When I saw the announcement that Ben Affleck would be donning Batman’s cape and cowl for Zack Snyder’s upcoming Batman/Superman crossover, I had to take a moment to process the synapses that skittered across my brain.
First and foremost, I’m a Batman fan. I loved seeing him don a pair of kryptonite gloves and beat Superman into the ground during Frank Miller’s “The Dark Knight Strikes Again.” I love that he has a contingency plan for each member of the Justice League of America just in case they go rogue. And I love the fact that he’s just a regular guy who has disciplined himself to such a point that he can hold his own with some of the galaxy’s most powerful heroes. So yes, it’s important that a movie about such an iconic character gets it right.
The next thought process was tricky. I, like many others, have painful memories of sitting through 2003’s “Daredevil,” and Ben Affleck is inextricably linked to that broken pile of awful. So, in a rash application of the transitive property, I reasoned thusly: “Daredevil” = suckiness and Ben Affleck = “Daredevil,” hence Ben Affleck = suckiness. If Ben Affleck plays Batman, the equation must end with Batman = suckiness. Right? Well, not exactly. Not only was my equation an unsound demonstration of the transitive property, it’s tough to overlook the fact that Ben Affleck directed and starred in “Argo,” which cleaned up at last year’s Oscars.
After I collected my thoughts, about the announcement, I decided that I would maintain an open mind. If we live in a world where the guy who wrote and directed “Sucker Punch” can helm an epic film crossover like “Batman vs. Superman,” surely a Golden Globe-nominated actor can play a complicated character like Batman.
Just because we have a profound and oft misunderstood love of a particular character, story, or spaceship does not mean we get to take ownership of it.
There’s still a lot of nerd-hate towards Batfleck, however. Take Seth Green’s recent appearance on “Larry King Now,” for example. Green, who has made several contributions to the geekscape via his work on “Robot Chicken” and “Family Guy,” made his opinion on the casting decision very clear, and, long story short, he’s not happy about it (check out the video if you want the long story). Though there are many aspects of this interview that bother me, I think it hints at a larger issue within the our collective geek community, and that issue is this: Just because we have a profound and oft misunderstood love of a particular character, story, or spaceship does not mean we get to take ownership of it. At the end of the day, there’s not much more we can do than leave these stories with the professionals and hope for the best.
We’re living in a golden age of geek culture—a time in which knowing a lot about sci-fi and comic books is actually kinda cool. I’ve seen all of my favorite superheroes get film adaptations, and I’m glad that pop culture has finally recognized the beauty and sophistication of these stories. Since I want this to last for as long as possible, I’m not about to write something off before it even has a chance to get started. The preemptive criticism that we’re seeing with Ben Affleck’s casting as Batman is what leads people to deny themselves some fantastic additions to their nerd arsenals. If I had listened to the haters who were against the “Harry Potter” books because of their popularity, I would have denied myself one of the best fantasy stories ever written. If I had beef with the fact that some upstart named Ronald D. Moore had the audacity to cast Katee Sackhoff as the originally male character of Starbuck in a reinvention of “Battlestar Galactica,” I would have missed out on one of the most memorable female characters in science fiction history.
I won’t disagree that the Batman/Superman film is up against a lot of obstacles. But it’s precisely those obstacles that could make the franchise into something worthy of DC’s most legendary characters. My vote? Come 2016, let’s just watch the thing and judge it for what it is, rather than spend all this time judging it for what we think it’s going to be.