The Hypothetical DCEU Reboot Discussion Thread

[TheVileOne]

Audiences don't like recasting though. This could nip that whole problem in the bud.

But, it's just a spitball. Have no idea where the train is going, but Affleck stepping down as director makes me believe there is some truth that he might try to leave.

 

[ManWithNoName18]

I'd hope for at least 2 solo Batman Bruce Wayne movies before a passing of the torch deal

 

[FunkMiller]

Yeah, you could always just say Dick Grayson is Batman now and run with that. That way it's not recasting, but a different character.

"Why is Robin pretending to be Batman?" - every single GA member.

 

[ManWithNoName18]

You guys realize that the same people will be in charge right? Just because you reboot doesn't mean that WB magically goes away. It'll be new people reporting to the same execs who've been at the company for decades. Only way it'll make a difference is if Time Warner fires everyone at WB which i don't see happening anytime soon. People who aren't a fan of this Universe are pretty much screwed for a very long time movie wise.

Basically this, in terms of quality I don't see what would change if they reboot the DCEU in either TV or movie format given how we've seen the current DCEU handled. We saw how badly the braintrust managed it. And we're going to have to wait until 2017's Wonder Woman and JL to see if Johns/Berg have made any noticeable difference.

 

[Boom]

Audiences don't like recasting though. This could nip that whole problem in the bud.

I'm of the opposite mind on this. I think they really don't care, so long as the character is entertaining.

 

[Rorschach2012]

Basically this, in terms of quality I don't see what would change if they reboot the DCEU in either TV or movie format given how we've seen the current DCEU handled. We saw how badly the braintrust managed it. And we're going to have to wait until 2017's Wonder Woman and JL to see if Johns/Berg have made any noticeable difference.

Get Timm and Dini in charge like they should've all along and see how good things get!

 

[Boy Scout]

Cancel the DCEU. Expand the Arrowverse. Problem solved.

Hardly.

 

[Osiris-Rex]

But then someone reminded me that the last two solo Batman movies made over a billion dollars and that there's simply more profit to be made there. Though I really don't know how much TV shows make.

According to an article in Forbes, WB made over $1 billion from the DC TV shows. But that was all of them lumped together, it didn't say what each individual show makes. But I think there are about 10, 5 on CW, 2 on Fox, and a few on cable.
So, say, each show makes about $100 million for WB. As I recall the licensing fee for Supergirl on CBS was $4 million an episode so 20 episodes equals $80 million. Plus however much WB got from Netflix. I would guess about the same for the other ones.

My silly fantasy is that the DCEU does poorly enough for WB to consider selling DC as a whole - and Amazon buys the company. Berlanti's universe carries on on broadcast TV, while Amazon 'do a Netflix' with other DC properties on their streaming service, and continue to make movies of their major properties, with a crisis arc story linking all three.

Doubt it. DC Entertainment does the comic books, movies, and TV shows. So even if the movies don't do that great WB still makes a lot of money off the TV shows and comic books and wouldn't want to give up the rights to them.
And the movies do make a lot of money even if they aren't all a critical success. $1 billion each for the last two Batman movies. And almost $900 million and over $700 million for the last two movies with Batman in them.

Audiences don't like recasting though. This could nip that whole problem in the bud.

The audiences don't like same casting either from the sound of things on all these message boards. Otherwise WB should just cast Anne Hathaway for Selina Kyle again

 

[DrCosmic]

Batman is not going to be on HBO as an R-rated adult series because Warner Bros. still wants to be able to market it to kids.

Those aren't mutually exclusive. They could have a toon show going that's big and rake in the money with the kids there, while also raking in the money from merchandising of whatever superheroes they are doing in the movies. Diversify. It's a smart business move... perhaps too smart, but still smart.

 

[TheVileOne]

You could be right, I think for now though Warner Bros. is staying steadfast on wanting to keep Batman, at least the character of Batman on film for now and PG-13. I recall PG-13 was one of the only mandates that Nolan had on Batman Begins. He needed to give it a PG-13 rating and have a love interest.

But I would say based on they like to market Batman toward kids, they'd be skittish about allowing an actual full on Batman TV show on HBO at a TV-MA rating.

I think doing a side story anthology series in that format would be more realistic. Or a GCPD type of show.

 

[Boom]

Is HBO adamantly against PG-13 material or something? I'm not sure why the suggestion of an HBO Batman series necessitates R-rated material, umless that's just their policy.

 

[Web-Head]

Basically this, in terms of quality I don't see what would change if they reboot the DCEU in either TV or movie format given how we've seen the current DCEU handled. We saw how badly the braintrust managed it. And we're going to have to wait until 2017's Wonder Woman and JL to see if Johns/Berg have made any noticeable difference.

I saw this in the trivia section for Green Lantern on IMDB, so it seems WB has been doing this with their superhero films for a while now.

According to one insider, the film was severely hit with interference from Warner Bros:

"One thing I feel needs mentioning: this is not Martin Campbell's cut of the film, but the studio's. I live in New Orleans where it was shot, I read the shooting script, all of which was painstakingly filmed with intense research, and all of that was left on the cutting room floor - a sort of combination of what happened to Daredevil (2003) and Watchmen (2009), respectively - character development sacrificed for CG, scenes made irrelevant by removing their setup. The movie in the theater starts with an explanation of mythos that is made redundant by the more natural, scripted questions from Hal when he gets the ring. Ten minutes of childhood Hal, Carol, and Hector that sets up Hal's first ring construct is reduced to an awkwardly placed flashback in the middle of another scene. The training with the ring is almost completely excised except for one minor scene. Most appallingly, the ending completely deletes the fact that Kilowog, Sinestro, and Toma-Re arrive at the end and help Hal defeat Parallax. Not to mention Parallax was supposed to be a 3rd act reveal after we spend the film worried about Hammond going evil, not the main villain for the entire film. I sincerely hope we get a director's cut or at least all the deleted scenes on the video release".

