Who was a better batman Adam West or Michael Keaton?

Originally posted by SpyCspider
I must say I'm kinda biased overall just cuz BATMAN and BATMAN Returns seemed to be more for a mature audience...it's grittier, savage, and less colorful. And hence, Keaton made a Batman in THAT Gotham City with its insane Joker more believable.

Batman Forever made it seem like a big merry-go-around. Tommy Lee Jone's portrayal of the supposedly deranged and bitter Two-Face fell flat because he was too goofy. While Val COULD have portrayed the Dark Knight rather well, the characters and surrounding he had to interact with made him a less formidable Bats. He kept having to switch from a dark to a light side. BATS would NEVER make a grand entrance into a crowd of onlookers during the beginning scene just to talk to Chase and the Commish. He'd go in silently like a ninja like Bats did at the AXIS Chemicals plant in the first movie. Or when he tried to rescue the ice princess in BAtman Returns. The point is Batman Forever was made as it was--I don't think you can judge what Vilmer could have done with a better script or not.

If you had to ask me which Batman emulated Kevin Conroy's Bats the most in performance, it would have to be Keaton's Batman. As Bruce Wayne, physically, I actually think Clooney would fit Bruce Wayne the best since he had the square jaw, the manly look (like in the animated series). Kilmer had a pretty boy look. And as short as he was, Keaton had the lonely, torn mysterious look as Wayne.

As for fighting, you gotta remember this was 1988 (or was it 1989). Martial Arts films in the U.S. weren't filled with Matrix-style Hong Kong choreagraphy. There WERE a few films that had that, but none of which were blockbusters. I think the fighting scenes satisfied audiences for its time. As weak as he was shown fighting that big dude in the end, you gotta remember this was supposed to be somewhat Bats in his early career....just coming out and fighting PROFESSIONAL criminals, not lowly thugs. How can you not enjoy Bats grabbing that big dude in the end by the legs and throwing him down the cathedral? How can you NOT like Batman punching that clown in the throat sideways without even glancing at him in Batman Returns? In BATMAN FOREVER, I hated that "comical fight scene" when that dude whips out his gadgets and Bats waited and kicked him in the face. But I loved it when Bats kicked that sword guy charging him in the face in BATMAN. See the difference? It's all about delivery.

I'd want Keaton's BAts to back me up. Not so much with VAl's.

okay YOUR reasons unlike Batdudes are actually reasonable points so I can respect YOUR reasons for liking the first two better.I still say the first two sucked even worse than BATMAN FOREVER did though. 😄

Mr. Parker, I think you have this bizzare illness that makes you hate me. I try to be a nice guy with good reasons, but YOU try to diss me because I don't word things correct. What I've been trying to say is that Keaton made a more Year One mature badass Bats, he didn't have the bat shaped grappling hooks, but he was still perfectly good. And I know you think he was miscast but he did a good job right? Val was good, but he was, like SpyCspider said, too pretty boy for a lot of people. (This is off topic but the machine guns on the Batmobile in BATMAN were used to make a door through the Axis Chemicals garage when he blew it up)
And like I said before about the thug beating on Batman, he was pretty big and no Batman in the comics would probably need his eyes to fight him.

I would replie but I think I have put all my ideals on why Keaton is better in other posts/trends, and Think of going back to all Joker, and getting rid of the Mortal Kombat sig/avtor.

Originally posted by Bat Dude
Mr. Parker, I think you have this bizzare illness that makes you hate me. I try to be a nice guy with good reasons, but YOU try to diss me because I don't word things correct. What I've been trying to say is that Keaton made a more Year One mature badass Bats, he didn't have the bat shaped grappling hooks, but he was still perfectly good. And I know you think he was miscast but he did a good job right? Val was good, but he was, like SpyCspider said, too pretty boy for a lot of people. (This is off topic but the machine guns on the Batmobile in BATMAN were used to make a door through the Axis Chemicals garage when he blew it up)
And like I said before about the thug beating on Batman, he was pretty big and no Batman in the comics would probably need his eyes to fight him.

Now now... Be nice you two

er....just throwing my two cents in....

i kinda thot that the scene where the guy whips out his toys and comes running at batman in the third movie were good. hm.....come to think of it, i think it happened twice. once in the beginning, at the bank, and once at nygma's party. the second one i thot was kinda funny/good. this guy puts all this energy into looking intimidating and impressive, and then batman "says" you're done? good? ok. WHAM! translation= the other guy put all his effort into looking intimidating and oh boy batman i'm gonna slice you to ribbons, and batman actually delivered the goods, doing what this guy hoped to accomplish by trying to look scary/nasty.

but then *blush* i'm kinda a fan of the third movie, but for different reasons than mr parker. 🙂

adam west>all

I think this is getting a little old but oh well, Keaton rox!

Lets see, the batman actors. West was a good Bruce Wayne and a good campy batman for his time. Keaton was a joke, fat, short, too old, bad figther, made of bruce wayne a goofy idiot with memory problems , doing a bad copy of chris reeve portrayal of clark kent in superman, didnt look anything as batman or bruce wayne, ect. Kilmer didnt impress me, he was too unconvincet and without soul as batman or bruce wayne, too insipid, but he looked more as batman or bruce wayne and he was a better figther than keaton and his bruce wayne wasnt an goofy idiot as he is supposed to be in the comics. Clooney is a good actor sometimes, but in batman and robin the script was terrible and his acting was terrible because he was playing the same thing as batman or as bruce wayne. That was a joke. To resume it, the three actors sucked, but kilmer was the best one of the three.

spycspider, best post so far.

kilmer was the best one of the three. [/B][/QUOTE]

although we have many of the same agreements on the batman movies bakerboy,we also have quite a few disagreements on the batman movies as well.However,that last statement you hit the nail right on the head about Kilmer being the best to have played the role so far.Its ONLY on the net where you find people who liked Keaton so much,most people in real life I talk to "and I know you have told me the same thing that most people you talk to in real life in your country as well" hated Keaton also because of how physically miscast he was for the role.

