Originally Posted by Kahran Ramsus
Apples and oranges. Keaton got complaints because he was a comedic actor and fans were concerned that they were taking the Adam West approach.
It is specifically Affleck's acting ability that is being criticized here. Keaton was already a great actor pre-Batman. Affleck has never had a performance as good as Keaton in Beetlejuice. Plus Burton is a far better director than Snyder.
You are right that there is a difference, but at its root the situation is the same, closer than you may think, actually.
Keaton may have been a great actor, but it was in films that nobody saw, that were also huge flops. Mr. Mom
was a surprise hit (but not a box office smash), but it didn't make people think of him as a great actor (comedies usually are looked upon as less 'worthy' performances in the grand pantheon of acting). Even people that didn't assume the tone would be campy in BATMAN
still doubted Keaton could pull it off. So there was the worry over the tone, and then Keaton's skill was almost a separate complaint.
Like Affleck, his career was in the toilet and just starting to get back out when Beetlejuice
hit and was liked. Clean and Sober
proved he could do it in terms of his acting quality (he can do drama?!?) but the masses didn't see it. Ben's in a similar situation: he's given excellent performances in films since what people cling to (Daredevil
), but the masses didn't see them, so they're thinking with their heads ten years in the past (with Keaton, everyone's minds were stuck on Mr. Mom
, five years past).
Truth be told, Affleck has actually had more success on his upswing before Batman than Keaton did before Batman. The nature of the complaint is a little
bit different, but at its heart, the reaction is exactly the same.