Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
GustavoLeao

Ben Affleck no longer directing The Batman

75 posts in this topic

Superman HAS been highly anticipated.  But they haven't delivered anything remotely close to being good in decades.  37 years is a long time to make bad movies.  But he's been more successful on TV than anything Batman related. 

Batman's been done.  It's always good to have a new Batman movie, but I wouldn't exactly compare this upcoming movie to a Star Wars film or Star Trek in say 2009. 

I'm with you on this. I'm tired of Batman when there are so many other heroes that could be done. But if they can't even get Supes right.....

I agree that there are many other heroes they could (and should) be looking into, but that doesn't make Superman more highly anticipated than Batman.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You failed to mention that "Superman Returns" opened a year after Batman Begins and it was a big financial disappointment by comparison. Domestically it didn't even make its budget back.  Overseas, it pulled in even less. That wasn't the case with Nolan's Batman movies, which paved the way (both in look and feel) for the (albeit misguided) Snyder Superman movies. 

According to box office mojo, Superman Returns opened to $52 million compared to Batman Begins opening to $48 million.

It's funny you mention it because I forgot about it, and worse, I recently watched it on netflix, but you're right--I should have brought it up.  However, note that Superman still beat Batman's opening, showing the anticipation. 

Surprisingly, Superman Returns outgrossed Batman Begins worldwide.  I'm actually really surprised since I didn't realize that until just now.  But there was a key difference--people liked Batman Begins.  The reviews were good as was the audience reaction.  True, Superman had a bigger budget, and the numbers were close enough that Batman made more for the studio, but if anything, this shows that a bad Superman movie had more excitement behind it than a very good Batman movie.

 

Here are the Batman numbers:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=batmanbegins.htm

Budget $150 million, Domestic Gross: $206.8 million, International Gross: $167.3 million.  Total Gross: $374.2 million, Opening Weekend: $48 million.

Here are the Superman numbers:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=superman06.htm

Budget $200 million, Domestic Gross: $200 million.  International Gross $191 million.  Total Gross $391 million, Opening Weekend: $52.5 million. 

 

I will concede these points--the Batman movie was better, made more money, and despite the grosses, I believe that objectively, people reacted far more positively. 

Yet the fact that Superman got off to a better start makes me wonder what the Superman grosses would have been if the movie was actually good.

 

I'm with you on this. I'm tired of Batman when there are so many other heroes that could be done. But if they can't even get Supes right.....

As a long time fan of Superman, I can't begin to say how frustrating it is.  I absolutely believe that if DC ever got the right writing team, they would blow Marvel out of the water.  Although honestly, it may be too late given there have been so many bad movies from them. 

But like you said, they can't get Superman right.  What's more frustrating is that they HAVE got Superman right on TV and in cartoons.  There is no excuse to not make a good Superman movie ever, let alone have a 37 year drought. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Affleck Confirms That He's Still THE BATMAN With A New Image Welcoming Matt Reeves As Director

Amid speculation that Ben Affleck may not be returning to play The Dark Knight in the next solo Batman movie, the actor has now taken to social media to silence the rumors for good!

If they let Reeves have actual control? I think a film helmed by him has a good shot. He has proven himself to be a good director for franchises, his first Planet of the Apes film is tremendous and has made it's sequel (also helmed by him) to be one of the few big budget franchise films I am looking forward to this year. 

And while I haven't really seen Affleck in action as Batman? I hear good things, maybe they could be the teak to turn around what seems like a mess of a cinematic universe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You failed to mention that "Superman Returns" opened a year after Batman Begins and it was a big financial disappointment by comparison. Domestically it didn't even make its budget back.  Overseas, it pulled in even less. That wasn't the case with Nolan's Batman movies, which paved the way (both in look and feel) for the (albeit misguided) Snyder Superman movies. 

According to box office mojo, Superman Returns opened to $52 million compared to Batman Begins opening to $48 million.

It's funny you mention it because I forgot about it, and worse, I recently watched it on netflix, but you're right--I should have brought it up.  However, note that Superman still beat Batman's opening, showing the anticipation. 

Surprisingly, Superman Returns outgrossed Batman Begins worldwide.  I'm actually really surprised since I didn't realize that until just now.  But there was a key difference--people liked Batman Begins.  The reviews were good as was the audience reaction.  True, Superman had a bigger budget, and the numbers were close enough that Batman made more for the studio, but if anything, this shows that a bad Superman movie had more excitement behind it than a very good Batman movie.

