CGTalk > Main > General Discussion
Login register
reply share thread « Previous Thread | Next Thread »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-23-2013, 02:13 PM   #61
joyceanblue
PRO
 
joyceanblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 120
i suppose oscar was not enough of a reward for making an american war propaganda film. this is not going to go down well.
 
Old 08-23-2013, 02:28 PM   #62
cookepuss
Lord of the posts
Rob
NYC, USA
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,268
I'm torn on this whole Affleck thing.

Part of me knows that he's actually a really good actor. He's actually got range enough to place the playboy AND the tortured soul. The other part of me knows, well, Daredevil. I blame most of that on the writing, but it still doesn't fully remove the stink latched onto Affleck himself.

IMO, Affleck is now in the same position that Chris Evans was coming into Captain America. He had to make people forget that he played Johnny Storm in the medicore Fantastic Four movie. It worked, but it could have easily not. Affleck faces the same challenge. He could be an awesome Batman OR he could totally bury the franchise for another 10 years.

What I will say is this. Michael Keaton, imo, was an amazing choice and nobody thought that it could have been possible. I saw Batman when it came out in 1989. I had only known Keaton for roles like Mr. Mom, Gung Ho, & Beetljuice. To me, the casting people for Batman were insane. I was intrigued, but still VERY skeptical.

The moment Keaton came on screen and said, "I'm Batman!" I was like, "Holy sh**! You ARE Batman." The fact that he was only 5'9" and didn't look like a model didn't bother me. Most billionaires look way more like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, & Michael Bloomberg than Christian Bale. What cemented Keaton for me as being an awesome Batman & Wayne is that he looked simultaneously tortured and psychotic.

If, as an older Batman, Affleck can pull of the whole grim, jaded, grizzled, & "I know better" attitude... I think that he might be able to nail it. If, instead, he either chooses to ape other Bat-actors then all hope is lost.

At the end of the day, it all comes back to the script for me though. Man of Steel had some excellent Jor-El & Krypton stuff, but the rest of the movie fell flat for me. Don't even get me started on that 3rd act.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyBug
I'm not thrilled but I wasn't much either when they announced Heat Ledger was cast as Joker. Although it is not by canon I would love to see Idris Elba as Batman, that would be even more shocking to the general audience

I don't think that "shocking" is even the right word. I don't think that anybody has a problem with color blind casting. In fact, most people here would probably agree that Idris Elba is an excellent actor who'd be great in pretty much any role.

The problem is that comics, unlike novels, are a visual medium. In effect, even without an actor in place, the character's visage has largely been cemented. We already have a preconceived notion concerning what the character's supposed to look like. The challenge for the casting director is to get somebody who fits that already defined depiction. So, while somebody like Donald Glover might have made a fine Spider-Man, the expectation was that he'd be Caucasian.

I attend NY Comic Con every year. On one of last year's panels, for the Avengers line of comics, they brought up the issue of race and diversity. The answer, while not shocking, exposes a simple and immutable fact: These iconic characters were created by white guys in a time when "white was right". These guys were a product of their times and their creations reflected that. Writers and artists of later generations saw this inequity and did the best they could to create new characters who didn't fit the mold of old. So, while there are a bunch of great characters of color, it just so happens that all of the old ones are white.

You could, in theory, still cast a guy like Idris Elba as Batman. He'd be awesome. Still, it doesn't change the fact that, by design, Batman was not white. It's not being racist. It's just that Batman's entire appearance was set in stone well before any movie ever got cast.

Compare that to a novel. We might have a general idea of how a character might look. We might be told that he's dashing, charismatic, square jawed, & utterly rich. However, we may not be told whether or not he's white, black, or something else - unless the author is trying to paint a particularly vivid picture or make a point. Even then, movie audiences would be a lot more accepting of a change because they don't have a physical picture to reference. Once that image is set in stone and you cast an actor to make that part visually iconic..... Try casting against design for somebody like James Bond or Dr. Who.

While these characters are fictional, it doesn't change our expectations of them. That'd be like casting Phillip Seymour Hoffman as Martin Luther King Jr. in a biopic. Great actor, but...

FTR, I've always held out hope that they'd have recast Bond with Elba in the lead. Not gonna happen, but one can dream.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The views presented herein do not necessarily represent those of my brain.
 
