Ben Affleck or Michael Keaton?

[Tacit Ronin]

Because why not. There is a Bale/Ben comparison thread. There should be one of Keaton and Ben as well.

 

[The Joker]

Ben Affleck. Better acting, better Bruce Wayne, and at least he didn't smile when he killed someone.

 

[Matt]

Keaton. But that may just reflect my age.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Ben no contest. I don't even want to elaborate. The only reason why anyone would prefer Keaton - deep attachment to childhood memories.

 

[Baneis8feettall]

Ben Affleck. I love Michael Keaton as an actor and first batman movie is one of my favorites (2nd is pretty cool too) but he shouldn't be Batman. Obvious love choice by Tim Burton. It was made later Johnny Depp probably would be the Batman. lol.

Still good acting despite his physical limitations and a movie don't give a damn about comics Batman much.

 

[Golgo-13]

Ben.

Keaton was a great Bruce Wayne..and an okay Batman. Ben is both a great Bruce AND Batman.

 

[Matt]

Ben no contest. I don't even want to elaborate. The only reason why anyone would prefer Keaton - deep attachment to childhood memories.

Everyone's first is their best.

 

[The Joker]

Everyone's first is their best.

I don't know. Keaton was my first and he's actually one of my least favorites.

 

[Rowsdower!]

Ben Affleck. Better acting, better Bruce Wayne, and at least he didn't smile when he killed someone.

No, he smiled, you just couldn't see it through the all the dark blue filters Zack uses in every shot.t:

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Hey man, those filters are philosophical and deep.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I don't know. Keaton was my first and he's actually one of my least favorites.

Same. I actually prefer Kilmer to Keaton. He just had the misfortune of not having as good a film around him. I definitely prefer West to Keaton. West is my second favorite after Bale.

 

[KalMart]

Keaton I thought was an interesting Bruce Wayne, while unfortunately a rather laughable Batman. If it makes any sense...I thought as Bruce Wayne, Keaton represented more complexity by saying less than either Bale or Affleck did by saying much more.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Why was he a laughable Batman?

 

[JackWhite]

Ben Affleck. Better acting, better Bruce Wayne, and at least he didn't smile when he killed someone.

lol, this.

 

[KalMart]

Why was he a laughable Batman?

Just looked/felt wrong in the role to me...and this was from when I first saw it in '89. I don't blame him completely, the costume was goofy and also made him move weird. It just looked silly to me at the time. But he's an intriguing actor who at the time was making an impact with non-comedy roles, so I found his presence interesting as Wayne.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

Couldn't answer Affleck v Bale, having a hard time answering this one. I honestly don't know anymore. lol.

I think I came to the conclusion a while back that Bale was more interesting and an overall better actor than Keaton.

And I think I need to see the film again, but it's very possible Affleck is better than both of them.

idk. I'll get back to you.

 

[DACrowe]

This one is closer, but I give it to Keaton. It might be nostalgia, but I still felt like Keaton's Batman was a hero, even if a damaged one. Affleck's Batman is no less murderous, but he seems much more like a bully and an Ayn Rand-loving *****ebag when he is beating on Superman. He also seems easily manipulated by Lex Luthor while Keaton's Batman saw right through the villains overtime, save for when he got hot and bothered for Catwoman.

But it probably just boils down to Keaton being a better actor and being in better movies (even Bale cannot match the intensity in the eyes Keaton brought, and he easily has the best voice of the three). I can see why some would go for Affleck due to better fighting techniques and a better looking suit (at least while it's moving), not to mention looking more the part while Keaton was cast against type. But Keaton for me.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Keaton definitely did seem smart, I'll give him that one. He sniffed out that Penguin was up to something pretty much immediately, just by watching him on television.

 

[DCW]

Affleck was great but Keaton's still my favorite.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

I carry a torch for Keaton's Batman. Always have. Nobody had taken the crown in almost 30 years. I also like Kilmer, Clooney and West in the role, but Keaton was king. It's not to say that Ben has run away with it, because he hasn't. Yet.

