The Flash (2022)

[Gotham Knight]

I'm going to quote myself from elsewhere:

Whether Keaton gets any solo this or that can be changed depending on how much business the Flash does. My two cents: I understand that this internet driven niche of the comic-book sphere doesn't think much of Keaton, but that was the same mentality that people had when they couldn't imagine 'Mr. Mom' as Batman. Gunn, though a good filmmaker, now strikes me as that kind of comic book fan, who doesn't understand that CB fan die-hards who can quote chapter and verse are not what makes money and if he's running the whole show he has to remember that or he's going to fry. Love it or hate it, Keaton is a draw to the general public, many of that group still consider his run the last time that they liked any of this. The general dollars are the real dollars.

I've said it before and I will say it again: You are vastly underestimating Keaton's (as Batman) drawing power. 70 or 100 years old, that version of Batman puts asses in seats. James Gunn has his chance to find out as we all do when Flash hits theaters. Flash will decide this matter.

[eledoremassis02]

Leakers and scoopers have been so off that I have no idea whats right and wrong anymore with these films. Its caused me to loose interest in it, and one reason wny im honestly glad I dont have a deep envolvement with these franchises (MCU warmed me up to that lol).

If The Flash is the Snyderverse send off, atleast it will be a film that (what we know) seems to be screening well. So while it may not be what we Snyderfans want, atleast it didnt end of Justice League Theatrical and will end on somthing grand and well received.

What we do not know for sure is Gunn is reworking the DCEU (possibly starting over). I think its starting off with the same problms they've had since the BVS days (knee jerk reactions/last minute structural retocns). Release Flash, see how it does and then go from there. No problem "what ifing" at this point, but nothing solid should be made till Flash's money comes in.

Im just qestioning alot what I read these days (really this whole year). From "Keaton wont be in costume" to "He'll just be a mentor type" to now "He had a whole new Batman movie scrapped" it's too much and I'll wait till either some direct evidence and/or/if Keaton speaks about it.

At the end of the day, for me, it is what it is. Im taking baby steps. Im waiting for The Flash. My ultimate goal now is to just see Keatons/Afflecks scenes on a bonus of Aquaman 2 just to see how they both handle the same material. That would be cool.

[thecolorsblend]

Gunn better figure this out, cause he's about to piss off a lot of people if this isn't well thought out. I'm not flipping tables yet. But we'll see.....

I'm getting the idea that this is an authentic leak. Meaning, this wasn't planned and it wasn't strategic in some way.

Assuming I'm right, this is a huge mess and Gunn is facing a pretty serious crisis. A lot of actors and directors realize their jobs could be on the line, their agents now look sort of like a-holes for not even realizing this was going on and it's hard to escape the idea that somebody did this to Gunn on purpose. No idea who or why. But this is looking like a stab in the back.

[The Dark Knight]

If The Flash is the Snyderverse send off, atleast it will be a film that (what we know) seems to be screening well. So while it may not be what we Snyderfans want, atleast it didnt end of Justice League Theatrical and will end on somthing grand and well received.

I see the logic in this being tied up in the Ezra situation. If they recast Superman and other prominent heroes as part of an official reboot of sorts, it's a lot less jarring that Barry Allen suddenly has a different physical appearance. If one goes they all go, and their time together on screen remains intact by going down together.

If they get rid of the Reeves-verse, I'll be pretty pissed. If they force Pattinson into a shared universe, it'll probably diminish my love for the Reeves-verse, thus, pissing me off. Bad situation whichever way you cut it.

My hope, is they get a new Batman for the shared universe(DCU), and just keep him in the team up movies, while letting Reeves do his thing with solo movies. When Reeves' trilogy ends, they could start doing solo movies with the DCU Batman. But that's just me.

Reeves needs to be left alone, that much is clear to me. If Keaton isn't retained going forward I would greatly prefer what you propose here and simply wait for the Pattinson series to end and then integrate a new version for the shared universe. Spider-Man is Marvel's biggest character and he was absent from the MCU for the longest time. He lived on in a seperate universe with Maguire and Garfield before Holland appeared. I don't see why the same couldn't happen here.

[The Laughing Fish]

Anyway, a couple of anonymous DC sources connected behind the scenes spoke to Deadline and appeared to express some doubts that a full-on reboot is guaranteed to be on the way:

"This is creating a riot," says one content maker connected to DC fare about the level of silence they've received on the fate of their DC projects going forward. "And it's a horrible optic. This business is based on relationships."

