Ben Affleck's Batman - The right idea for the wrong franchise?

[bat39]

So it seems that its now official - Ben Affleck is done as Batman. A little less than five years after he was first announced as the Caped Crusader, and just two movies later (three, if you count cameo appearances), Batfleck is no more.

And as much as I am looking forward to Matt Reeves' new take on the character, with whoever the next actor will be, I can't help but feel a little saddened by the fact that Affleck's Batman is over and done with. Particularly because we barely got to know him, and he was barely given a chance to live up to his potential.

Affleck's Batman was an interesting take on the character, to say the least. Pretty much NO ONE wanted a retread of the origin story, so jumping to the other end of the chronological spectrum and giving us an older burnt-out Batman past his prime was a great move. Making him a lot more bitter, violent and morally unmoored than we're used to seeing him was a bold move - one that admittedly not everyone appreciated. And then of course, there was the look - right out of the pages of Frank Miller's DKR. Finally, a comic-book accurate Batman look after decades of black armor!

Psychologically, this Batman was pretty intriguing. When I watched BvS, I remember being very impressed by the metaphor of the opening scene. The bats led me into the light...a beautiful lie, Bruce recalls, reflecting upon how becoming the Batman, being this violent, brutal agent of justice deluded him into believeing that he was helping make the world a better place. There was also the unspoken fact that decades of defending Gotham from the likes of madmen like the Joker, and losing his partner to a tragic death, caused him to lose his own moral compass and become even more vengeful and cruel.

The notion that a paranoid and brooding Batman would be vary of the awesome, unchecked power of Superman, and other superheroes, is one that's been around in the comics for a good thirty years now. But Affleck and Zack Snyder really drove home the psychology behind that impulse better than most comic-book writers have. And of course, that led us to the turning point in this Batman's story - how Superman's sacrifice and innate humanity reminds Bruce that his own mission is to bring people hope and make the world a better place, and how he needs to better live upto that.

Yes, Affleck's Batman was great. But perhaps he wasn't the right Batman for the DCEU.

For starters, this was a 'young' DC Universe, where superheroes were just starting to emerge. Now personally, I like the idea of Batman being around before Superman and the other Justice League members because I feel that Bruce Wayne putting on that cape and cowl for the first time and scaring the sh#t out of criminals works best in a context where flying men and Amazon warriors aren't common knowledge. But there's a world of difference between a Batman who's been around for a few years helping found the Justice League and a burnt-out ageing Batman who's been around for twenty years doing it. It makes Batman less of a peer to the other heroes, and more of a Nick Fury-like mentor figure/general. Which I suppose was the direction they were going for, but, like a lot of things with Justice League, didn't turn out so well.

More fundamentally though, perhaps Affleck's Batman simply wasn't one designed for a shared universe. His Batman was a psychologically rich character and a great director and screenwriter could have done wonders with him in a solo film. But foregoing the solo film and instead sticking him in a film with the likes of Aquaman, Flash, Wonder Woman and Cyborg was far from the soundest plan. This was probably a flaw with Snyder's original plan to begin with, but once you throw Joss Whedon's messy Avengers-lite take on the JL movie into the mix, it becomes a disaster. As it is, Affleck's Batman sorta worked in BvS simply because we got to spent a fair bit of time with him - which actually proved detrimental to Superman. And even so, a lot of people simply didn't get the time and space to appreciate Affleck's Batman when his debut involved sharing the screen with the other big-name DC hero.

The sad part is that had we gotten to see Snyder's DCEU arc play out on-screen, we might have emerged with a deeper appreciation of this version of the Dark Knight. And the solo film written and directed by Affleck would have given us a chance to get to know Batfleck on-screen even better, without all the other capes. As it stands, every avenue to let us get to know this Batman better and to let him live up to his potential was closed off. So really, Affleck leaving the role officially at this point is pretty much a mercy kill to Batfleck.

[Vakanai]

I'll always be disappointed that we never got a solo movie with him as Batman, that was just a wasted opportunity. While Batman v Superman was far from a good movie, it gave us the best Batman action scenes in live action I've ever seen. The Batmobile chase and the warehouse fight were freaking glorious. I wanted a whole movie like that, but I don't think it'll ever be in the cards.

Also dude looked intimidating as hell in the batsuit, perfect.

[Coal Tiger]

Affleck wasn't even the best Daredevil.

If you're gonna start a shared universe, maybe an old cranky Batman who's been at it for 20 years isn't the best place to start.

[Sacred Knight]

Affleck wasn't even the best Daredevil.

If you're gonna start a shared universe, maybe an old cranky Batman who's been at it for 20 years isn't the best place to start.

Yup. Just a monumental misunderstanding of what source material they were being inspired from. You wanna do DKR Batman fine. But you don't do it in a shared universe you're just starting, where everyone else is new. I'll never understand their logic making this most fundamental of boners right off the freaking bat, no pun intended.

[kingaliencracker]

Yup. Just a monumental misunderstanding of what source material they were being inspired from. You wanna do DKR Batman fine. But you don't do it in a shared universe you're just starting, where everyone else is new. I'll never understand their logic making this most fundamental of boners right off the freaking bat, no pun intended.

