Michael Keaton is one of my favorite actors. He is that all-too-rare performer who can make each line and every action feel as if it is happening for the first time. He's genuinely exciting to watch. The only grievances I have with him are that a) he works much too infrequently, and b) when he does work, it's too often in projects that are beneath him (Jack Frost, Herbie Fully Loaded, White Noise...let me just say Jack Frost one more time.) He hit his creative stride in the late 80's, showing his range in under-appreciated gems like The Dream Team and Clean and Sober, and with a very fruitful Tim Burton collaboration. That pairing brought us one of the all-time great comic performances in Beetlejuice and of course, Keaton as Batman in -- for my money -- the two best superhero films ever made. As far as I'm concerned, no other film Batman even comes close to Keaton, and I immediately associate him with the role. Kilmer sleepwalked through it, Clooney looked embarrassed (rightfully so), and Christian Bale bored me to tears. Keaton played the role largely straight, but it's the flashes of madness and manic energy that brought his Bruce Wayne and Batman to life. "You wanna get nuts? Let's get nuts!"
And now it seems Keaton has been spending time around the Chicago set of The Dark Knight! I did some hunting online and found that Keaton is shooting his directorial debut, The Merry Gentleman in Chicago right now, so it's possible he just stopped by to say hello. But the kid in me who saw Batman at the dollar show eight times can't help but hold out some sliver of hope that Michael Keaton might make some sort of appearance in the new Batman flick. I'm being realistic, I don't expect him to suit up and high-five with Christian Bale, or for them to fight crime side-by-side, but wouldn't it be a great touch to have a little winking cameo from (apologies to Adam West) the real Batman? Keaton did a similar fun little reprise of his Jackie Brown character Ray Nicolette in Out of Sight, so why not this? The fans would love it. Of course this is all pure speculation and dreaming, but we'll find out if it comes true when The Dark Knight hits theaters on June 18th of 2008.
Cinematical's 2008 Cannes Preview
EXCLUSIVE: 'City of Ember' Poster Premiere!
Tons of New 'Quantum of Solace' Images!
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
4-23-2007 @ 3:51PM
Eric said...
Keaton was a terrible Batman and so were both his Batman films.
Reply
4-23-2007 @ 3:57PM
Scott K said...
Your assessment of the various Batmen is pretty off, but a non-cheesy cameo could be kind of cool in The Dark Knight.
Reply
4-23-2007 @ 4:06PM
Flit said...
I. Am. batman. rose colored glasses my friend, rose color glasses.
Just try showing any +16 year old the first batman and see what he thinks.
Reply
4-23-2007 @ 4:39PM
Joseph J. Finn said...
I'd go with Kilmer as balancing both sides of Batman a little better, but Keaton is a close second. And I freaking loved a recent performance of his, as a Red Sox fan opening up his breakthrough play on October 25, 1986 in Game 6.
Reply
4-23-2007 @ 5:29PM
bgdc said...
I like Keaton too but he was too scrawny and too flighty to really be Bruce Wayne. Bale is and will always be the definitive Batman. He embodies what Bruce Wayne should be - tough, wounded, intelligent, polished - just an all around bad ass who happens to be totally jacked in the head.
Keaton's Beetlejuice and Dream Team are great fun. Mr. mom is still fun to watch. And Keaton owned his scenes in Out of Sight (but I still think that's a perfect film for people who like scene stealing character parts).
Reply
4-23-2007 @ 8:23PM
Damian said...
While I might disagree with your opinion of Bale (I thought he was great; probably the best actor out there right now to play Bruce Wayne/Batman), I agree that Keaton's take on the character is highly under-appreciated nowadays. He was the first to bring a sort of eccentric quality to Wayne that had never been seen before. I suppose it helped that Keaton, in addition to being a comedic talent, is also a very good dramatic actor, one who doesn't get nearly the amount of credit I think he deserves (although he might get more if he were choosing better movies to appear in lately).
In the aftermath of Nolan's excellent re-invention of the Batman franchise, it's become sort of "in" now to trash Burton's Batman films (similar to how we are in a sort of "Brosnan backlash" now after the Bond reboot that was Casino Royale) but Burton's movies are nevertheless quite good and, in my opnion, actually superior artistically/visually to Nolan's product (though his film is admittedly better in terms of story/plot and character). What Burton's "Batmans" might lack in substance they more than make up for in sheer visceral style. The original 1989 version is still one of my all-time favorite comic book movies... and I don't care how brilliant Heath Ledger is/isn't going to be in the sequel; he's gonna have some HUGE shoes to fill after Jack's iconic portrayal.
Reply
4-23-2007 @ 9:26PM
Rich said...
I always thought George Cloney was the best person to play Bruce Wayne. He has the rich playboy thing down, but failed as The Batman. Val Kilmer nailed the The Batman, but couldn't pull off Bruce.
Michael Keaton was a happy medium. He did a really good Bruce and a really good Batman. He also had the air of being off his rocker but keeping it in check.
Christian Bale filled in Michael Keaton's shoes quite well. He does a believable as Bruce Wayne and The Batman.
Reply
4-30-2007 @ 2:05PM
Dianna said...
I have to agree with you Pat, I LOVED Michael Keaton as Batman. Anytime I see the first Batman on TV I have to watch it. I remember being completely disappointed later on when the next Batman installments came out and he didn't play Batman, I always sorta hoped he would come back. I thought Cloney sucked and so did Kilmer. I have not seen the newest Batman.(And as a huge Christian Bale fan, since the days of Newsies [god Im a loser ;D] and a Neeson fan too, I am ashamed that I havent seen it yet). Also, not really on topic, but he was hilarious in Multiplicity. "She touched my pepe Steve". hahahahaha.
Reply