I think, for me, I need to see a Heath Ledger level of commitment from Affleck. Was I a fan of Ledger's casting as Joker? No, but he transformed himself into that character and did something unlike he has ever done before. Affleck, to me at least, is almost always playing a variation of the same guy in all his movies. He needs to somehow make me believe he has become Batman..I hope he does it.
Anyone who continues to bring up Josh Brolin. I see your Daredevil and raise you a Jonah Hex.
Brolin's probably not stable enough to rely on for a series of blockbuster films. He always seems like he's a couple benders away from turning into Nick Nolte.
Anyone who continues to bring up Josh Brolin. I see your Daredevil and raise you a Jonah Hex.
Brolin's probably not stable enough to rely on for a series of blockbuster films. He always seems like he's a couple benders away from turning into Nick Nolte.
Good old Nick, a front runner for the title role in the 1978 Superman film, don't you know!
I think, for me, I need to see a Heath Ledger level of commitment from Affleck. Was I a fan of Ledger's casting as Joker? No, but he transformed himself into that character and did something unlike he has ever done before. Affleck, to me at least, is almost always playing a variation of the same guy in all his movies. He needs to somehow make me believe he has become Batman..I hope he does it.
Heath Ledger didn't survive the "Heath Ledger" level of commitment. I don't think I would wish that on anyone.
I don't think that playing Batman requires great acting chops. You have to be able to move athletically while wearing rubber, have a great chin, and a sore throat. Affleck is more then a capable enough actor. He just comes off as soft. He can overcome this.
I think, for me, I need to see a Heath Ledger level of commitment from Affleck. Was I a fan of Ledger's casting as Joker? No, but he transformed himself into that character and did something unlike he has ever done before. Affleck, to me at least, is almost always playing a variation of the same guy in all his movies. He needs to somehow make me believe he has become Batman..I hope he does it.
Heath Ledger didn't survive the "Heath Ledger" level of commitment. I don't think I would wish that on anyone.
I don't think that playing Batman requires great acting chops. You have to be able to move athletically while wearing rubber, have a great chin, and a sore throat. Affleck is more then a capable enough actor. He just comes off as soft. He can overcome this.
I think Bruce Wayne is the harder role. Harder than Batman. It was something that Keaton did very well. (And Bale, though to me Keaton was the best Wayne).
But it may be that this movie doesn't even have Bruce Wayne in it. It might just have Batman. I mean, I doubt they would commit to it THAT hard, having us never see Affleck out of the suit. But it would be an interesting way to keep the movie more the Superman/Clark point of view.
C. a new reboot of the character just 3 or so years after a half-billion people saw what is the greatest superhero trilogy to date...
Robert Downey Jr is still going to play Tony Stark in the next Avengers movie so everything should be ok
B-)
That said, I would think the Nolan Batman movies are done in a stand alone universe and over and done with, at least I would hope so.
However if the season premier of Arrow Thea calls up Olliver and says "did you see the news about what happened in Metropolis" I would not be disappointed.
That was my point...the idea of a "stand alone universe" will get you some blank stares from most of the populous who made Nolan's Batman a 3 billion dollar franchise. We are used to multiple universes, reboots, Elseworlds, etc. but my mom and dad (as an example) don't.
The people who read comics and are hip to this, sadly, number in the TENS OF THOUSANDS... not the millions who pay to see these movies.
That's a good point but I heard a lot of people (non comic geeks) saying why did they have another origin story for Spider-man we know who Spider-man is just get to the good stuff.
People have seen the origin enough that I think you can get away with it.
Now when Affleck signs on to do the next Daredevil movie they may have to revisit the origin well, it's been a while and people might have forgotten.
My point, again, is that if they did not do the origin AGAIN in ASM, people would have no choice but to think this Spider-Man was the same as the Tobey McGuire one. How could they not? Hence, the origin redo.
Likewise, if they have a Ben Affleck Batman, with no *new* origin, people would assume he was either Bale's Batman, or the Gordon-Levitt character. It's not a matter of whether or not people remember his origin, it's whether or not people understand that he's a different interpretation of the character.
I'm not so sure. We assumed Clooney's Batman was the same as the 3 movies before, but was there really any movie reference? In Forever, they reference Catwoman, but nothing in B&R. They altered the suits, cave, vehicles, & tone.
When Begins came out, did everyone assume it was Keaton's Batman? I think with some alterations, they could pull off the Snyder Batman from Nolan's. I'd hope they stay away from any lengthy Batman origin in his "new" movie. Lets be honest, ghd movie might be a Man of Steel sequel, but its a Batman movie; hence one of my main concerns with this experiment.
