In defense of Jake Gyllenhaal as the Batman

Making the case for Jake Gyllenhaal to be the next Batman.

For nearly a month now we have been enduring the rumor of Jake Gyllenhaal replacing Ben Affleck as The Batman. Supposedly, Gyllenhaal wants the gig and is under director Matt Reeves’ watchful eye for the part. Now all of this is merely rumor and speculation at the moment. It makes sense to some degree due to the constant, nearly year-long onslaught of rumors on Affleck’s potential departure from the role. Nonetheless, some people are hesitant to this rumored casting choice.

Gyllenhaal’s age

The first and obvious obstacle to some people is age. Affleck is 45 years old and Gyllenhaal is 36, hence a nine-year difference. Snyder makes it clear this is an older and broken down Batman. I will note, Affleck was only 42 when principal photography began on Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Reeves noted if everything goes well production can begin in 2018. The Batman has no release date yet, but then, that would put Gyllenhaal on the verge of 37 if all comes true, hence only a five-year gap from Affleck when he began.

The ages of Hollywood’s Batman

Michael Keaton began his role of Batman at age 37 and finished it at around 41. Enter Val Kilmer, who was 35 years old when he received the role in 1996. Wow, Batman can de-age! He did not get to continue the role and it was handed over to George Clooney who is a whole two years younger than Kilmer. However, he was 35, the same age as Kilmer when he was casted.

Then there’s Christian Bale. He was in his early 30’s when Batman Begins opened. He was in his mid-30’s when The Dark Knight released, even though the film takes place only a year later. Finally, he was in his late 30’s when The Dark Knight Rises hit theaters, but that film took place ten years later, hence he should technically be in his early 40’s, right? You could argue they drove this home with his initial appearance in a robe, cane and facial hair. There’s no excuse for this to not be done for Gyllenhaal.

More from Movies

• James Gunn’s Superman: Legacy casts more major DC characters
• New Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom trailer pushes Arthur to his limits
• 7 actors who could replace Ezra Miller as The Flash in the DC Universe
• Masters of the Universe reboot’s new domain could be at Amazon’s Prime Video Streamer
• James Gunn gives interesting update of Superman and Supergirl movies at DC Studios

Too pretty to be Batman

This is a common nitpick in regards to Gyllenhaal as Batman. Yes, Gyllenhaal has this young, pretty boy look to him. He has the face you could imagine on your teenage daughter’s bedroom door. People magazine has selected him not once, but twice for their various good-looking celebrities list. Overall, it is not an image one can allude to the broken, hammered down Bruce Wayne that Affleck has given to the audience.

This is not to say Affleck’s Bruce Wayne is ugly, but Gyllenhaal’s offers a more warming presence. There are ways around this dilemma, with prosthetics, make-up, lighting and more.

Storytelling can also be of service in case The Batman follows Justice League. I would argue with Superman’s return and a more positive outlook from Superman’s example he has been taking better care of himself and less drinking.

The pretty boy vibe that people get from him can always be dealt with through good performance. Case in point, Heath Ledger. Ledger too had this pretty boy, teen idol vibe to him. Remember almost no fan wanted to see him as The Joker. With a good dose of make-up, costume, great direction and his performance, this perception of Ledger is now gone. Now he is only The Joker.

Gyllenhaal’s Acting Chops

Gyllenhaal has plenty of range to approach the role of Batman. He is extremely muscle-bound in Southpaw. Therefore, acquiring that body is possible for him to do again. He shows plenty of emotion in numerous films like Demolition or this year’s Stronger. Many of his films do exist in a rather dark, cynical and realistic setting such as Zodiac, Nightcrawler and Enemy. He plays the hero, but this hero is hardly ever the gallant, bold, courageous and dashing white knight. No, the protagonist he plays is normally in a state of suffering, misery, internal conflict and more. Sound familiar?

Next: 50 greatest super heroes in comic book history

I do not think people are giving Gyllenhaal a fair chance here. The man has numerous roles under his belt, granted there a few not worthy of praise, but the good easily outweighs the bad. Plus, you forget this man is a highly talented, Academy-Award nominee. Yes, he is younger than Affleck but age is not always a physical, biological trait. I am sure plenty of you have heard people say of others “they don’t act their age.” Some people act younger than their perceived age and some act older, or at least that is what their peers say. Who is to say Gyllenhaal cannot act like a broken down man in his forties? Heck, until I looked up his actual age I already thought he was playing that in a couple of his films.