#1 Posted by SOG7dc (7004 posts) - - Show Bio

Christian bale sucked

George Clooney sucked

Adam west.....

ive been thinking on this for a while and I cant think of an actor that would do the character justice. do you guys have any ideas?

(respect to kevin conroy)

#2 Posted by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio

@sog7dc: Well Bale has been the best, without a doubt. Ive heard all arguments against it (mostly his voice) but its just nitpicky non-fans usually. We had a great Oscar winning actor who really took the character seriously and made it his own. People can criticize him all they want, when people look back he'll be the definitive gritty dark Batman.

And Kevin Conroy is great save for some pretty hilarious off the mark moments. I'd post that "Harvey....no.." video if I wasn't on my phone at the moment. LOL still laugh thinking about it. I always think of that when people bring up Conroy.

But I really can't think of anyone right now who I think would be a great Batman. In my mind we've had the best one already so it's time to move on to other characters.

#3 Posted by SOG7dc (7004 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis:

I have to disagree about bale. theres a lot I didn't like about him as batman. first of all I don't think bale is a very good actor to begin with. whenever I watch him I know im watching Christian bale. when I watch Leonardo dicaprio play a character. I feel as though im watching a documentary about whoever he's playing. bles voice was bad his bruce wayne was bad (again this is all my opinion) and worst of all I didn't feel like I was watching batman. the first movie "batman begins" was just completely awful, the second was only good because of heath ledger (r.i.p) and the third one was just meh.

#4 Posted by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio

@sog7dc: well you're certainly entitled to your opinion but Batman Begins being just plain bad? Im not sure what your reasons are as It's the strongest Batman picture of all time IMO. It's overshadowed by TDK because of its popularity, but it really is the best one. It's gritty indie feel that Nolan first brought to Gotham was best. Since then Gotham has transformed into a standard American metropolis, but Begins really nailed the nuances. Another noteworthy fact is that Begins could be looked at as starting this whole onslaught of superhero films. Director of Iron Man, John Favreau, enjoyed Nolan's Begins movie so much that it heavily inspired an influenced him in creating Iron Man 1. Which is interesting considering IM headlined the MCU. So in a way, Begins is the cornerstone for which all modern superhero movies stand. It was the first modern example of a talented group of artists taking the comic book medium seriously.

And though you're not the first to complain about Bale's voice (as I predicted you undoubtedly would), there's more to be taken from a performance than ones raspy voice (which i should add was far more pronounced in the TDK and TDKR than Begins). Also what are your reasons for not liking his Bruce Wayne? I like how he actually had to act when portraying himself in public. As the movie addressed this dichotomy between who Bruce really is now and how he has to live to avoid suspicion. Whether you like Bale or not, it's impossible to deny he made the character his own for a modern generation. And that has resonated with a lot if people. Nolan's Batman films are the new standard for which we measure superhero films.

#5 Posted by Dabee (2387 posts) - - Show Bio

@sog7dc said:

Christian bale sucked

George Clooney sucked

Adam west.....

ive been thinking on this for a while and I cant think of an actor that would do the character justice. do you guys have any ideas?

(respect to kevin conroy)

You think they all sucked? You have to put up a more thoughtful argument or you just look ignorant, and I'm sure that's not your intention. (Please don't take this as me calling you ignorant, I'm not.) Why do you think they sucked?

Personally, I don't think there has ever been a BAD Batman. Adam West's show was WAY before my time, but I've still seen a few episodes. For the effects they had at the time, it's really just not fair to compare it to today's Batman movies with all of the CGI. In comparison, the effects are sure to take away from the show if you grew up with CGI, but that shouldn't be mixed up with West's acting ability. Even Ledger's Joker would look cheesy with the 60s effects available at the time, and that would be REALLY tough to make look cheesy.

However, I have always seen Christian Bale on the screen (the movies I grew up with), so it's kind of hard to place somebody else in the role. Maybe Ben Affleck,? I could see him bear the cowl.

#6 Posted by ArturoCalaKayVee (11376 posts) - - Show Bio

Christian Bale sucking is a matter of opinion. I thought he was the perfect Batman in a stand alone Universe.

