Superman on the new WB Studio Tour banner

[TheBatman]

I don't know about the first part of that... I think Keaton is more iconic than Bale.

With Bale, it's the movies, not necessarily him (he's solid and did a great job, but not necessarily iconic). I'd argue that Heath Ledger is the most iconic thing about Bale's franchise, whereas Keaton (and Nicholson) are iconic.

Keaton spent his tenure being overshadowed by Nicholson and Pfeifer, Joker and Catwoman being the most iconic thing in B89 and BR. At worst, Bale is as equally iconic as Keaton.

[Vordan]

Because people believe it automatically means that both Cavill and Affleck are being erased/ignored/disrespected by Warners and DC.

We have to keep in mind that with Affleck, it was his decision to leave the franchise behind. True,the events of Justice League's troubled production may have hastened his decision to quit, but it seems more due to the fact he quit to get his life in order and being the defacto face of the DCEU franchise wasn't really a good fit for him,especially after it became clear the directorial vision and limited arc he signed up for was no longer being pursued. Warners probably were more than fine with Ben Affleck being Batman for the next several years yet. He wasn't fired. He quit. Frankly I was shocked he came back for Flash and even the Snyder cut reshoots.

With Cavill...its just unclear. I think WB likes him in the role of Superman. I think he likes being Superman and if given the right circumstances he'd be content on playing him for several more movies yet. However the empasse seems to be over how WB wants to use Superman and Cavill wanting more money and increased creative input. For whatever reason neither party is willing to budge,and thus Cavill is, and will likely to remain,in a strange limbo.

With Cavill it’s because he wants another solo movie and WB doesn’t want to give him one because 1. His tenure as Superman hasn’t been the success they hoped for, and 2. They’re already making another solo Superman movie and don’t want anything competing with that. The trades said they offered him an MCU Hulk/Nick Fury deal: no solos but he’d get to be a big part in team movies and he’d be cameoing around in other peoples movies as well. Cavill wasn’t interested without the promise of a solo, so instead they pivoted to Keaton seemingly filling that role and the new Supergirl as well.

Cavill is likely never donning the cape again unless it’s to make an Affleck-esque exit from the franchise. Otherwise for all intents and purposes Calle will be replacing him within the DCEU and this new black Superman will be filling the “Superman” position for now, although if that fails as well they’ll probably just put the franchise on ice for a couple of decades which is fine by me.

[manofsteel1979]

With Cavill it’s because he wants another solo movie and WB doesn’t want to give him one because 1. His tenure as Superman hasn’t been the success they hoped for, and 2. They’re already making another solo Superman movie and don’t want anything competing with that. The trades said they offered him an MCU Hulk/Nick Fury deal: no solos but he’d get to be a big part in team movies and he’d be cameoing around in other peoples movies as well. Cavill wasn’t interested without the promise of a solo, so instead they pivoted to Keaton seemingly filling that role and the new Supergirl as well.

Cavill is likely never donning the cape again unless it’s to make an Affleck-esque exit from the franchise. Otherwise for all intents and purposes Calle will be replacing him within the DCEU and this new black Superman will be filling the “Superman” position for now, although if that fails as well they’ll probably just put the franchise on ice for a couple of decades which is fine by me.

If its true about Keaton,I wonder what Warners would have done if he had said no. Go to Christian Bale next with a brinks truck ? Beg Affleck to stay? Come back to cavill and offer him more money? It seems that having some sort of mentor figure is key to whatever plans they have going forward.

I sort of understand Cavill's position, but I also sort of understand Warners position in terms of not having faith in Superman as a big screen big budget franchise anymore. What people forget is Warners never made a Superman film until the several year clusterfuck in the mid to late 90s that after a tortured existence morphed into Superman Returns, which itself underperformed. The Donner film and its sequels were all made by other people and distributed by Warners.. Add to the fact its been 1981 since a Superman related film was an unquestionable blockbuster hit, whilst there have been 7 solo Batman films since 89 and Batman has only had one flop in that time. Now one could argue those issues with Superman boil down to the clueless mindset of Warners execs themselves, but of course to them it's the characters fault that their "great" ideas fall flat. That of course is a topic for another time.

[JAK]

Keaton spent his tenure being overshadowed by Nicholson and Pfeifer, Joker and Catwoman being the most iconic thing in B89 and BR. At worst, Bale is as equally iconic as Keaton.

I agree that they did overshadow him a bit, but I don't think he was overshadowed to the same degree. If Bale came back the way Keaton is now, I honestly don't think it'd have the same impact. And while it's anecdotal, I hear Keaton's performance get mentioned, specifically - but rarely Bale's (and some of the few times I have, it wasn't fully positive, usually about his Batman voice). Part of that could be because Keaton was the first of the "modern" era of Batman movies, of course, so there is that.

[JAK]

If its true about Keaton,I wonder what Warners would have done if he had said no. Go to Christian Bale next with a brinks truck ? Beg Affleck to stay? Come back to cavill and offer him more money? It seems that having some sort of mentor figure is key to whatever plans they have going forward.

I sort of understand Cavill's position, but I also sort of understand Warners position in terms of not having faith in Superman as a big screen big budget franchise anymore. What people forget is Warners never made a Superman film until the several year clusterfuck in the mid to late 90s that after a tortured existence morphed into Superman Returns, which itself underperformed. The Donner film and its sequels were all made by other people and distributed by Warners.. Add to the fact its been 1981 since a Superman related film was an unquestionable blockbuster hit, whilst there have been 7 solo Batman films since 89 and Batman has only had one flop in that time. Now one could argue those issues with Superman boil down to the clueless mindset of Warners execs themselves, but of course to them it's the characters fault that their "great" ideas fall flat. That of course is a topic for another time.

True - and it should be noted that, regardless of whether it's the studio or the character, the studio will still be involved.... so if they don't think Superman will make them money, they may well be right, because *they'll* still be involved and screwing it up. So, same result either way. Although, even with the theatrical JL, most of the buzz about Superman was fairly positive (even for those who didn't like the film, overall), so you'd think they'd listen. But we know that paying attention isn't their strong suit.

[TheBatman]

I agree that they did overshadow him a bit, but I don't think he was overshadowed to the same degree.

I mean, if anything, it was worse. Keaton was overshadowed both in terms of performance and character development.

There's a reason why Batman Begins, a Christian Bale film, was often regarded as the first live action Batman film that was actually about Batman.

If Bale came back the way Keaton is now, I honestly don't think it'd have the same impact.

To say this simply undermines how popular Bale is in the role. As much as people want to believe otherwise, this isn't a Superman scenario where Reeve is the clear number 1.

And while it's anecdotal, I hear Keaton's performance get mentioned, specifically - but rarely Bale's (and some of the few times I have, it wasn't fully positive, usually about his Batman voice). Part of that could be because Keaton was the first of the "modern" era of Batman movies, of course, so there is that.

Meanwhile, Bale has won several "Best Batman" Polls from notable websites:

https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/sci-fi...e-best-batman/

https://variety.com/2017/film/news/b...ll-1202614916/

https://www.maxim.com/entertainment/...-batman-2019-6

You may not find polls credible, but I'd say it's a better indicator than anecdotal evidence. One of these polls even lines up with my assessment that, at worst, Bale is neck in neck with Keaton, but even then, Bale still won that poll with a 1% lead.

[JAK]

I mean, if anything, it was worse. Keaton was overshadowed both in terms of performance and character development.

There's a reason why Batman Begins, a Christian Bale film, was often regarded as the first live action Batman film that was actually about Batman.

Well, the story is literally more about Batman, and he's given more of a focus. So that makes sense. And the time when 89 and BR came out, there was absolutely a lot of talk about Keaton's performance being overshadowed; but over time I've seen that shift in discussions. It could just be different circles, of course, but that's been my experience. I'm also not placing "more iconic" as an interchangeable phrase for "best," as I see the two things as very different.

To say this simply undermines how popular Bale is in the role. As much as people want to believe otherwise, this isn't a Superman scenario where Reeve is the clear number 1.

I should clarify: Keaton isn't "far and away" more iconic to the degree that Reeve is, as the Bale films brought several things to the larger perception of the franchise that have stuck. I just think he's ahead of Bale enough to note (and as I said/hinted at before, time likely has a lot to do with that - Bale's may very well have the same trajectory).

Meanwhile, Bale has won several "Best Batman" Polls from notable websites:

https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/sci-fi...e-best-batman/

https://variety.com/2017/film/news/b...ll-1202614916/

https://www.maxim.com/entertainment/...-batman-2019-6

You may not find polls credible, but I'd say it's a better indicator than anecdotal evidence. One of these polls even lines up with my assessment that, at worst, Bale is neck in neck with Keaton, but even then, Bale still won that poll with a 1% lead.

I don't find them *not* credible (and I appreciate you sharing them), I'm just curious if that has more to do with the respective movies each is attached to than how the performance itself is seen. Bale's films are considered more serious (because they are), and I do think that has an impact on things. To illustrate the point, I think Affleck would have better showings in these polls if his turn as Batman had been in less divisive films.


Depending on what happens in these upcoming movies, the talk surrounding Keaton will be an indicator - he has a chance to further make or break his legacy as Batman. If we generally hear people saying they'd have preferred to see Bale, then we'll definitely know. I don't think that will happen, but you never know.

[Vordan]

So I just read a Flash movie plot “leak” and holy s*** if it’s true, and I’m skeptical myself despite it making some sense, there is in fact a reason why Reeve is there with Keaton, Gadot, and Margot. Twitter will go nuclear and I can’t wait. I’m praying for it to be true

If its true about Keaton,I wonder what Warners would have done if he had said no. Go to Christian Bale next with a brinks truck ? Beg Affleck to stay? Come back to cavill and offer him more money? It seems that having some sort of mentor figure is key to whatever plans they have going forward.

I sort of understand Cavill's position, but I also sort of understand Warners position in terms of not having faith in Superman as a big screen big budget franchise anymore. What people forget is Warners never made a Superman film until the several year clusterfuck in the mid to late 90s that after a tortured existence morphed into Superman Returns, which itself underperformed. The Donner film and its sequels were all made by other people and distributed by Warners.. Add to the fact its been 1981 since a Superman related film was an unquestionable blockbuster hit, whilst there have been 7 solo Batman films since 89 and Batman has only had one flop in that time. Now one could argue those issues with Superman boil down to the clueless mindset of Warners execs themselves, but of course to them it's the characters fault that their "great" ideas fall flat. That of course is a topic for another time.

They don’t have faith in Cavill but they haven’t given up on Superman given they’re taking another chance with a novice screenwriter in Coates rebooting him with a black actor which is going to be insanely controversial, unless you think it will be an HBO Max film.

If Keaton had passed they might’ve made Cavill another offer, and they absolutely would’ve asked Bale.

[oneveryfineday]

So I just read a Flash movie plot “leak” and holy s*** if it’s true, and I’m skeptical myself despite it making some sense, there is in fact a reason why Reeve is there with Keaton, Gadot, and Margot. Twitter will go nuclear and I can’t wait. I’m praying for it to be true

spoilers:

Cool if true, but the fact that Clark’s daughter is named KARA irks me lol. Just call her Lara or Laurel or Cir-El! Of course the general movie-going audience won’t care and Kara will always be the main Supergirl.

end of spoilers

[Sacred Knight]

Keaton spent his tenure being overshadowed by Nicholson and Pfeifer, Joker and Catwoman being the most iconic thing in B89 and BR. At worst, Bale is as equally iconic as Keaton.

Keaton wasn't any more overshadowed by them than Bale was overshadowed by Ledger. It was just multiple great performances. Heck I'd even argue Keaton was the show stealer in '89. Nicholson got top billing, everyone knew what he would bring. Keaton on the other hand was a very controversial casting choice and he strongly surprised the masses with his performance.

[Frontier]

spoilers:

Cool if true, but the fact that Clark’s daughter is named KARA irks me lol. Just call her Lara or Laurel or Cir-El! Of course the general movie-going audience won’t care and Kara will always be the main Supergirl.

end of spoilers

spoilers:

That's a weird instance of consistent brand implementation.

end of spoilers

[manofsteel1979]

So I just read a Flash movie plot “leak” and holy s*** if it’s true, and I’m skeptical myself despite it making some sense, there is in fact a reason why Reeve is there with Keaton, Gadot, and Margot. Twitter will go nuclear and I can’t wait. I’m praying for it to be true


They don’t have faith in Cavill but they haven’t given up on Superman given they’re taking another chance with a novice screenwriter in Coates rebooting him with a black actor which is going to be insanely controversial, unless you think it will be an HBO Max film.

If Keaton had passed they might’ve made Cavill another offer, and they absolutely would’ve asked Bale.

I believe the reason they are doing the Coates/Abrams Superman is they have indeed lost faith in the traditional Clark Kent version of Superman. Yeah,its possible the race bent Superman character May still be called Clark Kent,but it'll essentially be Calvin Ellis or Val-Zod with the CK name.i doubt he'll be a Kansas raised farm boy/mild mannered reporter. At this point it is also the reason why this new Superman isn't going to be part of the same universe as and why a Supergirl is seemingly replacing Kal/Clark in the mainstream universe as the main Super character, IF the Flash rumors are to be believed.

The film side of WB haven't given up on the "S" and all that entails from a marketing standpoint, but they have given up on Superman as we've known him. Otherwise, they would have just recast Kal-El/Clark Kent.

[Vordan]

I believe the reason they are doing the Coates/Abrams Superman is they have indeed lost faith in the traditional Clark Kent version of Superman. Yeah,its possible the race bent Superman character May still be Clark Kent,but it'll essentially be Calvin Ellis or Val-Zod with the CK name for marketing purposes. At this point it is also the reason why this Superman isn't going to be part of the same universe and why a Supergirl is seemingly replacing Kal/Clark in the mainstream universe.

They haven't given up on the "S" and all that entails from a marketing standpoint, but they have given up on Superman as we've known him. Otherwise, they would have just recast Kal-El/Clark Kent.

Oh personally I think it’s the other way around. This will be Clark Kent but black, much as I love Calvin (and I know Val has his fans) neither one of those two can stand on equal footing with Clark in terms of stories for adaption. Hell if the rumors are true, I’m pretty sure I even know the story Coates will be drawing from (I’m embarrassed it didn’t occur to me until recently).

A period piece starring the “original” Clark Kent/Kal-El Superman in a story about race? Where have we seen that already? Oh yeah:



This was the most high profile Superman comic success in a long time, I can see WB taking notice. And Coates then makes perfect sense as to why they’d go with him (whether he can do a good job or not) because he obviously would be intimately familiar with the subject matter. Making Superman black in a story where he fights the Klan is easily understandable.

But they’re not putting this in the main universe which is what they’d be doing if they were truly giving up on Clark. If that rumored leak is true, I can actually see Superlad’s theory being right. spoilers:

Supergirl will be Reeve’s daughter and uphold the mantle until her brother Jon grows up and becomes Superman too, because I can’t see them abandoning Superman and Batman in the DCEU for long, and Keaton will definitely be training Terry McGuiness at some point.

end of spoilers

Is it annoying that Batman is getting another reboot that seems to faithfully adapt his stories while Superman is yet again in the midst of f***ery on the big screen? Of course but there’s plenty of more traditional Superman content elsewhere: S&L, MAWS, the animated movies, WB Montreal may be making a Superman game (don’t hold your breath but it’s being rumored yet again), etc. There’s other places to get our fix even if we’re sadly never going to see a classic Superman fight Brainiac on the big screen (expect Supergirl to get that).

[TheBatman]

Keaton wasn't any more overshadowed by them than Bale was overshadowed by Ledger.

He definitely wasn't less overshadowed in comparison to Bale.

It was just multiple great performances. Heck I'd even argue Keaton was the show stealer in '89. Nicholson got top billing, everyone knew what he would bring. Keaton on the other hand was a very controversial casting choice and he strongly surprised the masses with his performance.

Sure, Keaton was a pleasant surprise, but Joker was very much the most iconic performance from that film.

[bat39]

Keaton wasn't any more overshadowed by them than Bale was overshadowed by Ledger. It was just multiple great performances. Heck I'd even argue Keaton was the show stealer in '89. Nicholson got top billing, everyone knew what he would bring. Keaton on the other hand was a very controversial casting choice and he strongly surprised the masses with his performance.

I feel that Michael Keaton's Batman is getting re-evaluated lately, perhaps in line the the ''second coming'' the actor himself has been enjoying over the past half-decade. The fact that the first Burton film celebrated its 30th anniversary a couple of years back may well have also aroused some interest in those films again.

I think when the Nolan films were at the peak of their popularity and cultural predominance, it was easy to overlook the Burton/Keaton films. People associated the pre-Nolan Batman films mainly with the two Schumacher efforts, and then only to trash them and highlight how Nolan's 'realistic' vision for the character was superior. In the midst of this, the Burton films were largely ignored - well, apart from Jack Nicholson's Joker, who always continued to remain a part of the discource.

But now, the dust settled on the Nolanverse a long time ago. We've had another Batman who's come and (kinda) left since then, and yet another one showing up in a new reboot. With Michael Keaton being in the spotlight (pun intended!) these last several years, I think people have been interested in re-exploring his version of Bruce Wayne and realizing that a) It's pretty darn good and b) It wouldn't be a bad idea to see more of it (especially since, unlike Bale's Batman, he never got an ending). That coupled with the growing interest of WB in the Multiverse and the perrennial interest in nostalgia for legacy properties may well have combined to get Keaton back on-screen as the Bat!

Talking as someone who loves the Nolanverse and every aspect of it, I'd say that while Bale was a great Batman (and an even better Bruce Wayne IMO), I think a lot of people think he's ''THE best'' largely because of the movies he was in. I don't think, objectively speaking, Bale is necessarily better than Keaton or vice versa...I'd like to think they're both up there on the top. Its definitely not like the case with Superman, where Christopher Reeve is untouchable (which, to my mind, has had the unfortunate effect of the franchise just not being able to move beyond the shadow of his films)...