Yesterday, the Internet practically imploded when it was announced that Ben Affleck will be donning Batman's iconic cape and cowl in 2015's Batman/Superman team-up film. Immediately, Twitter and Facebook lit up with loads of negative reactions.
This served as a reminder to me that comic book fans have incredibly short memories when it comes to casting announcements. Affleck's casting has, if some fans are to be believed, all but ruined the new DC cinematic universe. Before a single frame of film has been produced.
|Michael Keaton in 1989's Batman|
Yet even before shooting began at London's Pinewood Studios last fall, ''Batman'' generated more anger than anticipation among the comic book hero's fans - the hard-core audience for any film such as this. In a massive letter-writing campaign, objections were raised over the studio's emphasis on this high-concept Batman and the refusal to make a serious square-jawed film out of one of the most popular - and psychologically complex - comic book characters.The controversy, which erupted in the front pages of The Wall Street Journal and numerous trade publications, focused on the casting of Mr. Keaton, best known as the anarchic prankster in last year's comedy hit ''Beetlejuice,'' as the vengeful vigilante... The suspicion voiced by hundreds of angry fans was that ''Batman'' would be a campy send-up similar to the self-parodying but hugely popular 1960's television series.
Warner's rushed out a trailer to assuage fan's fears; the trailer was a success and Batman became a highly anticipated film. People believed that Mr. Mom could be the Dark Knight, and Keaton's performance has, for the most part, been remembered kindly as the years have passed.
Of course, Ledger's interpretation of the Clown Prince of Crime has gone on to be praised almost universally. Ledger stole the show in The Dark Knight, proved the naysayers wrong, and was captivating in every scene he was in. So you would think fans would have learned a lesson from Ledger's casting announcement and trusted the creative decisions of Christopher Nolan and his team when it came to casting announcements for The Dark Knight Rises, but interestingly enough, the same song and dance surfaced.
Fan concerns were raised with both Tom Hardy and Anne Hathaway. Tom Hardy wasn't deemed "big enough" to stand toe-to-toe with Christian Bale (Hardy stands around 5'-10" tall, while Bale is just over 6'). Never mind that Hardy looked every bit as muscle-bound as Bane needed to be. Never mind that height issues could be resolved through digital and practical trickery (see Elijah Wood and Sean Astin in the Lord of the Rings trilogy). Hardy wasn't tall enough. And Hathaway once played a princess in a Disney movie, so obviously she wasn't up to par.
|Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle in The Dark Knight Rises|
There are other examples, but these prior instances of fan outrage over Bat-casting serves as a perfect template regarding Affleck's announcement as the new Bruce Wayne. Keaton, Ledger, Hardy and Hathaway were all criticized based on roles they previously played, or superficial details like height. And all of this before a single frame of film was produced or released to the public.
Yes, Ben Affleck starred in Daredevil. It wasn't a great film by any stretch of the imagination, but it was also a financial success. On top of that, many times over the years I've heard that the Director's Cut of Daredevil is substantially better than the theatrical version. The film was evidently stripped of some of its more violent aspects in order to secure a PG-13 rating, but also cut an entire subplot which was restored in the Director's Cut. Overall, about 30 minutes of film was trimmed for the theatrical version. Empire Magazine still had problems with Affleck in the role, but stated the Director's Cut was truer to the character than the theatrical version.
And we all know how well films usually turn out when the studio steps into the director's or editor's chair.
Look, Affleck wasn't my first choice either. I was honestly expecting Josh Brolin to get the nod, since he was, evidently, a WB favorite for the part. Interestingly enough, when Brolin's name was being tossed around, I didn't see anyone throwing Jonah Hex into the mix, which was a much, much worse film than Daredevil could have ever hoped to be. Brolin is a fine enough actor, and Jonah Hex should be evidence enough that someone can still be a good actor even if they're in a mess of a film. Yes, Daredevil wasn't good per se, but it also came out twelve years ago. The rest of us likely don't want to be held to a standard of work that we produced twelve years ago. In this case, I think it's worth giving Affleck the benefit of the doubt.
Affleck's announcement comes as the script is still being written. We don't know what the tone of the film will be like, what the characterization will be like, or even the plot of the film. People may or may not like Ben Affleck, and that's their prerogative. But an actor's job is to portray someone they're not. With the announcement less than 24 hours old at the time of this posting, all I can say is relax. Reserve judgement until there's actually a product to see. Affleck is a big name in Hollywood, but Batman and Superman are being melded into a big machine, of which Affleck will be a cog. That's not meant to be demeaning in any way, but there will be a lot of pieces moving, seen and unseen, and Affleck will be but one of them. I have a hard time seeing anyone surpassing Christian Bale as Batman/Bruce Wayne any time soon, but for goodness sake's, let's give Ben Affleck a chance before citing him as the death of Batman.