Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hollywood Reporter has confirmed it scored just fine with audiences, but that was already known if you know any of the Twitter and Reddit folks who regularly have the scoop on test screenings -

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/batgirl-hbo-max-movie-dc-canceled-1235191932/

"Batgirl’s test score, which was for a director’s cut, is comparable to scores for the first It (2017), which wound up grossing $700.3 million globally, as well as an early score for the upcoming Shazam! Fury of the Gods. Both of those films tested in the 60s."

The idea it's being binned because it tested badly is 100% spin to justify a call that had already been made for corporate reasons. There's a reason it was "leaked" to the NY Post in particular.

I get that's the business, but there's something incredibly ugly about a lie like that, when it's something hundreds of people worked on for a year and they're already getting the kick in the teeth of knowing nobody will see it.

I guess it will suddenly be available somewhere like the Corman Fantastic Four movie

For years, the Fantastic 4 thing confused me. I went to a comic convention where the cast were promoting it like any cast would promote their movie. They had all kinds of pictures, answered questions. Then….nothing. For years I wondered what happened.

Now I feel bad for them. What a slap in the face for a group of young actors! And it almost certainly affected their careers.

Now the Batgirl cast get the same treatment, but worse. How much worse will their careers be after the studio told the world their film was so terrible it couldn’t be released.

A good (however lengthy) summary of information - including more than one bit of first hand information - and a discussion of the situation/reasoning/potential fallout, Zaslav's leadership vs what Jason Kilar did when he was in charge, and the tax/financial implications behind this decision.

For those mentioning The Flash film it has (at least) double the budget and also Michael F****ng Keaton in it as Batman. Ezra Miller antics outside the film will keep him from further Flash movies but that bad boy is getting released in some capacity.

To be fair, this film also had Michael Keaton in it.

But yes, Flash cost significantly more, and is actually complete.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
To be fair, this film also had Michael Keaton in it.

Was this also the one that started as a Joss Whedon script? I thought I remembered he was supposed to be doing something Batgirl related a bit ago.

beast_gts wrote:
Probably related:

HBO Max is expected to layoff around 70% of their development staff.

“Sounds like they’re not doing HBO Max scripted shows anymore with HBO taking over, so less scripted shows overall,” says one company insider.

(Source: https://thewrap.com/hbo-max-layoffs-warner-bros-discovery-q2-earnings-preview/)

This doesn't bode well for that hbo max Dune spinoff show they were working on, might be canned now, bummer.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:



A good (however lengthy) summary of information - including more than one bit of first hand information - and a discussion of the situation/reasoning/potential fallout, Zaslav's leadership vs what Jason Kilar did when he was in charge, and the tax/financial implications behind this decision.

Cheers for that. Informative article is informative.

I guess it might also be that all the actors and directors etc were on a flat fee rather than anything involving percentages, or bonuses based on how well it did

so easier to kill without lawsuits asking for money based on what the talents lawyers claim the film should have done if it was released

 Ahtman wrote:
For those mentioning The Flash film it has (at least) double the budget and also Michael F****ng Keaton in it as Batman. Ezra Miller antics outside the film will keep him from further Flash movies but that bad boy is getting released in some capacity.

Yeah. There's too much invested there...but also The Flash probably has a chance to make a lot more money.

Batgirl was (possibly poorly) originally conceived of as an expensive $70 million streaming-only shindig...before they decided to give it a theatrical run to try to make more money...but that cost more money to bring it up to that level...and then would still require tens of millions in marketing expenses, etc. This kinda describes a money pit to me.

And even if test screenings were solid, let's remember that Birds of Prey did well there AND critically but never found an audience. Batgirl has the same screenwriter as BoP, FYI. Which is not to say that she's bad or to blame, just that maybe it felt like Groundhog Day to the studio with another box-office dud. It does seem crazy to just gakcan it, but I'm not sure there was ever really a good plan for the project.

Honestly, it makes sense to me for them to focus on their biggest characters and give them good films that can really kill it. Rather than spam smaller theatrical films or streaming films for lesser characters in a universe where the existence of Superman is up in the air and Batman is a 70 year old guy (or will be, post-Flash). And the other Batman that killed it at the box office is walled off from the main universe. If the plan is to shore up the core stuff, then move forward...I'm on board with that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimskul wrote:
Warner Bros legit are holding onto some bad apple actors at the moment, between Amber Heard with her recent dumpster fire of a trial with Johnny Depp and Ezra Miller's whole grooming and insanity using the trans label to justify his actions, WB really needs to clean house. Also, I'm shocked at how reluctant they are at using Henry Cavill for more Superman stuff.

