The Big Picture: Batfleck

[Bruce]

Here is the problem - Affleck could play a great Superman.

Affleck doesn't play grim all that well, and when you get right down to it the central idea with Batman, that fear can be used to create order? That's not Affleck either.

The risk is that the director ends up taking out the strengths of Affleck in trying to mould his performance towards the strengths of Batman, ending up with neither.

It is not his acting chops really at the heart of it, it is that he doesn't quite fit the role.

 

[2xDouble]

And to the people who bring up Daredevil, yes it was 10 years ago, but let's also remember that Daredevil was not bad BECAUSE of Affleck.

Quite true. Daredevil was watchable thanks to Affleck really trying to sell the character... something the producers of Green Lantern forgot when they effectively took Ryan Reynolds out of the equation. The rest of the movie was pretty bad, but watching it again, you can tell that, even relatively half-assed compared to some of his other roles, Affleck played a decent Daredevil. Maybe that can translate into him being a decent Batman, maybe not. Time till tell.

I personally don't see Ben Affleck as Batman. Bruce Wayne, maybe, but not Batman. (He could make a pretty interesting DC villain, though... and he'd make one hell of a Flash.) I'd much rather he take on a behind-the-scenes role, adding his expertise to the direction and screenwriting. Ideally, this will happen either way. On the other hand, Affleck's style and personality is comparable to that of Michael Keaton. That's not a bad thing.

As an aside... I'd be quite interested to see Bob discuss this topic with Angry Joe [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0QWdnhW9jM] (warning, loud). They're on relatively opposite sides, but with enough common ground and cautious optimism to make it interesting. I find it very interesting that both equate "Superman vs Batman" on the same level as "Iron Man vs Thor", as something that should happen once in one scene and then everybody moves on.

I'm more concerned that Batman has the potential to completely overshadow Superman's movie... very much like the US Army did to the Transformers' movies (F you, Bay!). I just hope the writers and directors remember that this shouldn't be Batman vs Superman, this is Man of Steel 2 with special guest, the Batman. (...and in my opinion, they can tell Frank Miller's versions of these characters to drown themselves in lava.)

 

[franksands]

Bob, If the first news was that Ben Afflect was cast as Batman, I would be ok with that. I think he's a great actor, loved Argo, so no problems there. The problem is that they quoted The Dark Knight Returns and said this Batman will be a "rugged and older" Batman. The way I see it, this would be a perfect part for Mickey Rourke or Bruce Willis. They did brilliantly "rugged and older" characters in Sin City. I would pay good money to see Jonh Hartigan as Batman. As much as I like Afleck, I don't think he has the body or the face to play this part.
And another point, I completely cannot take any more of this "dark and gritty" stuff hollywood thinks all movies must be, but with MoS as the tone, how can it not be dark and gritty?
Also, Snyder's superman kills if he thinks things took long enough, so the fight with Batman should be quick.

 

[Arslan Aladeen]

As much as I like Batman, I can't really work up the energy one way or another to care about Affleck as Batman. He seems like an okay actor, better director. There are worse people to play him. I dunno, I enjoyed the Nolan Batman movies, but I think I'm a bit burned out on Batman movies for the time being.

 

[Falseprophet]

The times are changing; the world has become more dark and painful as even with all the advances in science, our humanity has become more chaotic in war, politics, and isolation.

Also, the comparisons aren't apt. They just aren't. I get bob has his issues with some of the things that snuck into modern DC films but...I mean THATS THE AGE WE LIVE IN. The world is dark and full of terrors, If i may rip someone else's schtick. comics typically represent modern thought and general feelings. If you don't like it, sorry. This is the age we live in. If you want to hide under a 'happy' movie rock, thats okay, but I for one don't want to see a Golden-Silver Age flick.

Did you realize the Golden Age of comics, when these characters were created, happened during and just after the planet was enmeshed in the bloodiest, most destructive, and pretty much most depraved conflict the human race has ever seen?

Did you realize the Silver Age happened during a period of immense civil and international strife, including the civil rights movement, terrorism, the Cuba Missile Crisis, the Berlin Wall, and the Vietnam War?

I grew up enjoying all the 80s toy related properties Bob likes to wax nostalgic about--while cognizant of the fact that the USSR had nuclear missiles pointed at my hometown that could reduce it to radioactive ash within 15 minutes.

