OPINION: I was as surprised as anyone when Ben Affleck was named the new Batman by Warner Bros. While I know I will be incurring the Wrath of Khan from a certain segment of Deadline readers for saying this, I do not share the alarm expressed by just about all 300+ Deadline commenters who’ve condemned the move and feel it’s awful for Affleck, Warner Bros, and humanity as a whole.
Related: Ben Affleck To Play Batman In Warners’ Batman-Superman Pic
This is the biggest Affleck surprise I can recall since I saw Gone Baby Gone and was surprised to see that he was a helluva filmmaker. I guess what I’m saying is, Affleck has earned some rope from us; he knows what he is doing. I know he’s read the script, and he loves the concept. After watching Robert Downey Jr unexpectedly (at the time) establish himself as a global superstar after he auditioned for and won over Marvel for Iron Man, I see a lot of upside for Affleck to bolster his global viability, without a lot of career risk. This is a giant coup for the fledgling Greg Silverman-Sue Kroll regime at Warner Bros. Not only in their effort to create global hits, but also in their effort to strengthen studio ties to Affleck after the turbulent exit of Jeff Robinov (who’ll be looking to bring guys like Affleck over if and when he ever takes the top film job at Fox).
Related: Superman Sequel Will Feature Batman In “Explosive New Film”
Even though I couldn’t understand all of the gravelly dialogue lines he delivered from beneath the Batmask, Christian Bale’s three turns as the Caped Crusader gave him global cred. They didn’t discount his other screen performances, either. That’s because, like Affleck and Downey, Bale wasn’t a newcomer when he took the job (newbies from George Reeves to Christopher Reeve and Brandon Routh seem to get imprinted by the role and disappear after). His Batman persona also didn’t stop Oscar voters from giving Bale the trophy for his performance in The Fighter.
Affleck isn’t the same guy he was when he made 2003′s Daredevil, or when he hurt his career by starring with off-screen squeeze Jennifer Lopez in Gigli. After that, he smartly worked his tail off to write his career a second act as a writer-director who stars in his own films. That is his identity now. He’s the guy who directed, produced and starred in the reigning Best Picture Oscar winner Argo, and he has The Town and Gone Baby Gone under his belt. Name another filmmaker outside of Christopher Nolan whose last three films stack up with that kind of quality? Even if he moonlights as Batman, it doesn’t change that true identity. And I thought he did a great job acting in Argo and The Town.
Also, those painful career lessons made Affleck shrewdly selective. If this works, he will have created a great role he can return to in between his directorial outings, the same way that Downey will do for future Avengers installments. Affleck won’t have to carry these movies himself, and I’d be surprised if he made a freestanding Batfilm.
I have been waiting for Warner Bros to turn a corner with its DC Comics crimefighter universe, beyond Batman and Superman. They’ve taken a step in that direction even if it is by combining those two characters. Now, they have a bona fide leading man in the fold (because Henry Cavill could not pack a movie house right now if he wasn’t wearing the red cape). Suddenly, the next step, the inevitable Justice League film, looks intriguing and I bet more big names will enlist by the time that movie gets made. Sure, I’d feel better if Nolan was still steering it all, but a lot of people liked Zack Snyder’s Man Of Steel. The DC franchise effort seems to be in good hands. And imagine if Affleck really likes the job enough to rescind his previous pass and direct that Justice League movie?
Now, I know Batman doesn’t work for everybody and that George Clooney had a famously awful time battling Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Mr Freeze character in Batman & Robin. But that was just a flat-out misfire with such cringe-worthy campy dialogue that I recall Clooney’s prankster pals creating a For Your Consideration roadside billboard they knew he would see while driving, that had him pictured as Batman uttering the line he said while apprehending the villain: “Freeze, Freeze.” Those mistakes weren’t made under Nolan’s ,and if Snyder and the studio can ace this movie and follow it with a Justice League ensemble two-thirds as sharp as The Avengers, Marvel will have real superhero competition on its hands for the first time.
Well before Kevin Feige took the reins and Disney paid $4 billion for Marvel, it’s worth remembering that superhero factory spent decades wandering the wilderness with a trail of bad movies, awful rights deals and a bankruptcy. Now, Marvel rivals Pixar for quality control. What I’m saying is, nobody knows if these moves work until you see the movie. On paper, landing Affleck is a potential game-changing move for Warner Bros and DC Comics to use a Batman-Superman pic as a way to finally launch a Justice League franchise that will spawn spinoffs of other characters like Wonder Woman, films that are hard to launch cold.
As for those people signing online petitions against Affleck, I bet they were the same yokels raging when Daniel Craig was named to succeed Pierce Brosnan as James Bond. That worked out pretty well. Does anyone really think these naysayers will miss a movie that has Batman and Superman squaring off for the first time in a major studio feature?
Get Deadline news and alerts FREE to your inbox...
From the LA Times… 1988
“Mr. Mom as Batman?
July 03, 1988
So Michael Keaton has been cast as Batman/Bruce Wayne?
He might have made a good Joker, but his comic style, which he seems unable to shake (but can amplify), has doomed this promised “serious” treatment of Bob Kane’s character to the same tired, boring level of artificial “camp” that made the TV series a hit yet simultaneously doomed it to an early cancellation.
The painful lesson of “Superman III”–when you don’t treat venerable superheroes with respect the audience rejects the property–has been ignored in this cynical, opportunistic attempt to capitalize on the success of “Beetlejuice” (same director, same star).
The Sam Hamm script that director Tim Burton is filming has many blunders, but does treat the characters basically seriously. Obviously, in casting Keaton, Burton is rejecting this approach altogether and going after a manic comedy.
