Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Ben Affleck is your new Bruce Wayne; Bryan Cranston as Lex Luthor?

Dpantherman

By Dpantherman,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

nickzz Newbie

nickzz

Posted
Posted

i don't think batman is particularly difficult character to portray.

 

flip on your batman voice, cover 80% of your face, have a serious attitude and you're set.

 

that being said, it's batman not batboy. i wouldn't have even considered affleck for the role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raskle Contributor

Raskle

Posted
Posted

Prolly gonna get poo on for suggesting it, but I think Ben Foster could have handled this role very well... even though he's a ginger.

 

 

I'll wait and see about Affleck. I've liked most of his work, but DD sucked balls (theatrical release to be fair), and not my idea of the Batman type. But then again, this is also why I'm not in Hollywood making the big bucks either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Inimicus Mentor

Inimicus

Posted
Posted

Prolly gonna get poo on for suggesting it, but I think Ben Foster could have handled this role very well... even though he's a ginger.

 

 

I'll wait and see about Affleck. I've liked most of his work, but DD sucked balls (theatrical release to be fair), and not my idea of the Batman type. But then again, this is also why I'm not in Hollywood making the big bucks either.

 

Ben Foster always comes off as a little unhinged.

 

Not in a good batman way either.  You got to believe that although Wayne is clearly a disturbed individual, you dont ever think he is just going to start killing people.  With Foster you would think that was an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raskle Contributor

Raskle

Posted
Posted

Ben Foster always comes off as a little unhinged.

 

Not in a good batman way either.  You got to believe that although Wayne is clearly a disturbed individual, you dont ever think he is just going to start killing people.  With Foster you would think that was an option.

 

Fair enough, but I do remember back in the day, Batman in the DC comics did kill the occasional henchmen or twelve, with a good day being he winged the hell outta the Penguin (pun intended). It was only after the whole mother's movements in the late 70s and early 80s that he started to tie up bad guys instead of outright killing them, given the chance.

 

 

Slightly unhinged and not afraid to permanently take down bad guys is my idea of who Batman is. So, Foster kinda fits the true vigilante and darker style I'm expecting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darth Biscuit Mentor

Darth Biscuit

Posted
Posted

 

 

Me and Dpantherman will like this...

 

 

JT wants to play the Riddler...

 

 

http://variety.com/2013/film/news/justin-timberlake-wants-to-play-the-riddler-1200592367/

 

 

 

“Not a chance in hell. I ain’t playing Robin. I have no aspiration to ever be a superhero in a movie,” he told the radio show.

“Now, a villain! I’ll tell you the villain I want to play more than anything because I grew up loving Batman, funnily enough, is The Riddler. The Riddler is my favorite villain. The Riddler was like a sociopath. He was proper crazy. So if I’m gonna play crazy, I’m wanna play proper crazy.”

 

 

 

Can Mrs. Timberlake also play a part?  Preferably a scantily clad part?

 

Maybe something like this...

 

1-Batgirl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OneBadCat Grand Master

OneBadCat

Posted
Posted

If Jack Nicholson  had been given the same script that Heath Ledger was given, Ledger's performance would have seemed journeyman at best.

 

Come on now that's a little overboard. Ledger gave one of the most creative performances in the past 10 years in my opinion. I don't crown his ass like a lot of people do but he was incredibly unique in that movie. I say that as a huge Nicholson fan.

 

 

Affleck will have to pull a rabbit out of his ass to make this work. Bale is in my opinion of one the top 3 actors  right now. He had the aura, ego and confidence of Bruce Wayne. He's been the best one yet in my opinion. Michael Keaton second, then I throw Kilmer and Clooney in the garbage can.

 

I think the reason Bale turned it down was because this movie is a Superman cross over. That makes the script incredibly more difficult to be as thrilling the Nolan series, it already loses its grittiness. That said I wish he would have accepted.

 

 

You all do realize that if Heath Ledger didn't die there would have been at least 4 movies, 2 with the joker, then they still probably would have done Bane too. It would have been the greatest movie franchise ever imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nickzz Newbie

nickzz

Posted
Posted

Bruce Wayne / Batman dynamic is extremely difficult to portray

 

then all previous batmans are all phenomenal actors because it doesn't seem very difficult at all. not saying i could do it, but it doesn't require any sort of deep performance.... it's a super hero movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zod Grand Master

Zod

Posted
Posted

then all previous batmans are all phenomenal actors because it doesn't seem very difficult at all. not saying i could do it, but it doesn't require any sort of deep performance.... it's a super hero movie.

Clooney, Kilmer failed horribly at it

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rodeo Grand Master

rodeo

Posted
Posted

Clooney, Kilmer failed horribly at it

 

They did what they could with the material. Like Affleck with Daredevil, they didn't write the scripts.

