Out of curiosity, is there anyone around here who disliked Michael Keaton's Batman?

[ChrisBaleBatman]

My point was that Magneto WAS old like Mckellen up until the alien thing.

So..one can say that he's representing the OLD Magneto, pre alien youth thingy.

 

[El Payaso]

uh dude apparently you have not read through the previous posts because you are incorrect that back then the controversy about keaton being Batman died down after the movie came out.As I said and another poster stated earlier,my coworkers and HIS coworkers were outraged over the casting choice of keaton as batman back then and after the movie came out,most of them did not change their minds about keaton.It is also false to mention that people have only started bashing keaton after Batman Begins came out.I have been blasting away at Keaton ever since back in 89 when Burton made that horrific casting choice of Keaton back then as have many of my friends have over the years.so I dont know WHERE you came up with that false information because it is so incorrect.Many people here already ALSO mentioned and pointed out how Alec Baldwin would easily have been a much better far superiour choice for batman then keaton was.Bale may get some flack as the old batman when a new batman series is made 20 years from now,but I guarantee you,he WONT get anywhere the amount that Keaton has gotten over the years.Yeah People might have still preferred west over keaton but thats because how crappy burtons batman movies were.I guarantee you those same people dont prefer west over Bale.

Your case is interesting... people wanting Adam west over Keaton... your personal friends being some kind of official poll... but none of that constitutes a fact, even when your personal friends could be cool people to drink a beer with.

Here's a fact. Burton's B89 made more money 16 years ago than Batman Begins. And certainly more than Batman 66.

My point was that Magneto WAS old like Mckellen up until the alien thing.

So..one can say that he's representing the OLD Magneto, pre alien youth thingy.

So, he doesn't look the part.

 

[LongDong]

Your case is interesting... people wanting Adam west over Keaton... your personal friends being some kind of official poll... but none of that constitutes a fact, even when your personal friends could be cool people to drink a beer with.

Here's a fact. Burton's B89 made more money 16 years ago than Batman Begins. And certainly more than Batman 66.



So, he doesn't look the part.

It’s true my trollish friend. West had a faction of fans that wanted him to be Batman again. He was of course the main person saying this, but there were fans who wanted him in cape and cowl yet again. Mainly an older audience, but it is true.

Yes Batman made more than Batman Begins, but you fail to mention that times were different. Back in 89 movies did not get released for home viewing within a few short months after its theatrical run. Movies took forever to come out back then. A more important fact you fail to mention (either because you did not think of it or you want to leave it out to make your point actually have some merit) was that there was not comic movies coming out left and right like there is nowadays. Fans are able to choose between more and more options now than they were back then. Batman 89 was a fairly new thing, there had never been a real Batman movie made before (as compared to nowadays we had 4 to choose from as well as countless cartoons and cartoon movies) and it had no real competition in the theaters either. It had to go up against Karate Kid 3, Do the Right Thing, Weekend at Bernie’s and Ghostbusters 2. Sure the last Indiana Jones movie had come out but it was out for a whole month before Batman was released.

Anyway, I got to go run the dogs; you have a great day under the bridge buddy.

 

[Dr. Fate]

It’s true my trollish friend. West had a faction of fans that wanted him to be Batman again. He was of course the main person saying this, but there were fans who wanted him in cape and cowl yet again. Mainly an older audience, but it is true.

Yes Batman made more than Batman Begins, but you fail to mention that times were different. Back in 89 movies did not get released for home viewing within a few short months after its theatrical run. Movies took forever to come out back then. A more important fact you fail to mention (either because you did not think of it or you want to leave it out to make your point actually have some merit) was that there was not comic movies coming out left and right like there is nowadays. Fans are able to choose between more and more options now than they were back then. Batman 89 was a fairly new thing, there had never been a real Batman movie made before (as compared to nowadays we had 4 to choose from as well as countless cartoons and cartoon movies) and it had no real competition in the theaters either. It had to go up against Karate Kid 3, Do the Right Thing, Weekend at Bernie’s and Ghostbusters 2. Sure the last Indiana Jones movie had come out but it was out for a whole month before Batman was released.

Anyway, I got to go run the dogs; you have a great day under the bridge buddy.

