Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Shadowman wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:If I may reiterate my post from the other thread: Now Matt Damon HAS to play Robin.

NO, it has to be the Matt Damon puppet from Team America.

Well, we can give him a try as Batman, it's not like anything of value will be damaged.

People complained about Heath Ledger as the Joker, as well as the Joker's design, and about Anne Hathaway as Catwoman. And they both knocked it out of the park, so anything's possible.

At least they had more Oscars to their names and a better reputation... All Affleck has is the one Oscar from Argo and basically no other major credit.

prowl123 wrote:At least they had more Oscars to their names and a better reputation... All Affleck has is the one Oscar from Argo and basically no other major credit.

He has tons of nominations, though, many for Best Picture, not to mention Gone Baby Gone, The Town, and Argo are all really good movies. (94% for the first two, 96% for Argo, on Rotten Tomatoes) And he's got an Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay for Good Will Hunting.

The amount of awards doesn't really say much about how good someone will play a role, neither does their reputation. "Good" actors have flops, and "Bad" actors have gems.
Its all about how you look at the actor's acting style.
For example, lets use Keanu Reeves, or Shia Lebeouf. Each of these two are exactly the same in every movie they are in. They dont change it up at all. But their personalities better suit certain films characters. Matrix trilogy? Good. It didn't demand much from Keanu other than that he be Keanu. The Day The Earth Stood Still. HORRIBLE. Never see it. Its the definition of boring. Constantine is also a good film. Has both the above mentioned actors in it, they play off eachother and it works And to throw Shia a bone Disturbia was pretty good, and he has his moments in the TF films. And Holes I guess.

My point is, if you keep the actors style in mind, it may not be all bad.

I haven't seen anything with Ben Afleck in it I dont think, so I can't apply that logic here.

BeastProwl wrote:Constantine is also a good film.

Considering the character is a snarky, blonde, British guy, Keanu was not a particularly solid choice for the role...

Shadowman wrote:

prowl123 wrote:At least they had more Oscars to their names and a better reputation... All Affleck has is the one Oscar from Argo and basically no other major credit.

He has tons of nominations, though, many for Best Picture, not to mention Gone Baby Gone, The Town, and Argo are all really good movies. (94% for the first two, 96% for Argo, on Rotten Tomatoes) And he's got an Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay for Good Will Hunting.

oh I didn't know he wrote Good Will Hunting. That gives me a little bit of hope for him but I really don't feel that hr fits the role.

prowl123 wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

prowl123 wrote:At least they had more Oscars to their names and a better reputation... All Affleck has is the one Oscar from Argo and basically no other major credit.

He has tons of nominations, though, many for Best Picture, not to mention Gone Baby Gone, The Town, and Argo are all really good movies. (94% for the first two, 96% for Argo, on Rotten Tomatoes) And he's got an Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay for Good Will Hunting.

oh I didn't know he wrote Good Will Hunting. That gives me a little bit of hope for him but I really don't feel that hr fits the role.

That's what they said about Michael Keaton. And then he fit that role really damn good.

Shadowman wrote: Considering the character is a snarky, blonde, British guy, Keanu was not a particularly solid choice for the role...

I haven't read whatever material Constantine was based off of, so I thought it was good. Hell I used to think the Scott Pilgrim movie was good too. But then I read the books like a week ago and just can't enjoy it much... (Latest to the party I know)

I'll concede I hate it when film makers base movies off of books, or novels and just butcher it.

With comics/cartoons you get wiggle room, since they've been recreated and retold so many times, but if your basing it off of a book, or a novel that hasn't been redone over and over and over the you should aim for accuracy, right? I wonder how many other butchered films I enjoy without knowing it. Thats a scary thing to think about.

Shadowman wrote:

BeastProwl wrote:Constantine is also a good film.

Considering the character is a snarky, blonde, British guy, Keanu was not a particularly solid choice for the role...

I have nevr read the comics,but i liked the film.

BeastProwl wrote:

Shadowman wrote: Considering the character is a snarky, blonde, British guy, Keanu was not a particularly solid choice for the role...

I haven't read whatever material Constantine was based off of, so I thought it was good. Hell I used to think the Scott Pilgrim movie was good too. But then I read the books like a week ago and just can't enjoy it much... (Latest to the party I know)

See with me, it was the other way around, I started reading the comics after the trailers popped up, and I loved the movie.

BeastProwl wrote:I'll concede I hate it when film makers base movies off of books, or novels and just butcher it.

With comics/cartoons you get wiggle room, since they've been recreated and retold so many times, but if your basing it off of a book, or a novel that hasn't been redone over and over and over the you should aim for accuracy, right? I wonder how many other butchered films I enjoy without knowing it. Thats a scary thing to think about.

I'll just say if you were a fan of the show, the Last Airbender is even more godawful than it is to non-fans. A genuine betrayal of the source material.

It's not always a bad thing. Look at Akira, and if you haven't, do so now. It's a 120-minute adaptation of a 2122-page manga, it ends far earlier into the story than the manga, and the story is, at many points, only superficially similar. It's also considered one of the single greatest works in anime, if not animation in general. It's not always a bad thing: You need a butcher to get a fine steak, after all.

Ive seen Akira, its required viewing, and animated and told so well it holds up even today. Its just, Akira struck a good balance. And by balance I mean it was so awesome no-one cared about the innacuracy (Kinda like the first FMA series). But sometimes it gets taken too far.

I know its been discussed, and you even like it for some odd reason, but Dragonball Evolution is a good example of a butchered film, made worse by the fact that the guy playing piccolo is a DBZ fan. I mean, If I was playing a character in a movie like that, ide at least say something about how stupid the whole thing is.

