Discussion in 'Batman World' started by Thread Manager, Jul 23, 2011.
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]194478[/split]
Too many threads have devolved into the discussion and arguments over the two. Here is a forum where we can intelligently discuss the two, with out flaming or name calling. And please, keep it intelligent...
Keaton had a couple of moments that showed he didn't want to be Batman either, it's just Bale's is more fleshed out and explored.
I'm not sure about fleshed out. Keaton looked pretty convincing when explaining to both Vicky and Selina his situation. Now Nolan is an expert explaining in full detail Batman's motivations, even when that could mnean to get a little repetitive.
But that's just it, it was a couple of scenes with Keaton where he basically just says he tried to avoid being Batman but he can't. That's it.
Whereas Bale's Batman actually had a plot line made about it that seems to run over the three movies. In Batman Begins he saw his mission as being finite. In TDK he thought he saw the opportunity to retire the mantle when a better hero in Dent presented itself. By the end of TDK he had accepted he would always be Batman.
If the teaser for TDKR is any indicator, he again faces some kind of crisis in his mission as Batman when Gordon said Batman was gone and needs to come back and Bruce replied "What if he doesn't exist anymore?". Maybe Bane breaks him or exposes his identity. Who knows? But the teaser makes it clear something along those lines happens.
You cannot equate all of this to Keaton's two scenes. Bale's Batman's dilemmas in handling a life as Batman is unquestionably more fleshed out without being repetitive. Begins was all about his fears. But there was no fears addressed in TDK because all that was dealt with already. I expect TDKR to tackle it from a different angle, too.
I was just saying both versions had that aspect of the character, not just Bale's as someone was implying.
I agree. I said the same thing to that person. I think he just misinterpreted Keaton as having none because Bale's is more fleshed out by comparison.
It almost impossible to compare the two for me...
Bale was given more attention script wise and had many more opportunities for genuine 'acting' moments. Or shall we say periods of reflection.
Keaton had Burton's visual flair guiding him... allowing him to look an intimidating and forceful figure on the screen. Also I think keeping his dialogue to a minimum allows him to have an overall greater presence.
It visual storytelling/ presence vs. sheer exposition for me.
I felt Keaton's pain. I thought he was scary as Batman. I get neither of those from Bale. Just my feeling.
I love both equally, two completly different amazing interpretations of the character.
...had Burton and Keaton done an origin story, you'd have a point. Neither Batman '89 nor Batman Returns were origin stories. Batman Begins was nothing BUT an origin story.
Bale was better in Begins, on par with Keaton, but he was just a joke in the Dark Knight. The voice was way overdone and ruined a lot of scenes.
I fail to see how I don't have a point. Nothing that I said there was untrue.
Neither was Spider-Man 2 an origin story, but it still addressed a lot of Peter's personal demons about being Spider-Man. Even re-visited his guilt over Uncle Ben's death again.
It doesn't have to be an origin story to explore the hero. Burton just made the conscious choice not to.
I'd agree with that. The voice is one of my biggest gripes about the Nolan Batman movies. Bale tends to overdo it quite often.
I'd have to disagree, I believe Warner Bros overdid his voice digitally in post in TDK that wasn't all Bale. He sounded pretty good in BB.
The main problem with Bale's voice is that it's all over the place. It lacks consistency. Although to give him credit, he is having to:
1. Speak with an American accent.
2. Disguise his identity.
3. Sound intimidating.
4. Hide his lisp/speech impediment.
It ain't easy.
Yeah the voice was very annoying, especially towards the end of the movie during the final encounter and when Dent threatened to kill Gordon's son. It's hard to enjoy something when all you can hear is a nail scratching against a chalkboard. The voice was perfect in Batman Begins I have no idea why they decided to make Batman sound like some evil blue monster from some Looney Tunes cartoon. When you have thousands of kiddies on YouTube making fun of Batman for the voice then you know it's a problem.
Over 16 MILLION views...
that's exactly what I was referring to.
I didnt need to see him fighting with being Batman in the Burton movies because his Bruce is a damaged person. He doesnt know how to be a normal person. He wants a normal life but the darkness within him compels him to fight crime. I would not doubt that he relives that night his parents died everytime he closes his eyes.
Nolan basically went back and did the origin story and gave us the year one. Burton's had already been Batman for a good while, and people mostly viewed him as some kind of urban legend, and possibly not even human.
In Batman '89, the Joker's goons were very surprised to find out in the alley that Batman was "human after all". They shot him at point blank range and discovered that he was wearing body armor.
They saw him as a creature...not just a man in a mask. (Which I really liked.)
Actually he seemed to be relatively new to Gotham. Knox claimed there had been 8 sightings in just under a month. So he had not been Batman for a good while at all.
Bale's a better Wayne. Keaton's a better Batman. I say tie.