Well spoken LongDong.

Also, the Superman movies had burned themselves out by that point. Stupid Salkinds with a little Golan/Globus...

 

[SHADOWBAT69]

uh dude apparently you have not read through the previous posts because you are incorrect that back then the controversy about keaton being Batman died down after the movie came out.As I said and another poster stated earlier,my coworkers and HIS coworkers were outraged over the casting choice of keaton as batman back then and after the movie came out,most of them did not change their minds about keaton.It is also false to mention that people have only started bashing keaton after Batman Begins came out.I have been blasting away at Keaton ever since back in 89 when Burton made that horrific casting choice of Keaton back then as have many of my friends have over the years.so I dont know WHERE you came up with that false information because it is so incorrect.Many people here already ALSO mentioned and pointed out how Alec Baldwin would easily have been a much better far superiour choice for batman then keaton was.Bale may get some flack as the old batman when a new batman series is made 20 years from now,but I guarantee you,he WONT get anywhere the amount that Keaton has gotten over the years.Yeah People might have still preferred west over keaton but thats because how crappy burtons batman movies were.I guarantee you those same people dont prefer west over Bale.

yeh, ive read the whole thread and all i see are people who like Keaton and people who hate Keaton. The controversy did die down after the release, this is not false information. Critics and fans both were saying it was not as they thought it would be and he did give a good performance for this movie. Ihave gone to numorous conventions over the years and have talked to many fans, comic writers, and even people in "the industry". The comments are always the same, Keaton did a good job. Just because you and your select friends are the Keaton haters doesnt mean that everyone else in the country also dislikes him. I based my statement on what is written in articles and on the broad people i have talked to and met over the last 17 years. Its obvious you are a Bale lover in your posts so discussing this is going nowhere with you. You can say that in your area everone hated Keaton, everyone you talk to hated Keaton, the theatres were quite and poeple walked out going "that sucked". It must have been the only place in America that had that reaction, either that or Batmania 1989 never happened.

 

[LongDong]

yeh, ive read the whole thread and all i see are people who like Keaton and people who hate Keaton. The controversy did die down after the release, this is not false information. Critics and fans both were saying it was not as they thought it would be and he did give a good performance for this movie. Ihave gone to numorous conventions over the years and have talked to many fans, comic writers, and even people in "the industry". The comments are always the same, Keaton did a good job. Just because you and your select friends are the Keaton haters doesnt mean that everyone else in the country also dislikes him. I based my statement on what is written in articles and on the broad people i have talked to and met over the last 17 years. Its obvious you are a Bale lover in your posts so discussing this is going nowhere with you. You can say that in your area everone hated Keaton, everyone you talk to hated Keaton, the theatres were quite and poeple walked out going "that sucked". It must have been the only place in America that had that reaction, either that or Batmania 1989 never happened.

it is true the fear of Keaton as Batman did die down, but from my recollection is was due more to being relieved it was not the campy Batman everyone knew and that Keaton was not as bad as everyone expected him to be. People were not blown away by Keaton, but they were satisfied he was not Adam West. People were more blown away by this dark super hero movie of easily one of the top 2 comic book characters ever, and were blown away by Jack as the Joker than anything. Keaton was like Trent Dilfer in the Super Bowl, just don't throw any interceptions and we can win. He was not expected to pass for 300 yards and 3 touchdowns.

 

[SHADOWBAT69]

it is true the fear of Keaton as Batman did die down, but from my recollection is was due more to being relieved it was not the campy Batman everyone knew and that Keaton was not as bad as everyone expected him to be. People were not blown away by Keaton, but they were satisfied he was not Adam West. People were more blown away by this dark super hero movie of easily one of the top 2 comic book characters ever, and were blown away by Jack as the Joker than anything. Keaton was like Trent Dilfer in the Super Bowl, just don't throw any interceptions and we can win. He was not expected to pass for 300 yards and 3 touchdowns.

This is true, that was a part of it. Thats why i said that others said he was "good". The movie as a whole has to be credited for his portrayal. It was a unique vision, his performance of Batman was right for this "world". Just like, as much as ill prolly get bashed for saying this, Clooney was right for B&R.

