It was for the best for sure.
I really dig this part:
“To me, I know the name of the movie is Batman, and it’s hugely iconic and very cool and cultural iconic and because of Tim Burton , artistically iconic, I knew from the get-go it was Bruce Wayne,” said the actor. “That was the secret. I never talked about it. [Everyone would say] Batman, Batman, Batman does this, and I kept thinking to myself, ‘Y’all are thinking wrong here.’ [It’s all about] Bruce Wayne. What kind of person does that? … Who becomes that? What kind of person [does that]?”
Thanks for posting this '89! I’m gonna listen to that podcast.
“What type of person does that.”
I do because nobody else can.
#TrueThat #Awesome
I can totally understand why Michael Keaton walked away from Batman. His interpretation of Batman would be out of place in Joel Schumacher’s films.
Reading that really make me understand Michael Keaton point of view.
Bruce Wayne had a tragic childhood, what would the tragic event do to a young kid who witness his Parent’s murder after a fun movie night?
Seeing Zorro that night was huge inspiration, if you watch The Mark Of Zorro starring Tyrone Powers, he was nothing like Superman, but you can see a bit of Batman in him.
While I do enjoy Batman Forever, I think Batman is definitely should be a dark hero like the ghost Spectre.
If I wrote a light hearted campy story of Spectre, I can see alot of DC fans would attack me for ruining a character I know so little about. And that’s what Joel Schumacher did with Batman.
Christopher Nolan gets it, Tim Burton gets it, Matt Reeves gets it, but Schumacher didn’t get it.
Interesting.
I like Keaton’s approach, especially the part where he emphasizes the man behind the mask.
While Batman Forever as a movie is definitely different in tone and visuals than its predecessors, I don’t feel like its handling of Batman was as drastically different as this would make it seem though. Batman & Robin was a whole other story though 
.
…
…
…
Confession: I like ‘em all 