Nicholas Hoult (not Robert Pattinson) should play Batman

Holy no-brainer, Batman!

When Variety reported Thursday that Robert Pattinson would be the next actor to take on the role of Bruce Wayne, my heart sank faster than Bella’s did when Edward Cullen ghosted her in “Twilight: New Moon.” After four torturous films starring a sluggish, 46-year-old Ben Affleck as Batman, we don’t need a vampire heartthrob or Cedric Diggory from “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” — we need a therapist.

But Hoult your horses!

Deadline declared shortly after the news broke that the casting of director Matt Reeves’ movie is not a done deal yet, and the shortlist for the part also includes the excellent Nicholas Hoult, the recent star of “The Favourite” and “Tolkien.” He’s a much better candidate, and the obvious choice.

Whatever the case may be, DC seems to be borrowing a page from Marvel’s casting of Tom Holland as Spider-Man, as both Pattinson, 33, and Hoult, 29, are boyish and British. But while Pattinson is indie-bland and better suited to a superhero Vogue spread, Hoult is a funny and emotional actor who’s enduring one of the most impressive second acts for a child star since Drew Barrymore and Ron Howard.

However, if there’s any franchise that won’t see this glaring gap in talent, it’s Batman. The caped crusader has been a familiar presence on cinema screens longer than most others, and he’s currently bat-ing .500. Of course, there’s the fantastic Adam West, Michael Keaton and Christian Bale, but there’s also the abysmal Affleck, George Clooney and Val “Nipple Suit” Kilmer. The tendency too often is to go with the boring hot guy, and then overcompensate with a ridiculous movie.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *