Why there will never be a better Batman than Keaton

Discussion in 'Batman World' started by Chris Wallace, Mar 19, 2005.

  1. Infinity9999x Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2005
    Messages:
    12,109
    Likes Received:
    633
    exactaly, I think it was interesting that they portrayed Batman as a smaller guy becuz then less ppl would suspect Wayne was Batman. That's what always bugged me bout the Superman concept, I mean ok we have this huge built guy in the comics who's always gone when superman is around, and he bares a stricking resemblence to superman.....but kno one knows hes superman...ya right. Oh and for a second there u got me freaked out cuz my Name is Chris and I was like how did he fing out my name.....? and then I saw wallaces name and I was like ohh duh...lol :rolleyes:
     
  2. Lazlo Panaflex Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Messages:
    5,752
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  3. Infinity9999x Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2005
    Messages:
    12,109
    Likes Received:
    633
    ya Reeve did do a good job but I just never bought the whole Superman Idea, I mean a guy can only fool so many people buy taking off his glasses. Reeve was a great actor tho.
     
  4. Pookie Begins Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,499
    Likes Received:
    0
    By that logic, it would actually give Bale a better chance at succeding and going above and beyond Keaton, the man who came before him. That is always the evolution of things, someone will always come along and be better after taking what he saw from his predecessors and adding his own flair. It is seen in many different landscapes. And also, Keaton wasn't piornering ANYTHING, the character was being potrayed as bad ass, anti-social nut in the biggest comic book of the 80's aka DKR which he based his entire performance off of.
     
  5. P. Cushing Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,748
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's not always true though. Neither Davison, McCoy, McGann or Eccleston are Better than Baker even though they succeeded him. Same with Everrett and Roxburgh, succeeding Merrison. And again with Oldman succeeding Lee and Palance. Still, it does happen some time (Conroy succeeding Sessions and Keaton, Whitfeild succeeding Rutherford and Hickson, etc.)
     
  6. Pookie Begins Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,499
    Likes Received:
    0
    I didn't say the next person in line for the role would be better, but which ever one is new to the role and obviously knocked it out the park, borrowed and stood on the shoulders of those before him.
     
  7. Comic Book Boy Producer/Writer/Director

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Messages:
    6,093
    Likes Received:
    0
    I disagree. Reeve did such a good job, when he was Clark he looked and seemed TOTALLY different than when he was Superman. It was amazing.
     
  8. Infinity9999x Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2005
    Messages:
    12,109
    Likes Received:
    633
    I just watched a bit of the movie again tonight, and you are right Reeve did really sell that role, I was really more making the point to the general concept of superman, especially in the comics where the portray Clark Kent as this huge buff guy. That always seemed unrealisitic to me. But I'm just a casual reader of Superman too.
     
  9. GLREBORN Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Messages:
    364
    Likes Received:
    0
    Keaton was never Batman

    Heck he is not even that great an actor.
     
  10. P. Cushing Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,748
    Likes Received:
    0
    Keaton was Batman from 1989 to when BTAS premiered.
     
  11. Crashorama Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    12
    He is an awesome actor.
     
  12. Guason Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    0
    Keaton is Batman
    And he`s such a great actor, even better than Bale.
     
  13. anaelmasri Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2004
    Messages:
    352
    Likes Received:
    0
    totally agree with u man
    bale looks like he will be great
    but KEATON IS BATMAN
     
  14. portland2002 Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2002
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    0
    Val Kilmer's my favorite Batman.
     
  15. Guason Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    0
    Keaton would have even made a better goofy and talkitive Batman than both Clooney and Kilmer if he had been asked to!
    I really have a hard time thinking one of them would have done a better job than he did, `cause let`s admit it they wouldn`t have. :hq:
     
  16. -Fire-Fly- The Fire Ant

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    831
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes I agree Keaton was good for his time but the show must go on...Bale is Batman

    Bat-Miles:batman:
     
  17. The Sage The World's Finest

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2004
    Messages:
    47,068
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bale will be Batman, and Keaton will still be Batman when it's all said and done.
     
  18. The Guard Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2002
    Messages:
    33,429
    Likes Received:
    820
    Agreed. Michael Keaton and Christian Bale are two different kinds of Batmen, just like West and Keaton were. Keaton was cast to fill the role of a completely re-imagined Dark Knight. Bale's not picking up where Keaton, Kilmer or Clooney left off, he's doing what Keaton did in 1989. Helping reinvent Batman. Nothing, I think, will ever change the fact that Keaton gave a hell of a performance as both Bruce Wayne and Batman in both films. He did things that appealed to comic book fans who flat-out hated those movies and their take on the character. Nothing's going to change that. I seriously doubt we're going to look back after BATMAN BEGINS and go "God, because Bale was good, Keaton's acting sucked".
     
  19. P. Cushing Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,748
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't be so sure about that last part, The Guard. Some people will just because.















    Keaton rules. A lot.
     
  20. swifty Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    3,976
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]

    Bale will own Keaton's ass!!!!