 

Here are the Batman numbers:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=batmanbegins.htm

Budget $150 million, Domestic Gross: $206.8 million, International Gross: $167.3 million.  Total Gross: $374.2 million, Opening Weekend: $48 million.

Here are the Superman numbers:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=superman06.htm

Budget $200 million, Domestic Gross: $200 million.  International Gross $191 million.  Total Gross $391 million, Opening Weekend: $52.5 million. 

 

I will concede these points--the Batman movie was better, made more money, and despite the grosses, I believe that objectively, people reacted far more positively. 

Yet the fact that Superman got off to a better start makes me wonder what the Superman grosses would have been if the movie was actually good.

^
Um... Your math doesn't match the links.  Superman Returns had a budget of $270 million, not $200 million.  "Batman Begins" cost $120 million LESS to make, therefore it was more PROFITABLE. 

That's why BB had two sequels, not because of any bias against Superman.  I'm pretty sure that if Superman Returns were more profitable than BB?  We'd have had The Bright Knight, followed by Rise of Superman instead....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for the record?  A difference of $120 million is about 2.5 Deadpools... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Affleck Confirms That He's Still THE BATMAN With A New Image Welcoming Matt Reeves As Director

Amid speculation that Ben Affleck may not be returning to play The Dark Knight in the next solo Batman movie, the actor has now taken to social media to silence the rumors for good!

If they let Reeves have actual control? I think a film helmed by him has a good shot. He has proven himself to be a good director for franchises, his first Planet of the Apes film is tremendous and has made it's sequel (also helmed by him) to be one of the few big budget franchise films I am looking forward to this year. 

And while I haven't really seen Affleck in action as Batman? I hear good things, maybe they could be the teak to turn around what seems like a mess of a cinematic universe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Affleck Confirms That He's Still THE BATMAN With A New Image Welcoming Matt Reeves As Director

Amid speculation that Ben Affleck may not be returning to play The Dark Knight in the next solo Batman movie, the actor has now taken to social media to silence the rumors for good!

If they let Reeves have actual control? I think a film helmed by him has a good shot. He has proven himself to be a good director for franchises, his first Planet of the Apes film is tremendous and has made it's sequel (also helmed by him) to be one of the few big budget franchise films I am looking forward to this year. 

And while I haven't really seen Affleck in action as Batman? I hear good things, maybe they could be the teak to turn around what seems like a mess of a cinematic universe. 

The writing of the last two was a bit of an issue as well; I think I might be a bit more optimistic if they brought in a fresh writing team as well.  A director can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig, right?   Nevertheless, I echo Kenman's optimism in Reeves' talent, as I am a big fan of the rebooted POTA movies, particularly Reeves' last outing (which ranks among the best in the series; and that's encompassing ALL of the Apes' movies, going back to 1968).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Affleck Confirms That He's Still THE BATMAN With A New Image Welcoming Matt Reeves As Director

Amid speculation that Ben Affleck may not be returning to play The Dark Knight in the next solo Batman movie, the actor has now taken to social media to silence the rumors for good!

If they let Reeves have actual control? I think a film helmed by him has a good shot. He has proven himself to be a good director for franchises, his first Planet of the Apes film is tremendous and has made it's sequel (also helmed by him) to be one of the few big budget franchise films I am looking forward to this year. 

And while I haven't really seen Affleck in action as Batman? I hear good things, maybe they could be the teak to turn around what seems like a mess of a cinematic universe. 

The writing of the last two was a bit of an issue as well; I think I might be a bit more optimistic if they brought in a fresh writing team as well.  A director can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig, right?   Nevertheless, I echo Kenman's optimism in Reeves' talent, as I am a big fan of the rebooted POTA movies, particularly Reeves' last outing (which ranks among the best in the series; and that's encompassing ALL of the Apes' movies, going back to 1968).

I also loved Reeves American remake of "Let the Right One In," re-titled "Let Me In."  A great modern Vampire/coming-of-age film. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Affleck Confirms That He's Still THE BATMAN With A New Image Welcoming Matt Reeves As Director

Amid speculation that Ben Affleck may not be returning to play The Dark Knight in the next solo Batman movie, the actor has now taken to social media to silence the rumors for good!

If they let Reeves have actual control? I think a film helmed by him has a good shot. He has proven himself to be a good director for franchises, his first Planet of the Apes film is tremendous and has made it's sequel (also helmed by him) to be one of the few big budget franchise films I am looking forward to this year. 

