^ New title edit 5-21-14

v Original post and title here

Superman/Batman Movie in 2016 - AFFLECK. *IS*. BATMAN.

http://herocomplex.latimes.com/movies/comic-con-2013-superman-batman-movie-will-follow-man-of-steel/

Comic-Con 2013: ‘Superman & Batman’ movie will follow ‘Man of Steel’

Warner Bros. is about to bring together two of its most iconic heroes: Superman and Batman will unite in a new film, the follow-up to “Man of Steel,” set for release in 2015.

According to two sources with knowledge of the movie, Warner Bros. intends to announce the news at its Comic-Con International panel Saturday morning. Said a Warner Bros. spokesperson, “We don’t comment on rumors regarding these properties.”

“Man of Steel” director Zack Snyder is expected to reunite with screenwriter David S. Goyer and star Henry Cavill for the new film. It’s unlikely Christian Bale will step back into the bat suit, as the actor has indicated publicly that he has moved on from his days as Bruce Wayne.

“Man of Steel” producer and “Dark Knight” trilogy director Christopher Nolan is expected by some to produce the project, but the exact nature of his involvement is unclear.

The move marks the culmination of years of effort on the part of Warner Bros. and DC Comics to bring their superheroes together in a similar fashion to their primary competitor Marvel, which successfully combined its superheroes into a $1.5-billion box-office hit with “The Avengers.”

In the comic world, the two heroes are teaming up in a new series, “Batman/Superman,” by writer Greg Pak and artist Jae Lee.

– Nicole Sperlin

The Nolan trilogy was pretty self contained. Even if Third Rock suits up as Batman (and I really don't know if I can see JGL as Bruce Wayne) you're re-introducing one of the tentpoles of JL, hell of DC Comics, in half a movie, which really doesn't seem fair to the character or allow any worthwhile character development.

Mind you, I'm not saying there needs to necessarily be a 3rd Batman reboot, like The Amazing Spiderman (though it must be said my intense dislike for the movie has lessened over time). And yes, if you're looking at The Avengers you have a major(ish) character brought on in the ensemble cast. But Batman isn't Hawkeye, and it would seem to be a disservice to bring him in a teamup movie when we have no grasp of what kind of Batman we're working with. Yes we know the backstory, but that didn't stop Miller's Batman being different from Burtons, or Shummachers, or Nolans.

I would actually applaud them if they secure JGL. The whole JL thing is lacking any continuity and seems badly-timed (with the need to recast Batman and Green Lantern so soon after the previous efforts) - if they use JGL and perhaps don't set it within Gotham, then they have a shot of re-evaluating the character we know but maintaining the previous story, etc.

Thankfully.

It will be far more of a financial success off the top with Bale as Batman, or at worst with JGL in the role.

Introducing a brand new Batman, the face of DC in the film world, as a co-star in a Supes vehicle seems like a bigger risk to the Justice League plans than they're worth, unless they know they have a home run Batman, in which case why not introduce him?

They will absolutely attempt to throw big bucks at Bale or JGL. I'd be surprised if they didn't.

>It will be far more of a financial success off the top with
>Bale as Batman, or at worst with JGL in the role.

Bale, yes. JGL, no.

>Introducing a brand new Batman, the face of DC in the film
>world, as a co-star in a Supes vehicle seems like a bigger
>risk to the Justice League plans than they're worth

This whole idea is a risk, whether it's tied to the Nolanverse or not.

> unless
>they know they have a home run Batman, in which case why not
>introduce him?

Next year's SDCC.

>They will absolutely attempt to throw big bucks at Bale or
>JGL. I'd be surprised if they didn't.

Again... I agree with Bale. JGL on the other hand is them deciding to not use Bruce Wayne.

I should expand my "zip-zero" comment though. I could see them using Bale. And that being the only tie to the Nolan verse. But the reason I don't see them doing that is if they are indeed ramping up to do a JL film, by the time they get around to it dude is gonna be ooooooooooold. If they're thinking long run here, they gotta go younger than 40 on Bats. Which again... brings us to JGL. They might go for that. But I think it'd be misstep.

Obviously any Batman will add intrigue to the Cavill Supes sequel, since MoS underperformed from expectations. Regardless, tying it in will make it feel more like a Dark Avengers, which really is exactly what DC is hoping for. This isn't like Bruce Banner-- there wasn't an iconic Banner vision before Avengers. Whoever they pick has to be as good as or better than Bale to avoid second-week drop off due to word of mouth.

Safest bet is clearly Bale.

When you say that MoS underperformed, is that critical? Financial? Or both? Critical isn't too hard to understand (although I enjoyed the movie), but financially ... it's up to about 620 million worldwide. Still more than solid numbers. Was WB expecting Dark Knight or Avengers money straight out of the gate?

>When you say that MoS underperformed, is that critical?
>Financial? Or both? Critical isn't too hard to understand
>(although I enjoyed the movie), but financially ... it's up to
>about 620 million worldwide. Still more than solid numbers.
>Was WB expecting Dark Knight or Avengers money straight out of
>the gate?

The critical disappointment is obvious, no need to waste time debating that.

Financially, hey spent more on MoS than either The Dark Knight or The Avengers (TDKR cost more, but was obviously a more sure thing). Fourth most expensive superhero movie ever, after TDKR, Spider-Man 3, and The Amazing Spider-Man, and it'll finish below all of those in worldwide gross, not to mention plenty of lower-budgeted flicks like Avengers, The Dark Knight, the other Spider-Man films, and Iron Man 3.

Considering it had the Nolan name and was considered "the next big thing" for the DC Universe, this isn't a financial disappointment in terms of profitability, but it is a financial disappointment in terms of expectations. I'd be stunned if they expected any less than 325-350 domestic, 750-800 worldwide.

To give you a comparison, adjusted for inflation, Superman Returns had a 100 million dollar opening weekend... and if you add the 15% that the industry generally accepts is the bump for IMAX/3D, its opening weekend domestically is very similar to what Man of Steel did. And Superman Returns was considered a financial disappointment in terms of expectations.

I'm sure someone could counter this point by saying expectations don't matter, only the bottom line... but there's no question DC feels the heat. With Sony ramping up the Sinister Six in the next Spidey flick, Avengers 2 in 2015, and Fox trying to bring the X-Men world to a bigger level next year, WB can't afford for their DC movies to keep coming in below expectations. Green Lantern tanked, Man of Steel came in at the most grounded of financial expectations at best. A Justice League movie still seems a long way away at this point.

The whole "tomato meter" dust up may have hurt critics more than the movie itself.
_________________________________
Reunion Radio Podcasts
http://reunionradio.blogspot.com/
Twitter @therealoldpro

The majority of critics were mixed on the film at best. Superman Returns had notably better critical notices.

Not that critics truly matter for blockbusters anyway, but since the Marvel films are nearly all well received by critics, for the next step in the Nolan DC verse to not be remotely as loved as the Batman films is pretty noteworthy.

>Superman Returns had notably better critical notices.

I think more than any movie in recent memory MOS exposed the gap between the audience and critics

Even the head of Rotten Tomatoes was scratching his head after this shit

_________________________________
Reunion Radio Podcasts
http://reunionradio.blogspot.com/
Twitter @therealoldpro

why "throw big bucks" at him to play Bruce Wayne when he just played Robin?

And Bale ain't doing that shit again. I'd be really surprised.

Yeah, Bale has stated on multiple occasions that he is done. He says it is time for another actor to get some shine.

>And Bale ain't doing that shit again. I'd be really
>surprised.

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/07/01/christian-bale-batman-justice-league/

Christian Bale says he won't be Batman in 'Justice League' movie
by Adam Markovitz on Jul 1, 2013 at 5:28PM

We already knew that Christian Bale probably wasn’t going to show up as Batman in the upcoming Justice League movie, the Avengers-style supergroup of DC heroes. First, Bale said that he wouldn’t do another Batman movie unless Christopher Nolan opted for a fourth Dark Knight chapter, which Nolan says isn’t happening. Then Man of Steel and Dark Knight screenwriter David S. Goyer confirmed that the Justice League’s Batman would be a rebooted character. So that pretty much closed the book.
Still, with news like this, sometimes you just have to hear it from the man himself.

“We were incredibly fortunate to get to make three . That’s enough. Let’s not get greedy,” says Bale, who called EW to promote his upcoming revenge drama Out of the Furnace (in theaters Nov. 27). “Chris always said he wanted to make it one film at a time. And we ended up sitting there looking at each other, saying ‘We’re about to make the third.’ We never really knew if we were going to get to be there, but if that was how it was going to be, this was where it should end as well.”
The actor says he hasn’t even been involved in official talks about a Justice League movie. ”I have no information, no knowledge about anything. I’ve literally not had a conversation with a living soul. I understand that they may be making a Justice League movie, that’s it.” But he says he’s not sad to pass Batman’s cowl into new hands: “It’s a torch that should be handed from one actor to another. So I enjoy looking forward to what somebody else will come up with.”
Follow Adam on Twitter: @amrkvtz

He'd play John Blake or whatever as the new Batman. Which TDKR obviously alludes to as a possibility.

I'm not saying that's what I want. I'm saying that continuity between the Nolan trilogy and this upcoming Batman will likely be important to a lot of people.

and doesn't include any of the other superheroes. Even back when JL was being discussed they were never planning to incorporate Bale or the Nolan Batman universe into the storyline. It was going to be a brand new Batman with no reference to Nolan films.

Or Bryan Singer's Superman. Sort of connected to the preceding movies but not really.

All that matters: Batman put the cape down for a while, but he's back because he realizes he can't live a normal life. Allude to past events without getting too specific. Could be the Nolan movies, could be something else. Choose your own adventure.

.

Nolan's trilogy still seems pretty self contained. Do you have some quick exposition explaining why Bruce came back (and then have to explain what JGL has been doing - has he taken up the Bat mantle? Is he Robin, as his last name clumsily suggests in TDKR)?

>Nolan's trilogy still seems pretty self contained. Do you
>have some quick exposition explaining why Bruce came back (and
>then have to explain what JGL has been doing - has he taken up
>the Bat mantle? Is he Robin, as his last name clumsily
>suggests in TDKR)?

I don't think this guy is writing the movie, so I don't know why he would have to come up with all the essential details as to how a soft reboot would work out to simply suggest the possibility (probability?) that this is the direction they take it.

It's a good opportunity to introduce a new Batman without having to do a reboot so soon. They can establish a new character without having to do a new origin story and risk it feeling stale. Put him in an established universe and just spin him off on a standalone without having to go through a lot of set up. Makes perfect sense. It'll be successful (provided the script doesn't completely blow) and it creates an easy path to a JL flick.

batman, superman, and spider-man never need their origin stories re-told again. never. everyone on the planet knows them by heart. lets just get to the action.

and JGL would be a goddamn abomination. nothing about him is right for the character.

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18uhbkmo0j3bhjpg/ku-xlarge.jpg





http://io9.com/theyre-doing-a-superman-batman-movie-but-thats-not-851711013

They're doing a Superman/Batman movie... but that's not the big news
CHARLIE JANE ANDERS
24 minutes ago

Man of Steel director Zack Snyder just came out and rocked our worlds at Comic-Con. Not just announcing that Batman will be in the Superman sequel — which he did with a cool-looking metallic Superman-Batman logo that drove the crowd nuts. But that was not the biggest deal.

Spoilers ahead...

The biggest deal was, Snyder brought out Man of Steel actor Harry Lennix (General Swanwick) to use his cool voice to read the following piece of dialogue:

I want you to remember, Clark…in all the years to come…in your most private moments…I want you to remember…my hand…at your throat…I want…you to remember…the one man who beat you.
Yup. Batman's speech from Dark Knight Returns. Snyder said the movie won't be an adaptation of this film... but it will be inspired by it. The crowd lost their shit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m05YaiPnRHU

a cameo or reference in a second Superman movie.

.

hmmm let me stop bulshittin and watch Man of Steel

sittin right here on the Hdrive

I even missed it when I saw the film, but there is a reference in there.

you sir owe me 2 hours 12 minutes and 42 seconds of time

im sitting here like ?????

WB and DC really need to hire competent screenwriters

how is batman gonna tie in to THAT?

so they destroy Metropolis....and a day later its rebuilt?

and was Lois Lane a superhero as well?

how the fuck was she teleporting all these different places?

dude im like.....

MAKE MINE MARVEL!!!!!!!!

.

what was it?

....the satellite that Zod crashed through had a Wayne Enterprises logo on it.

dude....

It's a nice Easter Egg, but it's far from the type of synergy that Marvel uses to put their universe together.

Then again, Marvel is simply much much better run up top than the DC film universe is, so expecting something more than a brief Easter egg is probably asking too much.

.

*shrug*


*skatin' the rings of saturn*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=B7E8dge7H8Y


..and miles to go before i sleep...

Bale is a boringly average actor (at best).
We need to see a real personality with some swagger.
I don't care who the actor is just as long as he can bring the heat.

I never really felt the Nolan's Batman was ACTUALLY Batman. It seemed more like Bruce Wayne. The relentless preparation, the determination, the INTELLIGENCE.

I saw VERY little of the Batman we all say could be ANYONE w/a little prep time.

Frankly, Nolan's Batman doesn't even DESERVE to stand next to Supes.

The Nolan Trilogy (edit: the first two films in the Nolan Trilogy) are pretty great, but at no point did I ever feel like "Man, this is a Batman movie!"

It's not a knock against Nolan or the films themselves. I like Nolan and GENERALLY like this Batman trilogy - but it ain't really Batman, not to me..

I think people immediately think you're hating when you say "It's good but it didn't feel like Batman to me."

But then again, I want the blue and gray Denny O'Neil/Neal Adams Batman more than anything else.

and turned the entire city's cellphones into a sonar network

He's smarter than me

Bats just used his tech, hell Fox had to man the sonar station and feed updates to Bats... Nolan never once made him the world's greatest detective, just a rich guy with cool gadgets

When he recreated the shattered bullet. That was one of my favorite moments of that flick.

that was one of my favorite sequences in that film because it made him a detective


****************************
I don't even love life no more, my niggas I just live it.... Jean Grae

>I never really felt the Nolan's Batman was ACTUALLY Batman.
>It seemed more like Bruce Wayne. The relentless preparation,
>the determination, the INTELLIGENCE.
the details you're talking about will never make their way into a movie, they're best left for books, or a TV series even.


>I saw VERY little of the Batman we all say could be ANYONE w/a
>little prep time.
aside from creating and setting up the Batman mystique, fixing the city's air supply using a light rail, setting up citywide sonar through cell phones (fox helped him but he set it up, even coded it to self-destruct after he was done finding the joker), kidnapping the mob's financial wizard from his home country, scoping out the assassination attempt on the mayor in plain clothes, getting that fingerprint on the bullet....i mean for a film, in which action is required, what exactly are you looking for? In a future movie that attempts to be less grounded with reality, perhaps you get more of what you're looking for but I don't see it as lacking in that department.


>
>Frankly, Nolan's Batman doesn't even DESERVE to stand next to
>Supes.

>fixing
>the city's air supply using a light rail, setting up citywide
>sonar through cell phones (fox helped him but he set it up,
>even coded it to self-destruct after he was done finding the
>joker), kidnapping the mob's financial wizard from his home
>country, scoping out the assassination attempt on the mayor in
>plain clothes, getting that fingerprint on the bullet....i
>mean for a film, in which action is required, what exactly are
>you looking for? In a future movie that attempts to be less
>grounded with reality, perhaps you get more of what you're
>looking for but I don't see it as lacking in that department.

>what exactly are
>you looking for?

You answered it yourself.

"a future movie that attempts to be less
grounded with reality"

Theres only 2 years left! (c) Bussa Bus

~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

you know the Queen of Prep time is gonna be the star of the show

the fact that superman can kill him 50 times in a second wont account for anything

>the fact that superman can kill him 50 times in a second wont
>account for anything

i'm halfway serious. if he hadn't clearly given up being a real actor, he'd be perfect.

i can't think of anyone else who'd work.

But Neeson wouldn't be bad either.

I doubt they go older Batman though, sadly.

...they better just give the suit back to Michael Keaton.

perfect

but yeah doubt they will go older like that
_________________________________
Reunion Radio Podcasts
http://reunionradio.blogspot.com/
Twitter @therealoldpro

http://io9.com/rumor-warner-bros-wants-an-old-bruce-wayne-for-batman-1002826375


Rumor: Warner Bros. wants an old Bruce Wayne for Batman Vs. Superman

Rumor: Warner Bros. wants an old Bruce Wayne for Batman Vs. SupermanExpand

Rumor of the day: Warner Bros. wants an older Batman to fight the bushy-chested Henry Cavill/Clark Kent. Which means, Armie Hammer is out (plus he just announced he's not all that interested in being the next Bat). So: Inexperienced Superman vs. Old Batman, how does that strike you?

Let's not blame George for Joel's bullshit.

How old are we talking about though?

>Let's not blame George for Joel's bullshit.
>
>How old are we talking about though?

Dude makes a good Batman... I just think he's a bit too old now even for this version. Sounds like they're looking in the 40s range.
_________________________________
Reunion Radio Podcasts
http://reunionradio.blogspot.com/
Twitter @therealoldpro

Kurt Russel?

Can't see that at allllllllllllllllllllll.

Liam WOULD be perfect though.

Bruce Willis might be good though...

lol

He can toe that line between hero and psycho nicely, which I think is a good thing for older Batman.

>i'm halfway serious. if he hadn't clearly given up being a
>real actor, he'd be perfect.

and cmon, did you miss this? http://joeltalksmovies.bangordailynews.com/files/2012/02/thegrey.jpg

After watching "Shame" and "Fish Tank", he seems to have the perfect blend of dark-natured intrigue and playfulness to be Batman.

Fassbender just seems much too waify, effeminate and British...like slightly more intimidating than Jude Law

300 and Hunger show he has the requisite physicality, if still on the slim side.

He's pretty much made to play Bruce Wayne IMO. He's got the chops to bring some real weight to the role. He's older. I dunno about him doing the action scenes, but I doubt that would be a huge issue. I just think he brings a charm and elegance to the Wayne character that we really haven't ever had. Bale did a great job showing how much Bruce cared about the people of Gotham, and Gere can bring that compassion out in interesting ways.

The other guy I keep coming back to is Matt Damon. Shit, Bourne is damn near Batman without the cape and cowl anyways. He's a great actor who would add a grizzled, grimy element to an older Batman that would be great for this. He's pretty much a man of the people in real life, and think the same compassion and consciousness he exudes in real life would translate perfectly into Wayne.

Both guys would be excellent IMO.

I still like Gosling if they skew a bit younger, and Brolin would be dope as well. He would probably be the closest thing there is to a big screen version of the TAS iteration, which is great. In the end I still would like to see Gere in the role, though I'm probably in an extreme minority on that one. I can't see any reason not to cast Damon though.

I mean, I'm not one of those people who thinks all superheroes need to skew young, but Gere is almost eligible for social security and probably has been on the cover of AARP Magazine sometime recently. I agree about the compassion thing as Bruce Wayne, but really, homie is too old to be Batman.

I always picture Batman now as someone in his late 30s/early 40s. Matt Damon isn't a bad choice, but I think he's a little too... Personable. Even with Bourne on his résumé.

He ages like a damn vampire.

I think he could play late 40's Batman pretty well and I still think he'd give an extremely compelling portrayal of both sides of the Bruce/Batman coin, as would Damon.

Between Brolin and Gosling, I'd say Josh brings a more physical presence. He likely brings a square-jawed, straight forward Batman to the table with Superman the fold whereas Gos will most likely swag all over Supes.

I still would like to see Clooney given a second shot at Batman.

All that said, Affleck is still the absolute best man out there for this job, but I'd want him to write and direct as well as play Bruce/Bats, and none of that is in the cards.

Or Jeffery Dean Morgan.

http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00062997.html

I've seen a very vocal internet backing of him as Bats, but his name hasn't come up once in these "rumors." Interesting.

Dude looked like he was smelling a fart throughout Dredd.

excitement dropping.

http://variety.com/2013/film/news/ben-affleck-is-the-new-batman-1200586881/

Ben Affleck is Batman.

The actor will replace Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne in the upcoming untitled Superman-Batman feature for Warner Bros., the studio announced Thursday.

“Man of Steel” actors Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Laurence Fishburne and Diane Lane are reprising their roles with Zack Snyder on board to direct.

The film is slated to bow on July 17, 2015.

I don't have hate for Ben like others. He has turned into quite the good director. But this choice surprises me. Them choosing him and him accepting. He seemed like he was past this kind of stuff in his career. After Bale turned down $50 million this was their next choice?

EDIT: I saw that the $50 million thing wasn't real.

“Ben provides an interesting counter-balance to Henry’s Superman. He has the acting chops to create a layered portrayal of a man who is older and wiser than Clark Kent and bears the scars of a seasoned crime fighter, but retain the charm that the world sees in billionaire Bruce Wayne,” Snyder said in a statement. “I can’t wait to work with him.”

I don't really see Affleck as a guy who can play the "scars of a seasoned crime fighter". He doesn't strike me as someone who plays a character with a dark side all that well. Even in "The Town", he was more the good guy who'd done some bad things. He definitely seems more like a Superman than a Batman.

Sorry, Internet. This is awesome.

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

yo DC WTF?

ben Affleck?

Make Mine MARVEL!

http://tinyurl.com/lwkghp5

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

http://therealmcast.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/AFFLECK-SUPERMAN.jpg

That's like blaming Will Smith for AFTER EARTH tanking.

...it's oddly apropos for HOLLYWOODLAND too. lol

how did they watch that and say "we've got our guy! the fans will love this!"

