The internet has spoken: We do not disrespect Christian Bale.
For reference, Pattinson is playing the titular superhero in DC and Warner Bros.' latest Bruce Wayne film, due out June 2021. He replaces Ben Affleck, who reprised the role in "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" and "Justice League," who replaced Bale in "Batman Begins," "The Dark Knight" and "The Dark Knight Rises."
"The Batman" is meant to be a more noir, emotional version of the Dark Knight's story, putting Bruce Wayne in a complicated position to save Gotham City. Though we were all a little skeptical when the casting choice first broke, the role actually suits Pattinson quite well. He's probably most well-known for "Twilight," but the 34-year-old actor has taken a different path in his career over the last eight or so years, pulling out impressive performances in independent films like "The Lighthouse," "Good Time" and "High Life." Bruce Wayne has always been broody; it's Pattinson's aesthetic incarnate.
So, Meg's not wrong there: While we'll wait until next year for our official analysis, Pattinson can probably do Batman. Where she messed up, however, was insinuating that Bale couldn't do Edward Cullen.
I mean, have you seen Christian Bale? I'm not sure anyone really knows what he actually looks or sounds like -- that's how much he completely transforms into his characters.
Like, this is the same person.
So, yes, Meg, Bale could most definitely do Edward Cullen. In fact, maybe he should have.
The Twitterverse didn't let her get away with this abysmal analysis, lighting up her replies and retweets with antitheses that made the point very clear: Both actors are great in their own ways, but Bale can act the pants off of any role thrown his way. "American Hustle"? Patrick Bateman? The Laurie to Winona Ryder's Jo March?! C'mon, Meg.
In conclusion: Christian Bale.