Ben Affleck Was "Reluctant" to Take Batman Role

Ben Affleck Was "Reluctant" to Take Batman Role

Ben Affleck initially felt he wasn't the right actor to play Batman but was convinced by director Zack Snyder.

Back in August it was revealed that Ben Affleck would be donning the cape and cowl to co-star as Batman in the Batman/Superman team-up sequel to Man of Steel. The reaction among certain sects of Bat-fans was, how shall we put it, angry. Affleck did have his defenders, but there were more than a few voices expressing outrage at the thought of Ben "Armageddon/Pearl Harbor/Gigli" Affleck taking up the mantle of the Bat. As it turns out, Affleck himself apparently had some of the same reservations.

"Initially I was reluctant as I felt I didn't fit the traditional mold," he said, speaking about the role. It would apparently be director Zack Snyder who would convince Affleck to take on the job. "Once Zack showed me the concept, and that it would be both different from the great movies that Chris [Nolan] and Christian [Bale] made but still in keeping with tradition I was excited." Affleck wasn't willing to elaborate much, however, on what won him over. "I don't want to go further because I want to be able to capitalize on what is new about this iteration by having it be a surprise to the audience."

Regardless of how surprising the new take on the character is, it's probably still going to take some work to win over Affleck's many skeptics. Then again, if he takes to truly channeling the Dark Knight he shouldn't have too much trouble performing superhuman feats. Maybe he just needs one of those nifty knee brace thingies that aging Bruce Wayne used in The Dark Knight Rises. We're not sure specifically how that would help, but it was fun to watch Christian Bale kick through solid brick.

Source: 411Mania

Permalink

Hey guys, in case you haven't heard yet Ben Affleck is going to play Batman.

He's the hero that Gotham didn't deserve, but the one it got.

He's a Dork Knight.

As much as I love Batman the only "traditional mold" I care about is whither or not they use CGI for his acrobatics.
That, and don't make the character a smug git one minute and a brooding crybaby the next.

I don't understand why they wanted him if he was so reluctant to play Batman.

Hazzard:
I don't understand why they wanted him if he was so reluctant to play Batman.

Because of Zack's artistic vision. You can't argue with artistic visions.

Hazzard:
I don't understand why they wanted him if he was so reluctant to play Batman.

Probably because Matt Damon is Lex Luthor or something. Or Zack Snyder really wants to see Affleck in a skin tight costume again.

I don't have a problem with Affleck as Batman. My problem is with the fact that WB is rushing the whole Superman vs Batman thing right after Man of Steel. I think they should of waited one more movie, but they desperately want to catch up to Marvel in establishing their own cinematic comic-verse.

The more I think about it, the less of a problem I have with Affleck as Batman. I'm sure he can play a Batman Beyond style crusty asshole just fine, which I suspect is where this movie is headed.

No, my bigger concern is that the script will be obviously rushed like it was for Man of Steel and Snyder will apply a blue filter to the entire film like he always does.

P.S. Thanks

Hazzard:
I don't understand why they wanted him if he was so reluctant to play Batman.

Because he's a good actor?

It's a decade now since the aberrations that were Gigli and Daredevil, sooner or later you have to forgive him.

I'm just whatever.

Here's your chance to surprise us Affleck.

james.sponge:

Hazzard:
I don't understand why they wanted him if he was so reluctant to play Batman.

Because of Zack's artistic vision. You can't argue with artistic visions.

That's right! Zack Snyder is out to reinvent cinema as we know it. Batman vs Superman: The Citizen Kane of movies - you heard it here first!

Also:

I-LIKE-YOUR-AVATAR

There, I said it.

fix-the-spade:

Hazzard:
I don't understand why they wanted him if he was so reluctant to play Batman.

Because he's a good actor?

It's a decade now since the aberrations that were Gigli and Daredevil, sooner or later you have to forgive him.

Especially considering that no actor could have made the lines in Daredevil work. Like, at all.

It doesn't particularly matter who plays Batman or Superman or any other character for that matter in this movie or any other, what does is whether the ones picked to write the damn script can actually write. If not, there's absolutely nothing that can salvage a movie, not big time actors, not big time directors, not big time producers, the movie is just outright screwed.

Affleck is probably the best actor I can think of who could play Batman who hasn't actually done it yet, and it's because of Daredevil. He was basically already playing a slightly less broody Batman in Daredevil, and playing it well.

Oh, and for the record, I LIKED Daredevil, in fact it's the movie that really got me into reading his comics for the first time. I have no idea why so many people hate it, it's like throwing a gold bar in the trash because the gold isn't pure enough.

