how come michael keaton stop playing batman?

[Justice League 2000]

hello friends Question and I forgot long time ago how come michael keaton stop playing batman? let me know. :)

[Manhunter]

I think it was a number of reasons:

-He didn't like the fact that Batman was taking a backseat to the villains.

-He didn't like the direction Schumacher was planning to take the movies.

-He wasn't getting enough money.

[optimal321]

Just to add to what Manhunter said:

I read somewhere that, Batman Returns did worse in the box office than the first one, so the WB suits decided that people didn't like the movie franchise had that dark. So, along with a couple tons of neon light bulbs, Schumacher decided to really lighten up Batman's world. Keaton always liked the complexities to Batman's character, and really wasn't interested in doing three hour toy commercials.

[The Game]

Because Keaton stunk! ;)

No actually (like everyone else said) he didn't like the direction the franchise was going. Plus, I'm sure he didn't want to be typecasted, etc.

-The Game

[murmur]

Frankly, I very much respect Keaton's decision to stay out of the other two movies, keeping his artistic integrity when the Batman franchise got dumped into a cesspool. George Clooney, otoh, had no such integrity. Commenting on Batman & Robin, he said that Batman movies are about the villains because of the weakness of Batman's character. I'm paraphrasing here: Here's a guy who's a billionaire and he's got all this cool stuff. So, your parents died when you were a kid. Get over it.

Of course, I can't imagine anyone who takes Batman seriously being involved in that last film...

[Barb Gordon]

I actually recall Clooney stating that he feels so bad that the Batman movie he was in did so badly. He hates being known as the guy that screwed up the Batman role, which is why he hasn't touched it again. I always figured Keaton just wanted to move on. His luck, he'd get typecasted as Batman if he did a third one. Typecasting spells doom for any actor/actress, whether they're just starting out or have been in the business a while. Once everyone can only see you as this one character, no one is going to want to give you a different role. But of course, who could stand Schumacher, anyways?

Barb^-^

[The Guard]

Respect what you want.

Keaton bailed because he wasn't getting a raise. A small part of it was that Burton wasn't directing the third film, but Keaton left because he wanted mas dinero. As was his right.

[Russkafin]

I remember an interview with Mr. Keaton around the time Batman Forever came out, asking him point blank why he wasn't doing another one. He said it was because he thought he had brought all he could to the character in the first two films and was ready to move on. Whether you believe that or the money thing is up to you!

Still, I can't help but remember how the movie was originally going to have Keaton as Batman and Robin Williams as the Riddler. If they had kept that cast and Burton as the director, I wonder what the film would have been like.

[GrayGhost]

Originally posted by optimal321
Just to add to what Manhunter said:

I read somewhere that, Batman Returns did worse in the box office than the first one, so the WB suits decided that people didn't like the movie franchise had that dark. So, along with a couple tons of neon light bulbs, Schumacher decided to really lighten up Batman's world. Keaton always liked the complexities to Batman's character, and really wasn't interested in doing three hour toy commercials.

You are correct:
(According to the imdb)

Batman: $251.188 million (USA) [Budget: $35 mil]
Batman Returns: $162.831 million (USA) [Budget: $80 mil]
Batman Forever: $184.031 million (USA) [Budget: $100 mil]
Batman & Robin: $107.285 million (USA) [Budget: $110 mil]

I also heard that Keaton did not want to be typecast as Batman. However, I am glad he left because I feel that Val Kilmer was the best out of all three, I think he handled Bruce Wayne and Batman better. I am sure others would agree if he played Bats in the first two. People tend to in most cases always lean towards the first person to portray a role (Adam West doesn't count :p )

[Bird Boy]

As with everything EVERYONE said, I would like to add, that I heard another reason he wasn't gonna be Bats again, was because he didn't like the darkness of Batman Returns. (Literally, was there ANY daytime shots?)

-BB

[Terminatah]

Until very recently, I was more familiar with the Schumacher Batman films than I was with the original Batman. As a result, I also preferred Val Kilmer. In the back of my head, I thought Michael Keaton didn't even look like Batman; how good could he be? But when I got ahold of Batman and saw Keaton's intense performance, I was floored. I can't believe I ever doubted him as the best live-action Batman. His defining moment was when he grabbed that thug by the collar, held him over the ledge of a building, looked into his eyes, and said "I'm Batman." What a performance! I had previously only attributed this line to George Clooney, whose delivery of it was a JOKE.

