131,262
pages
ALL POSTSBen Affleck as Batman
I've heard a lot of people say that Ben Affleck will do terrible as Batman. Believe me I've had my share of doubts but come'on we haven't even seen a trailer and we're already judging Batffleck. I saw the pics of him in the bat suit and though he looks sort of bulky I think he will do fine as Batman. Anyone else agree with me?
(Edited by Fandom Cultures)
0
<p>Are people still judging Batfleck? I thought that ended about two months after the announcement.
</p><p>I don't know how he will do. Frankly, I don't care that much. I care much more about Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman.
</p>
(Edited by Tupka217)
0
<div class="quote"><i>
<p>SforHope wrote:
Judging for his performance in Daredevil....I say he is a no. I can only hope I'm wrong. As for Gal; I think she'll perform just like Cavill did Sups.
</p>
</i></div>
<p>I don't know her acting skills. I watched her first Fast & Furious film to gauge them, but those aren't made to showcase scriptwriting or acting. </p><p>Daredevil was ages ago, and it suffered from a now despised mood and generally poor script. Affleck has had good and bad films like pretty much every actor. </p>
<p>I don't know her acting skills. I watched her first Fast & Furious film to gauge them, but those aren't made to showcase scriptwriting or acting. </p><p>Daredevil was ages ago, and it suffered from a now despised mood and generally poor script. Affleck has had good and bad films like pretty much every actor. </p>
(Edited by Tupka217)
what do you think
(Edited by administrators)
Remember back in 1989. Everyone thought Michael Keaton would be a horrible Batman but it turns out that his performance wasn't half bad. What if Affleck surprises us the same way
(Edited by Fandom Cultures)
0
<div class="quote"><i>
<p>SforHope wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">
<p>Tupka217 wrote:
I watched her first Fast & Furious film to gauge them, but those aren't made to showcase scriptwriting or acting.
</p>
</i></div>
<p>Well then, if the WW role is too big for her, we can always have her other talents. </p> </div> <p>You're referring to her past military career, right? She did her own stunts on F&F. She can beat Affleck and Cavill with two hands tied behind her back and blindfolded. The physical parts shouldn't be a problem. </p> <div class="quote"><i> <p>SforHope wrote: </p><p>Keaton was being hated because he was relatively new and had mostly been featured in comedy films. Batman was serious business and people couldn't see Keaton in a role like that. Another point was his height and physique that was nothing like Batman should be. (1.70m/5'8") But the movie was well done, in terms of production value. The acting might not be excellent for nowadays standards, but then it was pretty good. </p><p>Affleck on the other hand is now a much more seasoned actor, with good and bad movies from diverse genres and people complains because they can't see Affleck as the Dark Knight; and there's also the thing that he seems "too old", when at 42, Affleck is around the same age as Keaton was on Batman Returns. And nobody mentions that his physique is pretty much Batman's. </p> </i></div>
<p>Affleck, on the other hand, is 6'3½" (1.93). Cavill is 6'1" (1.85). Gadot is 5'10" (1.78) - which is tall, as far as women in Hollywood go. I'm glad Batman has small ears and Wonder Woman has heels. They need it. </p><p>Affleck's not too old at 42 - this is Established Batman, not Year One Batman. It's good this isn't another origin story. Take notes please, whoever is in charge of Marvel's new Spider-Man movie. </p>
<p>Well then, if the WW role is too big for her, we can always have her other talents. </p> </div> <p>You're referring to her past military career, right? She did her own stunts on F&F. She can beat Affleck and Cavill with two hands tied behind her back and blindfolded. The physical parts shouldn't be a problem. </p> <div class="quote"><i> <p>SforHope wrote: </p><p>Keaton was being hated because he was relatively new and had mostly been featured in comedy films. Batman was serious business and people couldn't see Keaton in a role like that. Another point was his height and physique that was nothing like Batman should be. (1.70m/5'8") But the movie was well done, in terms of production value. The acting might not be excellent for nowadays standards, but then it was pretty good. </p><p>Affleck on the other hand is now a much more seasoned actor, with good and bad movies from diverse genres and people complains because they can't see Affleck as the Dark Knight; and there's also the thing that he seems "too old", when at 42, Affleck is around the same age as Keaton was on Batman Returns. And nobody mentions that his physique is pretty much Batman's. </p> </i></div>
<p>Affleck, on the other hand, is 6'3½" (1.93). Cavill is 6'1" (1.85). Gadot is 5'10" (1.78) - which is tall, as far as women in Hollywood go. I'm glad Batman has small ears and Wonder Woman has heels. They need it. </p><p>Affleck's not too old at 42 - this is Established Batman, not Year One Batman. It's good this isn't another origin story. Take notes please, whoever is in charge of Marvel's new Spider-Man movie. </p>
(Edited by Tupka217)
<p>You've got a point. I'm still worried about Ben Affleck because of Daredevil. However I think Ben Affleck can pull off a great Batman (just don't try to imitate the Christian Bale voice and try to copy Kevin Conroy's voice)
</p>
(Edited by Fandom Cultures)