Originally posted by Mr Parker
No YOUR an idiot.You think that horrible actor Pierce Brosan was the best James Bond ever.that says it all about you. 😆 Im not saying those others were great casting choices-Halle Berry as catwoman and clooney as batman for sure rivals Keaton as batman.But Keaton was a horrible Bruce Wayne.Its funny how you only qouted part of my post and not the whole post since it proves that Kilmer was easily the better Bruce wayne. 🙄 Keaton was a horrible bruce wayne because not only did he not look the part but he acted nothing at all like bruce wayne and just tried to copy Chris Reeves perfromance as superman acting goofy and dorky like bruce wayne and macho as batman.Kilmer at least acted the part which is cool with the women and suave and like i said,at least had the right look and build.
1. You're - not your.
2. James Bond isn't as big a character as Batman in the sense that people have been reading Batman comics for decades so that they know how the character is. Wow, you really had nothing else to say since apparently had to dig up something else on me, right? You're a F**King idiot. 😆
3. "For sure rivals" - then you are FOR SURE an idiot not only by your comments, but by later contadicting yourself. I believe the phrase you first used was "Michael keaton was the worst casting choice in comicbook history".
4. The more you talk the more I truly believe you have a mental issue - lets look at this:
"Its funny how you only qouted part of my post and not the whole post since it proves that Kilmer was easily the better Bruce wayne."
Let me ask you this; WTF does this have to do with what I commented about your initial post? Think about it. Yes, you are an idiot.
As I'll admit, Keaton's Batman was no where near perfect, but it wasn't "the worst comic book casting choice" as you claim.
Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Yeah, but you see, no matter how good of a job Keaton supposedly did, it wouldn't matter.I, personally, think he was a poor choice for the role AND he did a poor job. I couldn't take him seriously. He was a shrimp of a guy trying to be Batman, one of my favorite characters who I know a whole lot about.
Let's say hypothetically, Keaton did the best job, hands down. It still wouldn't matter, because of how he looks.
He doesn't look like Bruce Wayne OR Batman. I don't buy it and neither should anyone else. I mean, I guess that's harsh and all, trying to impose my thoughts on others, but come on... it's obvious why the guy was a poor choice.
Add to this that Christian Bale is an excellent actor, looks the part, and did a good job with the character itself and you've got your perfect Batman right there.
Exactly.some people just dont get it though that it doesnt matter how good a job an actor did with their role.if they dont even come close to fitting the part then they bring no credibility to the role and keaton was no exception.Like you said,even if he DID do the best job ,it wouldnt matter because of how he looked the part.
Like you said,he doesnt look like Bruce Wayne OR Batman.Countless of people didnt buy him as batman or bruce wayne either because of that.Your not imposing your thoughts here,your just speaking the truth.Its so obvious to anybody with logic and common sense that he was miscast in that role.Who wants to see a shrimp play Batman? Thats a disgusting joke to true Batman fans because like you said,it was so obvious he was a poor choice.
As someone else mentioned,even the creator thought Val Kilmer was the best choice and came closest to portraying the best Bruce wayne out of the Schumacher/Burton Batman movies that were made.The people that say Kilmer had blond hair in that movie are obviously thinking of Kilmers PAST movies when his hair was blond because his hair is brown in Batman Forever.Jim Carrey as everybody knows, has brown hair and you look at the scenes with Kilmer and Carrey standing together you can see he has the exact same color of hair Carrey does in that movie-brown.
Originally posted by DarkDethbringer
no i have plenty of idea what i am talking about. You simply questioning my credibility makes it seem as though you dont know what you are talking about. Bale over stressed hsi war on crime, and not giving a shit. when Batman sows constant disgression and always knows what he wants and where he is. He rarely makes social gaffs unless they are intentional. and he never really had any big time "Should i kill them cause they did something bad? b-bu-but killing is wrong!" Batman would have done what he thooiught was right and never over angsted the scenes. Keaton however showed that Bruce was a mask by pretending, and quite well might i add, to be a richboy who needs help to shit an dlikes ot flaunt his money. PLUS Alfred acted more liek a father as he is intended to in the Burton Films
Snake Eyes is right.you dont know what your talking about at all.If anybody overstreesed their war on crime that was keaton in Burtons pathetic version by killing people in cowardly ways.Bales Batman was the true Batman.He made it a point he would not kill people to bring them to justice.Keatons Batman AGAIN was a bumbling fool copying off Chris Reeves performace as superman being a dork around women when thats not Batman at all. 🙄 Burtons Alfred escorted Vickie Vale to the batcave against Batmans wishes something Alfred would NEVER do.
