Greatest portrayal of Batman?

[Rodrigo90]

Alright, but leaving a man to die is not killing him.

That's true.

But it was still cruel. As much of an ******* Ra's was, I like the sentiments Batman told Joker in Arkham City -
"Even after everything you've done, I would have saved you."

That's the true Batman in my eyes.

 

[Cain]

Ended up going with Keaton even though I'm on the same boat as The Batman in that I feel West, Keaton and Bale all brought their own special something to the role. I'd even argue that Kilmer did as well.

However the one thing Keaton did have over those other guys in abundance IMO and what made me side with him in terms of "greatest portrayal" was that presence. Whenever he was on screen I really did feel I was looking at Batman in the flesh based on his mannerisms and appearance alone.

Never really felt that about anybody else save for West but not on the level of Keaton because lighting Keaton like a monster was ingenious in that it evoked the same message as some of my most favorite "Batman in the shadows" and "Batman guarding the city" type of comic panels. Especially from the Breyfogle and early Bob Kane era.

 

[DeadPresident]

That's true.

But it was still cruel. As much of an ******* Ra's was, I like the sentiments Batman told Joker in Arkham City -
"Even after everything you've done, I would have saved you."

That's the true Batman in my eyes.

Dude this is so contradictory...you spent like two pages defending why Batman killed in the Burton movies and then say a Batman that would save a repeat murderer is the "true Batman"?

By that logic you shouldn't even rank Keaton's performance as it wasn't even Batman, it was the Punisher or the Shadow.

 

[Cain]

Or The Batman from the first year of his appearances in Detective Comics who was clearly influenced by pulp characters like The Spider and The Phantom.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Dude this is so contradictory...you spent like two pages defending why Batman killed in the Burton movies and then say a Batman that would save a repeat murderer is the "true Batman"?

By that logic you shouldn't even rank Keaton's performance as it wasn't even Batman, it was the Punisher or the Shadow.

I liked the evolution of the character. He went from being a tortured killer, to attempting to change at the end of BR, when he tried telling Selina to not kill Shreck. Then he further worked on those issues in BF, until he finally come to be at peace in B&R.

And I don't class Keaton, Kilmer or Clooney as the true Batman. Keaton is my favourite, but I recognise that he's not the perfect portrayal.

And yes, I have less issues with Keaton's Batman being a mentally unstable Punisher like killer (which he wasn't deep down when he demonstrated his desire to take Shreck to the police), than I do with Bale's Batman leaving Ra's to die.

But at the end of the day, neither of them, for those reasons, can make me proclaim them as the true Batman.

It's the compassionate Batman from AC that I really much prefer. He's the true hero.

 

[spider-neil]

Alright, but leaving a man to die is not killing him.

Yes it is. I was apoplectic with rage when Batman just flies out the back of the train without saving him. Pissing on the character of Batman. As if Batman would ever do that in a million years.

 

[Rodrigo90]

 

[Rodrigo90]

This is what Bale's Batman is guilty of
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depraved-heart_murder

It's considered second degree murder in some states. Just not Gotham's

 

[The Joker]

Dude this is so contradictory...you spent like two pages defending why Batman killed in the Burton movies and then say a Batman that would save a repeat murderer is the "true Batman"?

By that logic you shouldn't even rank Keaton's performance as it wasn't even Batman, it was the Punisher or the Shadow.

Exactly

Yes it is. I was apoplectic with rage when Batman just flies out the back of the train without saving him. Pissing on the character of Batman. As if Batman would ever do that in a million years.

http://whatculture.com/film/10-highly-questionable-actions-committed-by-batman.php/6

Now you can not overreact with your "apoplectic rage".

This is what Bale's Batman is guilty of
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depraved-heart_murder

It's considered second degree murder in some states. Just not Gotham's

No wonder this silly law is not universal in all states.

 

[Mee]

Bale for sure



Keaton had a nice voice for it but didn't look the part at all. Too short and scrawny. Adam West was great for what the show was trying to do. He and Clooney should almost be in a separate category of campy Batmans. Clooney I'll always believe could have been a great Batman given a real chance. Clooney in a Batman movie with a script/director like Bale got? Yes please. Val Kilmer was okay, nothing special but not bad.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Exactly



http://whatculture.com/film/10-highly-questionable-actions-committed-by-batman.php/6

Now you can not overreact with your "apoplectic rage".



No wonder this silly law is not universal in all states.

"Callous disregard for human life".
It's pretty dispicable though, no?

