Which is the better "I'm Batman"

[Batman2k7]

i like BB better his voice sounds cool

 

[Damiean Dark]

^I dont know how you come to that conclusion one thing most fans agree on, even the most die hard BB fans is that Keaton as Batman was far more natural then bale especially in the voice department even though they liked BB more as a film Bales voice sounds forced throughout the film and he doesnt have the smooth presence Keaton had imo.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

^I dont know how you come to that conclusion one thing most fans agree on, even the most die hard BB fans is that Keaton as Batman was far more natural then bale especially in the voice department even though they liked BB more as a film Bales voice sounds forced throughout the film and he doesnt have the smooth presence Keaton had imo.

Man, it's better for the commonwealth of SHH if you don't challenge a fan of BB. You'll start a war.

 

[Palpadious]

This was an alternate take of Keaton's scene, but they didn't use it for some reason.

http://keatonbatman.ytmnd.com/

 

[DocLathropBrown]

This was an alternate take of Keaton's scene, but they didn't use it for some reason.

http://keatonbatman.ytmnd.com/

HAHA! Brilliant!

 

[BatScot]

to answer the question as posed... B89.

 

[General Vulcun]

lol Batman'89 is so overrated. Anyway...ya, Begins easily.

First off, with Batman'89s scene, Batman watches the couple get mugged, but doesn't even try to help them in the moment; just lets the thugs get away with the money and follow them from there?! Stupid.

Then for no reason, he slowly decends from no where with his cape spread out like batwings...there are no thugs standing front of him directly, so who is he presenting this particular form to?! The audience?! Pfft, how lame.

Then instead of just knocking them out, he decides to play with them?! I mean, he could've just kicked their asses then and there like Batman would, but no...he has to make noises with the stones and then calmly wait until they decide to FINALLY turn around, just so he can present himself once again (this time, the thugs will see his presentation). Then he approaches them, they shoot him, and he plays dead?! What if Batman did that every time he approached a criminal; wait until they shoot him and play dead?! lol. Then, the muscle-less Keaton with the 70 pound Batsuit is somehow able to deliver a kick so powerful that the guy goes flying thru a wooden door (for a realistic character, how unrealistic). Then the other thug does a stupid thing and run across the roof rather than thru the door to get away (how would he possibly get away by running across the roof. The grappling hook didn't bother me so I wont touch that one, but once again, a muscle-less Keaton with a 70 pound Batsuit on is able to produce enough power and strength to lift an entire human being off the ground, and easily dangle him over the edge of a building (I'm not buying that for one second).

And with the "I'm Batman" part finally here, I'll say that the line had no impact, and Keaton spoke too softly; the actor playing the thug did fine.

The scene in Batman Begins was way better. First off, unlike Batman'89, Batman doesn't wait for the thugs to make thier moves, he just makes his move. The Batman in this scene actually hunts thugs like animals, rather than having the animals hunt him; this is very much like Batman.

Skipping ahead, at the part where he attacks all those thugs in that area at the docks; using the skills that The League taught him, he's able to quickly take down thugs as fast as he possibly can, but just because Bale is muscular and the Batsuit is light, doesn't mean he gets away without injuries; also realistic. The Batman in that scene doesn't hesitate, he acts.

Now Falcone, who's stranded with a knocked out driver (it must've been "HIM") and pretty scared to top it off, gets ripped thru the top car window and is face to face with Batman (knowing Keaton's Batman, he'd probably make noises until Falcone came out of the car, and then he'd present himself yet AGAIN! lol).

Cutting to the chase, Bale's delivery is brilliant; it's intense and makes Batman come across as very animalistic rather than simply a man (looks like theatricality is working), and to top it all off, instead of (like Keaton's Batman would do) allowing Falcone to make the first move, Batman gives him a quick headbutt (with a hell of an impact!), and instantly takes him out of the equation. And the music that accompanies the rest of the scene lets the audience know that this truly is the beginning of Batman.

As for "nice coat"...it didn't need to happen at all, but the zipping up with the grapple hook was pretty cool and very much like Batman.