#7 Edited by SOG7dc (7004 posts) - - Show Bio

@

@dabee: @extremis: well after a little more thought I can say this. I actually enjoyed Clooney's bruce wayne. just not his batman. and with adam west I really guess he was just more of a goofy character because that was the time. that's what they could do back then. but with bale my opinion remains the same. I don't think he was a good cast. and overall ijust didn't agree with the direction of the Nolan trilogy. the "realistic" approach it took ruined the novelty of the character for me. that's why I think marvel movies are better because they showcase the novelty and the fiction of the characters. I may be in the minority but the Nolan trilogy just wasn't my cup of tea. while I will admit there were certain things I did like in the movies. averall I was just disappointed in the films as a whole. maybe it was studio interference id love the read the original scripts for all three movies. but I just didn't like the Nolan movies.

and @arturocalakayvee of course its my opinion. I didn't mean to state it as fact and If I did I apologize. but this is definitely subjective

#8 Edited by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio

@sog7dc: studio interference Nolan's films? You're mistaken as Warner gave Nolan pretty much free reign, and why wouldn't they considering the success and praise he got? They knew they had lightning in a bottle with an artistic director in Nolan. Also, he would t have made the films had they wrestled creative control. He has made this very clear. Also probably why he and his wife produce pretty much all of his movies. And anyway, if DC tried to control the films creatively they would have tied some ther heroes or stories in. But Nolan made it known he would only make a self contained story about Batman. One that could stand on its on as a great trilogy without any studio baggage.

If there's a studio guilty of interference with the creative control of movies it is most certainly Marvel. Thats why its pretty ironic you brought this up. My evidence being every phase 1 MCU movie after Iron man leading up to the Avengers. Most notably IM2. Don't get me wrong IM2 is my favorite Marvel movie, but it'd be silly to maintain the studio didn't shoehorn in all these different narratives to tie in Shield and basically make it an Avengers prelude. But to me Marvels movies are mostly fun light hearted fare anyway so I didn't mind it.

And not to be mean, but Clooney?! His Batman was an abomination. Whether he's batman, Bruce or not we should never mention that film seriously. Anyone who brings up Clooney when talking about Batman gets no pass from me. Lol sorry but that film took Batman years back in respect. Thankfully Nolan save the character's modern interpretation.

#9 Posted by SOG7dc (7004 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis:

well maybe we just should agree to disagree. I just didn't enjoy nolans batman. I like marvels movies more (although I admit that there is a lot of studio interference case in point ironman 3) because the novelty is still there. its not a realistic approach. its just the mythos.....but on the original topic. who do you think would be a good batman aside from bale

#10 Edited by Dark_Vengeance_ (14595 posts) - - Show Bio

Jon Hamm, they just have to put him in instnsive workout sessions first.

Online
#11 Posted by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio

@darkknightdetective: @sog7dc:

Actually yeah, John Hamm does t sound to bad. Best Bruce ive seen put forward. IDK how his Batman would be tho..

#12 Posted by Dark_Vengeance_ (14595 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis: As long as he doesn't wear pointy nipples he should be fine.

Online
#13 Posted by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio
#14 Posted by Dark_Vengeance_ (14595 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis: No bat-nipples. For his voice he should try to imitate Clint Eastwood.

Online
#15 Posted by End_Boss (725 posts) - - Show Bio

Bale was the only actor that took the part seriously, and consequently was the only one who really pulled it off.
Kilmer is underrated. Keaton is overrated. Clooney was just about as bad as everyone (including him) thinks he was.

#16 Edited by AllStarSuperman (21740 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis said:

@sog7dc: well you're certainly entitled to your opinion but Batman Begins being just plain bad? Im not sure what your reasons are as It's the strongest Batman picture of all time IMO. It's overshadowed by TDK because of its popularity, but it really is the best one. It's gritty indie feel that Nolan first brought to Gotham was best. Since then Gotham has transformed into a standard American metropolis, but Begins really nailed the nuances. Another noteworthy fact is that Begins could be looked at as starting this whole onslaught of superhero films. Director of Iron Man, John Favreau, enjoyed Nolan's Begins movie so much that it heavily inspired an influenced him in creating Iron Man 1. Which is interesting considering IM headlined the MCU. So in a way, Begins is the cornerstone for which all modern superhero movies stand. It was the first modern example of a talented group of artists taking the comic book medium seriously.

And though you're not the first to complain about Bale's voice (as I predicted you undoubtedly would), there's more to be taken from a performance than ones raspy voice (which i should add was far more pronounced in the TDK and TDKR than Begins). Also what are your reasons for not liking his Bruce Wayne? I like how he actually had to act when portraying himself in public. As the movie addressed this dichotomy between who Bruce really is now and how he has to live to avoid suspicion. Whether you like Bale or not, it's impossible to deny he made the character his own for a modern generation. And that has resonated with a lot if people. Nolan's Batman films are the new standard for which we measure superhero films.

