# Oh, I Don't Know if I'm Digging This...News About Upcoming Batman Film...



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Have any of you seen this yet?

http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/13/5710490/ben-affleck-batman-and-batmobile-first-photo

The first shots of Ben Affleck as the Caped Crusader/Dark Knight have been put out, along with the reimagined Batmobile, soon to be seen in the _Man of Steel_ sequel by Zack Snyder and DC/Warner. While I don't know what to make of Affleck standing in the new suit yet -- doesn't look too far off Christian Bale's "stance" in his suit in Chris Nolan's trilogy of films -- or the Batmobile, have you read who they're planning on CASTING for Lex Luthor? JESSE EISENBERG? REALLY? Am I missing something here? It wasn't bad enough we got Gal Gadot for Wonder Woman (should have been Jamie Alexander -- no doubt) or that there's rumors that Matt Damon may play AQUAMAN if he's introduced in this film (or the followup Justice League project planned)...we get JESSE EISENBERG as the Man of Steel's adversary? 

People, either I'm getting too old or something is going wrong in our society...seriously...it was terrible enough when Snyder used Laurence Fishburne to play Perry White...and now there are rumors that the Fantastic 4 reboot -- which I discussed with Mike in my _Amazing Spider-Man 2_ thread -- will substitute Chris Evans for a black actor (yet still keeps his Caucasian sister)...I mean, is this what Hollywood has come to? Does EVERY single film have to cater to a young, overtly sensitive and politically correct demographic in order to sell tickets? Really? I simply can't get over some of these casting decisions...these films are bound to fail...

At any rate, the official title of the next Superman film, which is supposed to introduce a new Batman with Affleck behind the cowl and cape, still doesn't exist, but don't expect it to keep its _Superman vs. Batman_ moniker as this was merely a placeholder for DC while they got their stuff together ramping up for this (which hasn't been that successful thus far with rescheduled release dates, shaky shooting schedules, casting recalls and more)...

What say you?

















(Jamie Alexander in the costume)








Can you see it?










I LOVE this one...


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

Osage_Winter said:


> ...have you read who they're planning on CASTING for Lex Luthor? JESSE EISENBERG? REALLY? Am I missing something here?


Their minds?

Personally, I'm too old for these constant franchise remake and makeovers.

As to the "TheAmazing Spider-Man 2". Here are the numbers. $550m, domestic and foreign.

Never heard of Gal Gadot until this post. Base on IMDb, she's booked solid and I'm sure, raking it in.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

BeeMan458 said:


> Their minds?
> 
> Personally, I'm too old for these constant franchise remake and makeovers.


I totally agree BeeMan...


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

THIS ONE is TOTALLY priceless......








:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

BeeMan458 said:


> As to the "TheAmazing Spider-Man 2". Here are the numbers. $550m, domestic and foreign.


Oh, due to all the marketing money they threw at this thing -- and it was OBNOXIOUS, let me tell you -- I knew Sony was gonna reap some rewards from this travesty...it's just a pity because it was far from the best comic adaptation ever made...:sarcastic:


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

Osage_Winter said:


> THIS ONE is TOTALLY priceless......


How'd you like Green Lantern? In my opinion, these franchises are getting worse, not better.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

BeeMan458 said:


> How'd you like Green Lantern? In my opinion, these franchises are getting worse, not better.


Oh don't even get me STARTED on that joke of a take on the iconic DC character...Martin Campbell as a director? Really? The guy that did _Casino Royale?_ That's gonna be another problem with this _Justice League _project for Time Warner, who has the rights to the DC characters in these motion picture versions, because the _Green Lantern _film flopped and he's an integral part of the group (rumors are floating around that yet another African-American actor will play Hal Jordan this time around if he's introduced)...

In all fairness to DC, Warner and Campbell, Green Lantern was an extremely difficult, complex character to realize on a big screen in live action; it is really a tricky endeavor for any filmmaker to take.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

Thanks for the response on "Green Lantern." I was afraid I was the only one that thought it was a bomb.

These movie companies are cranking superhero movies out as if there's some sort of an expiration date on the movie can and in my opinion, are guilty of oversaturation and in their haste, guilty of quality dilution and do so as if quality is a secondary concern.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

BeeMan458 said:


> Thanks for the response on "Green Lantern." I was afraid I was the only one that thought it was a bomb.


Oh, ABSOLUTELY not -- it was universally accepted as a massive stinker, my friend...:T



> These movie companies are cranking superhero movies out as if there's some sort of an expiration date on the movie can and in my opinion, are guilty of oversaturation and in their haste, guilty of quality dilution and do so as if quality is a secondary concern.


