Nave 'Torment'
Vigilante Detective
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2010
- Messages
- 4,742
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
I don't think that Affleck should even try to "top" any of the previous incarnations of Batman, just as Cavill didn't try to "top" Reeve. Both Christian Bale and Michael Keaton are definitive Batmen to a great many fans, and seeing as how the purpose of this film is not to explore Batman's gradual development as a character, I am inclined to believe that we will not get a portrayal that is even remotely similar to the existing ones.
I personally would love to see BatFleck as this Dionysian force to be reckoned with. Just as Goyer and Nolan wrote in The Joker in TDK, give that role to Batman in this one. A sort of Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns retold through the eyes of Superman, where Batman is an unstoppable and uncompromising force who shows Clark just how far the human spirit can go despite having physical limitations.
On that note, if there would be a catch-theme in the film, it could be "limitations" -- Superman explores the things that limits him as a public hero which Batman doesn't have to deal with (assuming he is public enemy #1 from the get-go, save for a few who feel that Superman isn't the hero he is meant to be), the limitations he feels regarding his own humanity in a world where he is utterly exposed and his only civilian identity is "fake" (until he learns a thing or two from Bruce about "secret identities" and I dunno, maybe a throw-in line about how his dad would've approved of it) and then you have Clark dealing with his physical limitations (Kryptonite) just as Batman and the rest of humanity is once faced against the reality of a "Superman" walking among us.
In many ways, if Snyder manages to make this less spectacle-laden and maybe get Ben Affleck or Watchmen-scribe David Hayter to polish the script, it could be the movie that surprises everyone on a much deeper level. I think a part of MoS that was flawed is that the script assumed people would take its universe very seriously from the get-go, that's something Snyder always assumes in all of his movies. Look at 300 or Sucker Punch or Watchmen and you see that he assumes that comic-book / pop-cultural sensibilities would be appreciated on the same serious level as high-art. Nolan did the same with his Dark Knight Trilogy, but he never forgot that at the end of the day all of this "seriousness" in the script has to come naturally. When TDK started off it was true-blue action noir flick, but the more you saw of the Joker and Dent the more you started to get into those deeper philosophical dilemmas about chaos and order and what not. In the middle you had Batman trying to find that balance. I am not counting on a Batman-exploration like that, I'd however love to see how the iconography of these two heroes play out. Maybe Snyder gets an advantage this time because we already have a legacy established for both Batman and Superman. But if he wants to make his film serious, he needs to start from a not-so-serious place and then gradually get into it.
For Batman, that's seen by introducing him as a generic force or outsider or "unspoken" champion for the audience, and then gradually showing us how dangerous Batman really is. The portrayal should be about Batman as a threat, as a potential menace, as someone whose very existence threatens a lot of the things that Superman is struggling to defend. I don't think that the portryal that Bale put on, as this human being struggling to become a symbol of fear and hope applies to this one. This should be mythical, urban-legend Batman. Not humanistic Batman. This should really be a Batman we are all slightly afraid of.
...because even Superman isn't capable of stopping him.
I personally would love to see BatFleck as this Dionysian force to be reckoned with. Just as Goyer and Nolan wrote in The Joker in TDK, give that role to Batman in this one. A sort of Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns retold through the eyes of Superman, where Batman is an unstoppable and uncompromising force who shows Clark just how far the human spirit can go despite having physical limitations.
On that note, if there would be a catch-theme in the film, it could be "limitations" -- Superman explores the things that limits him as a public hero which Batman doesn't have to deal with (assuming he is public enemy #1 from the get-go, save for a few who feel that Superman isn't the hero he is meant to be), the limitations he feels regarding his own humanity in a world where he is utterly exposed and his only civilian identity is "fake" (until he learns a thing or two from Bruce about "secret identities" and I dunno, maybe a throw-in line about how his dad would've approved of it) and then you have Clark dealing with his physical limitations (Kryptonite) just as Batman and the rest of humanity is once faced against the reality of a "Superman" walking among us.
In many ways, if Snyder manages to make this less spectacle-laden and maybe get Ben Affleck or Watchmen-scribe David Hayter to polish the script, it could be the movie that surprises everyone on a much deeper level. I think a part of MoS that was flawed is that the script assumed people would take its universe very seriously from the get-go, that's something Snyder always assumes in all of his movies. Look at 300 or Sucker Punch or Watchmen and you see that he assumes that comic-book / pop-cultural sensibilities would be appreciated on the same serious level as high-art. Nolan did the same with his Dark Knight Trilogy, but he never forgot that at the end of the day all of this "seriousness" in the script has to come naturally. When TDK started off it was true-blue action noir flick, but the more you saw of the Joker and Dent the more you started to get into those deeper philosophical dilemmas about chaos and order and what not. In the middle you had Batman trying to find that balance. I am not counting on a Batman-exploration like that, I'd however love to see how the iconography of these two heroes play out. Maybe Snyder gets an advantage this time because we already have a legacy established for both Batman and Superman. But if he wants to make his film serious, he needs to start from a not-so-serious place and then gradually get into it.
For Batman, that's seen by introducing him as a generic force or outsider or "unspoken" champion for the audience, and then gradually showing us how dangerous Batman really is. The portrayal should be about Batman as a threat, as a potential menace, as someone whose very existence threatens a lot of the things that Superman is struggling to defend. I don't think that the portryal that Bale put on, as this human being struggling to become a symbol of fear and hope applies to this one. This should be mythical, urban-legend Batman. Not humanistic Batman. This should really be a Batman we are all slightly afraid of.
...because even Superman isn't capable of stopping him.
Well done, man!
