Ben Affleck Signed For Multiple Films As Batman & Will Help "Create" The Character; 'Live By Night' To Shoot In 2014

News
by Kevin Jagernauth
August 25, 2013 12:52 PM
44 Comments
  • |

Better get used to it, folks. Ben Affleck is your next Batman. And as the Internet continues to have a collective short memory about the furor that greeted Michael Keaton when he was tapped to play Bruce Wayne in Tim Burton's films, or even Christopher Nolan's decision to cast Heath Ledger as the Joker, Warner Bros. is going about their business. We're still just under two years from seeing how Affleck will shade this new incarnation of the iconic superhero, and it seems he's got a few ideas of his own.

In case you missed it in last week's (nearly embarrassing) hysteria surrounding the announcement, the official press release notes that "Affleck and filmmaker Zack Snyder will create an entirely new incarnation of the character." Indeed, as the trades work the phones and try to get more intel about the forthcoming sequel, THR notes that in early days of the negotiating process (it was so secret, few even knew about it his agency or at the studio, hence the surprise) initial talks were centered "on story and character." Given Affleck's experience and success as a writer/director, it's likely no surprise he wanted his fingerprint or at least his ideas tabled, and it's probably safe to say that they will be incorporated in the script confirmed to penned by David S. Goyer, who is conceiving the story with Zack Snyder.

And in case it isn't obvious already, the trade also notes that Affleck is "signed for multiple movies," which means he'll be wearing that cape and cowl for a while. And more importantly, as many folks have already been pondering, THR says that this whole deal "potentially lines Affleck up to star in (and direct?)" in the eventual "Justice League" movie. It doesn't seem to be much more than guesswork now, but you have to remember Affleck was previously offered "Man Of Steel" and "Justice League" to direct, turning them both down. Could starring as Batman be a way for him to test the blockbuster waters and see how that machinery works as an actor before committing as a director? Time will tell.

But what of Affleck's next project, "Live By Night"? Initially, it was slated to shoot this fall. Then, David Fincher's "Gone Girl" came along and it was suggested that Affleck would make that movie, then shift over to lensing the Dennis Lehane flick immediately after for a planned 2014 release. Well, the good news is that it's still happening, but you'll be waiting an extra year. It looks like Affleck will make "Gone Girl," shoot "Superman Vs. Batman" from February to August next year (damn), and in that time, gear up pre-production on the Prohibition saga "Live By Night" for a fall 2014 shoot. So, what does this mean?

Blockbuster Affleck in "Superman Vs. Batman" on July 17, 2015 and Filmmaker Affleck returning with "Live By Night" for what we can only surmise is a 2015 release as well. So for those of you worrying Batman would take Affleck away from a so-far-impressive directorial career, it seems it will only be a slight delay before he's back behind the camera. 

Lastly, fans should note: the original LATimes article that broke the "Superman Vs. Batman news had Christopher Nolan only listed as an executive producer on the project. This meant Nolan, who had a hand in writing the story of "Man of Steel," wouldn't really be involved for this sequel. Curiously enough, the more recent aforementioned WB press release announcing Affleck as Batman named several producers and executive producers, but Nolan's name was conspicuously absent. He'll be busy shooting "Interstellar" soon and sadly, it sounds like he's not going to be involved in this ongoing comic book series any longer. Update: BoxOfficeMojo reporter Ray Subers says WB told on Friday that Nolan (and wife Emma Thomasis still involved, however, adds, "But I agree, it is very odd that they weren't in the press release." Regardless the point stands: Nolan went from co-author of the story and producer on the last film to an executive producer not even listed in the company's press release to the world. EP credits are usually no more than token credits anyhow and it seems he will be on the periphery.

You might also like:
Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    

44 Comments

  • Flexnfx | August 27, 2013 5:48 PMReply

    According to Warner Brothers...Affleck's the Batman we deserve...Tis a Dark night indeed!

    http://affleckisnotbatman.blogspot.com/

  • Jack | August 27, 2013 12:48 PMReply

    Lets say it wasn't Affleck who took on the part. Lets say it was Ryan Gosling. You'd all find thousands of reasons to complain about him being batman. So lets just wait and see how he plays the character.

