Ben Affleck's Batman vs. Christian Bale's

[Gothamsknight]

In terms of depiction, I guess it's subjective whether you much you care for an older Batman. I like the idea, but it's not something I would have liked to see in that context, especially after MOS. Perhaps Snyder with his deconstructionist sensibilities thought an older, jaded Batman fit into that. And it certainly does, but for the love of God, don't make him a murderer.

An older Batman I can get behind like Keaton coming back or The Dark Knight Rises or Returns, but an older Batman is NOT what I want to see as the status quo live action Batman. I have zero interest in an older Batman series of films. At least build up to it. The Dark Knight Rises may not depict an old Batman, but I connected much, much more to a strung out, retired Bruce because of the writing and directing. And the fact that it's earned.

For the record, Kilmer is my third favorite live action Batman. I'm not saying he's mind blowing, but he does a terrific job of playing a very straight forward, crime fighting, heroic O'Neill era Batman and can play it straight while still doing fun stuff.

Affleck could have been decent as a BTAS type of Bruce and Batman. But in all honesty, that works for me as a cartoon, not in live action. Plus Affleck ain't Kevin Conroy, even if it's just a voice.

I think Snyder gave into his worst impulses when writing the affleck version. He didn't have to be a murderer, but of course Snyder shoehorned that in for the sake of being edgy. And honestly, there's not a single good reason in the movie for making Batman a killer.

I, too, think Kilmer was very underrated. Say what you will about Batman Forever and Batman & Robin, but Kilmer did a good job with what he had.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I think Snyder gave into his worst impulses when writing the affleck version. He didn't have to be a murderer, but of course Snyder shoehorned that in for the sake of being edgy. And honestly, there's not a single good reason in the movie for making Batman a killer.

I, too, think Kilmer was very underrated. Say what you will about Batman Forever and Batman & Robin, but Kilmer did a good job with what he had.

Yeah, I think Snyder, for all of his sensibilities, it's just the wrong sensibilities for these particular superheroes. Especially Superman. There's a reason why he fits in with Watchmen more. I don't like Watchmen as a movie, but at least it's within his wheelhouse.

I agree, ideally it shouldn't happen. I could have been okay with the idea of Batman killing in BVS if the whole point of Batman is that he's never killed before and is struggling with the choice of killing Superman given how Superman in those movies is a terrifying alien. If that code had been properly established, it would have been a great source of tension in the movie. It would have put me on edge for the right reasons, unlike that damn warehouse scene.

But I'll cut it some slack in the previous movies. Batman kills people in the Burton films. But I don't have much of a problem with that because it's done in a pretty whimsical way within a more whimsical interpretation. Ideally, I could do without it, but it doesn't shock me like Batman ripping a knife out of himself and stabbing a man with it because not only is Batman killing part of Snyder's vision and arc for the character, the killing is brutal and offhanded, creating a very disturbing character

 

[Gothamsknight]

Yeah, I think Snyder, for all of his sensibilities, it's just the wrong sensibilities for these particular superheroes. Especially Superman. There's a reason why he fits in with Watchmen more. I don't like Watchmen as a movie, but at least it's within his wheelhouse.

I agree, ideally it shouldn't happen. But I'll cut it some slack in the previous movies. Batman kills people in the Burton films. But I don't have much of a problem with that because it's done in a pretty whimsical way within a more whimsical interpretation. Ideally, I could do without it, but it doesn't shock me like Batman ripping a knife out of himself and stabbing a man with it because Snyder executes it in such a brutal, off handed way.

Agreed. I think that Snyder has tried way too hard to deconstruct these heroes, and it just doesn't work. People like the way these characters are, and of course different interpretations are good, but there comes a time when there can be too much change in the wrong areas. It ends up coming across that he doesn't actually like the characters.

The Burton movies are guilty of the killing thing too. I think that the reason I'm personally less harsh on them is because the production design, and the performances are so entertaining that they save the movies for me. Though, I definitely think the Burton movies have a lot of character flaws, especially when you put them up against something like TDK trilogy, but overall I think they're more entertaining movies than what Snyder has done

 

[Doctor Jones]

Agreed. I think that Snyder has tried way too hard to deconstruct these heroes, and it just doesn't work. People like the way these characters are, and of course different interpretations are good, but there comes a time when there can be too much change in the wrong areas. It ends up coming across that he doesn't actually like the characters.