Old 08-23-2013, 03:16 PM   #63
Magnus3D
Expert
 
Magnus3D's Avatar
portfolio
Magnus Rönnkvist
Freelance 3D artist and photographer
Göteborg, Sweden
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,332
Send a message via ICQ to Magnus3D Send a message via MSN to Magnus3D Send a message via Yahoo to Magnus3D
When i found of Ben Affleck would be the new Batman i could help but feeling sad because it means the end of the great Batman character and movies we have enjoyed until now. He just can't do it, he haven't got the voice required, the acting and all that. No i'm sorry but i will move on to other superheroes now which will be portrayed by real actors.

/ Magnus
 
Old 08-23-2013, 05:15 PM   #64
cookepuss
Lord of the posts
Rob
NYC, USA
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnus3D
When i found of Ben Affleck would be the new Batman i could help but feeling sad because it means the end of the great Batman character and movies we have enjoyed until now.

Honestly? I have very mixed feelings about the Nolanverse Batman in general.

The first movie was passable. It was by no means perfect and had a bunch of flaws. There were a bunch of 3rd act problems. However, seeing as how it was an epic improvement above Batman & Robin, I think that (at the time) I hailed it as pretty magnificent. In hindsight, I'd call it above average at most.

The second movie was great. Ledger definitely deserved the Oscar. He stole the movie. TDK did have a few problems though. Dent's character seemed tacked on and the resolution to his story was awkward & rushed. Plus a few quirky moments annoy me to this day. Chief among them is how Batman jumped out the window to save his ex and left Joker with the guests at the party. (Look at how they jump to the next scene without any follow up. *ugh*) Still, the movie stands as the best of the series.

IMO, the 3rd movie was kinda sad. I figured that they'd have worked out the kinks by then. Nah. At best, it was as good as the first. At worst, which is where I feel it belongs, it was a steaming pile. Bane was terribly written, poorly acted, & just badly translated for the big screen. Catwoman just sat there. Hathaway was okay, but lacked any of the charm of her predecessors. Her plot just lay there like week old lasagna. The whole 2nd act sagged and dragged everything down. The final villain related plot twist felt tacked on. Batman's characterization was terrible. Making him a whiny recluse was an insult to fans. The fight choreography? Watch how some moves never hit, but the actors react anyway. Awful. Some movies get better on repeat viewings. TDKR? Not so much.

The Nolanverse always bugged me anyway. In an attempt to create a sense of reality and ground the movie, he boxed it in. In his vision, probably most of Batman's rogues gallery would be eliminated. Characters like Killer Croc, Clayface, & even Poison Ivy might be unrecognizable in his world. Here's where I have to hand it to Marvel. They try to ground their characters, but also embrace some of the wild things that've made them so popular. I can never see a character like Thor or Hulk existing in the Nolanverse.

I also never fully took to Bale. I think that his Bruce Wayne was excellent, but that his Batman was a bit off. That growl voice never sat well with me. Plus, I think that Nolan's Batman wasn't nearly as much of a great detective as the Batmen before him. He relied way too much on gadgets than deductive reasoning. I even got a feeling that, at times, Fox & Alfred were smarter than him. Batman has to be brilliant. Psychotic, but brilliant. I'm not sure that Nolan's Batman was a master strategist capable of outsmarting anybody. At times, he was more of a bully with principles than anything else.

I'm hoping that Snyder has a little something to offer that deviates from what has been the norm these past few years. Time to shake things up some.

Quote:
He just can't do it, he haven't got the voice required, the acting and all that.

Batman's not a voice. It's a an attitude. Most of the acting is done in the eyes. If you can get those eyes to look crazy and even a bit sad then you've got Batman. Batman is much better when he's quiet and in the shadows than growling out some monologue. Batman needs to be played by an actor who can embrace the darkness without overdoing it. Bale, imo, got close, but he missed the mark.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The views presented herein do not necessarily represent those of my brain.

Last edited by cookepuss : 08-23-2013 at 05:22 PM.
 
