The Dark Knight The Christian Bale/Bruce Wayne thread

[The Joker]

My favorite Batman Begins review was from the New York Times and Manohla Dargis. She explains why Bale is the best Bruce Wayne/Batman:

http://movies.nytimes.com/2005/06/15/movies/15batm.html

Bruce Wayne is a blue blood patrician from the finest family in Gotham. I never got that from the other Batman actors. It may be a somewhat minor point, but it's always bugged me.

Don't like that reviewer. She dissed Adam West's Batman

 

[El Payaso]

Then maybe you should improve your reading comprehension. If my points were about showing how Bale's Bruce Wayne is superior than Keaton's, how does that make me defensive?

I never said he was inferior than Keaton or that Keaton was superior than Bale yet you reacted as if I did. That’s how.

Yes, it does mean inferior in certain situations. If Keaton's Bruce is so helpless in front of Vicki that he couldn't say a bare few words without making a complete fool of himself in spite of planning to do so, that is inferior. There's a world of difference between that and Bale's Bruce being caught by surprise in a an embarrassing situation. It's a pity you constantly fail to grasp that.

In fact I don’t fail at admitting they both bumbled.

It is you who keeps equating vulnerable with complete fool for some reason.

Stop as in halt his playboy ruse for the moment while he was talking to Rachel.

He stopped being a playboy and started to bumble, all right.

Of course he did. But he wasn't bumbling just because he was facing his girlfriend like Keaton did. It was about much more.

In your statement it’s implied that he bumbled, which was my whole point. Never said who needed better reasons for it.

The rest are embellishing excuses.

It was not just love, but also about his image in the eyes of his childhood friend as a worthy heir to the Wayne philanthropic legacy.

Yes, he cares a lot for his family’s name, legacy and reputation as we learn throughout the movie. Alfred never needs to remind him to care for those things.

And it's clear that he only really tries to explain himself when Rachel says "what choice do I have and you're too busy 'swimming'".

But he started bumbling the second he saw her though. Well, it was really comprehensible since she was the one that made him the man he is by slapping him twice.

It's still nothing compared to the blunders of Keaton's Bruce who makes an ass out of himself almost every single time he speaks to a woman.

In fact Keaton’s vulnerability made him to get Vicky into his bed after the first date. Much more than Bale’s Bruce did with Rachel throughout all his life. After all she ended up dumping him for Dent. For much more superior reasons of course.

Because there is no reason for him to fumble like that.

Exposing his true self for the first time since a traumatic event is reason enough.

It's true that he was about to expose himself in front of Vicki, but what really intimidated him was her possible reaction to it. Will she still stay with him now that she's found out he's a crazy costumed vigilante? Or does he keep his secret concealed? All this for Vale who he met, what, a couple of days ago? There is nothing really of great value at stake here which is supposed to give him the jitters.

Cooming from someone who thinks being vulnerable is being a fool I’m not surprised you equal being in love with ‘nothing really of great value’ as a reason to be nervous.

Bale’s Batman actually told Rachel that when he had quit being Batman (something Bruce Wayne would do?) they could be together again; See how love is important for both?

But then again, Keaton's Bruce was always poor at social encounters. That's something Bale's Bruce does quite effortlessly.

On the other hand, as I said, scoring in the bed with the girl he loves is something Keaton’s Bruce does effortlessly. That speaks something about certain Bruces’ “social skills.”

Still, it is hilarious and very wrong when Alfred looks and sounds more pissed than Batman.

It is hilarious as it is intended to be. It is right as Alfred took some time to make the soup just to have it being spit away.

Bruce Wayne is not just 'someone'. In your own words, he is an obsessive, intense, tortured and brooding individual.

I think I need to be quoted as to where did I say all that.

And then, if I did, the sum of those adjectives doesn’t rule out being unintentionally hilarious now and then. I’m sure even Hitler had some hilarious moments inspite of how evil and serious he could have been.

Christopher Reeve said – in an interview in “Inside of the Actors Studio” - tt in order to enrich a character you had to take its main characteristics and at least in one moment play the opposite for any human being can’t be the exact same 100% of time.

It most certainly is 'inferior' if such a character comes off as unintentionally hilarious in many different situations. Especially when he is his true self rather than just in public.

Well, as soon as the Joker came in in that scene Keaton’s Bruce was able to face the villiain himself, without the need of a mask, to save Vicky. Unlike you know who.

Uhm, so?

So I find your paranoia amusing.

And I hope you will actually read what I wrote instead of simply wasting the next page plugging your ears going 'LALALALATHEYBOTHFUMBLEDICANTHEARYOULALALALA!'

Then I hope you won’t keep replying to someone you think is not listening to you.

Unless, of course you don’t actually think that.

 

[El Payaso]

There's a huge difference between taking a capture of an entire shot from the film as it is and freeze-framing an actor from a lengthy scene while he is talking just to make him look ridiculous.

Of course. The difference is: it doesn’t help your case this time.

You thought this was just some kind of a joke and nothing else,

In fact, given that it wasn’t funny or creative enough to be a joke, I interpreted it as the realization that you didn’t have any valuable arguments against Keaton so you hads to resort to this kind of device.

and that's where you prove your utter failure to comprehend my point behind that post.

I admit that’s true.

I failed to get irritated and frustrated by it. Even worse, I shouldn’t have replied to you showing that that simplistic game was able to be easily played both ways by putting some frames where Bale looks even worse than Keaton.

When he is in the cave with Alfred or by himself, such silly antics are completely uncharacteristic of Bruce Wayne, especially in terms of the words people often use to describe Keaton's Wayne, or even Bruce Wayne in general.

As it is not to be eager to quit as Batman knowing Joker is out there just because Harvey Dent is doing a good job, but hey, at least the movies were good.

Everything from his voice,

You sure you wanna get Bale’s Batman voice involved in this discussion as a counterpoint?

his reaction and that dumbass look Keaton gives ill fits a person who is supposed to be brooding, tortured, obsessive and/or intense.

It could be. Only you think an obssessed character has to be one-dimentional enough to be brooding 100% of time.

