Ben Affleck's appointment as Batman a good choice

This is a follow up to the article covered by fellow entertainment writer Paul Saunders of The Journalist.ie.

Okay, let's start by saying that if this was Spiderman, Superman or any other "superhero" of that kind, we would have been so bored by now! You can't browse the internet without bumping into a nerds perspective of why Ben Affleck's appointment is a terrible idea, or, if you click the right button you just might be convinced by someone else on how the vision of Affleck in the bat suit is not a total disaster.

Warner Bros. have accomplished a divide in Batman fans with immediate effect. Believe in me when I tell you, your opinion will not change their decision, and John Roden's opposed petition will do no such damage either.

Before I give my own opinion of why Ben Affleck as Batman could work, let's look at what John Roden is saying to us on Change.org ;"His acting skill is not even close to being believable as Bruce Wayne and he won't do the role justice. He's not intimidating enough for the role of Batman. Batman is someone that strikes fear in the hearts of men. His portrayal of Daredevil was atrocious and he's not remotely close to an action star or a superhero. Please find someone else and deliver to the fans what they want". 

There is only a certain amount of times the average Batman fan can use Affleck's performance in Daredevil (2003) as an excuse to rid him of future comic book movie opportunities. While Daredevil was mediocre, it was not all Ben Afflecks fault, after all the guy is an actor. He gets paid to do what he is told. Those who remember the movie will give it credit for its fighting choreography at least, no? Bare in mind if there was a flaw in Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy it was the awful fighting choreography. Batman moved like a stiff gargoyle. Hardly a movie comparison but it wasn't all strawberries and cream when it came down to analysing Nolan's take and the Dark Knight Rises also has enough "croaks" to fill a nerd's blog.

Going back to Daredevil, where Ben Affleck played a kick ass blind super hero with a demented past. And while it may not have been the movie fans wanted, Ben Affleck was the best thing about it. Looking at movies such as Changing Lanes (2002), The Town (2010)  and Argo (2012), can he act? Come on, of course he can. Didn't he strike "fear into the hearts of men" in The Town? He delivered two great performances in Changing Lanes and Argo also. If fans are shedding any doubt over his acting credentials, watch the above films.

Adapting to the "dark knight" if you like, may prove challenging, but he isn't inheriting Christian Bale's Gothic voice (thank god). As we know, he will play an older Batman in order to reference the apparent "epic" collision between himself and Superman. However that vision could change.

Would he have been my first choice? No. But even now I can't tell you who would have been. But what I can say is it would not have been Christian Bale. Talks of Bale being offered 50 Million to return appeared extremely false over time. Christian Bale is a man who knows what's right for this franchise and by him not returning is a great stance from the Welshman. Warner Bros. are clearly aiming for something a bit more "light" but with a touch of grit also. If fans of Nolan's trilogy really think Warner Bros are out to destroy the pattern left by Bale they would be extremely gullible. You would like to think that Nolan and co have had a strong input in granting Affleck the opportunity. That is what I believe, and that is what will keep my mind at rest.

Ben Affleck has the build and the inter changeable personality to pull off both Bruce Wayne and Batman. Forget Jersey Girl (2004), the man starred in Hollywoodland (2006), State of Play (2009), both serious enough and quite believable roles that have gone on to place him as the next Batman. It's a new era for both Superman and Batman movies and one might have to get used to the possibility of Ben Affleck playing Batman beyond the Man of Steel sequel. Out with the old and in with the new. As a huge Batman fan (I even like Batman Forever), it would only slightly damage my love for the character if Affleck was to have a "stinker", but then again, I just have to remind myself that it could have been George Clooney...oh wait!

2 Guns

Genre: Action/Comedy
Director: Baltasar Kormakur
Starring: Denzel Washington, Mark Wahlberg, Paula Patton & Bill Paxton.
Running: 109 Mins

Buddy cop movies signified 1980/90 action flicks with Eddie Murphy and Nick Nolte's 48hrs, Tango and Cash and Beverly Hills Cop to name a few. While modern Hollywood tends to be more ambitious with dramatic tales featuring pretentious dialogue, a movie such as 2 Guns could be potentially overlooked by so-called movie connoisseurs as Ryan Gosling parades the fans with his good looks and facial expressions in Only God Forgives, and Johnny Depp and Tim Burton try to squeeze endless money from the passive. If you look hard enough, Denzel Washington and Mark Whalberg can be seen in the background advertising a simple movie that is well shot, ambitious and truthfully funny; it goes down as one of the most surprisingly entertaining flicks of the summer. 