But still, Batman or no Batman; Keaton, Kilmer, and Clooney are all great actors.

-Terminatah

[BarryAlen]

Rogain is Expensive (so I've heard)

[Ayleim]

Originally posted by Bird Boy
As with everything EVERYONE said, I would like to add, that I heard another reason he wasn't gonna be Bats again, was because he didn't like the darkness of Batman Returns. (Literally, was there ANY daytime shots?)

-BB

Not with "Batman" himself - which kinda makes sense after all. Off the top of my head, daytime scenes include that CD-scratching episode :), Bruce talking to Selina before the tree-lighting ceremony, and also when they 1st met at Shreck's office.

[mbaker]

I may not be A fan of the live action Bat films, but I can understand Keaton's decision to bail out once Jole Scumacher signed on. I agree with what he said about how sometimes Batman takes A back seat in favor of the villians, and not give both of them equle time. Which is why I disagree with Clooney's comment on "Batman & Robin". I don't blame both of them for not wanting to be typecasted. As for Val Kilmer, he bailed out the minute he learned that Arnold Schwarzenegger was going to play Mr.Freeze because dropped him like A hot potato for the role of the T-1000 in "Terminator 2" (which eventually went to Robert Patrick) Another reason that Keaton bailed out has to do with the toys. This was from the Summer '92 issue of Rolling Stone from what I've learned.

[Bane]

I remember seing a press confrence when the 3rd movie was going to be made, WB didn't wan't to pay him the $10 million dollars he was asking for because he said that the suit was to hot to wear.I don't know if im wrong or not but just something I remember seing.

[mbaker]

That's one of the problems I had with the Batman costumes. I'm sure all three actors hated waring them. The chest, and legging parts should've been made out of something like spendex, and they could ware A bullet proof vest to keep the realism consistant in scenes that have gunplay. Just my opinion. It also find it interesting that the cost of each movie falls in stark contrast to the grosses each of them made.

[X-human]

I read that Keaton left the role because Burton left and he simply hated the role of Batman. I'll try and find the publication.

Which I think, if true, is partly why he was so good at it. Batman can't look like he's having fun. That was the main problem with Clooney, he was just having to much fun. With Kilmer, it was a little bit of both. I think he played Bruce Wayne far to straight, but he was at least looser then Keaton's.

[jimi5150]

I remember reading something about Robin Williams.

He was so upset with Disney when he found out how much they were making from the Alladdin merchandising, that he wanted a cut from WB when they asked him to do the Riddler.

Keaton seemed to think that was a pretty good idea, also.

It became a dealbreaker & they were both told to take a hike.

Urban legend? Cold hard truth? Who knows for sure!

[The Guard]

That's one of the problems I had with the Batman costumes. I'm sure all three actors hated waring them. The chest, and legging parts should've been made out of something like spendex, and they could ware A bullet proof vest to keep the realism consistant in scenes that have gunplay. Just my opinion. It also find it interesting that the cost of each movie falls in stark contrast to the grosses each of them made.

In the 1989 film, look close. There's an actual jumpsuit, and then a vest like chest armor thingie overtop it. You can see the spandex underneath the chest armor when he gets clubbed in the back of the head by The Joker's goons. There's definitely a rubber chestplate over spandex.

[Ayleim]

Originally posted by The Guard
In the 1989 film, look close. There's an actual jumpsuit, and then a vest like chest armor thingie overtop it. You can see the spandex underneath the chest armor when he gets clubbed in the back of the head by The Joker's goons. There's definitely a rubber chestplate over spandex.

Not to mention in the 2nd movie, after Catwoman clawed him in the side, he called Alfred asking for antiseptic ointment in his costume but minus the armour thingy.

[Samhaine]

I know that back when Burton was still attached to the Superman movie there was talk of a Batman cameo in the script (I don't know, I never read it) and I had heard Keaton would play Batman in that cameo.