Buzz is that the studio is done with Miller after The Flash. But they aren't going to cut off their nose to spite their face with The Flash. And Miller is hardly the only troubled actor in Hollywood history. I don't think Miller and Heard sticking around for one more movie is that big of a deal outside of Twitter.

Henry Cavill on the other hand must have banged someone's wife.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Casualty wrote:
I get that's the business, but there's something incredibly ugly about a lie like that, when it's something hundreds of people worked on for a year and they're already getting the kick in the teeth of knowing nobody will see it.

I feel for all the creative professionals who worked on the film. It really sucks to put a lot of energy and juice into something that never sees the light of day. But that is how it goes sometimes for creatives who aren't Hollywood filmmakers. I've certainly worked on stuff that never launched. Different thing and wildly different scale, of course...but this is something that happens to creative people. As long as everyone was paid for the work and fairly treated otherwise, you just have to shrug and move on. It seems shocking for Hollywood but isn't so shocking in other creative fields.

Wow, he got all her up. But it more or less confirms the movie was poor. A shame for all those who worked on it and it would've been great to see Michael as Batman again. C'est la vie, I guess.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
I guess it might also be that all the actors and directors etc were on a flat fee rather than anything involving percentages, or bonuses based on how well it did

so easier to kill without lawsuits asking for money based on what the talents lawyers claim the film should have done if it was released

That's because it was a streaming movie, not a theatrical movie with points-based deals for the stars.

BBC News is currently running through why all the Glasgow locals got annoyed by the filming process, and how it wrecked their businesses. Nothing like kicking a subject when they are down

 Flinty wrote:
BBC News is currently running through why all the Glasgow locals got annoyed by the filming process, and how it wrecked their businesses. Nothing like kicking a subject when they are down

Something tells me that the filming of a TV movie was not the single point of failure for their businesses, but it makes a handy scapegoat.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
BBC News is currently running through why all the Glasgow locals got annoyed by the filming process, and how it wrecked their businesses. Nothing like kicking a subject when they are down

Something tells me that the filming of a TV movie was not the single point of failure for their businesses, but it makes a handy scapegoat.

Dunno. If it interfered with foot traffic and/or parking, with the promise of a later Infamy pay off (for instance, Cockburn Street in Edinburgh is where we first see Wanda and Vision in Infinity War. The shops there point that out with window stickers etc) as recognisable locations? They’re not getting the promised, if nebulous, reward.

 Flinty wrote:
BBC News is currently running through why all the Glasgow locals got annoyed by the filming process, and how it wrecked their businesses. Nothing like kicking a subject when they are down

I can sympathize. I lived in LA long enough to get thoroughly annoyed by 'No you can't, we're filming here' attitudes. University buildings shut down with no warning, shops inaccessible after an hour long trek to get there... it gets old, fast.

Cockburn street cant have been closed for more than a day or so though. Some of these businesses were apparently affected for a month, and unable even to get mail sorted correctly as Royal Mail couldn’t get up the street.

Only reinforces my point. The pay off, in theory, was bragging rights of a sort. Now? Apparently they can just suck it up.

After the storm of "the sky is falling!" from yesterday, here is a shorter follow-up video where we can take a breath and look at what's actually going on:




The TL;DR is: Stop reading headlines. Start reading articles. Scripted content is not going away. HBO Max =/= HBO (a confusion I had).

 Flinty wrote:
Cockburn street cant have been closed for more than a day or so though. Some of these businesses were apparently affected for a month, and unable even to get mail sorted correctly as Royal Mail couldn’t get up the street.

It was actually closed for at least a week, possibly two, but only late evening and night time. Probably because the production didn't have to redress anything, so they were able to just move the crew and equipment in and out when necessary. Same with Waverley station.

I can imagine for the Glasgow businesses, losing a month of foot traffic and not even getting the brand recognition of appearing in a Hollywood movie, would be a major problem, especially just coming out of Covid. According to the BBC article the compensation worked out as about £30 a day, which is pitiful.

As a wider consideration of Streets Closed For Filming, the exact location is going to matter too.

