DC Movies- if at first you don't succeed...

[Spence]

 

On 7/18/2022 at 8:38 PM, Bazza said:

 

 

I've never been a fan of the grim dark Casual-Killer Man movies that replaced Superman under Snyder.  But the Snyder cut was 100%....no 1000% better than the theatrical version.  

 

On 8/4/2022 at 3:35 PM, Scott Ruggels said:

Most interesting is that, Zaslav said that the vaulting of Batgirl was done to "protect the brand",

 

Everything I read or listened to indicated that Batgirl was brutally bad and provoked a very very negative reaction from test audiences.  Initial statements announcing it being canned mentioned that. 

Then suddenly it was it was all about tax write-offs and "it was a good movie but..." statements.  I think they are just saying that so they can try to avoid any possible legal repercussions.  After all modern movies have a lot of stake holders.

 

 

[Scott Ruggels]

 The speculation is that he will be removed wholesale from the movie, and replaced. Who his replacement is, is unknown at this time, but the general rule is that if an actor is de-casted, then they have to be completely removed from the film for contractual reasons. He is still paid for his time, but no further pay from the movie.

[slikmar]

45 minutes ago, Spence said:

Everything I read or listened to indicated that Batgirl was brutally bad and provoked a very very negative reaction from test audiences.  Initial statements announcing it being canned mentioned that. 

Then suddenly it was it was all about tax write-offs and "it was a good movie but..." statements.  I think they are just saying that so they can try to avoid any possible legal repercussions.  After all modern movies have a lot of stake holders.

Yes, but IIRC, the it was bad thats why it was canned came from WB, but the tax write-off stuff came from people outside.

[unclevlad]

10 minutes ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 The speculation is that he will be removed wholesale from the movie, and replaced. Who his replacement is, is unknown at this time, but the general rule is that if an actor is de-casted, then they have to be completely removed from the film for contractual reasons. He is still paid for his time, but no further pay from the movie.

 

That sounds right...but...

https://epicstream.com/article/ezra-miller-removed-from-daliland-tiff-credits

 

Miller is listed in IMDb as playing Young Dali, so he's probably in a decent number of scenes that are presumably important to the story development, and it's much too late to even consider reshoots, since it gets released in mid September.  I expect this is the producers doing the most they feel they can...and Miller's involvement came before his toxicity escalated to polonium-like levels.  

 

3 minutes ago, slikmar said:

Yes, but IIRC, the it was bad thats why it was canned came from WB, but the tax write-off stuff came from people outside.

 

That was what I saw, too.  And the "it was horribly bad" could well be true, but it's also potentially pure CYA.  I don't believe WB in the slightest, not given that they're gutting HBO Max regardless.  Remember Babylon 5?  And PTEN?  And how higher ups wanted PTEN to die, as they were trying to form The WB at the time.  So...they did.  They killed Kung Fu, and basically forced Claudia Christian off the show.  (She wanted to do a movie, that was gonna pay a LOT more.  She would've had to be written out of scripts for a chunk of the season...but that would've been quite manageable.  The studio said No, so she quit.)  This has a similar feel, of the executive suite more interested in getting its way, collateral damage be damned.

 

Another argument:  the video, and other outlets, mentioned that both Batgirl and Supergirl have been viewed as being too woke.  Whether that's a real factor or not...they're both dead in the water.  Also, that kind of characterization frequently does translate into a good-sized segment *loathing* a movie, so the "it's too horrible to let live" charge has a basis.  

[Scott Ruggels]

We’ll see, but they added another charge to Miller today.  I would not be surprised if they just scrap it, though the preview audiences and the executives seemed to think it was a fun movie.   

[Ternaugh]

2 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Well yeah I think they should have dumped him years ago but they seem determined to keep him in the movie for some reason.  Probably cost, its super expensive to reshoot every scene of the main character.

 

Apparently, it's a common request for effects houses to add or remove characters from scenes using CGI, and that's in movies that don't use animations of a character to show the speed force.

