DC/WB Films/Worlds (No Spoilers)

[Lightning Rider]

Someone on reddit claiming to have info on what appears to be a WBD all hands following the earnings call - everything in there seems plausible but obviously take it with a grain of salt.

I mean, it's all believable.

[Robanker]

And that is the reason why some people view salesman and lawyers as unfeeling sharks chasing the money instead of caring about the product and people they are selling and helping. Sure actors work for pay but Keaton made the movies to be seen by the movie going public not just the crew.

"One for the bills, two for the belt. "

Not every movie an actor does is a passion project. A lot of them view these movies as paychecks they have fun making but don't care about. It's more about making money to fuel projects they actually want to make.

I don't think Keaton really cares for himself if this comes out. Maybe he liked people he worked with and hopes for them it does well, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if he just did this for the money so he can finance smaller projects he cares about that don't get big studio traction.

Source: Hundreds of actors do this and have admitted to it.

Someone on reddit claiming to have info on what appears to be a WBD all hands following the earnings call - everything in there seems plausible but obviously take it with a grain of salt.

They may as well have said "the current team will work on being less white abs male, but otherwise we don't think any diverse employees would have been good enough and are sticking with #JustUsLeague."

Jesus. lol

[Vordan]

Someone on reddit claiming to have info on what appears to be a WBD all hands following the earnings call - everything in there seems plausible but obviously take it with a grain of salt.

Most important comment is that Hamada is definitely gone

[HsssH]

I'm not sure if I trust that post due to this:

They were asked how they expect the creative community to work with them after axing a near-completed project, and they said it was a "one-time instance" and said their commitment to movie theaters would attract the right talent

So nobody in the room knew that same thing happened to Scoob? Everything else also reads like something someone following the news could figure out on his own.

[Robanker]

I'm not sure if I trust that post due to this:



So nobody in the room knew that same thing happened to Scoob? Everything else also reads like something someone following the news could figure out on his own.

Anyone who believes "we got it out of our system" is basically new to the industry.

[Vordan]

I'm not sure if I trust that post due to this:



So nobody in the room knew that same thing happened to Scoob? Everything else also reads like something someone following the news could figure out on his own.

The “one time instance” refers to both Batgirl and Scoob, but I do call bull on the notion that this will never happen again.

[Myskin]

I'm not sure if I trust that post due to this:



So nobody in the room knew that same thing happened to Scoob? Everything else also reads like something someone following the news could figure out on his own.

If you check all the posts of this user you'll see that at the beginning they talked about both movies, and the follow-up was about Batgirl only.
Anyway, provided the info is real, some points are very interesting regarding the way the WB/D structure works. Internal problems aside, apparently they are placing their bets on unique, very recognizable brands like House of Thrones, Dune and specific, well-known talents like Tartakovsky rather than lower budget movies like Batgirl which may dilute the DC brand too much. It is an old-style Hollywood mindset, which also their interest for theatrical release reminds me of.

[Myskin]

Oh, and by the way, more rumors about the Batgirl movie.
https://comicbookmovie.com/batman/ba...5149#gs.7vm52v
No one will actually know what the movie is like (even if it leaks, I'd say).
But the rumors are conflicting to say the least.

[Johnny]

They may as well have said "the current team will work on being less white abs male, but otherwise we don't think any diverse employees would have been good enough and are sticking with #JustUsLeague."

Of all their problems that's one I don't think I understand. Why would they be grilled over how their executive team happens to look like. In what way would having a diverse team be suddenly more competent or efficient. The previous team was comparatively more diverse I believe and that didn't seem to result in having a better or more successful company.

[Thezmage]

Of all their problems that's one I don't think I understand. Why would they be grilled over how their executive team happens to look like. In what way would having a diverse team be suddenly more competent or efficient. The previous team was comparatively more diverse I believe and that didn't seem to result in having a better or more successful company.

In what way would a team of all white guys suddenly more competent or efficient?

It indicates that the executive team was hired out of a talent pool that rejects competent and efficient managers who aren’t straight white guys. Because if they were hiring based on who was best for the job just by the odds that would include some diversity. Because, as you point out, talent is not connected to skin color

[Myskin]

Of all their problems that's one I don't think I understand. Why would they be grilled over how their executive team happens to look like. In what way would having a diverse team be suddenly more competent or efficient. The previous team was comparatively more diverse I believe and that didn't seem to result in having a better or more successful company.

It's just a PR thing.
More or less like Feige expressing his "condolences" to the Batgirl directors, which makes him appear good. Even if Disney is a creativity shredder which shamelessly exploits its VFX artists and kicks its directors away if they don't conform to its vision (does anyone remember what happened to Edgar Wright?).

[Johnny]

In what way would a team of all white guys suddenly more competent or efficient?