So all in all (for me, at least), the "I'm Batman" scene in Begins is just very much the Batman in the comics (or as I say, the "Alpha and Omega of Batman"), and is very much an intense and effective first view of Batman.

To me, the Batman'89 "I'm Batman" scene is only popular because of nostalgia; fans saw it as kids, it tickled their tummies and made them go "weeeee", and they will forever love it because of that, etc. etc. etc. Judging both scenes from a film making point of view, and from the way Batman is drawn in the comics ("Alpha and Omega..."), the scene in Batman Begins just has a greater, longer lasting impact that I'd expect a character like Batman would and SHOULD have.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

No, no bias there. Nosiree bob.

Fine evidence, by the way. Maybe you should be critiquing movies when you start acting like an adult. What you chose is not the problem, rather, how you chose it... using your bias to speak well of one thing and not another. Choosing to interpret the Burton material like an idiot sure makes your choice look good, doesn't it? You chose not to "get" anything Burton was doing.

lol Batman'89 is so overrated. Anyway...ya, Begins easily.

Overrated? Are you kidding me? Ever since Begins came out, you get more Burton bashing than anything else. With the rampent Begins bias among the populous of this board.... it makes B89 the clear candidate for "Underrated."

First off, with Batman'89s scene, Batman watches the couple get mugged, but doesn't even try to help them in the moment; just lets the thugs get away with the money and follow them from there?! Stupid.

Never let a 12 year old critique a film. What was implied by the wife's scream and Batman's subsequent reaction was that Batman ONLY heard the scream. He did not witness the crime (and from that height, how could he have seen the specifics?), and was nowhere near that particular alley. It was meant to be mythic, sure, Batman couldn't have possibly actually heard the scream all the way from the alley to the cathedral, but it's a mythic quality that comes directly from the books.

Then for no reason, he slowly decends from no where with his cape spread out like batwings...there are no thugs standing front of him directly, so who is he presenting this particular form to?! The audience?! Pfft, how lame.

Did it ever occur to you that he was gliding down with the cape? No, of course it didn't. You're intentionally missing this stuff because your anti-Burton... or you just have the thought processes of a 6 year old.

Then instead of just knocking them out, he decides to play with them?! I mean, he could've just kicked their asses then and there like Batman would, but no...he has to make noises with the stones and then calmly wait until they decide to FINALLY turn around, just so he can present himself once again (this time, the thugs will see his presentation). Then he approaches them, they shoot him, and he plays dead?! What if Batman did that every time he approached a criminal; wait until they shoot him and play dead?! lol.

Yup. You missed the entire point of the scene. Did you even TRY to pick up on a real film's nuainces? Bigger films are going to eat you alive with that great set of comprehesion skills you have there, kid. Batman was intentionally building himself up to them mythically to scare them. "I want you to tell all your friends about me." Could that mean.... yes! He was trying to get them to spread the word of his existance, just like the Batman of *gasp!* the comic books!

Then, the muscle-less Keaton...

You've never seen him shirtless, so I'd love to hear how you think you know this for a fact. Not to mention the fact that he'd have to be in impeccable shape to act through that suit. And he trained for two months prior to the movie.... no. You're right. Keaton's a 98-pound weakling.

...with the 70 pound Batsuit is somehow able to deliver a kick so powerful that the guy goes flying thru a wooden door (for a realistic character, how unrealistic).

First of all, Keaton delivered this kick himself. Proven and documented. Second, it's simple physics, something you won't learn about until High School. If you kick somebody hard enough, they will fall (or fly, depending on the force applied) in the direction they were kicked. and not ALL wood is five feet thick, kid. Though the art of interpretation, we can thus assume that the door was made of a cheap and thin type of wood.

Then the other thug does a stupid thing and run across the roof rather than thru the door to get away (how would he possibly get away by running across the roof.

Criminals are stupid. That's why they're criminals. You're honestly picking on the scene for this? I think we've got a college thesis here, kids! When you wake up and see what the world is really like, then get back to me...