Batman has been a popular character for almost five decades–not because he is a figure of comedy, but precisely because he is \o7 not\f7 , especially in the last couple of years. By ignoring this, by casting a clown as Batman, Warner Bros. and Burton have defecated on the history of Batman and on the hopes of those who appreciate the character and his potential.
Better they should have filmed Frank Miller’s “Batman: the Dark Knight Returns.” But that would have required courage, taste and imagination.
ALLAN B. ROTHSTEIN”
The funny thing is, I actually championed Michael Keaton as Batman, despite his up-’til-then repertoire of zany comedy characters. And, upon viewing the final product, I thought he did an admiral job and was ultimately impressed. In fact, to this day, I still see him as THE Batman.
And, yes, I was a fan of the cheesy television series with Adam West, but I was able to completely separate Tim Burton’s vision (despite Nicholson’s campy – albeit fantastic – turn as the Joker – still better than Ledger’s later portrayal – blashpemy!) from the series’ style.
And I rate Tim Burton’s “Batman” as still the best of any Batman film to date. How can anyone forget those awesome scene transitions (e.g. as the corner of Batman’s cape disappears out of frame with a “whoosh”), shot as if straight out of the comic book pages with the characters literally springing to life from their two-dimensional illustrations?
I shivered when Val Kilmer was announced to “fill” his cape, and my worst fears were realized when I saw “Batman Forever”. And I nearly pulled the skin from my face when George Clooney was cast as the caped crusader and, again, my worst fears were realized upon seeing the results in “Batman & Robin”.
I had faith in Christian Bale, and his Batman proved to be a decent updating of the character, though the current trend of turning superheroes and spies (hello, Jason Bourne) into MMA/invincible supersoldiers detracted from Nolan’s franchise.
Now, Ben Affleck? Well, let’s just say, if my previous prejudgments and subsequent validations (for me, anyway) indicate anything, I’m not going to like this version of Batman.
It’s “admirable” job, not “admiral”.
And as sheer popcorn comic-book entertainment goes, Batman Forever was as good, if not better, than any of the Burton films. It’s Batman & Robin that was an unqualified disaster.
Anyone who states that “Batman Forever was as good, if not better, than any of the Burton Films” is obviously retarded. You, sir, are absolutely retarded. I don’t know how you learned to type, or what you use to protect your keyboard from the drool that constantly oozes forth from your mouth, but please do the rest of us a favor and take your absolutely retarded commentary elsewhere.
Why do you feel you have to call people names who disagree with you? Why is the word retarded even in your vocabulary? Why is it necessary to disparage someones else’s opinion? Are you that childish, that insecure, that intolerant of anyone and anything that doesn’t fit with your personal world view? Especially about a pretend story about a pretend person that has not real impact on life at all. Here’s a suggestion. “I don’t agree with you at all. I think bla, bla, bla, bla.”(and give real, thoughtful, substantive reasons for your argument.) It’s how real adults discuss their differences. Then again for someone who uses the word retarded as a invective, that might be quite a stretch for you.
It’s “as good as, if not better than, any of the Burton films.”
No one is above the law, not even the grammar police.
Thank you.
I still rank Keaton’s Bruce Wayne as the best interpretation of all the movies. He always seemed haunted and troubled, not like the dashing, James Bond type personas the subsequent actors tried to pull off. His Bruce Wayne was brilliant but introverted. You got the feeling that he just wanted to be Batman all the time.
Hell, cast him as an older Batman. Seeing him revisit that character would ad such depth to the part,
I also really liked Michael Keaton as Batman. His Batman was much more interesting than the others. And the first Batman had a sense of fun. The Bale Batmans are so gloomy. And Keaton knew when to jump ship.
That’s why it’s called “The Dark Knight”.
Those version were totally different from the TV series take off. This explores BatMan’s darker side etc…. Not the campy fun BatMan of the TV series.
This is fundamental in understanding the two choices for the movies. Campy fun BatMan, or dark and troubled BatMan?
Seriously, these are (supposed to be) like two different movies.
Keaton was a beast in the role. I’ll always see him in that role.
Spot on comment.
Why don’t we petition Warner Brothers to have Keaton do The Dark Knight Returns, then?
Hell, I’m happy to read that I am not the only one out there who believes Michael is the one and only Batman.
I agree wholeheartedly.Hollywood refuses to look at the CHARACTER of Batman/Bruce Wayne and for that matter James Bond (I don’t care how much money those Craig films made, they’re just awful). And for heaven’s sake Batman is not James Bond like the Nolan films make him out to be.He is a tortured, dysfunctional noir vigilante-hero, NOT a dashing ‘superhero’.
Did you watch the Nolan films? All they were about was the development of Bruce Wayne’s character….all you Keaton fans must be in th 40-50 demo still hanging on to your glory days. News flash, mobile phones are cordless now
KWilson
Bale sucked super hard in DKR. His contorted side talking nonsensical verbally indistinguishable lines only iced the crapcake fight scenes and bastardized Bane(mini-sized with a sean connery voice)/ knightfall storyline was far beyond any Batman canon. You must hate Batman if you can see how hard that everything about that movie blew.
UH, The Bond Movies starring Daniel Craig were not awful at all, were you blindfolded and tricked into watching Pierce Brosnan and Roger Moore Bond films?!
Yes! Would LOVE to see Michael Keaton play Batman again. (or see him in anything – what happened to his features career?!)
Err…
Didn’t anyone see “Clear History”? See that first, then think about signing a petition to get Keaton suited up again.