And while that action of Batman with KGBeast is in the same vain, it was later retconned and is now a moot point. It was a pretty cowardly act and poor writing, making Batman look a *****e

 

[shauner111]

Yes it is. I was apoplectic with rage when Batman just flies out the back of the train without saving him. Pissing on the character of Batman. As if Batman would ever do that in a million years.

Not saving a person is not killing them, if the friggin murderer put himself on the train with a suicidal mission to kill himself in the first place. I don't know how your brain works then. If Ras was forced on the train, or if he had a plan to escape it, then i would agree with you. But that's not what happened. Batman didn't kill anybody.

I dont understand the logic of people who say he killed him. How does that even enter your brain? If i hop on some speedy train cuz im amazing like that, and some nutcase got on it himself, took control of it and is making sure that it's a non-stop train headed toward some chemical plant . I get on to see if i can do something to stop it, but i can't. Im able to jump out but this nutjob is going to die crashing with this train....and so IM THE MURDERER?

It's the exact same thing. If you respond to that by saying "yes, you killed him". Then i have lost hope for humanity and the human brain.

 

[The Joker]

"Callous disregard for human life".
It's pretty dispicable though, no?

No. Because not saving them is not killing them or causing them to be killed. Deliberately murdering multiple people when he doesn't even need to ala Keaton Batman, that's despicable.

And while that action of Batman with KGBeast is in the same vain, it was later retconned and is now a moot point. It was a pretty cowardly act and poor writing, making Batman look a *****e

It was not retconned, KGBeast just survived it. And doesn't negate the fact that Batman actually left him to die either.

So you're wrong on this one, too. But here I'll give you another example:

Spoiler

 

[Rodrigo90]

No. Because it wasn't a callous disregard for human life. Not saving them is not killing them or causing them to be killed. Deliberately murdering multiple people when he doesn't even need to ala Keaton Batman, that's despicable.



It was not retconned, KGBeast just survived it. And doesn't negate the fact that Batman actually left him to die either.

So you're wrong on this one, too. But here I'll give you another example:

Well, I guess it's just a matter of opinion. I consider it pretty callous if somebody has an opportunity to save someone and just casually and cooly leaves them to be obliterated. That IS a lack of consideration for human life, because you're letting that life be extinguished, and having no second thoughts. That's bordering psychopathy, if not psychopathy. It's different if Batman TRIED to save Ra's but COULDN'T. In Begins, he simply WOULDN'T, and that in my opinion, is a callous disregard for human life.

So by those standards, Bale is no better than Keaton. Not worse, but certainly no better. They're both *****es, as is Batman from the comics, after seeing that

Each interpretation have a disregard for human life.

Keaton murdered.
Comic Batman shut in a man in a room to die.
Bale left a man to die.
Comic Batman could've saved a guy from being shot to death, but left him to die.

So what are we are trying to prove? That one is worse over the other?
Because all we done is come to a conclusion that comics Bats, Keaton and Bale are all *****es.

I disagree with those actions listed above, but it doesn't mean I like any interpretation of the character less. I just like, preferably, a Batman like the one in Arkham City, which writers will often do

 

[The Joker]

Well, I guess it's just a matter of opinion. I consider it pretty callous if somebody has an opportunity to save someone and just casually and cooly leaves them to be obliterated. That IS a lack of consideration for human life, because you're letting that life be extinguished, and having no second thoughts. That's bordering psychopathy, if not psychopathy. It's different if Batman TRIED to save Ra's but COULDN'T. In Begins, he simply WOULDN'T, and that in my opinion, is a callous disregard for human life.

If Batman regularly just left villains to die I would call that despicable and a lack of concern for human life. But this was a one off event, and not an alien concept to the character. He was not even the instrument of Ra's Al Ghul's predicament. He simply left Ra's to his own self made fate.

So by those standards, Bale is no better than Keaton. Not worse, but certainly no better. They're both *****es, as is Batman from the comics, after seeing that

Oh come on that's like saying someone who steals 10 bucks is as bad as someone who steals 10 grand lol. Keaton's Batman killed regularly and when he didn't even have to either. His only kill I would call justified was the Ray Charles looking goon in the church tower because he was whupping his ass and would have killed him eventually.

Each interpretation have a disregard for human life.

Keaton murdered.
Comic Batman shut in a man in a room to die.
Bale left a man to die.
Comic Batman could've saved a guy from being shot to death, but left him to die.