You know what? I couldn't agree more, Bee -- I have ALWAYS said if you're gonna do one of these films, especially on an epic scale, do it right no matter how long the production takes...I would do all the research even years beforehand, getting assistants to help me gather all the comics (as many as possible) to get a feel for the REAL origin story and I'd cast as close to possible...I wouldn't just "guess" at a storyline to make a hodge-podge of adversaries, romantic interests, costume designs, etc...

This was the one major thing I had against _Avengers_ -- the whole thing felt too "rushed" from out of the gate, simply to appeal to fans that were drooling for the film to be made and released; it opens with Loki arriving on Earth via SHIELD's "toying" with the "energy gate" et al, not really explaining what happened to him at the end of _Thor_, then ramps up to simply do whatever it could to rush the other characters together, including Banner who they happen to track down...somewhere other than where he was last seen at the end of Louis Leterrier's _Incredible Hulk_ (which was supposed to be the "connection" film for the Banner character in this)...the whole thing felt rushed and hurried with many plot holes and other elements that just didn't jive to me...

Now -- of course I realize we have to take into consideration budgets, time frames and studio demands for how long these things can take...and that the average theater-going public today are a pack of young imbeciles, for the most part, who can't put their cell phones down and stop texting even if a nuclear bomb was dropped on their theater...and, that the average attention span is that of a goldfish when it comes to the everyday human being (a scientifically confirmed fact). But when it's something as "epic" or sweeping as _The Avengers_, why shouldn't it have been treated like _Titanic?_ Why not make it a bit longer to flesh out the story more and "ground" the characters somewhat?

Today, as you hint at, it's all about rushing these things to the screen to "beat" the rival studio for premium release dates, ticket sale opportunities, post-marketing with toys, games, etc...etc...it's nauseating just how fast our world has become. I totally agree with the legions upon legions of fans that have said Warner and Zack Snyder should slow down on the making of this next film, and not worry about "competing" with Marvel/Disney and its _Avengers_ project...it's already too late to worry about releasing around the same time, so why not take your time and do the film right? And that doesn't include introducing like three new characters to what is supposed to be a SUPERMAN sequel a la Wonder Woman, Batman and perhaps even more...flesh these characters out right in their own films and THEN do a kick-butt_ Justice League_...do you agree?


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

Osage_Winter said:


> ...so why not take your time and do the film right? And that doesn't include introducing like three new characters to what is supposed to be a SUPERMAN sequel a la Wonder Woman, Batman and perhaps even more...flesh these characters out right in their own films and THEN do a kick-butt_ Justice League_...do you agree?


Absolutely. Even though as a kid in the 60's, growing up wrapped around a comic book stand every Saturday morning, the producers rush to action and don't build up the characters and the movie becomes to action oriented and not enough content/character driver. Female characters seemed to be built up along jiggle factor as opposed to being real personalities such as was the case of Batwoman.

I had no idea how PC the superheros producers had become. Being that I grew up in the 50's and 60's, that's where my values lay and I'll leave that as my final comment on the issue.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

BeeMan458 said:


> Absolutely. Even though as a kid in the 60's, growing up wrapped around a comic book stand every Saturday morning, the producers rush to action and don't build up the characters and the movie becomes to action oriented and not enough content/character driver. Female characters seemed to be built up along jiggle factor as opposed to being real personalities such as was the case of Batwoman.


Did you mean _Catwoman_ at the end of your statement? 



> I had no idea how PC the superheros producers had become. Being that I grew up in the 50's and 60's, that's where my values lay and I'll leave that as my final comment on the issue.


Thank you for your input on the subject. :T

I'll have a couple of new reviews up hopefully tomorrow on the Blu-rays of _I, Frankenstein_ and _Ride Along_...don't have high hopes for either...:sarcastic:


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

Osage_Winter said:


> Did you mean _Catwoman_ at the end of your statement?


D'oh! Yes. In the case of Catwoman (2004), I felt a great deal of effort was spent to 




There were many character development scenes in this movie.


----------



## Savjac (Apr 17, 2008)

I am so not sure about any of these new movies, like many folks, I do believe it would be nice if Hollywood just moved along and found new "Stuff".

The movie industry has always been about making money, at least in the mainstream so it comes as no surprise they will keep making junk or retreading what worked until there is no more blood to be had. As new viewers come of age, they may not be acquainted with the comic books or even the earlier films. So us older folks, and no Osage I do not consider you old, get rather tired of the remakes and the poor writing, directing, CGI, actor/actress placements and move on.

