MaskedManJRK said:
The only thing that I don't think they got right was when comparing Begins to '89, they said that Bale's was more noir--bulls**t. They define a noir character as someone with a morally ambiguious personality--Keaton's interpetation was definately that, we're not completely sure if he truely is good or if he's just fighting people to ease his pain.
From what was said, I think they concluded Keaton's Batman being less of a film-noir character when compared to Bale's is because -
"film noir is about getting under the surface of a character, understanding the split-conciousness, the guilt, the driving passions of really marginal obsessed individuals...individuals who, by definition, live on the margins of society"
"Christian Bale's Batman is truly a dark knight, a noir protagonist driven by guilt, by fear, by uncertainty, by a past that continues to haunt him and that he can't let go of..."
On this basis alone, Bale's interpretation of the character is infinitely more noirish than Keaton's because Burton rarely puts Batman under the microscope - there is no explaination as to
why exactly did he choose the symbol of the bat, what relationship does the symbol of fear have with the character of Bruce Wayne and why exactly is he undertaking this crusade against the criminal element?
Is it anger? Is it guilt? Or is it revenge?
Sure, Keaton's Batman was morally ambigous but like it was mentioned in the podcast, it's also about "geting under the surface of the character" which B89 barely (if not never) did.
I also recall one other comment from that piece where it was said that film noir protagonists are never mysterious or ambigous by the end of the film - yet another point that B89 conflicts with by still leaving a number of unanswered questions about the protagonist (like the ones I mentioned above).
very good catch. Gordan needs one too.