Old 08-23-2013, 05:20 PM   #65
Stankluv
Lord of the posts
Martin S
USA
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 723
@cgipadawan. I think an extra warm-up movie would be another origin movie. Another origin movie is the antichrist in my opinion. I am hoping that this gets Batman to where "Batman & Robin" failed to take the franchise. A James Bond like, grab-it-and-go status quo...maybe a status quo after the Justice League...where things just coexist, like in the comics.

(Bruce Wayne, rich, parents dead, Grows up to be Batman, fights crime, scary) + all new actors = the next Batman movie arc that hopefully does NOT contain a robust origin story.
 
Old 08-23-2013, 05:29 PM   #66
cookepuss
Lord of the posts
Rob
NYC, USA
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stankluv
the next Batman movie arc that hopefully does NOT contain a robust origin story.

Agreed. An origin would only be appropriate if we hadn't seen it retold in something like 20 years. At that point, it's about bringing it to a new generation of viewers. With TDKR still fresh in our minds, a "do over" on the origin seems like overkill. It's not as if that there's much more to offer. Most of the origin can be done in a quick flashback and within the core movie - if needed.

That's why the most recent Spider-Man annoyed me. It wasn't a bad movie, but there was no point in redoing the origin and then unnecessarily adding new stuff to it. They were just trying to wash the stain of Spider-Man 3 away and went a step too far. ASM should've just been a re-cast Spider-Man 4. That's it.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The views presented herein do not necessarily represent those of my brain.
 
Old 08-23-2013, 05:36 PM   #67
Stankluv
Lord of the posts
Martin S
USA
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 723
Also..."acting in the eyes" with a big prosthetic/cowl thing is equal parts Director, Cinematographer, Actor and Editor, minimally (I was around some VFX work that was remapping different facial features to different playback speeds...if you understand what that is....anything is possible with regards to massaging a performance.). People critiquing Ben Affleck's acting are being silly if they don't think he can pull any expression for the .8 second jump cuts that a Batman character is spotlighted under. Full frame or farther...Batman's eyes are pretty hard to make out, especially when he is moving in the slightest.

Ben Affleck is a square jawed, solid 6'4" (to Henry Cavill's 6'1"). He will look like Batman in the suit. He will look the right size fighting a depowered Superman (Who seems to have a more muscled physique). The raw pieces are perfect. I wanted an older Batman, but whatever.

It will be ok.
 
Old 08-23-2013, 06:07 PM   #68
cookepuss
Lord of the posts
Rob
NYC, USA
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stankluv
Ben Affleck is a square jawed, solid 6'4" (to Henry Cavill's 6'1"). He will look like Batman in the suit. He will look the right size fighting a depowered Superman (Who seems to have a more muscled physique). The raw pieces are perfect. I wanted an older Batman, but whatever.

Technically, he IS older. Only 2 years older than Bale, but easily 11 years older than Cavill. 42's not that old these days, but he's not exactly a 20-something either. As for the physique, I was reading that Affleck is now training for 2-3 hours each day to bulk up for the role.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The views presented herein do not necessarily represent those of my brain.
 
Old 08-23-2013, 07:30 PM   #69
zzacmann
Shaved Monkey
 
zzacmann's Avatar
portfolio
Zac Overcash
Animator
Vancouver, Canada
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by musashidan
I think you may have overstated this somewhat. A distant third? Personally I think that all three are in accord. Many fine actors make a role their own. Flesh out the character they perceive from the script. Improvise large swathes of the script even. There are many great examples: one being the incredible cast assembled for The Sopranos. The acting is top-drawer.


I'm not suggesting that great acting doesn't make a good film a great deal better, but crap acting can still be acceptable and even considered good if the writing and direction is good ie: Keanu Reeves in The Matrix or Schwarzenneger in T2. But the greatest actors can't help poor writing and direction - Michael Caine in Jaws Revenge, Hally Berry in Catwoman, Natalie Portman in the prequels.
__________________
"Have you ever just stared at it.......Marveled at its bee yooty?"
 
Old 08-23-2013, 07:47 PM   #70
kelgy
Stranger in Town
 
kelgy's Avatar
portfolio
Kel G
Professionally unemployed
Surrey, Canada
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzacmann
But the greatest actors can't help poor writing and direction - Michael Caine in Jaws Revenge, Hally Berry in Catwoman, Natalie Portman in the prequels.


