http://variety.com/2017/film/news/batgirl-movie-joss-whedon-warner-bros-1202018544/

Obviously this could be good, but man is WB ever piling it on with the Bat properties between this and Nightwing. But Whedon could handle a sidekick/spinoff film. Not sure how you're going to introduce Babs into the main DCEU though.

whose past we don't really know about. Not sure where Nightwing and Batgirl are going to fit into this.

If they let Joss do his thing, this could be the best DCEU movie yet.

Would've been the easiest PR slam dunk in the world, and considering how Whedon was pissy with the feminist reaction to Avengers 2, I'm not convinced this was the home run move I'm sure DC thinks it is.

Also, doesn't this seem to indicate a tonal shift in DC? Would they really punt on the darkness so relatively early in the DCEU process? Or maybe I'm just assuming Whedon will do his shtick here... but again, if you're not signing him for his shtick, why not get a qualified female director?

picking Joss based on his pedigree with "Buffy" makes more sense, purely on the feminist angle (aside from the fact he's a great writer and director). i don't see why a female director HAS to be chosen to tell a Batgirl story, speshly if one of ur primary motivations is 'great PR' (none of this is based on the assumption a female director CAN'T do the job, which is ludicrous, but i think it's getting to be equally ludicrous that a guy with experience helming female lead characters (that don't completely conform to stereotypes) can't also be a sensible choice).

Avengers 2 is something even Joss isn't completely happy with, for multiple reasons. and it's a less enjoyable film because of it (hard for a Joss stan like me to say, but tis the truth). that might've had more to do with being in the Marvel machine than anything else. otherwise, Whedon & female characters? AND it's in comic book world? why would picking Joss even be questioned?

V.

LOL at you twisting yourself in knots typing all that.

is my point.
i'm just stating the reasons why Joss is also a viable candidate (and thinking out loud in my first post). and i think in general it's naive to assume that just because the films lead is female that the directing job will automatically go to, or is more likely to go to, a female (not to state the obvious, but). i didn't disagree with Frank's sentiments on that. it's definitely a missed opportunity.
ideally a whole lotta cool shit should happen but that's rarely the case. at least in this instance i can understand why Joss in particular would be chosen for a project like this (also why he was previously in talks to develop a Wonder Woman project a decade ago). this the kinda shit he does. would a film like this benefit from a female directors POV? fuck yes (im leaving out the PR angle cos thats the point i had a problem with). but if Joss is what we get instead, that's still cool with me and at least makes some sense. even a casual fan of the mans work would go "ahhh yeah, i get it" if they heard the news.
i also think it's entirely possible to make this point without disparaging women or the feminist movement.

sooo...was that less knotty?
or more?
where we at right now on the knot scale?

V.

Just hire a woman.

Something that happens way way way too rarely in the studio system.

So, yes, DC would get positive PR, but it wouldn't be perceived as a PR move by the public, except by those who have a general mistrust at any opportunity given to a woman. No one thinks Wonder Woman is directed by a woman because of the PR-- they think they gave it to this female director because she can tell the story well.

I don't doubt Whedon's storytelling-- but when you factor in everything, I'm not sure why, if you're looking to expand your universe, you're not also looking for increased diversity in your voices with characters like this one (though maybe the fact that Suicide Squad robbed Ayer of his voice means I'm hoping for too much).

Given the hands-on way the DC heads have managed the previous productions, you'd think Whedon wouldn't want anything to do with them.

If he's smart, he'll at the very least bring a woman (*coughcoughGAIL SIMONEcough*) on to co write.

Obviously with the Buffyverse and his time at Marvel his showrunner experience would help fill in a gap DC needs bad and this might be them giving him a gateway drug to fixing (sorry Hellyeah)...err helping to re-organize the movie DCverse.

I gotta hope that if DC was smart (and they might not be) that the bigger goal with giving him such carte blanche on the property is to help influence/organize their phase 2 and beyond stuff.

That said, there's no reason why he couldn't do that and and still have a woman ultimately direct (or write, produce) or any of the fucking jobs DC is hiring him for the project, lol.

where's my flash movie tho?

I think Wheedon is a good choice for this based off Angel and Buffy more than his Avengers work. I haven't been a fan of the DC movies yet so will see what he can do with it. Marvel fans that have turned on DC completely maybe will be more likely to give this one a chance with him on board.

btw MCU nearly 10 years in and no female directors or solo female films yet. Captain Marvel still 2 years away and y'all hating on this choice? really?

