Was Michael Keaton too Old to be Playing Batman in 1989?

TMC1982

Sidekick
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
0
Points
31
Michael Keaton was pushing 40 when he made this movie. By this phase in Batman's career, she should've already taken Dick Grayson under his wing. It has however, been suggested that this takes place at the early stages of Batman's crime fighting career. In the comics, Bruce Wayne was approximately, in his early 20s when he started portraying Batman.
 
IMO, yes. Bruce Wayne should not be a balding guy, and Batman should not be a short man.
 
IMO, yes. Bruce Wayne should not be a balding guy, and Batman should not be a short man.

Petty, petty, petty...

Keaton did a great job and when the acting was as good as his... I don't care how old he is or looks.
 
probably but i'm not sure you can get that sort of intensity from an younger man

besides, against all his rogue's, his age doesn't particularly stand out in the film.
 
*checks IMDb* wow, he was 38. He got famous a bit late, didn't he?
 
Are you serious? What kind of question is this?
 
Mine or the thread starter's ?
 
Eh, it's not how old you are... it's how old you can look in the film you are acting and Keaton didn't look bad at all.
 
Last edited:
Oh for the love of....

Most of the James Bond actors were pushing 50 when they were doing their flicks. Keaton looked fine.
 
Michael Keaton was pushing 40 when he made this movie. By this phase in Batman's career, she should've already taken Dick Grayson under his wing. It has however, been suggested that this takes place at the early stages of Batman's crime fighting career. In the comics, Bruce Wayne was approximately, in his early 20s when he started portraying Batman.

No wonder that you had trouble with Keaton. You must have thought of him as a woman.:woot:

What do you mean portraying Batman? You make it sound like that Bruce Wayne was an actor.:huh:

Sorry if I was too rude making fun of you.
 
Oh for the love of....

Most of the James Bond actors were pushing 50 when they were doing their flicks. Keaton looked fine.
So, you think Bruce Wayne is supposed to be a balding guy, as opposed to a playboy?
 
Oh for the love of....

Most of the James Bond actors were pushing 50 when they were doing their flicks. Keaton looked fine.


Exactly, before Christian Bale, no one questioned Keaton as Batman or Keaton's age.
 
Wouldn't Christian Bale count too? :p Hes 34!!! Must be a young handsome 25 fellow to portraye a young batman, clearly! ;p
 
No it is true, before Batman Begins, Burton and Keaton were gods in the Batman-world
Nope. I remember people complaining about Keaton not looking like Bruce Wayne back in 2001-2004.
 
Nope. I remember people complaining about Keaton not looking like Bruce Wayne back in 2001-2004.

I did in 1989.

"THIS is Bruce Wayne?" :shock

Not so much because of his age, but his looks. I think it's hard for a guy in his 20s to have this presence you need for Batman.
 
So, you think Bruce Wayne is supposed to be a balding guy, as opposed to a playboy?

Of course not. That's why I am a Keaton supporter. He didn't look like that.
 
Last edited:
Hell no, he was the right choice and of the right age to play the established version of Batman.
 
Keaton kicks ass. This thread doesn't.

Pity you only look at looks for a character. That's what's going against you, that's why you already lost.

It's not aobut how he looks it's about the actor. Burton stated a nice quote.

"If he was six foot five and muscular, he wouldn't need to put on a batsuit."
 
Keaton kicks ass. This thread doesn't.

Pity you only look at looks for a character. That's what's going against you, that's why you already lost.

It's not aobut how he looks it's about the actor. Burton stated a nice quote.

"If he was six foot five and muscular, he wouldn't need to put on a batsuit."

While I love Keaton, and agree that his look did not make me enjoy his Batman movies any less, I completely disagree with Burton's quote.

Bruce Wayne is a physically imposing man. He's big and strong, but the point of Batman (and BB and MOTP illustrated this nicely) is that, while we might be intimidated by a 6'5 muscular man, we won't be very afraid of him if we have a gun. That's why Bruce needed the batsuit, to create fear, not to hide his average physical stature.
 
IMO, yes. Bruce Wayne should not be a balding guy, and Batman should not be a short man.

He had a full head of hair in Batman and Batman Returns and 5'10" isn't exactly short. Society is too youth obsessed today. George Reeves is my favorite Superman, and Michael Keaton is my favorite Batman. They look like actual men, distinguished. George Reeves was 37 when The Adventures of Superman started and 44 when it ended. Michael Keaton was 37 in Batman and 40 in Batman Returns. Gabriel Macht is 36 in The Spirit.
 
keaton was perfect and SCARY in his batman roles. in the comics batman was 30 when he first became batman, so 37 isnt really all that bad to play batman. keaton once went on record to say that if joel ass clown schumacher didnt mess up batman ,we would be on batman 17 with him as batman in every one of them.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"