YES, YES, and YES. Someone who agrees that Begins is the best! Begins was the best story, i just dont get sick of it. i could watch it 100 times in a row. cant say the same for TDK and TDKR. Begins had the best quotes. in fact i just made a thread in off topic called, Battle of The Movie Quotes: Batman Begins.

@end_boss said:

Bale was the only actor that took the part seriously, and consequently was the only one who really pulled it off.

Kilmer is underrated. Keaton is overrated. Clooney was just about as bad as everyone (including him) thinks he was.

This guy knows whats up.

#17 Posted by RideASpaceCowboy (523 posts) - - Show Bio

If there were ever a live action movie or show which called for an older version of Bruce Wayne / Batman (e.g. Batman Beyond, The Dark Knight Returns, Kingdom Come, etc), the only possible actor to cast would be Kevin Conroy. For a younger version of the character, I'd cast Joe Manganiello.

#18 Edited by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio

@allstarsuperman: yes! Another person who finally agrees with me on this. We need to stick together and spread the truth haha.

But seriously, it's crazy how much people underestimate that movie. I think given some time, people will eventually look back and see Begins as the definitive Batman film. God, remember the first time seeing that ending where Gordon's like "got a new guy, taste for the theatrical like you. Leaves a calling card" * Batman flips over a joker* "I'll look into it". Gives me chills just thinking about it. What an amazing film. Damn, I need to go watch it for like the 25th time now. (It really does have great replay value).

#19 Edited by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio

@end_boss: well you just said it best. Props.

#20 Edited by AllStarSuperman (21740 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis said:

@allstarsuperman: yes! Another person who finally agrees with me on this. We need to stick together and spread the truth haha.

But seriously, it's crazy how much people underestimate that movie. I think given some time, people will eventually look back and see Begins as the definitive Batman film. God, remember the first time seeing that ending where Gordon's like "got a new guy, taste for the theatrical like you. Leaves a calling card" * Batman flips over a joker* "I'll look into it". Gives me chills just thinking about it. What an amazing film. Damn, I need to go watch it for like the 25th time now. (It really does have great replay value).

Its THEE origin film. thats what makes it so great. Begins and Kick-Ass are the 2 movies that really, really, really, get the grasp of being a hero. my favorite part was this:

Jim Gordon: I never said, "Thank you."

Batman: And you'll never have to.

#21 Posted by sinestro_GL (3127 posts) - - Show Bio

Naaaah. Bale wasn't particularly a good BATMAN.

But that's not really his fault, it's the fault of whoever wrote the script. Batman was NEVER really portrayed as a detective, but rather some hot-head policeman (that interrogation scene with the Joker springs to mind - jeez, it was their first meeting, and he starts beating the crap out of him).

I think in all of the three films, the only note-worthy things that could be considered as investigative on Batman's part was a ballistics test in TDK and the background check on Selina Kyle AFTER he got robbed by his own employee.

...and @extremis:, that scene was just taken from the ending of Batman: Year One. Just in case you didn't know :)

#22 Posted by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio

@sinestro_gl: I read Year One, thanks

He's a 'hothead' because Rachel is presumably about to die, and ended up actually happening as the Joker played a rather evil trick on him. The great part about the Joker is that he pushes Batman further than any villain. Its maddening. Almost to the point of breaking his "one rule". So its actually a great scene that really captures that Batman-Joker dynamic. Guess ya missed that :)

#23 Edited by krunkeela (188 posts) - - Show Bio

Adam Sandler. No questions asked. Case closed, this forum is over.

#24 Posted by ZombieMowlcher (677 posts) - - Show Bio

Adam West portrayed what I think golden age batman was like. That batman was pretty campy.

#25 Posted by snarkybits (337 posts) - - Show Bio

Bale was the best.

But, now it's time for Russell Brand to shine!

#26 Posted by John Valentine (16307 posts) - - Show Bio

For a younger version of the character, I'd cast Joe Manganiello.

He's way too big.

#27 Edited by Havenless (1340 posts) - - Show Bio

I would actually love to see Michael Keaton play 50 yr old Batman.

Otherwise, I choose Jeffrey Donovan. Tall, brunette, well spoken, athletic, great actor. His eyes remind me a lot of Bruce Wayne from the Animated Series. He has a naturally lanky build, so he'd probably have to put on a lot of muscle to be believable. But man, he's such a good actor.

As Bruce Wayne:

As Batman:

#28 Posted by sinestro_GL (3127 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis: But that's my problem with that whole scene. It's like Nolan wanted to capture the entire Batman-Joker relationship in their first meeting. Sure, it was effective for a movie, but for me, as a comic reader, I thought this was maybe pushed too much - because it was their FIRST meeting.

