Ben Affleck: Overrated or Underrated?

The storm has calmed. Fans are taking a few breaths. Now that the reality of Ben Affleck being the next Batman has set in and the tide of overly snide #Batfleck tweets has been stemmed, somewhat, by other Bat-related gossip about the upcoming sequel to Man of Steel, cooler heads can now prevail with a level-headed assessment of the man’s lively screen career.

Have his matinee-idol looks helped him as an actor…or hurt him by limiting the kinds of roles he can play? What to make of his directing talents?—after all, his 2012 film Argo won the Best Picture Oscar…and Affleck didn’t even make the cut to score a Best Director nomination, let alone a trophy. Clearly some people must feel him to be overrated, while the public surprise greeting that snub reveals others to likely consider him underrated.

Movie Irv is ready for the challenge:

Irv didn’t mention Daredevil, so let me be one among the apparently very few to say that I thought he did well by the role in an underrated movie (that even Affleck now underrates!)—so that alone should tell you what my vote would be.  And I never needed to forgive him for Gigli, because I never saw it. (That might also be one more reason I can still be High on J. Lo) But let’s turn the discussion over to you now, and how you rate le cinéma de Ben Affleck…

  • mike

    Very over rated.

  • akentg

    I first recall seeing him in “Shakespeare in Love” where he played the ego driven lead actor. I thought it the best performance in the film which did not receive proper recognition. But every detail of that performance was clear, precise, and always on point. I became a fan. I feel his disaster work, such Gigli, were a result of his extracurricular activities more than his work. But, with his successful marriage and maturity he seems happy and able to do his job extremely well. His work as producer/director may remain his greatest achievement as time goes by ( he certainly has grown more than his old time buddy from earlier days). It is hard for anyone who has to take the criticism he has for being unwise in earlier days, but he has had the last laugh. Yes, he has been underrated–but no more.

  • TrippyTrellis

    He’s a fine, charismatic actor and a great director. He has been seriously underrated.

  • Dene Ann

    He is great looking, a very good actor and director. Good looks and a family haven’t hurt Hugh Jackman! We need MORE Tall, handsome actors…that can act! I’m happy to hear he will be the new Batman, he’ll bring his own “thing” to that role as all the rest have done, and besides he will become rich from the movie! He looks better, acts better, directs better than a lot of the so called “hunks” in Hollywood that have to have very short actresses so they can tower over them. I always look forward to an Affleck movie and I wish him the best of luck in his endeavors!

  • wade

    I found Argo very over rated and that sort of affects my opinion of him now and the fact that it won best picture Oscar certainly affects my opinion of the validity of the Academy Awards

  • Jeffry Heise

    I think that with age comes wisdom and maturity, and Affleck has paid his dues. He was pretty much a “himbo” earlier in his career with both PEARL HARBOR and GIGLI as his acting nadirs. His resurgence began with HOLLYWOODLAND and his terrific performance as George Reeves, and it solidified with two directorial outings-the compelling GONE, BABY, GONE and the intense and powerful THE TOWN, a film that got raves from many for his work on both sides of the camera. ARGO was not my pick for the best film of 2012 (that honor goes to a tie-LINCOLN & SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK) but it was right up there, and the last half hour of that film is almost unbearably tense even though you know it was a happy ending-I cannot find any major or even minor flaw in that film. As for the brouhaha over his portraying Batman, all I can say is-it’s only a movie, folks, not al Queda. I personally think he will do well in the part, and considering the uproar when Michael Keaton was announced for the role in 1988 and how he managed to win over people (I do not recall the same furor over Val Kilmer, whom I thought was incredibly physically miscast; and George Clooney, who was probably the closest we will ever get to how Bob Kane physically portrayed him but who happened to be in perhaps the worst superhero movie ever made), so I just wish people would shut up and give Affleck a chance. If nothing else, if it is discovered that his casting was a mistake, it still will not come within a million miles of the casting of Tom Cruise in INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE-that will be the baseline of a screwup as far as casting is concerned for years to come! Affleck is definitely NOT overrated-no way.

  • FalmouthBill

    I agree, in his early years he was vacuous at best, his co-hort Matt Damon left him in the dust early on. He is somewhat more palatable to me nowadays, but still not a reason “alone” to watch his films. I rely on his particular costar/s of any of his movies to decide if I’ll be bothered to watch them.
    I had, and still have, the same problem with Leonardo DiCaprio, he is given all the plum roles, and still impresses me not. The only time I thought he was a good actor was in his early role in the “Gilbert Grape” movie.
    Again, I’ll end with Dennis Millers great line, “that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong” !