Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

Ben Affleck Set To Play Batman in 'Man Of Steel' Sequel

News
by Drew Taylor
August 22, 2013 9:40 PM
34 Comments
  • |

Well this is something of a surprise: Ben Affleck, former-heartthrob-turned-legitimate-film-director, will once again don a tight, restrictive outfit as Batman in Zack Snyder's "Man of Steel" sequel. The new, currently untitled movie, is scheduled for release by Warner Bros in the jam-packed summer of 2015, will pit the Man of Tomorrow (played once again by Henry Cavill) against the Dark Knight. Affleck previously saved a crime-plagued city as the Man Without Fear in 2003's underwhelming "Daredevil" and played George Reeves, who starred in the fifties TV show "Adventures of Superman," in "Hollywoodland." We wonder if he's already started working on his gravely Batman voice already (probably, yes).

In a statement, Warner Bros' Greg Silverman said: "We knew we needed an extraordinary actor to take on one of DC Comics’ most enduringly popular Super Heroes, and Ben Affleck certainly fits that bill, and then some." Silverman went on: "His outstanding career is a testament to his talent and we know he and Zack will bring new dimension to the duality of this character."

According to director Zack Snyder: “Ben provides an interesting counter-balance to Henry’s Superman. He has the acting chops to create a layered portrayal of a man who is older and wiser than Clark Kent and bears the scars of a seasoned crime fighter, but retain the charm that the world sees in billionaire Bruce Wayne. I can’t wait to work with him."

There are a couple of things that are really interesting about this: first off, are we to believe that Affleck will be the new Batman for a number of new movies? It seemed like the studio and DC Comics were introducing a new Batman so that he could then be spun off into his own, post-Christopher Nolan movies. Does it really seem like Affleck would be up to do this? It seems unlikely, but then again we don't know the make and model of the dump truck full of money they drove up to Affleck's house (it was probably so large Jennifer Garner thought it was some kind of hover craft), so he just might. Affleck will star alongside original "Man of Steel" players Amy Adams, Laurence Fishburne and Diane Lane.

More importantly, we wonder where this leaves Affleck's next directorial project, an adaptation of Dennis Lehane's sprawling historical thriller "Live By Night" (think "L.A. Confidential" but in Boston). Production on that film was supposed to start in early 2014, right after Affleck wrapped his role as the tortured husband in David Fincher's "Gone Girl" (another adaptation of a best-selling literary smash, this one by Gillian Flynn). The "Man of Steel" sequel, however, would shoot in roughly the same time frame.

Both "Live by Night" and "Man of Steel" are Warner Bros movies so maybe his role in the super-sequel is so minor that he can do his time on that in a very covert way while still starring in and directing "Live by Night," but that seems like a stretch even for the Academy Award-winning multi-hyphenate. 

The "Man of Steel" sequel enters the summer of 2015 gladiatorial games on July 17th.

Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    

34 Comments

  • Herman | August 24, 2013 6:40 PMReply

    Outrageous! They will ruin the sequel to the movie I hated!

  • Noel | August 23, 2013 7:09 PMReply

    At least he's tall enough...they'd need someone who is the same height and build and Henry Cahill, but is also famous enough for the role. Can you think of anyone else?

  • Aaron | August 25, 2013 4:13 PM

    Uhhhh, yeah, how about.... christian bale?!!! what the hell is this? outstanding actor? he ruined daredevil. he's got the wrong face, imagine his thin upper lip and buck teeth in the batman cowl, its an outrage. why would they get rid of christian bale after the most successful batman movie ever? this is sheer stupidity, they will ruin the series

  • Collins | August 23, 2013 4:11 PMReply

    I figure either Snyder wanted a chance to have sex with Affleck or WB was truly desperate. Either way it was a very bad choice. this movie will definitely be the new Batman & Robin

  • john | August 27, 2013 11:24 PM

    Christian bale was the sorriest batman there is all 3 batman suck nolan is sorry producer he dont need to do Superman or Batman get new prodocer ben is better than bale any day

  • Richard Schitz | August 23, 2013 10:04 AMReply

    Total missed opportunity not hiring Tom Selleck as a grizzled, old, moustachioed Batman.

  • gert | August 23, 2013 7:19 AMReply

    They should let him direct this and make it a gritty boston crime drama. That i would watch.

  • PRESIDENT MAO | August 23, 2013 6:49 AMReply

    NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • L. | August 23, 2013 5:03 AMReply

    Kevin Smith probably has a hard-on right now thinking that his BFF will invite him on set.
    Beside he liked Watchmen (wtf?) and even went as far as saying that the Supes/Bat idea was a well planned idea from Warner (as if it wasn't but a desperate attempt to make anything with more than one caped dude because "that's what kids want").

    Next step, the movies will merge with the CW stuff (that was basically implied recently by the CW boss) and the guy from Arrow and the upcoming Flash will join for a justice league movie.
    And it will suck so bad.

  • L. | August 23, 2013 5:04 AM

    Oh and please let me just copy that sentence once again :
    "His outstanding career is a testament to his talent (??) and we know he and Zack will bring new dimension to the duality of this character (????)."
    Seriously if you didn't pop a vessel right here you're not a sane person.

  • Michael | August 23, 2013 2:23 AMReply

    Not sure how I feel, I think if he's considerably better than he was 10 years ago, than he's passable. I could easily see him donning the cowl, as long as he drops that Bostonian accent. PLEASE.

