Michael Keaton. I like the campy nature in general of the Tim Burton era.
However I will say, that I find later villain depictions to be excellent. Ledger’s Joker, and Colin Farrel as Cobblepot are two examples that quickly come to mind.
Those campy villains were amazing though - Ledger was an amazing Joker but so was Nicholson and so was Hamill… Carrey as the riddler was also amazing!
Honestly I think part of the appeal of Batman now is that the characters are archetypes and each portrayal shows how the universe might unfold slightly differently based on the specific personality traits involved. Will we have a lone ronin Joker like Ledger? Will it be Nicholson’s charismatic mafioso? Phoenix’s debilitated martyr? Hamill’s obsessed moralizing sadist?
Each one shows an interesting twist on the central character and gives a fresh story that, while great on it’s own, really shines when viewed through contrast.
Nicholson and Ledger were supremely competent agents of destruction - Hamill and Romero seemed entirely focused on their arch to the point of their own destruction - meanwhile Phoenix was utterly incompetent and gained notoriety only because he was a useful idiot latched on to by a society in deep pain (@see the rise of right wing dictators).
It’s fucking awesome. Batman is essentially new media’s Arthurian Cycle.
Michael Keaton. I like the campy nature in general of the Tim Burton era.
However I will say, that I find later villain depictions to be excellent. Ledger’s Joker, and Colin Farrel as Cobblepot are two examples that quickly come to mind.
Those campy villains were amazing though - Ledger was an amazing Joker but so was Nicholson and so was Hamill… Carrey as the riddler was also amazing!
Honestly I think part of the appeal of Batman now is that the characters are archetypes and each portrayal shows how the universe might unfold slightly differently based on the specific personality traits involved. Will we have a lone ronin Joker like Ledger? Will it be Nicholson’s charismatic mafioso? Phoenix’s debilitated martyr? Hamill’s obsessed moralizing sadist?
Each one shows an interesting twist on the central character and gives a fresh story that, while great on it’s own, really shines when viewed through contrast.
Nicholson and Ledger were supremely competent agents of destruction - Hamill and Romero seemed entirely focused on their arch to the point of their own destruction - meanwhile Phoenix was utterly incompetent and gained notoriety only because he was a useful idiot latched on to by a society in deep pain (@see the rise of right wing dictators).
It’s fucking awesome. Batman is essentially new media’s Arthurian Cycle.