It's a Superman film. Perhaps I'm unfamiliar with modern DC stuff, but I've never gotten the impression that Batman in titles with non-Batman-based heros (like Superman, WW, Flash, JLA, etc) is nearly as dark as Batman in Batman-based titles.
As such, I don't think it's a problem if Affleck isn't as dark a Batman as Christian Bale, or even Val Kilmer, Michael Keaton, or George Clooney.
If he can't achieve Adam West levels of darkness, though, we have a problem.
I actually liked Daredevil. Perfect, no -- but better than it probably had a right to be. Biggest problem was trying to throw in a number of themes that had been built up over the years.
I am waiting for Marvel Studios to get around to adapting Daredevil: Born Again. The rights reverted to them late last year, and that would be a great film. All they have to do is follow the damn comic -- already scripted and storyboarded for them.
Do you think comic book movies would be better if they translated actual story arcs instead of trying to create their own mythology and continuity? Do we really need a back-story and origin movie? Like what about Marvel's "Operation Galactic Storm" where the Avengers had to keep Earth from getting caught in the crossfire in a Kree-Shair war. It involved a lot of heroes and there wouldn't be time to explain each one so they don't. They just present the plot and let the characters act.
> Jennifer Garner in that outfit, however.... nevermind.
Hence the entire reason why the Elektra movie made even as little money as it did. I admit that I went to see that movie with a bi F/F couple, and all three of us were exulting in the guilty-pleasure fact that we were sitting through that dreck for one reason and one reason only... ;)
I have seen something like two Affleck films. One was Chasing Amy, and when I left the theater I said "he will be a star someday." The other was Good Will Hunting. His choice of projects since then has just not led me to the theater or even the video library/streaming service. But everything I hear about him now says he is talented and smart. I will not prejudge him for any role.
And remember how much noise there was about Michael Keaton playing the part? And that was before the Internet. I still love his weird take on Batman. So there is always room for talented actors to do what they can with classic roles. (Think how many Sherlock Holmeses there have been.)
My qualms are more to do with yet another Batman film; with Zack Snyder doing this film when nothing I know about Man of Steel makes me want to see it; and with Warner Bros. essentially making a conservative casting choice to go with a conservative film that uses the same two heroes again and ignores everyone else in the DC canon (especially Wonder Woman). I have very little desire to see Supes and Batman duking it out. And given that Dark Knight Rises ended an arc, I can't see any reason to start over again.
The DC movie I would love to see that will never be made is The Elongated Man. I consider him much cooler than Reed Richards and much less of a jerk than Plastic Man; also, mystery crossovers FTW. But he's virtually unknown in the wider culture, so they'll never even consider him.
Only if they get someone really REALLY good to play Sue Dibny. An Elongated Man movie without Sue would be like making a Sherlock Holmes movie without Watson. Ralph may have the stretching powers, but Sue is an equal partner.
This is a building block to a wider DC Universe, though. Yeah, Superman and Batman are very familiar, but we haven't seen them in live action together. And then there's Ollie and Barry on the small screen...
Remember when Heath Ledger was announced for the new Joker? Oh, the outrage! The flame wars! The betrayal of all that is holy! Then the movie came out and all those people scrambled to delete their old forum posts so they could be replaced with "I always knew Heath would be perfect for the Joker."
Honestly I don't like the idea but since I'm not going to see the next Man of Steel anyway it doesn't bother me as much. I haven't even seen the current Man of Steel for a variety of reasons, most of which have to do with the writer's total lack of understanding of Superman as a character. (I think it was Christopher Nolan, I could be wrong)
As for the previous actors? Well that's going to come down to a matter of personal taste. I thought that Michael Keaton did a great job as Batman and Bruce Wayne in the first Batman movie. The second was way too dark for my taste, and because Batman shouldn't be straight up murdering people. Val Kilmer was at least passable, but Shumacher was approaching things from the Adam West version of Batman and by the time George Clooney had gotten to playing him it was so bad that they nearly killed the franchise.
Then there was Christian Bale. This is a hard one because so many people love the Christopher Nolan Batman movies, and I do think the first two are alright. Heath Ledger does make a great Joker, but I do have problems with the movies that keep me from thinking that they're the best Batman movies that they could be. Part of this is the attempt to ground them in realism. I'm sorry that just bothers me, it's supposed to be a superhero movie. I get that Nolan wanted to approach it differently and I can respect that, but it's just not what I, personally, like.
I read all the "Batman is ruined forever!" posts and can't help put think of two words. (Well, one name.)
Remember all the "Brokeback Mountain" jokes, and how Ledger was going to destroy the concept of the Joker for all time? Then, all those same people said they knew all along he'd define the role. Yeah, right.
Am I saying that Affleck is as good as Ledger was? No. What I am saying is that the guy deserves a change to give it a shot to make it his own, and ignore all the idiots who say "Mr Mom will never make a good Batman, and don't get me started about Nicholson!"