Remember that scene in the beginning of Batman Returns when he is in the manor silently waiting by himself. One can see that even during that moment he is in a state of deep concentration or contemplation and even then he is interrupted by the light of the signal. But you don't see him make a fool out of himself then now, did you? Which clearly shows a break in concentration doesn't necessarily result in unintentional hilarity, particularly for a sober and serious personality like Bruce Wayne.

It seems that being alone expecting the Bat-signal and getting the Bat-signal is different enough from being at the computer researching about a possible threat and then distracted by cold soup that was supposed to be a hot dish. It's a pity you fail to grasp that.

 

[Fenrir]

I never said he was inferior than Keaton or that Keaton was superior than Bale yet you reacted as if I did. That’s how.

I was replying to nathaniel's post before you jumped in. It was a response to his arguments which clearly put Keaton on a pedestal. You come in halfway and reply to a post that wasn't addressed to you in the first place. And now you insinuate that my own response wasn't in accordance to what you wrote? Wow, way to make yourself look like a complete jackass.

In fact I don’t fail at admitting they both bumbled.
It is you who keeps equating vulnerable with complete fool for some reason.

Yes, vulnerability is equated with being a complete fool when there is little reason for him to be vulnerable in the first place.

In your statement it’s implied that he bumbled, which was my whole point. Never said who needed better reasons for it.

Then it's your own utter failure to look at anything beyond it's face value. It's like saying Clooney is just as good as Keaton, or that Tommy Lee Jones just as good as Eckhart, because they were both Batman and Two-Face. If you can't discuss and comprehend anything beyond binary values like 'yes' or 'no', then you really shouldn't be posting here.

The rest are embellishing excuses.

It only would have been an excuse if I was implying that Bale never bumbled. I never did. I simply said the circumstances in which Bale's Bruce was caught off guard were for me pressing than Keaton's. At that moment, he had a lot more at stake than just his love. Even so, he did considerably better than Keaton's Wayne given the situation. Bale's Bruce said what he wanted to and didn't need a motherly pat on the cheek from his girlfriend to do it. If little things like that can't help you see the difference between the bumbling Bruce of Keaton and that of Bale, then I can't help you.

Yes, he cares a lot for his family’s name, legacy and reputation as we learn throughout the movie. Alfred never needs to remind him to care for those things.

Alfred only reminds him to care for things that Bruce deemed superficial compared to the ultimate goal of cleaning Gotham of crime and corruption such as attending his birthday party or not destroying Wayne Manor (which conincidentally Alfred himself admits that the Wayne legacy is more than bricks and mortars). Otherwise, there are no more than 2 occasions on which Alfred tells Bruce that what he is shunning is important to uphold the family name. Whereas I can point more than a dozen instances from the film in which Bruce clearly shows how much he cared for his parents and their philanthropic legacy. So please, spare me from these kinds of strawman arguments. They are pointless and only make you look incompetent.

But he started bumbling the second he saw her though. Well, it was really comprehensible since she was the one that made him the man he is by slapping him twice.

Yup, it was the slap and not the accusation that his father would be ashamed of him that changed Wayne. I wonder if I should slap you twice to knock some sense into since you seem to think that as an effective technique for changing one's perceptions.

In fact Keaton’s vulnerability made him to get Vicky into his bed after the first date.

Oh great, sympathy sex.

Much more than Bale’s Bruce did with Rachel throughout all his life. After all she ended up dumping him for Dent. For much more superior reasons of course.

Should I feel bad for Bale's Wayne that Rachel didn't sleep with him out of pity for his vulnerability, like Vale did for Keaton's Wayne?

Exposing his true self for the first time since a traumatic event is reason enough.

Exposing his true self means making a complete ass out of himself? The real Bruce Wayne that Keaton plays is a babbling moron who couldn't say three simple words "I am Batman" in spite of planning for it in front of the girl he loves? That means not only does lack the spine, but doesn't have the moral courage to be honest and straightforward even when he wants to.

Coming from someone who thinks being vulnerable is being a fool I’m not surprised you equal being in love with ‘nothing really of great value’ as a reason to be nervous. Bale’s Batman actually told Rachel that when he had quit being Batman (something Bruce Wayne would do?) they could be together again; See how love is important for both?

Key word being "when and if he quits being Batman". Which means being Batman is more important to him than his love. That is why he is willing to defer one for the sake of the other. And it's good you bring that point up too. When Bale's Bruce planned to reveal his secret to Rachel, he did so without any trouble. Unfortunately Keaton's 'love' only found out about his secret when Alfred took the initiative after realizing Bruce didn't have the balls to tell her himself. If Keaton's Wayne had trouble honestly telling his love about his true identity, then he is even less of a man.

On the other hand, as I said, scoring in the bed with the girl he loves is something Keaton’s Bruce does effortlessly. That speaks something about certain Bruces’ “social skills.”

Yup. Effortlessly. By showing how vulnerable he is so that the girl has pity on him and sleeps with him as some kind of consolation. It's just like that scene in Wedding Crashers where Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn's characters get emotional and cry in front of chicks they dance with at the weddings to get them to have sex with them. Real 'social skills' there, bub.

It is hilarious as it is intended to be. It is right as Alfred took some time to make the soup just to have it being spit away.

Yup, Alfred is pissed because Bruce spit out the soup he spent valuable time making. But Bruce isn't pissed at being interrupted in between what is obviously a very important investigation. No, just pauses for two whole seconds with that confounded dumbass look on his face.

I think I need to be quoted as to where did I say all that.

If you didn't, absolving yourself from it would indicate that they are also not applicable to how you would describe Keaton's Wayne. And if Keaton's Bruce Wayne does not fit those adjectives, then he really isn't Bruce Wayne as he is supposed to be at all to begin with.

And then, if I did, the sum of those adjectives doesn’t rule out being unintentionally hilarious now and then. I’m sure even Hitler had some hilarious moments inspite of how evil and serious he could have been.

Yes, I'm sure Hitler acted like Peter Parker in his most intimate moments. God, words can't describe how downright stupid and ******ed you sound now.

Christopher Reeve said – in an interview in “Inside of the Actors Studio” - tt in order to enrich a character you had to take its main characteristics and at least in one moment play the opposite for any human being can’t be the exact same 100% of time.