>btw MCU nearly 10 years in and no female directors or solo
>female films yet. Captain Marvel still 2 years away and y'all
>hating on this choice? really?

Marvel and DC both got praise for the Captain Marvel/Wonder Woman announcements. (Similarly, Marvel getting praise for Black Panther too.)

But best believe if Marvel did a different movie after Captain Marvel about another female hero and it was directed and written by a dude, they'd get rightly fried too. Marvel was getting strung up in the press for the lack of diversity before the BP/CM announcements. Rightfully so. And this is coming from a big Marvel fan.

sincerely asking after reading http://www.thewrap.com/joss-whedon-feminist-hypocrite-infidelity-affairs-ex-wife-kai-cole-says/

She frames it as infidelity = not being a feminist which is bullshit.

The question is that did he use his power to fuck those actress/staff/writers...that's where we can easily slide into is Whedon a piece of shit. He puts it as if they were hitting on him...*shrug* which might be so. It also might be so that since he's the big boss man all his hollas worked because of the 'implication' (c) Always Sunny.

But by her focusing on that by him cheating = he's a woman hater...this is a gotta hear both sides situation, lol. Its a bad accusation.




>sincerely asking after reading
>http://www.thewrap.com/joss-whedon-feminist-hypocrite-infidelity-affairs-ex-wife-kai-cole-says/

>She frames it as infidelity = not being a feminist which is
>bullshit.

that's why i ask. it certainly undercuts his image and reputation as this male feminist modern day icon, but at the very least the creative works themselves could be argued as feminist. the man himself may not be, depending on how much credence you place in his ex-wife's account and that nebulous definition of feminism we now have.


>The question is that did he use his power to fuck those
>actress/staff/writers...

(lest we forget, "you're goddamn right i fuck fans")


>that's where we can easily slide into
>is Whedon a piece of shit. He puts it as if they were hitting
>on him...*shrug* which might be so. It also might be so that
>since he's the big boss man all his hollas worked because of
>the 'implication' (c) Always Sunny.
>
>But by her focusing on that by him cheating = he's a woman
>hater...this is a gotta hear both sides situation, lol. Its a
>bad accusation.

i agree that it didn't quite add up, which is to be expected in a public spat between former spouses. i also think it's clear he didn't get into writing movies and tv shows just to sleep around. still, i believe her that the path he chose that gave him such access to young and impressionable women enabled him to be a serial louse. does a man who cheats on his wife over and over with an apparent variety of women within the sphere of his work lose his feminist card, could he never have had one in that case, or is it all truly irrelevant so long as the work stands on its own merits? for me it's hard to separate the idealized identity of a feminist from the reality of a man who deceived his wife for over a decade and uses his fame and popularity to sleep with everyone from fans to people he directs and cuts checks.

i think this is going to follow him around for awhile, maybe forever. post inspired by whedonesque shutting down over this. personally i've never been invested enough in him to care that much, but i've always liked his stuff.

the founder of the website had apparently been toying with closing the site for the last 5yrs or so. timing is suspect, but can't say its just becos of Kai Cole's words.

V.

i know you know this, but everyone else should note that they are seeking charity donations to the infliction she says she now has from this, so it's definitely a factor in the closing.

fucking women who work for you and lying about it is definitely not progressive shit. it's the same old shit.

also, I never felt like he was a feminist from his work, and got a lot of credit for writing "strong" female characters only slightly less shittily than other dudes.

might've been notable in 1997, but it's not at all in 2017.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

"Hey, I write woman characters as if they are human beings and not walking fuck toys"

*Writes thousands of articles over the years at how progressive that is*

One can make the argument that since Whedon's big thing is characterization making more fully fleshed female characters were a byproduct of his system, not intentional or trying to make a statement.

That said, still a fan of his earlier works.


>fucking women who work for you and lying about it is
>definitely not progressive shit. it's the same old shit.
>
>also, I never felt like he was a feminist from his work, and
>got a lot of credit for writing "strong" female characters
>only slightly less shittily than other dudes.
>
>might've been notable in 1997, but it's not at all in 2017.
>
>www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

I don't in any way condone his behavior and the serial deception over the years of his marriage.

But he did advance the state of women characters in TV and considering the degree that Hollywood and mass media suppress the voices of women, his prominent usage of women in his projects is noteworthy.