There are some actors who can make any dialogue sound like gold. Peter Cushing was the master at it.
No matter what he was saying, his gravitas could make you take him seriously--thus a reason Lucas wanted him for Star Wars.
Also they can rewrite their own lines (i.e. Robert Shaw in Jaws).


Other actors are not up to it.
Portman and Berry are not in the same league.

Caine in Jaws the Revenge is a different story because he was primarily motivated by getting a house on a tropical island as payment for being in it.
 
Old 08-23-2013, 07:50 PM   #71
banman7
Frequenter
portfolio
United States Minor Outlying Islands
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 150
Quote:
Everybody said the same thing when Toby was announced as Spiderman, Daniel Craig as Bond, Ledger as Joker, etc, etc. It will be fine. I thought the same thing when I heard Christian Bale was going to play Batman. I thought this guy is too skinny and has a weird American accent. When Michael Keaton took on Batman everybody thought how the hell can Mr. Mom and Beetlejuice be Batman



Problem is that Affleck already has played a similiar character in the past, Daredevil, and guess what it did not work for him. He was part of what made the movie bad.

He can act but not every actor can be everybody. He specializes in political characters, good boys, and slightly good boy heroes. His buddy would have probably been a better Batman, Matt Damon or even Mark Walhberg.

The fact is Snyder is not the type of director who will get the best acting out of these guys and he has an eye for action but not for story, hence the slightly worse than the first, modern day Superman vs Batman.

I think DC universe has already failed before it began. What DC needs to do now is wait till Marvel pans out and folks are tired of superhero stories and then wait 6 years then reboot it all. 2030 should be good.
 
Old 08-23-2013, 08:45 PM   #72
Stankluv
Lord of the posts
Martin S
USA
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 723
Considering the mega-success of the last 3 Batman movies plus Man of Steel; to suggest that Warner Bros. is completely lost is just dumb. Honestly...everyone who has something negative to say or has some kind of alpha-nerd claim with regards to being disappointed with the deviation from a true version of this trademark vs. that trademarked character; just don't go see the next movie.

Maybe this is the part when you enter the next phase of your life. The part when you didn't see every super-hero movie and especially detested Batman. If you go see it, and if you are posting here we all know you will see it, then they win.

Your only effective voice is to not see it.

You could make some noise and discourage a few from not seeing it, but ultimately such an endeavor would be insipid. In the face of the true test, "how does the movie perform on its own merits?"; when this movie is a financial box office success (Anyone really betting against that?) such views will be amusing little, embarrassing footnotes of these individual's irrelevant intellects regarding the ways and means of Hollywood casting decisions. Plus, I thought you weren't going to see it?

I really don't care for the they vs. us characterization of Hollywood on an intellectual level, but I accept that it is a pervasive view. Regardless, it sounds like instead of breaking the internet, the Affleck casting decision is a great opportunity for a lot of people to get off the Batman Boat. I think the boat will continue to sail just fine without you.
 
Old 08-24-2013, 12:58 AM   #73
CGIPadawan
Part-Time Blenderite
 
CGIPadawan's Avatar
Giancarlo Ng
Quezon City, Philippines
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,886
Send a message via Yahoo to CGIPadawan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stankluv
@cgipadawan. I think an extra warm-up movie would be another origin movie. Another origin movie is the antichrist in my opinion. I am hoping that this gets Batman to where "Batman & Robin" failed to take the franchise. A James Bond like, grab-it-and-go status quo...maybe a status quo after the Justice League...where things just coexist, like in the comics.

(Bruce Wayne, rich, parents dead, Grows up to be Batman, fights crime, scary) + all new actors = the next Batman movie arc that hopefully does NOT contain a robust origin story.


But it IS already a grab-it-and-go system.

If you think of the Dark Knight Trilogy just like the Frank Miller books... they are each their own set. Now, just like in the comics, any team can step in... make their own Batman and just run with it.

Nobody in comics does "Year One" again... that's Frank Miller's stuff... Everybody now just does their own Batman. Their own costume, their own everything. When Jim Lee had his "HUSH" run, he didn't care about re-doing an origin again. In fact, he referenced everything from the Tim Burton films to whatever else he liked, and his version of the Batmobile looked like a Lamborghini.

