suit up, dwayne johnson (part two)...

Finally. Let's crack this one wide open.

THESIS: It is the official opinion of this blog that Batman should be played by Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson. So to it. I've floated this theory for a number of friends, and the most consistent reaction is, to me, the most baffling:

"Oh, he'd never be able to do Bruce Wayne."

I'm already stumped.

There are so many ways to argue against my overall premise that it throws me off when this is the first point of contention. In my mind I'm sputtering "Who the f- cares about Bruce Wayne?!" Then I relax. It's actually the Wayne angle that first put this idea in my head.

Keep the enclosed photograph in mind as you keep reading. Visually, what's the problem? He can rock a tux easily, and if you're still not sold it'd be easy to class him up further with a lesson or two. It'd be the cheapest expense for the whole movie.

The idea first came to me when I saw "The Rundown," where Johnson plays a hitman named Beck. The first scene takes place in a nightclub. Before he beats up everyone in the club, he tries to convince his target, an NFL star of whom Beck is a huge fan, to come quietly so no career-ending injuries are suffered by anyone. Beck genuinely argues to not fight, and Johnson sells it in a way that is only his: That of a physically intimidating man who can use crystal-clear English and charm to downplay his level of threat.

Bruce Wayne is a side character. Tim Burton's movies disagree, using Micheal Keaton to demonstrate a neurosis in Wayne that explains Batman's existence. This could be well and good, but the gain from Keaton's Wayne takes away from Batman himself, namely his physical presence. Keaton's Batman is nothing without the molded rubber suit. We as the moviegoers are then stuck with a hero that can't turn his head.

Oy.

You can explain Wayne to death, but for my money I just want Batman. Wayne's purpose is to fund the operation and make the occasional public appearance (usually connected to the larger story). The Rock can handle that.

And what do you get in return? A physically imposing Batman, one that does not require overly molded armor and has the maximum range of motion at his disposal. I've mentioned that Batman: The Animated Series is my end-all, and the most thrilling image is that of the hulking shadow, threatening in size and terrifyingly methodical.

Tangent alert! Related post, "professional frowns..." to come.

Now. Imagine you're watching this hulking shadow, and suddenly the thing is running at you, a flurry of movement and mass! Even the Dark Knight suit was too molded and restrictive. The way to best capture the threat of Batman is to embrace the size of a man like Johnson, but then in every way play up the speed and flexibility (because say what you will about pro wrestling, you know those people have to be limber to do it). I want to see Batman bust some moves.

Not just the usual stuff. Some crazy moves.



At least watch the first few minutes for my point.

Now we're getting somewhere. This basically sums up my argument, but I shouldn't stop before I mention Batman, the detective. The movies focus on the elaborate toys at his disposal, but I like The Animated Series for its focus more on his cunning, with more in-the-field work rather than back-to-the-lab. As explained above, I don't think Dwayne Johnson would have any trouble convincing us of this cunning.

In conclusion:


p.s. That reminds me: why do the movies insist on showing Batman's eyes? When have eyes ever been necessary for action heroes?