 

[LongDong]

This is true, that was a part of it. Thats why i said that others said he was "good". The movie as a whole has to be credited for his portrayal. It was a unique vision, his performance of Batman was right for this "world". Just like, as much as ill prolly get bashed for saying this, Clooney was right for B&R.

Clooney would have made a better Batman had he been under the guidance of a better director. Kilmer was easily the best of the original 3 and the closest to both Bruce and Bats we have seen, however his performance was lacking due to Schumacker.

I like Burton, but honestly he was a wrong choice for Batman - looking back that is. Back then it was great, but now his vision and take on the universe was missing something.

I honestly would loved to have seen McTiernan's take on the character when he was in his directing prime.

 

[El Payaso]

It’s true my trollish friend. West had a faction of fans that wanted him to be Batman again. He was of course the main person saying this, but there were fans who wanted him in cape and cowl yet again. Mainly an older audience, but it is true.

Yes, a couple of fans here and there doesn't consitute a trend as you make it seem.

Your friends, good people I'm sure, don't either.

Yes Batman made more than Batman Begins, but you fail to mention that times were different. Back in 89 movies did not get released for home viewing within a few short months after its theatrical run. Movies took forever to come out back then. A more important fact you fail to mention (either because you did not think of it or you want to leave it out to make your point actually have some merit) was that there was not comic movies coming out left and right like there is nowadays. Fans are able to choose between more and more options now than they were back then. Batman 89 was a fairly new thing, there had never been a real Batman movie made before (as compared to nowadays we had 4 to choose from as well as countless cartoons and cartoon movies) and it had no real competition in the theaters either. It had to go up against Karate Kid 3, Do the Right Thing, Weekend at Bernie’s and Ghostbusters 2. Sure the last Indiana Jones movie had come out but it was out for a whole month before Batman was released.

Anyway, I got to go run the dogs; you have a great day under the bridge buddy.

- Spiderman was made when superhero movies were common and still made more than B89. B Begins just couldn't. So the competition doesn't matter either, it's a matter of numbers, not of which one made more than its competition, but which made more than the other in their respective times.

- Before B89 there was a movie called Batman released in 66 which people could have said it was better, so there were Batman movies to compare B89 to. It was not a new thing. Specially after 4 Superman movies. Even if it was a good thing it could have done bad at B.O.

The controversy did die down after the release, this is not false information.

You obviously haven't talked to LongDong friends.

Clooney would have made a better Batman had he been under the guidance of a better director. Kilmer was easily the best of the original 3 and the closest to both Bruce and Bats we have seen, however his performance was lacking due to Schumacker.

I like Burton, but honestly he was a wrong choice for Batman - looking back that is. Back then it was great, but now his vision and take on the universe was missing something.

I honestly would loved to have seen McTiernan's take on the character when he was in his directing prime.

What Burton did inspired almost every movie after 89.

One of the most influenced was B Begins which didn't drop the Burton's idea of a armored Batman in a black rubber suit. And the visuals of Gotham, not making it New York in disguise (which was the way before B89).

McTiernan would wish he had the career Burton have had.

 

[LongDong]

[/color]

Yes, a couple of fans here and there doesn't consitute a trend as you make it seem.

Your friends, good people I'm sure, don't either.



- Spiderman was made when superhero movies were common and still made more than B89. B Begins just couldn't. So the competition doesn't matter either, it's a matter of numbers, not of which one made more than its competition, but which made more than the other in their respective times.

- Before B89 there was a movie called Batman released in 66 which people could have said it was better, so there were Batman movies to compare B89 to. It was not a new thing. Specially after 4 Superman movies. Even if it was a good thing it could have done bad at B.O.



You obviously haven't talked to LongDong friends.



What Burton did inspired almost every movie after 89.

One of the most influenced was B Begins which didn't drop the Burton's idea of a armored Batman in a black rubber suit. And the visuals of Gotham, not making it New York in disguise (which was the way before B89).

McTiernan would wish he had the career Burton have had.

You sir, are not even worth speaking to anymore. Wow you MAKE NO SENSE and have NO LOGIC in anything you say.

How old are you anyway?

Batman 66 was 20+ years before Batman 89, you obviously do not even understand the whole point of what was said.