Sorry to see that this chat room is loaded with the 45-60 crowd. Bale is the one and only Batman. Keaton was great, but Bruce Wayne has got to have some semblance of dashing to him in addition to the constipation, impotence and nightmares… When you really think about it, we should be more worried about what Zac Snyder will do with Affleck than what Affleck will do with Batman.
The Michael Keaton/Tim Burton movies are not Batman. That’s Burton applying his weirdness to the mythos.
Burton himself said he wasn’t a fan of the comics and didn’t use them much as source material. That explains the Joker killing Bruce Wayne’s parents. They got a couple of pages of the Moore/Bolland Killing Joke right, aside from that, not much of anything.
I love when random, unnamed people on the internet declare things like “I championed” or “As I’ve been saying for years.” Nobody knows or cares who you are. Your statements are meaningless and you have no impact. Go do something real.
Irony.
Forget it…it’s chico’s world and no one knows.
Lol…seriously, the irony is lost on him.
My favorite concept.
And the reason I am NOT replying to Chico.
Chico — no one cars about your comment. You do understand that? Like no one cares about this comment, either. We are all writing to and for ourselves.
I care.
Damn right, Chico. Now apply your wisdom to yourself, get out of the bedroom and go get a life. Time’s running out and trolling on the web is one of the saddest ways to waste your life. Good luck.
Except Chico was only talking to the commenters here, which he can affect or at least get a response from, not the wider world who couldn’t care less what anybody on here is “championing.”
Who are you?
People WORLWIDE have SPOKEN! 50,000 signed PETITIONS in 1 day! NO Ben BATMAN!
Point 1: STOP COMPARING Aflac to other actors who can act–Keaton, Ledger(rip), etc.
Point 2: Those actors didn’t have the HUGE FAME NEGATIVE BAGGAGE Aflac has (horrific Gigli, Daredevil, Bad taste in women JLo ghetto, gambling and arrogant persona, Toot-toot-tootsie roll dick reference, etc.)!
Keaton doesn’t get the credit he deserves for re-inventing Batman. That hushed, menacing whisper manner of speaking that he adopted for the character has been copied by pretty much everyone (except Clooney) who has followed after him. Including Bale and the animated series.
Or maybe both Keaton and Bale are smart actors that did their research and found that there are references to the “hoarse” voice that Bruce uses as Batman as far back as the mid-80s (see Knightfall)???
Herp-derp!!!
Only works if Matt Damon is Robin.
And then the next Batman and Robin with Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson.
That was funny!
Scholars with encyclopedic knowledge none of you are not and neither was the author of the quoted article. Keaton had at least shown his dark side the year prior in Clean & Sober (which no one saw, hence the outrage). Dude had range and proved it.
I would also like to point out that the author of quoted article had no idea what he was talking about then. In that sense, nothing’s changed.
Good call. Clean and Sober was the thing that assured me Keaton could handle it
I’m confused by your double negative, but I get the gist of your comment.
Yes, Keaton showed serious promise in “Clean and Sober”, which is why I, for one, supported his casting as Batman. “Clean and Sober”, however, was released one month after Rothstein’s article was published, so Rothstein may not have yet had the chance to see it before composing his rant. Perhaps, he would have changed his tune if he had waiting another month; perhaps not.
Michael Keaton for Bruce Wayne in the live action Batman, Beyond. Almost the correct age.
Affleck was the third choice for the role after it was turned down by Woody Allen and Danny DeVito.
I would actually prefer Woody Allen to Affleck. He at least has more than one emotion. My thought was that Bill Paxton and Keanu Reeves were both busy
Keep spinning for the Affleck machine, Mike. You and all the team Affleck posters and friends above.
I do admire the attempt to compare this to the Keaton casting 20 years ago. Or to a lesser extent, the Ledger casting. The difference was, they were actually, you know, good actors. Not a block of wood like Ben Affleck. Yes, he’s wooden. Least interesting guy in every film he’s in. He’s had his shot at male action stardom as Jack Ryan and Daredevil and failed. What critic worth his salt has ever hailed one of his performances? His best acting work was as B-actor and block of wood George Reeves in Hollywoodland.
But on a more basic level– chicks may like Affleck. But women will not drive the Box Office of a Batman film. Men will, or men won’t. Specifically, young men. Affleck has no testosterone, no badass credibility whatsoever. So he can’t act and isn’t even interesting as an actor, he’s metrosexual and doesn’t have a lick of obsession or the intensity. You mention Daniel Craig? Daniel Craig actually HAS intensity and you know, looks like he could beat someone up.
“But Ben’s an international star!” Really? Even in his most recent outings, Jeremy Renner was the best thing in the Town and Affleck as a Latino in ARGO was laughable. He was the one weak link in his own film. Thank God he cast Alan Arkin and John Goodman.
WB execs, keep reassuring yourselves with the Keaton comparison… This guy is toxic to the core fans and you and WB just don’t get it. I have it on good authority that Kevin Feige is over-the-moon, and you absolutely have the biggest piece of tentpole miscasting maybe ever.
You don’t get Batman, and you think this is just some fringe group of fans that will pay to see it anyway. This article proves how out of touch WB continues to be. Bombs away!!!
You’re exactly right on all counts but you don’t understand Warner Bros. They don’t see this as a solo Batman movie. Nor is it a straight sequel to Superman. It’s their way of leading up to Justice League. That’s all they care about. They are terrible cowards. There is no logical reason to combine Batman with Superman after just one new Superman movie. But they are doing it to compete with Marvel this is how desperate they are at WB.
