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.

That makes my brain hurt.

Back-ups are basically a default of most server set-ups these days, and if you have even half a brain, you'll make additional backups as well.

Actually permanently 'losing' server data requires a concerted effort these days. I'm not sure most casual users could manage to successfully do so.

All this stuff is just gross. The HBO Max purge just to stop paying people to make a quick stock turnaround is absolutely disgusting. I'll not be at all surprised when WB is back up for sale next year after shareholders have made a quick buck burning its legacy to the ground.

I suppose it was inevitable if they were to take advantage of fully binning the project, but that has to hurt to see the results of a lot of hard work just vanish.

Yeah that's got to be brutal to not even have any scenes survive at all. All those hours just lost.

Voss wrote:
That makes my brain hurt.

Back-ups are basically a default of most server set-ups these days, and if you have even half a brain, you'll make additional backups as well.

Actually permanently 'losing' server data requires a concerted effort these days. I'm not sure most casual users could manage to successfully do so.

I wouldn't be surprised if back-ups do exist. In set-ups like this, the non-tech people usually only get access to the "live" version of the files, with access to any back-up infrastructure only available to the techs.

From on operational perspective it makes a lot of sense. The decision has been made not to release the movie, so it follows they'd then remove the files related to a now-dead project from their creator-facing infrastructure.

If you haven’t heard they’ve been doing the same to a lot of their cartoons. Entire series being wiped from existence.

It's a problem with any big company- they can wipe things out. It's one reason I hate streaming being the norm because you lose the ability to have a legal local version. You lose DVD/BluRay and that means if they choose ot take a show off air or lose rights to it (or part of it) they might as well just delete it as its worthless to them.

It's the same as how movie-tie-in games can vanish from the steam store because the licence expires. At least there you can purchase and hold onto it through the steam system evne if you can never buy it again (total outright removal is super rare)

the big killer for games is music licencing, the moment you drop a contemporary tune on the sound track there's a ticking clock

My guess is they locked out the director from any back up copies, because he's the one most likely to leak it.

Hrm. I wonder if releasing it for free would still allow them to take the tax write off?

(Shrug)

All I know is we need to start building the myth for this film now. Start telling your kids how it was the greatest super film, if not the greatest film, of its era, how fans couldn't wait, how test audiences raved about it, but it is lost forever, sacrificed on the altar of Wall Street!

(Shakes fist at Wall Street)

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
My guess is they locked out the director from any back up copies, because he's the one most likely to leak it.

Hrm. I wonder if releasing it for free would still allow them to take the tax write off?

(Shrug)

All I know is we need to start building the myth for this film now. Start telling your kids how it was the greatest super film, if not the greatest film, of its era, how fans couldn't wait, how test audiences raved about it, but it is lost forever, sacrificed on the altar of Wall Street!

(Shakes fist at Wall Street)

*Looks at Warner Bros Discovery's market value that just keeps plummeting.*

This isn't how you sacrifice something on the altar of Wall Street. This is how you sacrifice something on the altar of Wall Street and utterly fail at Wall Street.

This is how a corporation dies.

Maybe they need to cancel more films and shows?

And pull more Sesame Street from HBO+, that'll be sure to lure more subscribers in!

 Overread wrote:
I still can't fathom how comic sales would be down* considering the insane marketing that the movies must be generating for comics.

Even if only a smaller portion of the customer base are engaging with comics, it should be spiking interest within that market segment constantly.


I could well see that perhaps people are buying fewer physical and more digital or even buying more physical volume and collected editions and less individual issues.



*That is unless a firm is being deliberate in presenting false data or is otherwise stalling/sabotaging/incompetent at serving the market.

This is really about the collapse of the News Stand model. News stands used to sell loads of comics- a lot of them to kids. When that fell apart, it was a complete coincidence that those sales evaporated.

Currently, most physical comics are sold via comic shops which cater primarily to adult collectors.

Naturally there are people with political agendas citing the reason for shrinking comics sales are "black Spider-Man" or "gay Superman" when the real reason is based on the sales model rather than the content.

