• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Cast The Inevitable Batman Reboot

Captaindemotion said:
Presumably the villain if the piece would be Firefly?
Click to expand...

Inspired!:rommie:

It just occurred to me, the Firefly cast, plus assorted Whedon alumni, might not work for a film. But if there was a new Batman TV series....

Also, Nathan could work as Batman, depending on the tone of the piece. A dark and gritty version....no chance. But something action packed and fun, clever and witty, not quite tongue in cheek, with just a hint of self awareness...he'd be ideal for the role.
 
No one immediately comes to mind for the reboot, but three requisites stand out:
1. He should be under 30.
2. He should have the acting chops to convincingly play the emotionally-scarred vigilante as well as the bored playboy.
3. He should be strong enough to carry his own films (as Batman) but wise enough as an actor to scale it back and be an effective part of an ensemble (Justice League).
 
Dark Gilligan said:
No one immediately comes to mind for the reboot, but three requisites stand out:
1. He should be under 30.
2. He should have the acting chops to convincingly play the emotionally-scarred vigilante as well as the bored playboy.
3. He should be strong enough to carry his own films (as Batman) but wise enough as an actor to scale it back and be an effective part of an ensemble (Justice League).
Click to expand...
So, your first requisite would have eliminated Christian Bale before he started shooting Batman Begins, alongside Michael Keaton before Batman and pretty much every other actor who's ever played Batman.

And incidentally, it also eliminates Joseph Gordon-Levitt now, in case anyone's been wondering, as well as the majority of actors mentioned in this thread, with the exception of Arnie Hammer and... Taylor Lautner.
 
I can see Armie Hammer as Superman but for some reason I have trouble picturing him as Batman.
 
I just thought of a couple more villains. I know they are popular choices and were mentioned when the last couple movies started production, but I still want Phillip Seymour Hoffman as Penguin, David Tennant as The Riddler and Robin Williams as Hugo Strange. They don't have to be in one movie, but I've wanted to see these for years. I think someone mentioned Neil Patrick Harris as The Riddler, and I could see that one working too.
 
Hugo Strange is probably one of the villains not used in a live action adaptation that I'd most want to see, and yep, I totally agree, Robin Williams would be perfect. Probably the only "The Dark Knight Rises" villain rumours that I was really excited about LOL.
 
DevilEyes said:
Dark Gilligan said:
He should be under 30.
Click to expand...
So, your first requisite would have eliminated Christian Bale before he started shooting Batman Begins, alongside Michael Keaton before Batman and pretty much every other actor who's ever played Batman. And incidentally, it also eliminates Joseph Gordon-Levitt now, in case anyone's been wondering, as well as the majority of actors mentioned in this thread, with the exception of Arnie Hammer and... Taylor Lautner.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Bruce Wayne was 22 when he became Batman. I'd like to see someone around the age of 25 or so. Not at all unheard of, since both Christopher Reeve and Henry Cavill were about that age playing Superman. And for the record, Joseph Gordon-Levitt is 31.
 
Actually in Batman: Year One it is established that Bruce is 25 years old, not 22, when he returns to Gotham from his training.

Henry Cavill is actually 29 years old. Christian Bale was 29 or 30 when he was first cast as Bruce Wayne for "Batman Begins". Just because Bruce is 25 doesn't mean the actor has to be as well.
 
I'm talking the long view. A new series of Batman and Justice League films could keep an actor engaged for a good ten years. You want somebody who's still viable at the end of the run, not just the here and now. Look how old and paunchy Nathan Fillian and David Boreanaz are today. Start at 25, end at 35.
 
I agree they should plan for a 10 year run, so, it would be wise to target 35 or younger for Bruce/Batman, but, I don't think they should automatically rule out a little older if someone perfect comes along, there's alot of 50 year olds in Hollywood that are still pretty young. Ben Browder will be 50 in December, and though obviously you wouldn't want to plan on him for another 10 years, he still is young enough to play a Batman character today (Not that he's necessarily right for the part, just an example of someone still young enough at 50 to be able to do the role)
 
DevilEyes said:
Dark Gilligan said:
No one immediately comes to mind for the reboot, but three requisites stand out:
1. He should be under 30.
2. He should have the acting chops to convincingly play the emotionally-scarred vigilante as well as the bored playboy.
3. He should be strong enough to carry his own films (as Batman) but wise enough as an actor to scale it back and be an effective part of an ensemble (Justice League).
Click to expand...
So, your first requisite would have eliminated Christian Bale before he started shooting Batman Begins, alongside Michael Keaton before Batman and pretty much every other actor who's ever played Batman.