Henry Cavill did a good job and he deserves to have a sequel with just him in it as the only superhero. But Warners is too afraid to do this. They also don’t want to risk rebooting Batman all over again. Chris Nolan was able to do it but they don’t have faith that lightning will strike twice so they are doing Superman Meets Batman instead.
The irony here is that they had a great Superman vs. Batman script 10 years ago that Wolfgang Petersen wanted to direct. They also had JJ Abrams Superman script that should have been made. Warners is a screwed up studio and now with the new team running the place they think this is their route to Marvel sized success. Let them do what they want. If it flops in 2015 they will all be out of their cushy jobs and a new team will take over.
You are spot-on with your comment that WB is desperate: so far, it is in the red this year and is down to The 300 II and The Hobbit, DoS, to pull its buns out of the fire for this year. If they don’t rake in the mega-big bucks, the studio execs may well lose their jobs long before this film is released.
I think that’s why Affleck was cast over some more inspired (although less well-known) choices: Warners is making what it believes is a sure-bet in casting Batman, hoping to ride the tails of his Oscar. As Deep Throat said, “follow the money.”
I’m sure they thought that Clooney was a sure-bet as well.
I couldn’t agree more. At the end of the day we can only rant and then shut up. like Harry said – “Let them do what they want. If it flops in 2015 they will all be out of their cushy jobs and a new team will take over.”
What a bunch if retards. America is in decline because of stupid people like the posters that could probably help make a change to this world if they found something else but reading comic books.
@Reality Man “women will not drive the Box Office of a Batman film. Men will, or men won’t. Specifically, young men.” Really? I’ve been going to any superhero/comicbook/genre movie that looked good (ad some that didn’t!) since I was a kid – and back then, I was taken by my Mom who was just as interested to see them as I was. I’m not an outlier.
As for the Affleck thing, I’m really on the fence. Daredevil was atrocious, but not only because of Affleck. The movie had many, many problems. Plus, Affleck was a drunk back then, and he’s ‘cleaned up, found Jesus, things are good, or so I hear…’ I’m pretty sure that last bit was a song quote (Weezer), but you get the picture. I’m willing to give him a chance to prove himself because I believe in second chances and I like being surprised.
I agree with that critique. He was awful.
Ben will be great!
Don’t ever compare Daniel Craig and Ben Affleck. You come off sounding like someone who has no business in show business.
They are a different species as far as I’m concerned.
I knew Batman. Batman was a personal friend of mine. And Ben Affleck is no Batman.
Exactly. Personally, I think Ben’s a nice guy who’s come a long way personally and professionally. To boot, becoming an impressive director, far surpassing whatever acting chops he had.
That being said, you can see the threads for the cloth here: this isn’t about Batman or Justice League. This is about WB giving their golden boy their best toy in the shop for free, just to keep him at WB, NOT about Affleck’s ability to play Batman.
Need anybody be reminded, this is just how we wound up with Schumacher.
WB stupidly sees Batman as just another property. This is how Marvel is different: Iron Man was a B hero at best until they got the right people for the job, and the rest is history
No he won’t.
Agreed. Ben is a better director than he is an actor. Most of the time he talks like he has marbles in his mouth. He has a hair bit more acting range than Keanu Reeves. I could care less as to who they cast. Why? Because I don’t have a dog in this race. My money isn’t invested into it. But, I feel sorry for the hardcore fans.
It’s not so much the wooden acting of Affleck that will ruin this Batman, as it is the whole superhero genre has pretty much run its course. As an example, let World War Z be the end and allow the “Zombie” genre to go out on a high (box office) note.
One only has to think of Southpark to imagine what the cops would say if a guy showed up in a Batman suit “in real life.” “Why don’t you go home, pal, before you get yourself hurt.”
It’s over, Johnny.
World War Z? A high note? It was a godawful film and total fail. Brad Pitt’s interpretation of the book scored five zeros.
Yes, World War Z sucked, but so far it’s pulled in over 500 million box office world wide. Since the Fanboys won’t get fooled again, they should forget any thoughts about a sequel and take the money and run.
Ben will be great? When was he ever great? Face it, the guy can’t act. He’s a top phony, but like most of the phonies in Hollywood he makes money on the incredibly stupid people who go to his horrendously moronic performances. Don’t blame this vaporous idiot. Blame the thousands of the great unwashed.
EXCELLENT, Carlos!
YOU, Sir, NAILED it!
But I hope we’ll hear more about villains (Lex and The Joker?) soon! They’ll decide if this movie is successful or not!
This whole thing sounds so absurd, it must be a publicity stunt.
Matt Damon as Lex! ROFL
Respectfully disagree, sir. Affleck is best only when playing Affleck. His acting outside what appears to be his own personality is, at best, strained. Of course, I also thought GBG vastly overrated and THE TOWN an absolute mess from concept on down, so maybe that shows how far apart our opinion picnic tables are on this one.
Regardless, a well-written and thoughtful piece. The proof shall be in 2015′s pudding!
All of Affleck’s movie thus far have been overpraised messes. This last one, the one with the Academy Award, really was incredibly poor. Sorry, but I just couldn’t bring myself to care whether or not those people were rescued. And why should I? The film barely even introduces them to us, let alone bother to flesh them out properly as characters.
As a director, he’s poor. As an actor, he may be even poorer. Which is odd because, on a personal level, he appears to be a very charismatic guy. At least in interviews.
Terrible choice for Batman.
I agree with both original comment and reply.
“The Town” was one of the worst movies I have ever seen; terrible in all respects.
