Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LS

Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman is one of the best things about the new “Batman” movies. He is far and away superior to the others who came before him, and will stand the test of time as the definitive screen Batman.

Keaton, despite being miscast, was actually good in the role. I will readily admit to that. But Bale is in a different league. It helps, of course, that Bale has superior material to work with, but he brings more to the role than Keaton (or Kilmer and Clooney). In addition to his considerable acting talent, Bale also passes the ‘can I imagine him kicking my a**’ test. Keaton was in no way an intimidating physical presence.


18 posted on 07/25/2008 11:14:06 PM PDT by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: Aetius

Disagree. Bale may be a “more intimidating physical presence,” but he completely lacks that insane quality of Keaton, and I can’t stand that quasi-lisp he has in his “tough” voice. Course, I really don’t like Bale anyway: didn’t like him in “The Prestige,” and pulled for Hugh Jackman the whole movie.


19 posted on 07/26/2008 4:48:08 AM PDT by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually." (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson