Ah, yes, I think I've seen this before. News about a comic book movie breaks out and fanboys/fangirls go nuts. It's as though the fate of the free world rests in the hands of the actors who play your favorite superhero as well as the people in charge of casting. I don't think Ben Affleck and Zach Snyder signed up for a task like that, but it's the one we've tasked them with, nonetheless.
By now you know the news. Ben Affleck is putting the superhero tights back on for the first time in more than a decade to take over one of the most legendary of all superheroes. The movie hasn't begun filming and the story has yet to be hashed out, but that won't stop us from taking to twitter, facebook, and message boards the world over and gab away. It reminds me of those who get excited for NFL preseason games. So, since we care so much more about superheroes than ANTYHING else in the movies nowadays, here I am, taking a timeout from reviews and dedicating a blog entry about them. I'll address three aspects of this particular phenomenon: the choice of Affleck to take over for Christian Bale, the ridiculously high bar, and why the outrage is so misplaced.
First of all, we remember what happened the last time Affleck played a superhero. Daredevil was one of the earlier attempts to flesh out Marvel's library of characters into cinema, and it shows. It's not a bad movie as much as it is a so-so one, and compared to the vision shown by directors like Joss Whedon, Christopher Nolan, and Zach Snyder, Mark Steven Johnson's film doesn't hold up well. But that was in 2002. Since then, Affleck has left his "pretty boy days (as well as the "Jen & Ben" phase, remember Gigli, as much as it hurts to do so?) far behind him. He's directed three outstanding films, including a Best Picture winner, and his acting is leaps and bounds better. Bottom line: let's remember that we're dealing with a man who has a solid feel for what constitutes quality in the movies. He's made some stinkers over the years, but hasn't everyone?
One cannot underestimate the impact of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy on any piece of news related to the Caped Crusader. Those movies, in particular the masterful second chapter, represent a transcendent experience when it comes to comic book-based films. They're full of social commentary and they march unflinchingly into dark corners of the human psyche. They took some liberties with the source material, but you know what they say about never letting the facts get in the way of a good story. Not only that, but Christian Bale was note-perfect in every scene of all three films, defying the common conception that an actor cannot possibly avoid being upstaged by the costume. While Nolan left The Dark Knight Rises somewhat open-ended to potentially allow someone else to continue in the universe he established, Warner Bros is saying "thanks, but no thanks." All signs point to the studio, as well as Man of Steel director Zach Snyder, going back to a more "traditional" hero. For many who helped make the Dark Knight movies into box office behemoths, that aftertaste won't sit well.
Finally, I have to wonder whether the outrageous reactions to the Affleck casting is even directed at the right person. Affleck doesn't have artistic control here; all he can do is play Bruce Wayne/Batman and hopefully sell the character. That's only one piece of an overall puzzle. What about those little insignificant details like script, direction, and tone? And what about the fact that this isn't actually a Batman movie. It's a direct sequel to Man of Steel that features Superman taking on Batman. For the first time in a major motion picture, the Caped Crusader will play more of a supporting role (although one can argue that Joel Schumaker's Batman films focused so much on the villains that Batman came across as second-fiddle, anyway). Actors may be what audiences remember the most, but unless Affleck is on screen for every scene throughout the running time, he's far from the most important element of making this epic project successful. Snyder still carries the heaviest burden.
Didn't fans in 1988 react with disbelief to the casting of Michael Keaton? Weren't many of us confused as to how the hell Heath "Brokeback Mountain" Ledger could possibly do The Joker justice? The former came back for a second go-around and the latter won a posthumous Oscar (and for what it's worth, delivered what I consider the best performance of any movie of the 2000s). Yeah, I'd say this is a case of predicting doom-and-gloom based on the preseason.
Interesting analysis and I absolutely agree with you about the preseason-esque overreaction. Let's see how this plays out first before we rush to judgement; however, there are at least two points which serve as underlying reasons for the overreaction.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, you pointed out that this is not a Batman movie. It's a sequel to a Superman origin story -- almost without a doubt the second installment of the MAN OF STEEL trilogy. So the casting of an A-list actor/director begs the question: why the hell is a supporting character portrayed by the biggest star in the movie? Most moviegoers weren't familiar with Henry Cavill prior to MAN OF STEEL. Director Zack Snyder originally went with a relative unknown to kick off this franchise, so why should he abandon that by casting a bona fide superstar as a secondary character? The only thing I can think of is that Snyder/Affleck knew it was a bold move that would get people talking about it two years before the release. And boy, it certainly has. Still, I would have loved to see a fresh face take on the role.
The second point is that the misplaced outrage could have to do with the fact that the critical reception to MAN OF STEEL was fairly tepid. Truth be told, I have yet to see it. It's possible that the lack of buzz diminished my interest. For a movie with such high expectations, it certainly wasn't the "most talked about" movie of the summer. Does this film truly need a sequel, or was it more or less a failure? (That's not to say this has ever stopped Hollywood before.) Perhaps the Affleck-of-late that we all know and love is taking a step backwards career-wise.