When it comes to the rumors out there that core DC superhero castmembers Gal Gadot (Wonder Woman), Jason Momoa (Aquaman) and Henry Cavill (Superman) might be recast as the Gunn-Safran administration creates a synergistic plan for the DC brand across all mediums, our source says: "These franchises which already make a lot of money — why stop them? How can a studio that's bearing so much debt afford to start from scratch? There are scripts and actors' schedules to be figured out."

Will there be a complete reboot of DC's core stars?
One studio insider tells us: "At no point was there any pre-conceived notions of not continuing with these actors. It all boils down to how The Flash (June 16) and Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom (December 25) do at the box office." Not to mention, the studio doesn't want Gadot to hang up Wonder Woman's lasso.

https://deadline.com/2022/12/wonder-woman-3-patty-jenkins-james-gunn-responds-dc-1235193576/

Damn it, I posted the wrong link. Here is the correct article that contained those quotes:
https://deadline.com/2022/12/dc-wonder-woman-james-gunn-man-of-steel-1235193778/

Forgive me for being blunt, but this isn't Smallville.

Not sure how that relates to anything.

I mentioned Smallville because your Green Arrow idea reminded me how that show used that character as a counterpart to Clark Kent, as Batman was off-limits while Nolan was doing his thing at the time.

Having a shared movie universe without Batman makes no sense whatsoever from a business point of view. Batman is the most popular and lucrative character in the entire DC IP, and no money-grabbing executive is going to leave all that cash on the table and exclude him from meeting Superman, Wonder Woman and the wider DC universe...just to keep a certain director happy. Especially not a debt-ridden company like WBD.

Assuming this reboot stuff is actually true, only a limited number of choices are on the table.

01- Reboot without Batman
02- Reboot with yet another new version of Batman while Pattinson's version is still a going concern
03- Reboot while forcibly annexing the Reevesverse

#2 takes us right back to where we started with multiple Batmen. #3 risks alienating Reeves. Ask anybody in Hollywood how easy it is to replace a director midstream.

#1 bypasses those problems while leaving the door wide open to introduce a new version of Batman after the Reeves version wraps up.

Frankly, none of those options are super attractive. But considering WBD has to play the ball where it is and since an otherwise trustworthy Hollywood trade is reporting on the reality of a reboot happening, #1 simply seems like the least bad option TO ME.

We can debate which is the least bad option all we want, but realistically, I can't see WBD having the patience to let one director finish his run before the character is free to join the shared universe. Regardless if it's a reboot or not.

Not that I have much faith in David Zaslav after hiring Gunn and Safran, but he has stated multiple times publicly that he wants Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman at the forefront of DC. From what I can tell about Zaslav, he doesn't care about alienating anybody, not after scrapping Batgirl without informing any of the directors or the producers. If Zaslav supports Gunn's reboot ideas, he certainly won't care about alienating current actors who are under contract, like Gadot, Rock and Cavill.

With that in mind, do you really think people like Zaslav are going to miss out on making more money by not developing another team-up project with the Trinity, just to keep Reeves happy? I really doubt it. Either Reeves would have to swallow his pride and get on with the program, or he'd have to leave.

I realize that you're one of the #RestoreTheSnyderverse true believers. But it looks like that ship has sailed and we should all get comfortable with that reality.

Believe it or not, I'm leaving emotion and my allegiance to the Snyderverse out of this discussion. I'm simply focused on whether or not a reboot is feasible, and trying to look at this situation realistically and logically.

But now that you have brought it up, are you sure that WBD unanimously agrees to end the Snyderverse? Because there appears to be some conflicting agendas going on behind the scenes:

Warner Bros. was indeed developing a sequel for 2013's Man of Steel and actively meeting with writers. Andy Muschietti, who directed Flash, even expressed interest in sitting behind the camera for something that would have brought a tone similar to the hopeful and heroic colors of the 1978 movie directed by Richard Donner, considered a benchmark in comic book movies. In fact, the current leadership team at Warner Bros Pictures — Michael De Luca and Pamela Abdy — did desire one more go-around of the Snyderverse heroes, possibly even having another Justice League movie with those actors.

