• Secure your account

    A friendly reminder to our users, please make sure your account is safe. Make sure you update your password and have an active email address to recover or change your password.

  • Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

Val Kilmer's Batman

S

SA1984

Guest
Hi I'm new to the HYPE. Autographs later :p
Anyways regarding our favourite dark knight on celluloid, i love the **** outta B'89, don't care what anyone says it ROCKED. BR is awesome & pretty solid & i actually really loved parts of BF. In parts it was fantastic but in some parts it was a little...umm...gay. but for the most part it was good.
then came June 1997 & i would rather eat my own feet after a 3 mile run rather than sit through that crock of **** again.
Then BB last year & **** me sideways & call me Betty, that film owned Spiderman's spandex arse & made Marvel it's collective biznitch once & 4 all.
yeah as u can tell i liked it.

so let's time travel back 2 1992...
picture it, Keaton is adamant & does not want 2 don cape & cowl again. What if Val Kilmer had been in BR?
I rated kilmer's performance in forever quite highly, i think he would have been fantastic opposite michelle pfeiffer in BR.
What y'all think? ( no childish posts please)
 
Batman Forever had its flaws, but I think Val Kilmer was a good Batman/Bruce Wayne. He could have been the undisputed king of all Batmen if he'd just had a more serious film surrounding him. It would have been interesting to have seen him facing off against Jack Nicholson in the original film and then see him with the lovely Michelle Pfeiffer in #2, and who knows, he may have redeemed Batman & Robin. Well, probably not.

Can you imagine Val Kilmer as Harvey Dent/Two-Face?

Off record, has anyone seen Joel Schumacher's non-Batman films - Flatliners, Time To Kill, The Client, etc?
 
i just dont see Kilmer with the broodiness that Keaton had that made that film work. Keaton had a presence about him in Returns and he interacted with the rest of the cast perfectly. All the actors in returns "clicked". And no one can touch Keatons glare in that cowl.
 
SHADOWBAT69 said:
i just dont see Kilmer with the broodiness that Keaton had that made that film work. Keaton had a presence about him in Returns and he interacted with the rest of the cast perfectly. All the actors in returns "clicked". And no one can touch Keatons glare in that cowl.

exactly:o:up:
 
true, Keaton was THE showstoppa as Bats, but i think Kilmer could have performed well in BR. the scene in forever where he speaks calmly 2 Dick while discouraging him from becoming Robin, think it goes like this:

Bruce :So you're willing to take a life? then it will happen like this. you make the kill. but your pain doesn't end with 2 Face, you go on looking for another face, & another, & another, until 1 horrible morning you wake up & realise that revenge has become your life

Dick:you wouldn't understand, your parents weren't killed by a madman.

Bruce: Yes they were.

This scene is very well executed & IMO quite underrated. watch the scene & u will know what i mean when i say that it has a brooding similarity to the whole classic 'Things change' exchange between Penguin & Bats in BR. I could vision Kilmer delivering that scene & it would have been cool 2 see, though don't get me wrong Keaton ****ing ruled
 
I liked Val Kilmer as Batman/Bruce Wayne but the script what was written was ok if given decent script I think Kilmer would been awesome as Dark Knight.
 
yes kilmer was a great batman. To bad he was with joel though.
 
Kilmer was definitely just sub-par with his portrayal of Batman. I just don't think there was anything for him to really do in that costume.

However, I think he absolutely shined as Bruce Wayne. I have no doubt that if Kilmer was in the first two, he probably would've done a better representation of Bruce and Batman (the latter being a bit questionable). But like someone mentioned earlier, the scene with him talking to Dick about Two-Face perfectly captured Bruce's understanding of the kid's situation, and how he doesn't anyone else to experience the pain that he has already dealt. I also think Kilmer brilliantly evoked the character's mysteriousness without saying a single word, but through his expressions (like Keaton also did). You could just watch him and know that there's something going on inside his head, but you don't know what. I loved that. :up:
 
I think it was a tough job to follow Michael Keaton. What I love about Keaton as Batman/Bruce Wayne (and this has been mentioned by Burton) is how contemplative he looks. As Bruce Wayne, he always seems to be thinking about things, trying to figure himself out. I would imagine Bruce Wayne would have quite a lot of frustrated thought, and Keaton was great at pulling that off.

Bale has that quality, but he has this determination quality that translated onscreen. You'd hear about him losing 60 pounds for "The Machinist" and hearing about how he got in shape for these movies preceding "Batman Begins" and you think, "Okay, I totally believe he's capable of going that far to become Batman". Christian Bale's drive as an actor made his Batman believeable and he was great.

"Batman Forever", while not perfect, can still be enjoyed. The intention to make a good movie was intact, and it's purpose wasn't just a cash-in through marketing toys. Kilmer was a good Batman, but he followed Michael Keaton and that's got to be a tough thing to do.
 