And then looking at Man of Steel, I just think, "Thats what Dragonball Evolution could have been".
I dont think it needed to be accurate, but come on, they didnt even try. And whats worse? Shiamalon (or however you spell it) TRIED with the last airbender. You could see the effort that went into it.

In the end, bad acting and betrayal of the source material sunk it. batman and superman dont need to worry about that.

BeastProwl wrote:I know its been discussed, and you even like it for some odd reason, but Dragonball Evolution is a good example of a butchered film, made worse by the fact that the guy playing piccolo is a DBZ fan.

Yeah, like might be a bit of a strong word. Not unlike ROTF, subsequent viewings only made me see all the little flaws.

BeastProwl wrote:I mean, If I was playing a character in a movie like that, ide at least say something about how stupid the whole thing is.

Funny story, the actor who play...ugh, Ah-ng, (Every time they mispronounced a name, I died a little inside) actually was a fan of the show and knew damn well how he should play Aang.

BeastProwl wrote:I dont think it needed to be accurate, but come on, they didnt even try. And whats worse? Shiamalon (or however you spell it) TRIED with the last airbender. You could see the effort that went into it.

And a lot of the effort was unnecessary! Especially the way bending was portrayed; in the series proper, it was very naturalistic, an extension of the users even slightest movements that made it flow perfectly alongside them. In the movie, it was the result of a lot of wild arm-flailing to so much as make a bit of water float around. They literally put far more effort into the bending than they needed to.

BeastProwl wrote:In the end, bad acting and betrayal of the source material sunk it. batman and superman dont need to worry about that.

On the one hand, Superman and Batman have 75 years of varying source material to draw from. Sure, there are some sources many writers and especially fans would prefer (Mostly the DCAU) but ultimately any writer would have a lot of choices for variety. (Assuming you don't do something as stupid as calling the Joker, one of the most iconic supervillains of all time, "overused."

On the other hand, Batman & Robin still happened and that had bad acting, a betrayal of the source material (Bane as a mindless brute!) AND godawful costume and set design.

Batman and Robin wasn't a thing. It never happened.

BeastProwl wrote:Batman and Robin wasn't a thing. It never happened.

It was a thing, and we need to accept and learn from these mistakes if we are to avoid making them in the future.

Shadowman wrote:

BeastProwl wrote:Batman and Robin wasn't a thing. It never happened.

It was a thing, and we need to accept and learn from these mistakes if we are to avoid making them in the future.

I don't know if I should be proud or ashamed to say I kind of liked Batman and Robin...

prowl123 wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

BeastProwl wrote:Batman and Robin wasn't a thing. It never happened.

It was a thing, and we need to accept and learn from these mistakes if we are to avoid making them in the future.

I don't know if I should be proud or ashamed to say I kind of liked Batman and Robin...

Ashamed, definitely. I mean, I liked it when I was a kid, and looking back, it makes perfect sense why a stupid 11-year-old like I was back then would enjoy it. These days, I see it for the insult to the franchise that it is.

Shadowman wrote:

prowl123 wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

BeastProwl wrote:Batman and Robin wasn't a thing. It never happened.

It was a thing, and we need to accept and learn from these mistakes if we are to avoid making them in the future.

I don't know if I should be proud or ashamed to say I kind of liked Batman and Robin...

Ashamed, definitely. I mean, I liked it when I was a kid, and looking back, it makes perfect sense why a stupid 11-year-old like I was back then would enjoy it. These days, I see it for the insult to the franchise that it is.

I'll need to re-watch it then

Who necro-bumped this thread?

Some SOB is gonna get reported!

Oh yeah Ben Affleck sucks.

Blast Cannon wrote:Who necro-bumped this thread?

Some SOB is gonna get reported!

Oh yeah Ben Affleck sucks.

There's a rumor floating around that due to the massive negative backlash, they might not have him at all.

Also there's a rumor going around that Bryan Cranston is going to be Lex Luthor.

Shadowman wrote:

Blast Cannon wrote:Who necro-bumped this thread?

Some SOB is gonna get reported!

Oh yeah Ben Affleck sucks.

There's a rumor floating around that due to the massive negative backlash, they might not have him at all.

Also there's a rumor going around that Bryan Cranston is going to be Lex Luthor.

Bryan Cranston is perfect. This gets all of my yes.

Ben Affleck does not get all of my yes. I really hope they pull him. He doesn't work with this role at all.

A thread I created over a year ago is still going? New world record for me.

Anyway, I heard the Affleck news too, but I'm on the fence. He's done some great movies, but I just don't see him being Batman. Actually, I just don't see him being a good superhero. Maybe he'll surprise me though.

Well, time to dust this baby off with some news:

First, old news, Gal Gadot will be playing Wonder Woman alongside Afleck's Batman and Cavill's Superman.

Second, and this is actually recent news, Jeremy Irons will be playing Alfred, while Lex Luthor will be played by...Jesse Eisenberg?

...what?

I genuinely dont think I have ever been so disappointed with a casting decision. I love Eisenberg as an actor, especially in Zombieland, but he is not right at all for this role.

As for Gal Gadot, she should be fine.

Still not happy about Ben Affleck.

...the ****?

BeastProwl wrote:...the ****?

It's DC. What do you expect?

Burn wrote:

BeastProwl wrote:...the ****?

It's DC. What do you expect?

I dont know...not this.

Wait. Maybe he's just playing a young flashback Lex Luthor? I wouldn't mind that so much.