Ben Affleck's Batman vs. Christian Bale's

[SiegePerilous]

Is the Batman voice really that annoying honestly? It was perfectly fine in Batman Begins and while it may have gotten a bit too growly at points in the next two movies, It never became unbearable. I dont think that should be the deciding factor when weighed against something like "lack of character" for Keaton. Bruce Wayne is the most important part of the character so how well that part is played really should be the deciding factor in the overall portayal.

Ive grown a lot more critical of the DCAU in recent years (even early TAS) but I do agree on it being Kevin Conroys best work as the character.

Obviously it's subjective. I think it's pretty unbearable/silly, and Nolan's whole aesthetic for the Bat-verse leaves me cold in general. They are very well done movies overall, but not my thing. Burton's are more in line with what I like, especially in terms of visuals and atmosphere, but they are far from perfect as well.

Reeves and Pattinson may top all of the previous ones for me personally, based on what we've seen so far. I've become more critical of the DCAU as well, but mostly as it pertains to other characters (especially Superman and Wonder Woman), and less so Batman. Early BTAS had some dud episodes, but I think even the bad episodes nailed the atmosphere and basic characterizations. And MOTP is still the best Bat-movie to make it to theaters without needing to change him too much.

 

[Frodo]

My only problem with the Timmverse Bruce/Babs thing is that she was into Dick Grayson at first. In general, Timm only took something that was flirted with in the Adam West show and actually made it a thing.

I just think that Dick and Babs as a couple works better in general.

They were both young people basically around the same age in BTAS, both college age, with a similar outlook on life.

In BTAS, Bruce was supposed to be a mentor /father like figure.

Then again, Timm had Harley and Nightwing hook up so , he has a "different", to be polite , vision of these dynamics.

 

[SiegePerilous]

Honestly, Timm strikes me as a creator who works better with some restrictions placed on him and/or heavy collaboration with others.

That's probably why BTAS was better in many ways than TNBA, and Bruce/Babs is precisely the kind of thing that should be vetoed.

 

[Awest66]

Obviously it's subjective. I think it's pretty unbearable/silly, and Nolan's whole aesthetic for the Bat-verse leaves me cold in general. They are very well done movies overall, but not my thing. Burton's are more in line with what I like, especially in terms of visuals and atmosphere, but they are far from perfect as well.

Reeves and Pattinson may top all of the previous ones for me personally, based on what we've seen so far. I've become more critical of the DCAU as well, but mostly as it pertains to other characters (especially Superman and Wonder Woman), and less so Batman. Early BTAS had some dud episodes, but I think even the bad episodes nailed the atmosphere and basic characterizations. And MOTP is still the best Bat-movie to make it to theaters without needing to change him too much.

Visuals and atmosphere dont really count for much with me if theres no strong characters or story to invest in and thats always where Burton struggled. I actually think Nolan captured the general feeling of the comics much better than he did. Batman Begins speaks for itself of course and The Dark Knight feels like a story ripped straight from the Chuck Dixon/Ed Brubaker run.

From the look of the trailer, Reeves/Pattinson are going for a grounded, street level vibe so I hope that isnt what left you cold about the Nolan films.

 

[Frodo]

Visuals and atmosphere dont really count for much with me if theres no strong characters or story to invest in and thats always where Burton struggled. I actually think Nolan captured the general feeling of the comics much better than he did. Batman Begins speaks for itself of course and The Dark Knight feels like a story ripped straight from the Chuck Dixon/Ed Brubaker run.

.

I think I would disagree with you on Burton in terms of characters. If anything , his characterization was probably his strongest suit in addition to atmosphere imo.

It's his characterization of Batman, Joker, Penguin, Catwoman, that's Burton's gotten most of his praise for. If anything, Burton cared more about the characters than he did the story.

Now , of course, Nolan has gone much deeper than Burton did back in the 80s and 90s and Nolan does feel like it was ripped from the page.

Burton's Batman wasn't as accurate to the comics as alot of comic fans then and today would prefer, but then again, you have to really appreciate the context of adapting a serious Batman film to a 1980s mainstream audience in 1987-1988 as opposed to looking at it in a context of Cinematic universes and full fidelity to the comics that we have in 2020.