And while I haven't really seen Affleck in action as Batman? I hear good things, maybe they could be the teak to turn around what seems like a mess of a cinematic universe. 

The writing of the last two was a bit of an issue as well; I think I might be a bit more optimistic if they brought in a fresh writing team as well.  A director can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig, right?   Nevertheless, I echo Kenman's optimism in Reeves' talent, as I am a big fan of the rebooted POTA movies, particularly Reeves' last outing (which ranks among the best in the series; and that's encompassing ALL of the Apes' movies, going back to 1968).

I also loved Reeves American remake of "Let the Right One In," re-titled "Let Me In."  A great modern Vampire/coming-of-age film. 

^
I was glad that he remained close to the original source movie, which I enjoyed VERY much, but it was almost too faithful; it was fine as a straight English language version of the deservedly acclaimed Swedish movie (which is basically "Twilight" but REALLY good), but as a remake, it really didn't bring any new angle or insight to it either.   I wouldn't say it's a good yardstick of Reeves' work, since it's 1:1 for the Swedish version, but he really won me over with "Dawn of the Planet of the Apes"; that showed a distinctive style that was sufficiently evolved from the previous movie ("Rise of...") to make it stand out.   It was a unique and beautifully made action movie. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um... Your math doesn't match the links.  Superman Returns had a budget of $270 million, not $200 million.  "Batman Begins" cost $120 million LESS to make, therefore it was more PROFITABLE. 

You're right--I misread the budget.  But I never said Batman wasn't more PROFITABLE.  I just said that Superman was just as anticipated if not more.  The number of people that saw Superman opening weekend was higher.  The grosses for Superman were higher.

And Batman was a MUCH better movie.  I believe that if Superman had been on the same level, the grosses would have been higher.  Quality matters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um... Your math doesn't match the links.  Superman Returns had a budget of $270 million, not $200 million.  "Batman Begins" cost $120 million LESS to make, therefore it was more PROFITABLE. 

You're right--I misread the budget.  But I never said Batman wasn't more PROFITABLE.  I just said that Superman was just as anticipated if not more.  The number of people that saw Superman opening weekend was higher.  The grosses for Superman were higher.

And Batman was a MUCH better movie.  I believe that if Superman had been on the same level, the grosses would have been higher.  Quality matters. 

Profit is a good indicator of how much something is anticipated; granted, it's not necessarily indicative of quality.  Yes, Superman had a big opening, but it didn't sustain it; Batman Begins had both stronger overall profitability and better word of mouth.   I'd say Batman won in a fair fight. 

As for Superman Returns not being on the same quality level as Batman Begins?  I agree.  That's precisely why (however misguidedly) they tried to retool Superman in Batman's image in the last two Zack Snyder Superman movies.   The result was a clunky hybrid that plays strongly at the box office, but is nowhere near as artistically satisfying for the hardcore fans as the best Batman movies or the best Superman films (there've not been too many of those... for me, it's generally the first and second ones; both of which are nearly 40 years old now).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes and no. 

At $10 a ticket, if my movie has a $5000 budget, and 1000 people see it, I made $5000.

If your movie has a $2000 budget, and 800 people see it, you made $6000.  You made more money, but my movie sold more tickets.  I think a studio would be happier with your movie, but mine got the larger audience.

The big difference I believe between Batman Begins and Superman Returns is quality.  I think opening weekends are a measure of anticipation, but total grosses can reflect on quality.  Staying power. I believe that Batman Begins had more staying power and I think that's simply because it was a better movie.

You may be right as to why they tried to make Superman into Batman but the flaw in that of course is that Superman is not Batman.  Different character, different vibe, and different reasons for popularity.

Superman Returns to me, was dull.  I think Singer's heart was in the right place, and it had moments, but he butchered the character too, albeit in a different way.

Snyder made Superman into a brooding, dark, reluctant hero.  Singer made Superman into a wimp, a deadbeat dad, a stalker, and someone who made some really stupid decisions.

 

I think the only thing he got right was using the music, though I also think he should have updated it, like they do with Bond.

 

Singer made a homage to Christopher Reeve when he should have focused more on Superman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Singer made a homage to Christopher Reeve when he should have focused more on Superman. 

This is an excellent point. For many of us, and I expect Singer as well, the two are inseparable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Singer made a homage to Christopher Reeve when he should have focused more on Superman. 

