Skip to main content
A scary good deal on trusted journalism
Get full digital access to globeandmail.com
$0.99
per week for 24 weeks SAVE OVER $140
OFFER ENDS OCTOBER 31
A scary good deal on trusted journalism
$0.99
per week
for 24 weeks
SAVE OVER $140
OFFER ENDS OCTOBER 31
// //

Actor and director Ben Affleck accepts the Guy of the Year award at the seventh annual Spike TV Guys Choice awards in Culver City, Calif., June 8, 2013. Affleck has been cast as Batman in an upcoming Superman sequel.

MARIO ANZUONI/Reuters

The bat-lash has begun.

Ben Affleck hasn't even been sized for a bat-suit and already, fans are crying foul.

Yesterday, Warner Brothers confirmed that the multihyphenate celebrity and Oscar winner will play the latest reincarnation of Bruce Wayne-cum-Batman, who will face off against Superman in the sequel to this summer's Man of Steel.

Story continues below advertisement

But the news has not been well-received – or at least, those against the decision are choosing to be especially vocal about their disapproval.

A change.org petition to have Affleck removed from the role was well on its way to garnering the necessary 2,500 signatures before being sent to executives at DC Comics and Warner Brothers.

On Twitter, the disapproval is being served up with an extra kick of snark. Some are using the hashtag #batfleck. Others have caught on to #BetterBatmanThanAffleck and are suggesting alternatives. To wit, a parody account of the Harry Potter anti-hero Professor Snape is obviously partial to Alan Rickman.

Movie trivia buffs will remember that Affleck has already played Superman – albeit in a roundabout way. In Hollywoodland, a 1950s-era film from 2006, his character George Reeves is the titular star of the television series Adventures of Superman.

But those in the anti-Affleck camp are quick to point out how the 41-year-old actor tanked in Daredevil. Of course, that film dates back to 2003 – the same year that Affleck appeared in another stinker, Gigli, opposite Jennifer Lopez. Together, the films reflect poor decision-making rather than falling short of superhero potential.

The Telegraph's Robbie Collin sticks up for Affleck as Bruce Wayne. Pointing out Affleck's string of successes over the past decade, both as actor and director, he writes, "He is handsome, popular and talented, and his star is once again in the ascendant. The more you think about it, in fact, the more obvious it seems: Who on earth would Warner Bros cast in their 2015 summer extravaganza if not their golden boy?"

Also in the pro-Affleck camp is the British edition of GQ. Writer Oliver Franklin makes another valid point: "The most important thing to remember is a simple one: this isn't Christopher Nolan's Batman."

Story continues below advertisement

Like Man of Steel, the sequel will be directed by Zack Snyder and will once again feature British actor Henry Cavill as Superman. As ordinary humans, Cavill is 10 years younger than Affleck.

Warner Brothers is not going to cave to the backlash. If anything, the people who make the decisions are probably marveling over the ease with which social media has galvanized reactions – for better or worse – to the decision.

But you have to wonder how Affleck now feels about assuming the part. The daunting part will not be following in the footsteps of Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, George Clooney and, most recently, Christian Bale; the stunts and codpiece come with the territory. The toughest part will be proving his dissenters wrong.

The film is set to hit theatres in July, 2015.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow the author of this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies