|
Post by Icctrombone on Jun 20, 2019 18:08:18 GMT -5
Dude, I was shocked when I saw Kilmer at his current weight. Wow.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jun 20, 2019 18:11:55 GMT -5
I’m Fatman.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jun 20, 2019 18:43:51 GMT -5
I actually thought he was the second best Batman in all the Franchises.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2019 21:25:44 GMT -5
George Clooney is a joke playing Batman and even funnier as Bruce Wayne. My favorite of the three ... is Michael Keaton ... Keaton is an above average Batman and slightly better than average Bruce Wayne. Kilmer was excellent as Batman and a below average Bruce Wayne. I rather have Keaton over Kilmer and Clooney any day of the week.
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Jun 20, 2019 21:32:42 GMT -5
I think Kilmer's performance would be better remembered if he'd been in a better movie.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Jun 21, 2019 10:12:00 GMT -5
Keaton to me is still the best live action Batman and Bruce Wayne, following Adam West. But I agree with Duragizer that Kilmer's performance was certainly hindered by a below average Batman film. Whereas Clooney just didn't work for me as either Batman or Bruce Wayne at all. And, Bale .... well most people here know my opinion of Bale as Batman and Bruce Wayne.
|
|
Crimebuster
CCF Podcast Guru
Making comics!
Posts: 3,922
|
Post by Crimebuster on Jun 21, 2019 10:57:38 GMT -5
Kilmer has been battling throat cancer for the past two years, and as a result has lost a lot of weight as a side effect of the cancer and treatment.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Jun 21, 2019 13:21:53 GMT -5
Kilmer has been battling throat cancer for the past two years, and as a result has lost a lot of weight as a side effect of the cancer and treatment. Wouldn't wish cancer on anyone. Kilmer kind of became his own worst enemy, in the 90s and early 00s, as he built a rep for being difficult. I'm sure a lot of that was a desire to portray the character in the best possible way; but, it ruffled too many feathers. I read a couple of accounts about Batman Forever, where is sounded like Jim Carrey and Val Kilmer were royal pains, while Tommy Lee Jones part got shoved to the side. Never fond of more than one villain in the movies. It only worked in the Adam West film (and Joker and Riddler feel a bit minimized, there, to me).
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Jun 21, 2019 13:30:07 GMT -5
Bale understood the differences between Wayne and Batman, and delivered both believably. I would extend this credit to Affleck, who played a slightly aged Wayne/Batman damn near close to perfect. They were not a case of "well, he's good in costume, but out of it??" / "well, he was good out of costume, but was a terrible Batman".
Other actors were either jokes (short, balding, out of shape Keaton), or examples of egos coming before character (Kilmer and Clooney).
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Jun 21, 2019 14:30:22 GMT -5
Just limiting it to DC, has there ever been a period of comparable length where Batman was as "good" as the George Perez Wonder Woman or the Wolfman/Perez Titans? The only run that I'm aware of that hits the two to three year mark of greatness is the Breyfogle/Grant run, but since I've only read one or two issues of that run, I can't fairly judge. And of course this is just limiting it to the mainstream, "A-list" stuff. Haney/Aparo on Brave and the Bold (starting with B&B # 98) is spectacular and anyone who says different is a gibbering idiot. But it's a little hard to argue that it's a great BATMAN comic as much as a great comic! With Batman in it! New Teen Titans is very much a superhero comic that is influenced by superhero comics and is designed to relate to other superhero comics and use - or at least purposefully deviate from - the established tropes of superhero comics. Brave and the Bold is written by creators who don't like superheroes (and science fiction, Haney was never good at sci-fi) BUT like pretty much every other genre so B&B alternates between exorcist style horror, spy comics, corporate espionage, Rocky style sports stories, gothic mysteries, medical thriller (!!!!) .. etc. It's great - best plotted and most structurally versatile superhero comic ever, IMO - but it doesn't offer Marvel style melodrama or long-term character development. And the creative team doesn't care about Batman at all. He acts however the genre-of-the month needs him to act, and he's rarely the protagonist (in the sense of "character that ends up changing") or the emotional core of the stories. So it's gonna feel a little off to folks raised on the "By fanboys, for fanboys" superhero books of the last 35-40 years. I love the Haney/Aparo B&B run, but like you said, it's not a great Batman comic in the purest sense. It is a great "Batman tours the DC Earth/Universe and has some really fun out-of-character adventures and moments" though. Still, 99.9% of the reason I love that run is because of Aparo's gorgeous art and storytelling.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Jun 21, 2019 14:50:44 GMT -5