Yes, no one could be the exact same 100% of the time. But for someone like Bruce Wayne, the lighter moments are more like ice breakers to break the tension rather than a consistent aspect of his personality.

Well, as soon as the Joker came in in that scene Keaton’s Bruce was able to face the villiain himself, without the need of a mask, to save Vicky. Unlike you know who.

Face the villain? More like distracting the villain. And his little charade was of no harm to the Joker either. He was lucky the Joker decided to leave Vicky at the apartment instead of taking her with him orr shoot Bruce in the head. Or get his goons to throw him out the balcony. It was simply a really dumb and ******ed thing to do.

Then I hope you won’t keep replying to someone you think is not listening to you. Unless, of course you don’t actually think that.

Persistence can be a wonderful thing.

 

[Fenrir]

Of course. The difference is: it doesn’t help your case this time. In fact, given that it wasn’t funny or creative enough to be a joke, I interpreted it as the realization that you didn’t have any valuable arguments against Keaton so you hads to resort to this kind of device. I admit that’s true. I failed to get irritated and frustrated by it. Even worse, I shouldn’t have replied to you showing that that simplistic game was able to be easily played both ways by putting some frames where Bale looks even worse than Keaton

Then it's nothing but another colossal failure on your part. That pic of Keaton was a genuine expression and a full shot, not some freeze-frame capture. The fact that YOU had to resort to resort to that kind of device shows YOU don't have any valuable arguments against Bale or in defense of Keaton.

As it is not to be eager to quit as Batman knowing Joker is out there just because Harvey Dent is doing a good job, but hey, at least the movies were good.

Batman had quit when criminals were at large. Please go see the BTAS episode 'I am The Night' to educate yourself.

You sure you wanna get Bale’s Batman voice involved in this discussion as a counterpoint?

Be my guest. You bringing up tangents that has no relevance to that point of mine only shows your own desperation and helplessness.

It could be. Only you think an obssessed character has to be one-dimentional enough to be brooding 100% of time.

And only you think a brooding character can be bumbling clown half the time.

It seems that being alone expecting the Bat-signal and getting the Bat-signal is different enough from being at the computer researching about a possible threat and then distracted by cold soup that was supposed to be a hot dish. It's a pity you fail to grasp that.

And you fail to grasp that a man sitting alone in a dark room with his hand on his chin is often associated with someone entangled in very deep thoughts. (unless of course you want to equate Keaton with a mindless drone who has nothing else going on his mind while he is waiting for the signal). Plus, his reaction to the signal did have an element of surprise. Either way, his line of thought was disturbed and he was interrupted.

 

[El Payaso]

I was replying to nathaniel's post before you jumped in. It was a response to his arguments which clearly put Keaton on a pedestal. You come in halfway and reply to a post that wasn't addressed to you in the first place. And now you insinuate that my own response wasn't in accordance to what you wrote? Wow, way to make yourself look like a complete jackass.

Yes, I posted in a public forum, way to be a fool. Because that conversation wasn't via PM right?

But if you resorted to name-calling when I have never called you any name, that speaks a lot about you losing control. You should relax, nobody is attacking you personally. It is pure movie disussion.

And well, if you keep thinking I have said things I never have and using that to attack me and start this long discussion, you should read better before replying. Good reader good replier.

Yes, vulnerability is equated with being a complete fool when there is little reason for him to be vulnerable in the first place.

Being in love is not “little” anything.

Then it's your own utter failure to look at anything beyond it's face value. It's like saying Clooney is just as good as Keaton, or that Tommy Lee Jones just as good as Eckhart, because they were both Batman and Two-Face. If you can't discuss and comprehend anything beyond binary values like 'yes' or 'no', then you really shouldn't be posting here.

In fact the comment wasn’t just based on that the two actors did the same character, but in the fact that they shared some similarities too.

And don’t ever tell someone to stop posting, it is rude and defensive; shows fear about what the optehr person ahs to say. Everybody’s free from posting as long as they’re respectful. Gotta accept the rules.

It only would have been an excuse if I was implying that Bale never bumbled. I never did. I simply said the circumstances in which Bale's Bruce was caught off guard were for me pressing than Keaton's. At that moment, he had a lot more at stake than just his love. Even so, he did considerably better than Keaton's Wayne given the situation. Bale's Bruce said what he wanted to and didn't need a motherly pat on the cheek from his girlfriend to do it. If little things like that can't help you see the difference between the bumbling Bruce of Keaton and that of Bale, then I can't help you.

What else was actually there at stake, other than what Rachel could think of him?

Because his own name can’t mean less to Bruce, as we learn in BB.

Alfred only reminds him to care for things that Bruce deemed superficial compared to the ultimate goal of cleaning Gotham of crime and corruption such as attending his birthday party or not destroying Wayne Manor (which conincidentally Alfred himself admits that the Wayne legacy is more than bricks and mortars). Otherwise, there are no more than 2 occasions on which Alfred tells Bruce that what he is shunning is important to uphold the family name. Whereas I can point more than a dozen instances from the film in which Bruce clearly shows how much he cared for his parents and their philanthropic legacy. So please, spare me from these kinds of strawman arguments. They are pointless and only make you look incompetent.

You won’t name one of that dozens instances and you’re calling ME incompetent?

Yup, it was the slap and not the accusation that his father would be ashamed of him that changed Wayne. I wonder if I should slap you twice to knock some sense into since you seem to think that as an effective technique for changing one's perceptions.

I’m not in love with you as Bale was with Rachel so I guess it won’t work. :wink:

Oh great, sympathy sex.

She was in love with him the next day, and then after she found out he lied to her. And then after she found out he was Batman.

It was clearly something else. Perception fail.

Should I feel bad for Bale's Wayne that Rachel didn't sleep with him out of pity for his vulnerability, like Vale did for Keaton's Wayne?

For a man that pretends to be a womanizer he has little actual success with the girl he truly loves. Unlike Keaton’s Bruce.

Exposing his true self means making a complete ass out of himself? The real Bruce Wayne that Keaton plays is a babbling moron who couldn't say three simple words "I am Batman" in spite of planning for it in front of the girl he loves? That means not only does lack the spine, but doesn't have the moral courage to be honest and straightforward even when he wants to.