“Argo” was a revisionist’s account of an incredibly tumultuous time in history.
But those are criticisms of him as a filmmaker (though he was also, merely, playing “Ben Affleck” in those films).
“Daredevil” deserved its spot on my Ten Worst List, primarily for Ben Affleck’s weak portrayal of the title character.
I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point well enough.
Mark this down. Test audiences will LAUGH at Ben Affleck as Batman a year from now. WB will have to figure out how to recut his performance. But there will be no way to completely cut him out of the movie. When the trailer comes out, it will be mocked online mercilessly.
Does the Joker work at Warner Bros? I think he must, only he could be twisted enough to do this. The Clown Prince of Crime finally figured out a way to destroy the Batman. He cast Ben Affleck.
“The Clown Prince of Crime finally figured out a way to destroy the Batman. He cast Ben Affleck.”
Awesome! The Joker is clever indeed.
Ok, that is a perfect comment…….you are correct and he has destroyed the Batman!
The guy is very talented and has proven so as a director, writer and actor. Enough said, really.
Then you have really low standards for what makes a great movie and actor. bad move for WB. Marvel has nothing to worry about, especially when Guardians of the Galaxy gets released and wipes the box office with this terrible match up. I feel sorry for Cavill. These idiots always seem to ruin Superman and they had a really good shot of making it happen with Cavill.
Thank you. Gone Baby Gone was okay at the beginning, if only because of Amy Ryan’s great performance, but it totally fell apart by the end. The Town is one of the most overrated movies of the past few years and was predictable, formulaic shlock fest with one one strong performance (Renner) but that was about it. Argo was meh and only won anything because Hollywood likes to be lionized by itself. I don’t get this move. I hope it backfires but I won’t be seeing the movie anyway because Superman is about as lame of a character as there is so it really doesn’t matter what I think about casting.
Well said!
This coming from The Walkin’ Dude…
You really think anyone outside of Los Angeles cares how good a move this is for Warner Bros.? That’s the wrong angle. Of COURSE it’s a good business decision and Affleck will cash in nicely, but that’s not what the fans are complaining about. You lack perspective.
The better move for WB would have been to cast someone on the rise like Cavill was prior to MoS. People will show up for this regardless – they didn’t need a big name star as Batman. So it’ll cost them more money with Affleck and it’s already cost them priceless cache with the fans. This is no slam dunk.
You’re right: that would have been the smartest move for Warner AND it would have saved a boatload of cash. That said, I think the author did a fair job on his analysis. And it’s time people give Ben a break. But on the business end, your spot on. Warner could have made a better bet.
In my position as a consumer, it is not my job to ‘give Ben a break’. He has earned the comments that people are posting thru his ability to act.
Every time I think of Ben as the Batman, I flash back to Daredevil. Weakest portrayal of a super hero ever. He did not inspire me at all. If it was not written into the script that Dare Devil wins, the Kingpin in that movie would have needed nothing more than to send a couple of gang initiates over to whoop some DD ass and the matter would have been finished.
Batman is a dark, brooding character. Just his voice alone is not a fit for Batman. Now, if he wanted to play Curly on the next 3 Stooges film, I say go for it.
“In my position as a consumer, it is not my job to ‘give Ben a break’. He has earned the comments that people are posting thru his ability to act.”
Then don’t go see it.
The re-introducing of Batman this soon after the Bale/Nolan trilogy as well as it being a part of a Man of Steel sequel is the real issue here. Any subsequent mistakes are just sprinkles on the poop sundae.
Amen Mike. Amen. Let’s not forget how WB and the film-makers were attacked when they cast what most people referred to as “the gay cowboy” as The Joker.
And rightly so.
Am I the only one who was not impressed with Heath Ledger’s Joker?
hopefully yes, yes you are.
Yep. You’re on your own on that one.
Ah, so the old adage is NOT true:
You CAN fool all of the people all of the time!
Oops. I did it again.
Correction: The adage is still true, because I remain unfooled.
Most definitely on your own…Ledger OWNED that role!
Then, I am very proud to separate myself from the mass audiences.
Glad you are so proud to separate yourself from intelligent thought.
yes, u r an idiot
Nope…
I didn’t care for Ledger, either.
My live-action Joker favorites are Cesar Romero and Jack Nicholson but I still like “Luke’s” version better.
And aside from Adam West’s Batman, which was a decent adaptation of the late 1940s/1950s era of Batman, the other live-action Batmen have been a mess.
The best adaptation I’ve seen by far was the 1990s animated TV series version which most of you seem to be unfamiliar with or won’t acknowledge as a superior adaptation. Sorry, but the live-action from 1989 onward is a mess. Only the 1940s serials are worse.
It’s a sign of DC and WB’s failure that most of you have never read a Batman comic let alone seen any of the animated movies… The live-action films really are a sorry mess.
P.S. –
You have got to be kidding about Affleck! Only people in Hollywood like the guy. I don’t particularly hate him myself nor do I take it as personally as other people but I have been struck by the fact that he’s never impressed me as being charismatic… Quite the opposite — I’ve found him repellant and just unlikeable for some reason every time I’ve seen him on film. (My reaction to Downey, Jr., has been quite the opposite and he rehabilitated a character Marvel tried its best to destroy for over a decade..)
I’m willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt in real life but I’ve never cared for the circling-wagons defense Hollywood does for very questionable casting. It’s very disingenuous and self-serving.
Oops! Make that TWO idiots.
I will go as far as saying he was overrated. It would be an exaggeration to say that he “owned the role”.
