Arkham MAX and (Matt Reeves-produced?) spin-offs

[Invader Joker]

 

[Eddie Dean]

Ding ding ding, corporate speak for “I wasn’t part of the project but when it was first developed”

 

[Invader Joker]

Ding ding ding, corporate speak for “I wasn’t part of the project but when it was first developed”

I think it's more likely that it was all Matt's idea.

 

[Eddie Dean]

Ok.

 

[Invader Joker]

 

[Filmfreak]

Yeah, sure, Reeves originally had this developed as a spin-off to his own movie like he himself confirmed in the past and then changed it to fit to a larger universe before Gunn took over and before Reeves even had any idea what the new universe would look like or even the mere fact that there was even going to be a reboot of the DCEU in the first place. And that to you sounds like the most plausible scenario. K.

 

[emielaen]

Lol people are gonna run with Gunn is ruining Reeves' work for a cool day or two. That should be fun. If you thought Caped Crusader was a brilliant idea and it wouldn't harm Reeves' work then idk how this is much different or some inherently bad move.

 

[Invader Joker]

Yeah, sure, Reeves originally had this developed as a spin-off to his own movie like he himself confirmed in the past and then changed it to fit to a larger universe before Gunn took over and before Reeves even had any idea what the new universe would look like or even the mere fact that there was even going to be a reboot of the DCEU in the first place. And that to you sounds like the most plausible scenario. K.

Only two things would have to happen here:
-For Matt to decide, after hearing different pitches, the show would work best with a more established or fantastical rogues gallery than what his universe has.
-For Matt to HEAR that a new DCU is being created.

Then he decides "Wait. Maybe the Arkham show with a more established and fantastical rogues gallery would work for Gunn's DCU. Let me pitch it to him." He pitches it and Gunn accepts.

Why does ANY of that sound far fetched to you?

 

[Eddie Dean]

That's not what Gunn said. Gunn said that it was always developed for the DCU. Which we know is a lie.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Why do people implicitly trust everything James Gunn says? I love his movies too but his job is to do PR and run interference for DC as a brand. Specifically for a shared universe that literally doesn't exist yet. He's a corporate hype man. Of course he's going to spin stuff like this into a narrative that makes everything look good. "We didn't want to do more spin-offs for the already successful movie because it wouldn't be good for the branding of our movies that don't exist yet" is not an easy to sell statement.

 

[Invader Joker]

That's not what Gunn said. Gunn said that it was always developed for the DCU. Which we know is a lie.

He then clarified that it was that way since it was pitched to him and that's what he meant. Jesus christ what do you guys think happened here then?

 

[emielaen]

I imagine he meant since he was involved as a CEO/producer himself it was always a DCU show. If the big takeaway is that Gunn is lying then.. okay? lol he ain't a politician or my partner so I'm not too worried about that. If this show even gets made, it being good or not won't weigh on him having lied about it's conception.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

He then clarified that it was that way since it was pitched to him and that's what he meant. Jesus christ what do you guys think happened here then?

My best guess would be that Gunn and co aren't actually particularly interested in Elseworlds stuff and view it as fundamentally a stumbling block in their desire to have a shared universe they control. The spin offs are an easy thing to rework to minimize anything being made by DC that isn't part of their thing.

It's not about the show itself, I don't care about this idea - I find Arkham stuff is normally boring and lame. But I do think it's a red flag.

 

[Invader Joker]

Why do people implicitly trust everything James Gunn says? I love his movies too but his job is to do PR and run interference for DC as a brand. Specifically for a shared universe that literally doesn't exist yet. He's a corporate hype man. Of course he's going to spin stuff like this into a narrative that makes everything look good. "We didn't want to do more spin-offs for the already successful movie because it wouldn't be good for the branding of our movies that don't exist yet" is not an easy to sell statement.

Because in this case the PR response actually lines up and makes perfect sense down to the fact Antonio Campos got announced the EXACT SAME DAY Gunn got announced. It also answers the important question of: Why do they feel so comfortable having a DCU Batman movie while Pattinson trilogy hasn't ended yet? Answer: Reeves is fine with it and actively encouraged it by pitching an Arkham show set in DCU.

 

[Eddie Dean]

lol

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Because in this case the PR response actually lines up and makes perfect sense down to the fact Antonio Campos got announced the EXACT SAME DAY Gunn got announced. It also answers the important question of: Why do they feel so comfortable having a DCU Batman movie while Pattinson trilogy hasn't ended yet? Answer: Reeves is fine with it and actively encouraged it by pitching an Arkham show set in DCU.

They feel comfortable with it because the DCU is a purely cynical exercise with no purpose other than another doomed effort at recreating the MCU's success and this requires a Batman. Reeves has sufficient clout they can't really force him to play ball, his movies are successful and him being forced out would be terrible PR for them - and Gunn is clearly intensely focused on PR. I have no idea how Reeves feels about it and won't speculate, clearly he's playing ball with them a bit on this but it is transparently obvious this was meant to be a spin-off from The Batman.