Competition DOES matter dude, don't be so asinine all the time. Spider-Man was the FIRST Spider-Man movie and has come out int he era of multiplexes. Spider-Man was never seenon the big screen before where as Batman had been done in 4 other films which still had the sting of the last one sucking pretty bad.

Batman 89 inspired almost every movie made after it? Are you insane? There have been less than a handful of movies that had had that sort of impat on movie making. Jaws, Star Wars top that list which I am afraid does not include Batman.

 

[LongDong]

McTiernan would wish he had the career Burton have had.

My whole point was how McTiernan handles characters and tension. He would have been a better fit for Batman. He also handles a large cast in action better than Burton.

 

[WhiteRat]

yeh, ive read the whole thread and all i see are people who like Keaton and people who hate Keaton. The controversy did die down after the release, this is not false information. Critics and fans both were saying it was not as they thought it would be and he did give a good performance for this movie. Ihave gone to numorous conventions over the years and have talked to many fans, comic writers, and even people in "the industry". The comments are always the same, Keaton did a good job. Just because you and your select friends are the Keaton haters doesnt mean that everyone else in the country also dislikes him. I based my statement on what is written in articles and on the broad people i have talked to and met over the last 17 years. Its obvious you are a Bale lover in your posts so discussing this is going nowhere with you. You can say that in your area everone hated Keaton, everyone you talk to hated Keaton, the theatres were quite and poeple walked out going "that sucked". It must have been the only place in America that had that reaction, either that or Batmania 1989 never happened.

No it did NOT die down as you have seen from all the posters here on this thread.as I said on that michelle phieffer thread that Dr Fate also made,the proof is in the pudding that Michelle Phieffer was a good Catwoman but that Keaton was NOT a good batman in the fact both the Burton fans and the non burton fans equally loved Phieffer in her role as Catwoman,there has been nothing but positive praise for her on that thread.thats not the case with this thread though.Yes it is incorrect information because its not just people i run into in real life like I have over the years but also over the net,wheter you want to admit it or not there are thousands out there who hated him as batman,enough with this select few crap.No it went around the whole country,it wasnt the only place.I have talked with friends of mine around the country who are batman fans and many have told me the same thing happened there.of course not all fans felt this way but thousands were not blown away by him as batman like they for christopher reeve as superman.Like Longdog said,they were just relieved more than anything else that he wasnt as bad as everyone expected him to be,that it wasnt another West incarnation.as I said before,when the next batman series comes along in 20 years,if Bale gets any flack as Batman it wont be ANYWHERE near the amount of flack that keaton as caught over the years.The majority of fans that hated Keaton as Batman were very pleased with Bale.Like Long Dong said earlier,Kilmer was the best batman to have played the role until Bale came along.He at least fit the role and looked the part and had the right physical build which is imperative to have when playing Batman.If he had had a more serious script to work with instead of corny lines,people would have been saying he was the best batman easily.

 

[WhiteRat]

You sir, are not even worth speaking to anymore. Wow you MAKE NO SENSE and have NO LOGIC in anything you say.

How old are you anyway?

Batman 66 was 20+ years before Batman 89, you obviously do not even understand the whole point of what was said.

Competition DOES matter dude, don't be so asinine all the time. Spider-Man was the FIRST Spider-Man movie and has come out int he era of multiplexes. Spider-Man was never seenon the big screen before where as Batman had been done in 4 other films which still had the sting of the last one sucking pretty bad.

Batman 89 inspired almost every movie made after it? Are you insane? There have been less than a handful of movies that had had that sort of impat on movie making. Jaws, Star Wars top that list which I am afraid does not include Batman.

I stopped speaking to him several pages back.you hear that sir? I dont read your insane rambilings and responses to me anymore,therefore when you quote me and reply to me you are just showing the true dolt that you are by talking to yourself since your the ONLy one who reads what you say.thats a great example of how the movie spider-man was pretty much only successful so much because like you said,it was the FIRST SPIDER-MAN movie to come out in its era and had no competition to face.Yeah spider-man had never been seen on the screen before and because he is such an extremely popular icon character,there was never any doubt in my mind it would be the huge money maker at the box office that it was.

yeah about the only movie batman inspired to be done like that was daredevil.