It indicates that the executive team was hired out of a talent pool that rejects competent and efficient managers who aren’t straight white guys. Because if they were hiring based on who was best for the job just by the odds that would include some diversity. Because, as you point out, talent is not connected to skin color

Is that what it indicates or is that how you personally see it and try to paint it as racial bias with no evidence. Unless there is actual proof that played any part in this, I think we should pump the breaks on that just yet. Noone has implied that talent or competency could somehow be related to physical appearance, the question is why would they be criticized purely for how their top brass happens to look like when as we have seen before with WB, having a more diverse team does not necessarily lead to better corporate structure, just as it wouldn't have if the past team also happened to look the way the current team does. Seems like this is a purely emotional reaction that amounts to little more than "get those white dudes out of there". Don't get me wrong, I'm not out to defend some grossly overpaid folks, but color should not be given as a reason for why they or anyone else don't belong in their positions.

[John Venus]

It's just a PR thing.
More or less like Feige expressing his "condolences" to the Batgirl directors, which makes him appear good. Even if Disney is a creativity shredder which shamelessly exploits its VFX artists and kicks its directors away if they don't conform to its vision (does anyone remember what happened to Edgar Wright?).

They do but nobody cares since they've both made up since: https://www.slashfilm.com/579221/edg...d-kevin-feige/

Find me a studio anywhere in the world where break ups over 'creative differences' don't happen. That's typical business in Hollywood. But shelving a $90M movie that's mostly completed for a tax write off is rare and is guaranteed o alienate creators and fans alike.

[Veni]

Not really the important thing to point out, but for the record, he hasn't won an Emmy. At least not yet. He was nominated for his role in Dopesick. He might win it, though, since he just won the SAG Award for that role.

Yes, your right. He didn't win an Emmy. He won a Golden Globe and a Critics' Choice Award. My mistake.

[Jack The Tripper]

Again, this is a lot of wild speculation without much evidence. And yeah: it would look bad to throw away several films that already costs hundreds of millions to make. But imagine also throwing away the franchises themselves, especially when at least one of them has already proven to be a billion dollar franchise. That's basically throwing a cash cow away.

On top of that, unlike Momoa's Aquaman or Gadot's Wonder Woman, Leslie Grace's Batgirl hadn't been debuted to the world yet. She hadn't had the chance to attract fans yet. Because, again, Momoa and Gadot have literally become stars because of their roles. Their portrayals have attracted a lot of fans. That's literally what any movie studio would want.



Again, it won't happen. Firstly, WB wouldn't want to wait as long as it would take for people to forget the DCEU. Secondly, a lot of DCEU content still performs really well. Peacemaker was a hit for HBO Max. Aquaman made over a billion dollars. Zachary Levi's Shazam is beloved by critics. And even you say people would not want to see someone other than Gadot as Wonder Woman. So, are they supposed to restart the DC Universe without Wonder Woman? Seems like a pretty big omission.



No, it is a bad comparison. It's an entirely different situation. Amazing Spider-Man 2 was received badly, but Spider-Man Homecoming was greenlit largely because the studio wanted to get Spider-Man into the MCU. Because they knew that would be a huge draw for fans and that that movie would perform well because of that. It wasn't just a case of "new creatives." It was a case where they were able to bring Marvel's flagship character into the ongoing shared universe that was wildly successful and, to many people, is the definitive version of those characters.

In this scenario, you already have a shared universe, where yeah, some properties underperformed, but several others exceeded expectations. And even for some of the ones that underperformed, people still want to see more of them. How many people have we seen clamoring for Cavill to return as Superman? A lot. Like, one of the main news stories coming out of Comic Con were the rumors of Cavill making an appearance.



It would at least be a significantly harder sell. And again, if they just rebooted entirely, they would have to wait a significant amount of time before making another attempt at a shared universe. Like, maybe five years if not a full 10. And that wouldn't make sense at a time when the DCEU has actually started to gain some momentum and critical acclaim.

I don’t want to go over the same points all over again so this is gonna be shorter;
To me, it looks very clear that Zaslav is refusing to commit to anything past Flash’s release so that he can work out a strategy. I’m sure Batgirl could have made decent money for them if they wanted to release it, but they didn’t because it would tarnish the brand. He does not seem to be interested in small picture wins, but focussed on creating a franchise that can be as successful as Marvel’s, which he name checked as something influential to his current plan - difficult to do when your two most famous characters are in limbo in the connected universe (Supes and Bats), and Gadot’s WW hasn’t been in a successful film since early 2017 - though covid gets some blame for that.

I found it interesting that Zaslav didn’t mention the future of any of those characters after their films, just that their films are coming out. No release date or title for WW3 (as far as I know at least). No word on Superman, no word on DCEU Batman, no word on Green Lantern, no word on Wonder Woman, no word on Aquaman or Flash AFTER their respective films. Regarding the Spider-Man comparison - there is no difference. My point is that you can successfully recast a popular character’s failed portrayal. Same with Prof X and Magneto, and all the Batmen, and Daredevil. It doesn’t matter if they’re transplanting him into a different universe, in fact Sony cancelled all their planned spin offs to recast and rebrand the Spider-Man movies (for better and worse) - but now the character and his universe is more popular than ever.

yes, of course it would be a drastic move - but Zaslav and discovery have clearly shown he’s theyre avoiding drastic business moves. DC is seen as low budget Marvel because of their really mixed and inconsistent decade. WB has changed hands twice. Drastic moves need to be taken in order to have some semblance of a worthy brand.

Again, not saying it’s a definite, but there are clearly signs pointing to it being a possibility.