Bale was easily the best with his playboy image he put on disguising his true self.And like we keep trying to tell you,unlike Keaton,he brought credibility to the role because he at least LOOKED the part.Tall,muscular,handsome and a full set of hair.Not this shrimp with a balding receding hairline. 😆
Originally posted by DarkDethbringer
no i have plenty of idea what i am talking about. You simply questioning my credibility makes it seem as though you dont know what you are talking about. Bale over stressed hsi war on crime, and not giving a shit. when Batman sows constant disgression and always knows what he wants and where he is. He rarely makes social gaffs unless they are intentional. and he never really had any big time "Should i kill them cause they did something bad? b-bu-but killing is wrong!" Batman would have done what he thooiught was right and never over angsted the scenes. Keaton however showed that Bruce was a mask by pretending, and quite well might i add, to be a richboy who needs help to shit an dlikes ot flaunt his money. PLUS Alfred acted more liek a father as he is intended to in the Burton Films
Results of the script, I think you'll find, or what your post said.
Originally posted by Mr Parker
I have the same agreements as SnakeEyes.Michael keaton was the worst casting choice in comicbook history.The wrong build and the wrong look of Bruce Wayne and he acted NOTHING at all like Bruce wayne from the comics.Yeah Christian Bale all the way then Val Kilmer comes in second.He at least looked the part of Bruce Wayne and at least acted like him.
Well, I know this is an old post, but I'm gonna talk about it anyway...
First of all, I guess I get to debate with you once more, Mr. Parker, you really are good at it 🙂 (and I've gotten better at it too)
Second of all, you are only basing your argument on his apperance. So Michael Keaton didn't exactly fit the bill as a handsome, dashing billionare playboy... that's not what the movie was trying to do. You have to remember that this movie was based on Frank Miller's DKR and Year One, where Bruce is very secluded and not all that well groomed... It was more or less a film adaption of DKR with bits of Year One...
Third of all, the notion that Kilmer was better than Keaton is not as far-fetched as I once thought... Don't get me wrong, I still think Keaton was a MUCH better Batman, but I have to admit that Kilmer played a better "modern" Bruce Wayne. I always thought that Keaton was playing an "old" Wayne, while everyone else TRIED to play a "modern" Wayne (it didn't always work out... *coughclooneycough*)
And finally, I stand by my earlier post...
Keaton=Best Batman Voice/costume was awesome, brought sort of a "Golden Age" feel to the character
Bale=Best Wayne Look, mannerisms, etc. Are all part of a "modern" Wayne
pfft you guys arent thinking yoru just posting your same ideas over again. doesnt matter, Bruce Wayne has Black hair, whiel Kilmer has blond hair and then light brown in Forever. Joel Schumacher is a fruit, he ****ing destroyed what could have been the ultimate franchise if Burton was alllowed to stay on.
Plus Alfred does what he thinks is best for Wayne, aka: being a father figure. He doesnt argue with him just presents his ideas and sometimes goes over his head he doesnt care if Wayne sacrafices the empire.
plus this thread is not to argue ABOUT, WHO HAS!! PLAYED HIM. its who who hasnt playe dhim would be better for the role
about 30 years ago CHristopher Lee could have done it. they messed up Batman too much when Bale playe dhim. plus thisa whole 'real' take on ti is kinda bothering me. Batman has been prty realistic so far. but nwo they are trying to add an explanation that can truly happen. Like Ras' al Ghul he didnt live forever in the movies he just switches from person to person. so that means, no Clayface, probably no Poison Ivy, most likely no Mr. Freeze. plenty of other great villains that cannt be used. but moving back to the point.