It’s not like Bale’s Bruce went to Rachel and told her the bare truth. Instead he uses a poetric device “it’s not who I am underneath...” It seems someone else didn’t have the courage to tell the “three words” directly.

Key word being "when and if he quits being Batman". Which means being Batman is more important to him than his love. That is why he is willing to defer one for the sake of the other.

According to the movie he talked to Rachel about it: he was willing to give up his Batman role and that meant, amongst other things, that they could be together at last. So he did it partially for love, go figure.

And it's good you bring that point up too. When Bale's Bruce planned to reveal his secret to Rachel, he did so without any trouble. Unfortunately Keaton's 'love' only found out about his secret when Alfred took the initiative after realizing Bruce didn't have the balls to tell her himself. If Keaton's Wayne had trouble honestly telling his love about his true identity, then he is even less of a man.

As long as I remember Bale’s Bruce needed to be in full Bat-costume, protected behind his mask and about to risk his life (he’d probably die) to throw a hint at her (It’s not who I am underneath...). He never went without his bat-costume directly at her to confess a thing as Keaton's Bruce did. But well, he was interrupted by the Joker.

Yup. Effortlessly. By showing how vulnerable he is so that the girl has pity on him and sleeps with him as some kind of consolation.

In fact he didn’t show anything at that point. All they did was having dinner. Perception fail 2.

In any case, it keeps being more than what Bale’s Bruce achieved.

It's just like that scene in Wedding Crashers where Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn's characters get emotional and cry in front of chicks they dance with at the weddings to get them to have sex with them. Real 'social skills' there, bub.

Except Bruce didn’t get emotional or cried in front of her. Perception fail 3.

Yup, Alfred is pissed because Bruce spit out the soup he spent valuable time making. But Bruce isn't pissed at being interrupted in between what is obviously a very important investigation. No, just pauses for two whole seconds with that confounded dumbass look on his face.

He’s not a rude man to his butler. Alfred is suppoosed to serve dinner, why should he be angry?

I don’t blame Bale’s Bruce for his own dumbass face in front of Rachel either. It was completely justified too.

If you didn't, absolving yourself from it would indicate that they are also not applicable to how you would describe Keaton's Wayne. And if Keaton's Bruce Wayne does not fit those adjectives, then he really isn't Bruce Wayne as he is supposed to be at all to begin with.

He’s just different than Bale’s approach which is all good. If both Bruces bumble, that shouldn’t be put against the approaches.

Yes, I'm sure Hitler acted like Peter Parker in his most intimate moments. God, words can't describe how downright stupid and ******ed you sound now.

Words fail you since your arguments about this seems to be exhausted. Stop the rude name-calling, breath deep and better replies will come to you naturally.

Peter Parker had never embodied the only way to be unintentionally hilarious as every human being has at least one different way of being it, so your argument fails big time.

Yes, no one could be the exact same 100% of the time. But for someone like Bruce Wayne, the lighter moments are more like ice breakers to break the tension rather than a consistent aspect of his personality.

Depends on the incarnation actually.

Face the villain? More like distracting the villain. And his little charade was of no harm to the Joker either. He was lucky the Joker decided to leave Vicky at the apartment instead of taking her with him orr shoot Bruce in the head. Or get his goons to throw him out the balcony. It was simply a really dumb and ******ed thing to do.

Yes, he saved the girl. Oh those men in love are so inferior.

Persistence can be a wonderful thing.

It shows, for example, that you didn't actually think I wasn't paying attention to you.



Unintentional admission can be a wonderful thing.

 

[El Payaso]

Then it's nothing but another colossal failure on your part. That pic of Keaton was a genuine expression and a full shot, not some freeze-frame capture.

Unless it is a youtube link or a gif, what you posted is a freeze-frame.

The fact that YOU had to resort to resort to that kind of device shows YOU don't have any valuable arguments against Bale or in defense of Keaton.

That’s true. I didn’t resort to resort (???) to that kind of device because I have nothing against Bale – as I have already stated – but only to prove you how pointless it is to put frames of the movie as a proof of a character being ‘inferior.’

Batman had quit when criminals were at large. Please go see the BTAS episode 'I am The Night' to educate yourself.

BTAS? No, they have changed things from comics before.

In any case, that's another similarity. Both Bruces were about to quit being Batman so they could be with the woman they loved.

Be my guest. You bringing up tangents that has no relevance to that point of mine only shows your own desperation and helplessness.

Well, that’s what I thought about someone bringing freeze-frames to “make a point.” Or the Peter Parker reference.

But Bale’s Bat-voice has a universal fame for being unintentionally hilarious at times. Not that it ruined the movie, of course, just a minor thing he has to improve. I personally think he will.

And only you think a brooding character can be bumbling clown half the time.

No, just now and then, as any human being.

And you fail to grasp that a man sitting alone in a dark room with his hand on his chin is often associated with someone entangled in very deep thoughts. (unless of course you want to equate Keaton with a mindless drone who has nothing else going on his mind while he is waiting for the signal). Plus, his reaction to the signal did have an element of surprise. Either way, his line of thought was disturbed and he was interrupted.

Yes. He was waiting for the bat-signal and he suddenly got... the bat-signal. What a surprise that should have been.

 

[Hunter Rider]

No need to make this personal gents, drop the snide stuff.

 

[El Payaso]

Thanks.

 

[Fenrir]

Yes, I posted in a public forum, way to be a fool. Because that conversation wasn't via PM right?

You said I was being defensive in response to a post that clearly wasn't addressed to you. Sure it is public forum, but the quote function is there for a reason. So yes, way to be a...well...you know...

Being in love is not “little” anything.

There are things far more important than being in love.

In fact the comment wasn’t just based on that the two actors did the same character, but in the fact that they shared some similarities too.

And my comments weren't just based on the fact that both characters bumbled, but rather how much they bumbled and in what circumstances.

What else was actually there at stake, other than what Rachel could think of him? Because his own name can’t mean less to Bruce, as we learn in BB.