It was a different time in which these properties were viewed by the mainstream in a much different light than they are today. It' s hard thing to truly appreciate if you weren't alive or old enough to be aware in the 80s and 90s.

The goal wasn't to do a by the book, faithful adaptation of the Batman myths. It was to get the audience to take this character seriously and to attempt to reflect the tone of stories like the recent Dark Knight Returns, Year One, and The Killing Joke. Not adapt, but to reflect the darker tone.

What Burton did , is introduce the idea of Batman as a Dark and Brooding hero to a general audience of the 1980s which still saw him as campy and goofy.

Yes, the comics had gotten their years before the 89 film, but that knowledge of a dark Batman was overwhelmingly limited to the comic fan community and to the comic creators. It wasn't something taken for granted by the general audience as it is today.

Burton's version, for all its flaws and shortcomings, created the archetype for presenting the character in live action and created the expectation, that a live action Batman film would automatically be serious and be taken seriously. That didn't exist before that time.

Burton's contribution to the cinematic Batman is that he changed how public viewed Batman. You have a couple of generations of fans who only know Batman as The Dark Knight . Batman 89 and Keaton's version played a massive part in shaping that perception today.

So while those early films are flawed , they did lay the important ground of getting audiences to change their way of thinking about Batman as a character.

 

[SiegePerilous]

Visuals and atmosphere dont really count for much with me if theres no strong characters or story to invest in and thats always where Burton struggled. I actually think Nolan captured the general feeling of the comics much better than he did. Batman Begins speaks for itself of course and The Dark Knight feels like a story ripped straight from the Chuck Dixon/Ed Brubaker run.

From the look of the trailer, Reeves/Pattinson are going for a grounded, street level vibe so I hope that isnt what left you cold about the Nolan films.

I'd agree with no strong characterizations being the most important thing. Nolan's films are better in some ways than Burton's on that front, but they don't really speak to me either. So I'm not really too attached to any of the characters in either film series beyond Burton's Selina, but Burton at least has cool visuals to fall back on. As for Nolan capturing the feel of the comics, that all depends on which era of the comics we're talking about. He does skew closer to the Dixon types but...I find Chuck Dixon to be one of the most overrated and boring Bat-writers . If we're going for something of that style, I vastly prefer Greg Rucka. Otherwise, my Batman jam is usually pre-Crisis runs like Englehart/Rogers and the only post-Crisis run I really love (for Batman himself at least) is Grant Morrison's and some stuff by Paul Dini.

They are going for it at least for this movie. I'm kind of not thrilled by getting more stuff like this, but if we have to, this at least looks very good for what it is. Whether it will remain that way or evolve into something more fantastical as it goes along remains to be seen. I hope it does, in a natural way. It kind of sucks we finally got a Batman with a comic accurate costume (Affleck), and he's trapped in a bad movie where he kills more people on screen than ever lol. Like I don't think a comic accurate Batman who isn't excessively violent (and doesn't kill people) should be this hard at this point, but they can never manage it outside of Adam West of all things.

 

[Awest66]

I'd agree with no strong characterizations being the most important thing. Nolan's films are better in some ways than Burton's on that front, but they don't really speak to me either. So I'm not really too attached to any of the characters in either film series beyond Burton's Selina, but Burton at least has cool visuals to fall back on. As for Nolan capturing the feel of the comics, that all depends on which era of the comics we're talking about. He does skew closer to the Dixon types but...I find Chuck Dixon to be one of the most overrated and boring Bat-writers . If we're going for something of that style, I vastly prefer Greg Rucka. Otherwise, my Batman jam is usually pre-Crisis runs like Englehart/Rogers and the only post-Crisis run I really love (for Batman himself at least) is Grant Morrison's and some stuff by Paul Dini.

They are going for it at least for this movie. I'm kind of not thrilled by getting more stuff like this, but if we have to, this at least looks very good for what it is. Whether it will remain that way or evolve into something more fantastical as it goes along remains to be seen. I hope it does, in a natural way. It kind of sucks we finally got a Batman with a comic accurate costume (Affleck), and he's trapped in a bad movie where he kills more people on screen than ever lol. Like I don't think a comic accurate Batman who isn't excessively violent (and doesn't kill people) should be this hard at this point, but they can never manage it outside of Adam West of all things.