Nothing against Ben Affleck, but I can't buy him as Batman.

I'm ready for a disaster. Everyone is still going to watch though, and I imagine a JL movie will still get made. But this is crap though.

So awful.

and its unbelievable how much

i mean Marvel pretty much gave them a template for success

and their just doing everything wrong

SMH

Affleck will drop out due to "scheduling conflicts" or some BS?

Hopefully?

FWIW, DC I don't think had the same opportunity to build a cinematic universe like Marvel. Marvel had a plan that they executed flawlessly, while DC already had a great thing going with Nolan's Batman that wasn't designed to expand to a bigger universe. So when they saw the success and wanted to copy, they were never able to follow the same blueprint.

I thought that the introduction of Batman in the Supes sequel was a good idea as a way to build towards a JL flick. I was hoping for a Batman Beyond flick, so it could stay in the Nolan universe, but Batman vs Superman makes sense. Ben Affleck playing Bruce/Bats just flat out doesn't.

Batman Boogaloo?

They're "fucking up" by casting Affleck? Jesus.... I hope you'r in your 20s because you sound like those nerds in '88 who were upset when they announced Keaton as Batman.

Browse around the internet and you'll see you're in a very small minority of those that favor the decision. Pretty sure the dissenters are not all in their 20's.

They went for a splashy big name instead of the best fit. There are literally dozens of other actors that would have been better.

>Browse around the internet and you'll see you're in a very
>small minority of those that favor the decision.

My bad. If the internet taste makers who got mad that Ruffalo replaced Ed Norton, said that Heath Ledger was going to ruin the Joker, and that Bryan Singer would make a good Superman movie because he "referenced Donner" disagree, then I must be in the wrong camp. lol

You implied my age was some kind of factor in not liking the casting decision.
I suggested if you look around the Internet, you'll see pretty much everyone, this board included, feels the same.
I never made any kind of reference to the credibility of people's opinion on the Internet.
I didn't realize what I said was that complicated.

Would've been a bigger fan of Matt Damon tho

And just go for gonzo.

I'm about to get my polar O_E on about this....

I'm not one of them but...

...no one saw this comin, hence the immediate outrage/dissatisfaction

par for the course

Actually, Val was in a good/not great movie. The faults of that film though weren't his fault.

THAT particular shitrock was a Schumacher excretion.

Hopefully he'll write too. It's a shame he isn't directing though, but it is what it is.

LOL@people up here pretending he's the same dude that did shit like Paycheck for a paycheck. He's clearly beefed up his resume and will absolutely bring major weight to both Bruce and Batman.

You're kinda dumb on the topic.

More interested in seeing Affleck direct that than star as Batman.

its gonna be ugly

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

As a matter of fact, I think Zack-dawg is trolling you, because I couldn't think of a better casting notice to make you mad. And the most beautiful thing about it? It puts you on the side of the nerds! hahahahahaha You finna sound mad frappe/Lesson-y on 2015.

I literally get a check in the mail from writing and
clowning decisions like this

When Hollywood does well, I have to do my day job to make
bread

I eat MUCH better

I couldn't clown Avengers....wanted to, so I get a check,
but couldn't (well, I COULD have, but that wouldn't have
been honest)

But this? Zack is an awful filmmaker....terrible. As in,
dreadful. And Affleck as Batman? bwahahahahahaahahhhahaha
This is going to be total dogshit....and I'm laughing all
the way to the bank

>As a matter of fact, I think Zack-dawg is trolling you,
>because I couldn't think of a better casting notice to make
>you mad. And the most beautiful thing about it? It puts you
>on the side of the nerds! hahahahahaha You finna sound mad
>frappe/Lesson-y on 2015.

Affleck or Jesus it doesn't matter who plays a new Batman the flick is going to be pretentious, underwhelming, and will fall well short of whatever well-developed and enjoyable Marvel flick comes out the same summer. Stop kidding yourselves.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________
But Zootown, black people and media, so...

Funny how Johnny Storm is as forgettable a comic book character there's been on the big screen. Yet STEVE FUCKING ROGERS had people saying the pledge of allegiance during the previous two summers.

Hell, Christian Bale was thought as a good actor, but no one knew what
was gonna happen when Batman Begins first came out.


So we're basing this Ben hate off of what? Gigli and a weak ass Daredevil movie?

If there's anyone who's demonstrated that he can take his lumps and come back it's Affleck.

Now there has been some shitty casting THROUGHOUT these super hero flicks. But I'm willing to be that a guy who's become a seasoned director and actor can bring more to a role than he could have dreamed of ten years ago.

People were nutting all over themselves before Man of Steel came out, then afterwards, the buzz died down quick fast. (For the record, I really enjoyed it.) With the shit storm known as every Transformers movie after the first one, the relatively underwhelming GI Joe flicks (I liked the first one, haven't seen the second one yet but people weren't singing its praises), I'm not going to let the hype machine pre-emptively determine whether something will be good or bad, cause CLEARLY prognosticators have been wrong enough of the time.

This isn't to say that without a doubt, the movie is guaranteed to bang and that Ben will beast in this role. But I'm gonna give dude a chance before writing him off.

Based on the OTHER shit that hasn't delivered, I'm gonna ride for Ben at least until the movie is out just because motherfuckers are shitting on it so early.

Affleck is a one speed type actor to me. The only film that really gives me any hope is "Changing Lanes", in which the perspective on his character changes throughout the film and it worked. Beyond that, he's usually the Boy Scout. When he does play bad, it comes off as kind of hammy or he goes 100% dickhead like in "Boiler Room".

The example of Chris Evans doesn't really work because Chris Evans didn't evolve - Captain America is a relatively easy role that fit into Evans' wheelhouse. I'd also think Affleck could have done that one (or Superman.) But Batman has an added layer that Evans and Affleck don't have in them IMO. Christian Bale had it but nobody knew it would work. Michael Keaton showed it in "Clean and Sober" but most people saw him as the comic actor so his initial casting was seen as strange. I think most people loved the idea of Val Kilmer as Batman although the movie sucked.

WB had a huge casting decision. They were replacing a Batman who had grossed billions of dollars for the next Superman movie, the first of which was a bit of a disappointment at the box office and a major disappointment for many fans and filmgoers. Ben Affleck is not a choice that is going to win those people over. Ben Affleck isn't a choice that gives me more confidence in Snyder/Goyer.
If they had said, Ben Affleck's taking over directing Batman vs. Superman, I'd be thrilled. As Superman, I wouldn't hate it. But Batman? I'm just not seeing it.

>Affleck is a one speed type actor to me. The only film that
>really gives me any hope is "Changing Lanes", in which the
>perspective on his character changes throughout the film and
>it worked. Beyond that, he's usually the Boy Scout. When he
>does play bad, it comes off as kind of hammy or he goes 100%
>dickhead like in "Boiler Room".
>
>The example of Chris Evans doesn't really work because Chris
>Evans didn't evolve - Captain America is a relatively easy
>role that fit into Evans' wheelhouse.

You discredit the power of Evans performance, going back to Captain America: TFA. You had to root for him BEFORE he changed into Cap, otherwise it would have only been a lab experiment. And in the Avengers, it was a delicate balance being such an all american hero that people could get behind without being cheesy and he pulled it off. I can't tell you how many people said "I really bought him as Captain America in the Avengers" as if they needed convincing to get behind that character. As we've discussed before, he's not as irreplaceable as RDJ is to Iron Man but he has firmly branded Captain America as HIS. I expect an additional layer to be shown in The Winter Soldier.

>I'd also think Affleck
>could have done that one (or Superman.) But Batman has an
>added layer that Evans and Affleck don't have in them IMO.
>Christian Bale had it but nobody knew it would work. Michael
>Keaton showed it in "Clean and Sober" but most people saw him
>as the comic actor so his initial casting was seen as strange.
>I think most people loved the idea of Val Kilmer as Batman
>although the movie sucked.
I did NOT, I was only like 13 at the time, but I was pissed the second I heard Keaton was off. I didn't realize shit would fall off so badly. LOVED Kilmer in the Saint. Did NOT like him in Batman. He was one note the whole film.


>WB had a huge casting decision. They were replacing a Batman
>who had grossed billions of dollars for the next Superman
>movie, the first of which was a bit of a disappointment at the
>box office and a major disappointment for many fans and
>filmgoers. Ben Affleck is not a choice that is going to win
>those people over. Ben Affleck isn't a choice that gives me
>more confidence in Snyder/Goyer.
But that's just it. They didn't know what Batman was going to be, AND without knowing much about Cavill, people were STILL excited about what Superman was going to be. I honestly don't know if many people will give the movie a fair shake because of that. It is far easier in this day and age to be an unknown or not yet a big draw in a big role than a proven commodity, because people have trouble being open minded and giving someone a chance. An average Affleck performance that neither hurts nor helps the movie will get SHIT ON.

>If they had said, Ben Affleck's taking over directing Batman
>vs. Superman, I'd be thrilled. As Superman, I wouldn't hate
>it. But Batman? I'm just not seeing it.

I think him being a director will greatly assist in how he plays the role, but we shall see.

>You discredit the power of Evans performance, going back to
>Captain America: TFA.

I'm not. I'm saying it was in his wheelhouse. Chris Evans playing Captain America well doesn't mean Chris Evans would make a lick of sense as Batman or Iron Man. They are different roles and require a different skillsets.

Evans has a natural "Aw shucks"-ness about him which helps him play Captain America. It's not to say that he wasn't good in it since he was but it's a role that fits him. There are a lot of actors with that same wheelhouse who would have sucked in Captain America.
Batman is playing Ben against type IMO and I've just never seen Affleck rise to the occassion and I have little faith in Snyder being the director who pulls that out of him.

And those movies turnt out just fine

No, they really did.

And this one will be no different

If anything, I'm more concerned with Zack Snyder's direction than I am with AFFLECK's acting

_______________________________________________________________________________________________
But Zootown, black people and media, so...

>
>If anything, I'm more concerned with Zack Snyder's direction
>than I am with AFFLECK's acting

I don't need them to do that, but I wouldn't be mad. I think Ben is a great choice for director of a film like this though.

>If anything, I'm more concerned with Zack Snyder's direction
>than I am with AFFLECK's acting

If Nolan was directing, I think most wouldn't have a problem, because he's so strong with actors.

But because it's Snyder, they sort of needed an actor who, if left to his own devices, can put forth a really rich, smart, and haunting performance. And to me, Affleck hasn't really shown *that.*

There's an awful lot of assuming and speculation on Affleck's performance based on previous material... and zero pages of new script.

It will be fine. AFFLECK will be fine.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
But Zootown, black people and media, so...

I think pretty much every Batman to date has been *fine* at worst, and everyone still complains like it's the worst choice ever.

I just worry about his acting. Not his intelligence nor his prowess nor his decision-making nor anything else about Affleck, who I love. This just doesn't seem like his type of role.

