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

[mister Lennon]

Dude, bob kane said that the best batman movie was batman and robin. And he said that every batman movie was better than the last one. That doesnt show anything.

Im not saying that there arent many people who liked keaton as batman. Off course that there are pro keatons, and so there are anti keatons. To deny one thing or another is just false, and i didnt post any of them.

The suscess in the box office doesnt show anything.


And now, el payaso is in my ignore list from here to eternity. Bye, payasito. Im tired of your insane and trollish posts.

 

[El Payaso]

I rememeber a little girl saying: what a short batman.

What you said at the theater doesn't count.

 

[The Joker]

Dude, bob kane said that the best batman movie was batman and robin. And he said that every batman movie was better than the last one. That doesnt show anything.

It shows Bob Kane liked Michael Keaton as Batman. Whether you agree with him or not is irrelevant. Batman's creator liked Keaton.

Im not saying that there arent many people who liked keaton as batman. Off course that there are pro keatons, and so there are anti keatons. To deny one thing or another is just false, and i didnt post any of them.

I'm not denying that there are people who dislike Keaton as Batman. I'm just saying that they are a small minority.

No matter what people say, Keaton was loved by the general public as Batman.

The suscess in the box office doesnt show anything.

Don't be ridiculous, of course it does. If so many people were willing to fork out their cash again and again for these movies, it obviously proves it was well loved.Critics and all loved it.

You're not going to turn around and tell me Batman Begins' financial success proves nothing are you??

 

[mister Lennon]

It shows Bob Kane liked Michael Keaton as Batman. Whether you agree with him or not is irrelevant. Batman's creator liked Keaton.

And he also said that Kilmer was the best batman and the best bruce wayne.
And even if danny de vito playing batman he would say, i like him . Dont be that fool, he is promoting a movie based in his character , the first movie about his character, even if it is a **** he would say that he liked it .



I'm not denying that there are people who dislike Keaton as Batman. I'm just saying that they are a small minority.

That is only your opinion. And ill said to you that you are wrong. There are at least so many people who hates keaton as batman than people who likes him.

No matter what people say, Keaton was loved by the general public as Batman.

Again, that is only your opinion. See my last post about it.



Don't be ridiculous, of course it does. If so many people were willing to fork out their cash again and again for these movies, it obviously proves it was well loved.Critics and all loved it.

You're not going to turn around and tell me Batman Begins' financial success proves nothing are you??

Batman begins is a great movie and it didnt so well at box office. Mainly because the poor marketing campaign.

Batman did well at box office because the great marketing campaing and for being the first batman movie on screen, with many and many fans waiting to see their heroe on screen for first time. Great difference, my friend.

 

[LongDong]

Clearly not enough of them to affect the critical and financial success of the movies



Yeah?? I remember going to see it and there was a bunch of kids there,and they all came out saying what an awesome Batman.



It does show something.It shows he's still fondly remembered by most fans.



When someone sees their opinion,a minority opinion too I might add,as a fact,then it is that person who is living in a fantasy world.

On a final note, Michael Keaton rocks as Batman.And that's Bob Kane approved

HAHAHAHA here is a direct quote from BOB KANE on Keaton as Batman.

"Oh, sure, I knew Adam. Adam, to me, he has a strong chin and [is] tall, dark and handsome; [he] looked more like my comic book Batman than Michael Keaton does as Batman for the movies. I say that only because Michael Keaton worked fine as he got into the character, it's kind of a new way of going. But when they first represented him to me as the Batman, I was a little bit surprised and almost disappointed - originally.

Michael doesn't have a big build, he doesn't have a strong, chiselled face, basically. But he's a good actor. They moulded this Bat-suit around him and on him. Actually, Pee Wee Herman would look like Batman in that Bat-suit! (Laughs)"

Bob Kane approved because he posed for a photo with the Batman actor? What an idiotic thing to say. Kane DID also say that he felt Keaton did a good job once he was in the suit (obviosuly based on his remarks without the suit he would have felt opposite)

 

[LongDong]

http://superherohype.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-91849.html

 

[El Payaso]

For that amtter Adam West's paunch was the real deal.

Keaton is good nevertheless.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

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.