And incidentally, it also eliminates Joseph Gordon-Levitt now, in case anyone's been wondering, as well as the majority of actors mentioned in this thread, with the exception of Arnie Hammer and... Taylor Lautner.
Click to expand...

But whether or not you agree with Dark Gilligan, he's entitled to his view of how the reboot should take shape and what the actors in it should be like. We had 30 something actors playing the lead in every other Batman movie - maybe it is time for a younger actor. What would be wrong with casting it in such a way as to distinguish it from the other movies?

As it happens, I'd be content to cast an actor who can pass for younger (in Begins Bale was 31 playing Bruce Wayne at varied ages between his teens and 30), but I'd have to reluctantly agree that having a Batman aged 30 at the start of his career was perhaps a questionable decision - bearing in mind that that's an age where many athletes and sportspeople are viewed as having their best days behind them.
 
As far as Pro-Athletes having their best days behind them by age 30, I think that's mostly because they've been taking a beating in their sport for 15+ years already, ratehr than by virtue of the fact that they're 30 years old (not to take away from your legitimate point that it's a legitimate interpretation to hire a younger actor, especially for the start of his career)
 
^True. But, even as a 40 year-old who likes to think he's fairly fit for his age, I'd have to admit that someone doing the sort of stuff Batman does is probably going to need to start doing it in his 20s...

And to be fair to Dark Gilligan, he merely said that the actor 'should' be under 30, not 'must' be.
 
Captaindemotion said:
As it happens, I'd be content to cast an actor who can pass for younger (in Begins Bale was 31 playing Bruce Wayne at varied ages between his teens and 30), but I'd have to reluctantly agree that having a Batman aged 30 at the start of his career was perhaps a questionable decision - bearing in mind that that's an age where many athletes and sportspeople are viewed as having their best days behind them.
Click to expand...
That comparison really makes very little sense. Sports and acting are two completely different things. The requirement for an actor is to act, and secondary, to look the part (which makeup and camerawork can help a lot with), rather than, say, to run really fast across the court to catch the ball coming from the other side of the net. By your logic, they should be casting top athletes in all the roles that require any action scenes (despite the fact that most actors don't do their own stunts... and it's not like stuntpeople are that young, either) and the top actors in Hollywood blockbusters should be those just out of their teens and should quit at 40 since they obviously have nothing more to offer, not being able to run that fast as they used to. :rolleyes:
 
Demotion I don't think was comparing actors and athletes, I think he was comparing Bruce Wayne and athletes. Bruce has often been described as being an Olympic level athlete. I think Demotion was arguing this is why it would be logical to use a younger actor.

Either way I don't think we should be limiting the casting by setting some kind of criteria.
 
DevilEyes said:
Captaindemotion said:
As it happens, I'd be content to cast an actor who can pass for younger (in Begins Bale was 31 playing Bruce Wayne at varied ages between his teens and 30), but I'd have to reluctantly agree that having a Batman aged 30 at the start of his career was perhaps a questionable decision - bearing in mind that that's an age where many athletes and sportspeople are viewed as having their best days behind them.
Click to expand...
That comparison really makes very little sense. Sports and acting are two completely different things. The requirement for an actor is to act, and secondary, to look the part (which makeup and camerawork can help a lot with), rather than, say, to run really fast across the court to catch the ball coming from the other side of the net.
Click to expand...

Thank you for missing the point entirely.

As Admiral Young said, Batman would have to have the power, fitness and stamina of an athlete. He doesn't have superpowers to fall back on, just his fitness. And athletes tend to peak in their late 20s/ early 30s, which is why I'm saying that it would make sense for the actor playing him to be in that age group. I said that if, as in Batman Begins, Batman was starting out aged 30, it might not make an awful lot of sense - he'd have missed his peak years of fitness.

Also, I never actually said that the actor playing Batman had to be in his 20s, I merely defended Dark Gilligan when he expressed the viewpoint that the actor playing the lead should be in his 20s. I didn't say I agreed with him entirely. I in fact said that having an actor who was in his 30s could pass for being in his 20s would suffice.

So maybe the next time before you quote me and throw in a rolleyes, you'd actually try to read and understand what I said!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top