The Batman Reboot Casting Thread - Part 3

[Britannic]

waste lol alfred was probably one of the best characters in nolan's trilogy

Um, he was ok, I guess - in the Nolan movies.
But what about the reboot??
I would want to see Oldman in a kick ass role - or nothing.

 

[shauner111]

if you haven't seen Drive, the Gosling suggestions will sound beyond silly. He has the brooding and violence in that movie (which we'll see more of in next years movies he'll be appearing in). And if people are gonna say he doesn't have the hair color or the voice for it...you're simple minded. Hair-dye and acting skills fix those problems. Otherwise he has the billionaire playboy down perfectly.

 

[Deathstroke]

Says the guy thats never seen Drive

Seen Drive. Gosling is still incredibly wrong for Batman.

 

[Changeling]

Seen Drive. Gosling is still incredibly wrong for Batman.

I don't believe you've seen it. But okay. That's your opinion! Awesome username btw

 

[Deathstroke]

Even overlooking his appearance being off, I can't picture this voice and acting style suiting Bruce Wayne or Batman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tim8XNViTss

It was a good performance in that film, but I saw no shades of Batman or aspects of Gosling's performance that evoked Batman.

 

[shauner111]

Even overlooking his appearance being off, I can't picture this voice and acting style suiting Bruce Wayne or Batman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tim8XNViTss

It was a good performance in that film, but I saw no shades of Batman or aspects of Gosling's performance that evoked Batman.

See, i had the opposite reaction. When i saw that scene i said "Gosling should be Batman".

 

[Edguy]

I don't want Bane to plat Batman, thank you.

Seriously though, Hardy don't look charming, calm or smart enough to be either Bruce Wayne or Batman.

 

[CConn]

Okay, I'm gonna say this...

I think immediate support of Gosling as Batman just because he played a tough guy in Drive is dumb. There's a hundred different ways to play a tough guy, and Gosling definitely channeled more of a Marlon Brando/Robert DeNiro vibe than Batman.

That said, what makes me think he could play the role of Batman extremely well, is how...likeable he was somehow able to make his character in Drive, despite having a pretty big absence of dialogue to convey that likability or genuine emotion.

And THAT's what it takes to play Batman. That's what Michael Keaton did so tremendously well in Burton's movies. When you're able to have an actor, who can retain a strong, likeable screen presence, despite being a pretty violent, deplorable, or downright psychotic character, you have a talent on your hands.

Gosling was able to do that in Drive. He was able to be psychotic and violent, but still convey an inner core of innocence and care. And I think, if there's one thing Nolan and Bale were never able to achieve with their movies and their Batman, it was that bridge of anger and innocence.

So no, Gosling's voice and acting style really doesn't scream Batman. But neither did Keaton's. But it really doesn't matter. I don't think, at least. Because its that silent, visual, and emotional acting that really makes or breaks a performance - not a verbal styling or event physical look.

 

[shauner111]

Okay, I'm gonna say this...

I think immediate support of Gosling as Batman just because he played a tough guy in Drive is dumb. There's a hundred different ways to play a tough guy, and Gosling definitely channeled more of a Marlon Brando/Robert DeNiro vibe than Batman.

That said, what makes me think he could play the role of Batman extremely well, is how...likeable he was somehow able to make his character in Drive, despite having a pretty big absence of dialogue to convey that likability or genuine emotion.

And THAT's what it takes to play Batman. That's what Michael Keaton did so tremendously well in Burton's movies. When you're able to have an actor, who can retain a strong, likeable screen presence, despite being a pretty violent, deplorable, or downright psychotic character, you have a talent on your hands.

Gosling was able to do that in Drive. He was able to be psychotic and violent, but still convey an inner core of innocence and care. And I think, if there's one thing Nolan and Bale were never able to achieve with their movies and their Batman, it was that bridge of anger and innocence.

So no, Gosling's voice and acting style really doesn't scream Batman. But neither did Keaton's. But it really doesn't matter. I don't think, at least. Because its that silent, visual, and emotional acting that really makes or breaks a performance - not a verbal styling or event physical look.

It's the intensity in the eyes, which Gosling has (and had in that scene that was just posted from Drive). And it's like you say, the likeability while showing the audience some questionable acts of violence or choices on his part. Keaton and Bale did it. And i think Gosling has that as well.

But the intensity in the eyes is very important for me, more than an actual build..which an actor can achieve by hitting the gym. Luckily Gosling has the build, the intensity, the looks, the range, what more do you want? Voice/Hair-Color? How are those things impossible to achieve?

 

[CConn]

Bale didn't do it at all, though.

 

[shauner111]

Yes he did. To me he did anyway.

But Keaton proved that you didn't need to have all those qualities. He had intensity, range and likeability and it worked just fine. Gosling (in my opinion) has even more going for him than Keaton. Maybe not as much as Bale or even Fassbender but it's still a lot.

 

[CConn]

With Drive and Keaton's Batman, there was a marked absence of dialogue to describe how the character was feeling, thusly leaving it entirely upon the actor's shoulders to describe their emotional condition. Purely by the way Nolan's movies were written, Bale never even had the opportunity to do it. Everything was explained through dialogue.

