FROM CLOONEY TO AFFLECK: BATMAN ADVICE

It's been reported, and I guess made official, that Ben Affleck is the new Batman and will star in the sequel to Man of Steel. I like Ben Affleck, I thought he was okay as Daredevil and I thought he did a great job playing George Reeves in Hollywoodland. I think that Affleck is not really the guy for the Batman role. Affleck just isn't that brooding, even when he did Daredevil it seemed like he was forcing his tortured portion. I am also assuming he got some advice from George Clooney and that advice was probably dispensed over drinks in a hot tub with Danny DeVito. I assume the conversation went like this:

Clooney: So they finally found someone worthy of my role.

Affleck: Yeah, wicked awesome.

Clooney: You have a challenge ahead of you, my nipple Batman was incredible.

Affleck: Irregardless I will be be the man.

Clooney: Who will be Superman?

Affleck: That Henry bastard, he's wicked good.

Clooney: Who will be Alfred?

Affleck: Either Mel Gibson or Bob Saget.

DeVito: Hey fuckers Rhea can be a great Catwoman.

Clooney: Remember the suits must always have nipples. Any word on Matt?

Affleck: He may play the part of The Demon.

Clooney: Hahahah, fantastic.

I'm sure that's not really what happened but when you think of the fact that George Clooney and Ben Affleck teamed up to bring back the porno beard, anything can happen. Batman is a popular character but it takes a special kind of person to pull it off. I thought Bale was good even though he gave Batman some serious throat cancer. Let's see what happens down the line, good luck to Ben Affleck.

CAN SUPERMAN EVER REALLY DELIVER?

Now that Man of Steel is coming out it's fair to ask if Superman can once again deliver, as it did once before. I think it's a tall order especially considering a number of factors that have a bearing on the success of Superman. Superman's costume, his attitude and the level of willingness to engage and less than kind practices, all matter. People want to bring up the success of the original 1940's serials and the 1950's series when talking about Superman. In the 1940's the serials actually combined animation with film and while it was a fairly new concept Superman was still a comic book.

The 1950's series with George Reeves did not make use of the source material and as such created fairly self containing stories that were usually resolved within a 30 minute time frame. You flash forward 20 years and you have the late Christopher Reeve taking over the mantle with a film that broke ground. The reason why Reeve's Superman was such a hit was because there were no major releases focusing on comic book characters in the 1970's. Everything marble did was televised and cheap, just look at Spiderman. While DC had a focus on television as evidenced by Batman, and the 1979 Legend of the Superheroes which was extremely campy.

Superman was box office gold because there was nothing like it. When you examine the series of Superman films you realize it was the only superhero attempting to go beyond the comic into an extended story with real conflict. When the 1980's rolled around the climate changed and Superman was considered a relic of a by gone era. While Superman remained strong in comics the idea of another film was not really a consideration until after The Death of Superman became the biggest selling comic book up to that point. For something close to fifteen years a franchise was proposed and Superman once again became the talk of the town, because of lost revenue.

While Superman was a hit on television with Smallville there was talk of a film and that film was finally made. Superman Returns was hailed as the re birth of the man of steel but really it was an attempt to modernize the 1970's series with a similar formula. An unknown actor was brought in to take the role while established stars served as support. Ultimately it was sad to see that the best performance came from the digital re creation of Marlon Brando's cut footage from the original. Superman did not really make it's money back, in fact Superman it lost money. With Man of Steel coming out it's fair to ask if Superman can once again do what it did in the 1970's in terms of the box office.

Man of Steel looks darker and somewhat darker and grittier, like it's trying hard to copy the formula for the new Batman series. The problem I see is that DC still has Superman as the perennially good boy scout that really only works for the government. I know this isn't the fact but I think Superman will be truly successful when it strays from the squeaky clean image of the character into a darker story. As a Superman fan though, I do hope the movie succeeds and creates an opportunity for exploring darker territory.