The Burton movies are guilty of the killing thing too. I think that the reason I'm personally less harsh on them is because the production design, and the performances are so entertaining that they save the movies for me. Though, I definitely think the Burton movies have character flaws, especially when you put them up against something like TDK trilogy, but overall I think they're more entertaining movies than what Snyder has done

I wouldn't mind a deconstructionist Superman story, but at least let's have enough straightforward Superman movies that get the character right first. And if you're going to be deconstructionist, it should be how in the end, Superman is a hero. Now one could argue BVS does this, but it's done all wrong. Superman is horrible from the beginning, gets worse in the middle and his whole "redemption" in the end is unearned. The last shot of this movie ends on Superman's grave! Oh, yeah, the kids will really love it!

Like I said, I think those things you stated are because it's housed in a more whimsical and fun story. His Batman films are more like monster movies with some Gothic fairy tale thrown into BR.

 

[Erzengel]

The Burton movies are guilty of the killing thing too. I think that the reason I'm personally less harsh on them is because the production design, and the performances are so entertaining that they save the movies for me. Though, I definitely think the Burton movies have a lot of character flaws, especially when you put them up against something like TDK trilogy, but overall I think they're more entertaining movies than what Snyder has done

It's cause in BvS, Batman's "killings" are reckless to the point of Bay porn.

 

[Gothamsknight]

It's cause in BvS, Batman's "killings" are reckless to the point of Bay porn.

Very true.

I wouldn't mind a deconstructionist Superman story, but at least let's have enough straightforward Superman movies that get the character right first. And if you're going to be deconstructionist, it should be how in the end, Superman is a hero. Now one could argue BVS does this, but it's done all wrong. Superman is horrible from the beginning, gets worse in the middle and his whole "redemption" in the end is unearned. The last shot of this movie ends on Superman's grave! Oh, yeah, the kids will really love it!

Like I said, I think those things you stated are because it's housed in a more whimsical and fun story. His Batman films are more like monster movies with some Gothic fairy tale thrown into BR.

Yeah, exactly. There's a time and a place for it, but right now, I'd love to see a traditional Superman story. I hope it happens sooner rather than later.

and yes you're spot on about Burtons movies.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I can't even take that warehouse scene seriously. It's comical of how over the top it is. Sure it has probably the best Batman fight choreography, but it's hard to enjoy it when I'm on pins and needles hoping Batman doesn't kill anybody. Look, my boy doesn't play nice and can put people in the hospital, but he doesn't aim crates at people's heads and throws them against concrete walls.

 

[Gothamsknight]

I can't even take that warehouse scene seriously. It's comical of how over the top it is. Sure it has probably the best Batman fight choreography, but it's hard to enjoy it when I'm on pins and needles hoping Batman doesn't kill anybody. Look, my boy doesn't play nice and can put people in the hospital, but he doesn't aim crates at people's heads and throws them against concrete walls.

That scene felt more forced than anything haha. I don't really care for it at all.

 

[Erzengel]

I can't even take that warehouse scene seriously. It's comical of how over the top it is. Sure it has probably the best Batman fight choreography, but it's hard to enjoy it when I'm on pins and needles hoping Batman doesn't kill anybody. Look, my boy doesn't play nice and can put people in the hospital, but he doesn't aim crates at people's heads and throws them against concrete walls.

I've said this before, but wow that's kind of sad, isn't it.

 

[Filmfreak]

That's the thing about action movies. Of course there is huge focus on the said action itself and that is what you primarily expect to see, but story, characters and overall writing are key ingredients as well. If they fail to make you care and relate, action on its own feels empty and irrelevant and it eventually fails to entertain.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I've said this before, but wow that's kind of sad, isn't it.

It's hard to be impressed when you're horrified. Snyder has no self awareness that his style brings. Something that's as simple and straightforward as a fight scene is actually depicted as a murder spree in Snyder's vision.

 

[The Batman]

It wreaks of a contrarians dream version of Batman that goes against everything that makes the character so unique and special.

This is exactly how I feel when posters describe their Batman preferences in "The Batman" forum.

In all seriousness, though...Ben Affleck Batman is how a lot of people either see Batman or want Batman to be. An edgy, psuedo-Frank Castle. Him having a comic accurate costume and Arkham-Game style fight moves for one scene cemented things.

 

[metaphysician]

Bale, by a mile. Affleck didn't ever actually get to play Batman, instead being fobbed off with something more like a bad 90s knockoff.