Christopher Nolan made it clear to WB that he did not want them using TDK trilogy as the springboard for their shared universe and because WB was not wanting to upset one of their best directors, they obliged. It didn't help matters that David Goyer, who was the writer for TDK trilogy, was also the writer for BvS, so he probably wasn't keen on retreading Batman's origin story either. So with that, I get where they were coming from in implementing a hardened, less compassionate, more established Batman/Bruce Wayne for the new film universe. It just wound up not working, for obvious reasons.

That's why I've argued that it's unfortunate that Christopher Nolan had the stance he had, because the best solution would have simply been to use the Nolan trilogy as the Batman origin. I've heard the argument that the trilogy was "too grounded" for a shared universe but I just think that's not accurate. Besides, Iron Man was pretty grounded itself but it launched the entire MCU. But you can't change what you can't change.

As far as Ben Affleck and his role as Batman, he was okay in BvS, forgettable in Suicide Squad, and outright awful in Justice League (then again, who wasn't?). Coupled with the fact that during his run as Batman, we also got the worst on-screen depiction of The Joker ever (which granted, wasn't his fault but still), and I'm ready to move on from his tenure in the role. I just hope WB isn't keen on giving up on Henry Cavill as Superman.

[Aahz]

Having an old TDKR-Batman is allready problematic, since that means that you would have technically also have to age up all of his support characters and villains (and if you don't do that, and have them come in as fresh new characters what's point of having an TDKR-Batman).

The age of the the DCEU Harley Quinn for example doesn't really match with that premise.

It is also wired, that Superheros and villains are treated as a relatively new thing in that universe, when Batman and his villains have been around for already 20 years at this point.

[numberthirty]

....
Yes, Affleck's Batman was great. But perhaps he wasn't the right Batman for the DCEU.

...

Worth noting that the "DCEU" wasn't right for the "DCEU".

[Armor of God]

Visually he was a great Bruce Wayne and I do think he was very committed in BVS but everything after that was a disaster both personally and professionally for Affleck. Snyder's poor storytelling decisions, poorly received films, his personal life and the demanding nature of the role took its toll on him.
He's going to be put in the same boat as Clooney and Kilmer, neither of whom were bad actors either. Its what it is.

[bat39]

Visually he was a great Bruce Wayne and I do think he was very committed in BVS but everything after that was a disaster both personally and professionally for Affleck. Snyder's poor storytelling decisions, poorly received films, his personal life and the demanding nature of the role took its toll on him.
He's going to be put in the same boat as Clooney and Kilmer, neither of whom were bad actors either. Its what it is.

Affleck is far from the best on-screen Batman IMO, but putting him in the same category as Clooney is perhaps taking it too far. Kilmer, IMO, made for a great Bruce Wayne and a decent Batman. And I'd argue that the same applies for Affleck, except that Affleck was a better Batman than Kilmer.

But the sad reality is that we'll never really be able to properly 'rank' Affleck among the other live-action Batman actors simply because we never got to see him in his own film, and the two films that he did appear in have loads of baggage which makes any objective effort at assessment near-impossible.

[Armor of God]

Affleck is far from the best on-screen Batman IMO, but putting him in the same category as Clooney is perhaps taking it too far. Kilmer, IMO, made for a great Bruce Wayne and a decent Batman. And I'd argue that the same applies for Affleck, except that Affleck was a better Batman than Kilmer.

But the sad reality is that we'll never really be able to properly 'rank' Affleck among the other live-action Batman actors simply because we never got to see him in his own film, and the two films that he did appear in have loads of baggage which makes any objective effort at assessment near-impossible.

I'm not sure how its taking it too far. Assuming the replacement Reeves picks does a good job then Affleck will be sandwiched as the bad take between that person and Bale much like how Kilmer and Clooney were sandwiched between Keaton and Bale. The critical reception to the Affleck films is virtually the same as that of the Schumacher films. Financially BVS underperformed like Batman Forever while Batman and Robin bombed like JL. The only difference is that one version was campy while the other was dark. I guess it had to happen, WB had to be shown that dark can produce similar results to camp.

[JAG2045]

Affleck wasn't even the best Daredevil.

If you're gonna start a shared universe, maybe an old cranky Batman who's been at it for 20 years isn't the best place to start.

Yeah that's exactly my thoughts as well, its clear that Snyder was desperate to adapt "Dark Knight Returns" hence the older burnt out Batman fighting in powered armour against Superman but it really didn't work in the context of starting a shared universe when all the other heroes (barring Diana age-wise) are brand new especially seeing how almost all the DCEU heroes (except Cyborg) are normally shown as his contemporaries.

[jetengine]

Affkeck would have worked for a single stand alone movie or a Trilogy. Not a shared universe.

[Random killer x]

So it seems that its now official - Ben Affleck is done as Batman. A little less than five years after he was first announced as the Caped Crusader, and just two movies later (three, if you count cameo appearances), Batfleck is no more.

