Which movie has the most Bat screen time?

[Paste Pot Pete]

I think where Burton's films get the reputation for being villain-centric is not because of a lack of Batman screen time, but an abundance of villain screen time.

I'd be interested in seeing the total villain screen time of the movies, because I've got a hunch that the non-Batman screentime of the Burton movies is taken up largely by villain stuff, whereas the non-Batman screentime of the Nolan movies (especially BB, obviously) is taken up mostly by Bruce Wayne business.

 

[Al-Pennyworth]

That is a good effort to work that out, nice work

 

[Travesty]

I'd be interested in seeing the total villain screen time of the movies, because I've got a hunch that the non-Batman screentime of the Burton movies is taken up largely by villain stuff, whereas the non-Batman screentime of the Nolan movies (especially BB, obviously) is taken up mostly by Bruce Wayne business.

This is somewhat true, but would you count Ducard as a villain, before he was shown to be Ras?

 

[Catman]

I wouldn't say MOSTLY. Joker and Harvey Dent had a lot of screentime. Batman Begins, since it was an origin story, focused almost entirely on Bruce Wayne/Batman but that wasn't the case with The Dark Knight. The villains shined there. No different than in the Burton/Schumacher films.

 

[AllyBabble]

I wouldn't say MOSTLY. Joker and Harvey Dent had a lot of screentime. Batman Begins, since it was an origin story, focused almost entirely on Bruce Wayne/Batman but that wasn't the case with The Dark Knight. The villains shined there. No different than in the Burton/Schumacher films.

The thing about the Burton Batman films is that they suffer from having long stretches without Batman appearing, which was very frustrating to me when they first came out, and I think are still detrimental to the film's enjoyment factor if you are there to see Batman in action.
Batman 89, one very short scene with Bats, then an ok amount of time in Axis chemicals, before a long stretch until we get him again in the art gallery. So not much Batman at all for the first 45/50mins.
There is only one small scene with Batman (not counting the drive past the library, which is negligable) before a long stretch until we get Batman fighting the circus gang again about 55mins into the film.
TDK may have the same amount of time in BM appearances roughly in terms of actual time, but he is spread out more evenly throughout the film, like a nice sensible sandwich or baggette that does not expect the customer to be chewing only on bread for half of your lunch, so it feels more like a Batman movie to me than the Burton's do.

 

[GothamAlleys]

The thing about the Burton Batman films is that they suffer from having long stretches without Batman appearing, which was very frustrating to me when they first came out, and I think are still detrimental to the film's enjoyment factor if you are there to see Batman in action.
Batman 89, one very short scene with Bats, then an ok amount of time in Axis chemicals, before a long stretch until we get him again in the art gallery. So not much Batman at all for the first 45/50mins.
There is only one small scene with Batman (not counting the drive past the library, which is negligable) before a long stretch until we get Batman fighting the circus gang again about 55mins into the film.
TDK may have the same amount of time in BM appearances roughly in terms of actual time, but he is spread out more evenly throughout the film, like a nice sensible sandwich or baggette that does not expect the customer to be chewing only on bread for half of your lunch, so it feels more like a Batman movie to me than the Burton's do.

And again, Burton made Gothic movies, almost operas. He said he approach Batman as dark figure, as someone like Phantom of the Opera so naturally hes gonna be a mysterious person in the shadow and a side character that we get glimpses of from other characters' perspective. Its like watching an Alien movie and seeing and knowing very little, only what the mian characters see. Yet Alien is still called Alien and is still an Alien movie. Same with Burton's Batman and I prefer this approach than lets say, seeing everything from Alien's perspective. It takes away the danger and mystery and darkness out of the character, and I always preferred the "dracula" Batman of Burton's movies

Tim Burton: [The people who criticized lack of focus on Batman] were missing the point of the character of Batman. This guy wants to remain as hidden as possible, and in the shadows as possible, and unrevealing about himself as possible, so all of those things - you know, he’s not gonna eat up screen time by these big speeches and doing dancing around the Batcave
Again, I felt less is more with him in the sense of who he is. (…) Michael’s eyes - it goes back to kind of like silent movie acting. I like when people sort of just look. It’s a movie so you kinda get more between the lines then you do [from] the actual lines (…) There's a loneliness to that character and witheldness. He’s a character that is sad and is private
Even when hes standing there looking there's an electricity about him. Again this is why I wanted him for Batman because its all about that. (BR audio commentary)

