Ben Affleck's Batman Will Be Tired and Weary in ‘Man of Steel 2’

A Warner Bros. CEO reveals Bruce Wayne will be a seasoned superhero when he first meets Superman in this sequel.
BY |
Ben Affleck's Batman Will Be Tired and Weary in ‘Man of Steel 2’

ben Affleck's Batman will be tired and weary in Man of Steel 2 Warner Bros. CEO Kevin Tsujihara spoke earlier today at the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Media, Communications and Entertainment Conference, where he described Ben Affleck's take on the Dark Knight in Man of Steel 2, calling this version of the superhero a seasoned veteran when he first meets Henry Cavill's Superman.

This is how the new Batman was sold to investors.

"[He will be] tired and weary and seasoned and [he's] been doing it for awhile.

The CEO also addressed the casting of Ben Affleck, which caused a firestorm of controversy on the Internet when it was announced last month, with many fans lobbying to oust the actor out of the role with various petitions.

"[He is] perfect. We think it's going to be huge. [The studio] could not be happier. We think it's the perfect springboard for Batman and Superman"

Man of Steel has gone onto earn over $660 million worldwide. Kevin Tsujihara ended his speech by revealing that a lot of announcements are expected to come out of the DC Comics' unit at Warner Bros. He then followed this up by noting the fact that the studio currently has three DC-based animated shows on the air right now. So its not known what kind of announcements are expected, and they may not have anything to do with the film side of the DC universe.

What do you think? Are you excited to see a more seasoned, and exhausted Dark Knight? Or do you wish Superman was going up against the vigilante at a younger age?

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice comes to theaters March 25th, 2016.

Sources:Variety

Best of the Web

87 comments

Want to join the discussion?

Facebook Twitter
  • tomp1210 • 2 years ago

    @gumperman I'll just add another little subject for debate - Clark's powers, I liked that it was about control etc. and they tried to go that route - anyone seen Superman Unbound? Anyway I liked the connection, and Faora was a pretty psycho villain, which is good, but makes you think - get there Supes, ffs!!! lol.

    Anyway, one thing I particularly didn't like about the movie was that they emphasised the fact that Clark had been absorbing the sun-rays for his whole life, but is basically on the same level as Zod by the end - strange atmos = instantly no powers, kinda felt empty. I think they should have gone the route of slow-drain, like in Smallville tv show, near the end, when he can super sprint from kryptonite, with the 'atmosphere' angle, but to bind him etc. at the end - I think they should have 'extracted' his powers somewhat - to get the dna info - like in Elysium if you've seen it (thus making it a harder choice for Clark at the end - because it makes it like by killing Zod, he is killing a part of himself (would just put emphasis on the 'hope for Krypton' aspect beyond Zod's planet-forming - especially if he put it in himself).

    reply

    • tomp1210 • 2 years ago

      @gumperman It had something to do with the new tech extremis I think, but yeh the suit fireworks was kinda annoying, loved seeing the hulkbuster for a sec though, I guess if he could have them all the time, then he wouldn't be as much of a hero - splitting himself too much. I liked IM 3, but two things annoyed me - the little orphan kid being a tech-wiz or whatever - didn't need additional affinity - was like Mary Jane being employed at the lab in Spiderman, and the 2nd was that the suits felt even lighter and flimsier than they seemed in IM 2's portable (somehow carriable version lol). I preferred the first movie when the technology of the suit carried more... weight? lol, now they were zipping around in pieces.

      reply

      • tomp1210 • 2 years ago

        by reposts I meant that when you click the button sometimes it posts your message several times without registering it, annoying

        reply

        • tomp1210 • 2 years ago

          Gah, friggin reposts

          @gumperman We'll see, I hope that's the case, because the Justice League is kinda depending on 3-dimensional characters, and the details of the story don't hack it by themselves. The fact remains that they painted him about as heroic as the Hulk in a videogame, but I guess you don't blame the parents for a todler tantrum (ok, a little harsh lol) although maybe they could make that cool character development in the movie to come - seperating Clark and Supes, and appropriating the fact that he is considered a superhero now etc. there is indeed still hope...

          I wonder what Zod's symbol meant...lol

          reply

          • gumperman • 2 years ago

            @tomp1210 I didn't see MAN OF STEEL as an adverts for violence. He is still young & learning who he is, which makes him way more relatable then ever before. Yes, he acted irrationally and destroyed some things, (we all have, but not to that extent since we don't have those powers) which I'm sure will be adressed in the next film, but the villians distroyed 10x as more and if not for Superman & the military, they would have the destroyed the whole world. Like it or not, you have look at it as a new story, the very beginnings of one still, that we've never seen before. The second one, and this is all just my guess and hope, will continue his growth and deal with the choices he made in the first one. He will learn from them and be the wiser and more of the Superman that we always new him as. Again, that's just my hope.