The grappling hook didn't bother me so I wont touch that one, but once again, a muscle-less Keaton with a 70 pound Batsuit on is able to produce enough power and strength to lift an entire human being off the ground, and easily dangle him over the edge of a building (I'm not buying that for one second).

Once again, simple physics. Keaton has muscle (Who was the guy who dictated that since Keaton was average height and average build, he must be a weakling?), and uses it via leverage to hold the guy over the edge of the roof. Ask your friends to help simulate this thoery sometime, you'll find it actually works!

And with the "I'm Batman" part finally here, I'll say that the line had no impact, and Keaton spoke too softly; the actor playing the thug did fine.

Gee, the line only caused a fan uproar that helped prove to the fans of the time that the film was being done seriously, it is also one of the best remembered movie lines in history and is still used to parody Michael Keaton to this day. And it inspired a scene in a little film called Batman Begins. No.... no impact at all. Too softly? That one's your opinion... I can't refute it, so I won't.

The scene in Batman Begins was way better. First off, unlike Batman'89, Batman doesn't wait for the thugs to make thier moves, he just makes his move. The Batman in this scene actually hunts thugs like animals, rather than having the animals hunt him; this is very much like Batman.

Says who? Do you know ANYTHING about Batman? I've been a faithful fan for 20 years.... Batman's never been animalistic in the comic books. It was entirely invented by Christopher Nolan. Batman has always allowed his image to make the criminals think he was a bat... he never went out of his way to act like an animal. Batman has also never just acted, Burton's scene is just as valid as Nolan's.

Skipping ahead, at the part where he attacks all those thugs in that area at the docks; using the skills that The League taught him, he's able to quickly take down thugs as fast as he possibly can, but just because Bale is muscular and the Batsuit is light, doesn't mean he gets away without injuries; also realistic. The Batman in that scene doesn't hesitate, he acts.

Where did you see Batman get injured in the fight? He doesn't. Look a little closer next time. Of course, you can hardly see the fight scenes, so I don't blame you, really. Once again, Michael Keaton was perfectly muscular (I'm certain that he could mop the floor with you). A man does not need to have a six pack to still be able to kick ass. If you can't believe this, then you need to get outside more often.

You draw a comparison.... where did Keaton's Batman hesitate? That's right.... never. At least, not in the scenes up for comparison.

And just to add insult to injury: there was no League for Keaton's Wayne. He was a self-taught badass.

Now Falcone, who's stranded with a knocked out driver (it must've been "HIM") and pretty scared to top it off, gets ripped thru the top car window and is face to face with Batman (knowing Keaton's Batman, he'd probably make noises until Falcone came out of the car, and then he'd present himself yet AGAIN! lol).

If Keaton did that, wouldn't he be fitting of THEATRICALITY and DECEPTION, something Bale was taught INTENSELY about? Gee, that's funny....

As for "nice coat"...it didn't need to happen at all, but the zipping up with the grapple hook was pretty cool and very much like Batman.

And nothing Keaton ever did was like the guy from the books. Ever.

So all in all (for me, at least), the "I'm Batman" scene in Begins is just very much the Batman in the comics.

Then, you need to actually read some Batman comic books.

To me, the Batman'89 "I'm Batman" scene is only popular because of nostalgia; fans saw it as kids, it tickled their tummies and made them go "weeeee"

Now THERE's an intelligent statement! Not only is it indicative of a child-trying-to-sound-like-an-adult, but it's foolish as well. Is that reason the same reason why mature fans (ie: 18+) all loved the film when it came out? I guess everybody who liked B89 is a stupid, childish person. That's what you're saying.

Judging both scenes from a film making point of view, and from the way Batman is drawn in the comics ("Alpha and Omega..."), the scene in Batman Begins just has a greater, longer lasting impact that I'd expect a character like Batman would and SHOULD have.