I was worried justly so that Batman Begins would not perform so well at the box office because it had two big negatives going against it.One -like you said,there had ALREADY been Four Batman movies made in this generation so batman fans and kids could just pop in a tape in the VCR to watch Batman if they wanted to so the eagerness to go see Batman on the screen wasnt there like it was in 89.Two-unlike Batman 89,Batman Begins was very poorly promoted unlike the spider-man movies and batman 89 which had year long advertising campains going for it.That just proves that when you got a great promotion for a popular character it will be a blockbuster at the theaters even though it hardly has the greatness in screenwriting that was present in the first two superman movies and in Batman Begins. Its really wise to do what i did several pages back,dont respond to him anymore,he doesnt know the meaning of logic or common sense.

 

[LongDong]

I stopped speaking to him several pages back.you hear that sir? I dont read your insane rambilings and responses to me anymore,therefore when you quote me and reply to me you are just showing the true dolt that you are by talking to yourself since your the ONLy one who reads what you say.thats a great example of how the movie spider-man was pretty much only successful so much because like you said,it was the FIRST SPIDER-MAN movie to come out in its era and had no competition to face.Yeah spider-man had never been seen on the screen before and because he is such an extremely popular icon character,there was never any doubt in my mind it would be the huge money maker at the box office that it was.

yeah about the only movie batman inspired to be done like that was daredevil.

I was worried justly so that Batman Begins would not perform so well at the box office because it had two big negatives going against it.One -like you said,there had ALREADY been Four Batman movies made in this generation so batman fans and kids could just pop in a tape in the VCR to watch Batman if they wanted to so the eagerness to go see Batman on the screen wasnt there like it was in 89.Two-unlike Batman 89,Batman Begins was very poorly promoted unlike the spider-man movies and batman 89 which had year long advertising campains going for it.That just proves that when you got a great promotion for a popular character it will be a blockbuster at the theaters even though it hardly has the greatness in screenwriting that was present in the first two superman movies and in Batman Begins. Its really wise to do what i did several pages back,dont respond to him anymore,he doesnt know the meaning of logic or common sense.

Yeah you are so right. I just hate to see others attacked I cant help it but defend, tis in my nature.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

I don't know how anyone could dislike Keaton as Batman.The dude rocked.

 

[Ceb-Man]

I liked Michael Keaton as Batman. I just did not like that The Joker/ Jack Napier killed The Waynes instead of like the comics Joe Chill.

 

[batmaluco]

Spider-Man was the FIRST Spider-Man movie and has come out int he era of multiplexes. Spider-Man was never seenon the big screen before where as Batman had been done in 4 other films which still had the sting of the last one sucking pretty bad.

You're wrong.
I saw this Spider-Man movie in the big screen before San Raimi's take. It was pretty lame, but the screen was pretty big.

 

[Dr. Fate]

You're wrong.
I saw this Spider-Man movie in the big screen before San Raimi's take. It was pretty lame, but the screen was pretty big.

I believe that was a TV series in the 1970s, not a full scale theatrical film.

 

[batmaluco]

I believe that was a TV series in the 1970s, not a full scale theatrical film.

There was a film at the series time, as much as 60's Batman was a TV series but had a movie released in movie theaters.
Not like Batman, I think that the Spider-Man's one was a pilot of the show, a special episode with a hour and half lenght or something like that.
I watched it in a movie theater when I was a kid.
It was lame though, but I liked...

 

[LongDong]

I liked Michael Keaton as Batman. I just did not like that The Joker/ Jack Napier killed The Waynes instead of like the comics Joe Chill.

I hated how Goyer rewrote Batman's "origin" in begins too. I think that it was very pivotal to his character having walked out of Zorro and his parents die, not that stupid bat opera bull****. Zorro was a major influence on him becoming a masked vigilante.

 

[El Payaso]

... and I wont waste my time with such ignorant comments like that,this will be my only post to you since you act like a child when people rightly criticise Keaton as batman.

You sir, are not even worth speaking to anymore. Wow you MAKE NO SENSE and have NO LOGIC in anything you say.

How old are you anyway?

^ I'm going to start collecting all of these.

