If Keaton never made it in 1989......

I think it was going to be Baldwin, but I read that he and Burton didn't get along during Beetlejuice so he fell out of the running.

 

Exactly. The original studio choice was Mel Gibson but he did Lethal Weapon 2 instead. Someone wanted Alec Baldwin, but Burton and him didn't get along during Beetlejuice.

Aside from those two (and Keaton) I don't think anyone was a serious contender. So I'm not sure of who would have gotten the role had Keaton not be chosen or had he turned it down.

But...you asked who WE think would have been great. Well...Alec Baldwin would have been awesome!

 

Baldwin looked exactly like Bruce Wayne. After seeing The Shadow I doubt he would have been better than Keaton. I don't say he'd have been bad but not extraordinary.

 

Back in the day how like when Baldwin looked in The Shadow I thought he could pull off a James Bond...I guess he could have pulled off the batman role but man did he let himself go! Baldwin is very out of shape today!

 

Always thought Baldwin would have been the perfect Bruce Wayne back in the day .... he had the right look and could be jovial, but could also do the quiet brooding Batman thing very well. He's 50 now I think and a bit out of shape but he seems to be more into politics than acting these days so probably doesn't have the same motivation to get in shape for any particular film.

 

I agree Baldwin would have been a cool choice, and he previously worked with Tim Burton too.

 

Do I have to go here?

Johnny Depp would have worked. Young, upcoming, Burton was in talks with him for Edward Scissorhands anyway. Maybe if he would have asked him to do it originally, he would still be making Batman films today like James Bond.

Who knows...THIS is a great thread.

 

i know he was like really young at the time (and this might sound alil out there)

but, i kinda think, Charlie Sheen, could of been decent back then
(this was before he got more into comedy roles, back in this "Young Guns" or "Wall Street" days)
he was young, but, had a mature look for his age (he could of pull off the look)

(though, he never worked with Burton, before)

 

Why does everyone think Depp is perfect for every role? He's good, but he doesn't have the look for every character/ person under the sun.

 

A bit off topic, but I thought Michael Douglas would have made one hell of a Harvey Dent/Two-Face back in the day.

Btw, does everyone know that Michael Keaton's real name is Michael Douglas?

 

^ya, Douglas could of been good

actually looking at the "wall street" poster, that whole cast could of been, batman III, Sheen as Bats, Douglas as Two-Face, Hannah as Dr. Chase
(he's not in the poster, but, was in that movie, too) John C. McGinley as Riddler lol

agreed,
if anything, he could of been, the Riddler, or Mad Hatter, in a future sequel (under Burton's direction), though

 

Agreed. However, he was still AWESOME in The Shadow.

I love Johnny Depp. I think he's the best actor of his generation BUT IN 1988 HE WAS A JOKE!

This was Johnny around the time Batman went into production:

[YT]olqCUeZMJy4[/YT]

um...no.

 

But for the sake of arguement Burton went with Depp. Maybe instead of CryBaby being a breakout role. Batman could have been and his relationship with Burton could have been even stronger.

When Keaton was chosen, people skoffed...when Ledger was cast, people skoffed, who knows, they would have skoffed at Depp too.

that is what is so fun with this thread. It opens up a ton of possiblities and opens a chance to go back into the past to see who would have worked in 1989. I love it.

 

I get what you're saying but aside from Platoon, Depp hadn't done any serious work. All he had done was Nightmare On Elm Street, Private Resort, and 21 Jump Street. There's no way WB would have allowed him to be cast in a huge summer blockbuster. Cry Baby, a silly John Waters movie, was the perfect vehicle for him to break out as a serious actor.

As for Keaton...he had already proven himself the year before with Clean and Sober. Not to mention that he was a big star at the time.

 

Probably Baldwin.

 

Touche...agreed.

 

- Mel Gibson
- Alec Baldwin

 

Ford...Harrison Ford.

 

Gibson, no contest.

Aside from Keaton, I think he's the only actor of the time that could believeably portray the obsession and the sadness the way that Keaton did. I don't think that Gibson gets enough recognition for his performance in the first Lethal Weapon. It was really, really powerful stuff.

 

well Peters wanted Bill Murray, I need to rewatch the documentary on the SE DVDs of that movie because I remember he had a lot of terrible ideas that fortunately didn't make it

 

Baldwin would have been, IMO, an even better choice for Batman '89. Keaton was good, but dang was he too short for the role! Burton did a pretty good job of hiding it, but in certain scenes poor Mike looks like a kid in the outfit! Especially after viewing The Shadow, I was convinced Alec was the better choice. Too bad he's too old to ever don the cowl!

 

Jon Peters was barely mentioned on the DVD. But the decision to cast Bill Murray was made by Ivan Reitman who was briefly involved during the early `80s. Sadly most "haters" associate the Murray casting with Tim Burton.

 

Most people would probably scoff at this but I think a young Timothy Dalton would've made an interesting Batman (although I've never heard him attempt an American accent.) He was definitely the most serious, and IMO most compelling and interesting Bond, at least until Craig. If you watch either of the 007 movies he was in, especially License to Kill, he definitely had some Batman-esque qualities, very reminiscent of a young Gregory Peck.