Maybe he's only guilty of the same crime that many folks in entertainment are guilty of - trying to project an image of piety that their actions fall short of.

If Whedon deflected his status as a feminist and simply claimed to write rich characters, maybe this story doesn't give an opportunity to express disappointment in the way that it does.

I didn't know anything about Whedon but I do like his work, from TV and the movies. I am disappointed that he lied to his wife and in some ways set back the perception that men can genuinely care for women and provide an environment where they feel loved.

But I personally don't think that his personal failings detract from the impact of his work.

I hope they can do my boy justice on the big screen. I hope.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/joss-whedon-exits-batgirl-movie-1087384

Joss Whedon Exits 'Batgirl' Movie

FEBRUARY 22, 2018 12:17pm PT by Borys Kit

The Bat signal is being dimmed … for now.

Joss Whedon is saying goodbye to DC Entertainment heroine Batgirl.

Whedon, the creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer among other pop culture touchstones, is exiting the Warner Bros. feature project, which he was writing and was slated to direct.

"Batgirl is such an exciting project, and Warners/DC such collaborative and supportive partners, that it took me months to realize I really didn't have a story," Whedon told The Hollywood Reporter in a statement. Referring to DC president Geoff Johns and Warner Bros. Picture Group president Toby Emmerich, Whedon added, "I'm grateful to Geoff and Toby and everyone who was so welcoming when I arrived, and so understanding when I…uh, is there a sexier word for 'failed?'"

Whedon came on to Batgirl almost a year ago, in March 2017, with the hopes of bringing to the big screen a companion to the female empowerment icon Wonder Woman, with this one tied to the most popular character in comics, Batman. Batgirl is Barbara Gordon, the daughter of Gotham City police commissioner James Gordon.

But sources say that Whedon, after a year of trying, could not crack the code of what a Batgirl movie should be. Wonder Woman, meanwhile, became a cultural phenomenon as well as one of the biggest hits and most acclaimed movies of 2017.

Industry sources add that even as Whedon faced story issues, in today's cultural entertainment environment, a male filmmaker may have faced greater public scrutiny if he were to have tackled a movie with such feminist importance such as Batgirl or Wonder Woman, much like a white filmmaker would have seen backlash taking on the Black Panther movie.

Whedon has been credited as a pioneering voice for female-focused genre fare, having created the hit TV show Buffy the Vampire Slayer two decades ago.

He does have a strong relationship with Warners, who brought him into the company's DC fold to take over last year's Justice League when director Zack Snyder was sidelined due to a family tragedy.

Whedon will face no shortage of suitors, as Netflix, Apple and others will likely vie for the next creation from the writer-director behind cult TV series such as Firefly and Dollhouse.

that said i would HOPE marvel puts him on the xmen movies once they get the paperwork sorted out.

or pump out a quality flick. their incoherent/disjointed rollout strategy for the dcu. whedon is just the latest episode but this fish is def rotting from the head.

He's just trying to get out of that mess while he still can.

Or if he just wisely saw that the ship was sinking and made his escape.

Hopefully one of his real homies pulled him aside and was like "man just walk away, you REALLY don't want that shit on your resume."

Having to sort out WB hierarchy and also their clumsy on-screen continuity I’m sure was intimidating enough. Top that off with your heart not being in it, and Marvel probably whispering in his ear about another fun idea, and he made appropriately made a clean break.

Can WB get Hope Larson to write the script?

She's been killing it for years.

If his issue was "I can't think of a story" then it would be easy for DC to get someone like Hope to collaborate with him on the script.

She even tweeted out that she has a million Batgirl stories to tell.

WB/DC needs to hit her up ASAP.

>If his issue was "I can't think of a story" then it would be
>easy for DC to get someone like Hope to collaborate with him
>on the script.

Something fishy

Woman/Writer Director
Primary female cast
Hype those facts on social media.
I'd be all for that btw, if they were actually being genuine about it and not using it for a ploy. If my suspicions are true.

>I'd be all for that btw, if they were actually being genuine
>about it and not using it for a ploy. If my suspicions are
>true.

I’m fine if they get work, I’m not fine with WB using them as props on some “look, we can be visionaries too”.

I'm a much bigger fan of the Day's output thus far than most, but even that comes with a caveat that they're not as bad they're made out to be.

But one thing I haven't been a fan of is any of the offshoots of the core properties.