Martin Campbell heavily criticized the studio for hacking the film to pieces during the editing process, which he claims resulted in the omission or alteration of numerous elements which would have made for a stronger film.

 

[Ivan Drago]

^

Most of the scenes can be found on the extended cut. It's not a better movie.

 

[Web-Head]

^

Most of the scenes can be found on the extended cut. It's not a better movie.

I wasn't suggesting it was, but there's a reason there was a BvS Ultimate edition and a SS extended cut released on blu-ray.

 

[MbJ]

I think what happened was WB tried to experiment more with creative freedom and it came back to bite them badly. One of their supposed selling points for the DCEU in the build-up to BVS was that (in an implied dig at Marvel, who just had high profile instances of directors refusing to work with them anymore because of interference) the DCEU would be a creator-focused franchise where directors are allowed to tell their stories without a bunch of businessmen messing them up. Batman v. Superman had cuts, but that's also because it was just way too long.

Then the movie came out and got savaged by reviewers and they suddenly realized this creative freedom thing wasn't as good an idea as it sounded, and ended up heavily recutting Suicide Squad. The Hollywood Reporter's expose did say it was the negative response to BVS that had Warner panic and decide to completely change SS.

Audiences don't like recasting though.

James Bond and the previous four Batmen would beg to differ. And besides, Batman v. Superman isn't exactly considered Oscar-worthy entertainment. I doubt anyone is gonna be seriously put off if a better follow-up happens to use a different actor. This isn't like the MCU where there's been a consistent string of hits and audiences have grown to love and embrace these actors. Affleck has been in one, critically panned flick as of yet. There'd be no issue with replacing him so long as the replacement was good.

 

[TheVileOne]

OK but how do you think people would've felt if suddenly Christian Bale had quit the two Batman sequels and it was Jake Gyllenhaal instead?

 

[MbJ]

OK but how do you think people would've felt if suddenly Christian Bale had quit the two Batman sequels and it was Jake Gyllenhaal instead?

If the movie was the same quality as it was? I don't think it'd have been a big deal. Besides, Heath Ledger's Joker was arguably the bigger draw of TDK than Bale was anyway. The first two Tim Burton Batman movies were huge hits but the franchise survived the transition to Val Kilmer, and only came crashing down in Batman & Robin (which had to do with the writing and direction).

 

[STARMAN]

I don't know if Affleck is staying or not but what makes this awkward is Affleck's upcoming appearance in JL.

 

[The Guard]

I saw this in the trivia section for Green Lantern on IMDB, so it seems WB has been doing this with their superhero films for a while now.

Beyond the fact that a studio can affect a final edit...do you actually believe this?

That WB shot and rendered a third act CGI-heavy battle sequence and just cut it out...because?

That they somehow inserted MORE of Parallax into the film at great expense to render istead of him just being a third act reveal...because?

 

[Web-Head]

Beyond the fact that a studio can affect a final edit...do you actually believe this?

That WB shot and rendered a third act CGI-heavy battle sequence and just cut it out...because?

That they somehow inserted MORE of Parallax into the film at great expense to render istead of him just being a third act reveal...because?

The second one was the one I was really emphasizing. WB cutting the film.

 

[BH/HHH]

OK but how do you think people would've felt if suddenly Christian Bale had quit the two Batman sequels and it was Jake Gyllenhaal instead?

Given I'm not as in love with the Dark Knight Rises as I was the first two looking back now I probably wouldn't have minded. I can't help but think what would the superhero cinema landscape look like if Justice League Mortal had happened.

 

[jmc]

WB has one of two options IMO if this goes sour. 1) Reboot from scratch and create a division within the company specifically for superhero films, whoever heads that division has full executive power to make the day to day decisions for the overall universe. 2) Revert to separate universes for the characters and allow film makers the chance to bring their vision to the screen like they did with Chris Nolan. Either scenario requires someone in charge, at the moment there is no one in charge.

 

[TheVileOne]

How likely would WB want to start over from scratch with such a division if this didn't go well though? Wouldn't they just as likely move on to other movies and focus on other franchises, like Fantastic Beasts?

 

[NHawk19]

If they want to keep the ties to this universe, then a Flashpoint, Zero Hour, Infinite Crisis event is the way to go. Start with the Flash film in current continuity then end it where you want your universe to be.

If they want to start over, not that I'm completely for or against it. I'm not sure who you start with. Superman and or Batman are the natural starting points, and we've seen their origins a ton of times now. For almost all the meh things with BvS, having Bruce at the battle of Metropolis watching his tower go down makes sense, and should've been able to transition to something great with Bruce seeing Clark as a threat, and coming to terms with things existing beyond what he currently understands. It fits with every argument then ends with the statement "Batman with prep time." The Lex and Zod stuff though ugh.

Maybe you just ignore it and adapt Throne of Atlantis. Then move on to a Tim Drake film, and dance around the names until you've got something you like.

 

[writer0327]

I think starting over is a major step backwards. Might as well scrap everything and wait 5-10 years and try again later.

The way to go at this point is to push ahead with a solid game plan. The one thing that should have stood out from the A:IW First Look is how a solid game plan can lead to great things. DC needs to figure out what they want to do and do it.....stop waffling. Stop changing as the wind blows. Backbone DC, backbone!!!

And you can always recast Batman if Affleck wants out. I think that's no problem whatsoever.