 |
| He has the chin but will he have the chops to be a convincing Dark Knight? |
Ever since Zack Snyder announced the Batman/Superman meet up at Comic Con, the internet's been exploding with rumors and gossip regarding who'll be next in line to wear the cowl. Last I heard, Christian Bale had been offered close to $60 mill. to return, which is an astronomical amount to pay any actor, no matter how good. Other than that, there was only speculation about what actor might be suitable for the part. None of the names floating around, such as Ryan Gosling or Bradley Cooper, struck me as even close to being suited for Batman. Having said that, Ben Affleck didn't even enter into the equation for me. At one point his name did come up and I just dismissed him immediately, thinking that he wouldn't fit either. Truthfully, he was about the last person I would've ever imagined.
After my initial shell shock wore off and I began to think about it a little more, I tried to focus on any positive aspects of the news. I wasn't surprised at all that the majority of fans reacted in the same way had Pee Wee Herman or Woody Allen been cast, but I think they're jumping to unfair conclusions far too early. Undoubtedly, their biggest beef with Ben involves his turn as blind vigilante Daredevil in Kevin Smith's bad 2003 film. Sure, it wasn't a good film but it wasn't simply Affleck's portrayal that made it stink; it's not as if the rest of the film was incredible and he was the weak link. The movie as a whole was terrible (no offense to Kevin Smith). If you have a bad script and weak story, good actors are not gonna be enough to save the film. Just about every good actor has been in bad films. Way I see it, Affleck did Daredevil as a favor to his friend Kevin Smith rather than as a serious role. Daredevil is a much more obscure superhero; Batman is a worldwide icon that commands respect. Given the hype and pressure surrounding these upcoming DC films, Affleck will no doubt be taking this honor very seriously. The truth is that no matter who was cast, after Bale's legendary portrayal, just about anyone would be hard to picture as the new Caped Crusader, even though this is going to be a new interpretation of the character. Of course, plenty of people out there simply hate Affleck as an actor and unfortunately, there's nothing that can be done about that. As soon as the news broke, a petition was started expressing fan outrage over Affleck being cast which I'm sure will be sent to WB and which I'm also sure will do absolutely nothing to change the decision. I for one like the guy and think he's a more than capable actor. Sure he's been in some stinkers, but he's also been in some great films, most notably Good Will Hunting, The Town, and most recently Argo, just to name a few. There has to be a specific reason that he was cast for such an iconic and legendary role so early in the game, a reason that we regular folks can't see yet the same way we couldn't initially see why Ledger was cast for the Joker in Dark Knight. I'll admit I didn't see Ledger as the Joker at all when he was first cast. Like Affleck, I thought he was a good actor but couldn't see the reason based on films he'd already done such as 10 Things I Hate About You. At that point Ledger was still basically a teenage heartthrob and had only begun tackling deeper roles. However, as we know, he blow the roof off it and created one of the most terrifying and insane villains in film history. When Michael Keaton was cast in Burton's 1989 Batman, people were probably outraged as well since Keaton was primarily a comic actor who didn't match Batman's physicality in the least, but he brought a dark, brooding quality to Bats and made Bruce Wayne feel like a totally different person. Bale did essentially the same thing while deeply exploring the psychological motivations of the character, but I'm sure when he was cast plenty of people couldn't see him in the part either. Hell, there are still plenty of people who favor Keaton over Bale and maybe a few who loved Val Kilmer. To each his own I guess.
Since many of the people involved in MOS 2 had some involvement in The Dark Knight Trilogy, (namely David Goyer and Chris Nolan), they must've immediately seen some essential Batman quality in Affleck as they did in Bale all those years ago. The DK trilogy was Nolan's baby and since he's an executive producer on Batman/Superman, I can't imagine he'd approve of anyone he didn't feel was absolutely right for the role in some way that's yet to be seen by us ordinary chaps. So far the cast choices for the DK films and Man of Steel haven't let me down, so I have no solid reason to believe they'll start now. Given the immense pressure facing anyone who takes up the mantle after Bale and the fact that Affleck certainly doesn't need the money or the recognition, I have to try to believe that he's in it for the right reasons and will give it his all. Just because I couldn't originally imagine him playing Batman doesn't mean he won't surprise us all and end up fitting the suit perfectly. The thing about good actors is that you really can't judge their performance in a new role with a new script in a new film based entirely on their past roles, especially when the new film doesn't even exist yet. As I was writing this, I read that Joss Whedon, director of Avengers and creator of Firefly, voiced his support for Affleck, saying that he has the chops to pull it off. That's a pretty glowing endorsement right there. Rather than wash my hands of the whole thing, like plenty of people are doing, I choose instead to reserve my judgments until we have actual evidence of him as Batman; until then I'm going to remain optimistic and hopeful that Affleck was cast because he showed something in his take on the character that we have yet to see, something that screamed "I'M BATMAN!"
No comments:
Post a Comment