I do wonder sometimes though how much the taste and expectations of todays younger audiences have changed since I was younger. Seeing Steve Reeves and Hercules, George Reeves as Superman followed by Christopher Reeve as a most excellent Superman. Will we ever see another Altman, Kubrick, Hal Ashby, Speilberg, Lucas etc that blaze new trails we had not seen before ?


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

BeeMan458 said:


> D'oh! Yes. In the case of Catwoman (2004), I felt a great deal of effort was spent to develop Halle Berry's character.
> 
> There were many character development scenes in this movie.


...because you had said _BATWoman_ in your original statement, that's why I asked...:T

Personally, I never liked the "shootoff" or "spinoff" feature films based on characters in other pictures i.e. Catwoman, Elektra; though I will agree that in doing this these characters are given plenty of developmental time even though the final product comes out to be ridiculous IMO.

From what I understand, Marvel and Disney are planning some sort of shootoff project based on the Spider-Man universe in which they're going to give feature films to some individual villain characters; I don't see it happening.


----------



## Mike Edwards (Mar 10, 2011)

I'm actually liking the idea of Affleck as Batman. at first I was reticent but I think he can do a nice hardened "frank miller" style Batman similar to "The Dark Knight Returns"

Eisenberg....now that's the one I've got a lot of hesitancy about. I understand WHY they're choosing him since they aren't going with the classic Lex Luthor but pulling from the 52 reboot universe which is a drastic change on the character from bald mustache twirling villain of old. in the 52 reboot he's a much younger, much more sneaky government rep who's job is to find a weakness in superman because they're afraid of him. He'll be a mix between the scientist/cold calculated man in black govt agent

as for Aquaman. the rumor about Matt Damon playing was debunked

the new MOS movie will definitely cause me to be hesitant though, since I didn't like the 1st MOS a wild amount, but I DO greatly like Snyder as a director, we'll see what he can do now that Nolan isn't going to be huddling over his shoulder the whole time.


----------



## Mike Edwards (Mar 10, 2011)

BeeMan458 said:


> Thanks for the response on "Green Lantern." I was afraid I was the only one that thought it was a bomb.
> 
> These movie companies are cranking superhero movies out as if there's some sort of an expiration date on the movie can and in my opinion, are guilty of oversaturation and in their haste, guilty of quality dilution and do so as if quality is a secondary concern.


actually the ones by fox and Sony ARE being cranked out that way. the reason being is because if they don't make another Fantastic 4, Spiderman or X-men movie every 3 years minimum then the rights revert back to Marvel studios and Sony n' Fox are sure as shooting not about to give up cash cows like that.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

Mike Edwards said:


> actually the ones by fox and Sony ARE being cranked out that way. the reason being is because if they don't make another Fantastic 4, Spiderman or X-men movie every 3 years minimum then the rights revert back to Marvel studios and Sony n' Fox are sure as shooting not about to give up cash cows like that.


From your above, it reads like there is an expiration date on the movie can.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

BeeMan458 said:


> From your above, it reads like there is an expiration date on the movie can.


:huh:


----------



## Mike Edwards (Mar 10, 2011)

BeeMan458 said:


> From your above, it reads like there is an expiration date on the movie can.


at least until the movies stop being profitable. then they'll let the rights laps back to marvel. they already did so with "DareDevil" and "The Punisher"


----------



## ambesolman (Apr 25, 2011)

I actually liked Punisher, minus Travolta. I really hate Eisenberg though


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

I don't have any issues with any of the casting.
A black brother and white sister can be easily addressed with adoption or different mom/dad and it won't take more than a few seconds of screen time to do it.
Might even be a better explanation of why the gamma rays did not give brother/sister the same super power.
The recent super hero movies have been better than the earlier ones IMO and ticket sales seem to agree.
Comic book movies are much more likely to fail if very much effort is put into recreating the comic book.
The movies that use the comic books as a high level guide work much better as movies.
And what was wrong with having Fishburne play Perry White?


----------



## willis7469 (Jan 31, 2014)

Ok. I know this thread is old, but with the new trailers, it seems relevant. 
I think Jesse Eisenberg's agent must have blackmail material on every person in Hollywood. How did he get cast as Lex Luthor? What a joke! I personally don't love affleck as batman, but I think he'll do good. I don't mind jesse in some of his other stuff, but this is just a bad idea. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mike Edwards (Mar 10, 2011)

Lex is a puzzling choice. I'm really liking Affleck as the trailers have shown him to look and sound the part of Bats, so much so that I'm actually looking forward to the film. As stated, the weak point seems to be lex right now


----------



## willis7469 (Jan 31, 2014)

I agree mike. I've enjoyed Affleck all the way back to dazed and confused, and I'm looking forward to his performance. "Weak link" is generous IMO, lol. Can't wait for March 25th. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

