Twilight Star Robert Pattinson Apparently Heading To Gotham As The New Batman

[memocromatico]

On 5/21/2019 at 12:30 PM, mako said:

You just made my point for me. "That's the ONE we remember him from." "He's NOT HALF BAD." ". . . AWAY FROM MAINSTREAM." Not exactly glowing accolades for an actor.

Bottom line, he's got just enough name recognition to put a few butts in seats and spark a few write-ups, but not enough that they'd have to pay NAME money. 

That's the one we've watched, that doesn't mean it's the only thing he's done. I mean, let's be real here, most of us here on these forums watch mostly one type of movie, and it's not the kind of movie he's been doing.

"Not half bad" is an expression used to compliment someone, in that they're not even half or a little bad in what they do.

I don't know why doing something away from mainstream would be giving someone bad rep. There are amazing actors that don't necessarily want the mass recognition and tabloids that come from involvement in mainstream media. Some prefer to be private, this would likely be the case after Twilight saga and the divorce drama for him.

[mako]

3 minutes ago, memocromatico said:

That's the one we've watched, that doesn't mean it's the only thing he's done. I mean, let's be real here, most of us here on these forums watch mostly one type of movie, and it's not the kind of movie he's been doing.

First, I never said he didn't do anything else, I said that was the one he was known for. Quick, without looking it up, tell me one non-Twilight film he's been in.

Second, don't speak for me. I watch all kinds of movies. Action, adventure, martial arts, sci-fi, comedy, western, horror, thriller, coming of age, big budget, low budget, no budget, indie, foreign, mockbuster (love those), and yes, even cheesy gothic vampire romance. Just because we're on a toy website doesn't mean all our movies have ray-guns and explosions.

[memocromatico]

1 hour ago, mako said:

First, I never said he didn't do anything else, I said that was the one he was known for. Quick, without looking it up, tell me one non-Twilight film he's been in.

Second, don't speak for me. I watch all kinds of movies. Action, adventure, martial arts, sci-fi, comedy, western, horror, thriller, coming of age, big budget, low budget, no budget, indie, foreign, mockbuster (love those), and yes, even cheesy gothic vampire romance. Just because we're on a toy website doesn't mean all our movies have ray-guns and explosions.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire , that I've watched. Other than that I remember hearing praise for his role in "Remember Me", which I haven't watched because I didn't want to watch when it was on cinemas due to grudge towards Twilight, and Water for Elephants which I wasn't in the mood for drama.

I'm glad you have such diverse taste, which is why I used "most", not "all", and "mostly", not "only". Have  you watched a movie with him in it other than the Twilight Saga? Did you honestly hate it that much in any non-Cullen role to say he's gonna be terrible as Batman?

[Blackmada]

I'm just bored with Batman these days and could use a break.

I remember just about everyone originally hating the idea of Heath Ledger as the Joker.

[Thinwheat]

I actually think he would do a good job as Batman. I'm interested. He's a good actor outside of Twilight, he's bulked up to superhero weight before, I like the choice. 
I could see them doing some screen tests with him and seeing how he fits the role first, but in a general sense, he's a good fit to me. 

[JayC]

Warner Bros. today announced they have locked in actor Robert Pattinson (Twilight) as the next Batman/Bruce Wayne to be featured in the Matt Reeves directed solo Dark Knight film which opens in theaters on June 25, 2021. It's a done deal folks.

[Patr10ts]

I'm stoked

[Satam]

Every other Batman actor must be from the isle of Great Britain.  This is the rule now.

[tycondrius24]

I don't mind Patterson getting the role. I know 90% people immediately think Twilight when they hear the name but he has done other stuff. I'll reserve my judgment till we see a trailer . you never know he could be the best batman we ever had as he may put a lot into the role to avoid his name being forever associated with twilight  every time his name is mentioned.

[cvg_965882526]

I'm stoked. He's a tremendous actor, I've watched him in films the past few years (never bothered with Twilight). Matt Reeves wants him. That's all I need to hear.

[Belmont13]

Here we go, this should be interesting.

[AlanXember]

Anybody interested in Batman's future should check out Pattinson's body of work post Twilight. Not only is he a really talented guy, he also comes off as a really reasonable human being with drive and passion for his work. One role shouldn't be enough to condemn an actor forever. Heck, Christian Bale would've gotten the same flack if he headlined a series like Twilight. Imagine if one film was all it took to take Bale out as Batman. Imagine if The Dark Knight never happened because of fans backlash against Heath Ledger as the Joker.  We would have missed out on some of the greatest superhero performances of all time.

Also, Mcfarlane's gets the DC license the year before, so you better believe having a super articulated/detailed Joaquin Phoenix Joker next to Pattinson Batman Is going to be the beginning of a great new era in DC film collecting. So much good is coming after so much wrong, I'd rather be excited and give this new direction the benefit of the doubt.

[Papasmurf52]

He might not be the best but he won’t be the worst

[primecollective]

Will Deathstroke still be in this movie??? Dying to know!!!

[JayC]

14 minutes ago, primecollective said:

Will Deathstroke still be in this movie??? Dying to know!!!

I don't think so. This is supposed to be based on a much younger Batman. They aren't just switching out actors, they seem to be going in a whole new direction from what we saw in Justice League.

[FASVB]

What can I say?