 

[Filmfreak]

Only two things would have to happen here:
-For Matt to decide, after hearing different pitches, the show would work best with a more established or fantastical rogues gallery than what his universe has.
-For Matt to HEAR that a new DCU is being created.

Then he decides "Wait. Maybe the Arkham show with a more established and fantastical rogues gallery would work for Gunn's DCU. Let me pitch it to him." He pitches it and Gunn accepts.

Why does ANY of that sound far fetched to you?

Because why wouldn't he want this in his own universe like the Penguin series or the GCPD show before it was scrapped, or even this show like it was originally planned? Having it be a part of something bigger limits the creative freedom that can be offered to a filmmaker and leaves the project open for other people to potentially do as they wish with certain aspects or characters of it.

And why would he even consider doing that before he had any idea what this new universe would be and how this project would fit in?

Also let's be real. When Gunn took over no one had any idea what was going to happen with DC films, not even him. WB was pushing for a Cavill Superman film and/or Black Adam crossover and there were many scenarios where the universe would continue as it was with slight changes. The decision was made after Black Adam tanked and the Cavill thing fell through. So he couldn't have heard anything because no one knew anything. Even Gunn himself didn't figure this out in his first day in charge.

So yeah, this sounds very much like something that changed after a while. What would you really expect Gunn to say if that was the case? "It was originally conceived as something else in a successfully preestablished universe and then I changed it because I want to push for my own universe to justify my existence as head of DC Films"?

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Does anyone honestly think Gunn would be open to the Elseworlds idea if he wasn't essentially stuck with it because he has two filmmakers who have made significantly more money for the studio with their own franchises in play? Everything he's said about the Elseworlds concept makes that pretty clear to me. "They'd have to be really, really extra special super good" is 100% a euphemism for "No".

 

[C Prometheus]

Because why wouldn't he want this in his own universe like the Penguin series or the GCPD show before it was scrapped, or even this show like it was originally planned? Having it be a part of something bigger limits the creative freedom that can be offered to a filmmaker and leaves the project open for other people to potentially do as they wish with certain aspects or characters of it.

And why would he even consider doing that before he had any idea what this new universe would be and how this project would fit in?

Also let's be real. When Gunn took over no one had any idea what was going to happen with DC films, not even him. WB was pushing for a Cavill Superman film and/or Black Adam crossover and there were many scenarios where the universe would continue as it was with slight changes. The decision was made after Black Adam tanked and the Cavill thing fell through. So he couldn't have heard anything because no one knew anything. Even Gunn himself didn't figure this out in his first day in charge.

So yeah, this sounds very much like something that changed after a while. What would you really expect Gunn to say if that was the case? "It was originally conceived as something else in a successfully preestablished universe and then I changed it because I want to push for my own universe to justify my existence as head of DC Films"?

Bingo. On the one hand, I guess it's nice to hear that Reeves will have some sort of presence on the DCU Batman. But I'm not particularly pleased to hear that it's likely compromising and siphoning away some of the neat project ideas that were supposed to be in the BatVerse initially.

Does anyone honestly think Gunn would be open to the Elseworlds idea if he wasn't essentially stuck with it because he has two filmmakers who have made significantly more money for the studio with their own franchises in play? Everything he's said about the Elseworlds concept makes that pretty clear to me. "They'd have to be really, really extra special super good" is 100% a euphemism for "No".

I can maybe see Gunn keeping true to the Elseworlds banner outside out of Joker and The Batman Saga for projects that overtly require the Elseworlds moniker, like say an adaptation of Gotham by Gaslight or Red Son. But yeah, this almost certainly came about because the two biggest successes for DC when Gunn and Safran took over were two out-of-continuity projects that were clearly self-contained.

 

[Eddie Dean]

Does anyone honestly think Gunn would be open to the Elseworlds idea if he wasn't essentially stuck with it because he has two filmmakers who have made significantly more money for the studio with their own franchises in play? Everything he's said about the Elseworlds concept makes that pretty clear to me. "They'd have to be really, really extra special super good" is 100% a euphemism for "No".

Which will be even funnier once Joker 2 and The Batman 2 far outgross Legacy.

 

[Filmfreak]

Does anyone honestly think Gunn would be open to the Elseworlds idea if he wasn't essentially stuck with it because he has two filmmakers who have made significantly more money for the studio with their own franchises in play? Everything he's said about the Elseworlds concept makes that pretty clear to me. "They'd have to be really, really extra special super good" is 100% a euphemism for "No".

Yeah and also these projects were more ore less already in development.

