Reeve's Superman or Bale's Batman

[Sian]

I'll be honest here.
I haven't cast my vote, because both actors made a fantastic job. Bale portrayed perfectly the cold menace of Batman alongside the superfluous charm of Wayne - who of course was the real mask.
And Reeve's performance was simply perfect. There'll never be another Superman like him. He was physical perfection of Kal El, but it was as Kent that he showed what a fine actor he was. His Superman films aren't dated even now.
And who can ever forget John Williams' magnificent score, especially in the opening scene?

 

[Sian]

If

****ing hell that moment from 0:26 to 0:33. If you pause at those two moments you can see how different they are. When in Superman mode it feels like Reeves is much taller, his shoulder looks much more ... normal ? (It looks weird when he’s Clark Kent),etc.

I havent watch Superman but that clip is really really impressive.

If you ever get the chance to see it, make sure the music's turned up really loud - especially this bit

 

[SupermanFan]

Christopher Reeve easily

Bale was a great Bruce Wayne but by the third film his Batman was almost a parody

 

[Lantern Venom]

This thread is utter blasphemy. Christopher Reeve & it's not close.

His portrayal is iconic & he embodied the Clark Kent/Superman character perfectly for the times & tone of his film's. He is the standard for which all actors/actresses that portray superheroes are judged.

I'm sure that you'll think this is blasphemy on another level, but I don't even put Reeve's version of Superman in the top 5. A big part of that is that acting choices alone don't determine how believable a character is.

Here's a prime example. This is Wesley Snipes in Blade 2. There is only one line of dialogue that he speaks, but he did much of his own action work in this trilogy. Check out the speed, the martial arts expertise, and the body language. It's not just a fight scene, it's a guy who **knows how to fight** laying the template for the modern comic book hero in live action:

 

[Mandon Knight]

Reeves for the ‘classic’ performance, but there again, I’m utterly biased, Superman (1978) is for me, the ultimate CBM of all time.

 

[COCOS]

from a acting standpoint,comparing what actors had to do with both of theses characters
seem extremely silly, Batman is a extremely vulnerable,psychologically ,emotionally damaged & deranged character while superman basically doesnt have anything in him,you could add as a actor
that was always the problem with superman as a character for me.

 

[Peyton Westlake]

I'm sure that you'll think this is blasphemy on another level, but I don't even put Reeve's version of Superman in the top 5. A big part of that is that acting choices alone don't determine how believable a character is.

Here's a prime example. This is Wesley Snipes in Blade 2. There is only one line of dialogue that he speaks, but he did much of his own action work in this trilogy. Check out the speed, the martial arts expertise, and the body language. It's not just a fight scene, it's a guy who **knows how to fight** laying the template for the modern comic book hero in live action:

Superman is not a 'fighter'. He's not trained in any martial arts, he doesnt have to be...he's Superman. So saying you dont see Superman fight is like saying we dont see Batman fly or throw cars around.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Superman is not a 'fighter'. He's not trained in any martial arts, he doesnt have to be...he's Superman. So saying you dont see Superman fight is like saying we dont see Batman fly or throw cars around.

The problem with that point of view is that Reeve's version of Superman often didn't sell the character physically. Take his first battle with Non & Ursa in Superman 2. He blows up a wall (or something like that) with his heat vision, then squints and grimaces from the exploding debris. Why? That made zero sense.

Non grabs him in an overarm reverse bearhug, and Superman acts like he has no idea what to do. He doesn't try to vibrate out, he doesn't use his chill/freeze breath or heat vision on Non's hands, he just struggles (and it looks AWFUL) like a little kid being held by an adult. When he does escape Non to avoid Ursa's punch, the effects of the time don't allow believable super speed.

On that note, there was also a mid-air kick in that fight that was absolutely painful to watch. It was slow, awkward, and the sound effect was cartoonish. By no means am I putting that on Reeve, but that scene illustrates just how much the original Superman films struggled to make any of his powers, and his familiarity with his powers, believable.

 

[Dark Raven]

The problem with that point of view is that Reeve's version of Superman often didn't sell the character physically. Take his first battle with Non & Ursa in Superman 2. He blows up a wall (or something like that) with his heat vision, then squints and grimaces from the exploding debris. Why? That made zero sense.

Non grabs him in an overarm reverse bearhug, and Superman acts like he has no idea what to do. He doesn't try to vibrate out, he doesn't use his chill/freeze breath or heat vision on Non's hands, he just struggles (and it looks AWFUL) like a little kid being held by an adult. When he does escape Non to avoid Ursa's punch, the effects of the time don't allow believable super speed.

