton but thats because how crappy burtons batman movies were.I guarantee you those same people dont prefer west over Bale.