How could you forget the smirking Batman who decided to wear a suit with nipples?

Why would you think that? Clooney is a charismatic old-Hollywood throwback while Affleck has proved that he can play a toughguy with zero charisma. That's pretty much Batman.

See I don't think he pulls off the batman part but he has enough charisma to pull off the Bruce Wayne aspect of it.

Sure but Wayne is barely significant. Affleck can play a charismatic, spoiled rich aristocrat for a few minutes.

I'll support this on the condition that Affleck uses his southie accent from Good Will Hunting as his Batman voice.

Eh, it'll all be voice modulated anyway (hopefully not as much as BaleMan was). Really all that matters is the chin. Affleck's got a Batman chin. And he's kinda tall. Really any famous tall dude with a manly chin could play Batman. Ben Affleck totally deserves the millions of dollars that he will earn for putting in his time.

I was joking. :(

And your jokes are met with truth. It's a sad thing indeed.

Clooney was good as Bruce Wayne I think though. It has been years since I saw the film.

Was Clooney's suit the only one that had nipple armor? I can't remember if Keaton or Kilmer had the same kind of suit, and I'm pretty sure Bale didn't either. Not that I'm checking out their nipples or anything...

Clooney is the only nipple-Batman. He was a punk who now laughs at Affleck

http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/rO...jpg_183939.jpg

indeed

it is kwown that crossing the Marvel Universe with the DC Universe is much like crossing the streams in Ghostbusters



"it would be bad"

I remember seeing Daredevil in the theatre with my dad, and he freaked out at the fairly mild sex scene, like "OMG MY CHILD IS WATCHING THIS!!!!!"

I'm seriously getting tired of people bringing up Gigli and Daredevil as reasons why he will be a bad Batman. Those movies are a decade old, are you the same person you were 10 years ago?

Besides, a talented actor that hit a rough patch in movies/ life but came back to play a superhero? Sounds a lot like this guy

http://wpc.556e.edgecastcdn.net/8055...oPuIkj_1_3.jpg

Canadians. http://www.atheistnetwork2.com/image...n_rolleyes.gif

My dad is not even Canadian though :rofl:

Also, I don't know if anyone brought up Gigli, or I must have missed that. I saw that one too and it's two hours I'll never get back. However that shouldn't be a benchmark as to whether Affleck is a good actor or not. I have to agree though that I think he's better behind the scenes. Good Will Hunting is one of my favourite movies, and Argo was great (even though 80% of it was fictionalized. Damn 'Muricans twisting a Canadian story around)

Did he mate with a Canadian female?

Yes and?

lol

Blood traitor.

To Canadians or to Kiwis? Lmaooo. My boyfriend must be a blood traitor towards Serbians then huh. :)

No, no, no. People who spawn with Canadians are blood traitors. There are no inferior races...except for Canadians.

So I'm sort of in limbo here right? Haha

I would say yes I am essentially the same person I was ten years ago. I think that's probably true for most people, including Ben Affleck. I agree it's not fair to discount him on the basis of Gigli because, hey, we all make mistakes, but I think Daredevil is a pretty reasonable thing to bring up since it's actually an example of what the actor is like playing a superhero, and one that's somewhat similar to Batman no less.

you might be the same person that you were ten years ago but I'm certainly not.

Also, bringing up being the same person might not be the thing to look at. What needs to be looked at is his skill at acting which CAN grow over time. Acting is a skill that changes over time regardless of who the person character as a human being is. Also, you can just lump DareDevil into the superhero pool and say that just because he acts one way with DareDevil that means he's going to do the same thing with Batman. They are two different characters and actors will portray them differently that's what they get paid to do.

Take actors like Depp, Pitt, Bale, Dicaprio..all the top actors that get considered for these type of roles typically rarely have a bad movie in their entire cataloge. Maybe a bad overall movie, but their specific part is well done. Cant remember the last time I saw a bad performance by bale.

Terminator Salvation was pretty awful.

But the question is: would it have been better with Ben Affleck in it instead of Christian Bale?

Obviously you've never seen Newsies or Reign of Fire

Again I think Bale was the only redeeming aspect of the movie. yes t sucked but certainly not due to his performance.

I have seen Reign of Fire and like a said to FRED the movie sucked but Bales performance was certainly not the reason. The guy can act extraordinarily well.

Okay but so has Ben Affleck, most often hammered by poor directors (re: Armageddon, Pearl Harbor) or by poor screenplays (re: Paycheck). Really the only bad movies where I think he was a part of the problem were Jersey Girl and Surviving Christmas and the latter has more to do with the genre of movie than anything else.

Since then he's proven himself as a capable director in Gone Baby Gone and Argo and kicked some serious ass in the under appreciated 2010 movie The Town. Before Warner Bros. decided to build up their movieverse in movies, he was suggested as a director for The Justice League, which for all we know could still be the case come 2017 when that movie is set to be released. He's an Academy Award winner and on top of all of that he's already a fan of the source material, which we saw what happened last year with The Avengers.

Well of course. His depth of ability and outstanding studies in the field are often astounding. No it would have been equally bad. I don't think Lawrence Olivier could of saved that movie.

The Town was a a very good movie. I think he will do just fine in the new Batman, I think hes one of those guys that continues to get better and as you mentioned you can only get better by directing also. Hes never gonna be a Michael Caine or even a Bale, but hes certainly improved over the years. I never saw Daredevil so i'm running blind, but I think most comic movies are pretty substandard in general.

I think he's a decent actor, and based on seeing Argo a few weeks ago, I think he's a very capable director. I just don't think he's a good action hero type of actor.

Agreed. The guy is a fantastic director imo.

But actor???

Bad movies he is terrible on...
Reindeer Games
Bounce
Jersey Girl
Pearl Harbor

Decent movies he is OK in...
Argo
Good Will hunting
The Town

When I went to California a few years ago, Changing Lanes was the in-flight movie on the way there and Shakespeare in Love was the one on the way back. :laughing:

Agreed except that I can't stand Chasing Amy and I think he was pretty good in Dazed and Confused.

I also agree that Daredevil shouldn't be held against him. Yeah, his performance was boring as ****. But it was a **** movie in general. Approximately 90% of all comic book adaptations are horrible regardless of the actors' performances.

And I still think that you don't really need to be a good actor to be a good Batman. If the film is skillfully produced, it will be good. If not, it will be bad - totally regardless of Affleck's acting ability or level of charisma. It's just a comic book movie.

Is Christopher Nolan directing this movie or is it someone else?

Someone else.

Zack Snyder, who directed the first Man of Steel movie, of which this is a sequel to.

I'm curious what the new Batsuit will look like. Given Snyder's proficiency with action I'm kind of hoping it will be more like the grey/blue suit from the comics. If this is the versus movie everyone is assuming it is then I really can't see Batman standing a chance if they use a suit similar to what was used in the Nolan movies that didn't allow for as much mobility.

No. You're Canadian and therefore inferior. Period.

But I have American citizenship!