That his antics, though a ruse, would distance the only remaining person aside from Alfred that he knew intimately in Gotham. It was not just the prospect of losing the woman he loved, but also losing his only childhood friend. What did Keaton's Bruce had to lose aside from the girl he met, what, a couple of days ago that made him so nervous?

You won’t name one of that dozens instances and you’re calling ME incompetent?

I thought you were competent enough to have known all them yourself that a mere mention would've been enough. Forgive me for overestimating your intelligence. I shall now list a few of those instances for your convenience -

1. "I am using this monster to help other people like my father did" - Pretty self explanatory.
2. "Your father would be ashamed you" - this is what was really the actual catalyst for making Bruce realize his mistake and drive him to action (not some slap like you ridiculously maintain). The thought that he would let down his parents was unbearable to him and started him off on a journey that would help him achieve the means for accomplishing his parents' philanthropic objectives.
3. "The apple has fallen very far from the tree" - a moment of sadness and self-disappointment in Bruce's face. Even though he was compelled to do what he did in order to save the lives of his guest, Fredricks ultimately hits Bruce where it hurt him most. Clearly a reaction of someone who *gasp* did care for his name despite what he impulsively said earlier.
4. "Rebuild it, just the way it was brick for brick" - Again, pretty self explanatory.

I’m not in love with you as Bale was with Rachel so I guess it won’t work. :wink:

How about I invite you to dinner in my lonely mansion? That would clearly make you fall in love with me in a single swoop.

She was in love with him the next day, and then after she found out he lied to her. And then after she found out he was Batman.

Yup, she barely even knew Bruce and slept with him on the very first date. What kind of woman falls in love with someone after the first date? Damn, what a ****!

For a man that pretends to be a womanizer he has little actual success with the girl he truly loves. Unlike Keaton’s Bruce.

Big deal Keaton scored with a ****. Vale's no different than the chicks Bale's Bruce always has in each arm all the time. But I guess both Keaton's Bruce and Vale were quite desperate individuals, what with him ogling at her since the very first time he saw here and she sleeping with this short, skinny and funny looking guy with little hair about whom she knows nothing about on the very first date. They were totally MADE for each other!

It’s not like Bale’s Bruce went to Rachel and told her the bare truth. Instead he uses a poetric device “it’s not who I am underneath...” It seems someone else didn’t have the courage to tell the “three words” directly.

It's quite ridiculous to imply that he didn't have the courage to tell her when he pretty much did. Besides, he never had any intention of doing so.

According to the movie he talked to Rachel about it: he was willing to give up his Batman role and that meant, amongst other things, that they could be together at last. So he did it partially for love, go figure.

Umm, what exactly gave you the impression that he wanted to give up being Batman for her? He wanted to be her while still being Batman. All he says to her is "Batman's just a symbol, Rachel", implying that he is still the person she knew and loved. Nowhere does he ever say that he is willing to give up being Batman to be with her. But Rachel understood that Bruce can never be a normal person as long as he is Batman. Bruce says it himself in TDK "you once told me that the day I was finished, we'd be together..." Why would he make her wait for something he was willing to do right then and there? That's the difference between Keaton's and Bale's Bruce Wayne. In TDK, his life is a mess. He clearly sees that the woman he loves is dating someone else yet his first and foremost priority was Gotham, even if it meant empowering the guy who is dating the love of his life. He could've let the Joker kill Harvey and have Rachel all for himself like any jealous ex-boyfriend would, but he saves Dent first. Not only that, but he thought of Dent as a bigger and better man than himself. He says things like "Harvey is that hero", "this is the face of Gotham's bright future" and "I believe in Harvey Dent", all that would risk pushing his love towards Harvey rather than away from him. Those are not the characteristics of someone who is willing to give up everything for the woman he loves. Your argument that Keaton's and Bale's Bruce share this similarity is flawed, incorrect and without any sound basis.

As long as I remember Bale’s Bruce needed to be in full Bat-costume, protected behind his mask and about to risk his life (he’d probably die) to throw a hint at her (It’s not who I am underneath...). He never went without his bat-costume directly at her to confess a thing as Keaton's Bruce did.

Because he never felt any need to. You seem to be confusing the fact that Bale's Bruce wanted to confess his secret to Rachel. He never did. He says "I'm sorry I didn't tell you, Rachel" because he never had any intention to. He reveals his secret to at that moment, because as you said, it might be the last time they would see each other and even then, he says it indirectly. Unlike Keaton who wanted to just blurt it out but couldn't. Oh there you go! Another difference between the two!

In fact he didn’t show anything at that point. All they did was having dinner. Perception fail 2.

Didn't you say that his vulnerability was what got her into bed with him? Sympathy sex.

In any case, it keeps being more than what Bale’s Bruce achieved.

Getting sympathy sex and that too from a ****. What's such a big deal about that?

Except Bruce didn’t get emotional or cried in front of her. Perception fail 3.

Neither did Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson in Wedding Crashers (well, not noticeably anyway). They just acted vulnerable.t: Like Keaton.

He’s not a rude man to his butler. Alfred is suppoosed to serve dinner, why should he be angry?

Even if he wasn't rude, he could've, I dunno, at least said something like "Alfred, it's December, it's snowing outside and I am down here in this cave with no heaters doing important research work. Something hot and warm would've really been appreciated and a lot more appropriate". But nooooo, he just gave Alfred that stupid look.

I don’t blame Bale’s Bruce for his own dumbass face in front of Rachel either. It was completely justified too.

Only that his face didn't have his face stuck like that for five seconds like Keaton.

He’s just different than Bale’s approach which is all good. If both Bruces bumble, that shouldn’t be put against the approaches.

Difference being Keaton's Bruce bumbles...a lot. You know, the scene in Vicki's apartment. Or when he is talking to Knox and Vale in the armory. Or the "I mistook me for someone else" scene. Or when he sees the news of the ice princess kidnapping and tries to get rid of Selina. For someone who is supposed to have trained his mind and body, Keaton's Bruce sure was a real shaky bundle of nerves a lot of the time.

Peter Parker had never embodied the only way to be unintentionally hilarious as every human being has at least one different way of being it, so your argument fails big time.