Im really sorry to hear you say that. To me, Batman Begins in particular is as perfect a live-action Batman movie as you can get without trying to copy/paste TAS into live-action. It was the first live-action movie to give Bruce Wayne actual focus and character development and give Commissioner Gordon a personality and relevant role in the story (not even Mask of the Phantasm checked all those boxes). Im also sorry to hear you feel that way about Dixon because I think hes one of the best writers to ever tackle the character of Batman (I honestly dont think anyone writes a better Riddler than him and his work with the bat family was amazing too) Im of the opposite opinion on Grant Morrison though but thats mostly cause Im not a fan of Damian.

I wouldnt call Bales Batman "excessively violent" and in terms of fidelity, He was super-faithful to the 70s era Denny O"Neil version of the character. So honestly, I think they have managed it (voice aside) I find that when people complain about the movies not being faithful to the comics, they"re really talking about them not being faithful to TAS instead.

 

[SiegePerilous]

Im really sorry to hear you say that. To me, Batman Begins in particular is as perfect a live-action Batman movie as you can get without trying to copy/paste TAS into live-action. It was the first live-action movie to give Bruce Wayne actual focus and character development and give Commissioner Gordon a personality and relevant role in the story (not even Mask of the Phantasm checked all those boxes). Im also sorry to hear you feel that way about Dixon because I think hes one of the best writers to ever tackle the character of Batman (I honestly dont think anyone writes a better Riddler than him and his work with the bat family was amazing too) Im of the opposite opinion on Grant Morrison though but thats mostly cause Im not a fan of Damian.

I wouldnt call Bales Batman "excessively violent" and in terms of fidelity, He was super-faithful to the 70s era Denny O"Neil version of the character. So honestly, I think they have managed it (voice aside) I find that when people complain about the movies not being faithful to the comics, they"re really talking about them not being faithful to TAS instead.

You don't have to be sorry about it. Not all tastes are going to line up. Dixon is reliably solid and does some good work with some other characters, but his take on Bruce never did much for me. Nightwing: Year One in particular was awful in that regard. And while he's good with the likes of Dick and Barbara, I think they are just as well done/better elsewhere (by Wolfman, Seeley, Morrsion or Simone). Batman Begins using Gordon more is a great plus for it, but I don't think not checking the box is an automatic detriment for MOTP. Basically, Gordon isn't any more or less a requirement for a Batman film to work than Alfred or Robin or any other supporting character.

Damian doesn't work for everyone. I really only like him in that run, but even then it's not really just about him. Bruce and Dick were at their best in recent years in that run, because Morrison actually made Bruce fun and likeable again instead of a tedious (and at times abusive) stick in the mud that he's been in comics in recent years.

I didn't mean that Nolan's Batman was excessively violent, it's a complaint about the modern character in general. Comics Batman and Arkham Verse Batman are violent and even utilize torture to extract info from suspects, all while maintaining the "no kill" rule, which is pretty ridiculous when combined with that. Both Burton and Snyder's Batmen gunned people down. Pattinson lays a savage beating on one of those clown guys, but we'll see if he learns to restrain himself more.

I think they mean both the comics and BTAS. After all, there is no John Blake in the comics and Selina actually goes by "Catwoman" in all forms of media before that movie.

 

[The Batman]

Dixon isn't a definitive Bruce Wayne writer to me.

If we're talking about Tim, Dick, and Babs, that's a whole other story, but Bruce himself? He's definitely a tier below the likes of Finger, O'Neil, Morrison, and Non Arkham Games Dini.

 

[Awest66]

You don't have to be sorry about it. Not all tastes are going to line up. Dixon is reliably solid and does some good work with some other characters, but his take on Bruce never did much for me. Nightwing: Year One in particular was awful in that regard. And while he's good with the likes of Dick and Barbara, I think they are just as well done/better elsewhere (by Wolfman, Seeley, Morrsion or Simone). Batman Begins using Gordon more is a great plus for it, but I don't think not checking the box is an automatic detriment for MOTP. Basically, Gordon isn't any more or less a requirement for a Batman film to work than Alfred or Robin or any other supporting character.

