Originally Posted by Ponyboy
As I've said before, depends on whether you like your Batman tortured and scary... or Nolan's version. Personally I think Keaton does more with his eyes. Interesting to watch. To say otherwise means you don't enjoy subtlety or nuance.
Washington Post described him best:
What Keaton brings to his characterization of both Batman and his millionaire-playboy alter ego, Bruce Wayne, is a quality of coiled concentration, a wary vigilance. In his Batsuit, Keaton's movements are stylized, almost robotic, and the stiffness of movement carries Arthurian associations, as if he were indeed a dark knight, armored for battle
But as evocative as he is in his Bat regalia, it's as Bruce Wayne that Keaton announces his own arrival. This is a true star performance, subtle, authoritative and sexually vibrant.there's genuine pain in the performance, signs of a wounded man trying to shake free of childhood traumas.
There are different ways to be intimidating. You can be intimidated by a big and angry bodybuilder who says that hell mess you up. You can also be intimidated by a lone child in the middle of the night standing still in front of your house staring. Keaton is that creepy child while Bale is that bodybuilder.
Keaton's Batman is a mysterious figure of the shadows, a Phantom of the Opera kind of a character who stays quiet and paralyzes with his psycho stare while remaining quoet and someone who is completely psycho and unpredictable. Almost a Norman Bates type. Nolan is someone who looks like he can rip you to pieces and he shows it with his anger, temper and yell (see: Flass interrogation). Again, both intimidating in different ways, both awesome. I like both the steak and the cake.
Kilmer was a joke imo. He wasnt intimidating at all he was just moping around and looked like bored and depressed blonde pretty boy who is as intimidating as Justin Timberlake. The only thing Kilmer did throughout entire movie was moping around. For me a Batman that is turned into reserved psycho because of the traumatic event (Keaton) and an angry Batman that is set for revenge on crime (Bale) is far more interesting than the DepressionMan (Kilmer). Then again, Kilmer was cast as Batman cause he was a pretty boy. Funny that Keaton was picked because of his temper and stare and Bale was picked for his intensity, while Kilmer was picked cause he was "Young" and "handsome". And he looks startled all the time when in the suit
Clooney is imo the worst casting choice in the history of motion picture. He looked idiotic in the suit, like some baseball dad with his son dressed for halloween and played a doctor next door in a Batman suit, not Batman and not Wayne
Also, I see Fudgie does absolutely nothing in this section other than trolling Burton's movies and board domination, aka bludgeoning people with his opinion. He is always here to rain on the parade and doesnt have anything to say other than hardcore Burton bashing. Just check his post history, every single post in this section is a bash. The member truth
did the same with Nolan movies, and look what happened to him. I dont think Fudgie was ever told to back off tho. I feel some double standard here