Thursday, August 22, 2013


Headline kind of says it all. Nothing else to report, but there you go. Ben Affleck is the new Dark Knight for "Batman vs. Superman." This only just now happened, so not much else to say. A few thoughts do come to mind immediately, however...

Okay, Internet? Get it out of your system: Bennifer. Gigli. Jersey Girl. Reindeer Games. Armageddon. Ha ha ha. None of that matters. Literally. Affleck is basically a post-larvae actor/director at this point - nothing before "Gone Baby Gone" matters. Ben's the man.

Besides, he wasn't the problem in "Daredevil." If he played Batman/Bruce Wayne in the same basic manner as Daredevil/Matt Murdock he'd be the best one apart from Keaton, Conroy, Bader and Adam West (Fuck you, Adam West was good.)

This doesn't automatically mean the movie is that much closer to not sucking. Not using Christian Bale means this won't totally be the played-out Nolan Batman, yes. Not casting someone appreciably older than Henry Cavill means it can't be that close to "Dark Knight Returns;" but those pernicious influences are still there.

Fun Fact #1: Unless I'm forgetting someone, this makes Ben Affleck the only actor who has ever played Batman AND Superman (look it up.)

Fun Fact #2: This actually isn't a total surprise: Back when Warner Bros. was still committed to "Justice League" coming out opposite "Avengers 2," they offered Affleck the director's chair on that one with the caveat that he also play Batman. Supposedly he said no at the time. One thing changed... I wonder if the other thing has, too?

Poor Henry Cavill. Not only do they think you need Batman's help to make people want to see you as Superman again, they think you need Oscar-Winning-Megastar-Batman.

Honestly? I'm immediately fond of this decision - and not just because it means he might possibly maybe bring some (or all?) of the production of a DC movie or two here to Boston. This guy is a good actor, he can play tough, he has range... but he's also funny and "regular." I'm sure the paycheck on this is big enough that he'd do the part in helium-voice if they asked, but if they let him play Batman as something other than the one-note growling asshole we've been putting up with for the last decade he could really be something special. Enough time has passed since George Clooney - we can have a stable, semi-happy Batman again.

Seriously, though - Ben? Mr. Affleck? Please bring some or all of this production to Boston. The last Gotham City was in fucking Philly for crissakes.

Let's get THIS dull idiocy out of the way: No, Matt Damon would be a shitty Robin. Casey Affleck for Robin, though? That I like. Jennifer Garner would be a not-awful Wonder Woman, but that's not gonna happen. No, Kevin Smith doesn't need to be anywhere near this - he's probably gonna launch another fucking circlejerk podcast just to "cover" this, let it be.

Now, Matt Damon for Lex Luthor, on the other hand? I'm listening.

PERSPECTIVE: Honestly, whether or not "Batman vs. Superman" is good is ultimately a negligible thing at this point. They're not gonna stop making superhero movies anytime soon, if this one doesn't work they'll get right eventually. This is good news strictly on the basis that the guy behind "Gone Baby Gone," "The Town" and "Argo" is going to have enough Fuck You Money to make whatever the HELL he wants for the forseeable future. That's why we call these things "tentpoles," kids.

Y'know what's funny? The logic used to be that DC heroes (or, more specifically, anyone from "Superfriends") were well-known/iconic enough to sell themselves, while Marvel's roster would probably need A-list megastars to make mainstream audiences give a shit.