BATMAN starring directed/produced by Matt Reeves (2018)
6 6

967 posts in this topic

80,945 posts

Casey Affleck thought he would be funny on a Baseball radio show interview.

Now the studio and Affleck are having to address this was just a joke, poorly delivered.

Ben Affleck And Casey Affleck Reps Address Batman Comments

Quote

For context, rumors flared up again after Ben Affleck's brother Casey Affleck spoke with the Dale & Holley with Keefe radio show. He said Ben “was an okay Batman. No, I thought he was great. He was great. He’s a hero, so he had something to channel and work with there. But he’s not going to do [The Batman], I don’t think. Sorry to say. … Is that breaking news? Because I was just kind of making that up, I don’t know.”

 

It didn't take long for that to make the rounds though, which prompted Casey's rep to clear up his client's meaning (via Buzzfeed). “He was having fun with the folks at the Red Sox game — where he threw out the first pitch in support of the Jimmy Fund — and not speaking from a place of firsthand knowledge.”

 

Ben's rep said that nothing has changed, and that “he'll continue to be Batman as long as the studio will have him.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
80,945 posts

Matt Reeves on ‘The Batman’: “It’s a standalone, this isn’t part of the extended universe”

the-batman-matt-reeves.jpg?quality=85&st

Quote

A couple of days before Comic-Con last month, The Batman director Matt Reeves was on “The Business” podcast hosted by The Hollywood Reporter’s Kim Masters. Reeves spoke about his position on making the movie, and had an interesting comment about how it was pitched to him by Warner Bros.

 

“When they approached me, what they said was: ‘look, it’s a standalone, this isn’t part of the extended universe,” Reeves said. He also confirmed that he has an idea for a trilogy in his head. Reeves said he’s “totally fine” not making a Batman movie if Warner Bros. doesn’t want to make the movie that he wants to make. So far, though, he said he and WB have been on the same page.

 

The Hollywood Reporter’s Kim Masters interviewed Matt Reeves for this podcast on July 17th. On July 21st she published the article about Ben Affleck’s Batman future coming to end soon. Make of that what you will, but it’s certainly interesting timing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,913 posts
6 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

Think this is a mistake at this point.  The public is going to be very confused by this, especially if Afleck remains as Batman.  Many were already upset by the recasting that has happened with the characters that have had TV appearances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
391 posts

Looks like Casey was more on point than we all thought or wanted to think? This is just getting flat out upsetting. How can nobody at WB figure out a way to remove their heads from their rear ends. It's just sad and disheartening at this point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
80,945 posts
44 minutes ago, MDR123 said:

http://comicbook.com/dc/2017/08/24/is-the-batman-not-dceu-matt-reeves-affleck-/ 

 

At least someone has the balls to step up and clear things up without more rumors running wild. 

See that? A whole 'cats and dogs living together-end of days' excitement and it turned out to be a writer misquoting Reeves.

:applause:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
391 posts
36 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

See that? A whole 'cats and dogs living together-end of days' excitement and it turned out to be a writer misquoting Reeves.

:applause:

Still, that's only 2 confirmations (potentially 3 if we're to take this Scoresese Joker thing seriously). I'm hesitantly following WB/DC because I want them to succeed but they need some PR folks ASAP to take hold of them, wring a few necks and even if they don't have a vision behind the scenes, get a formulated message out to the movie going public to clear things up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
80,945 posts
2 minutes ago, MDR123 said:

Still, that's only 2 confirmations (potentially 3 if we're to take this Scoresese Joker thing seriously). I'm hesitantly following WB/DC because I want them to succeed but they need some PR folks ASAP to take hold of them, wring a few necks and even if they don't have a vision behind the scenes, get a formulated message out to the movie going public to clear things up. 

That I agree with.

You would think with Kevin Feige being good friends with Geoff Johns, he'd take him aside and say, "Hey pal, can I make some suggestions?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
391 posts

YESSS!!!!!! That's all I've been saying for the last 24 hour mostly in the posts I've made. I just want some solidified ideas rather than websites and twitter folks running wild with rumors. Give us a Superman solo sequel. Give us some potential release dates for the SDCC announced slate, tell us maybe WHERE these "non-universe" rumors got started and EXPLAIN IT! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28,941 posts

Doesn't it seem like there is an concerted effort to put doubt/speculation/rumors constantly on this character/film

Every week there is some "fake" news story that needs to debunked 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
80,945 posts

Especially because of Ben Affleck's involvement. At least, it feels like that.