But that was before Gunn and Safran began formulating their new (and still in flux) plan.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-features/wonder-woman-3-not-moving-forward-dc-movies-1235276804/

So there ARE/WERE plans to continue the Snyderverse characters for at least one more time. The last sentence would imply those plans are no more, but then this article adds this suspicious report:

Jenkins' exit came as James Gunn and Peter Safran have been getting settled into their new roles as co-CEOs of DC Films and are busy plotting out an extensive multi-year plan for DC films, TV shows and games that they will present to Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav next week.

But the two had nothing to do with what happened to "Wonder Woman 3," TheWrap has learned.

Although Gunn and Safran have been given a mandate to reshape the DC landscape, Warner Bros. Discovery has "ongoing enterprises" that "nobody was going to mess with," according to one insider. This includes Matt Reeves writing the sequel to "The Batman," J.J. Abrams' Black-led "Superman" from Ta-Nehisi Coates, Todd Phillips' "Joker 2," and Patty Jenkins doing "Wonder Woman 3."

Last week, Jenkins turned in her treatment for "Wonder Woman 3" to the studio, according to the insiders.

Warner Bros. Film Group Co-Chairpersons and CEOs Michael De Luca and Pamela Abdy didn't think the treatment worked and decided not to move forward with the film in its current iteration. Gunn and Safran, who had nothing to do with the decision, also agreed with De Luca and Abdy that the treatment didn't work.

De Luca and Abdy spoke to Jenkins first and communicated that they didn't get the treatment, didn't think it was the right direction for the franchise and asked Jenkins if she would consider pitching something else for the IP in another direction.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/warner-bros-didn-t-cancel-234524443.html

Normally I don't give Umberto Gonzalez any credibility, but I posted this article because THR reported De Luca and Abdy were involved in turning down Jenkins' script. If those two execs are pro-Snyderverse then they must've been behind the decisions to get Cavill and Affleck back for their appearances in Black Adam, The Flash and Aquaman 2.

Another confusing thing is that it's alleged WW3 isn't technically canceled, the Jenkins script is merely rejected. The studio wants to keep Gal Gadot. Well, this leads me to the following questions about what the hell is going on:

-Why would Zaslav approve of De Luca and Abdy spending time and money in bringing Cavill and Affleck back for additional appearances if his heart wasn't really in it? If the supposed ten-year plan for DC consisted of a reboot along the way as some scoopers say, did this desire to actually do it got fast-tracked earlier than planned? If that's the case then that's just poor planning and gives the impression that WBD is just as reactionary as previous WB regimes.

-Why is WBD wasting more money on extensive reshoots for the upcoming Flash, Aquaman and Shazam movies? Zaslav went on record saying that the studio was going to make them better a few months ago, but why bother if none of them are part of the new plans? They're diminished now, so why increase your debts even further? It's unnecessary and irresponsible. The Flash itself is reportedly still not even picture-locked yet, but what's the point of even releasing that movie and the other two now? Any potential excitement and box office prospects are depressed. Which in turn, leads me to ask, what was the real reason for Batgirl's cancellation?

-If this THR article was a deliberate leak that didn't come from Gunn or Safran's office, then who revealed their plans? Was it De Luca and Abdy? Is this over a battle for boardroom power, or a call to arms to encourage fans to start a backlash to wrestle political power and undermine Gunn and Safran?

-Why the hell is the Rock promising more Black Adam, JSA spin-offs and Superman news and boasting how profitable his franchise is if it really isn't? Didn't he get the memo, or does he have support from higher-ups and the film is profitable after all?

-Can WBD even afford to pay out all the contracted parties going forward? It's easy to say they must scrap everything and start over, but you still have to pay people before you do that. If the Batgirl backlash was severe, what do you think is going to happen if the Rock is told there will be no more Black Adam? If the backlash is that severe, will it begin to scare off potential filmmakers from working on DC projects?

Apologies for the long post, but even by looking at this logically, this is a complete and utter mess. Nothing in the last few days is making much sense.

I reckon if WBD really wants to reboot everything, the best course of action is to write off the last remaining DC films for tax returns, get their finances in order and wait for many years before starting a new DC franchise again. Unless something drastic happens next week, keep your expectations low, and it would be wise to not get too invested in the future of anything DC-related going forward.

[eledoremassis02]

I was just thinking about how scoopers were saying the Beyond movie turned into the now canceled Batgirl movie. So this would have been different? Also reports of Catwoman coming back (wich may have been in the cards for a while since Michelle Pfeiffer posted about her catwoman whip in 2019.

