The actor alone will not ruin the character or the movie. There's lots of factors. Fact is Tobey Maguire was not suited to play Spider-Man Imho. But that alone was not going to ruin the movie. (And it certainly wasn't Reynolds fault that Green Lantern sucked either).
Whilst Affleck is 100 times the actor Macguire is, and has the physique for the part as well as the passion to get it right. So I've changed my mind on the subject now and think we should give the guy a chance.
Originally posted by Based
Freaking Keaton did this in 1989...
Heath was recent. If you have an issue calling it the Ledger defense then sure we'll rename it to the "stop overreacting until you watch the movie" defense.
Im pretty sure you are not reading my posts entirely....
Anyways your point is? I said "I don't recall hearing the "Keaton defense" to back up Ledger when he was getting blasted. The only thing that being from 89 proves is most likely Ledger made it a popular thing then someone thought back to Keatons time and said "hey same thing happened with Keaton!" In that case im absolutely right, it was Ledger that made it popular....hence why I call it The Ledger Defense. As for calling it the "stop overreacting until you watch the movie" defense....well thats kinda long so it kinda contradicts the reason in naming it. 😉
Like I said earlier I can understand what people are so upset about. This is BATMAN he has a huge fan following both comic nerds(me included) and general public and everyone wants him to be perfect. Casting an oddball like Ben is certainly going to cause them panic or worry. My personal opinion surrounding Ben himself is I don't think he fits but he may possibly do it. My more general opinion is that its a risk casting an oddball because there is already hate surrounding this movie. People are mad Batmans being rebooted so soon, mad that hes not going to be like Nolans, scared it will have the Bat nips level of cheese, and (now that I think about it) Man of Steel seems to have been split among the audience. Now you add someone that a lot of people are going to be like "WTF" to play Batman. At least if they had cast someone that people would have gone "Damn good choice!" it could have made the haters at least calm down a little but instead its making them even more nervous now. Preconceived hate can be a hard thing to over come if there is enough of it. People may start going crazy at nit picking it simply because of that alone.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
The actor alone will not ruin the character or the movie. There's lots of factors. Fact is Tobey Maguire was not suited to play Spider-Man Imho. But that alone was not going to ruin the movie. (And it certainly wasn't Reynolds fault that Green Lantern sucked either).Whilst Affleck is 100 times the actor Macguire is, and has the physique for the part as well as the passion to get it right. So I've changed my mind on the subject now and think we should give the guy a chance.
I thought Maguire made a fine Peter Parker but an awful Spider-Man. As for GL...well yeah he wasn't the only thing but he certainly was a good Hal imo. What ruined Spider-Man for me was he felt less like Spider-Man due to how his character was written. lol
I know this isn't that relevant but I guess when it comes down to it, it is, but when Matt Smith was cast as The Doctor, I hated him, then after a while I thought what the hell, and watched his episodes and he was awesome. So what I'm saying, wait till Batman Vs Superman (or whatever they are gonna call it) and see how Affleck is as Batman
Originally posted by Kazenji
It wasn't George Clooney's fault his Batman movie sucked.
He was the wrong guy to play the role and clearly didn't get the character. Don't know if that's his fault, but even without getting into how bad the story and script was in that movie, Batman himself was portrayed really badly in that movie.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
He was the wrong guy to play the role and clearly didn't get the character. Don't know if that's his fault, but even without getting into how bad the story and script was in that movie, Batman himself was portrayed really badly in that movie.
And that's what I meant in my earlier post regarding Affleck and it seeming like the whole George Clooney thing all over again but without the camp.
Both were clearly bad picks for the character. They're just not gruff enough to be Batman. They're passable Bruce Wayne's. And I'm being very kind there.
I still can't believe it actually. Like I chuckle at times, out of the blue while smh about this. Like it hasn't sunk in. Like i'm in denial mixed with maybe he'll quit because of all the outrage or the casting director may chose someone else because of the outrage or him/her finally seeing the light.
Originally posted by Doctorwho?
It was that hack Joel Schamacher or whatever is name is, made the movie too campy to even be enjoyable to anyone over the age of 8.
The ultimate blame goes to Warner Brothers. Since Batman Returns received backlash for being too dark for children, WB didn't want the same thing to happen again. They fired Burton, hired Schumacher, Keaton left (due to a campy script), and it all fell down from there. WB told Schumacher to make the last two Batman movies campy at every turn. Schumacher apologized for his role in ruining Batman.
Schumacher is an accomplice to this tragedy, but he at least could've made a good Batman movie as evidenced by Batman Forever. If WB didn't demand camp, it would've been really good.