Uhhh….Ledger was AMAZING! In my lifetime, I think Hoffman in ‘Midnight Cowboy’, Brando in ‘Godfather’, Jolie in ‘Girl interupted’, Crowe in ‘A Beautiul Mind’, Washington in Malcolm X, Day-Lewis in ‘Gangs of New York’ Decaprio in ‘What’s Eating Gilbert Grape’ and Swank in ‘Boys Don’t Cry’ were the ultra high watermarks. Ledger’s performance was mesmerizing.
WOW a bunch of crap movies you couldn’t pay me to sit through. GAG!
It doesnt matter who they cast America is sick of hollyweirds agenda and they are going to lose another big chunk of coin as we all wait for it to hit netflixs.
Hold it.
Wait.
Godfather and Midnight Cowboy are crap movies?
Don’t forget about Lou Costello in Abbot and Costello Meets Frankenstein!
Actually, I think that quite a large portion of his success is to be ascribed to the make-up artist.
Bringing up Heath Ledger doesn’t make much sense. If I didn’t know beforehand that Ledger was playing The Joker, I wouldn’t have known. The makeup completely changed his appearance. Plus, Ledger had shown previously that he had range. He used his range to create a manic character. The voice he gave to the Joker was mesmerizing. He was so dedicated to becoming the Joker that its affects took hold in his personal life. That’s true dedication. That’s why Ledger succeeded.
Will they completely change Affleck’s face for the movie like Nolan did with Ledger? I doubt it. Does Affleck have that kind of skill or dedication to do anything remotely like what Ledger did? I HIGHLY doubt it. The WB casting Affleck is like a gambler betting on a 3 legged horse in the Kentucky Derby.
Bringing up Ledger was intended to make a point about casting, in general, with respect to this franchise.
But I’m not sure I understand your argument. Affleck is cast to play Batman; not the Joker.
Excellent, excellent article. I couldn’t agree more. I like Affleck; sure, he was rather awful as Daredevil, but, as you clearly say, this could be a big game changer for WB and DC. I loved The Town, and well, Argo, speaks for itself.
I love him at the new Batfleck … and, say Ah Go Fuck Yourself if you can’t jump on board it.
btw: How great was Michael Keaton in that truly, horrific Larry David crap fest? What a waste of time … just saying!
Never heard of the town but argo was just socialist propaganda that Americans have had enough of.
“Never heard of the town but argo was just socialist propaganda that Americans have had enough of.”
Um, how?
I think Affleck directing Justice League would be fascinating; I hope he reconsiders it once he gets this first film under his belt.
I agree word for word. Excellent piece Mike!
Yeah, no. So is Deadline going to do a point/counterpoint, or just start a regular feature begging audiences to like casting decisions? Stop trying to take the poor WB publicist’s job Mike, they’re going to have a rough enough time as it is!
Man of Steel was disappointing and uninspired, I regretted taking my kid, we’re not going to the second one in theaters. The end.
What I find fascinating, is now most of the blogs and entertainment magazines/columns are running long detailed articles on why Affleck is just perfect and most of them say the exact same thing. Not accusing the powers that be at Warner of providing talking points…or maybe I am. Just a bit too pat. And really a shame of that is the case as that means these folks who are supposed to be independent have been co-opted.
Shades of old school MGM controlled publicity. Maybe Old Hollywood is making a comback.
Bingo. The authors of all the “Five Reasons Why Affleck is Perfect for Batman” all want to get continued interview access once production begins. You don’t get that intimate access if you flame the casting choice. The bloggers and web reporters know this which is why they are all parroting the studio talking points on this. They want to be invited to the press junkets and they want to be able to sit down with Affleck and Snyder at Comic Con a year from now. Warner publicists keep very accurate notes of which internet writers give them good press and which ones give them bad press. Entertainment Weekly is owned by Time Warner. They get the best access and everyone else has to stand in line but they all follow the lead of EW and everyone knows if they want to be treated well by the studio they better toe the line.
And Empire Magazine is owned by Warner Brothers, so anything it prints in regard to the studio is obviously biased.
Or maybe it’s because critics/entertainment writers are quite rightly waiting to judge the entire movie on its own merits once it comes out, rather than support kneejerk casting bashing of the type that has been proven wrong on several recent occasions.
It’s true Ben Affleck isn’t the same guy as he was in 2003 but I still feel he isn’t that great of an actor. He does far better directing and writing. His performance depends on the director but considering that I found MOS to be a disappointment and that the same team will return except for a reduced role for Christopher Nolan, Im worried.
I’ll refrain from copy/pasting all of yesterday’s comments into this. But it’s tempting.
You just compared RDJ to Affleck. Acting wise. That’s just silly. He’s NOT a good actor. Whether anyone likes his directing efforts or not.
Agreed. I respect Mike Fleming Jr.’s writing , but Ben Affleck should never be compared to Robert Downey Jr. ( even though I want him to do real movies again ) , Christian Bale , nor Daniel Craig. Affleck’s acting is mediocre at best. This guy mostly gives wooden and lightweight performances . Ben is another A-list film star that did not study acting.
I respect Affleck’s directing work with his past few films, yet I would never call him a brilliant filmmaker. I didn’t care for the ridiculous ending of both The Town & Argo. Also , Argo never had any overwhelmingly since of fear or dread , and it was a movie that dealt with terrorists . Plus , that film was very paint-by the-numbers to me .
Ben Affleck will do fine if the story and script are good. Man of Steel was an okay movie with okay global box office. It wasn’t Iron Man or the Avengers.