And as much as I am looking forward to Matt Reeves' new take on the character, with whoever the next actor will be, I can't help but feel a little saddened by the fact that Affleck's Batman is over and done with. Particularly because we barely got to know him, and he was barely given a chance to live up to his potential.

Affleck's Batman was an interesting take on the character, to say the least. Pretty much NO ONE wanted a retread of the origin story, so jumping to the other end of the chronological spectrum and giving us an older burnt-out Batman past his prime was a great move. Making him a lot more bitter, violent and morally unmoored than we're used to seeing him was a bold move - one that admittedly not everyone appreciated. And then of course, there was the look - right out of the pages of Frank Miller's DKR. Finally, a comic-book accurate Batman look after decades of black armor!

Psychologically, this Batman was pretty intriguing. When I watched BvS, I remember being very impressed by the metaphor of the opening scene. The bats led me into the light...a beautiful lie, Bruce recalls, reflecting upon how becoming the Batman, being this violent, brutal agent of justice deluded him into believeing that he was helping make the world a better place. There was also the unspoken fact that decades of defending Gotham from the likes of madmen like the Joker, and losing his partner to a tragic death, caused him to lose his own moral compass and become even more vengeful and cruel.

The notion that a paranoid and brooding Batman would be vary of the awesome, unchecked power of Superman, and other superheroes, is one that's been around in the comics for a good thirty years now. But Affleck and Zack Snyder really drove home the psychology behind that impulse better than most comic-book writers have. And of course, that led us to the turning point in this Batman's story - how Superman's sacrifice and innate humanity reminds Bruce that his own mission is to bring people hope and make the world a better place, and how he needs to better live upto that.

Yes, Affleck's Batman was great. But perhaps he wasn't the right Batman for the DCEU.

For starters, this was a 'young' DC Universe, where superheroes were just starting to emerge. Now personally, I like the idea of Batman being around before Superman and the other Justice League members because I feel that Bruce Wayne putting on that cape and cowl for the first time and scaring the sh#t out of criminals works best in a context where flying men and Amazon warriors aren't common knowledge. But there's a world of difference between a Batman who's been around for a few years helping found the Justice League and a burnt-out ageing Batman who's been around for twenty years doing it. It makes Batman less of a peer to the other heroes, and more of a Nick Fury-like mentor figure/general. Which I suppose was the direction they were going for, but, like a lot of things with Justice League, didn't turn out so well.

More fundamentally though, perhaps Affleck's Batman simply wasn't one designed for a shared universe. His Batman was a psychologically rich character and a great director and screenwriter could have done wonders with him in a solo film. But foregoing the solo film and instead sticking him in a film with the likes of Aquaman, Flash, Wonder Woman and Cyborg was far from the soundest plan. This was probably a flaw with Snyder's original plan to begin with, but once you throw Joss Whedon's messy Avengers-lite take on the JL movie into the mix, it becomes a disaster. As it is, Affleck's Batman sorta worked in BvS simply because we got to spent a fair bit of time with him - which actually proved detrimental to Superman. And even so, a lot of people simply didn't get the time and space to appreciate Affleck's Batman when his debut involved sharing the screen with the other big-name DC hero.

The sad part is that had we gotten to see Snyder's DCEU arc play out on-screen, we might have emerged with a deeper appreciation of this version of the Dark Knight. And the solo film written and directed by Affleck would have given us a chance to get to know Batfleck on-screen even better, without all the other capes. As it stands, every avenue to let us get to know this Batman better and to let him live up to his potential was closed off. So really, Affleck leaving the role officially at this point is pretty much a mercy kill to Batfleck.

I agree that the starting point for this DCEU should not have started where it did, if we had gotten one or preferably two solo batman movies along with the solo Wonder Woman before MOS would have worked much better. I also like seeing batman around before Superman arrives. Establishing everything we saw about Batman and his motivation in BVS would have made more people appreciate where this idea was going I think. We would have seen Superman’s side of things in his solo movie and also Batman, along with Diana’s story. I would have even went with including Christopher Nolan’s trilogy and make that the starting point of the DCEU. Throw a boat load of money at Bale to return if needed be.

[Jackalope89]

I agree that the starting point for this DCEU should not have started where it did, if we had gotten one or preferably two solo batman movies along with the solo Wonder Woman before MOS would have worked much better. I also like seeing batman around before Superman arrives. Establishing everything we saw about Batman and his motivation in BVS would have made more people appreciate where this idea was going I think. We would have seen Superman’s side of things in his solo movie and also Batman, along with Diana’s story. I would have even went with including Christopher Nolan’s trilogy and make that the starting point of the DCEU. Throw a boat load of money at Bale to return if needed be.

The Nolan Trilogy is just too grounded to include groups like the Amazons, Atlanteans, Speedsters, and Kryptonians.

[Random killer x]

The Nolan Trilogy is just too grounded to include groups like the Amazons, Atlanteans, Speedsters, and Kryptonians.

That’s why when Superman arrives at that point on Earth it’s a game changer. Everything was grounded until the son of Krypton arrives and turns the whole world upside down. Even Wonder Woman’s solo movie happens a long time ago during WW1 either all those people died or just a small amount of people kept her story a secret