I also don't remember Lucius Fox being in the HUSH series either... .the idea of Fox being the "genius on the Batman Team" was itself an interpretation of Nolan (and only in his work). It is not dogma or whatever.

Fans didn't say: "Hey! You can't do that... You gotta start over with an origin."

No, you don't need one. You just start up with a totally new Batman. Besides Nolan's trilogy ending basically now ends with "The point of the mask is that anybody can be Batman".

So... that's basically his way of handing it off.

So if Snyder wants a Batman who can "make antidotes and things"... That's game.

If you're talking about "starts"... The Tim Burton start I think can work. In the 1989 Batman, Batman arrives as an absolute. He simply "is". And then in his cave you can now have both the 1989 Batmobile and the Nolan-verse Batmobile... Which is basically a way of screwing up reality.... hehehe.

The HUSH Bat-Cave featured all things Batman in the same arsenal, for example:


Come to think of it, given how it starts and everything, and the amount of Rogues Gallery/World building elements... I wouldn't mind using "HUSH" as the base material for a kind of "Batman Re-Direction" film.

"HUSH" had this quality where much of the emotional range from the Nolanverse exists, but you have all this "wild design" going on and all these "hyper-escalated criminals"..... If you're going to probably build towards a world where "super things happen"... HUSH is a good base to start from.

But I'd probably shy away from using scene-stealers like The Joker...and probably remove quite a few characters.... Would be interesting to mix it with a couple of other stories and make it as a kind of "First and Final Appearance of Robin" type of story....

Anyways, my point is... No need for origin. Focus on something NEW to tell and tack on the "New World of DC" thing...

It'll work.
__________________
"Your most creative work is pre-production, once the film is in production, demands on time force you to produce rather than create."
REVERSION

Last edited by CGIPadawan : 08-24-2013 at 01:20 AM.
 
Old 08-24-2013, 06:25 PM   #74
Calabi
Frequenter
 
Calabi's Avatar
portfolio
Wobbleyou
London, United Kingdom
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 148
I dont think Ben Affleck will work. He cant play unhinged. Both Micheal Keaton and Christian Bale have both played unhinged characters. Batman is basically crazy, he's not some normal guy who just decided to dress up because he's rich. Ben Affleck is too, nice too normal, I havent seen him play anyone thats crazy convincingly. Only a crazy person can convince you there Batman.

Plus he just looks like Ben Affleck.
 
Old 08-24-2013, 11:06 PM   #75
JoeyP88
PRO
portfolio
Joey
Hampton, USA
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calabi
I dont think Ben Affleck will work. He cant play unhinged. Both Micheal Keaton and Christian Bale have both played unhinged characters. Batman is basically crazy, he's not some normal guy who just decided to dress up because he's rich. Ben Affleck is too, nice too normal, I havent seen him play anyone thats crazy convincingly. Only a crazy person can convince you there Batman.

Plus he just looks like Ben Affleck.


Sorry, I don't buy that. Bruce Wayne and Batman are both perfectly sane. The Joker, the Penguin, Riddler, and most definitely Two Face are all crazy, but not Batman. At least that was the normal canon for more than 60 years. If what you really mean is that Bruce Wayne has a degree of OCD which drives him to put on a cape and mask and hunt down criminals in the dead of night then yeah, i'll accept that, but OCD is not the same as crazy.

When Bruce Wayne decided to use the bat as his icon he did so because he wanted a symbol that would drive fear in the hearts of all criminals. It(Batman) wasn't some half-baked thought or the result of an imbalanced mind. Bruce Wayne is a brilliant man with an incredible degree of deductive reasoning and empathy. Is he obsessed, abso-frikkin-lutely, but no more than Thomas Edison, Einstein, Steve Jobs, James Cameron, or any number of others who are driven beyond that of the average individual.

The Batman persona is an act, a tool effectively used to strike fear into the heart of a class of people whom fear very little, and more importantly lack any fear for the justice system and what it might do to them if they commit a crime. But take an irrational symbol of a creature that was once used as inspiration for the vampire , learn how to disappear into the shadows and appear at will like ghost, and now you have tool that even the most street hardened criminal will learn to fear.

No, Batman is not crazy, nor is he unhinged, but he would sure like for all criminals he comes in contact with to think he is.
 
reply share thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.