who SHOULD play Batman who hasnt playe dhim yet
Originally posted by Jamaican
1. You're - not your.2. James Bond isn't as big a character as Batman in the sense that people have been reading Batman comics for decades so that they know how the character is. Wow, you really had nothing else to say since apparently had to dig up something else on me, right? You're a F**King idiot. 😆
3. "For sure rivals" - then you are FOR SURE an idiot not only by your comments, but by later contadicting yourself. I believe the phrase you first used was "Michael keaton was the worst casting choice in comicbook history".
4. The more you talk the more I truly believe you have a mental issue - lets look at this:
"Its funny how you only qouted part of my post and not the whole post since it proves that Kilmer was easily the better Bruce wayne."
Let me ask you this; WTF does this have to do with what I commented about your initial post? Think about it. Yes, you are an idiot.
As I'll admit, Keaton's Batman was no where near perfect, but it wasn't "the worst comic book casting choice" as you claim.
No You're -since you want to get so technical about everything,are an idiot.You engage in childish name calling if someone doesnt agree with you-thats what an idiot does. it has everything to do with it because you conviently left out the part on why Kilmer was the better Bruce wayne.Thats what people do when they cant counter a point is quote only PART of a post. 😆
Okay so maybe keaton wasnt the worst casting choice in comicbook history yeah Halle Berry and Clooney were probably worse but he was easily ONE of the worst.anybody with logic and common sense would know that to be true. 🙄
Originally posted by Bat Dude
Well, I know this is an old post, but I'm gonna talk about it anyway...First of all, I guess I get to debate with you once more, Mr. Parker, you really are good at it 🙂 (and I've gotten better at it too)
Second of all, you are only basing your argument on his apperance. So Michael Keaton didn't exactly fit the bill as a handsome, dashing billionare playboy... that's not what the movie was trying to do. You have to remember that this movie was based on Frank Miller's DKR and Year One, where Bruce is very secluded and not all that well groomed... It was more or less a film adaption of DKR with bits of Year One...
Third of all, the notion that Kilmer was better than Keaton is not as far-fetched as I once thought... Don't get me wrong, I still think Keaton was a MUCH better Batman, but I have to admit that Kilmer played a better "modern" Bruce Wayne. I always thought that Keaton was playing an "old" Wayne, while everyone else TRIED to play a "modern" Wayne (it didn't always work out... *coughclooneycough*)
And finally, I stand by my earlier post...
Keaton=Best Batman Voice/costume was awesome, brought sort of a "Golden Age" feel to the character
Bale=Best Wayne Look, mannerisms, etc. Are all part of a "modern" Wayne
Yep looks like we go at it again.heh heh.Your wrong there Dude-LOL-the user name.You obviously only read parts of my posts because I said Kilmer was better because not only did he at least look the part unlike Keaton but alos unlike Keaton,he actually acted like Bruce Wayne where Keaton just copied Chris Reeves performance as Superman being a goofy dork around people and macho and cool as Superma which is not Batman at all.Bale nailed the character of Bruce wayne and Batman and easily blows all the other imposters away.
Well we agree on one thing at least that Clooney was a horrible Bruce wayne. 😄
And you obviously only read part of my post, Mr. Parker...
I clearly said that Kilmer played a better "young" Wayne than Keaton, but overall Keaton was ok, since he played an out-of-continuity "old" Wayne...
And before you try to bury me with another post, I'll defend myself by saying...
When you criticze Keaton's performance, you have to take into account that the movie Batman 1989 was not based on a regular Batman comic of the day, it was based on Frank Miller's DKR, in which he murders criminals, with bits and pieces of Year One. This means the Wayne in 89 will of course act differently than a regular, modern Wayne.
And just to be fair, he did sort of take parts of Reeve's Kent/Superman, but that movie was successful, so it made sense to take an idea from a successful film...
And to answer the original question, I would have liked to see Brandon Lee's take on the character.