Justice League Ben Affleck IS Bruce Wayne/Batman - Part 6

[Arachnerd]

Define “most” here. Because I don’t think most of the audience would care if he were recast given the negative reaction to BVS and JL.

Yes, because fan opinions don't matter, apparently.

 

[Alonsovich]

I seriously doubt Bruce Wayne was active in the 80s.

Parents died in 1981 according to BvS (it's on the grave in the giant bat scene). Considering he already looked like 10-11 there I'd say at least his training happened in the 80s.

 

[Marvel united]

Yes, because fan opinions don't matter, apparently.

I think Affleck was a fine Batman but I'm not particularly attached to him and I think the prequel idea is dumb and convoluted. I dont think the general audience would care that much if Affleck never came back. This happened with Batman Forever and that movie was huge success and Keaton made a much bigger impression than Affleck did.

 

[Arachnerd]

I think Affleck was a fine Batman but I'm not particularly attached to him and I think the prequel idea is dumb and convoluted. I dont think the general audience would care that much if Affleck never came back. This happened with Batman Forever and that movie was huge success.

Box office wise, sure. Critically? Eh.

 

[_Superman_]

Define “most” here. Because I don’t think most of the audience would care if he were recast given the negative reaction to BVS and JL.

I'm not talking about caring if he was recast. I am talking about if people liked him as Batman which most seem to have liked outside some vocal groups who didn't like the fact that he killed. It's like Bale people like him as Batman but people also wouldn't care if he was recast.

 

[idiot09]

We're not in the minority. Most people like Ben as Batman.

Yeah. If it was no big deal, the press wouldnt be milking this at every opportunity. Nearly everyone praised his performance in BvS, and even those on the fence said under a different writer, he could be even better. After such a negative initial reaction, he turned it around with BvS. It might have dampened a bit with JL. But he's a popular and well liked Batman, and it would be a shame if he has to leave, no matter how anyone spins it.

 

[kguillou]

Marvel United may be right. Setting aside our own affinity for Affleck in the role for a second, theres no question that Affleck did not connect with the GA as Batman the same way say...RDJ connected playing Tony Stark. So recasting him is not likely to spark any GA outrage. Recasting Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman on the other hand, THAT would upset lots of movie goers,

 

[_Superman_]

Parents died in 1981 according to BvS (it's on the grave in the giant bat scene). Considering he already looked like 10-11 there I'd say at least his training happened in the 80s.

Batman was active around 96' since that's the line Bruce used in BvS about 20 years active.

 

[Dusty_Lane]

I think Finn Whittrock would be a good choice for what they're going for:

Hopefully Reeves Batman will just replace Affleck. No need for convoluted explanation with Affleck being present-day and Reeve being past. Soft reboot. It worked for Batman in the past just fine

Oh Jesus, who is that loss? Come on, just please let it be Affleck!

 

[idiot09]

Marvel United may be right. Setting aside our own affinity for Affleck in the role for a second, theres no question that Affleck did not connect with the GA as Batman the same way say...RDJ connected playing Tony Stark. So recasting him is not likely to spark any GA outrage. Recasting Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman on the other hand, THAT would upset lots of movie goers,

Not every role connects like Tony Stark or Gal Gadot does, so that's not a fair comparison.

Thor didnt connect with a lot of people for the first few movies, would it have been fair to just recast him and say "GA wont care, he aint RDJ". Nah, it would be ******. The GA isnt huge on Cavill too either, should we recast him too? Should we have recasted Gal after BVS too? Its a slippery slope.

He's a well liked Batman. He may not be the best. But he's far from the worst. And I think we need to see atleast ONE MORE outing from him. A proper standalone Batman movie.

 

[Spider-Fan]

If you're WB though, you want to know your Batman is going to come back for multiple films. Unless there is a guarantee Affleck would do like a trilogy or something, I can see WB wanting someone else. Affleck has been playing the "will he/won't he" card for years now. I can see that being a turn off for him coming back for the solos. Especially if they can just set them in the timeline when Batman was younger (or ignore it completely even).

 

[gdw]

Parents died in 1981 according to BvS (it's on the grave in the giant bat scene). Considering he already looked like 10-11 there I'd say at least his training happened in the 80s.

Batman was active around 96' since that's the line Bruce used in BvS about 20 years active.

