What If Val Kilmer Played Batman in 1989 Instead of Michael Keaton

[Paste Pot Pete]

As far as I'm concerned, aside from Bale, Kilmers dual portrayal of Bruce and Batman was the most faithful to the comics. You had Keaton, who was great I am not denying that, but he was pretty dark and gloomy both in and out of the Batsuit. And then you have Clooney, who was awful, acting like a smug playboy in and out of the batsuit. But both Kilmer and Bale seem to know how to play the dual roles.

Totally. I like Keaton's Bruce as a unique character and a worthwhile interpretation, but he's too far removed from traditional Bruce to be definitive, for me. Bale and Kilmer both nailed it.

For me, it's still Keaton's Batman and Bale's Bruce, with Kilmer doing fine work as both, but still coming in third.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Clooney's Bruce Wayne was pretty good when he had them moments with Alfred. I don't think anyone can blame Clooney for that debacle.

 

[Grommers]

I'd give Clooney more credit if he was acting.

It's quite clear he's just being himself.


Kilmer made a great Bruce Wayne / Batman.

Keaton was a good Batman

I like Bale as both Bruce Wayne / Batman.

I don't think he would of done much better in a new movie.

But he definetly was the best thing in Forever, well next to mr.gough.

 

[Blaztro]

Acting-wise, Kilmer goes down as one of the great Batmen. However, he could never be the real Batman. Anybody in Gotham could have gone "Hmmm... who is the only other person in the entire state with lips that large? Let's see... Bruce Wayne?"

 

[TMC1982]

Apparently Rene Russo was Schumacher's first choice for Chase Meridian, but the studio deemed her too old .

I could care less about age, she's still feckin' gorgeous. Woulda been better than Katie Holmes.

Rene Russo is only about four years older than Val Kilmer. I mean, nobody seemed to raise of fuss over the fact that Margot Kidder was several years older than Christopher Reeve while making the Superman movies.

 

[-JKR-]

WHAT IF...

MICHAEL BIEHN played Batman in 1989 instead of Michael Keaton?

 

[SUPERSEBAS]

Kilmer was a very good actor who was unfortunately dumped into a campy, more comedic version of Batman than it's prequels, and this has tarnished his performance. I've no doubt he would have done the role justice if we had gotten a darker version of the films a la Burton or Nolan, but at the end of the day Kilmer read the script and still decided to do it - so we can't really say it was unfair on him.

I remeber to hear Kilmer say that he signed without read the script! because to made Batman movie was a big chance to be in the top again