  • Martin | August 27, 2013 9:17 AMReply

    No matter how many of you media outlets try to force-feed us this idea that we better get used to the idea of Ben Affleck as our new Batman, numbers don't lie: The more you try to advocate him by calling the fans (the very people who will either make or break this movie) stupid, and the more you claim we better like this terrible decision, the less likely it is that fans will go and see this movie. Don't bite the hand that feeds you, and if you really piss off the fans, then the movie will bomb, and Warner Brothers will have serious financial woes. I don't know if warner Brothers is paying you guys and other websites to try and talk up Ben Affleck, but it sure seems that way. Judging by the comments section anywhere on the internet, the reception to this idea is not getting any warmer, no matter how many Hollywood insiders or media outlets tell us we're stupid, or that Affleck is a good choice.

  • fuck you | September 8, 2013 2:03 AM

    Like a butt fucking fag that's how he'll play.... go suck his dick.

  • Martin | August 27, 2013 9:17 AMReply

    No matter how many of you media outlets try to force-feed us this idea that we better get used to the idea of Ben Affleck as our new Batman, numbers don't lie: The more you try to advocate him by calling the fans (the very people who will either make or break this movie) stupid, and the more you claim we better like this terrible decision, the less likely it is that fans will go and see this movie. Don't bite the hand that feeds you, and if you really piss off the fans, then the movie will bomb, and Warner Brothers will have serious financial woes. I don't know if warner Brothers is paying you guys and other websites to try and talk up Ben Affleck, but it sure seems that way. Judging by the comments section anywhere on the internet, the reception to this idea is not getting any warmer, no matter how many Hollywood insiders or media outlets tell us we're stupid, or that Affleck is a good choice.

  • FANBOYS AND BEN AFFLECK SUCKS....SO DOES CHRISTOPHER NOLAN | August 26, 2013 9:12 PMReply

    They all suck. Authoritarian assholes who can't question jack shit.

  • Kenny | August 26, 2013 7:23 PMReply

    I refuse to watch any movie that will have Affleck portraying Bruce Wayne/Batman. For the idiots asking Why so serious? I'm a huge Batman fan. I don't hate Affleck despite the fact that he had some terrible movies but he's not Batman material. I refuse to watch it the same way I've refused to wtach Brokeback Mountain over the years.

  • SupesFan | August 29, 2013 2:36 AM

    Seriously? You say that you won't watch this movie, yet I bet you will be the at the movie theatre on opening night. And if Affleck will actually do a good job and this movie will be good, you still won't watch? If you're a huge batman fan, you will watch it either way since you didn't say you're a huge gay cowboy fan yet you still didn't watch the movie. Just accept that he's batman and judge after you have seen it.

  • Negro Please | August 26, 2013 8:34 PM

    You're going to watch the movie with all the other Bat-fans. You won't be able to help your damn self.

  • Dan | August 26, 2013 8:26 PM

    Uh ... how does the Brokeback Mountain comment even relate to your previous argument? Are you saying you didn't watch BM because you're a huge fan of gay cowboys and Ledger & Gyllenhaal weren't gay cowboy material?

  • Fanboys crying is sickening | August 26, 2013 6:59 AMReply

    I have never seen men cry like bitches after the announcement of Affleck as Batman. I'm so happy Nolan will have nothing really to do with this film I'm doing back flips. I don't care if his movies made a billion, they were full of unnecessary violence! Violence that gave an unstable idiot permission t shoot up a theater just like one of his characters, The Joker, does in his movies.

    It's a stupid superhero movie. Who the hell cares who puts on tights and a mask? It's ridiculous for grown men to get on Twitter and cry like a bunch of babies. Anyone can put on that costume but it's about the script.

    Ben fits the Wayne profile. He's good looking and he certainly can brood. He'll do fine. You idiots owe Matt Damon an apology too for including him in this mess of a protest.

    GROW UP BOYS!!! IT'S NOT THAT SERIOUS.

  • Rik | August 26, 2013 10:19 PM

    Chick flicks aren't that serious either. Or Twilight movies. Or reality shows about squabbling women. We don't quibble about your right to enjoy them. I don't think that's generous, I think that's fair.

    Those characters don't have a fraction of the fan base of characters nearly 100 years old. Some people do care about characterization, and not just base drama for drama's sake.