So what are we are trying to prove? That one is worse over the other?
Because all we done is come to a conclusion that comics Bats, Keaton and Bale are all *****es.

I'm trying to prove that Batman leaving someone to die like Bale did in Begins is not some unholy out of character moment. He's done it more than once in the comics. Here's another example;

He left Catman to drown. He left KGBeast to die etc, he's done this kind of thing in the comics. I understand completely why someone would dislike him doing that, but to say it pisses all over Batman, or it's out of character is just wrong.

That's my point. I don't expect anyone to like it.

 

[Rodrigo90]

If Batman regularly just left villains to die I would call that despicable and a lack of concern for human life. But this was a one off event, and not an alien concept to the character. He was not even the instrument of Ra's Al Ghul's predicament. He simply left Ra's to his own self made fate.

...He still could've saved him!

Oh come on that's like saying someone who steals 10 bucks is as bad as someone who steals 10 grand lol. Keaton's Batman killed regularly and when he didn't even have to either. His only kill I would call justified was the Ray Charles looking goon in the church tower because he was whupping his ass and would have killed him eventually.

Yeeeeeeah, but it still doesn't make it right does it?

I'm trying to prove that Batman leaving someone to die like Bale did in Begins is not some unholy out of character moment. He's done it more than once in the comics. Here's another example;

He left Catman to drown. He left KGBeast to die etc, he's done this kind of thing in the comics. I understand completely why someone would dislike him doing that, but to say it pisses all over Batman, or it's out of character is just wrong.

That's my point. I don't expect anyone to like it.

Then I concede to your point!
Batman has done some questionable stuff over the years, in many forms of medium, so I guess I shouldn't bash it. It's all down to the writer at hand.

I just prefer him a little more respectful for life, you know? Because it said somewhere, that it makes him no better than those he fights. Because they have no care for life. I expect MY Batman to be different like that and I got that in BTAS and Arkham City

 

[Boy Scout]

That's true.

But it was still cruel. As much of an ******* Ra's was, I like the sentiments Batman told Joker in Arkham City -
"Even after everything you've done, I would have saved you."

That's the true Batman in my eyes.

In situations where people such as The Joker or Ra's al Ghul are going to die (though not necessarily be murdered), I think it's perfectly acceptable for Batman to leave them to their fate, so long as he wasn't the cause. If Batman ever walked into a room and saw The Joker bleeding out on the floor after an aggressive confrontation with another super villain, I wouldn't think less of him for turning right around and walking out without making any effort to contact an ambulance.

 

[The Joker]

...He still could've saved him!

Yeah, but he didn't have to. If he had been responsible for Ra's predicament and left him to die I'd have a big problem with it.

Yeeeeeeah, but it still doesn't make it right does it?

The whole concept of Batman, taking the law into his own hands, is not right. There's just varying degrees of right and wrong with what Batman does.

Then I concede to your point!
Batman has done some questionable stuff over the years, in many forms of medium, so I guess I shouldn't bash it. It's all down to the writer at hand.

Bash it if you don't like it. Just don't accuse it of being untrue to the comics. That's all.

 

[shauner111]

In situations where people such as The Joker or Ra's al Ghul are going to die (though not necessarily be murdered), I think it's perfectly acceptable for Batman to leave them to their fate, so long as he wasn't the cause. If Batman ever walked into a room and saw The Joker bleeding out on the floor after an aggressive confrontation with another super villain, I wouldn't think less of him for turning right around and walking out without making any effort to contact an ambulance.

Absolutely. And to me that's not murder.

 

[Rodrigo90]

In situations where people such as The Joker or Ra's al Ghul are going to die (though not necessarily be murdered), I think it's perfectly acceptable for Batman to leave them to their fate, so long as he wasn't the cause. If Batman ever walked into a room and saw The Joker bleeding out on the floor after an aggressive confrontation with another super villain, I wouldn't think less of him for turning right around and walking out without making any effort to contact an ambulance.

Yeah, but he didn't have to. If he had been responsible for Ra's predicament and left him to die I'd have a big problem with it.


The whole concept of Batman, taking the law into his own hands, is not right. There's just varying degrees of right and wrong with what Batman does.

Bash it if you don't like it. Just don't accuse it of being untrue to the comics. That's all.

It all comes to my own personal feelings.

