The Batman Forever Script "Sucked" and That's Why Michael Keaton Passed

Keaton said no to playing Batman a third time because the script apparently wasn't compelling enough.

16 Comments

Michael Keaton played Batman twice, in the Tim Burton movies Batman (1989) and Batman Returns (1992). He passed on appearing in a third movie, Joel Schumacher's Batman Forever, and now he has revealed why. Appearing on The Hollywood Reporter's "Awards Chatter" podcast, Keaton said he didn't want to play the Dark Knight again because the script, at least the one he saw left a lot to be desired.

"It sucked," Keaton said (via Entertainment Weekly). "I knew it was in trouble when [Schumacher] said, 'Why does everything have to be so dark?'"

No Caption Provided

Batman Forever's Caped Crusader was played by Val Kilmer; he was replaced by George Clooney in 1997's Batman and Robin. Ben Affleck is the current Batman actor, having played the character most recently in 2016's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. He'll play the part again in this year's Justice League.

Keaton played a superhero actor in the Oscar winning Birdman, while he is signed up to play the evil Vulture in this summer's Spider-Man: Homecoming.

Also during THR's podcast, Keaton revealed that he declined a role on the hit ABC show Lost. He says he could have played a version of Matthew Fox's character--but with a major twist. This character would have been killed off in the pilot. The writers went a different way, and Keaton passed.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 16 comments about this story
16 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for Elranzer
Elranzer

1301

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Keaton is now age-appropriate to play a live-action older Batman if they did a live The Dark Knight Returns movie. Maybe if WB pulls the plug on the DCEU, they could go in that direction.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for luert
luert

440

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

BF was decent nice to me, and val kilmer was k, but I really liked keaton more as he was unstoppable, in my opinion he was more solid true to the way batman is, he was always quiet direct not much talk while on duty and on personal life he was clever but also normal, leaving aside george clooney who in my opinion is a jack of all trades since he can fit in very many different roles, and kilmer is also k, I've seen batman becoming more more human in the attitude, he's a person without super power but he's damn hell stubborn and very through, so I think that keaton did fit the part for the most back then, though I did like BF and B&R

Upvote • 
Avatar image for biggamerdude
BigGamerDude

2073

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

the whole thing sucked.

It astounds me how people can rank movies like BF and B&R above BvS, it wasn't that bad, it was good.

3 • 
Avatar image for fanboyman
FanboyMan

1501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By FanboyMan

@biggamerdude: BvS had cool special-effects, unfortunately the story sucked! I go to movies to get lost in the plot, to see actors (believably) playing characters, if I wanted to see a bunch of CG action I'd play a video game (but that's my opinion)

Upvote • 
Avatar image for darthrevenx
DarthRevenX

4519

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 1

@biggamerdude: of the 8 movies including Batman 1989 here;s my rating for em

08 Batman & Robin

terrible, nothing redeeming

07 Batman V Superman

terrible nothing redeeming

06 Batman Forever

eh, kinda bad but also had some good parts, Val was pretty good IMO

05 Batman Returns

kinda in the middle, it's kinda bad but has some good in it, kinda liked Catwoman...

04 Batman 1989

pretty good, had some inaccuracies to it but it was really funny, really dark when it needed to be and fun....

03 Batman Dark Knight Rising

it was pretty solid, loved Bane and Catwoman but some bits felt a little rushed like the prison escape and ending......but it's still an excellent film

02 Batman Begins

Pretty awesome, making Ra's Al Ghul the first villain was inspired and I loved how they executed it....

01 Batman The Dark Knight

from the intro to the end it was a thrill ride.....I don't think i'd been that riveted in theater since SW-ROTJ

now I will say some of the 1940's batman stuff was actually pretty good for the era....the stunts were good and action looked honest....like they did a good job staging the fights in those things....IDK, I was impressed call me nuts but I kinda dig some 40's movies.....the 40's Batman wasn't nearly as campy as the 60's show but lacked many of the super villains....but I think many of em weren't invented until later, Dr Hugo Strange was the first major villain in the comics....but IDK when Joker appeared.....

3 • 
Avatar image for shay-cormac
Shay-Cormac

261

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

@darthrevenx: Lol do you think Forever is better then DoJ? XD

Upvote • 
Avatar image for darthrevenx
DarthRevenX

4519

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 1

@shay-cormac: Val Kilmer elevates it slightly just cus he's pretty good as batman.....but to say it's better? it's merely a rung up from BVS....

B&R, BVS & BF if you think on it as a 100 point scale 1 being the worst then they're 1, 2 and 3 so yeah....the rest are farther up. the ladder...Batman Returns is like at 50 or so....just to give context....Dark Knight is around a 90 there's ways to improve it [I don;t see how though] but i'm being honest so i can't just say eww it's 100 that's unrealistic, that's an emotional rating.....

as i thought about the movies they all shifted like 5 or 6 times until i got really real about it.....had Nolan's Batman never existed then Batman 1989 would be 90 still.....and had Val not been as good in Forever it'd drop lower....not that where it's at isn't already bad....

naww, I liked Two Face as well but beyond batman and Two Face the movie wasn't the best....

Upvote • 
Avatar image for fanboyman
FanboyMan

1501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@darthrevenx: The Joker first appeared in Batman #1 so did Catwoman but they called her the Cat or something like that.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Heartagram_03
Heartagram_03

3675

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Edited By Heartagram_03

@biggamerdude: Opinions are a funny thing. amirite

Upvote • 
Avatar image for gameroutlawzz
GamerOuTLaWzz

1353

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

Was still enjoyable. Returns was the best tho

2 • 
Avatar image for fanboyman
FanboyMan

1501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By FanboyMan

Talk about dodging a Bat nipple shaped bullet!!

2 • 
Avatar image for mattcake
mattcake

1475

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I'd been wondering about that for 22 years... thank God I can sleep easy tonight.

8 • 
Avatar image for Runeweaver
Runeweaver

502

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

If you compared it to Batman and Robin it should have won an Oscar.

6 • 
Avatar image for LeoKRock
LeoKRock

467

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Batman Forever did "Suck", Keaton was right

7 •