Of course since I love both Burton and Nolan's movies like crazy, the fact that we get to see Batman as a regular but angry guy, like a cop character in Nolan's movies doesnt mean its a bad thing at all, just not dark and not Gothic in a poetic sense

 

[AllyBabble]

And again, Burton made Gothic movies, almost operas. He said he approach Batman as dark figure, as someone like Phantom of the Opera so naturally hes gonna be a mysterious person in the shadow and a side character that we get glimpses of from other characters' perspective. Its like watching an Alien movie and seeing and knowing very little, only what the mian characters see. Yet Alien is still called Alien and is still an Alien movie. Same with Burton's Batman and I prefer this approach than lets say, seeing everything from Alien's perspective. It takes away the danger and mystery and darkness out of the character, and I always preferred the "dracula" Batman of Burton's movies

Tim Burton: [The people who criticized lack of focus on Batman] were missing the point of the character of Batman. This guy wants to remain as hidden as possible, and in the shadows as possible, and unrevealing about himself as possible, so all of those things - you know, he’s not gonna eat up screen time by these big speeches and doing dancing around the Batcave
Again, I felt less is more with him in the sense of who he is. (&#8230 Michael’s eyes - it goes back to kind of like silent movie acting. I like when people sort of just look. It’s a movie so you kinda get more between the lines then you do [from] the actual lines (&#8230 There's a loneliness to that character and witheldness. He’s a character that is sad and is private
Even when hes standing there looking there's an electricity about him. Again this is why I wanted him for Batman because its all about that. (BR audio commentary)

Of course since I love both Burton and Nolan's movies like crazy, the fact that we get to see Batman as a regular but angry guy, like a cop character in Nolan's movies doesnt mean its a bad thing at all, just not dark and not Gothic in a poetic sense

I don't know if the example of Alien and the Phantom of the opera are that apt. As mysterious and gothic as that approach was, Batman is a physical presence that has to be out there fighting crime, getting his hands dirty and furthering the plot with his actions. You can still maintain an active physical presence but maintain the mystery, like when Keaton got a lot of his lines cut from BR as he felt BM talked too much.

Less is sometimes more, but sometimes the film directors errs on the side of caution too much and less is just less. I compare these long stretches without Batman in the Burton movies to what Lucas did with Darth Maul in TPM, he held him back a little too much to the point where it was frustrating to some viewers. Those who had been anticipating seeing a satisfactory showing from this character, who was the predominant figure in the movie's advertising and hype in the lead up to release.

 

[GothamAlleys]

I don't know if the example of Alien and the Phantom of the opera are that apt. As mysterious and gothic as that approach was, Batman is a physical presence that has to be out there fighting crime, getting his hands dirty and furthering the plot with his actions.

The Phantom example didnt come from me but from Burton who actually said that he modelled Batman after him. And phantom was also a real character, a human being, also hurt. And just like Phantom or Coppola's Dracula, when they dont talk its that much better for the character

I compare these long stretches without Batman in the Burton movies to what Lucas did with Darth Maul in TPM, he held him back a little too much to the point where it was frustrating to some viewers.

Well, like I said, its everyone's personal preference. I liked the quiet Batman who was "talking with his eyes" and he was very interesting to me as this dark gothic character. And Ironically, Maul is often described as the best or the only good thing about the prequels. I always loved the "vampire Batman" and Im glad I also have an alternative take in BB

 

[The Joker]

The thing about the Burton Batman films is that they suffer from having long stretches without Batman appearing, which was very frustrating to me when they first came out, and I think are still detrimental to the film's enjoyment factor if you are there to see Batman in action.
Batman 89, one very short scene with Bats, then an ok amount of time in Axis chemicals, before a long stretch until we get him again in the art gallery. So not much Batman at all for the first 45/50mins.
There is only one small scene with Batman (not counting the drive past the library, which is negligable) before a long stretch until we get Batman fighting the circus gang again about 55mins into the film.
TDK may have the same amount of time in BM appearances roughly in terms of actual time, but he is spread out more evenly throughout the film, like a nice sensible sandwich or baggette that does not expect the customer to be chewing only on bread for half of your lunch, so it feels more like a Batman movie to me than the Burton's do.

Agreed.