Damian doesn't work for everyone. I really only like him in that run, but even then it's not really just about him. Bruce and Dick were at their best in recent years in that run, because Morrison actually made Bruce fun and likeable again instead of a tedious (and at times abusive) stick in the mud that he's been in comics in recent years.

I didn't mean that Nolan's Batman was excessively violent, it's a complaint about the modern character in general. Comics Batman and Arkham Verse Batman are violent and even utilize torture to extract info from suspects, all while maintaining the "no kill" rule, which is pretty ridiculous when combined with that. Both Burton and Snyder's Batmen gunned people down. Pattinson lays a savage beating on one of those clown guys, but we'll see if he learns to restrain himself more.

I think they mean both the comics and BTAS. After all, there is no John Blake in the comics and Selina actually goes by "Catwoman" in all forms of media before that movie.

When it comes to Morrison, I'm actually kind of mixed overall on him. His Batman and Robin run is excellent (and also the best use of Damian period) but I'm lukewarm on his stuff with the Black Glove and I'm not a big fan of the Return of Bruce Wayne either. I'm more into runs that make extensive use of the Rogues Gallery beyond the Joker. I understand that his run appeals to fans who prefer a more fantastical Batman but I prefer a more street-level take on the character with a some out-there stuff thrown in here and there. To be fair Dixon certainly wasn't perfect either, He did kind of usher in the "Batjerk" incarnation of the character in his later work and he wrote Two-Face as a bit too evil and a bit of a cheater but his his work pre-Nightwing Year One is some of my absolute favorite stuff done with the character. He also wrote what is bar none the best Riddler story ever written ("Questions Multiply the Mystery") On the whole, I find Dixon's work on the character and his world much more palatable and easy to digest than Morrison's which I find to be an acquired taste.

I'm not saying it was a detriment for MOTP, I was just making a comparison in Begins favor considering how much a reputation Phantasm's gotten for being "the perfect Batman movie" in recent years. Also Selina Kyle actually was referred to as the Cat in one of the newspapers that Bruce is looking through in the beginning of Rises which was her original comic book name.

 

[The Batman]

Morrison's run definitely had an extensive use of villains beyond Joker. Joker doesn't even have that major of a role in Morrison's run, and he doesn't even show up in the Batman Inc portion.

Morrison built up Dr. Hurt and Talia as major rogues, and gave us new rogues like Professor Pyg.

 

[Awest66]

Morrison's run definitely had an extensive use of villains beyond Joker. Joker doesn't even have that major of a role in Morrison's run, and he doesn't even show up in the Batman Inc portion.

Morrison built up Dr. Hurt and Talia as major rogues, and gave us new rogues like Professor Pyg.

Looking back on what I said, You're right. I'm not a big fan of Simon Hurt though.

 

[SiegePerilous]

When it comes to Morrison, I'm actually kind of mixed overall on him. His Batman and Robin run is excellent (and also the best use of Damian period) but I'm lukewarm on his stuff with the Black Glove and I'm not a big fan of the Return of Bruce Wayne either. I'm more into runs that make extensive use of the Rogues Gallery beyond the Joker. I understand that his run appeals to fans who prefer a more fantastical Batman but I prefer a more street-level take on the character with a some out-there stuff thrown in here and there. To be fair Dixon certainly wasn't perfect either, He did kind of usher in the "Batjerk" incarnation of the character in his later work and he wrote Two-Face as a bit too evil and a bit of a cheater but his his work pre-Nightwing Year One is some of my absolute favorite stuff done with the character. He also wrote what is bar none the best Riddler story ever written ("Questions Multiply the Mystery") On the whole, I find Dixon's work on the character and his world much more palatable and easy to digest than Morrison's which I find to be an acquired taste.

I'm not saying it was a detriment for MOTP, I was just making a comparison in Begins favor considering how much a reputation Phantasm's gotten for being "the perfect Batman movie" in recent years. Also Selina Kyle actually was referred to as the Cat in one of the newspapers that Bruce is looking through in the beginning of Rises which was her original comic book name.