But yes, I'm sure it will be fine. I'd prefer it be GREAT... but worst case scenario, he'll be fine. Like always.

Which is pretty tough to do.

A bland Superman fighting a bland Batman? Pass.

Maybe if they get Lance Reddick for Lex Luthor it might inspire some interest but all of this puts my interest on the Superman Returns level (a film that I still haven't actually seen.)

>a really rich, smart,
>and haunting performance.

It's harder for heroes than villains, but Robert Downey Jr. and Mark Ruffalo were sensational-- that's two off the top. I'll even say Bale showed precisely what it takes (at least at first); although I know people question him as "Batman," he had that smart public-face, private-brooding thing down pat pretty well. Smart characters, plenty of depth, memorably performed.

For villains, I could rattle off a good number.

>Funny how Johnny Storm is as forgettable a comic book
>character there's been on the big screen. Yet STEVE FUCKING
>ROGERS had people saying the pledge of allegiance during the
>previous two summers.
>
>Hell, Christian Bale was thought as a good actor, but no one
>knew what
>was gonna happen when Batman Begins first came out.
>
>
>So we're basing this Ben hate off of what? Gigli and a weak
>ass Daredevil movie?
>
>If there's anyone who's demonstrated that he can take his
>lumps and come back it's Affleck.
>
>Now there has been some shitty casting THROUGHOUT these super
>hero flicks. But I'm willing to be that a guy who's become a
>seasoned director and actor can bring more to a role than he
>could have dreamed of ten years ago.
>
>People were nutting all over themselves before Man of Steel
>came out, then afterwards, the buzz died down quick fast.
>(For the record, I really enjoyed it.) With the shit storm
>known as every Transformers movie after the first one, the
>relatively underwhelming GI Joe flicks (I liked the first one,
>haven't seen the second one yet but people weren't singing its
>praises), I'm not going to let the hype machine pre-emptively
>determine whether something will be good or bad, cause CLEARLY
>prognosticators have been wrong enough of the time.
>
>This isn't to say that without a doubt, the movie is
>guaranteed to bang and that Ben will beast in this role. But
>I'm gonna give dude a chance before writing him off.
>
>Based on the OTHER shit that hasn't delivered, I'm gonna ride
>for Ben at least until the movie is out just because
>motherfuckers are shitting on it so early.


_________________________________
Reunion Radio Podcasts
http://reunionradio.blogspot.com/
Twitter @therealoldpro

He's at his best when he has to play the dumb lug. Affleck can do brave, he can do bold... but he can't do smart. The one time he did do smart well (Argo), it was because he underplayed it as much as possible, a la Redford. I don't see him underplaying Batman here, although maybe I'm wrong.

The reason Affleck sucked as an actor in so many lead roles is because he had to show depth of character, a variety of emotional colors. That's not his strong suit.

And they just cast him as the smartest and most haunted guy in the DC Universe.

I think Affleck could play the public Bruce Wayne beautifully, the guy at galas and charity events. He'd be a flawless choice there, really. But do I see him brooding in the Batcave? Nah. Not off the top.

And sadly, it's not really a Keaton/Ledger scenario in my eyes, since Burton and Nolan are far better "actor directors" than Snyder is. Maybe if Nolan is more hands on...?

It's not like the DC people have shown in the past a level of sterling perfection, so maybe I shouldn't have gotten my hopes up anyway. WB loves Affleck and they needed a "name" to bring the star value up in hopes of helping this make more money than the first, that's all it boils down to-- not "who is the best Batman for this universe going forward?"

But I've been wrong before, so fuck it. (Though I was incredibly pro-Ledger when that went down, I only used that example above as someone folks were skeptical about when casting was first announced.)

I hope he takes this chance and shows us
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

Yeah, a guy sporting a five year resume with screenwriting, producing, directing, and acting credits (split among those films) like that is actually *more* than adequate to play Batman. It's actually a great choice.

OH BUT DAREDEVIL!!!!

Nah.

I'll say it again: give Ben the helm of a DD flick right today and we'd have one of the very best superhero flicks ever made. He's a completely different guy today than he was then.

*That* dude was on some fresh-faced heartthrob just gettin paid shit
He's since built up an excellent list of films that make him perfectly suited for a movie like this.

This isn't Paycheck Ben joining forces with Joel Schumacher's boner for Bat Titties.

The guy who did the last Batman trilogy is producing.
The guy who excels at gritty thrillers is Batman.

This is NOT B&R or anything close to that. This is NOT DD.

>The guy who did the last Batman trilogy is producing.
>The guy who excels at gritty thrillers is Batman.

And I wouldn't say Affleck excels in gritty thrillers. He wasn't in Gone Baby Gone and he's not directing this film so that's moot. None of the other characters you mentioned really compare to Batman.

I mean, yeah, it's not going to be Batman and Robin or Daredevil but saying it's not going to be one of the worst superhero movies ever made isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.

Might have more over-all input this time as an EP than before.

And I pretty much agree. Also, Batman vs Superman is not going to be a $40m gritty thriller, so that's pretty much moot as well. I'm not going to totally shit on this idea until I get some sort of idea for how and in what story this is supposed to work, but my current trepidation is more out of disappointment that this is really the end of the Nolan-involved Dark Knight run. Really was holding out hope for just a JGL Nightwing movie or two.

There was bound to be backlash for anyone who wasn't Bale by the masses.

I really, honestly, thought there was something there with JGL to carry the story on in a more low-key sort of way. 50% upset Nolan's Gotham is done, 45% morning my brief acceptance of JGL, 5% just don't give a shit about a Superman.

His name was surprisingly absent from the press release.

"The new Super Hero film is being scripted by David S. Goyer from a story he co-created with Zack Snyder. Charles Roven and Deborah Snyder are producing, with Benjamin Melniker, Michael E. Uslan and Wesley Coller serving as executive producers. Production is expected to begin in 2014."

>And I wouldn't say Affleck excels in gritty thrillers. He
>wasn't in Gone Baby Gone and he's not directing this film so
>that's moot.

Moot how? So his wealth of experience means shit all of a sudden? Oh, he didn't act in the movie he wrote a great screenplay for so that experience is moot and he has nothing from that well to contribute somehow? He isn't directing or writing, so he'll have no creative input? I have a bridge for you if you think that's the case. Saying that resume moot is basically saying you just don't like the guy.

None of the other characters you mentioned really
>compare to Batman.

Oh, like all the Batman-esque characters played by Keaton and Bale?

Mr Mom sure laid the blueprint for Bruce Wayne!
When I think Beetlejuice, I think "that's the guy I want to don the cape and cowl".

Are Trevor Reznick and Patrick Bateman thought of Batman prototypes just because they're "dark"? Oh, I get it; Bateman IS awful close to Batman now that I think of it.

All of a sudden, Batman is an incredibly complex and nuanced role only a virtuoso could pull it off and even THEN, boy is that still a tough task!

All of a sudden Ben Affleck can't act for shit and has no remotely relevant experience that lends itself toward such a role. Might as well have cast Ahnold as Batman, right?

>I mean, yeah, it's not going to be Batman and Robin or
>Daredevil but saying it's not going to be one of the worst
>superhero movies ever made isn't exactly a ringing
>endorsement.

Telling people who are overreacting as though this is a horrendous choice that the movie won't be horrendous isn't done to endorse the film. A little context goes a long way, and this part of your response pretty much pretends that people here and elsewhere aren't acting like they cast Pauly Shore as Batman or some shit. If you weren't, you'd arrive at the logical conclusion that I'm simply addressing those things and not trying to use the notion that it won't be the worst thing ever as some sort of positive endorsement.

>Telling people who are overreacting as though this is a
>horrendous choice that the movie won't be horrendous isn't
>done to endorse the film. A little context goes a long way,
>and this part of your response pretty much pretends that
>people here and elsewhere aren't acting like they cast Pauly
>Shore as Batman or some shit.

Not sure when I said I was speaking for everyone or why I need to take into account the over-the-top Anti-Afflect people in my reply? Context doesn't matter in this case. If I agreed with your points, I'd agree. I don't. And saying, "Well, other people are overreacting" doesn't improve them.

I don't think that his latest performances make him any better of a fit for the role of Batman. I doubt that Goyer and Snyder, who already vetoed Christopher Nolan on Superman killing Zod, are going to just tell Affleck, "Sure buddy, you tell us where we're going wrong."
I'm not saying Affleck can't do it; I'm just saying nothing I've seen from him gives me confidence, especially when Snyder is the one directing the project.

>Not sure when I said I was speaking for everyone or why I need
>to take into account the over-the-top Anti-Afflect people in
>my reply?

NO. That's not at all what I'm saying. You need to take into context who *EYE* was speaking to and *why* I said what I said.

>Context doesn't matter in this case. If I agreed
>with your points, I'd agree. I don't. And saying, "Well, other
>people are overreacting" doesn't improve them.

No, you're just not getting it. I made my comments within a particular context, and you addressed those comments completely OUTSIDE of that context, implying an entirely different connotation to my statement- which you're still doing. My points don't need improvement, you
just suck at reading/responding to things in their proper context.

I said what I said in regard to those who think that way, but you took it as me somehow trying to spin that into a positive. That's you responding to my words out of their context.

>I don't think that his latest performances make him any better
>of a fit for the role of Batman.

Shrug.

>I doubt that Goyer and
>Snyder, who already vetoed Christopher Nolan on Superman
>killing Zod, are going to just tell Affleck, "Sure buddy, you
>tell us where we're going wrong."

That's not a gross over simplification or anything. See how you keep running to these bullshit extremes? They're not bringing a guy like Affleck who has been in director/writer/producer mode for his last few films and expect that he's just going to take orders. No, he's a WB GUY!!!!! He's there to contribute more than a face and a name who takes orders from Snyder.

Oh, I know, you'll turn that into some smarmy assed "sure, buddy, you tell us what we're doing wrong" retort. While you're trying to be snarky and cute, you know good and well I'm not getting at that extreme. He is definitely going to add some creative muscle to the team. He's not

>I'm not saying Affleck can't do it; I'm just saying nothing
>I've seen from him gives me confidence, especially when Snyder
>is the one directing the project.

Really? You're not saying he can't do it? Nah, you're mind is already made up. You haven't so much as taken a "wait and see" approach.

"No, really, my shit makes sense when you realize I'm talking to other people who aren't making sense. What? No, YOU'RE mad!"

Have fun.

Knock yourself out champ

He has zero Bruce Wayne in him.

Zip.

He's a goofball ass nigga, his sensibility just doesn't
jive

Bruce Wayne is more than just a white guy with dark hair


That's what y'all fail to realize


Man of Steel was horrid, and they actually picked a pretty
good Superman

This movie is gonna suck

We're totally shocked.

You're right though, they should probably get Night Dog to direct this. The twist will be that we won't know who was cast as Batman until the last 30 seconds, it will lose 150 million after the worldwide grosses settle up and you'll jerk off to it.