 

[shauner111]

I dont think that's entirely true. But in most cases you're right. But that has to do with writing. Bale still had everything (especially in Begins if you're looking at his physique).

 

[Changeling]

Bale looked the most like Bruce in BB for sure. and that costume was the best, if that costume were combined with TDK's in TDKR that would have been perfect. they had the perfect opportunity to update that costume but they really dropped the ball.

 

[CConn]

I dont think that's entirely true. But in most cases you're right. But that has to do with writing. Bale still had everything (especially in Begins if you're looking at his physique).

Actually, I find Bale to be rather emotionally hollow as an actor. In fact, he's either chosen characters who are naturally emotionally vacant, or he's approached the role from that perspective himself. From American Psycho, to Equilibrium, The Machinist, The Prestige and Batman, all of Bale's characters have, at their core, been emotionally vacant in some way.

That said, the one role I've seen him in where he really did emote a great deal was The Fighter. His role as Dicky Eklund was imbibed with an incredible amount of care and heart that honestly seemed to be one of the more genuine performances I've ever seen.

Bale looked the most like Bruce in BB for sure. and that costume was the best, if that costume were combined with TDK's in TDKR that would have been perfect. they had the perfect opportunity to update that costume but they really dropped the ball.

I can't wait for the day that people realize a pretty face and a cool costume makes up for about one tenth of a successful performance.

 

[Changeling]

Your quoting me was purely antagonistic but Ill respond anyway.

I as a comic book fan, have the right to complain about comic book costumes, thats what we do. And we also complain when actors dont look like their comic book counterparts.

But clearly talent comes before anything else, Im aware of that. But like you said, a cool costume and looking like the character should be taken into account (you said 10%) but talent matters most.

Is it wrong for me to want comic book characters on film to look like their comic book counterparts? No, its not.

 

[BestGirl]

I'm beginning to like the idea of Karl Urban for Batman in JLA!
(Coz he's pro'lly too old for the reboot)

I can't get behind Urban just because I find him to be kind of ugly.

 

[BestGirl]

I don't want Bane to plat Batman, thank you.

Seriously though, Hardy don't look charming, calm or smart enough to be either Bruce Wayne or Batman.

Wow, you don't think Hardy can play charming, calm, and smart? Have you seen Inception?

 

[shauner111]

I don't want Bane to plat Batman, thank you.

Seriously though, Hardy don't look charming, calm or smart enough to be either Bruce Wayne or Batman.

Hardys not the greatest at doing a straight up american accent. And he's played Bane already. So i say hell no to him too.

But Hardy...as not charming?? Calm or smart enough??? I think you should see more of his movies. Cuz it seems like you dont have a clue about Tom Hardy.

His character in Inception for example was all of those things wrapped in 1 gift basket.

 

[Changeling]

Tom Hardy as Lex Luthor is a better idea methinks!

 

[CConn]

Your quoting me was purely antagonistic but Ill respond anyway.

I as a comic book fan, have the right to complain about comic book costumes, thats what we do. And we also complain when actors dont look like their comic book counterparts.

But clearly talent comes before anything else, Im aware of that. But like you said, a cool costume and looking like the character should be taken into account (you said 10%) but talent matters most.

Is it wrong for me to want comic book characters on film to look like their comic book counterparts? No, its not.

No, but that's always 90% of the discussion among fans.

And, in rare cases, you'll even have people who suggest people who are wholly under-qualified purely because they have the "physique" or the look.

Not trying to say you're doing that or anything, but still, I'd love to see more than three posts in a role dedicated to actual acting ability rather than physiques and costumes discussion.

 

[Changeling]

That's valid.

I think that comic book fans are coming around though, the Ryan Gosling choice is picking up steam and that clearly isnt because he looks like Batman, rather that hes a great actor.

 

[Eddie Dean]

R. Gos 4 Bats

 

[aNarcHy2day]

I can't get behind Urban just because I find him to be kind of ugly.

He's probably not gonna end up top of a "World's Sexiest Man" list but to call him ugly is... well... I can't seem to agree with that.

I think he has that ruggedness and charisma to pull off a middle aged Batman that I think JLA needs. Also, since Dredd bombed (no fault of his, in fact quite the contrary) and I think the only things on his plate are the possible Riddick sequel and as Bones in Star Trek. So he IS available unlike Fassbender.

The fact that he is 40 is against him though but that is why he is my pick for JLA and not a reboot which needs a younger Batman.

Also I think DC are planning the reboot way too soon. I personally don't wanna reboot till all other major properties have at least one movie- Flash, Wonder Woman.

Yes, I like the idea of Gosling headlining the reboot, just not the idea of the reboot being so soon (yeah, 2016 IS too soon).

And give that Hardy guy a break. He would have been a good Bruce. But he was Bane. Live with it!

 

[flickchick85]

I find Karl Urban to be much more attractive than about half the people discussed here (not more attractive than Tom Hardy though!), so I think he's easily good-looking enough for the role. I mean, those cheekbones! Those eyes! That's a hot guy, imo. He's not my favorite for the role or anything, but I certainly wouldn't complain if he were cast.

As for Hardy, I think he would have been an awesome Batman. He has proven in past roles he can be calm, intelligent, and extremely charming. But he was Bane, so it's not gonna happen and that's fine. There are plenty of good options out there.