DisAfflected

[digitaldiscipline]

[reposting here from the original on tumblr]

So, here’s the thing. I give precisely no fucks who has played, is playing, or will play Batman (or any other superhero, even The Doctor). The actor fills a role, and will do what they can with the script and direction they’re given.

The humongous pile of internet wangst over Ben Affleck’s announcement as the next actor to portray Batman, on the heels of a conversation I was having else-net recently about the subject of nerd rage and cosplay shame (I think it was with matociquala), are simply iterations of the same theme, namely, that when someone takes on the role and inhabits a fantasy someone, as a fan, has built up in their mind, there is shear, and disconnect, and anger.

"This person can’t fulfill my imagination’s demands!" Well, how about, one, you let them try; two, you elucidate those so that someone, if they’re of a mind to listen, can see if they *can* (if they’re so inclined); and, three, you step the fuck away from the center of the entire universe and stop being such a special goddamned snowflake that the entire system must cater to.

I admit, I am not a fan of superhero movies (I’ve seen a few and skipped lots more, and there will probably be a fairly robust wall of text on the topic in the fairly near future, but the basic thesis is “superheroes are boring (to me)”), so I’m far less invested in this than someone for whom Batman is The Shit.

Batman is the new James Bond is the new Doctor - it’s a role to be inhabited by a neverending string of actors, but without even the pretense of continuity that the other roles kind of maintain, since it’s being “rebooted” or “re-imagined” or retconned or whatever it is that gives each actor/director/whomever carte blanche to paint over the corners they would otherwise have been painted into. And that’s fine, and liberating for the people crafting the newest take.

I haven’t always been a fan of Ben Affleck, but he seems to be no better or worse a choice than any other similar dude. And, hey, good for him to be paid to put in the gym time to look the part. I know I’d be down for that.

Comments

[clevermanka.livejournal.com]

I love superhero movies. I just can't figure out why they're doing Batman again.

[hellsop.livejournal.com]

The thing that's stopping you from playing Batman is not gym time, chief.

[etcet.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure it's my complete lack of acting ability.

[etcet.livejournal.com]

They're a thing that's a thing for some people's thing, but that thing is not my thing.

[thebigpants.livejournal.com]

I would also like to say that Americans need a healthy dose of reality. Yes, I'm a nerd and geek, but this is a damn movie. Syria has gassed 1000s of people and all we as a country can talk about is Batman?

[etcet.livejournal.com]

It's easy to get worked up over things that don't matter and hard to act on things of importance.

[the-siobhan.livejournal.com]

To be fair, Affleck has Daredevil to live down.

I still agree with you though. I was one of the people who reacted with horror when Michael Keaton got the role, and I thought he did a great job.

[etcet.livejournal.com]

Nobody holds Catwoman over Halle Barry's head, or whoever the poor fuck who played the Green Lantern. It was a shitty movie. *shrug*

[inulro.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that. The paint isn't even dry on the last reboot.

[inulro.livejournal.com]

Word.

[eglantine-br.livejournal.com]

Well said. And I think you are right.

[mimerki.livejournal.com]

I even care about this and am still solidly wait-and-see about it. Affleck isn't a great actor, but he does usually choose roles he can play, so whatever. Also, even if it's terrible and that is obviously his fault, this won't do worse than wreck 2 hours of my life. Hopefully, I'll even be snuggling with the charming boyfriend and snarking quietly in each other's ears, so that's not even a total wash.

[the-siobhan.livejournal.com]

Yes I do.But then I've never thought she was that great an actor to start with.

[etcet.livejournal.com]

Point taken. Sometimes, when otherwise good actors are in terrible movies[1], I wonder if the script just looked better when the role was offered, or if it wasn't shown, or if it got heavily rewritten, or what.

[1] My canonical example of this is "Wolf," which had Jack Nicholson and Michelle Pfeiffer in the leads, and was basically a big-budget B movie that managed to get just about everything five or ten degrees off-center from being any good.

[vatine]

In the recent (for "recent", read "made after the mid-80s") Batman films, there's only been one actor who did the role more than once (Christian Bale, I think). While I personally probably would not have picked Ben Affleck, I doubt he'll doa worse job than Val Kilmer, so it'll be Just Fine, You'll See.

In a way, I think it's a shame they used the same actor in two (three? three.) consecutive films, it would have been cooler if they didn't, keeping the whole "new film, new actor" thing going.