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

[Doctor Jones]

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.

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.

 

[OctaviusINC]

Is the starter of this thread the same poster of the "OMG Teh Harvey Dent is teh Black in '89!" thread?



But all jokes aside. Seriously, who cares? Batman '89 is history. Unless you want Goerge Lucas to remaster it by adding CGI hair and make Keaton a few inches taller, then stop complaining.

 

[TMC1982]

Are you serious? What kind of question is this?

I don't think it's any different than questioning whether or not a then 24 year old Chris O'Donnell was too old to be playing Dick Grayson in 1995.

 

[TMC1982]

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'm not talking about whether or not Michael Keaton looks exactly like Bruce Wayne in the comics, so don't put words in my mouth!

 

[TMC1982]

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

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

Sorry if I was too rude making fun of you.

What the hell are you talking about? Since when did I criticize Michael Keaton's performance as Batman/Bruce Wayne?

 

[the_scream]

Was he too old? Not for the role. Keaton is a fine actor and he fit the Burton universe perfectly. He would be a very improper choice for a film that establishes the character of Batman in his prime. You kind of wonder what Keaton's Batman has been doing for the past 20 years. Was he just quietly training? These issues are never really addressed in B89 because the writers believed that Batman's origins wouldn't work on the big screen.

 

[C. W. Saturn]

He had a full head of hair in Batman and Batman Returns and 5'10" isn't exactly short.

superhero hunks are usually 6'2''+

 

[Two-Face]

I think Keaton was too old play Batman but that doesn't stop me from liking Keaton as Dark Knight.

 

[Cain]

*checks IMDb* wow, he was 38. He got famous a bit late, didn't he?

He was already famous as a comedic actor though this is why there was a backlash people thought his casting confirmed this will be a Batman parody. That aside age really is nothing but a number anyway there have been quite a few "late bloomers" in Hollywood. Oscar winning actor and former Batman George Clooney found fame in his late 30's. Harrison Ford didn't blow up till he was pushing his mid 30's and Samuel L. Jackson didn't till he was already in his forties yet they're some of the most recognized actors today.

 

[Finlandman]

What the hell are you talking about? Since when did I criticize Michael Keaton's performance as Batman/Bruce Wayne?

Obviously you had some trouble with Keaton. You're basically saying that he should have been younger in your opinion. And when I said: "What do you mean portraying Batman? You make it sound like that Bruce Wayne was an actor.", I was referring to what you had said before. "when he started portraying Batman." I don't think that portray is a right verb in this situation. Sorry, if wrote too confusing text.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I'm not talking about whether or not Michael Keaton looks exactly like Bruce Wayne in the comics, so don't put words in my mouth!

But you're complaining about his physique. So what are you saying exactly?

 

[raybia]

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.

Yes. What in the hell was Bruce doing between the time his parents were murdered and he became Batman?

 

[The Guard]

Burton's Batman clearly wasn't supposed to be exactly like the comic book version. What is the point of this thread?

No, Keaton wasn't too old to play the role, because that's how old Batman was in Burton's version of the character.

 

[ross2287]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: As far as Batmen go, Michael Keaton is totally boss.

He (along with the 89 production crew) changed live action Batman films...forever. There's no going back. Well, I guess there could be some going back, but no one wants that.

Keaton was and is amazing.

 

[dude stannis]

Robert Downey J.r is 43.
Edward Norton is 39.
Tobey MaGuire is 33.

All these guys are playing franchise characters 10 years younger. Keaton was playing a 30-35 year old.

 

[TMC1982]

But you're complaining about his physique. So what are you saying exactly?

Where around here did I say anything about Michael Keaton not having the "right physique" to play Batman? Please enlighten me!

 

[MysterioMenace]

Keaton doesn’t look old in the film…so what’s his real age matter? Also Batman’s not noticeably short, Keaton’s relatively shorter in real life. Big difference! Finally Keaton’s not a bodybuilder, but he’s not exactly out-of-shape in the film. Plus he’s not exactly scrawny in the costume either. I’ve always found these criticisms to be nitpicks at best. Plus I was under the impression Bruce didn't become Batman until around his early 30's, his 20's were spent training.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

That was the impression I got also. He spent around two decades honing the various abilities he would need as Batman. The novelization if I remember right puts him at the age of 35.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I don't think it's any different than questioning whether or not a then 24 year old Chris O'Donnell was too old to be playing Dick Grayson in 1995.

That question is just as stupid to me, its quite obvious when making films people in charge make the adaption the way they feel it will fit well in the film theyre making.

Keaton=Equal to Bale as the best Batman on screen of all time

O'Donnel=Not really that bad as Robin (a character I personally dislike)

 

[p4poetic]

I always saw that Christian Bale was portraying Batman in his prime, whereas Michael Keaton would be actually playing the aging Batman. Although its kind of hard for me to picture Bale Bruce Wayne looking like Keaton Bruce Wayne when he gets older :P

 

[p4poetic]

Robert Downey J.r is 43.
Edward Norton is 39.
Tobey MaGuire is 33.

All these guys are playing franchise characters 10 years younger. Keaton was playing a 30-35 year old.

Ah but 27 in 2002

 

[TMC1982]

That question is just as stupid to me, its quite obvious when making films people in charge make the adaption the way they feel it will fit well in the film theyre making.

Keaton=Equal to Bale as the best Batman on screen of all time

O'Donnel=Not really that bad as Robin (a character I personally dislike)

What exactly makes the idea of comparing and contrasting the source material to what actually goes on screen "stupid"? I'm not the only one on the planet earth who has tried to in some shape or form do this.

 

[MysterioMenace]

Burton's Batman clearly wasn't supposed to be exactly like the comic book version. What is the point of this thread?

How do you figure that? Read Bob Kane/Bill Finger Batman. It's quite accurate. No more or less then Nolans.

 

[conan69]

"No it is true, before Batman Begins, Burton and Keaton were gods in the Batman-world"


Sorry but youre wrong.

There was always people who didnt like the film.

I attended Kuberts school only months after the film was released and most people I knew there at the time did NOT like the film. So the voice of dislike isnt something thats "just come along since BB"

They loved seeing the characters come to life on the screen but thought the film sucked. Big difference.


I'm a Batman fan going back to the early 70s - late 80s. I was reading Batman comics as far back as I can remember. I never liked Burtons film (or any of the others). My critism of Burtons film (including Nicholsons Joker) go WAY back here and at other places like HTF.


I personally think Burton is one of the most overrated directors in the business. Best film he ever made was easily Ed Wood.

 

[The Batkilt]

On paper I guess he was too old, but I don't think Keaton was too old to play the part. He did a good job. Personally as I've grown older and gotten more into Batman I don't like Batman '89 as much and have never been a huge fan of Batman Returns, but I think Keaton did a good job in both films.