And as others have pointed out, graphic novel collections and subscription models are not counted in these 'declining comics sales' and those seem to be the preferred model for many current fans.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slipspace wrote:

Voss wrote:
That makes my brain hurt.

Back-ups are basically a default of most server set-ups these days, and if you have even half a brain, you'll make additional backups as well.

Actually permanently 'losing' server data requires a concerted effort these days. I'm not sure most casual users could manage to successfully do so.

I wouldn't be surprised if back-ups do exist. In set-ups like this, the non-tech people usually only get access to the "live" version of the files, with access to any back-up infrastructure only available to the techs.

From on operational perspective it makes a lot of sense. The decision has been made not to release the movie, so it follows they'd then remove the files related to a now-dead project from their creator-facing infrastructure.

Yeah, this looks like a deliberate move to keep him from accessing and/or leaking anything they did.

It's rough for the people who put a lot of time and effort into the movie, but the corporation that owns the IP gets to do with it as they please.

The situation really makes me think that we should revisit how long it takes before something enters the public domain. Anyone can make their own works based off Shakespeare or Dickens works and one day anyone who wants to make their own stories of Batman or Spider-Man. I'm not opposed to the idea of changing public domain rules so that 50 years after publication works enter the public domain.

The problem is when something stops being owned by a person and is owned by a company and that company is still making things. Imagine if in 50 years after GW started everything moved into public domain. That would mean Old World would only have another 20 years or so.

It would probably make companies invest heavily into new things, but at the same time have even less interest in supporting things after a few years. Everything would become a short term creative project.


You'd go from 50 versions of Batman to 50 versions of *animal*man. All being the same gruff character just different enough to be a new IP.



It's always a battle though, families of people who created wealth generating ideas don't want to suddenly lose when the creator dies. A father with a family could go from supporting them to nothing if they walked under a buss and their revenue generating content suddenly goes free market.


Of course disney is doing their best to constantly extend the limits

Honestly, there's not a lot of good that comes out of things entering the public domain. Mostly just low effort attempts to cash on recognizable names though its nice that people can't be sued for their little local theater stuff I suppose. I feel a little different about music than things that are about characters, but I don't see a lot of good coming from public domain Steve Rogers.

I think media preservation is a different topic than public domain though. We need ways to ensure that works remain available as we enter a world in which the technology is ready to make that possible. Songs, movies, videogames, you name it. There needs to be something making sure these things remain available.

The problem is there's a bunch of them. There's at least one or two video game achieve groups around.

Part of the issue is the sheer volume of stuff being made. The other is trying to link up different preservation groups so that they work in an efficient manner.

Course then you hit issues such as what version - eg for music there are loads of different formats and encodings to preserve and the best are in the recording studio and might never be released to the general public.

On top of that even if you can preserve things you've then got to catalogue, index, tag, keyword, archieve and all so that it can actually be found. Remembering that some are going to be digital resources and some physical resources.

Public domain laws won't help with the Batgirl film- it is getting suppressed. You have to have a copy in order to make a copy, whether or not it is a legal copy.


The money involved in this is interesting.

Cancelling a film or simply not releasing it isn't such a crazy thing, but that doesn't happen with films that cost $90 million (or the $40 million Scooby film). That's a LOT to just call a loss without even collecting the crumbs from a bad release. And it is a strong contrast against The Flash (which probably should be canned due to the star being a fugitive from the law for kidnapping and all that).


$90 million is not a huge budget for a super hero film these days- though I wonder how it compares to the much smaller productions on Disney+ right now. It isn't like Roger Corman's Fantastic Four.

Oddly, I think this film would make WAY more than $90 million if they released it in the theatres right now- after this publicity and Michael Keaton and all that.

You don't know that. Sure Thing films fail at the theaters all the time, and this is FAR from a Sure Thing film.

Denial
Anger
Bargaining
Depression
Acceptance


Which stage are we at now?

The stage of interesting discussion. The same stage we’ve always been at. Not a single person in this thread has shown a particularly strong opinion on the binning of this movie.