[Bazza]

1 hour ago, Spence said:

 

 

I've never been a fan of the grim dark Casual-Killer Man movies that replaced Superman under Snyder.  But the Snyder cut was 100%....no 1000% better than the theatrical version.  

 

 

The Snyder film I enjoyed before his for-way into DCEU was Sucker Punch and this is more for the imaginative scenes not the “real world” scenes. In other words hit-and-miss. His JL cut is — likewise for me — hit and miss. Parts I enjoy, other parts I’d now skip. And still the most enjoyable DCEU film for me is Whedon’s JL. Snyder’s come a close second. 
 

 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Apparently, it's a common request for effects houses to add or remove characters from scenes using CGI, and that's in movies that don't use animations of a character to show the speed force.

 

All of the distortion and lightning effects probably make it pretty easy to replace the face on a sped up character, so that should help if they go with the replacement route.  At this point while people who know think Ezra Miller is a violent child-molesting lunatic, most people do not even know who he is, so his antics might not pull the movie down if they replace him like it would if the publicity was more significant.

[Scott Ruggels]

Okay, this article is clearer, on why they cannot out and out cancel and vault The Flash. 
 

https://arkhavencomics.com/2022/08/09/ezra-miller-charged-with-felony-burglary/

 

I am including the next day’s article on the coming “Pop” of the streaming bubble.  
 

https://arkhavencomics.com/2022/08/10/the-coming-streaming-collapse/

 

Zaslav is concentrating on making Warner Brothers profitable and stable. As a result, the studio, going forward, may be more respectful of the character’s past.  

 

[Ternaugh]

3 minutes ago, Scott Ruggels said:

Okay, this article is clearer, on why they cannot out and out cancel and vault The Flash. 
 

https://arkhavencomics.com/2022/08/09/ezra-miller-charged-with-felony-burglary/

 

I am including the next day’s article on the coming “Pop” of the streaming bubble.  
 

https://arkhavencomics.com/2022/08/10/the-coming-streaming-collapse/

 

Zaslav is concentrating on making Warner Brothers profitable and stable. As a result, the studio, going forward, may be more respectful of the character’s past.  

 

 

Short answer without the political or "woke" commentary from the first linked article: The Flash is a co-production with funding from outside of Warner, and therefore can't be written down without major financial penalties.

 

Given the quality of the first link, I did not bother with the second.

[Michael Hopcroft]

Besides, we've already seen the best Flash movie of the decade. It's called Sonic the Hedgehog...

 

 

[IndianaJoe3]

On 8/10/2022 at 10:31 PM, Old Man said:

 

"We're not Marvel."

[slikmar]

1 hour ago, IndianaJoe3 said:

 

"We're not Marvel."

I would say "we don't want to spend years building up viewers trust, we want their money now".

[Christopher R Taylor]

I don't suppose anyone is arguing that it is impossible for someone to make a profitable Batgirl movie; I know that I'd love to see a good Barbara Gordon film and I know a lot of other fans would -- she's a very beloved character.  The question is whether or not this Batgirl film could e profitable and by reports it was a real stinker that would have bombed and the DCU does not have any residual good will from great movies of the past like MCU does.

[Ternaugh]

2 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

I don't suppose anyone is arguing that it is impossible for someone to make a profitable Batgirl movie; I know that I'd love to see a good Barbara Gordon film and I know a lot of other fans would -- she's a very beloved character.  The question is whether or not this Batgirl film could e profitable and by reports it was a real stinker that would have bombed and the DCU does not have any residual good will from great movies of the past like MCU does.

 

Schrodinger's Batgirl

Good or terrible? The state's unknown until observed.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

 

Schrodinger's Batgirl

Good or terrible? The state's unknown until observed.

 

 

Best data we have on it right now was that it was awful, and inductive logic gives the most likely conclusion being that it must have been something that cannot have made them money, but we may never know.  I will miss seeing Brendan Frasier as Firefly, though.