His acting chops tho? Nothing has shown him even remotely able to tackle the gritty that's become synonymous with Nolan's Batman. And what we expect out of our superhero movies in general*

They should have went with a lesser name, and given him the movie to produce/direct. He's probably one of the best working directors in Hollywood today, and one of the most mediocre actors still getting work at the same time LOL (helps he casts himself in his own movies tho)

*Elephant in the room being the Avengers series, if they take a more lighthearted tone then Affleck could pull it off but I don't think thats how people want their Bats.

"gritty Nolan Batman," and that's not necessarily going to be the case

Based on what little been said so far by Snyder and Goyer, I don't believe AFFLECK's coming in to take over the Christian Bale incarnation of Batman

And The Town was lighthearted? Coulda fooled me

EDIT: IIRC it was funny in spots but that was mainly Jon Hamm cracking wise

I'm astounded that y'all are acting as if they just cast the Jersey Girl version of Ben Affleck. No one here is arguing that he's the best actor of his generation, but god-DAMN, R.I.P. to the concept of "let's wait and see."

________________________________________________________________________________________________
But Zootown, black people and media, so...

>His acting chops tho? Nothing has shown him even remotely
>able to tackle the gritty that's become synonymous with
>Nolan's Batman. And what we expect out of our superhero
>movies in general*

>They should have went with a lesser name, and given him the
>movie to produce/direct.

I'd be on board with him to direct and, say, Gosling, Damon, or Clooney as Batman. I don't think he's just a hired hand in this though, not with his recent directing/writing credentials. I seriously doubt WB brought him into this mix to do nothing more than take orders from an inferior director.

>He's probably one of the best
>working directors in Hollywood today,

Agreed.

>and one of the most
>mediocre actors still getting work at the same time LOL (helps
>he casts himself in his own movies tho)

Nah, can't clap to that. He does terrific work in his own movies IMO.

>*Elephant in the room being the Avengers series, if they take
>a more lighthearted tone then Affleck could pull it off but I
>don't think thats how people want their Bats.

How gritty is Spiderman? How gritty was F4? How gritty was... uh... well.... erm... what other big same SH films are there? What, Punisher? Does that even count? Nope, it's just been Batman for the most part. I think the reverse is true, Ben will help to add those layers to this.

>or Clooney as Batman.


did you forget?

Oh yes, I was there for that.

Superhero films have come an awful long way since then, and much more is expected. Crap like that just doesn't fly anymore.

Joel intentionally made it an over the top cartoon.

Are we really pinning that on George?

He didn't write, direct, or design those nipples.

Nah. *This* George in *this* climate is a great look.

A BA directed Batman flick with George as Batman would be excellent.

He can do Bruce, not Bats.

>He can do Bruce, not Bats.

Agreed. I could only see him in a Batman Beyond role at this point.

Think Affleck will do just fine...this is in the same over-reaction veign (remember how folks shit on casting Heath as the joker? How'd that turn out) as we see too often on the internets

I think it may be an un-filmable character without the full on cheese of the Reeves era.

Think it may be my atheism. If Batman is just "in tow", I'm out.

I don't think there's been a single time when Batman has been cast and the reaction has been, "Wow, that's a great idea. This is going to be a slam dunk."

Some of them have been good. Some of them have sucked. Some of them I thought wouldn't be anything special delivered. Some of them I thought would be good have sucked. Some of the films have been great. Some have been glorified gay porn. But before each of the three reboots (I count "Batman Forever" as a reboot), I don't think anyone has ever been convinced that this was going to be the start of a great franchise.

So, I'm going to reserve judgement on Affleck. The only thing I'm convinced of is that this movie is going to make a shit ton of money.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/why-ben-affleck-said-yes-613658

Why Ben Affleck Said 'Yes' to Batman (Analysis)
2:17 PM PDT 8/23/2013 by Borys Kit

The secret talks that led the Oscar-winning actor, director and producer to again agree to a superhero role -- and show Hollywood how a studio takes care of top talent.

Thursday's seemingly out-of-left field announcement by Warner Bros. that Ben Affleck was cast as Batman in the sequel to Man of Steel caught many in Hollywood by surprise -- but it was the culmination of months of conversations and deal-making.

Sources tell The Hollywood Reporter that the process began earlier this year when director Zack Snyder had finished working on Man of Steel with producer Christopher Nolan. Snyder and the studio already had ideas for a follow-up, and Snyder reached out to Affleck to check the star's interest.

It's unclear when these talks began. Multiple sources say the studio approached Josh Brolin, as well as other actors. Ryan Gosling was also a possibility, but the actor dislikes the idea of sequels.

But Affleck was curious, and initial talks focusing on story and character began. Once Affleck was satisfied, WME's Patrick Whitesell and Ziffren Brittenham's Sam Fischer began negotiating his role in the Superman sequel. Sources say that Affleck has been signed for multiple other movies. The talks were so secretive that many Warner execs and most WME agents remained unaware of their existence.

The high-profile choice left fans stunned -- thousands signed petitions for Warner Bros. to remove Affleck from the role, and a social media sentiment analysis firm estimated that 71 percent of tweets about the news in the first hour were negative. But years ago fans attacked Heath Ledger for after he was cast as the Joker, and in pre-Internet times, Michael Keaton when he landed the lead in Tim Burton's Batman. (Or, let's not forget, Jon Favreau's in-hindsight-perfect choice of Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man.)

On one level, Affleck’s return to superheroes seems bewildering. The Oscar-winning co-writer of Good Will Hunting drew scorn after donning the red suit for Daredevil, and later agreed it wasn't his best work. After he'd recovered and turned in a bravura performance directing and starring in The Town, Fox offered him the chance to direct and star in a Daredevil reboot -- but Affleck turned it down.

More recently, Nolan offered Affleck the chance to direct Man of Steel. Affleck declined, seemingly because of a desire not to return to the world of capes -- despite being an avowed comic book fan.
But it turns out Warner Bros. had other plans. And indeed, the film acts as a canny show of force by the studio, which, with one announcement, publicly threw its support behind one of its signature stars. Warners just showed Hollywood that it's still very much in the Ben Affleck business, a necessary move after his Argo took home the Best Picture Oscars -- but Kevin Tsujihara's ouster of Affleck champion Jeff Robinov left the studio’s many go-to talents uneasy.

Putting one of the studio's signature stars in one of it's signature franchises assuages those concerns and potentially keeps key figures in the fold, an important strategic move after the departure of not only Robinov but financier Legendary, a production partner with a talent-friendly reputation that's financing films across town at Universal.

The closely-watched sequel also gets a handy bolstering of star power. While Cavill didn't hurt Man of Steel's $289 million global box office while getting generally favorable reviews as Superman, he's seen as an actor on the rise -- not one who's able to open or carry a tentpole franchise on his back. The first movie benefited from strong work by Kevin Costner and Russell Crowe, but (spoiler alert!) both their characters died in the movie and are unlikely to return.

Affleck's presence also hedges the movie against Nolan’s greatly lessened involvement. Nolan was heavily involved in Man of Steel's story and post-production, and was instrumental in the studio's choice of Snyder as a director. But he's busy in Canada shooting Interstellar, his sci-fi adventure movie. Affleck's presence means a star who's also demonstrated Oscar-caliber chops as a director and writer, which should prove handy on Snyder's set.

But here's the big reason it makes sense: Affleck gets to be a tentpole actor again without the tentpole actor risk. After a run of big movies that cast his tentpole future in doubt (Paycheck, Surviving Christmas, Daredevil -- no offense, sir). Affleck reinvented himself as a smaller-scale filmmaker, and proved his ability to direct himself along the way. And while he's recently nabbed the prestigious role of starring in Gone Girl, which paired him with the well-regarded David Fincher, the Batman role allows him free rein over one of the no-brainer success stories of July 2015.

Because since it’s considered a sequel to Man of Steel and not a Batman movie, any potential underperformance issues won't ultimately land on his shoulders.

(That’s not to say there is no risk. Anyone stepping into the character’s boots has the tough task to of following Nolan's direction of Christian Bale. Affleck's trick is threading the needle between Bale's hoarse intensity and the campy mess Joel Schumacher made of George Clooney -- who keeps a photo of himself in the Batsuit in his Smoke House Productions office in mocking remembrance.)

The deal also potentially lines Affleck up to star in and direct Warner Bros.' answer to The Avengers: The eventual Justice League movie.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________
But Zootown, black people and media, so...

>Affleck's presence means a star who's also demonstrated
>Oscar-caliber chops as a director and writer, which should
>prove handy on Snyder's set.

But here's the big reason it makes sense: Affleck gets to be a
>tentpole actor again without the tentpole actor risk. After a
>run of big movies that cast his tentpole future in doubt
>(Paycheck, Surviving Christmas, Daredevil -- no offense, sir).
>Affleck reinvented himself as a smaller-scale filmmaker, and
>proved his ability to direct himself along the way. And while
>he's recently nabbed the prestigious role of starring in Gone
>Girl, which paired him with the well-regarded David Fincher,
>the Batman role allows him free rein over one of the
>no-brainer success stories of July 2015.
>
>Because since it’s considered a sequel to Man of Steel and not
>a Batman movie, any potential underperformance issues won't
>ultimately land on his shoulders.

All the perks if it works, none of the blame if it doesn't.

>>Because since it’s considered a sequel to Man of Steel and
>not
>>a Batman movie, any potential underperformance issues won't
>>ultimately land on his shoulders.

If it's doesn't do well or is a lousy movie, I doubt many fans are going to say, "Well, technically, it's a Superman sequel and not Ben's movie." I think the fan reaction shows that people are looking at this as a big deal and not, "Oh, Batman's also in this movie."

What will help him, critic-wise, is that critics have respect for him not and he's not some upstart (and not being one of Harvey's boys might have fewer spears sharpened for him.)

Still, while he can always go back to directing, in terms of his acting career, it'll likely be defined by his performance and the box office performance of Gone Girl and Batman vs. Superman.

I'm led to believe that it's a Superman movie with Batman more supporting, maybe in an adversarial role. In which case, (a) Batman will be the better written role, and (b) he won't have to "carry" it.

Who's the protagonist? That's what I'm interested in.

_____________________________________________________
"You can win with certainty with the spirit of "one cut". "Musashi Miyamoto

cause im not a DC fan

....but goddamn this is bad casting

the problem is THIS batman in THIS movie needs to be a gritty, older, cagey, weatherbeaten and extremely smart batman

mainly because his main rival in the film has the power of a god

Im not saying Affleck hasnt been a good actor in the last 10 yrs but this is not his role

it would almost be as bad as casting him as Wolverine

or casting Ryan Reynolds as Batman

no matter the talent certain people dont fit certain roles

Golden Globe Awards ‏@goldenglobes 3h
Bryan Cranston has been cast as Lex Luthor in the upcoming 'Man of Steel' sequel. --Reports #actors #movies

and

http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/exclusive-bryan-cranston-lex-luthor-batman-superman-matt-damon-aquaman-mark-strong-sinestro

As Cosmic Book News previously was informed, Lex Luthor has been cast in the Man of Steel sequel that will feature Ben Affleck as Batman and Henry Cavill as Superman.