 

[metaphysician]

What is it with the ardent, adoring fans of Bat-Fleck?

Affleck ( or rather, Snyder ) presented a Batman that a certain subset of Batman "fans" always wanted: one who had all the cool superficial aspects, like the costume, but was not "held back" by "uncool" aspects like a solid moral foundation or a coherent characterization. Bat-Affleck is Batman reduced to an restrained power fantasy, Batman as pornography.

 

[metaphysician]

I wouldn't mind a deconstructionist Superman story, but at least let's have enough straightforward Superman movies that get the character right first. And if you're going to be deconstructionist, it should be how in the end, Superman is a hero. Now one could argue BVS does this, but it's done all wrong. Superman is horrible from the beginning, gets worse in the middle and his whole "redemption" in the end is unearned. The last shot of this movie ends on Superman's grave! Oh, yeah, the kids will really love it!

Like I said, I think those things you stated are because it's housed in a more whimsical and fun story. His Batman films are more like monster movies with some Gothic fairy tale thrown into BR.

One of the ( many ) problems at play here is that, while Snyder definitely likes deconstructionist works, and tries to ape them, he doesn't really understand them, or realize that he didn't actually *create* a deconstruction. Deconstructionism is fundamentally about changing the underlying assumptions or context of a story in order to better understand it and find or reveal a hidden or unacknowledged meaning. This requires care and intent, both of which are absent in both movies.

For instance, the "world of cardboard" aspect of Superman's implication is totally a valid angle for deconstructive analysis. And Superman sure does destroy a lot of stuff in MoS with the casualness of cardboard. And the effect this has on any of the characters and their arcs? Not a damn thing. It doesn't play into or contrast with the moral philosophies of either Jor-El or Jonathan Kent, Clark himself doesn't react to it, the villains don't notice or comment on it, the various human bystanders don't seem to notice. Hell, the closest thing to a character defining moment in the movie, when Clark kills Zod? Only makes it stand out even more that the same Clark who is horrified at killing Zod just spent what felt like half the movie *not* noticing or reacting to the sheer collateral damage around him. And then mere minutes later everyone forgets about it. It has no thematic meaning, no influence on character arcs, it just exists because big scale destruction is "cool".

( And then when the topic actually is *finally* broached in BvS, it is broached by. . . having concern about the collateral damage in Metropolis be the domain of a murderous psycho who is functionally the antagonist of the movie, and whose arc is realizing that he was wrong to ever think that way. Because apparently the only way you could ever be concerned about a godlike being recklessly causing destruction is if you are the villain or an unknowing pawn of the villain. Yay? )

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Ben would probably have wound up being a better in-costume Batman had he had more time/gotten to play the role in a film by a better director (himself) but, obviously, Bale by a mile. He's just playing a richer, more nuanced character and the excellence of his Bruce Wayne makes up for the occasional weakness of his Batman.

Plus... I love Ben to death, I think Ben is a phenomenal filmmaker and he transformed an abysmal version of Batman on the page into a genuinely compelling performance which he deserves tremendous praise for but he isn't in the same league of performer as Bale. He's a very good actor but Bale is the best actor to play a superhero (not the best performance of a superhero, mind you, just the best actor overall).

 

[Frodo]

As someone who's been watching Affleck since the 90s, it was hard for me to ever see him as Batman/Bruce Wayne, and not as the Hollywood personality ,or the guy from Kevin Smith films, Good Will Hunting, Armageddon etc.

It was always Ben Affleck in a Batman suit ,as opposed to me being able to suspend my disbelief and seeing Batman.

I have a bit of the same issue with Pattinson's casting as Batman, to an extent given that he's also been a pretty high profile actor for a decade, though I'm not gonna judge his performance before I see it.

Bale is a chameleon as an actor both physically and in his performance. He can go from rail thin in The Machinist , to Jacked in Batman Begins, to Dick Cheney in Vice. He transforms.

So, it was alot easier for me to see him and believe, "That's Batman" . It's easier for me to see him take on the different sides of Bruce, and play him at different ages, and I can never think "that's Bale".

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

That's a good way of putting it. Bale became the character. Affleck was just Ben Affleck doing cosplay. He was a lot like George Clooney's portrayal in that regard.

