If keaton did Batman Forever....

[riddler]

It actually would have fit the progression though;

In the first film Bruce Wayne is a mystery to the public so much that Vale and Knox don't recognize him. The only other time we see him go out in public was to crime alley to pay his respects.

In the second film we see more of the industrious side of Bruce Wayne; he goes to meet with Shreck and implies he's discussed power issues with the Mayor. Perhaps having a female relationship and killing his parents killer as well as saving Gotham gave Bruce the confidence he needed?

So introducing Wayne enterprises and making Bruce a statesman was the next logical choice for the third film.

I don't see how that would give someone confidence. Likely it left him emotionally numb, with the only sense of enjoyment he has is when he's wailing on criminals, like miller batman. Thinking about it now that's probably why his connection with Selina was so important to him, it was him finding some human connection when he was losing himself.

Note that Bruce isn't acting quite as tortured in the second film. I know people like to read a lot into the first shot of Bruce but all that's implied there is that he's a man who sits and thinks to himself. He's more confident but he does in a way relive the dark part of his past noticing that Oswald was orphaned as well. In the third film he again would have relived it with Dick's parents dying. While many believe Bruce isn't acting dark and tortured in the fourth film because the third film cures him, it is also possible that is the only film in which there are no events paralleling his parents death.

Alfred dying.

It allows him to break free of his shell; he conquered the man who killed his parents and even Gotham. No longer did the city feel he's a foe.

You can't possibly think the old butler dying has any parralels to his parents death or Oswald becoming orphaned or Dicks parents getting killed; Alfred wasn't murdered nor was anyone getting orphaned over it. Bruce feels sorry for Oswald and Dick as well as regret over failing to save the Graysons. Alfred dying is not something Bruce would have regretted.

The third film ended in victory just like the first, it's not that big of a stretch to believe Keaton could have helmed the role. The 'drive thru' joke would have been awkward but thats it

[Edd Grayson]

Riddler, some say that the script still had Keaton in mind for the role. Like the scene in which he breaks into Chase's place, and how he's still socially awkward, those traits sound like Keaton's Bruce in Batman.

[Dagenspear]

I don't think Val Kilmer as Batman was a problem, quite the contrary, but the stupid conflicts between Tommy Lee Jones and Jim Carrey on set, the constant quips from the characters in the movie, even from Alfred, and the fact that they deleted much of the film's more serious material bothers me.

It was still satisfying for me, but not great.

God bless you, Dagenspear! God bless everyone in your life! (I mean that sincerely, please don't take it as sarcasm).

Thank you very much. I'm not being sarcastic either, to be clear.

I wasn't bothered by the quips myself. The film still had a lot of serious elements. Not really some of the deeper aspects, I agree. Although I personally found the giant bat deleted scene a little off.

God bless you! God bless everyone in your life!

[thecolorsblend]

It's amazing what's possible when the film the scene was shot on is properly developed and Goldenthal's music has been added to the scene. It would've thrown off the pacing and intensity of the film's climax big time to have that Navajo spirit quest going on but I think the scene itself could've been made to work.

[Wayne49]

Good question. When I apply hypotheticals I tend to configure thinking at that time rather than a current day opinion to determine a logical outcome. I think it would be TOO easy to suggest Keaton would have hit the "Trilogy" curse of superheroes like Superman and Spider-man, had he done a third one. Because to say that is to allow all the water to flow under that bridge of discontent after B&R came out 18 years ago. To assume that stays would not be giving it an accurate assessment. This movie came out in 1995 and those feelings of discourse towards Schumacher did NOT exist.

If we're to be completely honest, he actually saved the franchise with the success of Forever, because Returns had driven such a harsh nail into public opinion. The Studios were already at odds with the public over it's tone and subsequent reduced commercial appeal. And because that had happen so early, there were still allot of skeptics in the industry kitchen about Batman's viability as a franchise after only one sequel in. So perhaps the bigger question here is what would have happened to Keaton in the fourth installment? Success sells perception and industry value. Renewed success in a third Batman film would have propped up Keaton's market value and likely solidified the industry perception that he was not replaceable giving him more of a voice in the next film. Translation: Batman & Robin never gets made and we're having an entirely different conversation today about Schumacher's place in Batman cinematic history.

Remember, Schumacher always wanted to go darker. Who's to say with more clout in the Keaton camp they wouldn't have taken back that direction, only with a little more management on the tone controls. I think it's completely conceivable history gets completely rewritten if Keaton stays on and Batman Forever is the success it became.

[Grissom]

Good point. Keaton's performance has always been great as the Caped Crusader (not to mention all the other roles he has performed). If he did do BF, the direction of the film might have been different because Keaton would definitely have a say in what his character goes through and says in the film, within the context of the story.

[Edd Grayson]

I think he was right to decline the role, as the film turned out. If they had kept more quality control, BF and B&R would not be as hated today, in my opinion.

[Grissom]

That's one thing I love about the Batman franchise as a whole, everyone has their pick of favorites and you can find something to like (or for some something to dislike from each film).  There's a lot to choose from, from Batman '89 right up to The Dark Knight Rises.

[Edd Grayson]

That's one thing I love about the Batman franchise as a whole, everyone has their pick of favorites and you can find something to like (or for some something to dislike from each film).  There's a lot to choose from, from Batman '89 right up to The Dark Knight Rises.

Too true. And now we're getting a new one.

[OutRiddled]

Keaton would not have fit in Schumacher's world.  And Burton's ideas for the 3rd movie sound weird to me.  Although Rene Russo would have made a good Dr Chase Meridian.  Robin Williams as The Riddler?  Not sure about that casting.  Same with Marlon Wayans as Robin.  Don't know about Billy Dee Williams as Two-Face, either (although I like his Harvey Dent).  I am glad we got the movie we did.