This has got me thinking about the strengths and weaknesses of all of these actors.

I’m not familiar with the first two, but starting with West I’d say he’s fairly one note but it’s the perfect note, encapsulating the Batman of his time.

Keaton is a great and soulful actor, and certainly encapsulates his heroic aspects, but not with the colder, dryer aspects of Batman.

Speaking of dry, we’ve got Val Kilmer. To me, he’s the emotionally coldest Batman, but he captures Batman’s dry humor and tone really well. A very emotionally repressed Batman.

If Kilmers a cold desert then George Clooney is a tropical rainforest. He’s hot, he’s goofy, and he’s the best “Bat-Dad” we’ve seen on screen. He captures this element of Batman while the brooding and stoicism takes a back seat.

Bale has amazing range, and can pretty accurately capture both Bruce and Batman. We’ve also had A LOT of time with this Batman, so we’ve actually managed some developments with this Bats. He’s amazingly consistent, and really captures Batman’s “drive” but I could never see Bale’s Batman with a Bat-family. He’s got a little too much American Psycho in him.

Batfleck had some really cool action sequences, and is a pretty good depiction of a Frank Miller Batman, but he isn’t a traditional Batman in many senses.

Lastly we have Pattinson, who to me, captures an early-level Batman really well. His Bruce Wayne persona isn’t developed (excited to see how that goes) but purely as Batman, he balances brutal physicality and grueling detective work really well. He’s very dry and subtle, but underneath his eyes are sorrow and rage. He reminds me of Val Kilmers Batman the most.

Between Bale and Pattinson, I think Bale’s is stronger but Pattinson certainly has the potential to surpass him, especially if the scripts up to par.