Ben Affleck was banned from the Hard Rock blackjack table for counting cards

Ben Affleck was banned from the Hard Rock blackjack table for counting cards

He was all the way to 47 before they stopped him.

Kidding aside ...

Card-counting, and adjusting the bets accordingly, is not something mastered by dummies. Ol' Reindeer Games seems to have quite a good head on his shoulders, although he has never demonstrated that in any public appearance. I was shocked to find out he's that smart, although I was even more shocked back in 2006-07, when he did a brilliant job at writing and directing "Gone Baby Gone," after turning in a competent acting performance in Hollywoodland.

And still, even after all that, I can't erase the memory of Surviving Christmas.

Reader comment:

Affleck suffers from the curse of the “leading man” type. Born into a different body, Affleck could have made a fine character actor. He has plenty of talent. He just doesn’t have charisma. He keeps being offered leading man roles because he is good looking. But he doesn’t have that quality…whatever it is, that Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt have which induces people to fork over mountains of cash to watch them fight aliens or zombies. Affleck could have been great (and occasionally is) playing main characters in small movies or supporting characters in big movies.

Colin Farrell suffers the same problem, he is a character actor stuck in a leading man’s body. No one wants to see him play Alexander the Great (okay, that was a cheap shot), but Farrell is perfect as a charming, alcoholic father in Saving Mr. Banks, or a Country star in Crazy Heart. He and Affleck can star in smaller, character-driven films such as In Bruges and Argo. But they can’t seem to say no when a big budget movie like Total Recall or Batman are offered to them. The payday must be tempting, but afterwards they are stuck digging their way out the career pothole left by a big budget flop.

Scoop's note:

I've always felt approximately the same way, although I'd word it differently. Affleck is handsome, but sinister-looking, a combination unsuited for leading man work. He's more similar to Powers Booth than to Christopher Reeve. I would place Ryan Gosling, Clive Owen, Cumberbatch, Sean Bean and Colin Farrell in the handsome-but-menacing group as well. Everyone in that group is suited to be an elegant villain, or a Bogart-style hero, but they should leave the nice guy roles to Colin Firth, Hugh Jackman and Tom Hanks. Affleck spent altogether too much time trying to be James Stewart, when he should have been moving more toward James Dean.

Matthew McConaughey was also a member of the handsome-but-slightly-off-center group, and he's joined Affleck in winning awards by dumping the "dream boyfriend" act and embracing his inner character actor. (Well, to be fair, McConaughey has shown some acting chops. While Affleck has convinced me he can write, direct and produce, I've yet to become convinced of his acting talent.)

Curiously, Firth has gone in the opposite direction. We now picture him as a pillar of decency, but in his youth he was cast as the cold, calculating Valmont, the same role played by John Malkovich in a rival production! Looking at their careers since then, it's difficult to believe those two guys were once cast in the same part! Imagine Malkovich as Mark Darcy.

One small disagreement with your points. You imply that Affleck will bomb as Batman. I don't see that. Batman himself is a member of the attractive-but-sinister club. In the DC universe he seems to be a good guy because he fights bad guys who are threatening to destroy civilization. In the real world, Batman would BE a villain. Furthermore, no acting chops are needed to play Batman. Christian Bale is talented, but that role for him was just a suit and a silly voice. Some acting ability is required to play Bruce Wayne, but that's not a Jimmy Stewart role, either. Except for Clooney, the previous Bruce Waynes have all been members of the handsome-but-sinister club. And Clooney was the one who sucked at the job.