M
Except Robin was held over, commissioner Gordon as held over, Alfred was held over. The house was held over. Many things let us know what was going on.
So 00-Craig is the same as 00-Bronsnan?
What things besides returning cast (house was different) let you know it was definitely the same?
Incidentally, despite the different feel & look of the movie (and of course the actor in the Bat-suit), I've always lumped B&R with the other movies of the 90s. I just don't think everything is as finite as WE make them out to be.
M
And no, of course 00-Craig is not the same as 00-Bronson. They clearly took us back to the beginning of his career. They carried over one cast member because they like Judi Dench.
In Skyfall, 00-Craig pulls out of retirement the Astin-Martin auto he was given in Goldfinger, and made reference to how he used it early in his career.
I know a lot of people dump on Affleck all the time but I don't think Daredevil was his fault as much it was the director's fault. I saw in the special features on the DD dvd that an audience couldn't sit there for long enough. The full cut is a lot better. Also, I've been going back to the Kevin Smith stuff and there is some good things there. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and hopefully his experience as a director will give him more of an insight to an actor along with what has been happening in the DC Batman and Superman movies as of late.
I know a lot of people dump on Affleck all the time but I don't think Daredevil was his fault as much it was the director's fault. I saw in the special features on the DD dvd that an audience couldn't sit there for long enough. The full cut is a lot better. Also, I've been going back to the Kevin Smith stuff and there is some good things there. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and hopefully his experience as a director will give him more of an insight to an actor along with what has been happening in the DC Batman and Superman movies as of late.
Although I think the director shares some of the criticism for DareDevil, I think its more because of certain parts of the script he wrote. The playground fight being the main portion.
As for the cut of the movie, that was actually editing. The writer/director didn't want the subplot removed because its important to the main plot. Removing it also altered the movie's feel.
I know a lot of people dump on Affleck all the time but I don't think Daredevil was his fault as much it was the director's fault. I saw in the special features on the DD dvd that an audience couldn't sit there for long enough. The full cut is a lot better. Also, I've been going back to the Kevin Smith stuff and there is some good things there. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and hopefully his experience as a director will give him more of an insight to an actor along with what has been happening in the DC Batman and Superman movies as of late.
Although I think the director shares some of the criticism for DareDevil, I think its more because of certain parks of the script he wrote. The playground fight being the main portion.
As for the cut of the movie, that was actually editing. The writer/director didn't want the subplot removed because its important to the main plot. Removing it also altered the movie's feel.
M
Yeah, that playground scene was a break in the flow of the story and the tone. I understand they wanted to show some wirework but why not have the hero identities do that instead of it happening in public. BTW, thanks for the correction as it has been a while since I've seen the documentary.
I just hope that Affleck doesn't try to copy what Bale did and instead tries to make it fit in with the story being told, that being said I think the separation from Bale's Batman will be hard since Goyer and Nolan will be involved somewhere in the process. Unless Affleck does something Amazing, I think the Bale legacy will always mark this film simply because of that Goyer/Nolan connection.
Big red flag for me. The thought of watching an "old/tired" Batman is as appealing as watching an "old/tired" stripper.
Three of my favorite Bat stories are "old,tired" versions of him. I've maintained one of the best parts of Kingdom Come is Bruce in the harness, because no human being can endure the regimen/torture Batman put himself through and not come out unscathed.
DKR needs no description.
Batman Beyond, while I was late to the party, has been very enjoyable as well.
I think that's going to be the focal point of the movie - if all things were truly real, there's no way Batman, a human being at his core, could ever keep up with even 1/10th of a walking solar battery.
Big red flag for me. The thought of watching an "old/tired" Batman is as appealing as watching an "old/tired" stripper.
Three of my favorite Bat stories are "old,tired" versions of him. I've maintained one of the best parts of Kingdom Come is Bruce in the harness, because no human being can endure the regimen/torture Batman put himself through and not come out unscathed.
DKR needs no description.
Batman Beyond, while I was late to the party, has been very enjoyable as well.
I think that's going to be the focal point of the movie - if all things were truly real, there's no way Batman, a human being at his core, could ever keep up with even 1/10th of a walking solar battery.
Not that Batman won't try. :)
I would disagree that in any of the examples you've used, Batman is "old and tired".
The use of the harness in Kingdom Come is a reflection of Bruce Wayne's body having been beat down with years of abuse. The harness also speaks to the will of Batman to continue the fight.
