Batgirl Movie HBO Max original

[Powder]

I was almost shocked for a moment & then I remembered the reality of our modern world. It's probably just a marketing tactic. They know it sucks, so they need something to drum up some hysteria & lower expectations.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Powder

I was almost shocked for a moment & then I remembered the reality of our modern world. It's probably just a marketing tactic. They know it sucks, so they need something to drum up some hysteria & lower expectations.

I don't think that's really it. Maybe if there was a deluge of "UNCANCEL BATGIRL!" but the truth is that only a small and loud group of the same SJWs even care about it, and it's not like they turned up for Birds of Prey.

It's mostly three factors:

1. Tax writeoff. They spent about 70 million on it but it'd take another 50 million to market it. Now they don't need to spend even $1 in marketing and they get most of the money spent so far "back."

2. Horrific test screenings. This was not going to be a popular movie. Also, apparently Keaton was only in 3 or 4 scenes?

3. The current bosses want to clean up and consolidate the direction of the DCEU and this would be a big fat blight on it. Better to sweep it aside and do things more in line with their bigger plans.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Along with both black Superman projects. Especially the one from the super racist guy and Abrams.

I wouldn't be shocked if both were already cancelled. There's been no word about either one of them in ages.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

1. Tax writeoff. They spent about 70 million on it but it'd take another 50 million to market it. Now they don't need to spend even $1 in marketing and they get most of the money spent so far "back."

Allegedly the "real" budget was over $100 million, according to most sources. "$70 million" was the number they were allowed to speak of out loud but supposedly it cost a good bit more. And that's still before marketing.
---------------

All of this reminds me: Remember in 2017 when they announced the Nightwing movie (along with 87 other DC movies that have not and will never be made)?

WB is f*cking nuts; with DC alone their announced-and-then-cancelled movies outnumber the movies that actually get made by like almost 10-to-1. If a King broke so many promises they'd be beheaded.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

I'm now at a point where I have know idea what WB's roadmap is for their movies anymore. Although I hope Joker 2 won't happen because it doesn't need a sequel. I was actually curious to see how the Batgirl movie would turn out and not because Keaton was in it.

This is the first I've ever heard of a Scoob 2 being made. I heard the first one didn't do that good on streaming services.

[CyberCubed]

Apparently all that's coming now:

1. Aquaman 2, this is pretty much done

2. Black Adam.

3. Flash...if this ever comes out. I think it will due to the sheer mass of work they put into it, but Ezra going crazy in real life doesn't help matters.

4. Wonder Woman 3...eventually. But this seems far off.

5. Matt Reeve's Batman has a sequel and will be a trilogy at the least. This is basically our Batman for the next decade.


That's basically it. Pretty sure everything else you heard rumored or in the pipeline is pretty much cancelled.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by LeotheLateBloomer

I'm now at a point where I have know idea what WB's roadmap is for their movies anymore. Although I hope Joker 2 won't happen because it doesn't need a sequel. I was actually curious to see how the Batgirl movie would turn out and not because Keaton was in it.

This is the first I've ever heard of a Scoob 2 being made. I heard the first one didn't do that good on streaming services.

Joker 2 needs a sequel more than any of their other films because it’s actually unpredictable. What will they do? Aside from rumors, no one really would have a clue. That’s what makes it exciting to me.

And it helps to remember that we could have said the same thing about Alien, Terminator, or a ton of other films that didn’t “need” a sequel but spawned an amazing one anyway, sometimes even outdoing the first.

Just my opinion. I can understand if a Joker sequel doesn’t interest you, but it’s my belief that none of these films need a sequel more than the other, technically. I’d say the films that know how to do a one-and-done story are the most deserving of a sequel, in many ways.

[CyberCubed]

https://twitter.com/cynical_tutu/sta...17439569379329

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

Just my opinion. I can understand if a Joker sequel doesn’t interest you, but it’s my belief that none of these films need a sequel more than the other, technically. I’d say the films that know how to do a one-and-done story are the most deserving of a sequel, in many ways.

It's more that I just feel the movie is better as a standalone one-off.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

4. Wonder Woman 3...eventually. But this seems far off.

It seems like they're not even thinking about it right now, let alone so much as writing a script. Maybe we'll see WW3 in 2026. F*** WB is retarded.

And don't forget about Blue Beetle. That's in the middle of filming if it hasn't already wrapped.

[Leo656]

And the idea that Wonder Woman 3 with Jenkins at the helm is even possible shows how inept - and inconsistent - WB is. WW84 was by all accounts a disaster, and unlike the first movie where Zack was physically involved with the producing end and WB was overseeing the entire thing to ensure it fit with the rest of their DC slate, WW84 was by most accounts nearly ALL Patty Jenkins and the end result got hammered. They got terrible reviews AND lost a ton of money - although the pandemic had a lot to do with that part, sure - and yet Jenkins is supposedly going to get a mulligan? Why?

Just to be objective, here: MoS did well enough to greenlight BvS, but immediately after BvS underperformed - it made a small profit but not as much as hoped for/expected - WB was immediately trying to squeeze Snyder out because "One strike and you're out" and all that. Meanwhile, Jenkins lost them a TON of money and consumer confidence in what some people said was "The only good DC movie series" with Wonder Woman, and WB's response to her is "It's okay, try again, we'll get 'em next time"? What f*cking sense does THAT make? By rights they should have been even more harsh on her than they were on Snyder, all things being equal. Snyder did not lose them $200 million dollars, he actually made them money it just wasn't as much as they wanted. She, on the other hand, put them in red ink.

It really does come off like Jenkins is only getting another try because she's a woman. I'm sorry, there's just no other reason I can think of that seems plausible.