Haney/Aparo on Brave and the Bold (starting with B&B # 98) is spectacular and anyone who says different is a gibbering idiot. But it's a little hard to argue that it's a great BATMAN comic as much as a great comic! With Batman in it! New Teen Titans is very much a superhero comic that is influenced by superhero comics and is designed to relate to other superhero comics and use - or at least purposefully deviate from - the established tropes of superhero comics. Brave and the Bold is written by creators who don't like superheroes (and science fiction, Haney was never good at sci-fi) BUT like pretty much every other genre so B&B alternates between exorcist style horror, spy comics, corporate espionage, Rocky style sports stories, gothic mysteries, medical thriller (!!!!) .. etc. It's great - best plotted and most structurally versatile superhero comic ever, IMO - but it doesn't offer Marvel style melodrama or long-term character development. And the creative team doesn't care about Batman at all. He acts however the genre-of-the month needs him to act, and he's rarely the protagonist (in the sense of "character that ends up changing") or the emotional core of the stories. So it's gonna feel a little off to folks raised on the "By fanboys, for fanboys" superhero books of the last 35-40 years. I love the Haney/Aparo B&B run, but like you said, it's not a great Batman comic in the purest sense. It is a great "Batman tours the DC Earth/Universe and has some really fun out-of-character adventures and moments" though. Still, 99.9% of the reason I love that run is because of Aparo's gorgeous art and storytelling. Yeah, Aparo's so great. This had to have been the toughest of assignments - Like if you're drawing Spider-Man you're drawing pretty much the same thing issue after issue, the X-men would move around but you're still drawing the same characters and you're doing the same location for a couple months... Aparo could draw anything, and the job needed a guy who could draw anything. If the artist couldn't draw horses or architecture or didn't understand how to pace and structure romance stories than #129, # 113 and # 104 simply wouldn't have worked. By the '70s most comic artists could settle into a comfortable rut, but Aparo had to draw something completely different every issue. It was amazing how good he was, each and every time.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jun 21, 2019 17:02:00 GMT -5
Has Bruce Wayne ever had a recognizable face?
I mean, Peter Parker as drawn by Ditko, Andru or Romita is more than “that guy with brown hair”. You’d recognize Peter even if he wore Shang-Chi’s gi.
Ditto Reed Richards, or Superman... Both have typical features.
But Bruce? Every artist I’ve known draws him as “that handsome dark-haired man who looks serious”. I’d be hard-pressed to recognize Bruce Wayne if he wore a Robin costume, however, while I’m sure that everyone would recognize Perez!s Dick Grayson in the Batman!s cowl.
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Jun 21, 2019 17:43:39 GMT -5
Has Bruce Wayne ever had a recognizable face? I mean, Peter Parker as drawn by Ditko, Andru or Romita is more than “that guy with brown hair”. You’d recognize Peter even if he wore Shang-Chi’s gi. Ditto Reed Richards, or Superman... Both have typical features. But Bruce? Every artist I’ve known draws him as “that handsome dark-haired man who looks serious”. I’d be hard-pressed to recognize Bruce Wayne if he wore a Robin costume, however, while I’m sure that everyone would recognize Perez!s Dick Grayson in the Batman!s cowl. The Kane/Robinson/Sprang/Moldoff Bruce Wayne, with that enormous square chin, is quite recognizable.
Cei-U! I summon the telltale profile!
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jun 21, 2019 23:37:28 GMT -5
I used to think that Bruce Wayne just looked like Superman without the spit curl, but as Cei-U! noted, artists usually emphasized the granite like jaw and slicked back hair of Wayne to make the distinction clear when the two appeared side-by-side. Which makes me wonder what's so recognizable about Superman's face other than the squinty eyes.
Kind of strange how certain writers (starting with Alan Burnett, I believe) have supposed that Batman's body is a mass of knife, bullet, and flame burns and scars, but his face doesn't have a single distinguishing characteristic beyond square jaw. You'd think that a guy with 500 scars on his back and chest would have at least one knick above his neck.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Jun 22, 2019 0:35:28 GMT -5
They leave out all the panels where he begs "PLEASE! Not in the Face! A BLOO BLOO BLOO! A BLOO BLOO BLOO BLOO BLOO!"
|
|