  • Glass | August 23, 2013 2:53 AM

    I still don't get this whole "Boston accent" thing everyone keeps saying about him. Have you seen his roles in films that take place outside of Boston (95% of them). He talks like a weatherman. It's not like he has a debilitating Mark Wahlberg-in-The-Departed accent he can't shake...

  • TheoC | August 23, 2013 2:22 AMReply

    I wanted him for Lex, oh well. Negators gonna negate.

  • catttman | August 23, 2013 1:15 AMReply

    Maybe Affleck wants to have a good relationship with Warner, so they'll greenlight any film he wants to do. It happened with Kubrick, Clint and Nolan.

  • jean vigo | August 23, 2013 12:26 AMReply

    1. You can never have enough money once you have enough money. Show it to him.
    2. He's doing it because "as a dad of youngsters, he wants to do something they can enjoy; it's for them...." (cue: PR machine)
    3. At least WB is not appealing on kickstarter for this one.
    4. If it ends up a stinker, it really doesn't matter in the whole scheme of things, does it?

  • TheJosh | August 22, 2013 11:35 PMReply

    Matt Damon should play Lex Luthor. And then he can vow to destroy Superman because he wants to be Ben Affleck's best friend.

  • berk | August 22, 2013 11:22 PMReply

    I could see Warner Bros keeping Affleck as Batman as an ensemble player: Superman vs Batman and Justice League but not another series so soon after Nolan's. It lets WB have their Batman but frees Affleck from the huge commitment of carrying these types of movies every 2-3 years.

  • Javier | August 22, 2013 10:56 PMReply

    Should have asked Javier Bardem

  • RC | August 22, 2013 10:52 PMReply

    Affleck is a fairly decent director. Acting wise, he's passable as long as he stays close to home. But Batman? No. Its hard for me to believe he's even taking this. Isn't he a bit passed this now? It kind of makes me think of when the Coen brothers made BURN AFTER READING. They weren't going to top NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, so make a throwaway movie. Maye this is the thinking with putting in Ben after Bale. Thoughts?

  • droop | August 23, 2013 6:40 AM

    Burn After Reading is hilarious, what are you talking about? Seriously, Brad Pitt in that movie, his face alone made laugh. "I thought you might be worried... about the security... of you shit." Pissed myself laughing. Everyone was great in that movie, and it has one helluva cast, so I just don't understand how anyone doesn't like that movie. Great double-bill paired with The Big Lebowski.

  • Eddie | August 23, 2013 4:21 AM

    Strong analysis, Cory.

  • Chris (The other white meat) | August 23, 2013 1:28 AM

    Yeah. Burn After Reading is a good movie. Sorry. I watched The Big Lebowski the day it opened and quite a few people were saying the same things about that one that they're saying about Burn After Reading. After a movie like No Country you would think the Coens would be allowed to have a little fun. As far as Batman goes, this is not going to be the same Batman. Bale's Batman resides in a universe where Superman, the Flash and Wonder Woman don't exist. I'm curious to see what this take on Batman will be like. It should be interesting.

  • cory everett | August 23, 2013 12:48 AM

    BURN AFTER READING is TERRIBLE and Ben Affleck is not Batman.

  • Chris | August 23, 2013 12:24 AM

    "Burn After Reading" is not a throwaway movie. It's a victim of the same exact response that "The Big Lebowski" was initially greeted with - considered a disappointment on the heels of "Fargo." I'm not saying "BAR" is as good as "Lebowski," but it's very, very good.

  • tristan eldritch | August 22, 2013 10:24 PMReply

    Not that I care or will see the film in a blind fit, but Affleck doesn't strike me as a good choice....too blue collar somehow for Bruce Wayne. You see Affleck and wonder when he's gonna crack open a beer. Doesn't have that God's loneliest man of destiny vibe that Bruce should have.

  • This Kid | August 22, 2013 10:18 PMReply

    Lots of hate towards Affleck I think he'll be just fine as Batman, but I'm more interested on the possibility of him directing the solo Bats movie. That would be really cool

  • Matt | August 23, 2013 9:53 AM

    Yeah, I was wondering if he was doing this as some sort of behind-the-scenes deal so that he could eventually go on to direct and write the next Batman film. If so, I'm all for it. I can skip the Goyer-written fiasco this will inevitably end up being, and go for the Affleck-written/directed good one after.

  • Glass | August 22, 2013 10:12 PMReply

    IIII DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE YELLING ABOUTT!!!

    LOUUUUUUUUD NOISES!!! -Brick Tamland

  • me | August 22, 2013 10:09 PMReply

    You hear that? Sounds like the internet is erupting.

  • oogle monster | August 22, 2013 9:57 PMReply

    I like the choice but he will forever live in Bale's shadow. I would so much rather have Affleck DIRECT than star in this. He's a great director.

  • anonymouse | August 22, 2013 10:07 PM

    i would say he's a competent director. great? not so much. well, better than average, kind of like ron howard. available to make tentpole, by rote and by trope, films with little innovation in terms of storytelling, cinematography, directing, etc.

  • kris | August 22, 2013 9:55 PMReply

    hell no!!

  • hank | August 22, 2013 9:44 PMReply

    my guess is he's made a deal with them to play batman so that he can direct a project they were otherwise uninterested in financing. or maybe he just wants to growwwl.

  • Lou | August 22, 2013 9:44 PMReply

    Fuck yeah. All hail Affleck.

Email Updates