Btw, notice how he claims he will neevr ever speak to me again and the next thing he does is talking to me asking my age. One day this will be classic comedy... but sadly, I'm afraid LongDong won't be able to get it though. A true paradox.

Ah, more of the ignoring, not-talking-to-Payaso-anymore post:

Batman 66 was 20+ years before Batman 89, you obviously do not even understand the whole point of what was said.

Explain me how 20 years affects the point of having/not having a previous movie to compare.

Were people comparing the two versions of Psycho? Yes.
Were people comparing Gone with the Wind's sequel to the original? Yes

More than 20 years bud.

Competition DOES matter dude, don't be so asinine all the time. Spider-Man was the FIRST Spider-Man movie and has come out int he era of multiplexes. Spider-Man was never seenon the big screen before where as Batman had been done in 4 other films which still had the sting of the last one sucking pretty bad.

And X-Men had a first movie and Hulk had a first movie and they didn't succeed as much.

That is, being first (or second or third movie for that matter) doesn't affect the box office as you claim.

Batman 89 inspired almost every movie made after it? Are you insane? There have been less than a handful of movies that had had that sort of impat on movie making. Jaws, Star Wars top that list which I am afraid does not include Batman.

Ah, I meant superhero movie.

Now, how official is that list. Like my-personal-friend-said-that type?

No it did NOT die down as you have seen from all the posters here on this thread. as I said on that michelle phieffer thread that Dr Fate also made,the proof is in the pudding that Michelle Phieffer was a good Catwoman but that Keaton was NOT a good batman in the fact both the Burton fans and the non burton fans equally loved Phieffer in her role as Catwoman,there has been nothing but positive praise for her on that thread.

Are we, a bunch of fans somehwere on the net some kind of... evidence of something now?

At most these polls have like ... what... 100 votes?

Pft.

LongDong has his friends as an offical source, you have 100 votes... this doesn't sound very good/official/sane/clever.

thats not the case with this thread though.Yes it is incorrect information because its not just people i run into in real life like I have over the years but also over the net,wheter you want to admit it or not there are thousands out there who hated him as batman,enough with this select few crap.No it went around the whole country,it wasnt the only place.I have talked with friends of mine around the country who are batman fans and many have told me the same thing happened there.of course not all fans felt this way but thousands were not blown away by him as batman like they for christopher reeve as superman.

Ah, I judged you wrong.

You can also tell your friends are some serious evidence. I always give people like you too much credit.

The majority of fans that hated Keaton as Batman were very pleased with Bale.Like Long Dong said earlier,Kilmer was the best batman to have played the role until Bale came along.He at least fit the role and looked the part and had the right physical build which is imperative to have when playing Batman.If he had had a more serious script to work with instead of corny lines,people would have been saying he was the best batman easily.

But he is not.

Try to make fans in here or your friends choose between Kilmer and Keaton and you'll have to whine about how Schumacher put a gun against Kilmer's head to wear rubber nipples sooner that I say 'Just go away Payaso'.

I stopped speaking to him several pages back.you hear that sir? I dont read your insane rambilings and responses to me anymore,therefore when you quote me and reply to me you are just showing the true dolt that you are by talking to yourself since your the ONLy one who reads what you say.

It looks like the 6/6/06 brought more genius than satans.

Notice how he cries to heavens he is ignoring me and then he talks directly to me immediately?

And how he whine and claim he hasn't read my replies and then he tells me the exact tone of those very replies?

You can't ignore me? Just say so. It is much worse to try to disguise it.

thats a great example of how the movie spider-man was pretty much only successful so much because like you said,it was the FIRST SPIDER-MAN movie to come out in its era and had no competition to face.Yeah spider-man had never been seen on the screen before and because he is such an extremely popular icon character,there was never any doubt in my mind it would be the huge money maker at the box office that it was.

You'll have to read what I said to the other Payaso-ignoring dude.

I was worried justly so that Batman Begins would not perform so well at the box office because it had two big negatives going against it.One -like you said,there had ALREADY been Four Batman movies made in this generation so batman fans and kids could just pop in a tape in the VCR to watch Batman if they wanted to so the eagerness to go see Batman on the screen wasnt there like it was in 89.Two-unlike Batman 89,Batman Begins was very poorly promoted unlike the spider-man movies and batman 89 which had year long advertising campains going for it.That just proves that when you got a great promotion for a popular character it will be a blockbuster at the theaters even though it hardly has the greatness in screenwriting that was present in the first two superman movies and in Batman Begins. Its really wise to do what i did several pages back,dont respond to him anymore,he doesnt know the meaning of logic or common sense.

