Board Thread:DC Universe Discussion/@comment-3974095-20130611233337/@comment-1895174-20130823210928

Thailog wrote: LoveWaffle wrote: there's no real correlation between the quality of the movie and how much say the actors have on the creative process Umm... big egos... clashing... result... bad. Not an ironclad assumption. For one, you're assuming every time there are people with different ideas on the creative process they'll naturally end up clashing, which has no basis in reality. Just limiting ourselves to comic book movies, this has been the case with almost all of them made in the - juggling ideas through actors, the director, the producer, other studio heads, and, increasingly, some overarching guru to make sure all these properties work together. So far, the only major clash between the actor and someone else was between Edward Norton, a notoriously difficult person to work with, and Kevin Feige, and even that didn't derail the movie. If you want to go further back, there's also Wesley Snipes and David Goyer, but that's an extreme case (and the movie probably wouldn't have been good if they were best buddies anyway). Iron Man 3 did pretty well despite having to be filtered through the Disney execs, Kevin Feige, Joss Whedon, Shane Black, RDJ, a few other cast members, and, although in a limited way, the people working on the other MCU films.

Actors not having any input on the characters they portray is frankly a situation that rarely exists. LoveWaffle wrote: as you say, he's really good when he's directing himself Don't misquote me. I said "is only half-decent". Hugely different from "he's really good".

Bottom line is, Affleck has no business interfering with the creative process. He's not being hired as the director or producer. So, your wishful thinking based rationale (and the Chris Evans comparison) is just an overreaching extrapolation to further your belief that Ben is a good cast choice.

You're positive? Great. Allow me to be wallow on the "wait and see, though there were plenty of other safer choices" pool. I wouldn't say "hugely different", but whatever. If all you can say of him in The Town, Argo, and Gone Baby Gone is that's he's "only half-decent", I take it you haven't seen them. And if you have, it's quite a contrarian opinion.

Bottom line is, Affleck knows what he can do, and WB would not have hired him if they didn't expect him to have a take on what he'll be doing as Batman. My rationale isn't based on wishful thinking (or just a comparison to Chris Evans, that's just one example among many), but on what I've seen Affleck do in the past few years. As is the case with many people, your pessimistic and contrarian opinion on Affleck's career only serves to justify the knee-jerk reaction to his casting.

Is Affleck the best choice for the role? No, probably not. Neither was Mr. Mom, yet that went much better than expected. But he's far from the worst.