Because in this case the PR response actually lines up and makes perfect sense down to the fact Antonio Campos got announced the EXACT SAME DAY Gunn got announced. It also answers the important question of: Why do they feel so comfortable having a DCU Batman movie while Pattinson trilogy hasn't ended yet? Answer: Reeves is fine with it and actively encouraged it by pitching an Arkham show set in DCU.

You keep using that argument as if this is how business works. In his first day of trying to decide what to do with the universe Gunn decided to hire a showrunner for a spin-off that was going to be a part of a universe he himself hadn't even decided at that point.

I can maybe see Gunn keeping true to the Elseworlds banner outside out of Joker and The Batman Saga for projects that overtly require the Elseworlds moniker, like say an adaptation of Gotham by Gaslight or Red Son. But yeah, this almost certainly came about because the two biggest successes for DC when Gunn and Safran took over were two out-of-continuity projects that were clearly self-contained.

What makes it even more ironic is that cinematic universes are tanking everywhere at the moment. They desperately want to copy that Marvel recipe for years and are having another go at it, at a moment where people are not even responding to the MCU. I swear we could have a decade of cinematic universes literally bombing with each outing and corporates would still try to replicate the glory days of the pre-pandemic era as if audience needs are not evolving.

 

[Eddie Dean]

WB has the Nolan trilogy, Joker and The Batman as proven ways to make profitable comic book movies and a giant disaster called the DCEU to show how not to do it and they're going to try to do the DCEU again lol.

 

[emielaen]

Kinda ignoring execution and the actual films there, no? They're also doing the other thing as well?

 

[Invader Joker]

They feel comfortable with it because the DCU is a purely cynical exercise with no purpose other than another doomed effort at recreating the MCU's success and this requires a Batman. Reeves has sufficient clout they can't really force him to play ball, his movies are successful and him being forced out would be terrible PR for them - and Gunn is clearly intensely focused on PR. I have no idea how Reeves feels about it and won't speculate, clearly he's playing ball with them a bit on this but it is transparently obvious this was meant to be a spin-off from The Batman.

Because why wouldn't he want this in his own universe like the Penguin series or the GCPD show before it was scrapped, or even this show like it was originally planned? Having it be a part of something bigger limits the creative freedom that can be offered to a filmmaker and leaves the project open for other people to potentially do as they wish with certain aspects or characters of it.

And why would he even consider doing that before he had any idea what this new universe would be and how this project would fit in?

Also let's be real. When Gunn took over no one had any idea what was going to happen with DC films, not even him. WB was pushing for a Cavill Superman film and/or Black Adam crossover and there were many scenarios where the universe would continue as it was with slight changes. The decision was made after Black Adam tanked and the Cavill thing fell through. So he couldn't have heard anything because no one knew anything. Even Gunn himself didn't figure this out in his first day in charge.

So yeah, this sounds very much like something that changed after a while. What would you really expect Gunn to say if that was the case? "It was originally conceived as something else in a successfully preestablished universe and then I changed it because I want to push for my own universe to justify my existence as head of DC Films"?

I think one crucial, crucial detail you guys are COMPLETELY missing is the fact that Reeves universe right now is way, way, way more restrictive for projects like this than the DCU is. The Reeves universe is great—and it's also Reeves universe. They have to follow a very specific Batman and Gotham that Matt created, they have to be ridiculously aware of anything he has planned for his next 2 films which is probably also mega specific. There is pretty much zero creative freedom to be had on the Reevesverse because the only person that has that creative freedom at the end of the day is Matt Reeves. Even The Penguin is just looking to copy on a cheaper budget Matt's aesthetic.

Meanwhile, the DCU has no Batman established yet. It has no Gotham established. It has no look or designs established. It's all a blank page in that regard, and Brave and the Bold (which also doesn't have a script yet) is EXTREMELY unlikely to feature any of those rogues gallery villains in any sort of prominent ways.

It does not sound far fetched at all that yes, Matt at first thought "maybe we can make an Arkham show in my universe" but then as he met with actual showrunners and actual writers he realized that his world had faaar too many limitations and that an Arkham show would actually benefit from being in another universe that was a blank slate, which the DCU in regards to Batman undeniably is.

An Arkham show in the Reevesverse sounded cool, it could've been cool, but it also doesn't sound far fetched AT ALL how an Arkham show where they have access to all the rogues gallery villains and where they can do whatever they want with the lore on the hands of a talented, established showrunner might work a lot better, and how that's something that Matt probably ultimately recognized, being someone that demanded creative freedom himself. In recognizing that, he pitched it to Gunn as part of the DCU which is again, a blank slate right now, and Gunn accepted.

 

[Eddie Dean]

Kinda ignoring execution and the actual films there, no? They're also doing the other thing as well?

It's true, Superman Legacy could be amazing, but I have my doubts!