 

[returntovoid]

And again, Burton made Gothic movies, almost operas. He said he approach Batman as dark figure, as someone like Phantom of the Opera so naturally hes gonna be a mysterious person in the shadow and a side character that we get glimpses of from other characters' perspective. Its like watching an Alien movie and seeing and knowing very little, only what the mian characters see. Yet Alien is still called Alien and is still an Alien movie. Same with Burton's Batman and I prefer this approach than lets say, seeing everything from Alien's perspective. It takes away the danger and mystery and darkness out of the character, and I always preferred the "dracula" Batman of Burton's movies

Tim Burton: [The people who criticized lack of focus on Batman] were missing the point of the character of Batman. This guy wants to remain as hidden as possible, and in the shadows as possible, and unrevealing about himself as possible, so all of those things - you know, he’s not gonna eat up screen time by these big speeches and doing dancing around the Batcave
Again, I felt less is more with him in the sense of who he is. (…) Michael’s eyes - it goes back to kind of like silent movie acting. I like when people sort of just look. It’s a movie so you kinda get more between the lines then you do [from] the actual lines (…) There's a loneliness to that character and witheldness. He’s a character that is sad and is private
Even when hes standing there looking there's an electricity about him. Again this is why I wanted him for Batman because its all about that. (BR audio commentary)

Of course since I love both Burton and Nolan's movies like crazy, the fact that we get to see Batman as a regular but angry guy, like a cop character in Nolan's movies doesnt mean its a bad thing at all, just not dark and not Gothic in a poetic sense

I agree, I love that kind of less is more and Gothic approach to Batman.

 

[AllyBabble]

^Yeah(edit: in reply to Joker), sometimes when I am Nolaned out but feel like watching a BM movie, I think of putting on the Burton's, but then don't put them on as I can't be arsed sitting through those practically Batmanless first 45-50mins.
I think Batman89 could have used a great series of dark, shadowy appearances by Batman on a typical night out, much like Superman's 1st night on the job in SMTV, just like BM's 1st night back in the GN TDKR.

The Phantom example didnt come from me but from Burton who actually said that he modelled Batman after him. And phantom was also a real character, a human being, also hurt. And just like Phantom or Coppola's Dracula, when they dont talk its that much better for the character

Yeah, as I said when I cited the Micheal Keaton influence on BR's script, I was not talking about the talking aspect, more the actual physical apperances being spread through the film, so that they felt like Batman movies, and the audience are not sat there wondering where BM is, and marking time until his next appearance as they get bored with scenes with cops, reporters, villans, Alfred telling stories about wiping Bruce's bum when he was but a young boy etc

Well, like I said, its everyone's personal preference. I liked the quiet Batman who was "talking with his eyes" and he was very interesting to me as this dark gothic character. And Ironically, Maul is often described as the best or the only good thing about the prequels. I always loved the "vampire Batman" and Im glad I also have an alternative take in BB

I think you will find that more SW fans bemoan the fact that Maul was underused and wasted as a character, that's what I have read more predominantly on SW discussions threads anyway, rather than any unabashed praise for his appearances in tpm.
and as I was aying to Joker, Batman 89 could have used a great shadowy series of Batman appearances much like his 1st night out in FM's TDKR, where he is silent, and does not even really appear as much more than a shadow. That would fit in with Burton's criteria, but i think the movie was perhaps rushed and he did not have time to figure out how to do those type of scenes.
edit: He has said that they had a hard time figuring out how to present Batman, and was amazed that they got as much done as they did, but they could have had some cool scenes with just his hand smashing through a window grabbing a crook, or grabbing him up into the air etc like the GN TDKR. That would have been in keeping with his silent, gothic-y manifesto for the character.

 

[Bat-Mite]

I wouldn't say MOSTLY. Joker and Harvey Dent had a lot of screentime. Batman Begins, since it was an origin story, focused almost entirely on Bruce Wayne/Batman but that wasn't the case with The Dark Knight. The villains shined there. No different than in the Burton/Schumacher films.

I don't think Joker actually had that much screen time, but it seems like he did because he had such a huge presence. I could be wrong, because I haven't actually counted the number of minutes he's on screen. But before the movie came out, I remember Nolan talking about how the Joker wouldn't actually have as much screen time as people might expect, and it seemed that way to me when I saw the movie for the first time. In The Silence of the Lambs, Hannibal Lecter only has 15 minutes of screen time, but he makes such a huge impression that it seems a lot more than that. I think this is a similar situation.

Also, you can't really count Dent as a villain until he actually becomes Two-Face, and there's no question that he had very little screen time as Two-Face (one of the biggest fan complaints about TDK).

 

[Catman]

The thing about the Burton Batman films is that they suffer from having long stretches without Batman appearing

So did TDK. Unless you're counting Bruce Wayne in the Batcave as Batman scenes.