Batfleeeeeeecccck batfleck! da da dada dada!

I suppose it'll be interesting to see how it plays out, but by the time the team-up movie comes out, the Avengers' movie/character troupe will be very strong.

At first I was in the anti-Afleck camp but the more I think about it, even Bale wasn't that good. So far Michael Keaton was the best Batman and he killed people (as Batman, though I have my suspicions).

Then pretty much this:

Covarr:
The more I think about it, the less of a problem I have with Affleck as Batman. I'm sure he can play a Batman Beyond style crusty asshole just fine, which I suspect is where this movie is headed.

No, my bigger concern is that the script will be obviously rushed like it was for Man of Steel and Snyder will apply a blue filter to the entire film like he always does.

P.S. Thanks

I hated, hated, hated bale as batman, he just doesn't look like a batman, I could barely stand watching those movies.

At least Batfleck looks like a batman, I think he will do a fine job.

WHY THE HELL IS EVERYONE SO SKEPTICAL ABOUT BEN AFFLECK PLAYING BATMAN?

Seriously, he's had a few 'off' movies but he's had far more hits. He has shown that he can do comedy, drama, and everything in-between, far better than a lot of actors I can name. For the comedy side we have Dogma, Chasing Amy, and Mallrats. For the drama, far more suited for Batman, we have Good Will Hunting, The Sum of All Fears, State of Play, The Town, Gone Baby Gone, and the most relevant of all I feel, Argo. He has acting chops, serious ones, in films that have gone on to win or be nominated for very prestigious awards. He easily matches, if not out-classes, Christian Bale (one of my favourite actors no less) as an actor, yet people still think he's a bad choice for Batman.

I just don't understand it. Can someone please elaborate for me because I am seriously baffled by the reaction of the so-called 'fans' here...

The Bale movies were awful, so anything is an upgrade from that - whether it be the actors or production staff.

And Affleck's appearance alone fits my perception of Batman better than the last 3 movie Batmans, easily.

a batman no one saw coming, he's perfect.

Seriously though, I think Affleck is a good actor and this can turn out well. I look forward to seeing the finished product.

it would be both different from the great movies that Chris [Nolan] and Christian [Bale] made but still in keeping with tradition

I'd like to imagine this means he'll be totally Westing it up.

Screw realistic Marvel style, we're going in light-hearted, cartoonish, and pure rule of cool.

Trivun:
WHY THE HELL IS EVERYONE SO SKEPTICAL ABOUT BEN AFFLECK PLAYING BATMAN?

Seriously, he's had a few 'off' movies but he's had far more hits. He has shown that he can do comedy, drama, and everything in-between, far better than a lot of actors I can name. For the comedy side we have Dogma, Chasing Amy, and Mallrats. For the drama, far more suited for Batman, we have Good Will Hunting, The Sum of All Fears, State of Play, The Town, Gone Baby Gone, and the most relevant of all I feel, Argo. He has acting chops, serious ones, in films that have gone on to win or be nominated for very prestigious awards. He easily matches, if not out-classes, Christian Bale (one of my favourite actors no less) as an actor, yet people still think he's a bad choice for Batman.

I just don't understand it. Can someone please elaborate for me because I am seriously baffled by the reaction of the so-called 'fans' here...

He is pretty decent in Runner Runner as well, if that's anything to go by we know he can play a multi millionaire very well :')

and we know he can portray a superhero decently, Daredevil is seriously underrated. Perfect? No, the script was corny as hell and Bullseye wasn't well done, but Affleck, along with guy who played King Pin (cant remember his name but i should! >.<) pretty much saved the film.

Hero in a half shell:

it would be both different from the great movies that Chris [Nolan] and Christian [Bale] made but still in keeping with tradition

I'd like to imagine this means he'll be totally Westing it up.

Screw realistic Marvel style, we're going in light-hearted, cartoonish, and pure rule of cool.

Are you referring to the comic marvel or the movie marvel? Cause the Marvel Movie universe is anything if realistic

more like a "screw realistic Nolan style" if anything

which is a good thing

I'm more worried about Snyder being director and writer than Affleck being Batman.

james.sponge:

Hazzard:
I don't understand why they wanted him if he was so reluctant to play Batman.

Because of Zack's artistic vision. You can't argue with artistic visions.

Sure we can, we've been arguing with it since it was announced.

