WB's choice of Ben Affleck for playing Batman infuriarates fandom
Warner Brothers announced that Ben Affleck, whose career as an actor faltered several years ago, would play Batman in a Superman sequel where the twosome would combat each other. The announcement made quite a few people unhappy:
And seriously, if the fans are so bothered about the choices made for casting a movie, why don't they make demands along the same lines for DC to get rid of Dan DiDio along with Geoff Johns and several other hack writers who've desecrated their properties? Yeah, I wonder why it's just so easy for them to petition WB to change the casting but not to promote a boycott of DC for keeping such awful people in charge? If Bat-fans are really so mad about WB's casting choice, they should also be furious about whom the studio allows to run the scene back where it all began.
The casting of Hollywood A-lister Ben Affleck as the new Batman sparked fan outrage, with petitions calling for the coveted role to be recast and widespread howling on Twitter.While I get why Affleck is an unpopular choice - his take on Daredevil a decade ago was abortive - I'm a little bothered that the backlash has been turned into tabloid fodder, including this:
Warner Bros. announced Thursday that Affleck -- who earlier this year was the darling of Tinseltown when his "Argo" took home the Oscar for best picture -- would next don the Dark Knight's cape.
Affleck's debut as the savior of Gotham will come in a film slated for release in 2015, and also to feature Henry Cavill as Superman. Zack Snyder is to direct.
On Twitter, the hashtag #BetterBatmanThanBenAffleck was trending. Many Internet users proposed other actors, from Josh Brolin to Affleck pal Matt Damon to -- bizarrely -- Meryl Streep.Yeah, Meryl's a weird pick alright, but a pity the press has taken to sensationalizing all the objections being made. Personally, I'm skeptical a movie that could emphasize a clash between the Man of Steel and the Masked Manhunter will be anything other than a cheesy popcorn tale aimed more at what the wider public perceives as "insular fanboys." It also sounds more like they're using this as their plan for setting up a Justice League movie.
And seriously, if the fans are so bothered about the choices made for casting a movie, why don't they make demands along the same lines for DC to get rid of Dan DiDio along with Geoff Johns and several other hack writers who've desecrated their properties? Yeah, I wonder why it's just so easy for them to petition WB to change the casting but not to promote a boycott of DC for keeping such awful people in charge? If Bat-fans are really so mad about WB's casting choice, they should also be furious about whom the studio allows to run the scene back where it all began.
Labels: Batman, dc comics, msm propaganda, Superman
In 1989, it seemed that every news story about the then-upcoming (and much-hyped) Batman movie would say, "Long-time comics fans were delighted with the casting of Jack Nicholson as the Joker, but they were outraged by the choice of Michael Keaton to play Batman." And non-comics fans would then roll their eyes and sigh, "Those comic book geeks need to get a life." Deja vu.
Posted by
Anonymous |
6:10 PM
After all the missteps in the first film, the second isn't getting off to the greatest of starts, either.
Maybe they'll just throw in some extra doses of gore and profanity while skimping on a decent plot or characterization. That always works for Hollywood, right?
Posted by
The Drizzt |
6:17 PM
You would think that Affleck would be leery about playing another comic-book hero, especially after Daredevil bombed. Plus, you would think he'd be wary of typecasting. But I think it would be unfair to blame him for the DD movie's failure. The problem was a weak script, not the casting. But then, what do I know. I had no objection to Rex Smith as Daredevil, either.
Posted by
Anonymous |
6:51 PM
As per the first Anon, Keaton actually did a good job. So, if only for that, I'll keep an open mind.
But I am amused how everyone wants Obama to weigh in, via petitions. (The White House one is down, but not Change.org, I think.) Yeah, because the President has nothing better to do than to influence casting decisions.
Posted by
Killer Moth |
5:45 PM
Given that (per the media) this nation's biggest problems appear to be a rodeo clown mocking Prez Barry and Miley Cyrus having a breakdown, KM, why not have Barry weigh in on it?
Rumor is that Affleck will be in line to direct the JL movie to follow.
Posted by
The Drizzt |
2:19 PM
You got me there, Drizzt. After all, Hollywood paid for his Presidency, so why shouldn't he do it? I'm amazed he actually had the integrity not to show in The Butler, when it was basically black grievance porn, to borrow from John Derbyshire. Sounds right up Obama's alley.
Given his so-called Spider-Man love, I'm also amazed no one did a "save us from Andrew Garfield" petition, either.
Posted by
Killer Moth |
2:46 PM
Such a really nice and great informative post.Thanks for share with us.
Posted by
Casting Studios |
12:24 AM
You're forgetting one important thing: if DiDio and the rest are removed from the DC and Marvel lines, who's going to replace them?
Posted by
Drag |
9:44 PM