    Fanboys crying? A broad generalization. And who will cry for Carrie and her friends, on their next adventure into shoe-shopping land?

    I really don't care. If you do, that's great. I don't tell adults how to act.

    You should try that sometime

  • DE | August 26, 2013 3:21 PM

    @Fanboys crying: Super well said. Thumbs up from me.

  • Kcor | August 26, 2013 3:07 PM

    Your talking about grown men that probably has a very standard family life with not much exitment. Movies are entertaining and mind relief from the hard working jobs we have and taking care of our kids. If you though it was a stupid superhero to you, we'll it was a damn good movie for me and appreciates to see more great m oveis by Nolan. don't judge people because they have opinions like you....

  • blah | August 26, 2013 2:19 PM

    You're an idiot. Don't breed.

  • Static | August 26, 2013 2:35 AMReply

    His acting, we've seen afflecks entire acting range for the past 20 years or so, and none of it suggests he is even remotely capable of doing justice to a iconic and layered character that is Bruce Wayne/batman. He just does not seem appropriate. Understandably Keaton and ledger were both met with similar distaste in casting but unlike Ben, a person could look at both actors and know that somehow there is untapped potential to perform an outstanding role. Both thy portrayal of batman and joker respectfully are unparalleled to others. Again I say, within Ben afflecks entire acting career, he's shown that he is better behind the script or camera rather than star, and if you refer me to "the town" or "Argo" then acknowledge the fact that he is a much better actor when he is directing, because he knows where he is goon with the story and how he wants it portrayed. Under the guidance of another director he doesn't outperform or interprets ideas well.
    Of all actors, Ben Affleck is by far the most inappropriate one to take on the comic hero that has so many fans waiting for the prefect actor to don the iconic cape and cowl.
    I just don't think affleck will do well in this role. Despite his career growth.

  • Phlegmbot | August 31, 2013 2:41 AM

    I agree with you...but consider this: What if the Batman they do is far, FAR removed from the Nolan Batman...different from the grim, one-note character currently in the comics right now...WHAT IF...the Batman they utilize is closer to the Englehart and Rogers Batman, somewhere between that and Brave & the Bold Batman.

    IF they do that, THAT's a Batman Affleck can play. He absolutely canNOT do grim & gritty. He's not good at it -- he comes off, well, effeminate (see: Daredevil). But he can do...affable. He can do born-to-be-a-leader, lighter-touch Batman. A Batman who means business but can be wry and smarmy.

    That could work.

  • Daniel | August 26, 2013 1:09 AMReply

    Why don't they have Matt Damon portray Superman, since he actually has some muscle definition, and the two can vent some personal issues.

  • berk | August 25, 2013 9:58 PMReply

    I hope two superheroes means there will be twice as much 9/11 porn and unseen and assumed civilian casualties for babymen to write "that's not MY Superman/Batman". Then they will finally realize those character's aren't theirs, they are Warner Bros'.

  • Gabe Toro | August 26, 2013 3:08 AM

    The real Gabe here. Kudos.

  • sklar | August 25, 2013 7:10 PMReply

    True nerdy comic fans will rush to see baffleckman, others will rely on word of mouth. I truly wish Tom Weston-Jones was cast as Batman because he's a better actor (IMO) and his lips were made for that mask.

  • Joe | August 25, 2013 6:00 PMReply

    Man of Steel was a true interpretation of Superman. Even him killing Zod is true as he was saving the lives of humans on his adopted planet. Which shows him choosing Earth over Krypton. Also the action in the movie was so true to what it would be like if people who had superhuman strength would fight like. Especially the Smallville action scenes. Them attacking the jet fighters. C'mon, that was awesome.

    People bitch about Superman Returns. He didn't punch anyone. Then when you give people what they want they are still not satisfied.

    And to the Ben Affleck hate. Bruce Wayne/Batman isn't Hamlet. People need to calm down. It's a damn Comic Book character. Ben is tall, has dark hair, most women find him attractive, and he's busy getting all jacked at Gym Jones courtesy of Zach Snyder. Actually when you look at him and Bruce Wayne in the Comic Book he's the only Batman that actually looks like Bruce Wayne from the books.