Yeah, mr parker, you are right. In fact , i remember the day of the release of the first batman in my country, and my friends who were seeing the movie with me and some people in the public was laughing and making coments about what wrong was Keaton as batman. I remember a little girl saying " what a small batman" , i laughed my ass when i remember it. It prooves what stupid was the cast of michael keaton as batman. For not mention than his supossed "great performance" is a urban legend.
2

Yeah exactly Bakerboy.I also remember people walking out of the theaters saying-Man what a stupid and horrible casting choice casting that short runt, half bald michael keaton for Batman.Further proof it was a horrible casting choice.

You guyz and your "miscast" he was a better actor in BATMAN than Kilmer was in Batman Forever. And who really cares if he was a little wrong(the short thing was kinda right but he wasn't fat or bald) And Kilmer was a idiot in front of Chase as I can remember, "I uh I'm uh sorry uh I uh thought you were uh in trouble." You know, Keaton was also a good fighter. And the first thing that will come to your mind is "yeah right, remember the guy in the belltower that beat his ass!" Well he was pretty big if you ask me. And one more thing, Some people were miscast in Forever, Kilmer was one(he sucked because he was a terrible actor) Tommy Lee Jones(same reason) and Jim Carrey(more like a Joker, but Nichalson would be better) And further more, BATMAN and Batman Returns were far better than Batman Forver and Batman and Robin. Here is a question, who was a better dark Batman?(not Kilmer)

first of all

the guy in the bell tower was huge. and batman was f*cked up after the crash

maybe kilmer was physically better, but keaton was miles batter as te character. keaton is a better actor period.

Exactly

Originally posted by pr1983
first of all

the guy in the bell tower was huge. and batman was f*cked up after the crash

maybe kilmer was physically better, but keaton was miles batter as te character. keaton is a better actor period.

not as Bruce wayne he wasnt.and please dont use that old lame ass excuse that he was hurt and that guy was huge because AGAIN that guy had no special fighting skills at all and size dont mean shit when your a master in martial arts anyways so batman should EASLIY have been able to beat that guy blindfolded.its not like he broke both his legs and couldnt walk or anything. 🙄 please I hate that old lame ass excuse that he was hurt so dont use it because it does not wash.all bats had to do was kick him in the nuts.problem easily solved. 🙄 just admit that it was simply horrible screen writing no shame in that.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
not as Bruce wayne he wasnt.and please dont use that old lame ass excuse that he was hurt and that guy was huge because AGAIN that guy had no special fighting skills at all and size dont mean shit when your a master in martial arts anyways so batman should EASLIY have been able to beat that guy blindfolded.its not like he broke both his legs and couldnt walk or anything. 🙄 please I hate that old lame ass excuse that he was hurt so dont use it because it does not wash.all bats had to do was kick him in the nuts.problem easily solved. 🙄 just admit that it was simply horrible screen writing no shame in that.

Nothing pleases you Mr. Parker 😛

not as Bruce wayne he wasnt.and please dont use that old lame ass excuse that he was hurt and that guy was huge because AGAIN that guy had no special fighting skills at all and size dont mean shit when your a master in martial arts anyways so batman should EASLIY have been able to beat that guy blindfolded.its not like he broke both his legs and couldnt walk or anything. please I hate that old lame ass excuse that he was hurt so dont use it because it does not wash.all bats had to do was kick him in the nuts.problem easily solved. just admit that it was simply horrible screen writing no shame in that.

the guy was bigger than any bruce i've ever seen.

and its only a lame excuse to you, kinda like 'kilmer was better cos he was more physically suited'.

if any human being was in that crash, even one as fit as batman, he'd be injured. and how do you know the guy couldn't fight? and then even if he couldn't, batman is at a disadvantage because he's in so much pain. no matter how good a martial artist you are, you would suffer alot due to the amount of pain you were in. you can see it when he falls against the benches in the church. he's struggling to walk, let alone
fight a guy bigger and stronger than him.

and keaton WAS imo a better batman than kilmer.

and the writing is up there with the best of any comic book movie. that museum scene is a classic.

anyway, on topic,

i don't think its fair to compare west and keaton. when west was the 'camp' batman, the comics were in the same vain as the t.v. show. when keaton came along, the comics had become alot darker, and imo keaton suited the role of a dark batman.

Those excuses are stupid as always. I have seen batman injured in the comics and beating people like killer croc or man bat, who are monster with superhuman strenght , or 4 or 5 people at the same time. Batman is an expert in all kinds of fight, he has all in his mind , not only in his body. He is so clever that he could fight very well even injured, because his intelligence and his tactics. Could you say me that this stupid and slow guy from the movie is more dangerous than killer croc or man bat?

That is only a poor excuse to Keaton's poor fight movements. He was a terrible fighter and that is pathetic in a character as batman. One reason more because keaton sucked.

ffs...

first of all, its a movie, an adaptation of a comic, did u watch the other comic movies? i've read plenty of batman comics, and i've seen him recover from tons of shit, but if u put that on a screen people are gonna think its ridiculous. its a little thing called artistic license, they have to make him seem more human. his technique wasn't bad at all, and he came through most of his fights pretty well imo.

as for intelligence and tactics, they don't do shit if you've just crashed down the middle of a street and f*cked yourself up.

"hey my ribs are cracked and i might have brain damage, but my tactics will help me!"

bullshit.