While my sister and I were still toddlers, my parents saw their mortgage rate reach almost 20%. In the last 5 years, mine has almost never been more than 2.5%.

And yet, none of those things prevented our society from creating and enjoying light, comedic, hopeful, and optimistic entertainment. I swear, kids today are the wimpiest bunch of drama queens. No sense of historical perspective whatsoever.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

I'm kinda warming to the idea of him being Bats, and the idea that we could get a Dark Knight in the vein of Brave and the Bold or The Animated Series is an appealing one, certainly. A Batman who is competent, cheeky, and has fun with all his super gadgets is much more preferably to the grimdark, raspy, angsty, overly melodramatic Batman we've seen recently, so hopefully that happens.

Come to think of it, Batman was the weakest part of the best of the Dark Knight trilogy, so it's not like he's got a high bar against Bale. Against the (first two) movies, sure, but there's still plenty of ways to let Batman out without causing issue. I imagine the grimdark and angst loving crowd will be displeased, but we could do with collectively moving out of the nineties, anyway.

 

[RJ Dalton]

*stops laughing midway through the video*
Oh, wait you're serious. I'd drum up the Futurama clip about Bender laughing harder, but . . .
You're serious?

Okay, I knew Afleck turned out to be a good writer/director (that blew my mind, I'll admit), but when did he become a good actor?

 

[RaikuFA]

I'd also bringing up how Tom Hanks played some comedies before doing Philadelphia and Forrest Gump.

In related news, does anyone think Hanks would make for a great Gordon?

 

[hexFrank202]

Oh, though I do have one nitpick; I'm not saying that it's illegal to make fun of Mitt Romney or anything, but... why him? Bob also made the exact same genre of statement with Romney as the 'generic rich guy' in an earlier TGO episode. Why? Out of all the well-known rich people in America, he's far from the richest.

He was the wealthiest person to get nominated for president in years... eight years, to be exact. =\

Furthermore, he's a lot poorer than Bruce Wayne would be today adjusted for inflation. People have estimated Wayne's net worth to be somewhere around six billion. Romney hovers around two hundred million.

Also, Mittens gave away his inheritance before starting his own adult career.

 

[TwiZtah]

Fuck yes, finally, someone criticizes Batman!

He's not a hero, he knows the villains will get out of Arkham, therefore he is also indirectly responsible for the deaths of thousands.

He actually openly admits this in The Dark Knight Returns:
<youtube=vhPedOI9hZM>

Well then,if they could just take this mentality to the contemporary Batman and make him kill his enemies, then I'm happy.

 

[jmarquiso]

Heath Ledger was just some pretty boy actor no one saw anything in, and then The Dark Knight happened. Michael Keaton was Mr. Mom.

I do not have a problem with Affleck as Batman.

I'd like it more if he were voiced by Kevin Conroy though

 

[Machine Man 1992]

You just couldn't resist dragging your social justice agenda into this episode could you?

As for Batfleck, I'm neither excited or disappointed: I've never seen a major Afleck movie, so his reputation is second hand to me.

 

[Miroluck]

My main complaint about Affleck being in this movie (and, incidentally, him being in any role) is that his default facial expression looks really dumb to me.
About the fact that he "changed" in 10 years - everyobody's different. Not everyone change at the same rate, some people don't change at all.

 

[Machine Man 1992]

Oh, though I do have one nitpick; I'm not saying that it's illegal to make fun of Mitt Romney or anything, but... why him? Bob also made the exact same genre of statement with Romney as the 'generic rich guy' in an earlier TGO episode. Why? Out of all the well-known rich people in America, he's far from the richest.

He was the wealthiest person to get nominated for president in years... eight years, to be exact. =\

Furthermore, he's a lot poorer than Bruce Wayne would be today adjusted for inflation. People have estimated Wayne's net worth to be somewhere around six billion. Romney hovers around two hundred million.

Also, Mittens gave away his inheritance before starting his own adult career.

I did not know that. Makes me a little more sympathetic to the guy. I dislike people who are born into money, but have immense respect for people who can earn that kind of dosh themselves.

 

[Vivi22]

First up, I'm with Bob on not having an issue with Ben Affleck being picked as Batman. I was initially a bit surprised and a bit hesitant, but the man has talent and I see no reason not to wait and see, especially after the fans have been so unbelievably wrong about a lot of Batman related castings in the past.