 

[The Joker]

So did TDK. Unless you're counting Bruce Wayne in the Batcave as Batman scenes.

Not really. Batman was peppered throughout the movie. There was no long stretches where he didn't appear.

- Garage scene
- Bank vault with Gordon
- Hong Kong sequence
- Penthouse party fight
- The Joker victims in the apartment scene
- Maroni's club/interrogating Maroni/finding Dent terrorizing the Joker thug
- The Joker Truck/Bat-Pod/armoured car sequence
- Interrogation room/saving Dent
- The whole finale from setting up the Sonar tech, to the Prewitt Building battle, to the showdown with Two Face and Gordon's family

 

[Brother Jack]

I don't think Joker actually had that much screen time, but it seems like he did because he had such a huge presence. I could be wrong, because I haven't actually counted the number of minutes he's on screen. But before the movie came out, I remember Nolan talking about how the Joker wouldn't actually have as much screen time as people might expect, and it seemed that way to me when I saw the movie for the first time. In The Silence of the Lambs, Hannibal Lecter only has 15 minutes of screen time, but he makes such a huge impression that it seems a lot more than that. I think this is a similar situation.

I don't know exactly how much screen time Joker had but I know it was less than Bruce/Batman and Harvey Dent.

Also, you can't really count Dent as a villain until he actually becomes Two-Face, and there's no question that he had very little screen time as Two-Face (one of the biggest fan complaints about TDK).

Even then it's kind of difficult to really see him as a villain because of how tragic and empathetic his story was. Yes he was doing bad things, but you understood why he did it. I don't really like to consider Dent and Two-Face as two separate characters, I think they are essentially the same guy, which is part of the reason why I had no problem with Two-Face's screen time in TDK.

 

[Catman]

Not really. Batman was peppered throughout the movie.

Yes, peppered with a lot of mini scenes:

-(Bank vault) 0:36
-(Rooftop meeting) 0:50
-(Crime scene) 0:50
-(Gordon's porch) 0:04
-(Thomas Shift scene) 0:46
-(Saving Dent from building) 0:45
-(Rubble/Hospital scenes) 0:14

 

[Travesty]

Just got done with Forever. I'll try and do B&R tonight, and if I have time, then I'll post the findings, if not, then tomorrow for sure.

I'm also thinking about doing the two Jokers, but we'll see.....

 

[The Joker]

Yes, peppered with a lot of mini scenes:

-(Bank vault) 0:36
-(Rooftop meeting) 0:50
-(Crime scene) 0:50
-(Gordon's porch) 0:04
-(Thomas Shift scene) 0:46
-(Saving Dent from building) 0:45
-(Rubble/Hospital scenes) 0:14

So what? A mere ten seconds of seeing Batman simply standing on a rooftop, or gliding across the sky etc makes you feel his presence. Hannibal Lecter had something like 16 minutes in Silence of the Lambs, but you don't notice it.

I'm also thinking about doing the two Jokers, but we'll see.....

Guarantee you Nicholson had more screen time. He definitely has more screen time than Keaton.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Yeah, as I said when I cited the Micheal Keaton influence on BR's script, I was not talking about the talking aspect, more the actual physical apperances being spread through the film, so that they felt like Batman movies, and the audience are not sat there wondering where BM is, and marking time until his next appearance as they get bored with scenes with cops, reporters, villans, Alfred telling stories about wiping Bruce's bum when he was but a young boy etc

Again, personal preference. Im also a fan of Coppola's Dracula and I really never skipped parts of the movie to see Drac and never timed his screen time. I liked that he was a secondary character and that we knew and saw him only through the eyes of others, the main characters. And I think Batman as Phantom was fantastic. I aslo thought Bale as the normal man Batman was fantastic. Cant really knock any approaches, but if for some reason I would have to pick one favorite that would be Burton's. But I dont have to and I have four movies (B89, BR, BB, TDK) and 2 fantastic Batmans to enjoy

I think you will find that more SW fans bemoan the fact that Maul was underused and wasted as a character,

I sure agree with that, nut underused doesnt mean him taking screentime talking, showing getting prepared and all that.

 

[Elevator Man]

^Yeah(edit: in reply to Joker), sometimes when I am Nolaned out but feel like watching a BM movie, I think of putting on the Burton's, but then don't put them on as I can't be arsed sitting through those practically Batmanless first 45-50mins.
I think Batman89 could have used a great series of dark, shadowy appearances by Batman on a typical night out, much like Superman's 1st night on the job in SMTV, just like BM's 1st night back in the GN TDKR.