Only if you actually thought it was a serious argument to begin with. :facepalm

Depends on the incarnation actually.

Care to mention a few?

Yes, he saved the girl. Oh those men in love are so inferior.

Uhm, he saved the girl how exactly? Did he do anything when the Joker was dragging Vale out of the apartment? Or did he just lay there praying his rosaries hoping the Joker wouldn't take Vale away...which coincidentally speaking exactly what happened! I mean damn! What are the odds?

It shows, for example, that you didn't actually think I wasn't paying attention to you.

Unintentional admission can be a wonderful thing.

No, it shows that I was persistent about making myself heard despite thinking you weren't paying attention. What with you now entangled in the same kind of quote dissection, I was hoping by the law of averages at least one of my many points would hit that ol' cranium of yours sooner or later.

 

[Fenrir]

Unless it is a youtube link or a gif, what you posted is a freeze-frame.

It's not just a freeze-frame. It's an entire shot. Keaton's Bruce has that dumbass look on his face for five whole seconds - see 0:38:39-0:38:44 on the DVD for reference.

That’s true. I didn’t resort to resort (???) to that kind of device because I have nothing against Bale – as I have already stated – but only to prove you how pointless it is to put frames of the movie as a proof of a character being ‘inferior.’

Umm, yes you did. Freeze-framing while Bale's character is talking or in the middle of a motion so that you can salvage a few pics of the actor looking silly is nothing compared to Keaton's motionless 5-second ******ed stare. But since you have so much trouble understanding my words and a picture is worth a thousand words (which should be enough for you...I hope), allow me to enroll in your elementary school of freeze-frame comedy:

And that's just from two scenes. I haven't even touched Batman Returns yet. There are some real comedy gems in that one. Great material for the caption thread.

BTAS? No, they have changed things from comics before.

Since when did you start caring about fidelity to the comics? I mean, obviously seeing as you love the Burton films so much. Oh I get it, it's only important if you want to nag on Nolan's films.

Oh and you might want to look into a little book called The Dark Knight Returns in which Bruce quit as Batman (for 15 years at that) while criminals were still at large and turned Gotham back into an urban hellhole.

In any case, that's another similarity. Both Bruces were about to quit being Batman so they could be with the woman they loved.

Nope, wrong again. Bale's Bruce wasn't about to quit but rather wanted to be with the woman he loved only after he was finished as Batman and Gotham would no longer need him. And in TDK, he was to wrap up his business as Batman thanks to Harvey prosecuting half the city's biggest criminals and now that the city has a true hero to look upto who doesn't need to break the law or wear a mask to fight crime. He only tried quitting once and that too not because he wanted to be with Rachel but rather because he couldn't bear being responsible for any more deaths at the hands of the Joker and offered to turn himself in, despite Rachel telling that they couldn't be together if he did.

Well, that’s what I thought about someone bringing freeze-frames to “make a point.” Or the Peter Parker reference.

I never brought freeze-frames in some desperate attempt to respond to point. You did.

No, just now and then, as any human being.

No, it was quite a number of times.

Yes. He was waiting for the bat-signal and he suddenly got... the bat-signal. What a surprise that should have been.

Yes, he was totally looking at his watch going "any second now...". Yup, he was totally waiting for something he had no prior knowledge or information of that it would even occur with any degree of certainty to begin with. Unless of course, Gordon has him doing regular night shifts in the case of which, I concede my point.

 

[El Payaso]

You said I was being defensive in response to a post that clearly wasn't addressed to you. Sure it is public forum, but the quote function is there for a reason. So yes, way to be a...well...you know...

Wrong. You sounded defensive right after quoting me. I said boith bumbled you had to buld a whole argument about Bale being superior, even when my post never suggested he wasn’t. That has nothing todo with nathaniel or any other poster. Again, good reader, good replier. But at least is good to know that out of this discussion you learned little manners about how to treat other people.

There are things far more important than being in love.

Yes. Still being in love is not “little reason.” There are animals bigger than an elephant yet the elephant is still big.

And my comments weren't just based on the fact that both characters bumbled, but rather how much they bumbled and in what circumstances.

Yes, when two characters bumbled in front of a woman and you need the urge to be defensive you have to embellish your case somehow.

That his antics, though a ruse, would distance the only remaining person aside from Alfred that he knew intimately in Gotham. It was not just the prospect of losing the woman he loved, but also losing his only childhood friend. What did Keaton's Bruce had to lose aside from the girl he met, what, a couple of days ago that made him so nervous?

To distance the only remaining person aside from Alfred that he knew intimately in Gotham.

I thought you were competent enough to have known all them yourself that a mere mention would've been enough. Forgive me for overestimating your intelligence. I shall now list a few of those instances for your convenience -

1. "I am using this monster to help other people like my father did" - Pretty self explanatory.
2. "Your father would be ashamed you" - this is what was really the actual catalyst for making Bruce realize his mistake and drive him to action (not some slap like you ridiculously maintain). The thought that he would let down his parents was unbearable to him and started him off on a journey that would help him achieve the means for accomplishing his parents' philanthropic objectives.
3. "The apple has fallen very far from the tree" - a moment of sadness and self-disappointment in Bruce's face. Even though he was compelled to do what he did in order to save the lives of his guest, Fredricks ultimately hits Bruce where it hurt him most. Clearly a reaction of someone who *gasp* did care for his name despite what he impulsively said earlier.
4. "Rebuild it, just the way it was brick for brick" - Again, pretty self explanatory.

Very well done. You did your homework.

Still nothing of that was evident in Rachel’s scene. A little less fumbling and he could have said “Listen Rachel, this playboy thing is all a charade, I’ll tell you the truth later.”

If he really cared about his father’s name he wouldn’t make an a** of himself at every chance he gets. He still could play the playboy role to cover his bat-life but keeping the honour of the Waynes. The Batman thing is all his own thing.

How about I invite you to dinner in my lonely mansion? That would clearly make you fall in love with me in a single swoop.

If you were Keaton’s Bruce. If you were Bale’s you wouldn’t be able to score, just ask “hey, I’m quitting Batman, how about you kiss me now?”