It’s still being discussed because it’s a rare move from a major studio, and it’s therefore an interesting topic.

 Just Tony wrote:
You don't know that. Sure Thing films fail at the theaters all the time, and this is FAR from a Sure Thing film.

Denial
Anger
Bargaining
Depression
Acceptance


Which stage are we at now?

None of the above. Have you actually read the discussion? Nobody seems especially annoyed that the film isn't being released. Nobody's organising boycotts of WB. It's just a really weird situation for such an expensive movie to be finished, then canned. That's where we're at now.

We got immediate allusions to the cancellation being because of racism and misogyny, maybe a few phobias as well.


We got conspiracy theories about test screenings despite the fact there was multiple, yet the CT crowd all harken back to one article with less than credible sources.


We got cries of "muh public domain" because this one movie got shelved.


Don't forget the part where the director tried to get the film and found it deleted/missing/access prevented. Forget the fact several outlets reported the director's intent was to essentially pirate release the film.


I will never call out legitimate discussion, but I will call out any sort of baiting or conspiracy theories if they make no sense.


In my mind it's exactly as described in releases. Too expensive for streaming, not confident in theatrical release.

We got conspiracy theories about test screenings despite the fact there was multiple, yet the CT crowd all harken back to one article with less than credible sources.

...less than credible sources? Between NY Post and Hollywood Reporter?

I don't believe it was canned because racism or misogyny, I believe it was canned because Warner Bros Discovery are idiots that believe they can make a profit by cancelling stuff.
Moreover it is hard to care about Batgirl when in the same month WBD has not only been cancelling plenty of shows (specially animation ones), but it has outright disappeared loved shows like Infinity Train.

Who does that? even Netflix doesn't outright disappear content.

Not a lot of people care about Batgirl, plenty of people care about animation. And thus the discussion surrounding WBD has mostly moved on from Batgirl and onto whatever nonsensical stupidity WBD does next.

 odinsgrandson wrote:

This is really about the collapse of the News Stand model. News stands used to sell loads of comics- a lot of them to kids. When that fell apart, it was a complete coincidence that those sales evaporated.

Currently, most physical comics are sold via comic shops which cater primarily to adult collectors.

Naturally there are people with political agendas citing the reason for shrinking comics sales are "black Spider-Man" or "gay Superman" when the real reason is based on the sales model rather than the content.

And as others have pointed out, graphic novel collections and subscription models are not counted in these 'declining comics sales' and those seem to be the preferred model for many current fans.

One comic creators take on that.

https://quantumvibe.com/strip?page=2361
https://quantumvibe.com/strip?page=2363
https://quantumvibe.com/strip?page=2365
https://quantumvibe.com/strip?page=2367

 odinsgrandson wrote:
Public domain laws won't help with the Batgirl film- it is getting suppressed. You have to have a copy in order to make a copy, whether or not it is a legal copy.

The money involved in this is interesting.

Cancelling a film or simply not releasing it isn't such a crazy thing, but that doesn't happen with films that cost $90 million (or the $40 million Scooby film). That's a LOT to just call a loss without even collecting the crumbs from a bad release. And it is a strong contrast against The Flash (which probably should be canned due to the star being a fugitive from the law for kidnapping and all that).

$90 million is not a huge budget for a super hero film these days- though I wonder how it compares to the much smaller productions on Disney+ right now. It isn't like Roger Corman's Fantastic Four.

Oddly, I think this film would make WAY more than $90 million if they released it in the theatres right now- after this publicity and Michael Keaton and all that.

Think the general rule of thumb is that marketing and promotion is budgeted for around 50% of a film’s production cost. So breakeven for a theatrical release of Batgirl might have been around $135 mil. And that’s kind of a lot for an industry that still isn’t ‘right’. I think it’d basically have to be around top 20 or in terms of global box office to hit that mark.

Maybe it outperforms thanks to low “inventory” of feature films for cinemas. Or maybe it bombs far worse than expected, which happens in that industry. What’s more, if it’s poorly received does it genuinely become more “DC sucks” ammo at a time when they’ve been on a bit of a win streak?