Dr. Fate said:
Can you imagine Val Kilmer as Harvey Dent/Two-Face?

I can! Even in a schumacher film...if he went the Lost Boys route instead of what he actually did with Batman, Kilmer couldve been an awesome Dent.
 
Two Face said:
I liked Val Kilmer as Batman/Bruce Wayne but the script what was written was ok if given decent script I think Kilmer would been awesome as Dark Knight.

How a better script would have prevented Kilmer to do a wooden flavourless acting?
 
Well Kilmer did play the flamboyant playboy better but Burton never wanted to show him as a flamboyant playboy, but more of a shadowy neurotic and enigmatic one who quietly takes his conquests (at least in the first where her zeros in on Vicky Vale) kind of like a less possessive Howard Hughes.

However to the credit of schumaucher he brought Bruce Wayne into the light as a public figure, but one with an annoying papparazzi in it. However, outside of his scenes with Dick he seemed to just deliver his lines and his Batman was horrible with no intensity. His best Batman scene (the panel-by-panel recreation of coming out of the fire) looked cool because of the cinematography and the suit and not his performance. His Batman was kind of stale.


Keaton was much better. But then again Kilmer hated Schumaucher and hated this film so maybe he would not have been so wooden in a Burton movie, however I am perfectly happy and not risking it as we got to see Keaton do it again. I really would have rather see Keaton do it a third time too and not see Kilmer in the part, but alas it was not meant to be. Plus he had better chemistry with Catwoman than I think Kilmer might have had.
 
El Payaso said:
How a better script would have prevented Kilmer to do a wooden flavourless acting?


That's your ****ing opinion if he sucked for you but in my opinion he would have been great as Dark Knight if given descent script to act with.:up:
 
Iyt's not my opinion, it's a queastion. I want to know why so I can see what's the point behind your "****ing opinion" and see if you have some knowledge about acting or just about typing.
 
El Payaso said:
Iyt's not my opinion, it's a queastion. I want to know why so I can see what's the point behind your "****ing opinion" and see if you have some knowledge about acting or just about typing.

1. You should look at your own grammar and spelling before you judge a person while yourself has a problem.

2. I think Val Kilmer can act and his batman voice and different Bruce voice was great (unlike Clooney) he had the height sure hair colour wasn't right.


3. Why the attack?? I don't have to agree with you.
 
Two Face said:
1. You should look at your own grammar and spelling before you judge a person while yourself has a problem.

Ah yes. So I spelt it wrong. Awesome deal. That doesn't make me any less right or wrong.

Two Face said:
2. I think Val Kilmer can act and his batman voice and different Bruce voice was great (unlike Clooney) he had the height sure hair colour wasn't right.

Yes, you're right. My question was about how the script would fix anyone's acting.

Two Face said:
3. Why the attack?? I don't have to agree with you.

I made a question and you jumped up talking about " ****ing opinions". I ask YOU, why the attack?
 
I feel Kilmer's only problem as Batman was his lack of agression. He had everything else; the icy glare, the presence, you could see he felt sympathy and empathy for the supervillains even as he tried to take them out. He looked like he was thinking all the time, outwitting his opponents, using logic to get out of traps - that was pure Batman.


LOL, anyone who hasn't actually watched Forever properly and assumes it just the same camp nonsense as the following film just needs to check out Kilmer's troubled gaze throughout the film.

FilmoBatmanForever_L14.jpg
 
The Forever suit was actually one of my favoites, and if it weren't for some of the other cast members and the crappy script, I would've enjoyed it a hell of a lot more. I mean they made Two Face a giggling little idiot. Half of his face is ****ing melted! If I were Dent I wouldn't constantly be giggling. Kilmer could have been a great Batman if he was directed better and the script was better
 
The Last Meatbag said:
The Forever suit was actually one of my favoites, and if it weren't for some of the other cast members and the crappy script, I would've enjoyed it a hell of a lot more. I mean they made Two Face a giggling little idiot. Half of his face is ****ing melted! If I were Dent I wouldn't constantly be giggling. Kilmer could have been a great Batman if he was directed better and the script was better

Actually the Forever script is superb. They should use it in screenwriting courses.
 
The Last Meatbag said:
The Forever suit was actually one of my favoites, and if it weren't for some of the other cast members and the crappy script, I would've enjoyed it a hell of a lot more. I mean they made Two Face a giggling little idiot. Half of his face is ****ing melted! If I were Dent I wouldn't constantly be giggling. Kilmer could have been a great Batman if he was directed better and the script was better

The Forever suit was one of my faves as well - minus the nipples of course!! Kilmer is a great actor and had a lot of potential to be a great Bats/Bruce Wayne - the script allowed glimpses only though. As somebody posted before - it would have been interesting to see what Kilmer would have made with the role if he were in the 1st 2 films (and vice versa - Keaton in Forever anyone?)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,687
Messages
21,786,985
Members
45,616
Latest member
stevezorz
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"