On that note, there was also a mid-air kick in that fight that was absolutely painful to watch. It was slow, awkward, and the sound effect was cartoonish. By no means am I putting that on Reeve, but that scene illustrates just how much the original Superman films struggled to make any of his powers, and his familiarity with his powers, believable.

I think in the late 70s and early 80s there seemed to be some kind of aversion to heroes fighting or even punching anyone. Wonder Woman didn't do that either in her TV series, and neither did He-Man in the Filmation cartoon. Neither did the Incredible Hulk for that matter. Maybe they didn't want to portray violence for kids.

People were thrown or swatted aside, but never an actual punch to the face or other more aggressive acts of violence. So I think that reflected in the Superman films of the era and the way he fought.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

I'm really surprised that Reeve has over double the votes of Bale (31/15 as it stands). Whoever came out on top, I thought this would be a lot closer.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I think in the late 70s and early 80s there seemed to be some kind of aversion to heroes fighting or even punching anyone. Wonder Woman didn't do that either in her TV series, and neither did He-Man in the Filmation cartoon. Neither did the Incredible Hulk for that matter. Maybe they didn't want to portray violence for kids.

People were thrown or swatted aside, but never an actual punch to the face or other more aggressive acts of violence. So I think that reflected in the Superman films of the era and the way he fought.

You're right. That lasted all the way into the 90s. If you dissect the Spider-man: TAS, Spidey rarely hit or kicked anyone. That was a network mandate.

 

[TheVileOne]

I think they'd get around by the punch happening offscreen. Like Batman punches toward the camera and you never actually see the impact.

 

[Axl Van Sixx]

As others have said, Christopher Reeve wins this one and it's not even close. But for me, it comes down to one decisive factor: Bale's Bat-voice.

The voice Bale uses as Batman is embarrassing and drags his whole portrayal down. It's the main reason why, even though Bale is a superior Bruce Wayne to Michael Keaton, he's a far inferior Batman. Keaton's performance as Batman was absolutely perfect, and lowering his voice to a harsh whisper was the best way to disguise it while adding an element of menace. Bale's voice by the end of the TDK trilogy was just ridiculous; an over-the-top roar that made it impossible to take anything he was saying seriously.

Christopher Reeve is still the perfect Superman, though I think Henry Cavill is a worthy successor and could have given Reeve a real run for his money with better scripts. With all of the Batman actors, on the other hand, there's usually something I can nitpick, usually because they're stronger as Bruce Wayne or Batman. Kevin Conroy is really the only actor who's ever perfectly embodied both Bruce Wayne and Batman, but that's a bit of a cheat because he didn't have to embody the physicality of the role.

 

[Boy Scout]

I have to give it to Bale because of characterization. I think Reeve was good - although not as good as most do - but his Superman was a little too cheesy for me to fully invest in (to say nothing of his Kent, who is amusing and provides a great contrast to Superman, but is too far from my preferred take).

 

[Spider-Fan]

Not really a contest. It's Christopher Reeve. Bale I liked, but he's not on my Mount Rushmore of CBM heroes. Reeve would be.

 

[The Batman]

I'm really surprised that Reeve has over double the votes of Bale (31/15 as it stands).

I'm not.

If Bale were the live action equivalent of Kevin Conroy, not only would it have been closer, he probably would've won the poll.

The problem with Live Action Batmen is that none of them embody Batman as well as Chris Reeve embodied Superman. There is always some significant drawback to their performance.

 

[Peyton Westlake]

The problem with that point of view is that Reeve's version of Superman often didn't sell the character physically. Take his first battle with Non & Ursa in Superman 2. He blows up a wall (or something like that) with his heat vision, then squints and grimaces from the exploding debris. Why? That made zero sense.

Non grabs him in an overarm reverse bearhug, and Superman acts like he has no idea what to do. He doesn't try to vibrate out, he doesn't use his chill/freeze breath or heat vision on Non's hands, he just struggles (and it looks AWFUL) like a little kid being held by an adult. When he does escape Non to avoid Ursa's punch, the effects of the time don't allow believable super speed.

On that note, there was also a mid-air kick in that fight that was absolutely painful to watch. It was slow, awkward, and the sound effect was cartoonish. By no means am I putting that on Reeve, but that scene illustrates just how much the original Superman films struggled to make any of his powers, and his familiarity with his powers, believable.

There is also one more thing I would like to defend Reeves with your comments on him with the heat vision & he should have vibrated out, etc. You do have to remember 1 thing, and everyone seems to forget this, Superman was filmed in 1978.
The technology wasnt there to really film all these Superman 'feats' , I'm sure thats why the script showed the action as we saw it.
Based on how they can portray his superhuman abilities during a 1978 time with what was available.