This is an excellent point. For many of us, and I expect Singer as well, the two are inseparable. 

And I still think Superman Returns is a better movie than "Man of Steel", despite its many flaws.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having just rewatched Superman Returns on Netflix, I'm still not convinced.  Both really screwed the character up.  While I do like Routh as an actor, I think he was terribly cast as Superman, and with the exception of Spacey and the guy who played Perry White, I think the cast was terrible.

That might have been one of the biggest flaws of the movie--casting. 

I haven't been overly impressed with the MOS cast either, but for me, Superman Returns' cast was just terrible all around.  Routh's version of Superman was so weak that like Cavill, he failed to capture Superman's warmth.

I guess with a gun to my head, the wimpy guy who still shows he cares is better than the brooding guy who seems a reluctant hero, but both were pretty bad.  I think Dean Cain, Tom Welling, and Tyler Hoechlin all did much better jobs portraying Superman's warmth. 

It really bothers me that they can't get this character right, and I do consider Superman the most important character in DC.  If you can't get him right, it has a domino effect on the whole DC universe.  I don't think they got Batman right either, but he was a little closer.  Snyder really picked the wrong storyline to guide him.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having just rewatched Superman Returns on Netflix, I'm still not convinced.  Both really screwed the character up.  While I do like Routh as an actor, I think he was terribly cast as Superman, and with the exception of Spacey and the guy who played Perry White, I think the cast was terrible.

That might have been one of the biggest flaws of the movie--casting. 

I haven't been overly impressed with the MOS cast either, but for me, Superman Returns' cast was just terrible all around.  Routh's version of Superman was so weak that like Cavill, he failed to capture Superman's warmth.

I guess with a gun to my head, the wimpy guy who still shows he cares is better than the brooding guy who seems a reluctant hero, but both were pretty bad.  I think Dean Cain, Tom Welling, and Tyler Hoechlin all did much better jobs portraying Superman's warmth. 

It really bothers me that they can't get this character right, and I do consider Superman the most important character in DC.  If you can't get him right, it has a domino effect on the whole DC universe.  I don't think they got Batman right either, but he was a little closer.  Snyder really picked the wrong storyline to guide him.

 

 

Well, opinions are just that.

Personally it sounds like you're confusing the writing with the acting; I'm pretty sure that 'wimp' (god I hate that word) persona you perceive from Routh is more in the movie's writing (the character's indecisvenes, deadbeat dad-complex, etc) than the actor; the actor can only work with the screenplay and the direction he/she has got.

And I thought Routh was, looks/persona-wise, as close as one could get to Reeve's Superman as possible without a CGI double and a voice impersonator.   He captured much of Reeve's look, his befuddlement, his innocence, and most importantly, his vulnerability (and yes, I like Superman to be vulnerable, otherwise he's a boring action figure).   I see Routh's Superman as sort of a bridge to the more modern version, though I think the fact that he was deliberately skirting so close to Reeve's interpretation might've been the concrete galoshes that helped drown the movie in nostalgia. 

Still; I'd almost prefer an actor doing a 1:1 of Reeve's Superman than a brooding, soulless flying Batman wannabe (i.e Zack Snyder's Super D!@k).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The writing and the acting tend to go hand in hand.  Sometimes a good actor can make a scene work over a lesser actor.  This cast in Superman Returns did nothing for the movie.  Routh to me was nothing like Reeve.  Nothing.  He didn't have the warmth, the charisma, or the on screen presence. 

Reeve had all the great qualities you mention, including the vulnerability.  Superman's biggest weakness is not kryptonite.  You hurt him by hurting innocent people.  He can't protect everyone, much as he wants to.  But Routh?  He was a total wimp.  I didn't see this as capturing Reeve's Superman.  I saw it as a poor imitation of Reeve, with a poor script. 

Reeve's Superman was strong and decisive, and he would NEVER leave Earth just to do a lap around Krypton.  The whole premise of Superman leaving was just bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The writing and the acting tend to go hand in hand.  Sometimes a good actor can make a scene work over a lesser actor.  This cast in Superman Returns did nothing for the movie.  Routh to me was nothing like Reeve.  Nothing.  He didn't have the warmth, the charisma, or the on screen presence. 