2 Guns is an explosive tale of two ambitious individuals who believe they are working for the right cause only to discover loose ends that could spell the end of their careers. It was important to pair the right actors to create the necessary chemistry and that is well advertised in the opening scene as Robert "Bobby" (Denzel Washington) and Michael "Stig" (Mark Wahlberg) are in a restaurant which conveniently sits next to a bank. The story flashes back to show us the initial plan, played out by Stig. What they both know is their friendship is fake as both Bobby and Stig are working to rob the bank for different associates; Bobby is an undercover DEA agent and Stig is a Naval intelligence officer. It's the vanity in both characters that gets them into trouble following the robbery as Bobby's alliance as well as Stigs', betray the supposed plan leaving both men blackmailed and head hunted by Earl (Bill Paxton) who is determined to retrieve his money in the bloodiest and funniest ways possible.

The result of the bank robbery sees Stig sitting on 43 million with nobody to turn to. Bobby is also left out in the dirt as he is destined to investigate the motive behind his agencies portrayal; all while dodging bullets from the Mexican Cartel, the Navy and of course, Earl and his cohorts.

If 2 Guns sounds messy, it is, but all in good fashion as it supplies an endless amount of funny characters and die hard murderers. The movie focuses on two concepts; a survival premise as 2 Guns is blended with numerous "bad guys". On the other hand, its a fantastic reference to 80s and 90s "Buddy" action flicks, as Bobby and Stig come to realise the daunting task of having to work together in order to survive this mess and that's where director Baltasar Kormakur introduces a comedic ingredient that advertises great chemistry and wit about each of our protagonists.

2 Guns is the first movie to showcase Denzel Washington's humorous side. Okay, he has a certain amount of "swag" in almost all of his movies that can make him funny anyway, but he is full on this time around and bounces off Mark Walhberg's character so smoothly, you would think these two were raised in the same home!

This movie isn't trying to be perfect, with the introduction of Bill Paxton transforming it into a right cheese-fest at times, but that premise is recognisable from the off. Bill Paxton's Earl is a vicious character, playing a villainous Governor of California (Terminator free) to the extreme. While 2 Guns is explosive and funny, a movie like this can't fulfil it's buddy cop premise without an exotic female intervention that uses the clichéd fall out of two apparent friends and Paula Patton as Deb does just that.

Overall, director Baltasar Kormakur did a great job in constructing some great action scenes with dialogue of serious and humorous. While we know of Mark Walhberg's comedic side from Seth McFarlen's "Ted", nobody could have predicted the chemistry between Mark and Denzel would work so well.

7.8/10

Only God Forgives

It is almost impossible to start off this review without mentioning two things; Nicholas Winding Refn’s cinematic impact, captivating audience global with “Drive” (2009), and of course the continuity of Ryan Gosling’s on-screen success. So of course fans were looking forward to what the two can come up with next in Only God Forgives; a game of who blinks first, who can create the most tension using strictly facial expressions, in fact Refn’s latest vision is so overly pretentious, you just wonder if his ambition to match that of Drive led to sleepless nights, resulting in a very average movie.

Based in the slums of Bangkok, prostitutes and drugs are extremely rife and Julian’s Thai boxing club is at the centre of it all. The club is a smokescreen to hide a family run drug operation in which Julian (Ryan Gosling) runs alongside his brother Billy (Tom Burke). We are not forced to indulge in Billy’s psychotic persona for too long as he is hacked to pieces in a brothel. The savage murder sees the involvement of Julian’s mother Crystal (Kristin Scott Thomas) whose deranged character has clearly rubbed off Julian, resulting in a Norman Bates style relationship

The Bangkok area is patrolled, tortured and extremely feared by the corrupt Chan (Vithaya Pansringarm); a sergeant of the police who murders his victims in a ferocious way.

On one hand we have Crystal who seeks revenge for her son’s death, and then we have Julian who continues to mourn in the creepiest ways possible as he slowly patrols the darkly red corridors of a brothel, aimlessly looking at the walls. Julian spends his nights fantasising about sexual affection, and drifting in and out of the possibility of a showdown with the murderous Chang.

As expected, Refn hits us with a retro themed sound bite that was so significant in Drive. However, while the stage is set in the gritty visuals of Bangkok, Only God forgives fails to provide an efficient story to back up the design. While the plot is supposed to focus on vengeance, the lack of dialogue from the apparent protagonist (Gosling) is surprising as the director goes on to exaggerate his “knack” of creating tension with facial expressions in every scene. And while Julian and Chang do this very well when they match up, the Dracula style piano tune and the consistent thump of a loud drum really creates the atmospheric tempo as its consistent noise becomes a substitute for any potential dialogue.

