Justice League Ben Affleck IS Bruce Wayne/Batman - Part 4

[Crashorama]

That is exactly how I feel.

Yep.....to start a new set of Batman movies with Dick as Batman seems to me like a terrible idea. I have a hard time believing Matt Reeves would be ok with that. Bruce is Batman. As far as the whole Flashpoint thing, it seems over complicated and clunky. Just find a guy close to Ben's age (maybe a couple years younger) who is game for a few movies in the cowl and call it good. All that said, I REALLY hope JL is well received, and Affleck stays for a while.

 

[Jekecy]

That's why I think Reeves and his costume team should take a long look at what they've accomplished with the Black Panther suits. Those provide a great template for making a Batman suit that's not all foam padding and rubber.

How do you know there aren't complications with their method?

 

[KillerWolf]

Yep.....to start a new set of Batman movies with Dick as Batman seems to me like a terrible idea. I have a hard time believing Matt Reeves would be ok with that. Bruce is Batman. As far as the whole Flashpoint thing, it seems over complicated and clunky. Just find a guy close to Ben's age (maybe a couple years younger) who is game for a few movies in the cowl and call it good. All that said, I REALLY hope JL is well received, and Affleck stays for a while.

I don't think any director, when he gets the opportunity to make a Batman film, sees much of a potential in making Dick Grayson the Batman and lose all the character history and traits of Batman that are present only with Bruce Wayne being the one under the cowl, so that is something I very much doubt Reeves would do.

And, yeah, Flashpoint thing is absolutely unnecessary when you can simply recast and move on, as it has been done many times before.

 

[Boom]

How do you know there aren't complications with their method?

Well to be honest I don't, which is why I said they should take a good long look at them. I do know that the Civil War Black Panther suit wasn't as form-fitting as they wanted, which led to them touching it up with CGI in post. So if you're not willing to do any post-production touch-ups, I suppose there's a drawback.

If there are better alternatives, I'm happy to hear them. But even with the advancements made with the BvS/JL batsuits, they're still heavily-padded rubber suits (albeit textured to resemble fabric). I'd like to see something new brought to the table.

 

[Superherofan123]

Ben actually looks much more trim of late. I would not be surprised to see an announcement on the Batman possibly going into production early next year.

 

[The Shape]

Well to be honest I don't, which is why I said they should take a good long look at them. I do know that the Civil War Black Panther suit wasn't as form-fitting as they wanted, which led to them touching it up with CGI in post. So if you're not willing to do any post-production touch-ups, I suppose there's a drawback.

If there are better alternatives, I'm happy to hear them. But even with the advancements made with the BvS/JL batsuits, they're still heavily-padded rubber suits (albeit textured go resemble fabric). I'd like to see something new brought to the table.

Really depends what kind of look they're going for, but the obvious non-CGI solution is to simply produce a slightly slimmer muscle/body suit that can be covered with a textured "fabric" similar to the BvS/JL suits or some kind of new material when the time comes.

A good example would be the Sam Raimi Spider-man suits (at least in the first film), which actually did have understated padded/sculpted musculature in places suit beneath the "spandex" but still created the illusion that it was really only the actor or stuntman's actual musculature. The end result was a suit that appeared to be completely form-fitting and skin-tight, with not even a crease or any "bagginess" in sight. Also allowed the actor to be completely agile with full range of motion.

Spoiler

That was nearly 20 years ago, so I have to believe that they can take a similar concept/method and effectively translate it to fit the Batman aesthetic when called for. Snyder was obviously going for something different in terms of depicting his Batman as more of a hulking brute and bodybuilder, and his sculpted Batman suit fits that's aesthetic while still allowing the actor/stuntman to be pretty damn agile, all things considered. That method can eventually be stripped down and refined a bit to develop a new Batman aesthetic that more closely resembles a gymnast or martial artist as opposed to a bruiser or bodybuilder.

I really don't think CGI is the solution to every problem, or this "problem". Yes, a CGI-enhanced Batman suit could work and look cool, or it could be jarring and obvious (see: Cartoon Spider-man in Civil War and Homecoming). I'd much prefer to see them build on the huge advancements they've made with the BvS/JL suits since the Burton/Schumacher/Nolan days as opposed to reverting to CGI. (We've already reverted to a CGI cape in most instances, which has its positives and negatives in terms of execution)

Batman is also supposed to be a "real" guy wearing a "real" suit made out of seemingly real-word armor and materials (as opposed to Green Lantern or Black Panther who is decked out in the mysterious "vibranium") and I do think it helps to put the actor in a real, fully formed suit on-set.

 

[KillerMcQueen]

Well to be honest I don't, which is why I said they should take a good long look at them. I do know that the Civil War Black Panther suit wasn't as form-fitting as they wanted, which led to them touching it up with CGI in post. So if you're not willing to do any post-production touch-ups, I suppose there's a drawback.