 

I think it's pretty obvious Clooney can play a playboy type, considering he does in 9/10 of the movies he's in. And he's also really good in serious roles.

 

Clooney in a gritty Dark Knight style Batman with Bruce in his 50's would be fuging amazing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • cranky
      2027: Sharing my thoughts on the cap without a lotta research

      By cranky · Posted

      It all sounds great. The only unknowns are injuries and how they will need to be addressed. Horn has a history as does the newly added Jaelen Phillips and Cooker has yet to play an entire season as well. And then there are the Ikey's - totally unexpecteded injuries that put a major wrench in your plans. I do think its a great plan though.
    • LinvilleGorge
      2027: Sharing my thoughts on the cap without a lotta research

      By LinvilleGorge · Posted

      If we pay Bryce like a franchise QB we're completely and utterly buttfuged.
    • MHS831
      2027: Sharing my thoughts on the cap without a lotta research

      By MHS831 · Posted

      In my view, the realistic expectation for this team to compete will start 2027.  At that time, I think we could be looking at the following (this is HIGHLY speculative):   QB:  You know, Bryce.  I am not a fan, but they don't ask me.  But there is reason for hope--and here it is.  Bryce will be entering his prime.  Since we are likely to pay him, there will be changes that I include throughout this exercise--I realistically speculate on what they are going to do with Bryce and then I realistically speculate on what means in terms of the cap and other positions. Bryce HAS IMPROVED.  The idea is that if you give him more weapons and protection, that will continue.  His career:   At this rate, if his growth continues, by 2027 we should expect nearly 30 TDs and about 12 Interceptions and a Rating of about 98.  His completion percentage should settle at 65-66% or so.  If that happens, you can win with it. The following stats demonstrate how the Panthers will be able to afford it (and re-sign Ickey) My guess is they will require about $60m per year. This is why rookies who can play are important.  It also helps us see the blueprint.  You may disagree, but this is the cruel realities of the salary cap. Robert Hunt:  Cut post June 1 and save $19m.  Who do you replace him with?  Ickey. Tershawn Wharton:  Cutting him saves nearly $15m.  We should all hope to see Aaron Hall (UDFA) make the roster and play well.  Regardless, this is a position we would likely have to address in the next draft. Trevin Moehrig:  Cutting Moehrig as the starting SS saves this team $16.5m.   Ransom will be on year 3 of a cheap rookie deal and should be more than ready to take the reins.  their styles are similar.  Furthermore, FS Wheatley (R, 4th round) will be starting. Taylor Moton:  So much depends on his knee, but I have an idea that he can play another 3 years.  extending him could save the team about $5m per year.  Cutting him outright would save the team about $21m. In the most drastic situation, we have to cut Moton and the other three players mentioned.   We would need (in all likelihood) a starting DT and RT.  It is possible that the DE would be addressed, but Wharton's production (so far) could be equaled by a rookie.  Look for a cut free agent and a 2027 draft pick here.  If you cut Moton, you save $21m, and that would be the only big hole to fill.  Having Ickey at RG gives you some depth at T, and Ickey could be the guy.  T could be pick in the 2027 draft (first round), fwiw.  It saves you $21m while costing you $5m, for example. We get younger, creating a core of Freeling, Hecht, and the RT first rounder in 2027) along with Ekownu (second contract in the $15m range, and Lewis, whose contract would be in the $16m range if not extended.)  The OL cuts (Hunt, Moton) would save $40m.  The OL would get younger and still solid with veterans at G.   By cutting Wharton (no brainer if his play stays the same) and Moehrig (good player--but we have Ransom on a rookie contract who would not be that much of a drop off--if any) in addition to Hunt and Moton, we would save over $70m in cap room. We would be able to give Bryce bag  and we would have enough to re-sign Ickey (if the knee is not too risky) to a Guard contract (probably at a discount, coming off that injury).  Furthermore, we could add a RT in the draft (or a RG if Ickey moves to RT) and that would be the only large hole to fill. Correct my logic if you see issues-- On defense, in addition to the aforementioned, Scott ($2m contract) is out, replaced by a 4th round rookie contract. CB Jackson's contract ($7.8m) expires and he is (possibly) replaced by a rookie contract.  At Edge, patrick Jones II's $10m contract expires and he is likely a reserve, and his role is absorbed by Phillips, Scourton, Princely, and possible an UDFA like Isaiah Smith or a 2027 draft pick.   These productive developmental players over the past 2 drafts will pay huge dividends.  On paper, I see the team getting much younger and possibly better while cutting nearly $100m and reallocating that money to get more production.          
×
×
  • Create New...