Yeah, as I said when I cited the Micheal Keaton influence on BR's script, I was not talking about the talking aspect, more the actual physical apperances being spread through the film, so that they felt like Batman movies, and the audience are not sat there wondering where BM is, and marking time until his next appearance as they get bored with scenes with cops, reporters, villans, Alfred telling stories about wiping Bruce's bum when he was but a young boy etc




I think you will find that more SW fans bemoan the fact that Maul was underused and wasted as a character, that's what I have read more predominantly on SW discussions threads anyway, rather than any unabashed praise for his appearances in tpm.
and as I was aying to Joker, Batman 89 could have used a great shadowy series of Batman appearances much like his 1st night out in FM's TDKR, where he is silent, and does not even really appear as much more than a shadow. That would fit in with Burton's criteria, but i think the movie was perhaps rushed and he did not have time to figure out how to do those type of scenes.
edit: He has said that they had a hard time figuring out how to present Batman, and was amazed that they got as much done as they did, but they could have had some cool scenes with just his hand smashing through a window grabbing a crook, or grabbing him up into the air etc like the GN TDKR. That would have been in keeping with his silent, gothic-y manifesto for the character.

Apparently all you want to see is action scenes dealing with Batman. That's probably all you want in a Batman movie instead of a good movie. There are other characters in the movies too. Not just Batman. You just want an explosion every ten minutes. With very little room for story and character development. There's more to the character of Batman than just action.

And get over the screen time already in the Burton movies. You don't like it that Batman isn't shown for a long period of time fighting crime than stick with the Nolan films. This thread is really ticking people off b/c the Burton's Batman has the longest amount of screen time ( according to Travesty)and you get a fit and say stuff like "Batman should be fighting this and that blah blah blah ... And not be missing for a huge amount of time in the movie..."

I'll say it again there is more to Batman than just action scenes. I

 

[Travesty]

This thread is really ticking people off b/c the Burton's Batman has the longest amount of screen time ( according to Travesty)and you get a fit and say stuff like "Batman should be fighting this and that blah blah blah ... And not be missing for a huge amount of time in the movie..."

I don't think anybody is really upset in this thread. I think you need to settle down a bit.....

 

[AllyBabble]

Apparently all you want to see is action scenes dealing with Batman. That's probably all you want in a Batman movie instead of a good movie. There are other characters in the movies too. Not just Batman. You just want an explosion every ten minutes. With very little room for story and character development. There's more to the character of Batman than just action.

And get over the screen time already in the Burton movies. You don't like it that Batman isn't shown for a long period of time fighting crime than stick with the Nolan films. This thread is really ticking people off b/c the Burton's Batman has the longest amount of screen time ( according to Travesty)and you get a fit and say stuff like "Batman should be fighting this and that blah blah blah ... And not be missing for a huge amount of time in the movie..."

I'll say it again there is more to Batman than just action scenes. I

Yeah, the simple fact here is that you are focusing on one part of one post where i said he could have used a 'Batman's night out fighting crime' sequence like in SMTV.
But you ignore the fact that I enjoy *all* the types of typical BM scenes in TDK, the kind of things you get in the books that were missing from the Burton films.
One of my fav scenes from the Nolan's is in BB when Batman shows up at Gordon's house and has that wee chat with him, that was a huge thrill for me as that typical BM scene was conspicuous in it's absence from all 4 89-97 BM movies, ridiculous, same with the meeting on the rooftop at the end of BB. Classic BM/Gordon.
I also enjoy the little scenes where Gordon sends the cops out of the room while he and BM investigate the crime scenes(bank and the dead cops scene).
Same with just seeing Batman investigating, climbing rooftops, sitting on rooftops etc, all the kind of iconic scenes that make his presence felt and give me the same vibe as the comics I grew up obsessed over.
So, you presume much from one minor point i made about having a 'Batman night out' sequence, and fail completely. Not too smart buddy.

edit: Batman89 should really be called 'The Joker Begins', because that is what the movie concerns itself with for that first 45-50mins, just as Batman Begins did with Bruce's transformation into Batman. I'm not trying to be a smartass, that is just how the movie is constructed, but I paid to see a movie called 'Batman', and was quite disheartened by his lack of development in the film when I went to see it.
It is frustrating because there are great scenes Burton did that are still amongst my fav BM on film moments, Axis chemicals('oh...my...god'), the first appearance aping DC27, the escape from the art gallery and drive back to the batcave, all bonafide classic BM, but there is just not enough focus on Bats in the movies, a mistake that Nolan and Bale noticed and set to rectify.

edit: Hell, even the Bruce Wayne scenes in that first 45-50mins are primarily concerned with his pursuit of Vicki Vale, rather than anything Batman-ish. I sit through those scenes thinking 'wtf is this crap I have seen in a billiongazillion other movies about some eccentric yuppie chasing after some smart savvy chick, this is supposed to be a Batman movie!'
These kind of scenes are the reason I do not reach for the Burton movie that often at all these days, it's like 'Working Girl' or some crap has been inserted into the film.