If there are better alternatives, I'm happy to hear them. But even with the advancements made with the BvS/JL batsuits, they're still heavily-padded rubber suits (albeit textured go resemble fabric). I'd like to see something new brought to the table.

I'd really like them to slim down the suits construction, something akin to the way Spider-Man's suits have been handled in live action, with a much lighter muscle suit underneath a fabric suit, obviously still more pronounced and tough looking than Spidey's suits, but not quite the bulky rubber suits that Batman actors have had to put up with. It's unfortunate that Tobey and Andrew's Spidey suits haven't had more influence on superhero costumes in general, you don't need a bunch of leather, rubber, plastic, or super thick fabrics to translate these costumes to live action.

 

[fancyarcher]

Yeah, a more "slicker" Batman would my preferred suit at this point. I'm not a fan of making Batman look like a "body builder", or a machine. Ha!

 

[storyteller]

I think they really need to work on the cooling systems for these suits. I refuse to believe they can't get something in them to make it a damn freezer.

They really need to design a suit that can easily be taken off. So when they aren't shooting, the actor can slip out and cool down.

That the suit is still one part is ridiculous.

I am against the CGI retouching though that marvel used. Black panther turned weightless. Spider-man looked plastic.

Funny enough it's the homemade Spider-man suit CGI that looked terrific. The imperfections carried over. Form fitting becomes too perfect.

Vision works because it's pretty close and has those imperfections. We also never see a non cgi shot.

I swear if I see Green Lantern being all CGI, I will go to the set myself and smack whoever is in charge.

 

[fancyarcher]

Green Lantern will more then likely be CGI, because it's "cheaper", and all it'll do is bring me back memories of the 2011 film for me. Oof!

 

[C Prometheus]

I don't think any director, when he gets the opportunity to make a Batman film, sees much of a potential in making Dick Grayson the Batman and lose all the character history and traits of Batman that are present only with Bruce Wayne being the one under the cowl, so that is something I very much doubt Reeves would do.

And, yeah, Flashpoint thing is absolutely unnecessary when you can simply recast and move on, as it has been done many times before.

It is unnecessary. I'd personally prefer a hard recast myself. It wasn't needed when Keaton left or when Kilmer left, so it shouldn't be needed with Affleck potentially leaving.

I just think that's what their plan is due to how Affleck's now on record as essentially saying the same thing that THR reported back in July ("graceful way to segue out of the role"/"graceful way to explain the change in the role in an upcoming DC film"). With that in mind, Flashpoint resulting in a new Batman actor seems like the logical explanation for that.

 

[markjoedelonge]

Lol you guys keep thinking they're doing "Flashpoint" to recast? No no, they're doing it for the big bucks, it's essentially another JL film and will be marketed as such. It's like how Civil War was Avengers 2.5.

 

[C Prometheus]

Lol you guys keep thinking they're doing "Flashpoint" to recast? No no, they're doing it for the big bucks, it's essentially another JL film and will be marketed as such. It's like how Civil War was Avengers 2.5.

I think it's them having their cake and eating it too.

Flashpoint gives them a chance to make a big Civil War type film to get as much of the whole gang back together as possible into a single film again (and also allowing Ezra Miller to have his big breakout solo film as the Flash), while also potentially allowing them to fulfill the last movie slot on Ben's contract as Batman and smooth out any other potential kinks in the DCEU that they might want to get rid of too.

 

[GothamBat]

The last thing I want is a hard recast. Seriously... It'd be the most jarring thing ever if Bruce was just Jake Gyllenhal instead of Ben from one movie to the next. I may even bail on the entire DCEU. It would suck. If Ben is leaving...which he is, let's face it.... Then it'd be nice if they recast him with an in-continuity younger Bruce Wayne/Batman. One that is in his prime. Luckily, they did make it so this Batman has already been Batman-ing for two decades. People age and change a lot in that time span so the difference in appearance can be boiled down to that. He's just 20 years younger. A little make-up can bridge the gap if necessary. It *almost* feels intentional with how much they seem to put emphasis on the fact that this Batman is burnt out and his Batman days are sort of behind him. That his involvement with the league is some kind of reprisal and last hurrah. I actually don't think I'd mind it... We'd get a Batman who isn't pushing 50 with gray in his hair. It's like the one thing that bothers me about Batfleck. He's basically at the end of his rope while the universe around him is just starting out. I would really like it if they went the Days of future past route and simply got younger Bruce Wayne from the mid-eighties to join Superman, Flash and the others in present day. That way they preserve continuity pretty well and hell... It could leave room for Affleck to come back if ever him and WB resolve whatever issue they have with each other. I thought Days of future past would be contrived and awkward but it ended up being my favorite comicbook movie ever.

 

[GothamBat]

As far as how the world would perceive this drastically younger Bruce... Well if they can bring back Clark Kent then this shouldn't be too much of a stretch. They could pretend he's Bruce's estranged son, essentially making him take up the same exact role Ben's Bruce had. Billionaire, owner of Wayne enterprises, playboy ect. Essentially, all that would change would be how the world regards him and the fact that, on his birth certificate, he'd be called Bruce Wayne Jr.