In comic books, Batman is able to...I dunno..BEHAVE when he talks to the Joker - and in the comics, the Joker has done far worse shit than in that movie.

#29 Posted by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio

@sinestro_gl:

"It was effective for a movie"

^Good. this is all you need to know.

It's not a comic book. Obviously all of us here like comics but these are movies which have a much shorter time to work with. I'm glad they didnt stretch it out as, we know all too well now, Heath never would have been around for a second act.

#30 Posted by sinestro_GL (3127 posts) - - Show Bio
@extremis said:

@sinestro_gl:

"It was effective for a movie"

^Good. this is all you need to know.

It's not a comic book. Obviously all of us here like comics but these are movies which have a much shorter time to work with. I'm glad they didnt stretch it out as, we know all too well now, Heath never would have been around for a second act.

Actually, in my opinion, no.

Of course they can't cram 75 years of stories into a 2-hour flick, but I think movie-makers don't give enough respect to comic book readers a lot of the time.

#31 Posted by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio

@sinestro_gl: true but did you ever consider comic book fans tend to have impossible standards for these movies? I'm glad we leave the directing to artists and not fans. And what could Nolan's films have done to be truer to the material? Any good director takes at least some artistic license when creating a story. If you want something exactly like the comics, read the comics. I'm sick of this nit picking.

#32 Posted by sinestro_GL (3127 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis: Some very good points, but I don't think that film makers can expect comic book fans to be...objective when watching their heroes on screen. Of course, in the case of other films, yes, this may be considered nit-picking, but for me, my problem was with how Batman was written (more police, and no detective). I think that's more than just a nit-picking problem.

However, there have been several comic-book adaptations to film - this is certainly the case with the animated stories. What is the problem if people want to see their favourite stories brought to life? Sure, the non-comic-reading public may not care if it does follow the comic book, but us readers are a rational lot, and we know a good story when we read one - so no one really loses if they stay true to the source material more closely.

#33 Posted by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio

@sinestro_gl: the point is Nolan's films are the truest representation of The Batman mythology ever put to a live action film. I think your standards for being 'true to the source' are unreasonable. They are very different mediums. A movie can't represent everything the comics have as comic books have decades of history. It's easy to sit in ones ivory tower after the film is released and nit pick at certain elements of the character they missed as it would have been virtually impossible to include everything every fan would have liked to have seen. They nailed the true essence of the Batman character and his struggle to bring justice to Gotham. Not only that, but they knocked it out of the park. As a Batman fan that's all I could ever ask. Yeah it's not a perfect representation, but no movie can be a perfect mimic of the comics as, once again, they are completely different mediums. I think you should acknowledge that because of this maybe you expect too much of comic book adaptations and, as a result, have impossible standards.

#34 Posted by sinestro_GL (3127 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis: Live action, but not theatrical release (MOTP). My standards of being MORE faithful to the source is not unreasonable at all. I'll give you an example (more extreme, but it illustrates my point very well). Take Bane from the awful film that was 'Batman and Robin'. Was he true to the comic books? No. Was he good enough for what the movie needed? Yes. Like I said, that's an extreme case, because Bane was a bad character by any standards, comic-fan or not - whereas the Bale Batman wasn't a bad movie character at all ('cause he sure as hell isn't the comic book Batman).

I give Watchmen as an example of a perfectly adapted comic book story. Though the case of the Nolan films is different as they weren't directly adapted from any single story line. Fans of the comic, myself included, were very happy with the end result.

So are my standards impossible? Quite simply, no.

#35 Posted by Uncanny_Doom (426 posts) - - Show Bio

Bale didn't suck. Only thing that was wrong was the Batvoice, and it wasn't always a big problem. Also come on...Christian Bale is honestly one of the best and most accomplished actors in the last decade. The Batman stuff (aside from Dark Knight) is obviously some of his weaker work, but as an actor he's very capable.

That said, Batman is a character I find it hard to picture people playing. I can't just imagine the Batsuit on someone to be honest.

#36 Posted by Extremis (3344 posts) - - Show Bio

@sinestro_gl: i mean no offense or anything, but yeah they seem pretty unreasonable given how much the movies got right. And please don't say Bane from Batman and Robin was acceptable. The only reason that's true was because that movie was utter shit. That's the movie you should still be complaining about. Not Nolan's trilogy. But anyway looks like your not on board. I'll sail on...

#37 Edited by sinestro_GL (3127 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis: That was my point, it was acceptable that Bane was shit because the movie was bullocks - he worked for that crapola fest