
Ben Affleck‘s reps have been cagey about this one for the past month because he’s in the middle of so many acting and directing possibilities. But Warner Bros confirms Affleck is now in talks to replace Tom Cruise in the Dan Fogelman-scripted Nathan Decker, about a disgraced politician whose career is undone by an affair and who comes home to confront his own past. Despite the confirmation, I’m told reliably that Affleck won’t make a deal until he sees a rewrite that will determine whether or not he’ll star in the film.


If there’s on thing we learned, movies with a random guy’s name can’t lose.
Right, because JERRY MAGUIRE and ERIN BROCKOVICH were such bombs. And BEN-HUR and LAWRENCE OF ARABIA and SHERLOCK HOLMES and on and on and on…
And JOHN CARTER wasn’t a random guy’s name, he was an iconic hero in an iconic property known to millions of people, if not every single tween roaming the hallways of our nation’s junior highs. But yes, it was a terrible title and the movie deserved to bomb.
I’ll actually refute my post because, although maybe not a smash, Michael Clayton was awesome.
Don’t forget Michael Clayton. But hasn’t Ben Affleck already played a politician? I do believe it was State of Play.
What’s happening with The Stand?
State of Play Redux?
No thanks Ben.
Move on.
You make such a valid and strong point and you just give in and agree with who u were replying to.
WB should just make a blanket statement that Ben is might star in and or direct every piece of material they have purchased over the last 3 years
Noooooooo. He can’t act
State of Play was AWESOME. The UK version with Bill Nigh, James McAvoy, Et al, that is. The US version of S.O.P. is on par with the US abomination of an Aussie treasure, “Kath and Kim”. It’s a shame that so many folks don’t see the originals. Sometimes, ya just gotta say NO.
affleck and Cruise in the same sentence are you kidding me?? NO comparison! Cruise would’ve saved this movie, I have no interest in this project anymore.