But like you say, some just prefer the more fantastical aspects of Batman. Grounded realism for him, at least for me, is always a bit boring. I can get that anywhere, it's generally not what I'm looking for with superhero stories. And that's the approach Nolan mostly goes for. And he did a damn good job of it, nobody can deny the films were great for superhero films and were a success. But the more "real" you make Batman, the more ridiculous he comes off to me. In order for him to come across as a straight hero you want to root for, you really almost have to lean into the fantastical.

A blink and you'll miss it newspaper clipping isn't really all that satisfying though. She was the Cat for like three issues before being Catwoman for 80 years. I get full blown supervillain personas aren't really Nolan's aesthetic, but...let's just get over ourselves and let the costumed characters have their personas (still liked Hathaway and the characterization thoigh).

 

[Awest66]

But like you say, some just prefer the more fantastical aspects of Batman. Grounded realism for him, at least for me, is always a bit boring. I can get that anywhere, it's generally not what I'm looking for with superhero stories. And that's the approach Nolan mostly goes for. And he did a damn good job of it, nobody can deny the films were great for superhero films and were a success. But the more "real" you make Batman, the more ridiculous he comes off to me. In order for him to come across as a straight hero you want to root for, you really almost have to lean into the fantastical.

A blink and you'll miss it newspaper clipping isn't really all that satisfying though. She was the Cat for like three issues before being Catwoman for 80 years. I get full blown supervillain personas aren't really Nolan's aesthetic, but...let's just get over ourselves and let the costumed characters have their personas (still liked Hathaway and the characterization thoigh).

Ive actually never viewed the Nolan films as "realistic" honestly. Grounded definitely but thats not always the same. Their loaded with technology you"d never find in the real world (Sonar machine, microwave emitter, Tumbler) and they had a ninja organization be responsible for things like the fall of Rome and the great london fire. The villain plot of Begins is actually pretty much ripped straight from an episode of the Animated Series wholesale. I feel its the fans who tend to take the whole "realism" aspect too far when it comes to those movies.

I"ve nothing against some fantasy here and there from time to time in my Batman stuff but Id also argue it gets too far away from who the character is if you indulge too much in it. Batman is a crime fighter, his mission statement is fighting crime, not monsters or relatives of his from ancient times that were made immortal by apokiliptan technology. Those are things are fun every once in a while but I prefer a more sobee take on him. Grounded doesnt have to mean realistic, He can still fight the likes of Man-Bat and Clayface on a regular basis but his roots are in fighting street crime which in itself is a gritty affair.

 

[Neil McCauley]

Why is this still being debated?

 

[Flash525]

Affleck. Bale didn't really inspire. Affleck I thought was badass.

Thing is though, they were both cast for the same character to portray said character under different directors, different conditions, and within different themes. I prefer a more badass Batman, which I feel we got to see more of with Affleck.

 

[CocoReturns]

Bale had the advantage of a whole trilogy, one of the most iconic films ever made, and is generally known as a "chameleon actor." He was a magnificent Bruce Wayne, but his Batman was just..too human.

Affleck feels like what happens when a drifter has a bad day. You can practically feel the weight on his shoulders. He isn't rage-filled, but oddly composed, like someone who has spent years of emotional training to get there.

Now is the part where I get controversial: I believe Affleck played the part better, but there were much better comic influences on Nolan's Batman. Even when he didn't succeed in his "no kill rule" he at least TRIED, relying on gadgets as a substitute for lethal force.

Thus in terms of characterization, plotting, and morally-driven action scenes, Bale wins.

Batfleck only wins if one is going for a Batman who just mops the floor with the blood of his enemies.

It's weird, because creepy comic-bookish Batmen in live action (Keaton/Affleck) tend to kill. Whereas "real world" Batmen (Pattenson/Bale) have an aversion to killing that is more in line with comic books.

 

[Monte Cristo]

Affleck has the better suit, voice and fighting style. But Bale has the better characterisation, supporting cast and films. That leans more heavily towards Bale for me. He completed a real trilogy and it resonated with the populace in a bigger way.

 

[Boom]

Bale had the better character and performances. Affleck had the better suit and Bruce Wayne "look."

Bale wins.