Cockburn Street for instance is the quickest way from Waverley Station up to the Royal Mile, via Fleshmarket Close. And it has various pubs and food places. If that bit is closed off, the businesses lose more foot traffic than you might think, as folk arriving at the station would need to go over George IVth Bridge.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Not wanting to tarnish the brand yet still planning to release Ezra Millers flash.......
The cynic in me thinks some sexism might be happening

More likely the budget on Flash was much, much higher. Better to cut the smaller-budget stuff and try to recoup something on the really big-budget films.

Batgirl: Warner Discovery to 'protect DC brands' as part of new strategy - BBC

Warner Bros bosses have announced they are restructuring the firm to focus on DC superhero movies, in the hope of emulating the success of rivals Marvel.

beast_gts wrote:
Batgirl: Warner Discovery to 'protect DC brands' as part of new strategy - BBC

Warner Bros bosses have announced they are restructuring the firm to focus on DC superhero movies, in the hope of emulating the success of rivals Marvel.

Bit late for that, and isn't the House of Mouse going with a gak at a wall plan, and of late its only "The misadventures of wakadoo Wanda" thats hauled in the big moneys and Shang and Eternals doing okay(ish) by MCU standards (and Spider-Tom but that's a tangled web of movie money voodoo)

Seems a bit strange to get risk adverse over "Bat-Barb bashs Baddies" as if the plan is just to copy the other lot, both their prior B-films, Antman and Guardians did ok (heck Ironman was fairly C-lister till RDJ and co smashed a home run)

Cinema takings of late aren’t massively reliable benchmarks due to COVID.

Phase 4 has been, let’s say a bit unfocused. But I still wouldn’t say any MCU entry has been an out and out stinker as such. Eternals may well stick out like a sore thumb in-universe, but it’s still a pretty enjoyable if forgettable movie.

Compare to Suicide Squad and Justice League, which are just pretty rotten films through and through.

Maybe we’ll see a less Edge Lord DCEU in future. Sure “dark and gritty” (a term which always sets alarms off for me) Batman can work….but that’s about it. Edge Lord, Atlas Shrugged Superman was a bloody waste of Henry Cavill, and for reasons no-one can adequately explain.

Go back to the core of each character. Not the edgiest interpretation. Let Superman be The Big Blue Boy Scout. The one humanity looks up to.

The biggest problem the "DC Universe" movies have had is that they didn't take any time to build a movie universe, unlike Marvel. Marvel took a long time setting everything up with standalone movies that were largely very good but had a coherent plan for bringing it all together.

The impression I get with the DC movies is of an executive demanding they "do a Marvel", but in about one tenth the timeframe. It doesn't help that the movies vary between terrible and pretty good.

beast_gts wrote:
Batgirl: Warner Discovery to 'protect DC brands' as part of new strategy - BBC

Warner Bros bosses have announced they are restructuring the firm to focus on DC superhero movies, in the hope of emulating the success of rivals Marvel.

The worrying thing about that article is the idea that both studios want to refocus on the the Big Names.
We've seen those. Over and over and over again.
Its actually interesting to see smaller side characters, just don't do such a crap job with those films.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Maybe we’ll see a less Edge Lord DCEU in future. Sure “dark and gritty” (a term which always sets alarms off for me) Batman can work….but that’s about it. Edge Lord, Atlas Shrugged Superman was a bloody waste of Henry Cavill, and for reasons no-one can adequately explain.

Go back to the core of each character. Not the edgiest interpretation. Let Superman be The Big Blue Boy Scout. The one humanity looks up to.

This is the worst part of Black Adam to me. All the marketing with how he’s a down and dirty dude who ain’t afraid to leave destruction in his wake or kill some dudes. Like uuuhhhhh… Have you not been watching the rest of the DC movies? Superman snaps a dude’s neck in his first movie. Wonder Woman blows up a bank to kill a guy who was no real threat to her.

 AduroT wrote:
Wonder Woman blows up a bank to kill a guy who was no real threat to her.

This is much much worse in the Synder cut since there's a weird establishing shot added that makes it clear she is inches from him when he fires the initial rounds before he takes the time to flip to full auto to attack the hostages. She has SO much time to disarm him rather than do the crazy block down the line thing in that version. I actually like the Snyder Cut on the whole but this part drives me absolutely crazy.