 

[SiegePerilous]

Bale is a far better actor than Affleck in general, but truthfully I've come around to not really caring much for either of them as Batman. Looks wise, Affleck looks the part better, had a better costume, and had at least one awesome fight scene that looked like Batman come to life. He has limited range as an actor, but I think Batman can fit within that range. He would have been better casting when he was younger and had better talent behind the camera, because it's that that really lets down his turn as Batman. It's all in service to a pretty dumb character arc and story. That and the voice modulator is a dumb copout.

Bale's Batman had better character writing to make you invested in him, we actually got to see his journey. His Bat-voice is still distractingly dumb though. Affleck's might have been better if we could have been allowed to hear it.

Honestly, Keaton and West are still probably the best live action Batmen overall, and DCAU Batman still trumps all the live action stuff by a country mile.

 

[Awest66]

Bale is a far better actor than Affleck in general, but truthfully I've come around to not really caring much for either of them as Batman. Looks wise, Affleck looks the part better, had a better costume, and had at least one awesome fight scene that looked like Batman come to life. He has limited range as an actor, but I think Batman can fit within that range. He would have been better casting when he was younger and had better talent behind the camera, because it's that that really lets down his turn as Batman. It's all in service to a pretty dumb character arc and story. That and the voice modulator is a dumb copout.

Bale's Batman had better character writing to make you invested in him, we actually got to see his journey. His Bat-voice is still distractingly dumb though. Affleck's might have been better if we could have been allowed to hear it.

Honestly, Keaton and West are still probably the best live action Batmen overall, and DCAU Batman still trumps all the live action stuff by a country mile.

I disagree about Keaton. His lack of actual character and failure to properly capture the Bruce Wayne persona are far bigger strikes against him for me than Bale having a growly Batman voice.

On the DCAU thing, I would agree if were talking about just TAS Batman. Looking at DCAU Batman in his entirety forces me to acknowledge his having an affair with Jim Gordon's Daughter (yuck)

 

[Lily Adler]

I disagree about Keaton. His lack of actual character and failure to properly capture the Bruce Wayne persona are far bigger strikes against him for me than Bale having a growly Batman voice.

On the DCAU thing, I would agree if were talking about just TAS Batman. Looking at DCAU Batman in his entirety forces me to acknowledge his having an affair with Jim Gordon's Daughter (yuck)

Yeah most of us try to ignore this...

 

[SiegePerilous]

I disagree about Keaton. His lack of actual character and failure to properly capture the Bruce Wayne persona are far bigger strikes against him for me than Bale having a growly Batman voice.

On the DCAU thing, I would agree if were talking about just TAS Batman. Looking at DCAU Batman in his entirety forces me to acknowledge his having an affair with Jim Gordon's Daughter (yuck)

Eh, I feel Keaton is better as Batman while Bale is better as Bruce Wayne. Keaton's Bruce, while not sufficiently different enough from his Batman, is at least not as annoying to watch as having to listen to the Bat growl.

I mainly mean early BTAS Batman (before the design change). That still reigns supreme in my heart, and I definitely do not like the Bruce/Barbara crap. Overall though, I'd still probably rank the DCAU version above all others in terms of being faithful to the character while also being fun

 

[The Batman]

My only problem with the Timmverse Bruce/Babs thing is that she was into Dick Grayson at first. In general, Timm only took something that was flirted with in the Adam West show and actually made it a thing.

 

[Neil McCauley]

Bale is both the better actor and Batman with the far superior movies.

I did like Affleck, BvS and had no problem with him killing tho.

 

[Awest66]

Eh, I feel Keaton is better as Batman while Bale is better as Bruce Wayne. Keaton's Bruce, while not sufficiently different enough from his Batman, is at least not as annoying to watch as having to listen to the Bat growl.

I mainly mean early BTAS Batman (before the design change). That still reigns supreme in my heart, and I definitely do not like the Bruce/Barbara crap. Overall though, I'd still probably rank the DCAU version above all others in terms of being faithful to the character while also being fun

Is the Batman voice really that annoying honestly? It was perfectly fine in Batman Begins and while it may have gotten a bit too growly at points in the next two movies, It never became unbearable. I dont think that should be the deciding factor when weighed against something like "lack of character" for Keaton. Bruce Wayne is the most important part of the character so how well that part is played really should be the deciding factor in the overall portayal.

Ive grown a lot more critical of the DCAU in recent years (even early TAS) but I do agree on it being Kevin Conroys best work as the character.