The Batman series which made Warner Bros big bucks are the ones DIRECTED by Chris Nolan…not Zack Snyder even with Nolan’s help.
Good story…big box office. Fair story…fair box office and on down the line. Affleck is being smart going along for the ride to potential paydays (sequels) he has never seen before, and will probably never see again.
Any casting decision that requires an impassioned plea on Deadline to accept the casting is not a good decision, Mike. And BTW, it’s “yokels” like me who pay to see films like “Man of Steel” three times in theaters, while people like you get to see them for free.
I strongly urge the creative parties involved in this project to reconsider their decision.
One thing that posters on here seem to be missing is that these superhero pics are geared to 12 to 14 year olds. Their the ones who will be going to see it in drives, not us. And I don’t think many kids that age will have a problem with Affleck.
This article only talks about Affleck as Batman in terms of how it will help/hurt his Hollywood reputation and star power.
The thousands of petition signers are concerned about the QUALITY OF THE MOVIE, not how it will affect Affleck’s career.
Yeah, and most of those petitioners are the same ones who bought tickets for THE AVENGERS, CAPTAIN AMERICA, and THOR, all of which in my opinion are complete and utter crap. I only made it through 20 mins of THE AVENGERS before turning it off. But the general audience ate it up just like they will this.
Are you truly trying to say Ben Affleck is any worse than Chris Hemsworth or Chris Pine-oh I mean Evans (I confuse the two smiling whiteboys)??? At least Ben can direct. Hey, if Terrence Malick saw something in Ben, maybe you all should just shut the f’ up.
“Smiling whiteboys?” Spike? Is that you? Don’t worry. Hang in there with your Kickstarter and don’t take your rage out on Avengers. Maybe they’ll give you a superhero movie to eff up yet.
The comparison of Affleck to Pine, Evans and Hemsworth is moot; Pine is much younger than what they’re looking for, Evans is an intelligent character actor that can transform himself from role to role, and Hemsworth as Thor has a strong, swaggering presence that I’ve never seen Affleck project.
Yes, Affleck IS worse than your ignorantly-termed “smiling white boys”.
Maybe you should watch more movies?
Of course we’re concerned because we’re the ones who are paying to see it!
For me, the amazing part is that Ben Afleck will have managed to appear as BOTH Superman (as George Reeves as Superman, close enough, in “Hollywood;and”) and Batman in major motion pictures. Top that, Christian Bale.
People are not reacting in this way because they are too stupid to see what a good business move this is for WB; rather, that’s precisely the problem, and people see it only too well. This isn’t about making the best MOS v. Batman movie possible. It is, as the article says, primarily an insider deal meant to keep Affleck with WB.
Good choice.
Ben,
I hope you love Chicken Breasts and Cross Fit.
Screw the Naysayers. They are a dime a dozen.
Kill it!
Ben will ‘kill it’ all right… literally, at the box office. WB Exec. heads should roll when this film flops.
Affleck may be good in some movies and he may be a decent director, but the man is just not right for Batman. I get that they are trying to use his name to compete with Marvel, but nothing about his casting feels right. There were other choices that would have really energized the fans and still generated interest in the general crowd.
I support him because…
Who would’ve believed that after running his career into the ground he would come back and be an Oscar winning director? He surprised everyone (except maybe those closest to him who really know him).
Why is it so impossible to believe that he may surprise you once again.
Personally, my number one choice would’ve been Eric Bana.
I think Bale bailed when he realized this was a warm up to Justice League. He wasn’t going to risk tarnishing what he created with Nolan with Justice League 1,2,3, and 4 all directed by (insert director you hate).
All I’m saying is, if he surprised the world once before…it COULD happen again.
If he’s horrible…THEN you can crucify him.
Wait and see.
We haven’t seen an uproar on this scale over a superhero film in history. Is WB willing to risk killing off two of their only viable superhero franchises, and trash any possibility of a Justice League movie after BatmanVsSuperman flops?
Lol. Define “flop” for me. It could be critically panned, but it’s still going to make bank.
For this kind of project, “flop” would be $500mm worldwide box office, but more importantly, risk killing off interest in the 2 most valuable characters in the DC universe. This would be especially harmful given DC’s complete lack of ability to make compelling movies out of any of their second tier characters (like Marvel has done for Iron Man, Thor and Captain America).
You can shave sheep many times, but skin it only once.
Yes we have, over Keaton in Batman. It’s just social media wasn’t around back then like it is today, allowing too many schlobs with time on their hands to make up asinine petitions that are supposed to be used to make the world better and for REAL issues.
But what about Affleck’s VOICE? He’s got that squeaky, whining tenor. It’s simply awful.
Warner Bros. better be looking at casting feedback or they will have a potential bomb on their hands. There must be 50 better actors for this role.
This stupid film making by petition mindset just goes to show why film studios should treat the fan boy community with the distain it well deserves.
For all the crying that comes from this loud, but small slice of the general film going audience, you would think they somehow speak for the tens of millions of people who need to show up to make this film a hit. They don’t.
Many of these “There are 50 guys who would be a better choice then Affleck” guys would cast somebody like martial artist Scott Adkins because he knows how to fight verses if he can actually act. A totally childish mindset and a perfect reason to not take the threats of these “fans” with anything beyond a “whatever.”
Truth is the vast majority of these haters will show up to see the movie opening day regardless of what they say online, just so they can go on line to bash it or claim they were with Affleck from the start.
How quickly we forget Heath Ledger getting cast in The Dark Knight and all the “Broke Back Mountain Jokes.Now days you can’t find anybody who says they were against casting Ledger
after that guy killed it as The Joker.