First off....it wasn't a Bat opera....it was Faust. It served as a pretty cool foreshadowing.

Now, tell me....how would you have had the Waynes in suits, ties and dresses for a movie theatre? How would you have faced that whole Zorro aspect (btw.....I'm a huge Zorro fan, but even I understand why it didn't go down.)

So, he doesn't look the part

PRE- rejuvination........yes he does. That's my point.

Dude, bob kane said that the best batman movie was batman and robin. And he said that every batman movie was better than the last one. That doesnt show anything.

C'mon....he must have lost his mind by then.

He always stood at the POV that Batman should be dark.

Far as I know, Adam West is 6'2.......and so is Batman....so that might have had something to do with how Kane felt about West's look.

Plus, alot of people liked West's Bruce Wayne.

 

[LongDong]

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004170/bio

 

[atomicbattery]

To those who would assert that the Michael Keaton Batman was largely embraced by the passionate Batman fan community, the best I can do is refer you to the exhaustively researched book 'Batman Unmasked' by Will Brooker. The relevant sub-chapter headings would be 'Batman and Fandom: Anticipation and Rejection' (p. 279) and 'Batman: A Tim Burton Film'. Brooker sums up: 'To many fans, they got it wrong. They blew it And, worse, they didn't care.'

 

[El Payaso]

Far as I know, Adam West is 6'2.......and so is Batman....so that might have had something to do with how Kane felt about West's look.

Plus, alot of people liked West's Bruce Wayne.

That was my point.

No one cared about Adam West being a bodybuilder. And afyter seeing B89, no one cared about Keaton either. except those respectable 3 people.

To those who would assert that the Michael Keaton Batman was largely embraced by the passionate Batman fan community, the best I can do is refer you to the exhaustively researched book 'Batman Unmasked' by Will Brooker. The relevant sub-chapter headings would be 'Batman and Fandom: Anticipation and Rejection' (p. 279) and 'Batman: A Tim Burton Film'. Brooker sums up: 'To many fans, they got it wrong. They blew it And, worse, they didn't care.'

Will who?

I'm sorry, his opinion is respectable but how true is his statement. Did he make a research or something?

 

[LongDong]

First off....it wasn't a Bat opera....it was Faust. It served as a pretty cool foreshadowing.

Now, tell me....how would you have had the Waynes in suits, ties and dresses for a movie theatre? How would you have faced that whole Zorro aspect (btw.....I'm a huge Zorro fan, but even I understand why it didn't go down.).

easy, make it a big charity fund raiser showing clasic movies. The rich ALWAYS dress up for those society events.

Make it a GRAND OPENING for a new high end movie theater in town, part of Gothams rebuilding the slums, they dress up for opening ceremonies.\

The prpble you pose has very simple solutions. Goyer is just a jackass who cannot write to save his life. I also did not like how he changed the Batman Rha's relationship and had Batman let him die in the end. Batman would NOT do that.

All in all I really enjoyed the film.

 

[LongDong]

It shows Bob Kane liked Michael Keaton as Batman. Whether you agree with him or not is irrelevant. Batman's creator liked Keaton.

He wa also quoted as saying (in an interview with Cinescape) that Kilmer was his favorite Batman

 

[Diamondhead]

Keaton was a good enough Batman.
But…I hate 1989 batman with every fiber of my being.
Anyway this is a case where the costume makes the hero and thus …in all of those batman movies.

 

[atomicbattery]

Will who?

I'm sorry, his opinion is respectable but how true is his statement. Did he make a research or something?

'Batman Unmasked' by Will Brooker is probably the definitive book examining Batman as a cultural icon, I would say even moreso than 'Batman: the Complete History' by Les Daniels. You really should check it out before making a statement that perhaps 'three people' may have objected to Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne/Batman.

As Brooker quotes- "'For comic book fans... the movie serves one vital purpose: it represents them to the outside world.'... It was Batman: The Movie, a supposedly definitive representation, and the world was watching it. Tim Burton's Batman had become, as far as the wider audience was concerned, 'the' Batman."

This was what was so distressing for comic book fans. What ended up on screen was simply not Batman. This has nothing to do with whiny comic book geeks. It has to do with blithely and fundamentally changing a character that had existed for fifty years. It is possible to make a film that can show respect to the source material, please a passionate fan base, and be embraced by the wider public. Witness 'Lord of the Rings'.