Now we have been told a batch of new details, on top of why Affleck was chosen as Batman.

Bryan Cranston has been cast as Lex Luthor in what is said to be at least a six "appearance" deal (think of Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury popping up in every Marvel movie in the run-up to Avengers) and may be as high as ten.

Look for the official announcement to follow the conclusion to the final season of Breaking Bad as WB wants to dovetail off the end of that.

Regarding Ben Affleck, we are told he has allegedly a 13-appearance deal for Batman.

DC is going to have all of their main characters liberally appearing or at least mentioned in all of their movies to portray a more connected world than what Marvel Studios has done so far.

DC also does have major interest in bringing Matt Damon into the Justice League now that Affleck is on board, and it is rumored that he is being considered for Aquaman or Martian Manhunter.

Regarding Mark Strong playing Lex Luthor, the one thing that worked a bit against him was that he was already Sinestro -- and still could be again.

"Cranston truly is a dream casting for Luthor," we're told.

Damon as Aquaman would be cool too. Fuck it might as well.

A 10 picture deal? 13 for Ben?? Jeez.

Sinestro was easily the best thing about GL.

Cranston will kill as Luthor. (Pun not intended)

>DC is going to have all of their main characters liberally
>appearing or at least mentioned in all of their movies to
>portray a more connected world than what Marvel Studios has
>done so far.

marvel does it just enough to where it doesn't feel forced. if you do it anymore then either they all become justice league movies or there will be scenes that are literally just "Hey look, it's Aquaman." *Aquaman waves, then leaves*

>marvel does it just enough to where it doesn't feel forced.

IMO they should do more. IM3 would have fucking ROCKED if it would have been Bruce/Tony Hulk/IM buddy film.

>you do it anymore then either they all become justice league
>movies or there will be scenes that are literally just "Hey
>look, it's Aquaman." *Aquaman waves, then leaves*

Nah. IMO you can have appearances where a character or two serve specific functions. The fact that this is a living universe means Batman can call up Superman or GL when he's in a bind and just needs something specific done, air support or some shit.

It's still a Batman movie, but if we know these other cats are out there, even minor appearances go a long way toward creating a universe that's intertwined and not simply connected. Marvel has connected the dots, but really hasn't intertwined them to a great degree.

IMO it's a great opportunity to do it in a way that's decidedly different from Marvel.

The only problem I see is that DC screwed the pooch with GL, and even that made little to effort at building a new universe. They're extremely late to the party and should have "universe" party. Since The Dark Knight and Iron Man, we've had 6 other Marvel movies that all worked to build the Marvel U, whereas DC has released a standalone GL that didn't really try to tie anything together, a Batman movie that is not in the current DCU, and a Tepidly received Superman to kick off the new U.

Superman is essentially Iron Man 1. By the time we get to BVS, we'll have had a grand total of 11 Marvel U movies, counting Avengers 2, the Shield series, and later that year Phase 3 kicks off with Ant-Man.

>Nah. IMO you can have appearances where a character or two
>serve specific functions. The fact that this is a living
>universe means Batman can call up Superman or GL when he's in
>a bind and just needs something specific done, air support or
>some shit.

eh, if you're throwing a character in a movie you better give them a good reason to be there. if they don't have their own story, and are just there cause they got a phone call then it feels empty. plus if they keep doing that it will get boring.

>
>The only problem I see is that DC screwed the pooch with GL,
>and even that made little to effort at building a new
>universe. They're extremely late to the party and should have
>"universe" party. Since The Dark Knight and Iron Man, we've
>had 6 other Marvel movies that all worked to build the Marvel
>U, whereas DC has released a standalone GL that didn't really
>try to tie anything together, a Batman movie that is not in
>the current DCU, and a Tepidly received Superman to kick off
>the new U.

agreed, although the logical place to start financially is batman and superman. when superman returns bombed and nolan was in charge of batman (and wouldn't even entertain the idea of robin let alone superman) it probably became tougher, but you're right that they could've and should've done more with GL.

That is great casting.

Cranston play him.

Matt Damon would have been dope
Gos would have been great too
Richard Gere (yup, I said it, and stated why earlier in the thread)
Clooney (see: Gere)

Ben was always my #1 choice for the role, but also to write and direct.

Josh was definitely an intriguing choice though.

http://collider.com/ben-affleck-runner-runner-clip/

I guess they forgot about the Daredevil movie, and why do they need a well-known actor to play Batman, especially one who has already tried and fail as one in another movie years before?

Anyway, it's bad enough they can't seem to reboot Batman enough times to get the storyline right but now to bring in Batman with a new actor is just going to be an clusterfuck of no real timeline, no real story why both of them suddenly are co-existing in the same place and tell it or convince the audience a believable story, the plot or conflict will be so weak that it will be full of holes.

Also where the hell is that Wonder Woman or Green Arrow movie, those seem so easy to make and draw a plot from the comics to screen, when they did Green Lantern I knew they was going to fuck that up anyways cause they haven't made a decent Superman movie since Christopher Reeves retired as Clark Kent.

>I guess they forgot about the Daredevil movie, and why do
>they need a well-known actor to play Batman, especially one
>who has already tried and fail as one in another movie years
>before?

LOL@EVERYONE bringing up Daredevil .... while completely ignoring his recent catalog. I'm sure you'll catch up in another decade.

>Anyway, it's bad enough they can't seem to reboot Batman
>enough times to get the storyline right

That's literally not why it's being rebooted so often. It's rebooted because IT MAKES MONEY. I don't see people bitching about a gazillion Bond movies, and we've had about as many of those as we've have Batman movies since the Keaton flick.

>but now to bring in
>Batman with a new actor is just going to be an clusterfuck of
>no real timeline, no real story why both of them suddenly are
>co-existing in the same place and tell it or convince the
>audience a believable story, the plot or conflict will be so
>weak that it will be full of holes.

And you base this on what, exactly? You literally just reviewed a movie that hasn't been made yet. There isn't even a trailer yet, and you've somehow managed to diagnose all the problems it has. No script, no footage, and yet you, the guy who's always late to the movie party, already know there's no timeline or story.

Where is this "suddenly existing in the same place" tomfoolery coming from?

>Also where the hell is that Wonder Woman or Green Arrow movie,
>those seem so easy to make and draw a plot from the comics

Actually, WW has been in developmental hell for ages already and is widely considered to be too difficult to pull off without another introduction. Green Arrow had a script floating around awhile back that seemed to be well regarded, perhaps Zoo or Frank can shed some light on that one.

>screen, when they did Green Lantern I knew they was going to
>fuck that up anyways cause they haven't made a decent Superman
>movie since Christopher Reeves retired as Clark Kent.

SO you KNEW GL was going to suck because they didn't make a decent Superman flick since Reeves?

Well, considering they had only made ONE since that time and "decent" is actually a spot on way to describe it, well... let's just say your post is every bit the mess you claim BvS is going to be. You're either throwing out crazy assumptions or citing forceful opinions that are widely disagreed with. not that the agreement of others is a prerequisite for a valid opinion, but in the case of the people in charge of making the movie you deem easy to pull off thinking otherwise, well... I'd say they no more than the guy who never goes to the movies and flails wildly whenever he discusses them.

you can keep every DC flick of the last 10 years save for Batman Begins and I wouldn't bat a lash.

The best part is Bryan Cranston as Lex Luthor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4U4he3GgC4

Nobody watches Batman movies for good acting on the part of Batman. None of the actual Batmen have been "good". It's just a rich dude during the day who wears a mask and cape at night.

If the villains are good, the movie will be good. If the villains are stupid and corny, the movie will suck. Fucking Orlando Bloom could play Batman and nobody would really give two shits as long as everything else was good.

>Nobody watches Batman movies for good acting on the part of
>Batman. None of the actual Batmen have been "good". It's
>just a rich dude during the day who wears a mask and cape at
>night.
>
>If the villains are good, the movie will be good. If the
>villains are stupid and corny, the movie will suck. Fucking
>Orlando Bloom could play Batman and nobody would really give
>two shits as long as everything else was good.

that movie doesn't rely on the villains much at all, and that's surprising given that there's two of them. and cmon, keaton was good.

but the outrage has been way overboard.

as did all of the 90s batman flicks.

all of them.

lol Matt Damon is clownin' hard.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/28/matt-damon-ben-affleck-batman_n_3829471.html?ir=Entertainment

"I think it will be great. It will be terrific. I know there are a lot of people grousing on the internet. I just think it's kind of funny. You know, he's not playing King Lear. It's Batman!" Damon said. " certainly within his skill set. If anybody saw 'Argo' or 'The Town,' and all the work he's been doing lately, it's way more nuanced and interesting and way more difficult than Batman! Batman just sits there with his cowl over his head and whispers in a kinda gruff voice at people. Bruce Wayne is the more challenging part of the role, and Ben will be great at that."

>lol Matt Damon is clownin' hard.
>
>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/28/matt-damon-ben-affleck-batman_n_3829471.html?ir=Entertainment
>
>"I think it will be great. It will be terrific. I know there
>are a lot of people grousing on the internet. I just think
>it's kind of funny. You know, he's not playing King Lear. It's
>Batman!" Damon said. " certainly within his skill set.
>If anybody saw 'Argo' or 'The Town,' and all the work he's
>been doing lately, it's way more nuanced and interesting and
>way more difficult than Batman! Batman just sits there with
>his cowl over his head and whispers in a kinda gruff voice at
>people. Bruce Wayne is the more challenging part of the role,
>and Ben will be great at that."

smh

...it was pretty funny considering he could've been cast as King Lear & most of the public probably wouldn't give a shit

Still tho - you can't be coming off so cotdamned uninformed. Bruce Wayne is the hardest part of the role???

lol, no.

Batman isn't exactly fine art.

Bruce is the part that requires depth, not Batman. Where have all the deep, introspective, thoughtful moments in these Bat-movies been while sporting the cape and cowl? Few and far between. It's far easier to get a guy to play Batman than it is to play Bruce Wayne well.

Y'all act like Batman is Bruce's secret identity and not the other way around. Bruce is the secret identity of Batman. Bruce is the man behind the mask, so anyone trying to shoehorn this notion that Bruce isn't the more challenging part to play is lying to themselves to justify their dumb reaction to Ben getting the role.

There is no depth to Bruce Wayne, because as you yourself have noted, Bruce Wayne is a mask. He's the 'secret identity' Batman is the the actual 'person' here.

Mind you, this is coming from someone who LIKES the idea of Afleck playing the role. I actually think he can pull it off and I'm excited to see what they do w/it.

But saying Bruce is the 'hard part' is absurd. Bruce is a cariacature. Just like Clark Kent is Superman's critique on humanity, Bruce is Batman's critique on the failing of the elite.