  • caro | August 25, 2013 5:29 PMReply

    I don't understand why Batman needs Ben Affleck( a very very famous bland actor but a better director)

  • billy | August 25, 2013 9:47 PM

    Bruce Wayne is a pretty bland character. His conflict is all internal which manifests itself when he becomes batman. I didn't realize you need a young DeNiro or Pacino to portray the very deep character of Batman.

  • Luke | August 25, 2013 4:07 PMReply

    Lets leave everything from 'Man of Steel' aside and say Snyder is great technically- even than the Editing was rubbish on that film, if he can't even get that right aahmmm well..

  • Luke | August 25, 2013 4:06 PMReply

    Lets leave everything from 'Man of Steel' aside and say Snyder is great technically- even than the Editing was rubbish on that film, if he can't even get that right aahmmm well..

  • STONEBALL_JACKSON | August 25, 2013 3:43 PMReply

    Why don't you lazy shit-fucks update the picture and remove Bale? Too busy suckin' dick and NOT reading proofreading articles to photoshop Affleck in or use one of the many images already available? Or is that kind of manipulation beneath the Playlist cause it's not an activity that involves gargling Ryan Gosling's cum?

    Either way, fuck every one of you. CUNTS.

  • Logan | August 27, 2013 1:12 PM

    Shut up Faggot.

  • Alan B | August 26, 2013 4:33 AM

    Throwing around demands and threats? Classic Gabe!

  • GAbe Toro | August 26, 2013 3:09 AM

    I'm gonna find you and block you, Stoneball Jackson. Temme where do you live?

  • DG | August 25, 2013 8:21 PM

    Itd be funny if this comment turned out to be written by Ben Aflfleck.

  • DG | August 25, 2013 8:20 PM

    Itd be funny if this comment turned out to be written by Ben Aflfleck.

  • LOL | August 25, 2013 5:11 PM

    Yeah, we'll photoshop Affleck's face under the mask and get right on that for you.

  • Mark | August 25, 2013 3:28 PMReply

    Huh. I couldn't care less really. Man of Steel was a disaster and if Snyder is at the helm then the sequel will follow suit. Seems a shame for Affleck to ruin his upwards career trajectory by appearing in this trash. He must have been offered a LOT of money. I wonder which will be the bigger creative disaster, this or Bad Reboot's Episode VII?

  • Oogle monster | August 25, 2013 3:15 PMReply

    I can't see Nolan sitting around and dealing with this mess. I really wish the news was that Affleck was directing and co-starring. I don't even care if he's Batman. I just care that Snyder is still involved which spells DISASTER.

  • CB | August 25, 2013 3:06 PMReply

    Of course Nolan is done. Duh! Man of Steel was just him being a loyal to his friend David Goyer, helping him get a shot on Superman.

  • ? | August 25, 2013 2:21 PMReply

    How does the Internet have a short memory for something that happened 24 years ago? 60% of the Internet was either never born or too young then. And 99% of the Internet wasn't even on the Internet when Keaton was announced to be Batman. Could you stop with the short term memory phrase about Keaton? It provides your writing and opinion in this article with zero credibility/value.

  • The Letter To Variety section exploded | August 26, 2013 3:10 AM

    Haha

  • BEF | August 25, 2013 5:46 PM

    Ha, I was thinking the same thing ... the internet exploded at the Keaton casting in 1988?

  • 3:16 | August 25, 2013 2:16 PMReply

    Director Ben Affleck - Good
    Blockbuster Ben Affleck - Ugh

  • Chango Loco | August 25, 2013 1:09 PMReply

    "Could starring as Batman be a way for him to test the blockbuster waters, and seeing how that machinery works as an actor before committing as a director? Time will tell."

    Do you REALLY think Ben Affleck needs to test the blockbusters waters?!? Have you seen anything he's done prior to THE TOWN and ARGO?

  • YARBough | August 26, 2013 9:19 PM

    Yeah that sentence is really dumb.

  • Dan S | August 25, 2013 1:17 PM

    Ben Affleck is not a blockbuster actor. Gigli was made completely on that assumption and we know how that turned out.

  • D | August 25, 2013 1:03 PMReply

    Well I for one tend to think that Affleck's involvement in the character is good news.
    I mean Goyer and Snyder left alone, now "that" would have been a disaster (pun intended).

Email Updates