But as a bit of a minor nitpick, is it me, or does Bob oscillate wildly between covering up his Boston accent and just not giving a shit and letting it all hang out so to speak? It's quite jarring to be honest. I wouldn't have a problem with the obvious Bostonian to be fair, but it really sticks out and gets distracting for me when he clearly tries to hide it in a lot of videos.

 

[tdylan]

"Modern comics' fixation of this particular version of this particular character embodying entitlement and vengeance by proxy, finding a way to purchase victory over a character that's supposed to embody hope and optimism is emblematic of just about everything that went wrong with modern comics."

Thank you, Bob!

Amen! I'm glad there are people like Bob in the world that can conceive, as well as put to words, these kinds of ideas. I would have NEVER thought of Batman as some rich kid that has accomplished all that he has because he was rich enough to not have to worry about paying the bills and what not, so he has time to run around the world learning how to be a master thief, vantrilloquest, ninja, mechanic, pilot, astronaut, physiicist, biologist, botanist, and whatever else the plot requires

 

[Seracen]

Ben Affleck seems to have undergone the same revival that happened to DiCaprio. Suddenly, the man could act, and act well.

I am cautiously optimistic about it. Ben Affleck wasn't the problem in Daredevil. This wasn't my original choice, but as weird as it seems, it could be cool.

Also, I don't understand the Man of Steel hate train. I enjoyed it. Sure, I'd rather have seen more of Clark getting used to being Superman, but it was good. Also unsure of the fear of being influenced by Miller. I'm not the biggest fan of Frank Miller's vision for Bats or Supes, but I don't hate it either.

While I can appreciate that I'd rather the tone be more like the animated "World's Finest" from Bruce Timm's crew, I can see room for more grit, if done properly (as long as Supes isn't a brain-dead puppet, and Bats isn't some militant thug).

 

[LordLundar]

Which episode of Good Easts did he take the frame he used to punctuate the phrase "red flag". anyways...

Not Good Eats at all. It's from Restaurant Stakeout, one of those "I'm a successful restaurant owner so I'm going to scream at you until you do what I say." shows. Unlike some of the others though this guy doesn't have any positive energy in doing the show.

 

[xgideonx]

The comparisons to Robert Downey, Jr.'s Iron Man are not valid. Iron Man was a character that had never been portrayed on film prior - let alone one that had already been portrayed in a Oscar-winning/nominated, beloved trilogy. Furthermore, and more importantly, Downey completely reinvented (quite frankly, CHANGED) the character of Tony Stark. So much so, in fact, that the comic books have now been written to mimic HIS interpretation. If you think they'll reinvent Batman from brooding dark knight into wise-cracking, "fun" character....sorry, it ain't gonna happen. Nor should it. Unlike Iron Man was before the movies, Batman was - and continues to be - routinely voted the most popular comic book hero and it's not because of his jokes or his "fun."

 

[RJ 17]

I think Afleck will make a great Bruce Wayne, but Batman I'm having a little trouble seeing.

That's what my problem with Affleck being picked for the part came from. I think he could make a very charming, charismatic, even humorously eccentric quadzillionaire such as Bruce Wayne just as Bale was able to play Bruce Wayne pretty well (at least I thought he did). It's that other half of the character that I'm more concerned about.

With regards to my thoughts on Ben as a whole: eh, his track record is what hurts him the most. I fully agree that the movies that he's written and starred in himself came out decent to good, but it's when he shows up in other people's movies that I start having concerns.

With regards to Batman as a character: I gotta disagree...kinda. People like him because he's charismatic, brilliant, and a frickin' ninja wearing a cape. Then there's always the argument that the only reason people are interested in the Batman franchise isn't even for Batman himself, but rather his rogue's gallery of villains that he goes up against. If you ask people who the most interesting person in the Batman franchise is, I'd imagine the majority would probably pick Joker or whoever their favorite villain is. Batman actually suffers from the same problem as Superman: they're both too unstoppable. There's no real challenge to their existence seeing as how Batman just Batmans the fuck out of everything while Superman just Supermans the fuck out of everything. (yes, I didn just use "Batman" and "Superman" as verbs...it's fun!) As such in order to keep their stories interesting you have to go to other characters besides the main ones. And that's where my disagreement lies: people don't like Batman because they see him as a character they can relate to...the fact that he has more money than god makes him absolutely impossible to relate to. People like him (or specifically his series) because of the colorful character's he's up against and the wild plots they come up with in order to try and beat him.