Reeve had all the great qualities you mention, including the vulnerability.  Superman's biggest weakness is not kryptonite.  You hurt him by hurting innocent people.  He can't protect everyone, much as he wants to.  But Routh?  He was a total wimp.  I didn't see this as capturing Reeve's Superman.  I saw it as a poor imitation of Reeve, with a poor script. 

Reeve's Superman was strong and decisive, and he would NEVER leave Earth just to do a lap around Krypton.  The whole premise of Superman leaving was just bad. 

Well, you saw what you saw and I saw what I saw.

:)

Reeve's Superman was strong and decisive, and he would NEVER leave Earth just to do a lap around Krypton.  The whole premise of Superman leaving was just bad.

^
But once again, this demonstrates to me that you're confusing performance with writing; Routh didn't make the decision to send Superman to Krypton.  And Reeve's Superman had some terrible scripts himself (S3 and 4 come to mind...).

I would've liked to have seen what Routh could've brought to the table with a BETTER Superman script. 

And at any rate, I'm derailing; this is about Affleck's Batman.   I digress...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Routh may not have made the decision to send Superman to Krypton, but his lack of emotion and facial expressions are all him. 

It was a combination of writing and actors that were miscast.  Think of it like Cumberbatch as Khan--amazing actor--top notch, but he wasn't Khan.

 

I felt the same about Routh.  I liked Routh in other roles, but I still don't see him as a Superman type.  I don't think writing would fix that, though I guess we will never know. 

At this point, I don't even know if a good Superman script would do well because we have had so many bad ones that people won't give it a chance.

Then again, Rocky Balboa and Creed rebounded from Rocky V, and ST6 rebounded from ST5.

 

Back on topic, I wonder how much of a mess The Batman script is, and how long Affleck will play the role.  If I were going to recast, I would ignore BvS, and recast Batman with a guy who can pull off early 30s, and can play the role for a decade.  I'd want Batman de-aged to be in his early 30s no matter who the actor is.  That way we can have Dick Grayson as Nightwing in his early 20s, and Batman the same age range as Superman, where he belongs.

It sure sounds like Affleck wants out, so it would become a question of what they want to do and how much BvS should count.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
THE DARK KNIGHT Composer Hans Zimmer On Why Ben Affleck's Batman Isn't As Good As Christian Bale's
 
The Dark Knight Trilogy composer Hans Zimmer talks here about why he prefers Christian Bale's Batman to the version currently portrayed by Ben Affleck in the DC Films Universe. Sorry, Affleck fans, but I got to agree with him. "Thats more like it, Mr Wayne'
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2017 at 8:25 PM, Nombrecomun said:

But if they can't even get Supes right.....

Marvel does: :P

th?id=OIP.58Po1abov2K1--WLQ46WDACQEs&w=1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GustavoLeao said:
THE DARK KNIGHT Composer Hans Zimmer On Why Ben Affleck's Batman Isn't As Good As Christian Bale's
 
The Dark Knight Trilogy composer Hans Zimmer talks here about why he prefers Christian Bale's Batman to the version currently portrayed by Ben Affleck in the DC Films Universe. Sorry, Affleck fans, but I got to agree with him. "Thats more like it, Mr Wayne'
 

Zimmer doesn't really say it 'isn't as good'; he said Affleck's is different.  As a composer, Zimmer got used to composing for one actor's interpretation of a character, and then along comes another actor who plays it very differently.  But I didn't read that interview as "I like Bale's Batman better than Affleck's."   It's more like, "I liked the unresolved nature of Bale's Batman and I got used to writing for it."  

I'm not overly fond of Snyder's Batman movies, but I think Affleck's interpretation of the role was hardly the problem; and his Bat-voice was a HELL of a lot cooler than Bale's raspy Bat-lisp. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sehlat Vie said:

Zimmer doesn't really say it 'isn't as good'; he said Affleck's is different.  As a composer, Zimmer got used to composing for one actor's interpretation of a character, and then along comes another actor who plays it very differently.  But I didn't read that interview as "I like Bale's Batman better than Affleck's."   It's more like, "I liked the unresolved nature of Bale's Batman and I got used to writing for it."  

I'm not overly fond of Snyder's Batman movies, but I think Affleck's interpretation of the role was hardly the problem; and his Bat-voice was a HELL of a lot cooler than Bale's raspy Bat-lisp. :P

A couple friends of mine have taken to calling him Clint Batwood and there is a definite "Dirty Harry" vibe to it.

And I agree. The article isn't a slam. He's just getting used to the different beats a new guy is putting to the role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0