Batgirl 'Batgirl' movie? - Part 1

[Venom 1988]

Just saw this. Looks like the search for DC's Feige continues.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/06/dan...nd-tv-boss-role-at-warner-bros-discovery.html

 

[Arachnerd]

The Reports were basically WBD insiders trying to spin a controversial( at best), move to shelve the film.

They wanted to get out ahead of it and spin the narrative.

They thought sound and fury from "insiders" about a " irredeemable film " would be enough to put to rest any questions about Zaslav's judgement .

Instead , it did the exact opposite, in typical WB fashion.

Ironically, same excuses were being given for Snyder's Justice League back when Whedon was handling the whole thing.

Just saw this. Looks like the search for DC's Feige continues.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/06/dan...nd-tv-boss-role-at-warner-bros-discovery.html

Guy heard one minute of Zaslav spouting his vision for the DCEU and immediately noped out of there. Definitely a good sign.

 

[metaphysician]

I think this argument has been done to death. Almost every live-action Batman has killed from time to time, but Affleck on BvS is at a whole other level. Blowing up guys, stabbing, branding, torturing them and planning to kill an alien who saved a city for the 1% possibility that he may end up being a villain some day is nothing short of a Punisher-like character.

I have to disagree. That's a rather unfair and injust comparison. . . to the Punisher. Frank wouldn't have even considered going after Superman even in spite of the mistakes in MoS, for example; and while he might torture someone for information ( though even that is something Frank isn't always up for doing ), he'd probably find "brand someone so they get murdered in prison" unnecessarily prolonged and baroque versus just shooting someone. I suspect he'd find the "mass murder to steal kryptonite" part iffy, too- while he would have no problem murdering his way through mob foot soldiers or ruthless mercenaries, as punishment for their own misdeeds, doing so purely as a means to steal something for use towards something else? Ehhh.

 

[metaphysician]

I went from incredibly excited about Affleck to sick at my stomach from the characterization. There’s a huge difference between flipping a hot iron out of a fire pit such that it catches a building on fire and shooting folks up with machine guns. At least to me. Maybe others don’t feel that there is a distinction.

For me, I'd say the more important difference is the framing. When the Bale Batman killed someone, it was ( almost ) always set up as an act of mortal necessity, and typically that of an underdog. When the Affleck Batman killed someone, by contrast it was set up as a power fantasy, showing how invincible and unstoppable Batman is. It came off a lot more like "Watch as Batman stomps on helpless kittens", since for all that Batman is theoretically human, in BvS he was portrayed as just as much of a horror movie OCP to the normal human cast as Superman was.

( This, btw, is why I think the Warehouse Fight still mostly works, even though he's still a murder machine there. He is absolutely killing his way through mercenary mooks that are mostly helpless against him. . . but the scene both establishes the necessity of swift action by way of hostage timer, and establishes the complete lack of sympathy for the villains by the same hostage timer. Its the kind of scene where you'd *expect* a hero without fervent CvK would be taking the gloves off and leaving a bunch of dead villains. )

 

[Arachnerd]

...this thread is de-evolving into another tired Batfleck argument, so I'm gonna jump ship.

 

[Castor troy]

That would require one brain cell though.

This was genuinely awful, releasing it would not have done anything for the DC brand.

 

[Arachnerd]

No it wasn't, there isn't any actual proof that it was. Legitimate sources have provided that this got positive to mixed reactions. The "irredemeable" and "unwatchable" notions were thrown by New York Post whose reputation isn't exactly well received on US social media.

Also, Zaslav literally confirmed that it was a tax write-off (and that it probably didn't fit his vision of the DCEU), it had nothing to do with its quality. Actually do some research next time instead of treating clickbait hyperbole articles as gospel.

 

[Filmfreak]

Even if it was truly awful, further damaging the relationships between WB and talent for years to come is far worse than releasing one more bad DC film, like we haven't seen much worse films from them all these years anyway. It's incredibly short-sighted to suggest otherwise.

 

[Frodo]

It was a foolish and egotistical move on Zaslav's part , and if anything , it's done them far more harm to WB than releasing Batgirl ever would have.

 

[Frodo]

And speaking of tone deaf and foolish
‘Batgirl’s Demise Was “Blown Out Of Proportion” By Press, Warner Bros Discovery CFO Says: “Media Likes To Talk About Media” – Deadline

 

[Arachnerd]

The fact that they're defending this and acting as if the reaction has been nothing but hyperbole is laughable.

Yes, quite the great relationship you have with talent. Guess that justifies canning most of your animated content and burning bridges with the creators, not to mention selling a new Batman animated series to other networks for no discernible reason.

 

[Frodo]

They're also trying to save face on the eve of Marvel/ Disney announcing major new, consistent projects ,and continued successes, while WB is talking about a " ten year plan" to get their act together , basically.

 

[Castor troy]

No it wasn't, there isn't any actual proof that it was. Legitimate sources have provided that this got positive to mixed reactions. The "irredemeable" and "unwatchable" notions were thrown by New York Post whose reputation isn't exactly well received on US social media.

Also, Zaslav literally confirmed that it was a tax write-off (and that it probably didn't fit his vision of the DCEU), it had nothing to do with its quality. Actually do some research next time instead of treating clickbait hyperbole articles as gospel.

Well as someone who's actually seen it that's just my opinion. Yes, that doesn't make it a fact but that's how I felt about it.