Yeah, nobody remembers B89. It was just a little blip on the radar. It wasn't one of the highest grossing films of all time or anything. It wasn't the #1 film of 1989, an enormous pop culture icon that is still parodied to this day and quoted ("Where does he get those wonderful toys?" was quoted frequently in relation to Batman Begins. There's a shocker). Gee, I'd almost think that Batman Begins would have never happened without B89.... Guess I was wrong, but what do I know?

Listen, if you want to pick Bale.... go ahead, I don't care. What I do care about is somebody with an obvious bias coming in and tearing down a film just because. You don't have to try and convince us that you going with Bale is how you actually feel. I mean, if you want to make a comparison, do it objectively, or at least come up with some reasons that don't make you look like an idiot with no comprehension skills, because that's all you succeeded in doing. I wish I didn't have to make this post, but I can't help it. There's some problem that Nolanites have. Burton's films were too sophisticated for the lot of them. I guess if we didn't have a movie holding our hand, we'd drown in the complexities.

 

[General Vulcun]

Who says I'm a Nolanite? I'm always open to other interpretations of Batman, not just closed minded with "Nolan is best; that's it". Nolan just happened to make the best Batman film thus far, and it quite obviously shows. Is there anything wrong with THAT?! Or is it law that I must give in to nostalgia and like Batman'89 because it made a whole nation go "weeeeee" 17 years ago?

Also, yes, Bruce was hurt. Didn't you see the bruises on his arm the morning after? And by today's standards, it's too bad the scene (and the movie) is too dull to get into, enjoy, or really take seriously.

But hey, at least we got a better movie with The Joker coming in just over a year.

 

[blind_fury]

No poll?

Probably because you know Keaton would dominate.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

Who says I'm a Nolanite? I'm always open to other interpretations of Batman, not just closed minded with "Nolan is best; that's it". Nolan just happened to make the best Batman film thus far, and it quite obviously shows. Is there anything wrong with THAT?! Or is it law that I must give in to nostalgia and like Batman'89 because it made a whole nation go "weeeeee" 17 years ago?

You missed the entire point of my post. I don't care what you chose. That you're own business. But your reasons for why the scene in B89 were inferior were pathetic and show no comprehension skills on your part whatsoever.

And telling us everything about Batman doesn't make it a good film. For all of the facts it brings, the film fails to capture the heart and soul of the source material, which Burton did. BB is stiff, simplistic and superficial.

Also, yes, Bruce was hurt. Didn't you see the bruises on his arm the morning after?

Ah, yes. There's that, but for the life of me, I can't see him get hit in the actual fight.

And by today's standards, it's too bad the scene (and the movie) is too dull to get into, enjoy, or really take seriously.

If you mean B89, I feel sorry for your obvious lack of maturity to appreciate such a character piece. If you mean BB, I heartily agree!

But hey, at least we got a better movie with The Joker coming in just over a year.

Aside from Jack Nicholson being too old and too fat, you're no Batman fan at all if you can just denounce his performance like that. "Better?" By all accounts, it looks like Nolan is going to destroy the character and regurgitate him back on the screen being JINO. Jack Nicholson's portrayal was right-off-of-the-page. You can hardly get better than that. I'm all for a little difference from Nicholson in Ledger's portrayal, but it sounds like Nolan's making him as different as possible JUST to distance the film from what Nicholson did.... and that's disrespectful to the character. If the Joker's gonna feel like Nicholson anyway, you just deal with it. Nicholson did such a fine job as it is adapting the character, being too different from that means the Joker will hardly resemble the guy from the books.

But of course you wouldn't agree with that. To you, just about anything from B89 is inferior, so I'm really wasting my words.

 

[Rockbottom]

I could make a huge post explaining this next statement but I dont really have to, General Vulcun is a moron and DocLathropBrown wins.

I love both films, but General has come across as an idiot in this thread.

 

[daywalker2007]

keaton's all the way

i love the way he says straight after to the guy ,

"i want you tell all your friends about me"

and i absolutely love this line because its on the intro to the prince "future" song on the soundtrack

classic!

B89 rules!

Just a shame we never got a batman superman movie with keaton and reeve

would have been awesome that

bastards WB!