Film

Affleck as Batman? Why the hell not!

So, for the past week the internet’s been blowing up following the announcement that – amidst reported competition from pretty-boys Ryan Gosling and Bradley Cooper – none other than Ben Affleck will be donning the cape and cowl in the Man of Steel sequel, dubbed ‘Superman vs. Batman’. Angsty teens and comic book purists have lashed out at the prospect of somebody as ‘hit-and-miss’ as Ben f****** Affleck playing the world’s most beloved superhero. Now, I’ll admit that I was one of those critics. It was the first thing I saw when I switched on my laptop in the morning, and it ruined my day. I was furious. The prospect of a post-Nolan Batman is still a fresh wound for many and Affleck’s casting comes across as a giant middle-finger to the fans that have come to see Christian Bale as the ‘definitive’ Batman. But it’s a week later, I’ve had some time to cool down, some time to consider and… it’s actually a pretty damn good choice.

Most people’s reluctance to accept Ben Affleck as Bruce Wayne stems from his acting credits, specifically those of his earlier career. But even with such terrible titles as ‘Reindeer Games’ and ‘Gigli’, the one that critics have singled out is 2003’s ‘Daredevil’. Affleck played the lead of Matt Murdock, a blind lawyer who would at night don the red suit of the Daredevil and exact the justice that so often escapes in the courtroom. It was truly an awful film, and Affleck himself was singled-out as the chief culprit for such a disastrous take on the Marvel hero. Simply because he’s failed to shine as a superhero – ten years ago, I might add – nobody seems to think that he could do it again.

Well, I’ve got news for you: ‘Superman vs. Batman’ isn’t Daredevil, and Ben Affleck isn’t the same actor he was ten years ago. Since then he’s ducked out of acting and focused on directing – something that he truly excels at. If you need any convincing, go watch ‘Argo’. It’s so talked-up for a reason, and the many nominations that Affleck received for his direction were not awarded without cause. Affleck’s focus on directing over acting shows that he has matured: he’s gotten to know his own strengths, and if he didn’t think he’d be up to playing Bruce Wayne then I doubt that he would have accepted the role. It also paves the way for his involvement in future DC film projects. He’s expressed a keen interest in being involved with what I’ll call the ‘Justice League’ movement, which ‘Superman vs. Batman’ will undoubtedly pave the way for, and any involvement from him off-screen would be a plus.

Also, don’t you think that Affleck kind of fits the bill? ‘Superman vs. Batman’ will show an ageing Bruce Wayne, a figure who’s experienced a lot and seen some ugly things along the way. That brooding demeanour and those streaks of grey that Affleck’s been sporting lately sure scream ‘retired crime fighter’ to me. He would also, I think, offer more of a balance between the two sides of the character. One of the few issues I had with Christian Bale’s Batman was that, while he made for an excellent Batman, he never really sold me as Bruce Wayne, eccentric billionaire. Bale threw himself in to his scenes in the bat-suit, but could never quite seem to reach the same heights in the Armani. Affleck’s a seasoned actor who can convey a lot with very little, as he demonstrated with his lead performance in ‘Argo’, and this is an invaluable quality when dealing with a character as complicated as Batman.

So, yeah, I’m excited about this film, and I’m not afraid to say that Affleck’s casting has a lot to do with it. At the end of the day, it’s a ‘Man of Steel’ sequel, not a straight-Batman film. So, despite what the recent consensus on the internet may be, Affleck will most likely not make or break this film. Just be happy that we get to see Superman and Batman on the same screen, fellow nerds.

Click to comment
To Top