James Cameron: Dude, I don't know how many times I have to say this, but I am not talking about his lack of dialoge, I am talking about a lack of presence in the films. They feel unbalanced as Batman movies because of this. I actually agree with what Keaton did with the movie script, taking out lots of dialoge, making Batman's dialoug short , sharp and to the point, the 'Things Change' exchange is a good example of an effective exchange between BM and a villan that says a lot in one or two lines about the character.

 

[GothamAlleys]

James Cameron: Dude, I don't know how many times I have to say this, but I am not talking about his lack of dialoge, I am talking about a lack of presence in the films. They feel unbalanced as Batman movies because of this. I actually agree with what Keaton did with the movie script, taking out lots of dialoge, making Batman's dialoug short , sharp and to the point, the 'Things Change' exchange is a good example of an effective exchange between BM and a villan that says a lot in one or two lines about the character.

And I wasnt talking about dialogue either, but about his presence and screen time. Lack of alien in an Alien movie wasnt a problem for me, same with Vlad in Dracula, even tho they are the title characters and theyre what we paiod to see. Would you complain that Alien shouldve been called Ripley instead? All Im trying to say is that this is a gothic storytelling and I disagree that its by any means something wrong. Its simply a different approach and different type of a story and presenting a character, not a wrong one. There is no right or wrong here

 

[AllyBabble]

And I wasnt talking about dialogue either, but about his presence and screen time. Lack of alien in an Alien movie wasnt a problem for me, same with Vlad in Dracula, even tho they are the title characters and theyre what we paiod to see. Would you complain that Alien shouldve been called Ripley instead? All Im trying to say is that this is a gothic storytelling and I disagree that its by any means something wrong. Its simply a different approach and different type of a story and presenting a character, not a wrong one. There is no right or wrong here

Well, you could have fooled me buddy, because in every reply to my points you bring up the fact of less dialogue, while i was not talking about that, in fact i was beginning to think you were changing the goalposts of the debate just to try and 'win' your point, and I'm not entirely sure, but I think you may be doing that unconciously, because agian you seem to be doing it here, by saying you weren't saying that, when all you have to do is go back and read all your replies to me, where you were.
Right or wrong? Buddy, it's all about the opinions here, and imo he took the wrong approach here and 'less was indeed less' not more. He neglected a very interesting character here in Batman, and made an ineffective 'Batman' movie. The charactertisation is not great, not developed enough.
That's exactly what Bale thought when he read the books in prep, Year One, TLH etc, he thought 'why has this character not been explored in any of the four previous movies?' Because he wasn't , he was ignored in favour of the what should have been the supporting players.
That is my opinion, his approach was wrong and ineffective, that is, if he wanted to make a movie about Batman, and if you don't want to make a movie about Batman, don't call it Batman, call it The Joker, or Gotham. but he was commisioned to make a movie about Batman, and he failed to do that, he was a supporting player in what should have been his own film.

 

[Bat-Mite]

I aslo thought Bale as the normal man Batman was fantastic.

Unless it's someone dressing up for Halloween or a costume party, there is no such thing as a "normal man" Batman. It's not "normal" to dress up as a bat to do anything.

"When you told me about this idea of yours, the one thing that stopped me from calling the men in the white coats was that you said it wasn't about thrill seeking."

Keaton's eccentricities may have been more blatant, but most people don't respond to the deaths of loved ones by traveling around the world and learning every fighting method that comes their way, or by intentionally getting themselves locked up in prison in order to have "practice." I could go on and on with these examples, but the best one I can give is that the Joker was actually drawn to Batman by all the crazy things he was doing, as Joker reveals during the interrogation scene. In the mind of the Joker, he and Batman are cut from the same cloth, and Batman's just as crazy as he is. And there's definitely some truth to that. Just because Bale's Batman doesn't sleep upside down doesn't mean he's "normal", or even sane for that matter.