The movie survives on small talk, strange looks, slow-motion and unnecessary violence. While Refn expressed his grotesque side in Drive previously, he also had characters to back it up. Sure, we can look at Gosling’s on-screen presence all day but the man lacked any soul this time around. Same goes for the small cast involved who spent most of the time advertising stand-stills. 

The Concept of the movie is recognisable coming from Refn's point of view. It is visually satisfying with the sound similar to that of Drive. The "artsy fartsy" clan may claim to acknowledge a sense of enjoyment from Refn's latest but what seemed obvious to me was that Only God Forgives sounds great, it looks pretty slick and while some sequences may be entertainingly weird, it is very far from wonderful.

5/10

Only God Forgives - Trailer 

The Wolverine

Genre: Action/Adventure
Director: James Mangold
Starring: Hugh Jackman, Tao Okamoto, Rila Fukushima, 
Running: 129 Mins

If there is one thing we can all agree on in terms of X Men's prolific Wolverine character, is that Hugh Jackman enjoys the hell out playing him. And while X Men: The last stand (2006), along with Wolverine (2009) have been pretty much steam rolled and crapped on by not only comic book fans but movie buffs as a whole. Hugh is undoubtedly adamant in providing cinema-goers with a longer lasting taste in their mouth this time around, and that taste doesn't necessarily have to be a bitter one.

The Wolverine is a more in depth focus on Logan's struggle to overcome the fact that he has and will more than likely continue to struggle with his mutant ability. Following the events of The last stand, Logan is located out in the cold (literally) as his wolverine skills are put to good use as his choice of a nomadic lifestyle results in a homeless rugged wolverine. His dark days are spent suffering with regrettable nightmares relating to Jean Grey (Famke Janssen). Logan is hunted down as the great "Wolverine" by Yukio (Rila Fukushima) and invited to Japan where he will be tested of his true desire with Yashida (Hal Yamanouchi) offering him the chance of immortality. It is the event of that meeting that leads Wolverine into a physical battle of emotion and choices as Logan is caught up in an internal war, as Yashida's niece (Tao Okamoto) is targeted by the sleazy Viper (Svetlana Khodchenkova) and her cohorts. 

Logan is attacked from all angles as he begins to realise that the Viper is after much more than Yashida's niece,  leading him into the fight of his life even if it means losing a lot of blood. Wolverine embarks on an exciting warpath, one that involves less exaggeration (Helicopter battles free) and some straight up gut wrenching!

Directed by James Mangold (Walk the Line), The Wolverine is an explosive adventure when it needs to be, adding a touch of drama when it mattered. Hugh Jackman's Wolverine is far more engaging this time around, as you follow him from the events in Japan, to the cold woods right through to his battle with immortality, you pity the Wolverine at times, particularly in his struggle to let go of his true love that was Jean Grey (X.Men).

The staging premise in Japan is a wonderful set, giving off quite a comic book feel with a dark twist. While the overall cast is not much to brag about, the chemistry between Jackman and Rila Fukushima is very surprising as you will find yourself rooting for Rila's kick ass character just as much as Wolverine.

The Wolverine stages some satisfying action scenes such as the scrap on the bullet train, and while it is probably the most far-fetched scene in the entire movie, you understand the concept and quickly adapt to the vision of Mangold which ultimately leads to a showdown of many battles. Numerous villains such as The Viper, Shingen, Noburo (excluding the abundance of cohorts) is one flaw of the movie as it appears messy at times and quite direction-less as there is no official focus on a particular villain which can lead to you completely forgetting who you should fear until they get screen time. The Viper is probably the worst villain played in any Marvel movie so far. Maybe it was the actor or the writer's job, but she was plain and simply crap, dull, characterless and just down right careless. She reminded me of Uma Thurman's poison Ivy performance; poor and downright irrelevant. The Viper is noticeably filled in to add a touch of dangerous femininity which turns out to be boring!

We could talk of the bullshit romance that unexpectedly develops for Logan, but let's not be too harsh; with great cinema comes great stupidity, and the wolverine, make no mistake, throws in some stupidity but nowhere near the car crash that was X.Men Origins.

The Wolverine is really enjoyable, with Hugh Jackman's admiration for the character shining brighter than ever. Whether this will lead to another X.Men flick time will tell, but if it was a choice between another "tired" Patrick Stewart X.Men, or an official Wolverine sequel, a Wolverine sequel would probably come off better.

Overall: A great action flick under a well designed premise, and while the villains could have had more character, it is still highly entertaining.

7/10



....