Which means he was 15 years from parents death til the first appearance of the Bat. Also means that he would have been around 25-16 when he started, putting him at 45-46 in BvS, which lines up with what those involved with the film said.

 

[markjoedelonge]

No one loves Ben as Batman more than me, but at this point, I'm just sick of all this wishy-washy back and forth. I just want certainty. I want an actor dedicated to the role and willing to play the role for years to come. If Ben wants to do it, then that'll be a dream come true. But if not, Reeves is doing the right thing by looking for someone willing to play the role as long as the universe requires.

 

[kguillou]

Same here. And I totally understand the worry that Ben wont be back for sequels and that it wouldnt be pragmatic to have Ben do one Matt Reeves movie and THEN recast.

And yet....man. The selffish side of me wants that one swan song magnum opus standalone Batman movie where Ben just knocks it out of the park with a great script and powerful story. Just one more, go out on a high note then pass the torch. But again. Its not a realistic nor pragmatic idea thinking long term ESPECIALLY if the movie ends up successful.

 

[Alonsovich]

Which means he was 15 years from parents death til the first appearance of the Bat. Also means that he would have been around 25-16 when he started, putting him at 45-46 in BvS, which lines up with what those involved with the film said.

Yup, it also means that if Reeves' film has a young Batman then the film can't be set in present day, unless it isn't part of the DCEU, like that Todd Phillips Joker film, which of course could be another possibility...

 

[Marvel united]

Yup, it also means that if Reeves' film has a young Batman then the film can't be set in present day, unless it isn't part of the DCEU, like that Todd Phillips Joker film, which of course could be another possibility...

No, not really. It could just mean that Ben Affleck won't be Batman and the character will get a soft reboot to be younger. They can just retcon the older Batman

 

[idiot09]

If Reeves was telling a story with a more experience Batman, I can understand why people would be like "Oh but Affleck has to go, because he probably wont want to do 3 films etc etc". But Reeves is setting this in the past, with a young Batman, effectively ruling Affleck out of his plans. Which tells me its more Reeves decision than Affleck's.

Such stupid planning all around. Just make a badass solo Batman movie with Affleck you dimwits. How hard is that.

This planning with a trilogy in mind might just end badly. How about make one good film first? We already had a brilliant Batman trilogy, how many more do we need?

 

[Marvel united]

When was it mentioned in the article that The Batman would be a period piece? Am I missing something here?

And I doubt it'll end badly because fricking Matt Reeves is directing the movie. If comes down to Affleck or Reeves, I'm going wirh Reeves. All day. Every day. Affleck not playing Batman is not a death sentence for this movie.

 

[Spider-Fan]

It's speculation. We honestly don't know for sure.

 

[Alonsovich]

No, not really. It could just mean that Ben Affleck won't be Batman and the character will get a soft reboot to be younger. They can just retcon the older Batman

A soft reboot would be Flashpoint. Since that's not happening then what you're saying is a HARD reboot, which of course could be entirely possible, but would question the whole DCEU timeline. Even the Norton-Ruffalo recast didn't do that. There was a rumor on BOF that said that Reeves' film wasn't part of the DCEU and that's been going on for some time.

 

[MbJ]

Yes, because fan opinions don't matter, apparently.

In this case? No. Otherwise we’d
Probably have gotten an untouched Snyder Justice League to begin with. This whole thing happened because of the response to the movies.

 

[Arachnerd]

And WB made things worse when he left. It's not like Snyder's the only one to blame here.

 

[MbJ]

No, but that doesn’t have anything to do with what I said. They want to move on and put all that stuff behind them, which is probably why they don’t care if the fans want Affleck to stay, or a Snyder Cut, or honestly anything to do with the initial slate of movies. They just wanna go forward with the next slate of movies.

 

[routhman]

No, but that doesn’t have anything to do with what I said. They want to move on and put all that stuff behind them, which is probably why they don’t care if the fans want Affleck to stay, or a Snyder Cut, or honestly anything to do with the initial slate of movies. They just wanna go forward with the next slate of movies.

Yeah well keep disrespecting what your fans want and see how long they stick around.

 

[heatvision38]

Yeah well keep disrespecting what your fans want and see how long they stick around.

We are seeing it with Star Wars.

Honestly, I think it takes a delicate hand to find a balance to please the current fans of the DCEU (not counting Justice Abomination) and those you want to bring in. Wonder Woman was a good balance.