But some are so fanatical over what they like and expect, they make it a point to bash or detract from the DC movies. Like the Wonder Woman fake WB employee letter, outlining what a 'known' hot mess the movie was going to be. Who else would put that much effort into these smear stories when it turns out there is no truth to the rumor?

At least with the BvS later rumors that the film was too long and packed with too much details, there was truth to this. A tighter and more straightforward story would have pulled in more movie fans, and probably appeased the critics' concerns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,913 posts
2 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

Especially because of Ben Affleck's involvement. At least, it feels like that.

But some are so fanatical over what they like and expect, they make it a point to bash or detract from the DC movies. Like the Wonder Woman fake WB employee letter, outlining what a 'known' hot mess the movie was going to be. Who else would put that much effort into these smear stories when it turns out there is no truth to the rumor?

At least with the BvS later rumors that the film was too long and packed with too much details, there was truth to this. A tighter and more straightforward story would have pulled in more movie fans, and probably appeased the critics' concerns.

But as has been stated. WB is doing a horrific job with rumor control.  It has become impossibly to devine what pieces are true, exaggerated, or flat out false.  Most of the WW rumors turned out to be false. Many of the BvS turned out to be somewhat true.

 

Regardless of the validity, WB  needs to find someway to get ahead of these rumors and get things on stable ground. Marvel gets the typical leaked plot details, etc. but it is all standard stuff.  It is not this constant flood of negativity. It ultimately has no bearing on film quality, but it shows a front office that appears to be in some measure of disorder, or at least not very good at their job.

Edited by drotto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,950 posts
18 minutes ago, drotto said:

Marvel gets the typical leaked plot details, etc. but it is all standard stuff.  It is not this constant flood of negativity. It ultimately has no bearing on film quality, but it shows a front office that appears to be in some measure of disorder, or at least not very good at their job.

If Marvel movies were turning out as bad as the WB movies you'd be hearing the same constant negative speculation that WB is being subjected to.  After Spider-Man 3 got panned in 2007 there was about a year of negative speculation, but Marvel getting into the production business starting with Iron Man in 2008 and righting the ship so quickly and so continuously ever since quieted all of that chatter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,913 posts
21 minutes ago, fantastic_four said:

If Marvel movies were turning out as bad as the WB movies you'd be hearing the same constant negative speculation that WB is being subjected to.  After Spider-Man 3 got panned in 2007 there was about a year of negative speculation, but Marvel getting into the production business starting with Iron Man in 2008 and righting the ship so quickly and so continuously ever since quieted all of that chatter.

But speculation that a movie is bad is one thing.  Constantly hearing about director changes, rewrites, parts being cut, bad internal previews, cast changes, etc. does not seem to plague Marvel.  Except for the Gambit movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,950 posts
13 minutes ago, drotto said:
37 minutes ago, fantastic_four said:

If Marvel movies were turning out as bad as the WB movies you'd be hearing the same constant negative speculation that WB is being subjected to.  After Spider-Man 3 got panned in 2007 there was about a year of negative speculation, but Marvel getting into the production business starting with Iron Man in 2008 and righting the ship so quickly and so continuously ever since quieted all of that chatter.

But speculation that a movie is bad is one thing.  Constantly hearing about director changes, rewrites, parts being cut, bad internal previews, cast changes, etc. does not seem to plague Marvel.  Except for the Gambit movie.

It's because fans have little reason to second-guess Kevin Feige.  WB had that goodwill with Nolan until he left, but now we've got nobody at WB who any of us are sure can consistently produce quality films, thus the micro-analyzing.  We're all hoping Geoff Johns is that guy, but he hasn't proven it yet.   If Feige produces a set of four or five stinkers in a row like WB has with every film they've done in the past decade not directed by Christopher Nolan or Patty Jenkins, he'll start getting micro-analyzed, too.