It sucks. But I really hope that I'm so so so wrong. 

 

[mako]

A clip of Darth Vader's "Noooooo!" scene from the end of ROTS would be worth a lot right now.

[Belmont13]

5 minutes ago, mako said:

I clip of Darth Vader's "Noooooo!" scene from the end of ROTS would be worth a lot right now.

http://www.nooooooooooooooo.com/

[mako]

1 minute ago, Belmont13 said:

http://www.nooooooooooooooo.com/

That's the stuff.

[Batman1701]

I will point out the same thing I always point out in these situations:

Michael Keaton was, primarily and almost exclusively, known as a comedy actor, and often a highly slapstick one at that (biggest roles: "Johnny Dangerously" and "Beetlejuice").  And when he was announced as Batman, people cried bloody murder, because he was the worst idea for a serious Batman film EVER.  People were convinced he - along with Tim Burton - was gonna turn it into an absurdist, occult, camp take on the Adam West series from the '60s, and they hated it before they saw it.

Cut to the mid '90s and people were adamantly opposed to recasting Batman with Val Kilmer, because Keaton WAS Batman, NO ONE could do it better.

*shrug*

Ben Affleck CAN be a good actor, and could have been a great Batman.  He WASN'T, but it was possible.  Christian Bale is about the only actor who, the moment he was announced, we KNEW he could do an excellent job right out of the gate.  As for Pattinson . . . If he sucks, he sucks.  But I'ma wait to see if he actually sucks before deciding he sucks.

[red_bird08]

I will wait and see. I haven't watched any of his films so I don't know how he acts besides the fact that he is brooding in every photo which is perfect for Bruce. I really liked Ben Affleck as Batman though. 

[mako]

4 hours ago, Batman1701 said:

I will point out the same thing I always point out in these situations:

Michael Keaton was, primarily and almost exclusively, known as a comedy actor, and often a highly slapstick one at that (biggest roles: "Johnny Dangerously" and "Beetlejuice").  And when he was announced as Batman, people cried bloody murder, because he was the worst idea for a serious Batman film EVER.  People were convinced he - along with Tim Burton - was gonna turn it into an absurdist, occult, camp take on the Adam West series from the '60s, and they hated it before they saw it.
 

To which I'd point out, one of Keaton's most acclaimed pre-Bat films was Clean and Sober, very much NOT a slap-stick comedy. Show me anything that proves Pattinson has anything close to that kind of range. Until then, it's just Warner/DC desperately attempting some half-@$$ed stunt casting as they flail wildly to save themselves from going under at the box-office.

[80sboy4]

Ok after thinking about this for awhile maybe this Batman won't be a total disaster. Will keep an open mind about it, would I prefer other actors to portray Bats sure, but this is who they're going with.

[Batman1701]

12 hours ago, mako said:

To which I'd point out, one of Keaton's most acclaimed pre-Bat films was Clean and Sober, very much NOT a slap-stick comedy. Show me anything that proves Pattinson has anything close to that kind of range. Until then, it's just Warner/DC desperately attempting some half-@$$ed stunt casting as they flail wildly to save themselves from going under at the box-office.

*eyeroll again*

I mean, first of all, that last line is simply patently false.  WB is not hurting for money.  Just because some people didn't like their last Batman, and have preemptively decided this one is awful, is entirely irrelevant to their finances.  People HATED Batman V Superman, and yet still paid to see Justice League, and would have paid to see "The Bat-fleck" regardless.

Secondly, sounds like someone either wasn't around for the whole Keaton buzz or completely forgot it.  NO ONE watched "Clean and Sober," the movie didn't even make back its paltry $12mil budget.  Yes, Jon Peters reportedly made his recommendation based on it, but he was basically the only person who ever saw the movie, and literally everyone else in the room and most people in the industry and fans thought it was a ridiculous choice.  WB got 50,000 protest letters (pre-internet here) over the choice.  It was near universally decried as cronyism (because Tim Burton had just used him in a film) and pandering to public consciousness (because he had just been in a very popular Tim Burton film), and, of course, "stunt casting."

And as for Robert Pattinson's skill as an actor, and needing someone to "show you anything" about his skill and range?  The phrase "here, let me Google that for you" comes to mind.  While I'll READILY admit I haven't watched a single movie of his, I can look up basic facts and statistics as well as anyone (if they could be bothered, rather than sitting smugly on their preconceived notions).  Know what they tell me?

Five of his last six starring roles have massive critical acclaim, in the high 80s or 90s on Rotten Tomatoes, and he's been nominated or won numerous critical, professional, and respected artistic awards for his non-Twilight and post-Twilight work.

"Clean and Sober?" Is, to this day, considered a dreary and overly dark slog, and has a 56%, and no one cares.

In short: the facts don't support any of the quoted assertions; people are basing the whole of their criticism on the simple reality that they don't like the actor solely for one role, and not on the actual skills he has demonstrably proven in works other than the only one they're familiar with; and the entire premise of WB even NEEDING to "stunt cast" is so inaccurate as to be comical.

Is he what I would have chosen?  No.  But should he be given as fair a shake as any other actor?  Absolutely.

[Thinwheat]

He's a good actor and I think if you look past the Twilight stigma you'll see he's a good fit for the part. I'll give him a chance. Matt Reeves knows what he's doing and if this is his choice, I'm all for it.