 

[The Joker]

Bob Kane approved because he posed for a photo with the Batman actor? What an idiotic thing to say.

LOL! That pic got under your skin did it?? Mission accomplished. I knew it would annoy just the right people

Yes that's right, he approved because he stood on the movie set beside Keaton and got his photo taken with him.Would you pose for a photo beside an actor you felt bastardized your character??

Think before you type because it's YOU who's saying stupid things.

Kane DID also say that he felt Keaton did a good job once he was in the suit

That's right. He thought Keaton did a good job, like most people do

(obviosuly based on his remarks without the suit he would have felt opposite)

Really?? Did he ever complain about Keaton's rendition of Bruce Wayne??

He wa also quoted as saying (in an interview with Cinescape) that Kilmer was his favorite Batman

So??

How does that invalidate in any way that he liked Keaton as Batman??

 

[El Payaso]

The prpble you pose has very simple solutions. Goyer is just a jackass who cannot write to save his life. I also did not like how he changed the Batman Rha's relationship and had Batman let him die in the end. Batman would NOT do that.

All in all I really enjoyed the film.

I agree about Goyer. His dialogues were crap.

Batman in B Begins let the villiain die the same way Batman did in B89. The funny aspect about this is how some fans - not saying you do - use this aspect to critizise one movie but not the other.

'Batman Unmasked' by Will Brooker is probably the definitive book examining Batman as a cultural icon, I would say even moreso than 'Batman: the Complete History' by Les Daniels. You really should check it out before making a statement that perhaps 'three people' may have objected to Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne/Batman.

As Brooker quotes- "'For comic book fans... the movie serves one vital purpose: it represents them to the outside world.'... It was Batman: The Movie, a supposedly definitive representation, and the world was watching it. Tim Burton's Batman had become, as far as the wider audience was concerned, 'the' Batman."

This was what was so distressing for comic book fans. What ended up on screen was simply not Batman. This has nothing to do with whiny comic book geeks. It has to do with blithely and fundamentally changing a character that had existed for fifty years. It is possible to make a film that can show respect to the source material, please a passionate fan base, and be embraced by the wider public. Witness 'Lord of the Rings'.

The main problems of some fans is having too much of comic books knowledge and nothing of cinematography taste. A movie quality is not defined by its faithfulness to the source material.

Not to mention in the comics Batman has had different approaches, so basically any Batman movie would be unfaithful to some of them.

That's why you can't say Burton's movie wasn't about Batman just like that when it was clearly about Batman. Burton chose an approach and did it so brilliantly that even Nolan has kept some aspects of it, not to mention several other superhero movies.

And I have read numeorus fans complaining about Jackson's Lord of the Rings. Those fans and their personal opinions don't mean Jackson's movies were bad.

But since you're talking just about what fans think, then I can't give a rat's a** about it because as I said, some of them show little to no understanding of what movie quality is, so their opinion is often more attached to a 'see how much I know and understand about the character' attitude.

 

[LongDong]

LOL! That pic got under your skin did it?? Mission accomplished. I knew it would annoy just the right people .

Got under my skin? hardly, that is two idiotic things to say in a row. Way to go!!! Batting a thousand so far

Yes that's right, he approved because he stood on the movie set beside Keaton and got his photo taken with him.Would you pose for a photo beside an actor you felt bastardized your character??

Think before you type because it's YOU who's saying stupid things.

WOOHOO 3 for 3!!! You will be an all star yet. It is WIDELY known that KANE would have sold his own mnothers ashes for a few bucks. He was a licensing ****e who even went as far as to say that Batman and Robin was THE BEST Batman movie to date. OF COURSE he is going to pose next to ANYONE in the suit on the set, it will only help sell the movie and it shows a part of his history. he even stated PEEWEE HERMAN would have looked like Batman in that suit. Total knock on Keaton there.

That's right. He thought Keaton did a good job, like most people do

League leader in batting average right here. You go boy. Again and I quote " he (Mr Kane himself)even stated PEEWEE HERMAN would have looked like Batman in that suit. Total knock on Keaton there."

Really?? Did he ever complain about Keaton's rendition of Bruce Wayne??

Just read the pages the links direct you to dude. The maybe your ramblings would be wasted in another thread

So??

How does that invalidate in any way that he liked Keaton as Batman??

Keep this up you might be bound for the hall of fame!!!

 

[batmaluco]

HAHAHAHA here is a direct quote from BOB KANE on Keaton as Batman.

"Oh, sure, I knew Adam. Adam, to me, he has a strong chin and [is] tall, dark and handsome; [he] looked more like my comic book Batman than Michael Keaton does as Batman for the movies. I say that only because Michael Keaton worked fine as he got into the character, it's kind of a new way of going. But when they first represented him to me as the Batman, I was a little bit surprised and almost disappointed - originally.

Michael doesn't have a big build, he doesn't have a strong, chiselled face, basically. But he's a good actor. They moulded this Bat-suit around him and on him. Actually, Pee Wee Herman would look like Batman in that Bat-suit! (Laughs)"

If you need to rely your argumentation in Kane's authority, you should at least be fair, and to quote the whole stuff.
Here it is what you forgot to mention:

But Michael Keaton was the Batman of the 90's. He's a very good actor. Somehow, when he gets into that uniform, he becomes the Batman. He becomes swashbuckling, he has an air about him. The chin juts out another inch with that Bat-cowl he wears; he looks strong, he looks like Batman.

 

[The Joker]

Got under my skin? hardly, that is two idiotic things to say in a row. Way to go!!! Batting a thousand so far

Hee hee, the pathetic sarcasm tells me this really ticked you off

WOOHOO 3 for 3!!! You will be an all star yet. It is WIDELY known that KANE would have sold his own mnothers ashes for a few bucks. He was a licensing ****e who even went as far as to say that Batman and Robin was THE BEST Batman movie to date. OF COURSE he is going to pose next to ANYONE in the suit on the set, it will only help sell the movie and it shows a part of his history. he even stated PEEWEE HERMAN would have looked like Batman in that suit. Total knock on Keaton there.

No that's not a total knock on Keaton. If you use that ridiculous logic, I could say the same thing about Christian Bale. He looked good in a bat suit?? Yeah well so would Pee Wee Herman.

Would you like me to apply that logic to Bale, or even Kilmer?? I mean you're using it for Keaton

League leader in batting average right here. You go boy. Again and I quote " he (Mr Kane himself)even stated PEEWEE HERMAN would have looked like Batman in that suit. Total knock on Keaton there."

If the only response you can give is your stupid sarcasm and Kanes JOKING remark about the Bat suit making ANYONE look good in it, then just don't respond at all.

You're offering me no challenge for debate here.

Just read the pages the links direct you to dude. The maybe your ramblings would be wasted in another thread

I have read it. And there is nothing in it that invalidates what I'm saying. It is your pathetic ramblings mixed with even more pathetic sarcasm that's wasting everyone's time.

So far you three Keaton haters have offered nothing except the same ranting comments about how you hate Keaton, and oh yes your friends didn't like him lol, and mister lennon had a little girl in his theatre who though Keaton was a small Batman LMAO!

Wow you certainly showed us. All we got is huge critical and box office success to back us up. That and the general consensus of everyone loving Keaton as Batman

Keep this up you might be bound for the hall of fame!!!

I'd rather that than the hall of stupidity

If you need to rely your argumentation in Kane's authority, you should at least be fair, and to quote the whole stuff.
Here it is what you forgot to mention:

LOL!

 

[El Payaso]

League leader in batting average right here. You go boy. Again and I quote " he (Mr Kane himself)even stated PEEWEE HERMAN would have looked like Batman in that suit. Total knock on Keaton there."

"Even pee-wee would have looked like Batman in that suit."

Semantically this means that every actor - call it Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney, Bale or for that matter Adam West - would look good. And that was the idea, to show an average looking Bruce Wayne become a superhero. I don't see one problem in that quote.

 

[atomicbattery]

El Payaso- you've stated several times that film is different than comic books, and, believe it or not, I understand this. Plays, which usually have only a handful of sets (or even one) are often 'opened up' so that the action will not begin to feel static. Overly long source material (Lord of the Rings, Gone With The Wind, the Harry Potter books) is streamlined, characters even eliminated altogether, as a function of paring a film to a reasonable length. Thoughts are translated into physical action to accommodate a visual medium.