We see this to some extent with Marvel in the properties that they don't directly control.  Goodwill with the Sony Spider-Man movies was really drying up, and I, too, crucified Sony's bad executive-level decisions that led to most of those failures.  The idea of a Sony exec telling Sam Raimi that he HAS to use Venom, Sandman, and Green Goblin all in the same film is absolutely ridiculous.  Sam Raimi didn't screw up that film, Sony did by placing restrictions on their director that led to a bad film.  Fox started getting the business from fans after X-Men 3, the FF movies, and the first Wolverine film, but they managed to right the ship with X-Men: First Class, Days of Future Past, Deadpool, and Logan, so "Apocalypse" being a bit of a stinker hasn't dried up the goodwill yet.  But if Deadpool 2 and the next X-Men movie both bomb, all bets are off and expect the industry press and fans to start crucifying them again and the cries of "GIVE THEM BACK TO MARVEL, FOX!" to start over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
80,945 posts
2 hours ago, fantastic_four said:

If Marvel movies were turning out as bad as the WB movies you'd be hearing the same constant negative speculation that WB is being subjected to.  After Spider-Man 3 got panned in 2007 there was about a year of negative speculation, but Marvel getting into the production business starting with Iron Man in 2008 and righting the ship so quickly and so continuously ever since quieted all of that chatter.

See, but that is where Marvel gets a lot of slack because when they deliver a hit, it's huge.

- The Incredible Hulk: They allowed Ed Norton to redo the entire -script because he was a 'real fan' of Hulk. How'd that turn out?

- Thor: The Dark World: Went through three directors - including Patty Jenkins who walked away. A movie you rewatch often?

- Ant-Man: A good movie. But it could have been a superb movie. The MCC driving Edgar Wright batty was a mistake. But they kept most of his -script, having to give him credit for this in the movie. Thank goodness Peyton Reed made it entertaining still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,950 posts
25 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

- The Incredible Hulk: They allowed Ed Norton to redo the entire --script because he was a 'real fan' of Hulk. How'd that turn out?

- Thor: The Dark World: Went through three directors - including Patty Jenkins who walked away. A movie you rewatch often?

- Ant-Man: A good movie. But it could have been a superb movie. The MCC driving Edgar Wright batty was a mistake. But they kept most of his --script, having to give him credit for this in the movie. Thank goodness Peyton Reed made it entertaining still.

You're seeing something the critics didn't since the ratings on all three of those films were good.  I really don't get the "Incredible Hulk" hate; those Hulk vs. Abomination scenes were sublime.  Thor is the least re-watchable of the three, but it was enjoyable.  Certainly the critical ratings on all three films blow ALL of the DC movies away with the exception of the Nolan films, Wonder Woman, and the much-maligned but solid and critically acclaimed "Superman Returns."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
80,945 posts
1 hour ago, fantastic_four said:

You're seeing something the critics didn't since the ratings on all three of those films were good.  I really don't get the "Incredible Hulk" hate; those Hulk vs. Abomination scenes were sublime.  Thor is the least re-watchable of the three, but it was enjoyable.  Certainly the critical ratings on all three films blow ALL of the DC movies away with the exception of the Nolan films, Wonder Woman, and the much-maligned but solid and critically acclaimed "Superman Returns."

Unfortunately, it's not just something I picked up on by myself with The Incredible Hulk, no matter what the critics had to say about it. Though if you read what is posted on Rotten Tomatoes, this movie was rated one of the worst of the MCU films (6.2/10.0).

OUvczXT.png

Within the first six weeks of release, The Incredible Hulk had the highest weekly drop-off rates - twice. Only Cap3/AV2.5 experienced that rate of drop-off so soon for the same movie. And with The Incredible Hulk, it resulted in the worst financial results of all the movies (1.8 X production budget).

JKSJYJg.png

That's not to say what you like is horrible - what others like is better. That's just the reality of the situation. Yet because of the first success of the MCU (Iron Man), there was no fixation on the second movie being a bomb. Leading to an okay Iron Man 2 result, critic-wise (6.5/10.0) and box office-wise (3.1 X production budget).

Now back to your original point how WB/DC does not get the same break, I'm not one of those suggesting there is some conspiracy. There isn't some Disney hidden investment pool to write bad reviews. But I do think the critics were extremely harsh on Man of Steel (6.2/10.0) when movie-goers gave it a 3.9/5.0 and then later with Batman v Superman landing at 4.9/10.0 combined. Sure, BvS was crammed with details and not well edited. But I would watch that over The Incredible Hulk any day - and even more when it is BvS The Ultimate Cut.

Edited by Bosco685

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,646 posts

The Hulk movie with Ed Norton was surprisingly enjoyable to me.  Watched it a few times.  

Thor the dark world I watched once, same with bvs.  No need for me to watch those again.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
6 6