It's not a complete person tho, not by a long shot.

While Bruce is the mask, playing a caricature WITHOUT being a caricature takes depth.

Bats is the key, and it's not just grumbling in a stern voice.

Whilst I am not sold on the Afflack.. (Daredevil effed him up in my eyes forever)... I did see Argo and The Town and he has gotten a LOT better. As long as his atheticism got better I'll reserve my judgements.

you ever heard?


LOL

SMH indeed.

http://comicbook.com/blog/2013/11/11/batman-costume-in-batman-vs-superman-to-be-like-nothing-shown-in-the-movies-before/

Batman Costume In Batman Vs. Superman To Be Like Nothing Shown In The Movies Before

By: Scott Johnson on November 11, 2013

In : Batman Vs. Superman, Movies
- 4 Comments

Batman suit in Batman Vs. Superman

During the Man Of Steel live fan event on Saturday, fanboy Kevin Smith was the host. During his Hollywood Babble-On podcast with Ralph Garman after the event, Smith described himself as the “fat Chris Hardwick” and that the event was “kind of like a Talking Dead for Man Of Steel type thing.”

Smith had teased the possibility of seeing some artwork for Batman Vs. Superman before the event. He explained that Warner Bros. had told him there might be some artwork released, but they were very vague about it. He said some fans were mad at him on Twitter because the artwork turned out to be more “impressionistic” than being from the actual movie itself.

Even though Warner Bros. didn’t release any major Batman Vs. Superman news during the event, Smith said that director Zack Snyder gave him a special treat after the event.

“He pulls me to the side, and he shows me…he pulls out his iPhone, as if it was going to be like look at this picture of my kids. And he showed me something that just…I’m not kidding I went glassy-eyed, and not because I was baked, absolutely glassy-eyed. I went weak in the knees,” said Smith “And it made me happy in such a way that nothing I’m not involved with has made me feel in a long time. I saw the Batman costume. More than that I saw a picture of him in the costume. “

When Ralph Garman asked if Affleck was crying because he tends to cry a lot, Smith joked, “No, he was counting a pile of money, dude.”

Smith continued, “Now, I don’t want to give anything away, because that’s up to them and stuff. But I’m going to say this, man. I instantly bear hugged him. He was happy with that. You have not seen this costume in a movie on film before. It is…and for a comic book fan it was mindbending. I was like get the **** out of here. Only you have enough power to pull this off, man, because everyone always does this ****ing matrixy kind of slash X-men black armor thing. There wasn’t a single nipple on this ****ing suit, man. It was fantastic. I’m telling you as a geek I was just like . I was like this is giving me a heart attack.”

Smith added, “It’s its own thing, man. We haven’t been down this path at all. I was so elated. As happy as I was for that movie, as excited as I was, knowing the guy in the suit helps, but whether I knew that dude or not, as excited as I was, I was like a child, dude. I’ve wanted to see Batman and Superman together on the big screen since there was a Batman TV show with Adam West and Superman movie with Christopher Reeve.”

When Garman encouraged Kevin Smith to draw a picture of what he saw, he said he couldn’t but there was someone who could. Smith said, “There’s a very influence to it, I would say.”

While whoever Smith said was bleeped out of the podcast, the first guess would likely be Frank Miller, since the movie was originally announced with a quote from The Dark Knight Returns. However, there have also been rumors online that the new Batman costume is inspired by Lee Bermejo’s Batman in the Batman: Noël graphic novel.

Batman Vs. Superman is scheduled to be released in movie theaters on July 17, 2015.

Granted how this shakes out in the end is a different story entirely, but I'm not thrilled with that idea on the surface.

http://cdn3-www.playstationlifestyle.net/assets/uploads/2011/12/bmin.jpg

I'd also have no problem with that.

So maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe....?

http://blog.adlo.es/images/2009/04/batmanposter.jpg

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/batman-superman-movie-bumped-2016-671998

Good move. No reason to rush it. Not like it's coming off much momentum from DK Rises or Man of Steel.

This joke courtesy of James Rocchi.

because they would have been CLOBBERED by The Avengers 2.

Now, they can take some time and do what they should have done from the start. And possibly put a big chink in Marvel's armor.

Obvious, no?

Man of Steel sequel. Batman in a supporting role. Something 'epic' happens. Stakes get raised. Temporarily resolved>> Justice League to resolve it.

Now they have more time to do that plan, something... THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE ALL ALONG.

https://twitter.com/ZackSnyder/status/465889795978194944

http://imgur.com/Mb1wRn5

V.

V.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bnh0HiRIIAIPYpr.jpg

Looks cool. I'm really trying to see Wonder Woman, though.

image looks cool. still not looking forward to the movie cuz of Snyder, tho

> I'm really trying to see Wonder Woman, though.

they better not paint themselves into a corner though.

-I’m still dubious about Snyder doing JL AND BvS, which is an upgrade from my initial stance on the subject. It's a bad idea that just might work, at least in part due to the back to back shooting schedule.

I’m not tripping on Diana showing up in BvS, since the reports I’ve read jive perfectly with my guess that she’d play a smaller role in this just to introduce her.

I will say that if this turns out to be a mess, it WON’T be because of Affleck, and I’m convinced that regardless of how this turns out on the whole, he’ll do a fine job in the cape and cowl.

Which he won't be.

Yes, it is a press release.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/warner-bros-unveils-title-new-706231

>Warner Bros. Unveils Title of New Batman-Superman Film
10:32 AM PDT 5/21/2014 by Tatiana Siegel, Borys Kit

Production got under way on the film, which stars Henry Cavill in the role of Clark Kent/Superman and Ben Affleck as Bruce Wayne/Batman.

The untitled Batman-Superman movie finally has a title.

Warner Bros. unveiled the title as Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, just as production got under way in Michigan.

Zack Snyder directs the film, which stars Henry Cavill in the role of Clark Kent/Superman and Ben Affleck as Bruce Wayne/Batman.

The line of "Dawn of Justice" is meant to refer to how the movie sets up the Justice League movie, which Snyder and the studio are already developing. That movie could bow as soon as 2017.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice also stars Gal Gadot as Diana Prince/Wonder Woman, with Amy Adams, Laurence Fishburne and Diane Lane returning from Man of Steel, Jesse
Eisenberg as Lex Luthor, Jeremy Irons as Alfred, and Holly Hunter in a role newly created for the film.

The movie is shooting at the Michigan Motion Picture Studios and on location in and around Detroit. It also will shoot in Illinois, Africa and the South Pacific.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is written by Chris Terrio, from a screenplay by David S. Goyer. Charles Roven and Deborah Snyder are producing, with Benjamin Melniker, Michael E. Uslan, Wesley Coller, David S. Goyer and Geoff Johns serving as executive producers.

Principal photography will take place on location at Michigan Motion Picture Studios and on location in and around Detroit, Michigan; Illinois; Africa; and the South Pacific.

Set to open worldwide on May 6, 2016, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is based on Superman characters created by Jerry Siegel & Joe Shuster, Batman characters created by Bob Kane, and Wonder Woman created by William Moulton Marston, appearing in comic books published by DC Entertainment.

___________________________________________________________________________________________
Only losers and herbs believe that OKP = Fun with Words + People's Emotions

http://batmanvsupermandawnofjustice.com/

I realize this one would be a tough one, but I'm sick of these dumb vague sounding titles. "At World's End." "The Dark World." "The Last Stand." "Dawn of Justice." Just boring.

If it's SPECIFIC, then I'm more inclined to give it a pass. "Ghost Protocol." "The Winter Soldier." "Age of Ultron." Even "The Desolation of Smaug," which is a fucking mouthful. I still don't love it. But it's better.

And I even dig when the titles are totally different, without the colon. I like the Nolan Batman titles. I like what they're doing with the new Apes movies.

But goddamn, just call it Batman v Superman. Not a soul in the world is gonna wanna call that shit "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" in conversation. (If it were up to me, I'd just use numbers for sequels anyway. Avengers 2. Captain America 2. Mission: Impossible 4. Boom. Simple. That's what people are going to say at the box office anyway, in all likelihood.)

But that's an admittedly petty complaint, and one I have with most sequels nowadays. I realize it's about the hint of the Justice League movie coming. And if they were looking for a phrase after the colon, they could've done worse... I suppose.

And they were smart billing Batman first-- maybe it's more of a Batman movie than people theorized, which would be a cool surprise.

I feel like that was in some early ads but then disappeared. Maybe this will do the same.

The only thing that the title tells me is that the studio still doesn't realize how unwieldy their plan is. The title reflects the movie - Batman vs. Superman is enough, adding in the Justice League is an afterthought and unnecessary. Kind of shows that they still think that throwing more into the film is the right idea (even though this theory has consistently failed.)

Please, get it right.

And The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was released without any after-colon phrase. At least stateside.

with Batman and Superman in honor of Batman v. Superman.

I'd love to see Supes spitting, "Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with superpowers. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Aquaman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Zod and you curse me. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know, that Zod's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my destroying Metropolis during my fight with Zod, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives!"

Or Batman doing Alec Baldwin's "I am God!" speech.

>with Batman and Superman in honor of Batman v. Superman.
>
>I'd love to see Supes spitting, "Son, we live in a world that
>has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with
>superpowers. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Aquaman? I have a
>greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep
>for Zod and you curse me. You have that luxury. You have the
>luxury of not knowing what I know, that Zod's death, while
>tragic, probably saved lives. And my destroying Metropolis
>during my fight with Zod, while grotesque and incomprehensible
>to you, saves lives!"
>
>Or Batman doing Alec Baldwin's "I am God!" speech.

the one from Malice lol

So they just stick Batman v Superman in front. Just call the film World's Finest :-/

"Batman V Superman" and not "Batman Vs Superman"?

Because that's going to annoy me unless it involves one of them taking the other to court.

(Yes, it's actually Batman V Superman. Yes, that is stupid.)

Still looking forward to the actual movie, but what a shitty, shitty, dumb name.

http://i.imgur.com/IooTy5N.jpg
-------------------
http://blog.melanism.com
http://twitter.com/Melanism
http://seanlovesthis.tumblr.com
http://www.formspring.me/seanathan
http://www.last.fm/user/Melanism
http://www.flickr.com/photos/meldotcom/

Batman looks like Batman.

But probably not

Dope

I'm kinda glad Ben is getting another crack at the superhero role. Daredevil wasn't all his fault.

He was the most stiff Daredevil I ever saw. Terrible...

http://i.newsarama.com/images/i/000/133/157/original/y74HKHY.jpg?1406396179

*ejaculates*

Okay, no beef with this at all

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x227bar_batman-v-superman-teaser-leaked-hd-comic-con-2014_shortfilms

just read this little article about how batman is already gonna be in his 50's in this movie's timeline. seems like they will already limit theselves in future stories by doing this and they missed out on being able to tell ones that already happened (like robin).