            reply

            • gumperman • 2 years ago

              @mieko-siede I agree, Batman will come to Metropolis to see for himself if this Alien can be trusted. And yeah, I'm sure Clark will never even think about killing anyone again, after what he had to do. I don't think he will have to kill other impending threats from the stars, and I agree it could be a strong possibility that he may be forced with that decision, but I hope by then he will have become more wise and not even consider that a decision. Plus, he will have other heros working with him by then I would think. JUSTICE LEAGUE. Plus I don't think other beings will ever be as strong as him, so he wouldn't be as worried about them killing everyone on earth as much. I think too part of the reason he killed Zod was he himself was afraid of his own powers still and was still unaware of his limits fully and afraid of what Zod would do once he fully realized he had all of those powers. I mean Zod knew he was more powerful then everyone on earth, but he still didn't know what he could fully do. Clark was still learning and for all of his life up to that point basically and he was told to not use his powers and to hide them. Zod was a quick adapter and would learn his powers faster if given the chance. Anyway, enough of that ramblance.

              reply

              • gumperman • 2 years ago

                @undeadslayer4 I wasn't aware that everyone hates it, I thought most people enjoyed it, at least from what I've heard. I know a lot of people disliked the second one though. But all of that is irrelavant to me anyway as I form my own opinion when I watch a film. Also, I'm not sure why Stark blew up those suits. Because he wanted to? That would be my answer for him taking the metal out of his chest too, because he wanted it out of his chest. Frankly I'm surprised he waited this long.

                reply

                • mieko-siede • 2 years ago

                  @tomp1210 I actually like that. The Rorschach feel seems appropriate given that he was essentially a copy of Batman's persona. We haven't quite seen the obsessive Batman on screen yet.

                  reply

                  • mieko-siede • 2 years ago

                    @gumperman They almost have to use that as a basis for Batman to even take interest outside of Gotham. And Clark has to battle with the decision he was forced to make in killing Zod to reconcile how he'd handle enemies in the future. It's a given he'd never be forced to kill a mortal man. But will he have to kill again to protect us from other impending threats from the stars? In reality it's a strong possibility.

                    reply

                    • montablitz • 2 years ago

                      I bet he sounds stupid as batman

                      reply

                      • undeadslayer4 • 2 years ago

                        @gumperman ok then explain why everyone hates it and second why stark had to blow up all his suits in the end and that tiny piece of metal that was stuck a mm away from his heart

                        reply

                        • gumperman • 2 years ago

                          @mieko-siede Yeah, I hope that they do deal with the aftermath of what happened in the first movie for sure, I think it will be really interesting if done right.

                          reply

                          • tomp1210 • 2 years ago

                            @mieko-siede It's funny that people used to make a big deal about Superman being identifiable with his glasses, but strolling into the daily planet after that monstrosity was just arrogant XD.

                            Yeh I think if they are going to do Batman, his persona should be intensified, almost like an addiction - like Rorshak (probs wrong spelling lol). That way you can really bring a fear-based, almost alien-looking Batman into play, something that rubbed off of Bale too quickly.

                            reply

                            • mieko-siede • 2 years ago

                              @gumperman I don't want to see Frank Miller's story, but I do want to see the Miller-like Batman. Deeply scarred and brooding. Nearly psychopathic to a point that he appears he may go too far. Enough to cause a conflict in the thinking between Clark and Batman. Though, given all Clark is going to be dealing with in the aftermath of MOS I doubt that will be the conflict at all. I think it would come more from a place a paranoia on Batman's behalf.

                              reply

                              • gumperman • 2 years ago

                                @undeadslayer4 I disagree, about IM2 being better than 3. IM3 I felt, brought it back to the feel of IM1, but didn't make it exactly the same and I thought it was a good story. IM2, I don't think added anything to the storyline of Tony Stark and in my opinion can be skipped when watching the Marvel Films as a whole. Well that and THE INCREDIBLE HULK. The only thing you need to know from IM2 is why Rhodes now has a Iron Man suit, but that's all I can think of since I haven't seen the film in a long time. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by Nolan trashing TDKR or it being Ledgers fault, but to each their own.

                                reply

                                • gumperman • 2 years ago

                                  @CoreyB I know what you mean, I watched all of the DARK KNIGHT movies a few months ago and I agree, they are in a league of their own. Wonderful films! And I love Wally Pfisters work too! Also, like you said, "I just cant see him at this point in his career making a dumb decision. He must have an exact purpose for what he wants to contribute". Have you heard Kevin Smith talk about it? He says the same thing basically, "Ben Affleck wouldn't take this roll to ruin it and doesn't want it to fail." So yeah, he knows what he's doing.

                                  reply

                                  • gumperman • 2 years ago

                                    @mieko-siede Yeah, that's what I was thinking too, that they would should his backstory in flashbacks like MOS & BB, but thought maybe he would be narrating it like Jor-El & Zod did to Kal when they were talking about the past. I agree too that they do need a little backstory told, even though we all know it to some extent, because this is a new Batman and things wouldn't have happened exactly the same in BATMAN BEGINS or even BATMAN (89).

                                    reply

                                    • undeadslayer4 • 2 years ago

                                      @CoreyB i only know argo

                                      reply

                                      • undeadslayer4 • 2 years ago

                                        @tomp1210 i never seen them mention gotham when i watched the movie

                                        reply

                                        • undeadslayer4 • 2 years ago

                                          @CoreyB i agree but only dkr was horrible dark knight and batman begins i really liked but unfortunately i disagree about what u said whenever something like this in most movies it usually turns to be a dissapoinment like what happened the gi joe

                                          reply

                                          Around The Web

                                          Latest Headlines

                                          Popular Movies