 

[Boom]

Yeah... no.

A recast is bound to happen, GothamBat. Even if Reeves sets his Batman film/s in the past with a younger Batman, what about future Justice League films set in the present day? Well now instead of recasting Affleck with one actor, you're doing it with two.

A hard recast is simply the best course of action in order to keep things moving along. You're just going to have to find a way to reconcile it, sorry to say.

 

[GothamBat]

I don't think you understood what I meant? I was suggesting they use younger Bruce in present day. So the younger Bruce from the Reeves trilogy can be the same actor. It wouldn't need to be two.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

As far as how the world would perceive this drastically younger Bruce... Well if they can bring back Clark Kent then this shouldn't be too much of a stretch. They could pretend he's Bruce's estranged son, essentially making him take up the same exact role Ben's Bruce had. Billionaire, owner of Wayne enterprises, playboy ect. Essentially, all that would change would be how the world regards him and the fact that, on his birth certificate, he'd be called Bruce Wayne Jr.

The "world" doesn't have any emotional investment in these films. They will readily accept a new Batman who is good in a solid film. Even someone who (gasp) has different bone structure to Affleck.

 

[GothamBat]

The "world" doesn't have any emotional investment in these films. They will readily accept a new Batman who is good in a solid film. Even someone who (gasp) has different bone structure to Affleck.

No I meant the world as in... the people who populate the DCEU. Their response to "oh hey Bruce Wayne died and this is his estranged son who will now take over Wayne enterprises" -cue 20 years younger Bruce Wayne-

 

[Boom]

I don't think you understood what I meant? I was suggesting they use younger Bruce in present day. So the younger Bruce from the Reeves trilogy can be the same actor. It wouldn't need to be two.

And your suggestion for accomplishing that is to make it Bruce Wayne's estranged son. That idea, to put it kindly, is not great. It's no different than fans wanting them to get rid of Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor by introducing Lex Luthor Sr. with a different actor.

Frankly I don't know how that would be preferable to simply recasting the part, thus allowing Bruce's arc to continue.

 

[Crashorama]

Yeah... no.

A recast is bound to happen, GothamBat. Even if Reeves sets his Batman film/s in the past with a younger Batman, what about future Justice League films set in the present day? Well now instead of recasting Affleck with one actor, you're doing it with two.

A hard recast is simply the best course of action in order to keep things moving along. You're just going to have to find a way to reconcile it, sorry to say.

This. If he (Ben) is gonna leave, and I still hope he doesn't, just cast someone else and move on.

 

[GothamBat]

And your suggestion for accomplishing that is to make it Bruce Wayne's estranged son. That idea, to put it kindly, is not great. It's no different than fans harboring hope that can get rid of Jesse Eisenberg by introducing Lex Luthor Sr. with a different actor.

Frankly I don't know how that would be preferable to simply recasting the part, thus allowing Bruce's arc to continue.

Well that would just be the facade he would have when it comes to the world at large and the media. Something that wouldn't really affect him or his interplay with other heroes. Something that wouldn't really need to be mentioned more than like once or twice. He can't very well say "oh yeah I'm the same guy but 20 years younger and I'm here cause time-travel"

As far as allowing Bruce's arc to continue.. Just because he would be a younger version, wouldn't mean he couldn't continue to grow and develop. If anything there's more room for him to do that if he's young and in his prime. I don't know if you can go very many places with older Bruce other than the Batman beyond route. Like... I'd prefer a fresh start rather than them hard recasting only for them to incur the same problem when the character turns 50 and ages out of the Batman role (in canon).

Remember, THR did say WB was looking for a way to allow Ben to gracefully exit. Ben just recently said that he wants a cool way to segue out of the role. Those two statements both suggest an in-universe explanation to the recast rather than just swapping out Ben for someone else. I do think Flashpoint was devised to address Ben's exit among other things.

 

[KillerMcQueen]

And your suggestion for accomplishing that is to make it Bruce Wayne's estranged son. That idea, to put it kindly, is not great. It's no different than fans wanting them to get rid of Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor by introducing Lex Luthor Sr. with a different actor.

Frankly I don't know how that would be preferable to simply recasting the part, thus allowing Bruce's arc to continue.

I certainly wouldn't prefer it, it's just too much plot twisting, a hard recast can be jarring at first, but it's something that audiences have proven capable of dealing with, recasting and just continuing as usual is really the best course when Ben decides to leave.

 

[GothamBat]

I don't think it's ever been done with a main character... The only example I can conjure up of a major character getting recast in a big franchise is Dumbledore and they had no choice but to do a hard recast because the previous actor passed away + they didn't have the creative liberty to justify a recast due to them being tethered to the canon of the HP books

 

[BaneandDawn]

Campea mentioned he know the actor that will replace Affleck. I gotta give the guy credit. He have been saying this since february and no one believed him.