dude stannis
Avenger
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2003
- Messages
- 17,099
- Reaction score
- 7
- Points
- 31
Xenforo Cloud upgraded our forum to XenForo version 2.3.4. This update has created styling issues to our current templates.
Starting January 9th, site maintenance is ongoing until further notice, but please report any other issues you may experience so we can look into.
We apologize for the inconvenience.
Due to recent news involving X, formerly Twitter and its owner, the staff of SuperHeroHype have decided it would be best to no longer allow links on the board. Starting January 31st, users will no longer be able to post direct links to X on this site, however screenshots will still be allowed as long as they follow Hype rules and guidelines. We apologize for any inconvenience.
Playing a 18-19 year old.![]()
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."
I agree with you more actually, and I know that too. But I always liked the Burton stuck up for Keaton and his physical look.
Doomed Hero said:I still think Keaton plays a better Batman in coustume then Bale did.
I like that Burton is standing up for Keaton too, but the logic he uses there is just wrong. Batman created the batsuit to inspire fear, not to hide that he wasn't a physically imposing man. I'm actually kind of surprised Burton said this, because he did a good job of stressing the urban myth aspect and showing how Batman can inspire fear in criminals.
Still though, anyone who's familiar with Batman's back story knows that the sole reason he dresses up as a bat is to inspire fear. Nothing else.
I think there's a good debate for that. Bale's Batman reminded me very much of a Year One Batman. He relied heavily on his physical presence to intimidate (especially in fights), he was full of rage, and he made mistakes. Keaton's Batman was very much like a DKR/experienced Batman. He was cold, calculating, and controlled. I think Bale's Batman made a definite step toward Keaton's Batman in TDK. He seemed much more controlled and calculating in that movie, besides the interrogation scene with the Joker, where he let his emotions get to him. I'm expecting Bale to move even further in that direction in B3, and we'll likely end up with something close to how Batman was in TAS.
Both have detractors. For me, it was that I simply wanted to see more of Keaton's Batman. I wanted to learn more about him and see more of his character. In B89, I'd be surprised if he had more then 5 minutes of dialog total in the suit.
For Bale, it's the opposite. I think he has almost too much dialog in suit, and I think a big part of this has to do with his voice. Now, I don't mind it nearly as much as some, but it is distracting, and I don't think digitally deepening it helped any.
How do you figure that? Read Bob Kane/Bill Finger Batman. It's quite accurate. No more or less then Nolans.
He had a few popular comedies before Batman but yeah of course doing Batman put him on the map worldwide.*checks IMDb* wow, he was 38. He got famous a bit late, didn't he?
But Batman/Bruce Wayne while he may be strong and muscular he has more of an athletes body than a hulking brute and he's 6'2".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.
Bruce Wayne was a square-jawed bodybuilder type in Kane/Finger's Batman stories.
But Batman/Bruce Wayne while he may be strong and muscular he has more of an athletes body than a hulking brute and he's 6'2".
There was always people who didnt like the film.
In all honesty,I think Keaton was perfect. Who cares if he was pushing 40, it wasn't an origin story, you're supposed to assume he's been doing this for a while. Also, the main reason I love Keaton and prefer him to Bale, throughout all of B 89' he looks tormented and troubled. It's always bothered me that Nolan never really touches on this since its an integral part of the character.
About that; what I liked is how tormented he feels all the time even before they talk or explain about any traumatic fact in his past.
No. Batman became Batman by his LATE 20's / early 30's. BEGINS and TDK have it right. He study and trained for much of his 20's till he returned at like 28 or 29.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.
True, but it was totaly different outlooks on the character. That's why Keaton's Bruce acts one way, and Bale's another. Let me explain.In all honesty,I think Keaton was perfect. Who cares if he was pushing 40, it wasn't an origin story, you're supposed to assume he's been doing this for a while. Also, the main reason I love Keaton and prefer him to Bale, throughout all of B 89' he looks tormented and troubled. It's always bothered me that Nolan never really touches on this since its an integral part of the character.
True, but it was totaly different outlooks on the character. That's why Keaton's Bruce acts one way, and Bale's another. Let me explain.
Keaton's Bruce Wayne was a neurotic and visibily troubled man, which Burton thought was the best and most realistic way psychologically to express why a man would dress up as a Bat. So it would make sense for him to look visibily conflicted.
Bale's Bruce Wayne was a originally a lost young man, who learns guidance from people in his life, and he then dedicates himself. Bale's Bruce doesn't walk around troubled because they are distinguishly different takes on Batman.
Bale's psychological explanation is he's an extremely motivated man. That's why you always see that firey expression in Bale's Bruce's eyes. He turned a negative into an ultimate positive. You see his internal struggles with it at times in his needs for vengence v.s. justice, but that's all.
Keaton's Bruce shows his problems on the surface, looking visibily neurotic and crazy.
Definetely.That is, exactly, the difference between both approaches. And may I say that both were brilliantly done.
I still think Keaton plays a better Batman in coustume then Bale did.
Keaton and Bale are the two best batmen of all time!