Who did you guys think WB was going to cast before the Keaton shocker?

[burtongenius]

Real simple.  Who do you guys think warner bros was going to cast before the not beefed up keaton became batman?  Or who do you think should've been batman during that time frame?

[Paul (ral)]

Your question is a little confusing.

Are you asking;
A. In 1988 who did we think would be cast for Batman?
B. Who was considered for the role by WB?
C. In retrospect, who would we have liked to have seen cast instead of Keaton?


If it is B then there are other threads for this
ie. http://www.batmanmovieonline.com/forum/index.php?topic=1088.0

[johnnygobbs]

Among the names mentioned prior to Keaton's casting were Pierce Brosnan, Charlie Sheen, Bill Murray?!?, Mel Gibson, Patrick Swayze and Alec Baldwin.

If one were going to cast a more traditional 'playboy' version of Bruce Wayne, or even a more physically 'buff' version of Batman then I think Alec Baldwin, Pierce Brosnan or Mel Gibson would have been great in the part.  Sheen could have made an interesting 'younger' Bruce Wayne; people tend to forget what a decent actor he used to be before he flushed it all away in a torrant of drugs, prostitution and spousal abuse.  Swayze would have made for a better Batman than Bruce Wayne in my opinion.  He had the physicality for a formidable 'Caped Crusader' (although the original Batman suit may have restricted the full range of his moves), but I'm not too sure if I could picture him as Wayne so well.  As far as Murray goes, I love the guy.  He's one of my favourite comedic actors of all time (got to love Groundhog Day and Ghostbusters for a start), but I'm glad he wasn't cast as Batman.  Sure, Keaton was criticised for the very same reason I don't think Murray would have been right for the role prior to Batman's release, but unlike Murray, Keaton has an edgier, darker side to his range and cuts is more as a dashing, if eccentric playboy billionaire.

If I was a casting director at the time, I guess I would have gone for the obvious choice like Alec Baldwin, or maybe his brother William.  I would have reserved Mel Gibson for the role of DA Harvey Dent, although he'd probably be my second choice for Batman/Bruce Wayne.

Do you have any ideas of your own Burtongenius?

[burtongenius]

Okay, the world heres about Batman being made into a movie.  Thats a humongous deal.  I mean, the batman from the comics being made into a movie.

People know who batman is.  He's a smart, rich, well built, ninja trained guy who fights the crime of Gotham city in response (but not soley) to his parents murder.  When they make this movie, every single batman fan is expecting an comic to film transposition.  Batman is a big, strong guy.  

Now, this is before their were any burton-batman fans.  Nobody knew anything about burton (in respect to batman).  

Okay, a lot of the fans complained.  1)  Were any of you guys in the complainer crowd?  2)  Who would you have picked for batman?  3) Who did you expect to be batman?  3) Did you expect big name or maybe a new rising star? (either way, the people wanted muscles)  4)  Did Warner Bros. have the comics in mind when checking out possible casting choices?

I personally would've wanted a nice, charming, smart, big, strong, a little quiet bruce wayne.  I think Brendan Fraser might have done really good.   Either him or somebody new.  I'm think Baldwin is big enough but I don't think he would quite fit the profile.  But I don't know.

[burtongenius]

Now, when people saw the burton batman, they were surprised.  And liked it.  At least a good amount of batman- now burton/batman fans- liked it.  It created its own entity.

Now, here is where the rubber meets the road.  If (hypothetically), for the second batman movie, while it is being planned for, they decide to do a different actor because they think it can make more money.  Do you guys still want keaton or do you go back to your original comic book batman instincts?  I would go back to my comic instincts myself, but I don't mind keaton either.  He did a good job.  But I'm definetely being terribly honest here.  I would've picked somebody else.  But I'm not the hugest burton/batman fan either (I am a fan, just not a diehard fan).  

Anyone ready to be honest?  

[BatmAngelus]

I'm not sure if I even existed at the time that Keaton was cast, but if I were to transport myself back in time and had no knowledge of what would really happen to the Batman franchise, I probably would've been hoping for a live action representation of the 1970s comics written by O'Neil & Englehart (with a dash of Frank Miller's Year One).

I'd expect them to go the Superman: The Movie-Christopher Reeve route by casting an unknown, well-built actor (which is the approach that Tom Mankiewicz was supporting after his Superman: The Movie-type origin script).