Yup, she barely even knew Bruce and slept with him on the very first date. What kind of woman falls in love with someone after the first date? Damn, what a ****!

I didn’t see she fell with Alexander Knox because he wanted to date her. It’s clear women fall for real men.

Big deal Keaton scored with a ****. Vale's no different than the chicks Bale's Bruce always has in each arm all the time.

She is different. Bale’s Bruce didn’t score with those models either.

But I guess both Keaton's Bruce and Vale were quite desperate individuals, what with him ogling at her since the very first time he saw here and she sleeping with this short, skinny and funny looking guy with little hair about whom she knows nothing about on the very first date. They were totally MADE for each other!

Which makes Bale’s Bruce both unable to score and undesirable by the woman he loves.

It's quite ridiculous to imply that he didn't have the courage to tell her when he pretty much did. Besides, he never had any intention of doing so.

He didn’t. He just threw a hint behind a mask

Umm, what exactly gave you the impression that he wanted to give up being Batman for her? He wanted to be her while still being Batman. All he says to her is "Batman's just a symbol, Rachel", implying that he is still the person she knew and loved. Nowhere does he ever say that he is willing to give up being Batman to be with her. But Rachel understood that Bruce can never be a normal person as long as he is Batman. Bruce says it himself in TDK "you once told me that the day I was finished, we'd be together..." Why would he make her wait for something he was willing to do right then and there?

Bale’s Bruce tells Rachel: “The day you once told me about, the day Gotham no longer needs Batman. It’s coming.”

Why would he remind her at that precise moment of what she said one day if it quitting as Batman and be with Rachel weren’t deeply associated. He’s obviously waiting that his next quitting will bring him the girl he loves.

Rachel: (knowing what he means) “You can’t ask me to wait for that.”

Bale’s Bruce, instead of going, “Oh no, Rachel, you got it wrong; it’s not about us,” goes “It’s happening now,” emphasizing that she won’t have to wait for the day he will be the “real Bruce again.” That’s happening right away.

Harvey Dent interrupts them.

In another scene, Bruce insists on the subject. He hasn’t forgot about it since it’s important for his little heart:

Bruce: “You once told me if the day if the day came when I was finished [as Batman] we’d be together.”

Rachel: “Bruce don’t make me your only hope for a normal life.”

Bruce: “But did you mean it?”

Wow, he wants to be sure before quitting that she still wants to be with him. So he brings the subject up again and then re-ask the question. He needs her approval so bad. Because so far all that Bruce has got from Rachel was that one kiss and then she moved on to Harvey Dent. That hardly qualifies as Rachel being interested in him. He needs a better argument for her to be with him and that argument is quiotting being Batman.

Forgive me for saying this once again, but asking Rachel to confirm if her words of love were true – if she told him so, why doubt it? – makes him quite... vulnerable/in love.

So, you see. That kind of details tells me that a) he wanted to give up being Batman partially for her and b) He couldn’t be her while still being Batman.

That's the difference between Keaton's and Bale's Bruce Wayne. In TDK, his life is a mess. He clearly sees that the woman he loves is dating someone else yet his first and foremost priority was Gotham, even if it meant empowering the guy who is dating the love of his life. He could've let the Joker kill Harvey and have Rachel all for himself like any jealous ex-boyfriend would, but he saves Dent first. Not only that, but he thought of Dent as a bigger and better man than himself. He says things like "Harvey is that hero", "this is the face of Gotham's bright future" and "I believe in Harvey Dent", all that would risk pushing his love towards Harvey rather than away from him. Those are not the characteristics of someone who is willing to give up everything for the woman he loves. Your argument that Keaton's and Bale's Bruce share this similarity is flawed, incorrect and without any sound basis

The script tells us he didn't. It was just that Joker lied about the addresses. Batman went there hoping to find Rachel but he got Dent instead:

Because he never felt any need to. You seem to be confusing the fact that Bale's Bruce wanted to confess his secret to Rachel. He never did. He says "I'm sorry I didn't tell you, Rachel" because he never had any intention to. He reveals his secret to at that moment, because as you said, it might be the last time they would see each other and even then, he says it indirectly. Unlike Keaton who wanted to just blurt it out but couldn't. Oh there you go! Another difference between the two!

Both tried to say it. Both couldn’t do it directly. Sounds pretty much the same.

Didn't you say that his vulnerability was what got her into bed with him? Sympathy sex.

Vulnerability, amongst other things, made Vicki fell for Bruce. He wasn’t just money.

But if you think vulnerability alone gets you sex you’re wrong. Bale’s Bruce showed to be vulnerable in that restaurant scene and he got nothing.

Getting sympathy sex and that too from a ****. What's such a big deal about that?

The deals are two: 1) that’s wrong, it wasn’t sumpaty sex and Vale was no **** and 2) True or false, it’s still more than Bale’s got.

Neither did Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson in Wedding Crashers (well, not noticeably anyway). They just acted vulnerable.

Like Keaton.

But by now you already know that if one person act one way that doesn’t make him the representative model for every person that behaves the same. Lame comparisons must at least make a point or be accurate. Or well, humorous.

I myself made a better comparision with a much more close character: Bale’s Bruce.

Even if he wasn't rude, he could've, I dunno, at least said something like "Alfred, it's December, it's snowing outside and I am down here in this cave with no heaters doing important research work. Something hot and warm would've really been appreciated and a lot more appropriate". But nooooo, he just gave Alfred that stupid look.

I don’t think they needed crappy writing, so I’m glad they didn’t went with that line. The soup incident wasn’t big enough to make a fuss about it.

Only that his face didn't have his face stuck like that for five seconds like Keaton.

Bumble for one second or five makes you a bumbler all the same.

Difference being Keaton's Bruce bumbles...a lot. You know, the scene in Vicki's apartment. Or when he is talking to Knox and Vale in the armory. Or the "I mistook me for someone else" scene. Or when he sees the news of the ice princess kidnapping and tries to get rid of Selina. For someone who is supposed to have trained his mind and body, Keaton's Bruce sure was a real shaky bundle of nerves a lot of the time.

It’s never stated that Keaton’s Bruce trained him mind as a ninja. But from what we can see, yes he can fight properly.