At the beginning of Dark Night Returns, Bruce Wayne is doing everything possible to keep Batman down. The struggle has aged him. It isn't until he once again embraces Batman that he begins to live again.
In Batman Beyond, Bruce Wayne and Batman are one in the same. The body is beyond repair and he has to employ agents to do the work. However, the mind is as brilliant and the will is as focused as it ever was.
I would disagree that in any of the examples you've used, Batman is "old and tired".
So what you are arguing is Batman isn't "old and tired"; he is really "old and busted". Batman should be working in the Claremont Lounge not fighting crime. The stripper comparisons keep on coming. TS should be happy.
I'm taking the article to mean he's been at the game long enough that he's no longer challenged by it, and suddenly a new player has just come on the field and made the whole sport interesting again...not that he's a tired old man who just doesn't give a crap anymore...
I'm taking the article to mean he's been at the game long enough that he's no longer challenged by it, and suddenly a new player has just come on the field and made the whole sport interesting again...not that he's a tired old man who just doesn't give a crap anymore...
I can see your interpretation. It'd have to be that way. If this the version in the unified DCU movie universe, it'd be foolish & limiting to have your anchor (apparently) be "old & tired." I think his usability would be limited if he's the Kingdom Come/DKR/Batman Beyond/Rock of Ages versions.
I'm not completely sold that legit. Its not "Dark Knight Falls" and I can't believe the 2 have script that quick. Isn't Snyder & Goyer working on other projects currently? Plus, the selfie looks a bit off; like a quick photoshop.
I'm not even convinced Robin was discussed. If you have a "tired & worn" Batman, would he have a Robin that looks to be in his mid-teens (unless they're really trying for the DKR storyline.) Also there were 3 solid Batman movies without Robin, so why add him now? Finally, the more Batman characters added, the less its a Superman movie WITH Batman.
If you read the article, you will see that the picture originated from Justin Bieber's official twitter account. Are you suggesting he photoshopped it and posted it to his fans in order to get attention or something? I'm not certain that it's a fake myself.
Comments
I don't think that playing Batman requires great acting chops. You have to be able to move athletically while wearing rubber, have a great chin, and a sore throat.
Affleck is more then a capable enough actor. He just comes off as soft. He can overcome this.
But it may be that this movie doesn't even have Bruce Wayne in it. It might just have Batman. I mean, I doubt they would commit to it THAT hard, having us never see Affleck out of the suit. But it would be an interesting way to keep the movie more the Superman/Clark point of view.
Looks like I will be on the look out for Batfleck!
As for the cut of the movie, that was actually editing. The writer/director didn't want the subplot removed because its important to the main plot. Removing it also altered the movie's feel.
M
I just hope that Affleck doesn't try to copy what Bale did and instead tries to make it fit in with the story being told, that being said I think the separation from Bale's Batman will be hard since Goyer and Nolan will be involved somewhere in the process. Unless Affleck does something Amazing, I think the Bale legacy will always mark this film simply because of that Goyer/Nolan connection.
Big red flag for me. The thought of watching an "old/tired" Batman is as appealing as watching an "old/tired" stripper.
DKR needs no description.
Batman Beyond, while I was late to the party, has been very enjoyable as well.
I think that's going to be the focal point of the movie - if all things were truly real, there's no way Batman, a human being at his core, could ever keep up with even 1/10th of a walking solar battery.
Not that Batman won't try. :)
The use of the harness in Kingdom Come is a reflection of Bruce Wayne's body having been beat down with years of abuse. The harness also speaks to the will of Batman to continue the fight.
At the beginning of Dark Night Returns, Bruce Wayne is doing everything possible to keep Batman down. The struggle has aged him. It isn't until he once again embraces Batman that he begins to live again.
In Batman Beyond, Bruce Wayne and Batman are one in the same. The body is beyond repair and he has to employ agents to do the work. However, the mind is as brilliant and the will is as focused as it ever was.
M
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/14/justin-bieber-to-join-ben-affleck-in-batman-vs-superman-as-robin.html
DC truly has no idea what they're doing.
I'm not even convinced Robin was discussed. If you have a "tired & worn" Batman, would he have a Robin that looks to be in his mid-teens (unless they're really trying for the DKR storyline.) Also there were 3 solid Batman movies without Robin, so why add him now? Finally, the more Batman characters added, the less its a Superman movie WITH Batman.
M
Seems certain to be totally fake.