Just as in the case of Ledger,we won’t really know if Affleck can deliver until we see the damn movie.
I’m not Affleck’s agent and I don’t get paid to defend the guy but the overreaction to his casting is another sad example of people hating on a casting decision based off a prior film role (Daredevil) without looking at the actor’s full body of work.
Maybe he will suck as Batman, but the most important thing is that directors have the freedom to cast who they think fits a role and not what a collection of nerds who haven’t read the script and haven’t been apart of the casting process say as a knee jerk response. To do otherwise sets a bad example for the creative process when people not directly involved in a project have a say in how it comes together without knowing all the facts.
Name one role/character of which people were talking about how amazing Ben Affleck was….just one. If he’s as good as people say he is, that should be easy. The difference in this case is Heath Ledger’s performances had buzz, Robert Downey Jr’s as well. I argue Affleck has had none unless it is to talk about how horrible he was
Affleck was the bomb in Phantoms, yo!
Hollywoodland. Sad and nuanced. Even more affecting when set against his own career problems at the time. Affleck crushed it. I liked Changing Lanes, too. And Argo. So that’s three. Smart-ass.
You are absolutely right about Hollywoodland. What his career was going through at the time added to the overall feel of his performance. You really felt bad for him. Brilliant movie.
What is this nonsense? The audience was pissed about Keaton/Ledger/Craig/whatever analogy I’ve heard today, because it was outside what they had seen before. We’ve seen Affleck in big action films before, he’s mediocre. Really good director sure, but a mediocre actor.
Also “a lot of people liked Man of Steel”? Well not enough to get it past $300 million domestic or $700 million worldwide. For a superhero with Superman’s worldwide awareness? Those are OK numbers…not great.
Face it Warner Brothers this was a bad choice and you are starting with two strikes now (terrible MOS reviews, unpopular casting choice). So yes they could still hit a home run, but the odds aren’t good.
The Lone Ranger got terrible reviews. Man of Steel was mixed. It made more money than any first/origin or reboot superhero movie outside of Spider-Man and The Amazing Spider-Man.
That’s not entirely true.
The original Iron Man surpassed Man of Steel’s domestic tally and given the international markets that have opened up to the major studios since Iron Man’s release in 2008 its probably fair to say that in a like-for-like situation the original Iron Man would surpass its global takings as well. While Man of Steel obviously hasn’t been a flop I think there’s a decent argument to be made that it under performed.
Stop the madness! We all know Affleck is the wrong choice (So is making this movie right now, with the Superman reboot not even on DVD yet). Affleck as Batman feels like another Tim Burton throw back. “Make sure Ben washes the costume before he returns it.” It’s wrong to do that to the character of Batman and it won’t help Cavill or Superman either. So Bale bailed, you cannot just throw a big name in for some “star power” and figure problem solved. Neither can you hope to ride special effects all the way to the box office, that’s why Superman underperformed. Christian Bale has become such a recognizable actor now because of the Dark Knight. You don’t have to fill the void with another big name actor to get the movie goer’s interest. The character sells itself, but if you put the wrong man in the suit you risk losing the needed street cred. In this case, with the Dark knight movies, the work has been done and the character has been developed, find the right fit.
These movies are about the characters( not the actors), characters that have been developed for decades in comics, in novels, as well as the hearts and minds of every superhero fan in the world for generations. The actor has to fit the suit, not vice versa. Having a big name actor play the part can be more distracting than attracting when it comes to playing a role everyone knows so well. Henry Cavill, Christian Bale, Robert Downey Jr., Daniel Craig, even the cast of the new Star Trek movies, were all served by the role because it was bigger than them and they had to step up to deliver it right. That’s what made it work. The public did not have a familiarity with the person that over shadowed the character. That is going to be especially critical for a film where you have two icons battling it out, instead of supporting one another. If anything, casting a big name star for the villain has been consistently more successful.
The fact that Ben can just as easily step out of the role and continue to be successful in other ventures begs the question; what is his motivation for doing it in the first place? Very risky when you need him to play the role of a driven and intense individual such as Batman. Affleck will not have enough intensity or on screen action presence even with the black eye liner, a cape and molded pecks to take on a CG enhanced superman who just kicked the crap out of Krytpon’s most wanted. I’d rather see a sequel to Good Will Hunting, I’m not sure I have enough suspension of disbelief.
This comment really nails it – Ben Affleck will not provide the needed suspension of disbelief. He will indeed be a distracted. And he does not have the intensity of a Christian Bale or Daniel Craig who indeed had something to prove from the start. The kind of “unsprung coil ready to strike kind” of look intensity and inner turmoil Batman/Wayne conveys – it’s just not there and it’s hard to just pretend act that it’s there. The guy’s too comfortable – a bit like Hugh Jackman as Wolverine – he’s not exactly that character either because in real life, the man’s just too happy and content.
Read about how Christian Bale once went into an extended tirade on the set during film production on what I think was the last Batman movie, because one of the crew distracted him during a performance. The man is a driven, emotionally engage perfectionist who is totally invested in the role and has that inner rage.
Affleck? Rage? No.
What were they thinking?!
Dead on. Keaton/Craig/Ledger all had one thing in common — their acting in other films exceeded expectations (Layer Cake, Beetlejuice, and A Knight’s Tale, for example). While Affleck has shown himself to be a capable director, that has not spread to his acting ability. As many said about Argo, the only bad decision Affleck made was to cast himself in the lead. I’m not saying Affleck hasn’t had his moments (he was pretty good in The Town), but there is no evidence that he can pull off Batman.