So either that was a coincidence, or she was in some way involved in that for it to get scrapped for Batgirl (unless the leak was wrong) or they dusted off the script and it got canceled another time.

There is just too much floating around (and frankly has been for quite some time). Im not 100% sure whats real and whats justa adding flames to the DC fire. But im waiting for some official work fom someone (if we ever get that).

At this point I think we need a general leak thread lol

[Silver Nemesis]

Mark Waid's Dark Crisis: Big Bang one-shot contains some references to the Burtonverse that seemingly contradict earlier info concerning its position in the DC Multiverse. The first thing to mention is that there's a variant cover featuring a Napier Joker goon.

In the story itself, Barry Allen travels around the DC Multiverse noting the various realities he observes. Among the list of alternate universes he visits is Earth-789.

In his description of this reality, Barry writes:

Superman and Supergirl are Earth's only powered heroes; Batman's parents killed by the Joker. (Superman '78, Batman '89)

The Arrowverse Crisis on Infinite Earths crossover stated that the Burton films took place on Earth-89. Sam Hamm also Tweeted something about his Batman '89 comic taking place on Earth-89. But now Waid's saying that the Reeve Superman and Keaton Batman both exist on Earth-789. Which means the Bruce Wayne glimpsed in the Superman '78 comic...

...is in fact a younger version of the Burtonverse Bruce. However, if Michael Shannon is playing the Burtonverse Zod in The Flash, and Sasha Calle is playing Supergirl, then isn't that going to completely contradict all this? Are we to then take it that only the Superman '78 and Batman '89 comics take place on Earth-789, but that the live action films they follow occur in separate realities?

It would have been awesome if they could have got Terence Stamp to play the Burtonverse Zod. Sure, he's in his eighties. But they could have digitally de-aged him for the close-ups and had a stuntman handle his action scenes. I'd rather see Keaton go up against Stamp's Zod than Shannon's version.

The Dark Crisis: Big Bang comic also features a cameo by the Adam West Batman and Cesar Romero Joker. Barry confirms their universe is Earth-66, describing it thus:

Batman and Robin face exceptionally benign villains (Batman '66)

I wouldn't call villains who use a jack-in-the-box to try catapulting Batman over the sea and into the arms of an exploding octopus "exceptionally benign". "Diabolical scoundrels" is what I'd call them.

[The Joker]

Mark Waid's Dark Crisis: Big Bang one-shot contains some references to the Burtonverse that seemingly contradict earlier info concerning its position in the DC Multiverse.

In the story itself, Barry Allen travels around the DC Multiverse noting the various realities he observes. Among the list of alternate universes he visits is Earth-789.

In his description of this reality, Barry writes:

Superman and Supergirl are Earth's only powered heroes; Batman's parents killed by the Joker. (Superman '78, Batman '89)

Just to add to Silver's post, I saw this via Twitter. I am assuming it's from the aforementioned one-shot?

[thecolorsblend]

Batman and Robin face exceptionally benign villains (Batman '66)

I wouldn't call villains who use a jack-in-the-box to try catapulting Batman over the sea and into the arms of an exploding octopus "exceptionally benign". "Diabolical scoundrels" is what I'd call them.

Now that you mention it, I always thought that the electric chairs that the Joker tied Batman and Robin to were exceptionally benign.

[The Dark Knight]

However, if Michael Shannon is playing the Burtonverse Zod in The Flash, and Sasha Calle is playing Supergirl, then isn't that going to completely contradict all this? Are we to then take it that only the Superman '78 and Batman '89 comics take place on Earth-789, but that the live action films they follow occur in separate realities?

Due to the fact we only ever had B89 and BR, it never really sat well with me thinking Keaton shared his world with superhumans. A way I see it being tasteful is via universe leakage. Meaning the Burtonverse is its own thing, and the events of The Flash cause the timelines to merge into one another. If meta humans weren't a thing in the Burtonverse it would be exceptionally high intelligence on Keaton's part to be aware of their existence in other timelines, or the possibility for them to exist, and not being overawed by their sudden presence.

I wouldn't call villains who use a jack-in-the-box to try catapulting Batman over the sea and into the arms of an exploding octopus "exceptionally benign". "Diabolical scoundrels" is what I'd call them.

Deathtraps are deathtraps. All the villains who captured Batman and Robin fully intended to kill them.