Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Batman World' started by Sabotage8475, May 20, 2006.
Batman? OR Batman Returns?
Wow, good question, that's tricky!
I'd have to say Batman...no, Returns...no, Batman.
Yeah f**k it. Both.
IN something I read about Returns, he said he felt weird trying to play batman again because he felt like this time he was trying to play himself acting as batman since its a sequel and I guess he had forgotten what he did to make himself act the way he did last time... (or something like that) Anyway, they're both good so its hard to say which was best dammit.
I loved both... can't see them as that different either so he's just best in both... heh..
Weren't they pretty much the same?
The first one was WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY better. He was focused and he was a badass.
In Returns, he looks confused much of the time, too much of Keaton's comedy backup comes through.
B89, hands down. In B89, it was just natural, and he was going with the character. In Returns, he is kind of bland and seems to be a shell of his former performance. In B89, he has an edge and an aura. I don't think he has that at ALL in Returns. He's just "there". In B89, he has a mighty presense, but in Returns he doesn't.
I don't know about you, but I think his taking out the Fat Man in Returns was pretty badass.
Yeah, he couldn't physically kick his ass....so he killed him.
I think that was what Keaton was trying to do.
Looking at the events that happened before in '89 and looking at Returns, I see it as Batman lost in the mess of murder and mayhem that he created when he murdered The Joker and his men to try and stop the pain that comes from his parent's murder by taking out the murderer. This obviously didn't happen, and the pain seemed to be even more intesified.
It's only near the second half of the movie, when he's considering discarding the Batman persona to be with Selina, handling the final job, where he seems fairly whole again, and that collapses at the end when Selina refuses and sets herself up in the same exact emptyness that he created for himself at the end of the first movie.
It's the f**ked-up grin that Batman gives the Fat Man that does it for me. Funny and badass at the same time.
I found that grin chilling...eek!
I'll have to go with the 89 movie
I think I'd have to go with B89, though it is very close.
He was great in both films.
Both but B89 was an awesome movie and keaton really captured what batman was all about, he scared the s hit out of me......on nother note keaton is the only actor to play batman who actually looks badass and a tad monstrous in the batsuit.
you know, this is an interesting topic. I actually had to think about this. I loved him in both movies, i think his performance was brilliant in both. He did play the character a bit differently tho in Returns than in 89. He played a more mysterious Batman than he did in Returns. I love his interaction with both Penguin and Catwoman in Returns, especially his "youre not the mayor" confrontation as well as his attempt to redeem Selina at the end. There hasnt been any hero/villain interaction in any Batman movie that can touch those 2 scenes. He also played Bruce Wayne as a more evolved character because we got to see the business side of him as well as the playboy and brooding man.
So, i guess ill have to say Returns was the better performance for me.
It was, but that just highlights the difference between the two movies. In the first one, he wouldn't have grinned as he smacked the guy into the hole. To me, that's more badass.
A lot of it down to the direction. In Batman, the character is cloaked in mystery and often hidden in the shadows. He's usually silent, he appears, kicks ass, vanishes. In Returns, Burton doesn't try to make Batman mysterious, so we follow him around, we know everything he does, he makes some one-liners, he talks more, and so on.
Yeah. . .this is an interesting question. The reason is because he was great in both films. Of course the character evolved, so it had to be played differently. In B89 he was motivated by the death of his parents. In Returns since he got his revenge he wasn't sure if he wanted to continue. I guess he felt he could continue contributing to society by just being Bruce Wayne, which explains that whole meeting with Max Schrek where he wants to stop the whole power plant thing.
But. . .with that being said. . .I liked how in Returns he actually did most of his own stunts. That's what bothers me a bit about B89. One second you have Keaton being a badass and the next you have a stunt guy kicking or punishing someone. Atleast here it's Keaton kicking some ass. I guess he felt he had to do it since Michelle Phieffer was doing most of the stunts. For instance that scene in the rooftop was awesome. That's Keaton and Michelle going at it. How awesome is that? Even though it wasn't the best cherography I liked it a lot more than Daredevil and Electra fighting at the rooftop.
Try and beat that one Val Kilmer...lol Even smiling Keaton is badass !
He was great in both. His performance in the first one was so special and mysterious but in the second one he seemed to be more confortable in the character.