Now for a man who trained his body and mind ninja-style, Bale bumbled a lot for a girl. And then again he was trained to fight 600 men but one guy in clown make-up or 2 dogs can make the trick. Bale’s Bruce should have asked Ra’s for a refund!

Only if you actually thought it was a serious argument to begin with.

Yes, I did. Therefore – in your own words - your argument fails.

Care to mention a few?

Well, Adam West’s Bruce and Batman bumbled a lot having Catwoman/Miss Kittka close to him. Then we have Keaton’s bumbling for a woman, then Bale.

Consistent aspect of Bruce Wayne’s personality.

Uhm, he saved the girl how exactly? Did he do anything when the Joker was dragging Vale out of the apartment? Or did he just lay there praying his rosaries hoping the Joker wouldn't take Vale away...which coincidentally speaking exactly what happened! I mean damn! What are the odds?

It’s be quite helpful to get your dvd player repaired. It seems to be skipping scenes since Keaton’s Bruce never prayed, but faced Joker. By the end of the scene, Vicky was safe: good work done. Without a bat-suit.

No, it shows that I was persistent about making myself heard despite thinking you weren't paying attention. What with you now entangled in the same kind of quote dissection, I was hoping by the law of averages at least one of my many points would hit that ol' cranium of yours sooner or later.

Well, when you use blanks you make a lot of noise but can hardly hit anything.

 

[El Payaso]

It's not just a freeze-frame. It's an entire shot. Keaton's Bruce has that dumbass look on his face for five whole seconds - see 0:38:39-0:38:44 on the DVD for reference.

Which doesn’t make a difference.

Both Bruces had dumbasses faces in certain ocassions. That fact should be accepted.

And what you posted is still a freeze frame.

Umm, yes you did. Freeze-framing while Bale's character is talking or in the middle of a motion so that you can salvage a few pics of the actor looking silly is nothing compared to Keaton's motionless 5-second ******ed stare. But since you have so much trouble understanding my words and a picture is worth a thousand words (which should be enough for you...I hope), allow me to enroll in your elementary school of freeze-frame comedy:

I mean I – or anyone else – never had to resort to that kind of childish game as an attempt to make a point, untill you brought that up. After that, I had to lecture you about how infantile that was by doing the same.

Because that feeze frame you firstly posted was trying to make the point that Keaton’s Bruce bumbles. And I never said he didn’t to start with. It was your attempt to have a cheap mocking laugh in the absence of a better thing.

And that's just from two scenes. I haven't even touched Batman Returns yet. There are some real comedy gems in that one. Great material for the caption thread.

Or the scene where Batman tries to make a joke about “driving stick” (again for a man whose mind was trained ninja-style, his humour is pretty poor).

Both versions of Batman are plenty of great shots of stupid faces. We can post all of them and don’t make a point out of all of that. Caption material, sure. Proving a point about the character? Other than both Bale and Keaton made stupid faces, none.

Since when did you start caring about fidelity to the comics? I mean, obviously seeing as you love the Burton films so much. Oh I get it, it's only important if you want to nag on Nolan's films.

Nope, both Burton’s and Nolan’s films have a big loads of changes. Still, quitting Batman because of a girl or because you think Dent will be play doing your job was very interesting, un-Batman, but interesting. Same with making a snap decision of not quitting even when that very man is being arrested in your place.

I never brought freeze-frames in some desperate attempt to respond to point. You did.

You were the first doing it. I did it after that. None of us proved anything.

No, it was quite a number of times.

Now and then means a certain number of times.

Yes, he was totally looking at his watch going "any second now...". Yup, he was totally waiting for something he had no prior knowledge or information of that it would even occur with any degree of certainty to begin with. Unless of course, Gordon has him doing regular night shifts in the case of which, I concede my point.

So Bruce built all those devices in his roof just to make the bat-signal shining through that specific door during night and he was sitting in that very room by night not doing a thing and you say he could have been there as a mere coincidence and that the bat-signal was totally unexpected. That makes a case in your head only.

He had prior knowledge of the bat-signal and the way it is supposed to be shining in that specific room. He was waiting for it. It could have not happened that night but it was entirely possible. That’s why he wasn’t watching tv or reading a book.

 

[Travesty]

*Peaks inside to see what everybody is talking about*



The hell....

 

[El Payaso]

*Peaks inside to see what everybody is talking about*



The hell....

Come and join us my friend! t:

 

[GoblinWhirlwind]

Anytime I see page load of posts, each with 10 quotes... I stay out of the convo.

 

[El Payaso]

Anytime I see page load of posts, each with 10 quotes... I stay out of the convo.

Any person with at least a little common sense would do the same, believe me. I mean this with no bit of sarcasm.

 

[Travesty]

Come and join us my friend! t:

Hehe, I would, but it looks extremely complicated right now.

 

[The Batman]

Keaton, the most intelligent? And only equaled by Adam West?!

sigh....

Adam West is the smartest Batman...he was often smart to the point of ridiculousness....which, you know....was the idea of the 60's tv show in the first place

 

[TruerToTheCore]

sigh....

Adam West is the smartest Batman...he was often smart to the point of ridiculousness....which, you know....was the idea of the 60's tv show in the first place

Agreed.

Adam West's Batman is the only one who can be called "world's greatest detective".

 

[Polux]

We still doing the whole "My Batman is better than yours" thing ??




Polux

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Hey, I thought the part where Keaton was all nervous and couldn't spit his words out to Vale was pure brilliance. That was a great scene. Brings a human edge to the character.

 

[El Payaso]

We still doing the whole "My Batman is better than yours" thing ??




Polux

Now it's the "My Batman is more handsome."

Hey, I thought the part where Keaton was all nervous and couldn't spit his words out to Vale was pure brilliance. That was a great scene. Brings a human edge to the character.

Exactly. Heroes can be funny and men can cry without being considered idiots or inferior because of it.

 

[Panthro]

We still doing the whole "My Batman is better than yours" thing ??




Polux

It'll probably still be going on 30 years from now. Sad but true.

 

[TheDarkKnight08]

I don't think we'll see the day the general consensus is that each Batman actor (in a good Batman film) was amazing and faithful in their own way.