What you have yet to explain is how the transition from print to film makes the casting of Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne/Batman in any way logical or appropriate.

As you stated, there have been many interpretations of Batman in the comics over the years. But there is a fundamental core of the character that is unchangeable:
-Bruce Wayne saw his parents murdered when he was a child.
-He is wealthy.
-He trained himself, mentally and physically, to the limits of human perfection.
-He uses his wealth and training to fight a war on crime.
-In the execution of his mission he dresses as a bat.

By casting the soft, smallish, distracted Michael Keaton, you have FUNDAMENTALLY ALTERED THE ESSENCE OF THE CHARACTER. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TRANSLATION FROM ONE MEDIUM TO ANOTHER.
GET IT?

 

[atomicbattery]

In fact, it would be MORE appropriate to cast Keaton as Superman, an alien who gets his powers from a yellow sun, or Spider-Man, who got his from a radioactive spider bite, or any of the myriad comic book characters whose powers derive from the 'magical', than Batman, a man who has obsessively trained himself to be 'super'. There is, in film, what is called a willing suspension of disbelief. Keaton stretches credulity way, way beyond the breaking point.

 

[El Payaso]

El Payaso- you've stated several times that film is different than comic books, and, believe it or not, I understand this. Plays, which usually have only a handful of sets (or even one) are often 'opened up' so that the action will not begin to feel static. Overly long source material (Lord of the Rings, Gone With The Wind, the Harry Potter books) is streamlined, characters even eliminated altogether, as a function of paring a film to a reasonable length. Thoughts are translated into physical action to accommodate a visual medium.

What you have yet to explain is how the transition from print to film makes the casting of Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne/Batman in any way logical or appropriate.

As you stated, there have been many interpretations of Batman in the comics over the years. But there is a fundamental core of the character that is unchangeable:
-Bruce Wayne saw his parents murdered when he was a child.
-He is wealthy.
-He trained himself, mentally and physically, to the limits of human perfection.
-He uses his wealth and training to fight a war on crime.
-In the execution of his mission he dresses as a bat.

By casting the soft, smallish, distracted Michael Keaton, you have FUNDAMENTALLY ALTERED THE ESSENCE OF THE CHARACTER. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TRANSLATION FROM ONE MEDIUM TO ANOTHER.
GET IT?

And in B89 he did all of what you said.

Shots with Jack Napier, Vicky Vale and such shows a tall Batman (even when Keaton is not that tall).

There's also a shot of Bruce Wayne exercising upside down in the middle of the night and we can see he's pretty muscular (even when that's not Keaton).

If you state that Keaton himself should be the tall and muscular guy, then I could say that Christopher Reeve was miscasted because he's not really from Krypton or that the can't actually fly. Even more, Christian Bale would be miscated because he didn't train himself in the hymalayas. For what the actors can't do, they use effects of many kinds, stunts, CGI, etc etc. That's why the actor who plays Two-face shouldn't throw acid on his face, they use make-up.

Oh, and besides showing some anger, capital letters have never made a point.

And I'll have to quote myself to explain once again that it has everything to do with transaltion from comics to screen:

And that was the idea, to show an average looking Bruce Wayne becoming a superhero.

In fact, it would be MORE appropriate to cast Keaton as Superman, an alien who gets his powers from a yellow sun, or Spider-Man, who got his from a radioactive spider bite, or any of the myriad comic book characters whose powers derive from the 'magical', than Batman, a man who has obsessively trained himself to be 'super'. There is, in film, what is called a willing suspension of disbelief. Keaton stretches credulity way, way beyond the breaking point.

How about Christopher Reeve as Batman.

We can use every possible cast change to every superhero movie and that won't alter the fact Keaton was great as Batman. Not even if Bale was perfect for the role.

 

[LongDong]

If you need to rely your argumentation in Kane's authority, you should at least be fair, and to quote the whole stuff.
Here it is what you forgot to mention:

Ummmm, I did say he thoguht he did a good job as Batman onc ehe put the suit on. You not paying attention?