 

[STARMAN]

In regards to the squinting at exploding debris in Superman II, I always took it he squinted and grimaced because he knew the debris was falling on citizens below. The shot right after is the debris tumbling down the side of the building and crashing into the street where cars and people are.

 

[Zorro]

Reeve! Bale isn't even my favorite Batman

 

[Lantern Venom]

There is also one more thing I would like to defend Reeves with your comments on him with the heat vision & he should have vibrated out, etc. You do have to remember 1 thing, and everyone seems to forget this, Superman was filmed in 1978.
The technology wasnt there to really film all these Superman 'feats' , I'm sure thats why the script showed the action as we saw it.
Based on how they can portray his superhuman abilities during a 1978 time with what was available.

I'm well aware of that, and I often use this in my arguments against that version of Superman being a great adaptation of the character. The fandom of that version of the character is built around 1) Reeve's considerable acting skills and 2) it established a genre. I don't deny that either of those are true, I only believe that they're not enough to put that version of Superman in the conversation for great adaptations. I firmly believe that visuals and internal logic of the mythos are every bit as important as acting. On those counts, the effort came up short.

Some people believe that many allowances have to be made for the time period of adaptations. I don't believe that this should be the case. I recently introduced my youngest daughter to the original X-Men trilogy. I hadn't seen the first X-Men, now 20 years old, in many years. I was surprised by how well the characterizations and effects held up. Much the same can be said about Batman Begins despite 15 years having gone by since its release. Conversely, I remember having a different reaction to many 70s live-action comic book adaptations when I attempted to rewatch them in the 90s. The Superman films, the Shazam show, the Spider-man series...they were chores to digest. I saw all of the cracks in the foundation, and nostalgia wasn't nearly enough to compensate.

 

[Peyton Westlake]

I'm well aware of that, and I often use this in my arguments against that version of Superman being a great adaptation of the character. The fandom of that version of the character is built around 1) Reeve's considerable acting skills and 2) it established a genre. I don't deny that either of those are true, I only believe that they're not enough to put that version of Superman in the conversation for great adaptations. I firmly believe that visuals and internal logic of the mythos are every bit as important as acting. On those counts, the effort came up short.
Conversely, I remember having a different reaction to many 70s live-action comic book adaptations when I attempted to rewatch them in the 90s. The Superman films, the Shazam show, the Spider-man series...they were chores to digest. I saw all of the cracks in the foundation, and nostalgia wasn't nearly enough to compensate.

Well , I understand your logic by that and you are entitled to your opinion of those movies from the 70s showing their cracks in the foundation.
But let me ask you this.
Do you watch Jaws, only filmed 2 or 3 years prior to Superman and think the shark looks fake, its taking away from my enjoyment?
Or even Star Wars 1 year before Superman, and look at the monsters in the bar with Luke & Ben and say wow, they look so fake?
A good movie is a good movie no matter what.
Superman & the other 2 I mentioned I watch all the time when I see them on TV & always stop to watch them.
None of that ever enters my mind.
I can find cracks in the foundation with movies the past few years with all the CGI as well.

 

[Awest66]

Fans have said that we still don't have a live-action actor that embodies the character of Batman the way Reeves did Superman.

Wouldn't it be hilarious if that ended up being Robert Pattinson?

 

[Brother Jack]

Reeve as Superman is definitive in a way that almost no other actor/character pairing has been. That's not the case with Bale, as much as I love his incarnation. But I also don't think Batman lends itself as a character to a "definitive" version as much. Batman thrives on reinvention in a way few other characters do.

 

[Boom]

Reeve is iconic and commands attention every second he's in the suit. Pure charisma.

I'm a well-documented critic of Bale's Batman. I enjoy him as Bruce Wayne, but his Batman borders on parody in TDK and TDKR. I've tried for years to get over the "Bat voice," but I just can't move past it. I cannot take him seriously whenever he opens his mouth. I'll speak for myself here, but he never commands attention in a scene with other characters. In TDK alone he was arguably upstaged by all three of his major supporting players. I think his interpretation benefits greatly from the overall quality of the films surrounding it. When isolated on its own, I would hardly consider it anything "definitive."

Reeve, on the other hand, is untouched.

 

[The Batman]

Fans have said that we still don't have a live-action actor that embodies the character of Batman the way Reeves did Superman.

Wouldn't it be hilarious if that ended up being Robert Pattinson?

It would, but honestly, I'm not getting my hopes up.

At this point, I don't think there will be a Live Action Baman who is as definitive as Reeve's Superman. Spider-Man is currently in the same boat as Batman in this regard.