/OP I think the "reluctant" news is just to appease detractors of the whole thing. It doesn't matter whether he was reluctant or not - the key word here is "initially". Initially he was reluctant, just as, initially, most people were reluctant. But he's no longer reluctant, and neither should everybody else.

I don't much care for Affleck. He's OK as the straight leading type, tops. Not an actor with a very wide range. Maybe he'll be fine as Batman. My main problem is, I can never see him as anyone BUT Ben Affleck, which is not a problem I had with Bale. I forgot Christian Bale was Christian Bale, I could see Bruce Wayne and Batman on their own (never mind if I agree with the portrayal - the man can mask his persona). And I don't think Affleck can. I don't think he can make us forget he's Affleck.

I just realized the batman mask will perfectly fit around his stubble. He was born to play Batman.

Nowhere Man:
I don't have a problem with Affleck as Batman. My problem is with the fact that WB is rushing the whole Superman vs Batman thing right after Man of Steel. I think they should of waited one more movie, but they desperately want to catch up to Marvel in establishing their own cinematic comic-verse.

Agreed - I don't think Affleck is likely to be a good batman (BUT much stranger things have happened) - but frankly this movie seemed rushed, fan-service-ish, and just trying to compete directly with the Avengers, because its like every game being moved towards competing with Halo or Call of Duty, even if their in completely different genres.

Basically, if the movie is rubbish, I doubt it'll be Affleck who broke it.

Doug:
[quote="Nowhere Man" post="7.832161.20325954"]
Basically, if the movie is rubbish, I doubt it'll be Affleck who broke it.

That is very true, the problem is I believe he will be blamed for it and it will yet again set back his career no matter how well he is individually. Considering how many people disliked Superman I can't see adding a new Batman into the mix making it any better especially as DC related movies haven't been known as being particularly good. I think Affleck would make a good Batman, it's just that I have no faith in this movie and can't help but feel he'll get unfair blame for its inevitable collapse.

Whatislove:
I hated, hated, hated bale as batman, he just doesn't look like a batman, I could barely stand watching those movies.

At least Batfleck looks like a batman, I think he will do a fine job.

Really? How does afleck look like batman, bruce wayne exactly?

Granted i did not care for bale either, but bale looks more bruce wayne than afleck does.

But i want a huge steroid square jaw batman, ditch the rubber suits, hell you can get spidersilk skin that is bulletproof, i think we can manage a good old arkham asylum games suit spandex but armored and reinforced up, and it s perfectly plausable and looks better than some rubber monstrosity that actors cannot move in.

There are any number of fan films with the grey and black spandex and some actors just rock it.

All that said afleck deserves a chance. but it is kinda in the same vein as when you say hear that michael keaton was doing batman, neither looks much like batman you think looks like, neither is built the way you think batman is built like, both have rather all over the place acting careers, but neither has done much that screams omg hes batamn.

keaton rocked it for what he had to work with though, maybe afleck can do the same. afleck is a pretty big comic guy one of his best friends has written batman and is a super comic geek.

Counter balanced by the idea that zack snyder and the nolan crew is doing it and from what we have seen of man of steel and TDKR nolan team is great at fan service, but short on respecting or liking the characters or caring to accurately portray them.

and the more big splody scenes seem to be more snyders doing and i am all on board for big destruction, but you got to get superman stopping some of that destruction, or at lest caring about it, it just rings as so utterly fake and fail when you reach the end and suddenly supes has a moment of conscience because some random family is about to get fried by zods lazor eyes, go ask smallville or the whole of downtown metropolis that is utterly wrecked whole buildings just obliterated during the day when people out doing stuff and not even a eyelid batted but omg generic family x is about to die.

garbage writing, no character consistency or much of the core of superman to be seen at all, the dark knight started off good but by the third movie nolan had just pissed over the idea of batman, turned batman from the core of bruce waynes psyche to a sometime hobby he could just be or not be.

This movie could be a disaster just from the get go no matter if afleck turns out to be brilliant. Why the hell cant we just get BTAS or the team that does the arkham games from BTAS to make a movie script or at the very lest someone that will try to bring the actual characters to the movie.

Can we just give this guy a chance and watch how things play out?

Daredevil was TEN years ago. In the meantime, Affleck has really grown as a Director and as an actor. Even if you think Daredevil was the worst movie ever made (which it was not), you should cut this guy a second chance in light of all the ways that movies and super hero movies have changed in the last decade.

I still like this decision more and more to have him play batman.

Besides, all he has to do is be better than George Cloony, even though in reality Bale was a terrible batman. Great Wayne, awful batman.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here