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/08/05/new-batman-background-details-revealed-from-bvs-dawn-of-justice

This way, the Bat film they do after this can take place before the events of BvS and they don't have to deal with the annoying internet "Well, why didn't he just call Superman?" shithead questions.Because Ben can play these films slightly older than he is now and play the future Batman films his own age (or even a bit younger if they want to trust the audience to suspend their disbelief).

Going forward.

Why can’t they tell stories about how this older, Post-JLA Bruce Wayne, operates?

That’s an infinitely better premise than just telling Batman stories along the lines of what we’ve already seen. I really don’t want a prequel, and would rather see them move forward while referencing things that have happened.

This most likely sets up Batman as something resembling the crotchety, suspicious, sullen, overbearing jerk that has featured prominently in many JL stories over the years and *actually* sets up quite a few stories going forward.

It’s also a fresh take on the character we haven’t seen in film before.
Yeah, what morons.

No, these are great details. Who cares about all the previous stories that “could have been” told?

I think it's better for both movies this way:
http://variety.com/2014/film/news/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-moves-to-march-2016-1201277114/

http://arousinggrammardotcom.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/capsa3.jpg

Shaping up to be darknight returns. I'm wit it.

http://www.hngn.com/articles/38320/20140806/batman-vs-superman-movie-update-jason-momoas-aquaman-casting-officially-confirmed.htm

...and play coy about whether or not he has a cameo.

http://cbsdetroit.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/080814-zack-snyder-joins-the-show.mp3

https://twitter.com/ZackSnyder/status/588528448827621376

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BC8JtlKJe8g

http://www.flickeringmyth.com/2015/04/another-look-at-ben-afflecks-dark-knight-from-batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice.html

movie might underwhelm, but the costume is on point

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WWzgGyAH6Y

y'all can't front on this. looks AMAZING

Damn.


I already know folks gonna be mad at Ma Kent, though.

Im staying optimistic though. That cast is stacked and I like having the fear of Superman motivating Batman.

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WWzgGyAH6Y
>
>y'all can't front on this. looks AMAZING

Batman himself looks good, the rest, not so much

>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WWzgGyAH6Y
>>
>>y'all can't front on this. looks AMAZING
>
>Batman himself looks good, the rest, not so much
>

Batfleck does look good. The rest looks a fucking mess.

Dick? Jason Todd? Who do you think it was?

Not sure how I feel about that. I'm not surprised we're getting a Frank Miller-ish Batman in this, but I really hope this doesn't mean we'll never get a Nightwing appearance in the DCU films.

(Dick Grayson)

Some people are convinced that it's a Snyder fake out. I think a dead Grayson makes for a better story, though. One Robin, one death, one sad Batman.

if they use the red headed girl robin.


http://soundcloud.com/djshinobishaw
http://www.rareformnyc.com
http://twitter.com/DJShinobiShaw
https://twitter.com/RareFormNYC
PSN: ShinobiShaw

"Arm Leg Leg Arm How you doin?" (c)T510

Probably my favorite Superman story.

Or the storyline of Injustice: Gods Among Us.

https://instagram.com/p/5FBXRmkPMY/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6as8ahAr1Uc

New trailer drops Dec 2nd.

best one so far IMO.

Batman v Superman - Official Trailer 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fis-9Zqu2Ro

Looks dope but i gotta stop watching trailers for movies i know im gonna see

But Twitter has still usefully spoiled much of this trailer for me, despite me avoiding it.

Jesse doing his best Riddler impression, too.

This looks like such a mess.

yeah man...weren't we just talking about this on here? they really should've kept the trailers focused on the BvS angle instead of showing us that it all leads to nothing but a buddy comedy

plus there's no magic to the wonder woman appearance.

>leads to nothing but a buddy comedy


that back and forth banter sounded very justice league

I still don't want to believe that's true but I think it was Terry Rossio (screenwriter of Pirates of the Caribbean) who wrote over at his site that when he pressed a studio exec about trailers, they said that their research pointed towards people preferring to know what was going to happen in movies. Personally, I think they're misreading the info by thinking it means know EVERYTHING that happens in a movie but that's basically the norm nowadays.

It's like people don't get that there's an in-between. They either are top secret / JJ Abrams-style MYSTERY BOX! or Let's show the whole damn movie. My rule would be: give a sense of the story we're telling but don't use any footage from the last 30 - 45 minutes of the movie.

or in this case at least the final batlle...that should provide a ton of flexibility to show stuff but damn...can i have the final scenes as a reveal when i see it?

shit from the last 30 minutes.

http://www.tubechop.com/watch/7166028

Cuz he's doing the Batman growl voice too. And what the fuck is going on with Jesse's version of Lex? I assume that's Doomsday, way to give the finale away you studio fucks. I'm still seeing it anyway, haha.

>Batman v Superman - Official Trailer 2
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fis-9Zqu2Ro

I really wish they would just make a film serial of Batman. 6 movies within a year (or even a movie a month if you make it about the whole Justice league.)

They clearly have enough story to tell and they could make more money than overstuffing one film with so many ideas, characters, storylines.

The Doomsday reveal was particularly depressing since this will be like the Man of Steel in which a bunch of Philosophy 101 rambling will be undercut by a supervillain pressing the hero into a corner.

- this movie aims to portray its heroes as more serious and god-like characters and it comes off so cheesy

- Marvel meanwhile doesn't take its characters too seriously at all and you end up caring about them a great deal, especially Stark and Rogers.

If this Batman vs Superman flick DOESN'T blow I'll be totally surprised.

it probably will blow, but it'll still make money.

>If this Batman vs Superman flick DOESN'T blow I'll be totally
>surprised.

Snyder done fucked up the franchise but it'll make a ton of money regardless so who cares

I assumed it was some sonic blaster or grabbling gun or something.

even fired a gun in the comics before.

Jesse as Lex is um...interesting.

Gal does a okay job as WW, but it's more of an intro into the character.

I get ALL agenda shares on that one. lol.

I'm especially please that I get to troll the fuck out of my friend who still blames- and hasn't forgiven- Ben for Daredevil.

In fact I'm gonna text his punk ass now.

MSJ made awful fucking choices for an easy character to write and Gary Foster just have no idea how to make a movie.

Daredevil is my all time favorite superhero. With that said, the costume in the movie works much, much better than the costume in the show.

any idea why they chose to keep the tv universe completely separate"?

My former plug has made bad decisions on the reg since Day 1.

offices in Burbank.

I'm wondering if anything I wrote for The Flash a while back will still be used.

guaranteed a job once I'm out there.

but LA is pricey as fuck (not like you're unaware, but still)

You may want to check out the outskirts

I mean I share a house here that's fully furnished with one other person. And I'm in between Philly and NY. I wanna stay a critic, but my filmmaking side is always calling...

in Ontario and commute.

.

http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=6&topic_id=656198&mode=full#706706

http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=6&topic_id=656198&mesg_id=656198&page=#706706

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUN0F5wKbGE

Nonsensical, random slo-mo, laughable delivery from Batfleck. Hard to imagine who thought that was a good commercial.

I'm leaning more and more towards skipping this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cle_rKBpZ28

But can't wash away the bad taste of the previous trailers. #StillDoubting

I'm sorry but any movie having Superman in not should not be R rated. Also, this movie is fine as a PG-13.

But this ain't Warner's first time doing this shit. They put out one of the Hobbit movies as an R. And The Hobbit is a children's story...

Even though Watchmen already did the whole R-rated superhero film, and Blade, Sin City, and 300 did the whole R-rated comic film on top of that.

Just copped tickets for the biggest commercial IMAX screen in the USA for 70MM IMAX film (Lincoln Square NYC).

http://www.imax.com/news/batman-v-superman-dawn-justice-imax-tickets-sale-monday

Mark your calendars… Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice IMAX tickets go on sale Monday, February 29th!

With Director Zack Snyder filming several sequences with IMAX® cameras, the highest-resolution cameras in the world, the battle is going to be even bigger in IMAX. Only in IMAX theatres will these sequences expand vertically to fill the entire screen with breathtaking image quality for a truly immersive experience.

In an effort to make Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice available to as many IMAX fans as possible in their preferred format, we will be releasing the film in both 2D and 3D formats and across our various cutting-edge projection technologies including our dual xenon digital system, IMAX 15/70mm film and our next-generation laser system.

Please be sure to check your local listings for format details. We have listed the locations below that will be offering either IMAX 15/70 film projection or IMAX with laser.



The following theatres will be playing Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice in IMAX 2D with laser (please note this list is subject to change):

UNITED STATES

California

TCL Chinese Theatres IMAX – Hollywood

AMC Loews Metreon 16 & IMAX – San Francisco

AMC Universal CityWalk Stadium 19 & IMAX – Universal City

Massachusetts

Sunbrella IMAX 3D Theatre – Reading

Missouri

Branson’s IMAX Entertainment Complex - Branson

Virginia

Airbus IMAX, Stephen F. Udvar-Hazy Center - Chantilly

Washington

Boeing IMAX, Pacific Science Center - Seattle



The following theatres will be playing Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice in IMAX 3D with laser (please note this list is subject to change):

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

Vox Cinemas & IMAX - Dubai

GERMANY

Cinestar Berlin & IMAX - Berlin

Filmpalast AM ZKM & IMAX - Karlsruhe

IMAX 3D, Sinsheim Auto & Technik Museam - Sinsheim

UNITED KINGDOM

Cineworld Sheffield & IMAX - Sheffield

Empire Leicester Square IMAX - London



The following theatres will be playing Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice in IMAX 2D on IMAX 15/70 film projection (please note this list is subject to change):

Alabama

IMAX Dome, McWane Center - Birmingham

California

Hackworth IMAX Dome, The Tech Museum – San Jose

Florida

AutoNation IMAX, Museum of Discovery & Science – Ft. Lauderdale

IMAX Dome, Museum of Science & Industry – Tampa

Indiana

IMAX, Indiana State Museum – Indianapolis

Iowa

Blank IMAX Dome, Science Center Iowa – Des Moines

Michigan

Celebration! Cinema Grand Rapids North & IMAX – Grand Rapids

New York

AMC Loews Lincoln Square 13 & IMAX – New York

Pennsylvania

Tuttleman IMAX, The Franklin Institute– Philadelphia

Texas

Omnitheatre, Fort Worth Museum of Science & History – Fort Worth

UNITED KINGDOM

BFI IMAX, British Film Institute - London

Because I hate that shit.

right at the end. i mean how else can batman really compete?

Unlimited viewings while in theaters and a metal, laser cut collectible ticket.

My co-workers saw it last night, said Batman was great but the film was overstuffed and it felt like someone had a checklist of cool shit they wanted to do with the characters (and did a great job with it) but the set-up to the events was nonsensical.

The more fanboyish guy had a problem with the portrayals of the characters but the other guy seemed to think it was ok.

Overall, they thought it was mediocre (although one said if they had trimmed the fat, it could have been a really good movie), which is better than the initial expectations. But it probably has enough good scenes that many people will like it.