    [​IMG]
     
  21. Proximo Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,040
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bale look like a girl in that pictures.
    I have no doubt Bale will be a good Batman but i dont think he will beat Keaton's preformance.

    I mean just look at Keaton... He looks so much more intimidating and badass then Bale.
    Bale will probably be a better Bruce Wayne then Keaton but Batman no.
     
  22. buggs0268 Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,246
    Likes Received:
    0
    I still think this is so funny. When Batman 89 came out, most people thought Keaton sucked. The fan boys and comic people really hated him as Batman when the first one came out. I remember seeing it at the 12:00 am sneak showing the night before it was officially released, and when the movie was over all the Batman fans where going "God that sucked. He sucked as Batman!" Keaton made it all about the suit, and all the comic fans in 89 hated that. Keaton even said in interviews he played it for the suit. Batman is not just about the suit. I Just thought that would always be the case.

    Lets put it this way. After the film was over, and this was in the bigggest theater in town at the sneak preview showing with all the Batman fans there. Half of the audience was dressed up in batman, penguin, or joker cosutmes. Before the lights went out the whole audience was singing the 60 batman theme song. So this was a pro-Batman crowd. But, whent the movie was over, more people were talking about the Lethal Weapon 2 preview then Batman. Hell, more people wee talking about the stupid Yahoo Serious preview than they were Batman. If they where talking about Batman, it was how disapointed they were with it and Keaton. I heard alot of "That was what we were waiting for?" and there was so much hype before it was released, that it was all everyone talked about he following monday. And all the peopel I heard talking about it was how much it sucked, and how much Keaton sucked.

    So it jsut really cracks me up that people argue that he is the best now. Hell i think it is funny now that people think The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension was a great film now casue people thought it was really dumb when it came out.
     
  23. Proximo Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,040
    Likes Received:
    0
    singing 60s theme song? so i guess they expected a campy 60s style batman movie thats why they were pissed of the 89 movie.

    Now most of the people. fan boy etc, think burtons movies is the best and keaton is the man... 89 and returns will always be my favorite batman movies inspide of what Batman Begins will be like... i just cant accept someone else play Batman then Keaton... he is Batman for me.
     
  24. Riven Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2005
    Messages:
    6,625
    Likes Received:
    0
    No offense, but that "pro-Batman" crowd sounds like a bunch of freaking morons. Regardless if you like the Burton/Keaton Batman, that's just plain stupid.

    Ask almost anyone in the general audience who is a little knowledgable about Batman, not fanboys mind you, and they'll say B89 is their favorite Batman ever.

    B89 was not a dissapointment, nor was Keaton. B89 could have been a much better movie, but as a Batman movie adaptation it still stands unbeaten. I expect Begins to change that. But it still rules.
     
  25. buggs0268 Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,246
    Likes Received:
    0
    When it came out it was a total disapointment. It made money but that was becasue it was so overhyped everyone went to see it. But people, especially comic book people , hated it. My roomate at teh time owned a comic book store and I helped him set up at a comic book convention and that was what people would say when it was mentioned "God that sucked!" And the pro batman crows was the same type of crowd tha was dressed up and at opening night for all the Lord of the Ring movies. I am telling you from first hand experience, people were let down by the movie.

    I know Letterman told Keaton that he was the only Batman, but when Batman came out Letterman was goofing on it and saying things like "It looked nice but you could have cared less if everyone in Gotham died at the end of the movie" and people cheered. It was not well like when it came out as it was such a let down.

    And I was 22 at the time I saw it first showing at the biggest theater in town. So I wasn't just a kid. I know you are a fan of it but the movie was a total let down when it came out. And I am not just talking about just the fan boys. This movie was so hyped. Everyone was wearing the black shirt with the Batman logo. People were having the Batman logo cut into thir hair. I mean it was everywhere. And the general audience at the time hated it after it was released.

    6 months later, when I went to see a movie on opening night and they would show trivia questions with shots from the film when the lights were still on before the previews, and a shot from Batman came up, people who where paying attention to the screen groaned, and I remember hearing coments like "That movie just sucked"

    Again, I know youa re a fan, but when it came out, it was such a let down, not jsut to the fan boys, but to the general public. People liked the car. They liked Elfman's score. they liked the suit. But that was about it. And I know that people say they are the best out of the 4 now, which is my point. To me that is weird as people didn't like them when they came out. Batman Returns did not fly off of the videos shelves. Batman 1 did well on video sales, but that was the first time you could buy a brand new video tape release for $19.00. Before that a brand new video was $79.00-$89.50, if you could get them. Most videos back then you had to wair for 6 months before you bould buy a copy. You could get tehm on laser disc but not VHS. Alot of new releases you could not get at that time because the rental stores had agreements with the studios so that people would rent them instead of buying them. Batman was the first that was so cheap, and it was released in October or November if I remember correctly.

    Let me ask you this Riven. How old were you when the film came out? And were you there opening night. Did you see the film in the theater when it was released?
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"