I'm actually not gonna be shocked if the movie ends up not happening, though, or if Jenkins becomes "too busy" and someone else directs it. I suspect the public WW3 announcements were just PR spin to save face. They probably are looking for a graceful way to sh*tcan her and not have it look bad. But that's not what we know for a fact, all we know is that "supposedly" she's getting another chance. And if she does, well... that isn't right or fair.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

I'm actually not gonna be shocked if the movie ends up not happening, though, or if Jenkins becomes "too busy" and someone else directs it. I suspect the public WW3 announcements were just PR spin to save face. They probably are looking for a graceful way to sh*tcan her and not have it look bad. But that's not what we know for a fact, all we know is that "supposedly" she's getting another chance. And if she does, well... that isn't right or fair.

And all of this was said long before the Discovery deal. Who knows if Zaslov believes Patty deserves another chance, let alone if a WW3 is even something they want at this point.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by sdp

What actually happened was that when Discovery purchased WarnerMedia/Time Warner from AT&T for 43 billion dollars, it purchased some of AT&T's debt in the process of purchasing TW/WM and now Warner Bros Discovery is in 55-57 billion dollars worth of debt due to the combined corporations debts. So now it has to start cutting at least 3 billion dollars now, and will most likely need to start cutting more for "cost synergies". That's why it sold an office in Knoxville TN and Adult Swim offices in Georgia. First thing to usually go is unneeded properties and now Discovery is really cutting into the meat that is WarnerMedia. Expect more canceled shows and movies and more "unscripted" and cheap reality show garbage.

AT&T had the internet and thought they could also own the content too, but fired important people in executive roles, cut out a lot of the people that worked there too for "cost synergies" which is a fancy way for saying you're laying off hundreds if not thousands of workers to pay off debt. The AT&T Time Warner merger was jerked off to hell and back by Wall Street, until the quarterly report shown poorly and the pandemic put the final nail in the coffin of this poorly thought out merger.

AT&T needed a way out and Wall Street has been hammering media corporations to prepare for the "Streaming Wars" and tells smaller corporations to get bigger. So, Viacom and CBS already merged a few years back and so Discovery was the smallest fish in the pond. AT&T seen a perfect opportunity and started taking about selling WarnerMedia to Discovery in a debt offering and AT&T got out of the media business and lost a good chunk of debt in the process, has some hand chosen executives in the new WarnerDiscovery company while still being financially independent from all that mess and Discovery is technically now a large media company on par with ViacomCBSParamount.

But as you can see, it's shaping up to be the same **** from the last two mergers, AOL didn't know what to do, AT&T didn't know what they were doing and Discovery doesn't have a clue either.

Very well said. And all true. But we've known that for years since that shareholders meeting where it was stated outright "there are no sacred cows in our portfolio".

And so what really happened is that a decision was made regarding what to cut over perceived profitability of any given product. AAnnnndddd there you have it... Your "sense of reason and higher authority" post there most likely purposely omits that amidst everything you described, had Batgirl had strong screenings and was considered a "winner" flick they would've released it.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I don't think that's really it. Maybe if there was a deluge of "UNCANCEL BATGIRL!" but the truth is that only a small and loud group of the same SJWs even care about it, and it's not like they turned up for Birds of Prey.

It's mostly three factors:

1. Tax writeoff. They spent about 70 million on it but it'd take another 50 million to market it. Now they don't need to spend even $1 in marketing and they get most of the money spent so far "back."

2. Horrific test screenings. This was not going to be a popular movie. Also, apparently Keaton was only in 3 or 4 scenes?

3. The current bosses want to clean up and consolidate the direction of the DCEU and this would be a big fat blight on it. Better to sweep it aside and do things more in line with their bigger plans.

All of this exactly. The undeniable fundamental truth is that if they thought it was going to make the money now that they were betting on at the height of the woke $#!( zeitgeist they'd release the movie. They don't feel it's worth putting more money into. It's not getting released.

[Autbot_Benz]

Looks like Flash Movie Supergirl might be joining batgirl

Now, the prospect of other DC films being squashed looms. Insiders say Supergirl, which is in development, is not likely to move forward. Sasha Calle, who plays the caped superheroine, is introduced in the upcoming The Flash. Supergirl was going to spin off of the Miller-led tentpole.

https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movi...-bros-1392407/

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Autbot_Benz

Looks like Flash Movie Supergirl might be joining batgirl



https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movi...-bros-1392407/

I didn't even know they were planning a movie Supergirl. But if so... it's not looking so great for The Flash. This may end up being one great big enema, WB flushing out all the nonsense.

[CyberCubed]

They were never going to make that Supergirl movie. Wonder Twins was canceled earlier this year, Blue Beetle might be next.

If Shazam 2 wasn't coming out this year that would have been axed too.

[RaphaelinSTL]

This whole thing is wild.

Truthfully outside of Joker and The Batman (2022), I haven't been enjoying DC films for a long, long time ... but I still like to follow the news and what not. It's not the same intention, but this Batgirl movie has so much in common now with that Roger Corman Fantastic Four movie from 1994.

Ultimately, I'm sure this movie just sucked and looked cheap ... so it was easy to throw away.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

If Shazam 2 wasn't coming out this year that would have been axed too.

I doubt it. The first one was popular and these are relatively low cost. Also, harmless to any grander vision and not divisive by any means.

[CyberCubed]

It's ironic the initial backlash to this movie was a black woman cast as Batgirl, or a Batgirl movie in general, and now people are pretending to be "mad" that it was canceled. I get the feeling it could have been a C-tier movie at best if it did come out, so I don't think we missed much. Like it'd be one of those movies you just watch once to see how it is and then never watch it again.

[Andrew NDB]

So Michelle Pfieffer was in it as Catwoman? Eh... how?

[neatoman]

When will this thing leak?