Frankly, as I have read a very large cross-section of the comics from many eras, I've come to see that while Batman ostensibly has a no-kill code, he has flagrantly flown in the face of that. I'm not talking about the Golden Age Batman, either. This brilliantly-researched thread from Batman Online's forum showcases quite a lot (beyond the Golden Age and alternate universes): http://www.batman-online.com/forum/index.php?topic=1406.0. I suggest everyone interested in the "Batman kills" hoopla going on right now read that thread. It will be surprising to very many.

So the thing is--a Batman who kills does not bother me, but it doesn't mean a non-killing Batman is in any way lame or lesser. My only issue is a take that pushes the no-kill code so heavily--and then breaks it repeatedly. This is why Bale's take is the lowest for me.

Keaton and Affleck, at least, aren't preaching on about how they don't kill and then do it anyway. If they killed everyone they fight? Then it would indeed be "The Punisher." But occasional killing doesn't irk me. So this is why the two are tied, for me.

Keaton's got elements that I enjoy more than Affleck. Better Batcave(s), better Batmobile, longer ears, yellow oval and capsule belt. Score points for Keats. I also prefer a non-modulated voice. I adore Keaton's characterization of Bruce Wayne, for its unvarnished darkness and psychology. It's not the characterization of Wayne from the comics but it's excellent in its own right.

But in spite of the fact that Keaton gives one of the best performances in all of comic book cinema, he was still miscast. It doesn't bother me, it doesn't hurt his performance, but, objectively, he's not the right choice. Ben Affleck is. Why Affleck works for me when Bale didn't in this regard is because the characterization of Batman under Affleck is very reminiscent of Keaton's portrayal. The darkness, the intensity, the moodiness and the stoicism. The iconoclastic hardness. That doesn't erase the character's empathy, however. When it comes to criminals, they're brutal. But only criminals.

Ben has the superior costume (though I'd die for blue and gray), physique and look. He's got the moves. Keaton was no slouch for the time and what he had to work with, but with the BvS warehouse fight? It ain't even a contest. Ben also has the advantage of being more entrenched in the comic lore. He's been Batman (Keaton's was just starting). He's had--and lost--a Robin. Keaton may have the superior looking Joker, but I can tell Leto will be no slouch, himself.

So in a contest between Batmen--Keaton or Affleck? Let's just say that for me, right now, it's tied. Had Affleck been in a solo film for this question, I think it would undoubtedly go his way. But in his first showing, he's already on-par with the king for me, and that's very impressive when I'm a true-blue from-1989 Batfan. West was my first Batman, but Keaton made me fall in love with the character, and I will never love his portrayal any less. But somebody else can take the crown without defaming the previous ruler.

I think that when we finally get the chance to see Ben's Batman fully immersed in the full Batman mythos, he will reign supreme for me. But for now, he's in good company.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

but he seems much more like a bully and an Ayn Rand-loving *****ebag

He actually has a copy of Atlas Shrugged in his study. Not to mention he quotes Dick Cheney.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

They move all these threads from BvS forum.

Only times I vote for Ben Affleck is against Michael Keaton and George Clooney. Keaton was boring weird Bruce Wayne and his Batman just killer thug. Keaton also miscast. Affleck not miscast and was good Bruce Wayne so he win by that default.

 

[schereZada]

Keaton and Affleck are my two favorite ones. But Keaton wins by an inch.

I thought as Bruce Wayne, Keaton represented more complexity by saying less than either Bale or Affleck did by saying much more.

I feel the same about his Batman actually. Standing, motionless... more Batman than so much yelling and so many speeches from other Batmen.

 

[DACrowe]

He actually has a copy of Atlas Shrugged in his study. Not to mention he quotes Dick Cheney.

I missed the book but caught the Cheney quote. As I said, a bully and a *****ebag. And that is being charitable.

 

[DACrowe]

Keaton definitely did seem smart, I'll give him that one. He sniffed out that Penguin was up to something pretty much immediately, just by watching him on television.

Don't forget Max Shreck. He figured him out without breaking a sweat either. And when compared to how campy and cartoonish Eisenberg's Lex Luthor is, and how easily he manipulated his Batman, the Batfleck would probably be convinced to murder Commissioner Gordon and the mayor with his own hands by Shreck. Unless either of them had a mother named Martha.