If I heard that they were going for a known actor, I probably would've been expecting them to cast Mel Gibson, after his work in the Mad Max movies and the first Lethal Weapon (and use the Batsuit and camera tricks to cover the height issue).

On the other hand, in hindsight, I think Alec Baldwin could've pulled it off at the time, mainly based off of his work on The Shadow movie, but I don't think I would've been expecting him at all then.  I would've thought "That guy from Beetlejuice?!" (which would've been my same reaction to Keaton).

Ray Liotta reported to EW that he was offered a role.  There's no clarification which role, but if it was for Bruce Wayne and he took up the role, I would've thought, "Well, he'd have to lower his voice, but man, does he have the handsome-in-a-dark way look."  That said, after seeing him as a dangerous criminal in Something Wild and Goodfellas, I probably would've preferred him as Harvey Dent.
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,1537670,00.html

As for Keaton, yeah, I'll be honest- I probably would've been disappointed with the news and began to fear that the movie would be more of a comedic Beetlejuice-type surreal take on Batman that was darker than the 1960s series, but still mainly done for laughs. 
And considering Burton and Keaton's filmography pre-1989- would you blame me for feeling that way?

I don't think I would've been signing petitions or sending letters to WB, but I probably would've been skeptical and then, like other fans, won over by that first teaser trailer.  I also may have gone as far as to research the serious roles that Keaton's done and tried to watch him in Clean and Sober to see him play a serious role.

[burtongenius]

Mel Gibson.  I personally think he's a little too obvious (or too much of a pretty boy) to be batman but I understand why.  He's a good, serious actor with dark hair and handsome.  But I just don't think batmans for him.  I don't think Ray Liotta would've been a bad batman.  If I was back then, I would'ved expected Ray Liotta to be beefed up a little though.  Again, this is speculating before understanding what burton was doing.

I concur on the newcomer batman/superman thing.  And I would do the basic comic batman with a little bit of Batman 60s and Batman the animated series (highly underated).  But, your basic dark, crime fighting batman.

If I were with those fans, I probably would've been mad with them.  I mean, when even a person who doesn't like comic books at all thinks of batman, he knows he's a big, muscular guy who kicks peoples butt. 
Again, I like Brendan Frasier.  He's big, he's likeable, but he would have to be serious to be batman.  And maybe darken his hair.

[johnnygobbs]

I was a kid when the first Burton Batman film was made, and I only later got into Batman precisely because of this film and its sequel.  However, had I been a Batman fan prior to 1989 I guess I would have been a little wary about Keaton's casting.  I would have associated him with comedy.  Plus, I would have considered him too short, too slight and perhaps not handsome enough to portray my 'ideal' Batman.  At the time I would have probably have preferred to see someone like Gibson or Baldwin take the role on.

However, I now consider Keaton's performance to be unimpeachable.  None of the other actors I have mentioned would have been able to invest Bruce Wayne with the emotional depth and deep sense of trauma he was able to provide.  Moreover, Burton's basis for casting a relatively slight man as Batman makes sense.  Like he says, why would a 6'5" hunk need to dress up as a giant bat when he could simply don a hockey mask to go about scaring his foes.  Keaton's relatively smaller frame also imbues him with a greater degree of empathy, and makes his various tustles with his enemies more involving since there is always a possibility that he might lose.  That may not satisfy all the purists, but it does make for a more engaging, emotionally compelling protagonist than the typical Schwarzeneggar type.

[Paul (ral)]

And I would do the basic comic batman with a little bit of Batman 60s...

That was exactly what they were trying to get away from!

For me Keaton had no baggage.  I was 11. I hadn't seen Mr Mom, Nightshift or Beetlejuice.  The first image of the movie I saw was Keaton in the suit and it blew me away.  To me, you didn't have to be a big guy to be a good fighter plus his suit and gadgets gave him an extra edge so I bought into it.

[The Dark Knight]

And I would do the basic comic batman with a little bit of Batman 60s...

That was exactly what they were trying to get away from!

Correct. They wanted to go in the exact opposite direction, to return the character to how he was originally conceived: street wise and no nonsense. Burton wanted to get the first trailer out there as quickly as possible to show the world he meant business. To show the world he was walking his dark talk.

The series was not without humour mind you, but it was balanced with Burton?s absurd humour as evident in the Batwing confrontation. Playing things straight and not resorting to parody.

I feel Burton did include everything he liked about the character in the films. A sort of collective history.