 

[Frodo]

If you actually saw the film, then tells us what actually happens in it , including how it ends.
What's so awful about it that it, shouldn't have been finished or released?

 

[Babillygunn]

I guess when you have the face of Nic Cage you get to see unreleased movies?

 

[Castor troy]

I guess when you have the face of Nic Cage you get to see unreleased movies?

Something like that.

 

[Arachnerd]

Well as someone who's actually seen it that's just my opinion. Yes, that doesn't make it a fact but that's how I felt about it.

Oh yeah, I forgot. You're that one guy on this entire forum who's always claiming to be an insider even though I've seen no evidence proving it. You'll forgive me if I choose to trust the word of ViewerAnon (an insider who has provided legit information on movies both here and on social media) over you.

And let's assume that, hypothetically, I believe you here. I refer you to @Filmfreak 's point in the previous page:

Even if it was truly awful, further damaging the relationships between WB and talent for years to come is far worse than releasing one more bad DC film, like we haven't seen much worse films from them all these years anyway. It's incredibly short-sighted to suggest otherwise.

And not to mention, my aforementioned reference of how the animation section and its creators were treated by Zaslav's mindnumbingly stupid decisions. Drastic creative choices like these should not be applauded nor become the norm in Hollywood, it's a good way for directors to not want to work with your company. If you're honestly in support of any of that, then nothing you say here matters because you're not on the side of artistic integrity.

 

[Castor troy]

Oh yeah, I forgot. You're that one guy on this entire forum who's always claiming to be an insider even though I've seen no evidence proving it. You'll forgive me if I choose to trust the word of ViewerAnon (an insider who has provided legit information on movies both here and on social media) over you.

And let's assume that, hypothetically, I believe you here. I refer you to @Filmfreak 's point in the previous page:



And not to mention, my aforementioned reference of how the animation section and its creators were treated by Zaslav's mindnumbingly stupid decisions. Drastic creative choices like these should not be applauded nor become the norm in Hollywood, it's a good way for directors to not want to work with your company. If you're honestly in support of any of that, then nothing you say here matters because you're not on the side of artistic integrity.

I didn't realize I was in competition with someone on here. If you've followed my previous posts you would know, I've never provided any incorrect information on here. Believe what you like, it makes zero difference to me

 

[Babillygunn]

Can you provide any tangible reasons why you thought that the film was bad? Was it the story? The dialogue? The acting? The overall tone? Was it too campy? Too serious?

I am genuinely curious as to why the official word from Zaslav has been that the film was “awful.”

 

[Arachnerd]

I didn't realize I was in competition with someone on here. If you've followed my previous posts you would know, I've never provided any incorrect information on here. Believe what you like, it makes zero difference to me

Cool beans, yet I love how you deliberately ignored everything else I pointed out in regards to why people understandably responded so poorly to this decision, and why Zaslav's actions should not be excused, and you still chose to make it about your reputation. Says a lot about your character really, so I will not press this conversation with someone who clearly has no regard for artistic integrity regardless of quality.

 

[Frodo]

I didn't realize I was in competition with someone on here. If you've followed my previous posts you would know, I've never provided any incorrect information on here. Believe what you like, it makes zero difference to me

What i'd like to know is , as someone who says they've seen the film, what happens in the film, how does it end, and what's so bad about it that it couldn't have been finished or released?

And to be clear, I'm talking about specific details about the films, the characters beyond the ones everyone already knows are in the film, the acting, the story etc.

Presumably, if you have seen the film , you should be able to relay that specific information to us, and gives us the added context to WBD argue that the film was "irredeemable " and that it shouldn't be released.

In other words, if you can strengthen WBD's arguments , then please, let us know what led them to conclude the film should be shelved.

 

[J.Drangal]

Well, for now, this is the closest thing to a live-action Batgirl we will get :



The making-of :

 

[Arachnerd]

Corridor Crew did such a great job with this trailer that some folks actually thought it was a legit leak.

 

[TheScarecrow]

What i'd like to know is , as someone who says they've seen the film, what happens in the film, how does it end, and what's so bad about it that it couldn't have been finished or released?

And to be clear, I'm talking about specific details about the films, the characters beyond the ones everyone already knows are in the film, the acting, the story etc.

Presumably, if you have seen the film , you should be able to relay that specific information to us, and gives us the added context to WBD argue that the film was "irredeemable " and that it shouldn't be released.

In other words, if you can strengthen WBD's arguments , then please, let us know what led them to conclude the film should be shelved.

There have been multiple leaks about this.

The overall consensus is that the movie looked like a CW show. Cheap.

Both Umberto Gonzalez and Jett from BOF said they heard directly from people who saw it that it would have damaged Batman and DC overall.

 

[Arachnerd]

On the other hand, there have also been screenings that had decent reactions courtesy of ViewerAnon.

Fact of the matter is, we don't truly know. It probably could have gotten a mixed reception if we are to take all of this into account. That being said, I don't buy for one second that it was so terrible that it could have done permanent damage to Batman and DC as a whole. That viewpoint reeks of shamelessly biased hyperbole and I highly doubt that it could have been any worse than Suicide Squad or Josstice League. And that's not even mentioning the elephant in the room in regards to how a lot of people feel about BvS and Batfleck.

At the end of the day, it does not excuse the disrespectful and inconsiderate manner with how the movie was scrapped and the creators and crew not being informed. Defending that just shows a complete lack of respect toward artistic integrity.