[Old Man]

Takeaways from yesterday's Variety article:

• Batgirl was shot for streaming, not theaters, leading to the poor screening results
• Reshooting Batgirl for theatrical release would be too expensive
• DC streaming releases appear to be almost entirely dead because Zaslav is an idiot
• The cancellation of Batgirl has pissed off the exec in charge of the DCEU
• No one else wants the job, which is viewed as toxic (see Miller, Ezra)

Tl;dr: It's not looking optimistic for the DCEU.

 

[slikmar]

And until we here it was that horrible from someone other then WB, etc. do we take them at their word, or as people have surmised, it was a CYA so they would not spend any more money on the movie. I will not be surprised if sometime in the next year or so we do not see this movie appear on some streaming/other channel in an attempt to recoup at least some of the costs. Sadly, as it apparently was not done, it will never really be good.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Batgirl was shot for streaming, not theaters, leading to the poor screening results

 

I mean, nobody who saw prerelease versions said "it looked low defintion" or "the visuals were poor," they said things like "that was dumb" and "that was the worst DC movie I've ever seen" so this reads more like an excuse by the people who made it than actual analysis by the viewers.

[Pattern Ghost]

9 hours ago, Ternaugh said:

Given the quality of the first link, I did not bother with the second.

 

I read the second link first, and agree in reverse.

[Matt the Bruins]

7 hours ago, Ternaugh said:

 

Schrodinger's Batgirl

 

So it featured the Cassandra Cain version of the character?

[Grailknight]

11 hours ago, Matt the Bruins said:

 

So it featured the Cassandra Cain version of the character?

 

No, Hollywood can't handle the Cassandra Cain Batgirl. Just reading about her childhood would have them in a frothing fit but if you soften it, you ruin the character.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

So it featured the Cassandra Cain version of the character?

 

Second favorite batgirl after Barbara Gordon, but for some reason DC hates her and wants her to just never have existed.

[Scott Ruggels]

 SO what is expected to be released is  Black Adam, Shazam 2, and on the fence, The Flash. With the new production protocols,  Any new movies will be  only theatricals, first, Then POD, Then Blue Ray, And finally HBOMax after 6 months.  Zaslav is treating the Streaming release, the same as cable for films.  However, productions for HBO(Max as first run, will now be treated like standard Television, in terms of budgets, with some exceptions (Game of Thrones, or other such "Prestige" Television). 

[Ternaugh]

1 hour ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 SO what is expected to be released is  Black Adam, Shazam 2, and on the fence, The Flash. With the new production protocols,  Any new movies will be  only theatricals, first, Then POD, Then Blue Ray, And finally HBOMax after 6 months.  Zaslav is treating the Streaming release, the same as cable for films.  However, productions for HBO(Max as first run, will now be treated like standard Television, in terms of budgets, with some exceptions (Game of Thrones, or other such "Prestige" Television). 

 

Peacock/Universal has some films released same-day, but it's smaller films like the Firestarter remake, not films like the latest Jurassic World. Disney seems to have given up on the same-day premium releases, but most theatrical releases seem to be on a 45-day schedule to Disney+, which would probably match the curve for both profit and revenue on a theatrical release.

 

Warner's model seems to be a return to the process before the 2020 shutdown, which might work for them if there's demand for the films in theaters like what Paramount's Top Gun: Maverick has been experiencing. It assumes that every theatrical release is popular for a wide audience, though, so it may mean a turning away from some of the quirkier productions that they've had recently (Gunn's The Suicide Squad comes to mind). The focus on Blu-ray would be interesting, as physical media sales have been in decline for several years now, and Warner had previously wound down its Warner Archive, which used to be a good source for old movies on disc. Perhaps, the thought is that increasing the time to streaming may help with selling physical product. Given the way that HBOmax appears to be managing their collection now, it might be a good idea to have a physical copy of a movie you like, as it could be gone from the service without warning.