I know, that if I saw somebody who I majorly hated, who was a criminal, in a predicament, I would do the right thing and throw him a lifeline. Just so the authorities could find the reasonable punishment.
I was raised to be like that (Yes, I'm a Christian and so is/was Batman if you think about it. )

I've always told myself that, but I can't be sure of my feelings when push comes to shove.
And in my darkest moments (not that I have many lol) I often hear stories of men who hurt and murder people, and I do at times, wish death upon them.

I simply prefer the Batman's that would save Ra's and Joker, and you often get them, which I'm pleased about, because it appeals to me most

 

[DeadPresident]

I liked the evolution of the character. He went from being a tortured killer, to attempting to change at the end of BR, when he tried telling Selina to not kill Shreck. Then he further worked on those issues in BF, until he finally come to be at peace in B&R.

And I don't class Keaton, Kilmer or Clooney as the true Batman. Keaton is my favourite, but I recognise that he's not the perfect portrayal.

And yes, I have less issues with Keaton's Batman being a mentally unstable Punisher like killer (which he wasn't deep down when he demonstrated his desire to take Shreck to the police), than I do with Bale's Batman leaving Ra's to die.

But at the end of the day, neither of them, for those reasons, can make me proclaim them as the true Batman.

It's the compassionate Batman from AC that I really much prefer. He's the true hero.

...The inconsistencies are too numerous to even attempt. You like Keaton's portrayal more than Bale's. That's all, there is no empirical basis for why, just your preference.

-Kills several easily subdue-able criminals, wants to detain Schreck = Good Batman.

-Saves Gotham from destroying itself through irrational fear-driven citizens but let's self-confessed genocidal mastermind fend for himself = Bad Batman.

...Ok, gotcha. I mean purely mathematically you make no sense. 4 murders > 1 death by inaction.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Absolutely. And to me that's not murder.

It's not a noble trait though

 

[DeadPresident]

It all comes to my own personal feelings.

I know, that if I saw somebody who I majorly hated, who was a criminal, in a predicament, I would do the right thing and throw him a lifeline. Just so the authorities could find the reasonable punishment.
I was raised to be like that (Yes, I'm a Christian and so is/was Batman if you think about it. )

I've always told myself that, but I can't be sure of my feelings when push comes to shove.
And in my darkest moments (not that I have many lol) I often hear stories of men who hurt and murder people, and I do at times, wish death upon them.

I simply prefer the Batman's that would save Ra's and Joker, and you often get them, which I'm pleased about, because it appeals to me most

This highlights how far off base you are. You dislike Bale's Batman because he let an important villain die. You like Keaton's Batman despite the fact that he consciously killed unimportant thugs.

So a Batman that'll save Joker and Ra's, that's a good Christian. And so is a Batman that knowingly murders random grunts... I love your posts.

 

[Rodrigo90]

...The inconsistencies are too numerous to even attempt. You like Keaton's portrayal more than Bale's. That's all, there is no empirical basis for why, just your preference.

-Kills several easily subdue-able criminals, wants to detain Schreck = Good Batman.

-Saves Gotham from destroying itself through irrational fear-driven citizens but let's self-confessed genocidal mastermind fend for himself = Bad Batman.

...Ok, gotcha. I mean purely mathematically you make no sense. 4 murders > 1 death by inaction.

I'm going to be here all night with this

I said from the beginning, that Keaton is my favourite Batman for nostalgic reasons alone.

I don't condone the murders that his character comitted, anymore than I condone Bale's Batman leaving a man to die.

They are not admirable traits to anyone, in my opinion.

And the thing I like, and believe in, is the power of redemption. Keaton's character morphed into Kilmer, who then morphed into Clooney. It was the same character, who learned and rectified his mistakes and ensured that his pain wouldn't lapse onto Dick. I see that and I liked it. Just because the films ended becoming a pile of bantha poodoo, doesn't mean I don't like what they did with Bruce in the characterisation terms.

Repent for your sins and you shall be rewarded

 

[shauner111]

Yes, but they should still be looked at as stand-alone films. We are not judging the films when it comes to the overall story of a series. We're seperating Keaton's Batman, Kilmer's, Clooney's, Bale's. So Keaton in this context has nothing to do with Kilmer or Clooney. Judging Keatons Batman alone, he is a cold-blooded killer and you said he's your favorite. Bale was not a cold-blooded killer. He didn't save a man, he left him to die, not exactly murder but it is what it is. Yet you say that's not how Batman would react. So just based on how they treat criminals, logically you should prefer Bale's Batman to Keatons.

But OK, if you're judging it based on everything else (look, behavior etc)...then that's fine. You prefer Keaton and that's cool.