Who knows what would have happened, but I think I can understand the calculus that the execs were looking at. I definitely understand that $90 million is kinda crazy for a one-off streaming-only movie unless you’re sure it’s going to be an EVENT. Had Batgirl been a series, it might have been a different conversation, because they drive many more subs.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
My guess is they locked out the director from any back up copies, because he's the one most likely to leak it.

Hrm. I wonder if releasing it for free would still allow them to take the tax write off?

(Shrug)

All I know is we need to start building the myth for this film now. Start telling your kids how it was the greatest super film, if not the greatest film, of its era, how fans couldn't wait, how test audiences raved about it, but it is lost forever, sacrificed on the altar of Wall Street!

(Shakes fist at Wall Street)

and given he was trying to access it without permission (and copy what he found) that was a smart move on their part,

nothing worse than taking all the bad publicity for writing the film off only for the tax office to dispute things and claim it's promoting interest in their IPs since it's out in the wild so not being allowed the write off

 Tyran wrote:
I believe it was canned because Warner Bros Discovery are idiots that believe they can make a profit by cancelling stuff.

They're not idiots. And they're not making a profit. They're reducing their loss.

 Tyran wrote:
in the same month WBD has not only been cancelling plenty of shows (specially animation ones), but it has outright disappeared loved shows like Infinity Train.

Firstly, a lot of the cancellations are cancellations on HBO Max. The streaming service. For instance, the Caped Crusader show hasn't been cancelled, it's just not been given the go ahead on the HBO Max service. Warner Brothers is shopping it around to other places.

As for "disappearing" things, they've explained this: There are many shows that, by keeping them available, it costs them money as they have to keep paying residuals. By removing them, those costs go away.

If shows no one is watching are costing you money, and you can save that money simply by removing them from the streaming platform, why wouldn't you?

 Just Tony wrote:
You don't know that. Sure Thing films fail at the theaters all the time, and this is FAR from a Sure Thing film.

Denial
Anger
Bargaining
Depression
Acceptance


Which stage are we at now?

Is Snakes on a Plane a stage of grief? Can this movie really be worse than Morbius? And that one got released TWICE!



Actually I do feel annoyed on behalf of the film makers. They were hired to make a movie that was definitely going to get a release and now that's all gone. This offends me as an artist, and it doesn't really matter whether the art was bad. This means that artists that make films good will have less trust with the people who make movies get funded at WB.



But ultimately I'm here because this is so unprecedented and interesting. Yes, projects get canned all the time and they get downgraded to home video or streaming release and stuff like that. But not projects that cost this much money.

WB threw enough money at this that it seems crazy for them not to want to scrape together even a meager return on that investment. And I mean, it isn't like this could do any more damage to the DC brand than they've already done with most of their other movies.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
I believe it was canned because Warner Bros Discovery are idiots that believe they can make a profit by cancelling stuff.

They're not idiots. And they're not making a profit. They're reducing their loss.

And yet their losses keep increasing.

 Tyran wrote:
in the same month WBD has not only been cancelling plenty of shows (specially animation ones), but it has outright disappeared loved shows like Infinity Train.

Firstly, a lot of the cancellations are cancellations on HBO Max. The streaming service. For instance, the Caped Crusader show hasn't been cancelled, it's just not been given the go ahead on the HBO Max service. Warner Brothers is shopping it around to other places.

As for "disappearing" things, they've explained this: There are many shows that, by keeping them available, it costs them money as they have to keep paying residuals. By removing them, those costs go away.

If shows no one is watching are costing you money, and you can save that money simply by removing them from the streaming platform, why wouldn't you?

Considering some of the removed shows are quite beloved with dedicated fanbases, really debatable no one is watching them.

You're being disingenuous.

Saying a show has 'disappeared' implies you can't find it anywhere. A quick check on Infinity Train shows it easily available through amazon prime video, and I suspect other places as well. That isn't 'disappeared,' just off the chains of a crappy streaming service.