All of that is true.

And Keaton was a great Batman.

I don't know how anyone could dislike Keaton as Batman.The dude rocked.

Well, it's just a couple of dudes... and their personal friends.

 

[LongDong]

You sir, are not even worth speaking to anymore. Wow you MAKE NO SENSE and have NO LOGIC in anything you say.

How old are you anyway?

^ I'm going to start collecting all of these.

Btw, notice how he claims he will neevr ever speak to me again and the next thing he does is talking to me asking my age. One day this will be classic comedy... but sadly, I'm afraid LongDong won't be able to get it though. A true paradox.

Ah, more of the ignoring, not-talking-to-Payaso-anymore post:



Explain me how 20 years affects the point of having/not having a previous movie to compare.



And X-Men had a first movie and Hulk had a first movie and they didn't succeed as much.

That is, being first (or second or third movie for that matter) doesn't affect the box office as you claim.



Ah, I meant superhero movie.

Now, how official is that list. Like my-personal-friend-said-that type?

No it did NOT die down as you have seen from all the posters here on this thread. as I said on that michelle phieffer thread that Dr Fate also made,the proof is in the pudding that Michelle Phieffer was a good Catwoman but that Keaton was NOT a good batman in the fact both the Burton fans and the non burton fans equally loved Phieffer in her role as Catwoman,there has been nothing but positive praise for her on that thread.

Are we, a bunch of fans somehwere on the net some kind of... evidence of something now?

At most these polls have like ... what... 100 votes?

Pft.

LongDong has his friends as an offical source, you have 100 votes... this doesn't sound very good/official/sane/clever.




Ah, I judged you wrong.

You can also tell your friends are some serious evidence. I always give people like you too much credit.



But he is not.

Try to make fans in here or your friends choose between Kilmer and Keaton and you'll have to whine about how Schumacher put a gun against Kilmer's head to wear rubber nipples sooner that I say 'Just go away Payaso'.


It looks like the 6/6/06 brought more genius than satans.

Notice how he cries to heavens he is ignoring me and then he talks directly to me immediately?

And how he whine and claim he hasn't read my replies and then he tells me the exact tone of those very replies?

You can't ignore me? Just say so. It is much worse to try to disguise it.

thats a great example of how the movie spider-man was pretty much only successful so much because like you said,it was the FIRST SPIDER-MAN movie to come out in its era and had no competition to face.Yeah spider-man had never been seen on the screen before and because he is such an extremely popular icon character,there was never any doubt in my mind it would be the huge money maker at the box office that it was.

You'll have to read what I said to the other Payaso-ignoring dude.



All of that is true.

And Keaton was a great Batman.



Well, it's just a couple of dudes... and their personal friends.

Ok Einstein show me where I said I was never going to speak to you again?

A couple of frineds as a source? Your ignorance knows no bounds. Where were you when they were handing out common sense? I understand you do not speak english so that has to explain your lack of comprehension with what people are saying here, as nobody can be that stupid.

 

[LongDong]

payaso, try www.dictionary.com and it might help you with your grasp of the language

 

[El Payaso]

Ok Einstein show me where I said I was never going to speak to you again?

Here:

... and I wont waste my time with such ignorant comments like that,this will be my only post to you since you act like a child when people rightly criticise Keaton as batman.

And here...

You sir, are not even worth speaking to anymore. Wow you MAKE NO SENSE and have NO LOGIC in anything you say

IF you're not stupid enough to know something is not wrthy to waste time on it and then you waste time on it.

A couple of frineds as a source? Your ignorance knows no bounds. Where were you when they were handing out common sense? I understand you do not speak english so that has to explain your lack of comprehension with what people are saying here, as nobody can be that stupid.

payaso, try www.dictionary.com and it might help you with your grasp of the language

A good tip, stick to attack my grammar, it will be your only hope kid.

 

[ZERO]

No.