I think MOS and WW here excellent, but its definitely been a mixed bag of mostly bad with really strong highlights.

SS was trash outside of Will and Margot, and they were magic in damn near every scene.

JL was a fun video game come to life, but was choppy and skittish with a complete embarrassment of a villain.

The Batgirl, joker, Gotham City Sirens, etc though? NONE of that shit sounds remotely interesting and they haven't nailed enough of the core titles to generate interst in anything else.

Meanwhile, Civil War was a so well executed that I'd pay opening night money to watch Cap, Falcon and Bucky in a road trip buddy comedy in a rusty old VW Bug.

as long as its more of a stand-alone genre film instead of attempting to be a summer blockbuster. I have no idea how you establish Burnside or build a world with Gotham looming next door tho. You'd have to pretty much start from scratch. There's a market for it tho.

Batgirl is a nice alternative to WW

I'm a firm believe that it's all about story and execution, whatever the project. It's why Ant-Man was a hit; the right cast, quality writing, intelligent and fun use of the premise, wise choices in tone, and the biggest reason of all?

The fact that it served as counter-programming to their own established brand. Frankly, that's why the whole MCU works, as each series has it's own identity.

The DCU hasn't established that they can do this with successfully *and* with consistency within their core properties.

For this reason, very little of what they have done should generate excitement for anything they do going forward, especially their side characters, even guys like Deadshot or Harley Quinn, and it's precisely due to the grossly uneven execution and destructive meddling of WB.

The property itself is nearly immaterial IMO.

trying to make everything like Nolan's Batman when we're all looking for uplifing and hopeful which is what Superman is supposed to be and probably what Batgirl could be.

Dark/light, the tone is immaterial to the quality of story and execution of that story. The issue has nothing to do with trying to be dark. It's bad storytelling, overly convoluted plots, bland, unimaginative villains, mediocre dialogue, etc. To say nothing of heavy-handed studio involvement.

The presence of those same issues wouldn't make a better movie by virtue of a lighter, brighter tone. The "dark" tone is a convenient, simplistic and low common denominator scapegoatin, but its dead last on the list of issues with these films.

https://variety.com/2022/film/news/batgirl-movie-why-not-releasing-warner-bros-1235332062/

I don't care how shitty you think it would be, if you have a finished $80+ mil budget film in the can, and you don't release it *exclusively* for the tax write-off? Fuck the fuck off.

We get shitty comic book movies almost every month. Not for nothing, there was some talent behind this. I hope everyone who has a project setup at Warners looks at this and thinks twice.

>I don't care how shitty you think it would be, if you have a
>finished $80+ mil budget film in the can, and you don't
>release it *exclusively* for the tax write-off? Fuck the fuck
>off.

Only reason I can think of is if they’re afraid this will harm the DCEU, and that’s ridiculous. I’m actually a fan of most of the movies, but still, there’s no way this movie is so bad it fucks up the shared universe or whatever. Just release it on Max and call it a day.

>Only reason I can think of is if they’re afraid this will
>harm the DCEU, and that’s ridiculous. I’m actually a fan
>of most of the movies, but still, there’s no way this movie
>is so bad it fucks up the shared universe or whatever. Just
>release it on Max and call it a day.

They've been actively attempting to fuck up the DCEU with bad movies for years and it keeps plugging along, lol.

It has everything to do with an exec pinching pennies and viewing tax write-offs as better for the brand than movies. (It's also why they just pulled six of the MAX Originals off the streaming platform with zero heads-up.)

>It has everything to do with an exec pinching pennies and
>viewing tax write-offs as better for the brand than movies.
>(It's also why they just pulled six of the MAX Originals off
>the streaming platform with zero heads-up.)

I knew there had to be some changes to these streamers at some point, cause they’re shelling out money/taking on lots of debt and not forecasted to be profitable for a while, but this was not what I envisioned. How sad.

>They've been actively attempting to fuck up the DCEU with bad
>movies for years and it keeps plugging along, lol.

...into one new streaming platform. He's a business man, not a film lover. They basically hired a guy who doesnt give a shit.

https://variety.com/2022/digital/news/hbo-max-discovery-plus-merger-2023-1235333314/

This shit he pulled was bad calculus. With proper marketing, this could have at least half of it's money back.

It’ll get worse

It's pretty well documented the guy is a lunatic

This seems like a Twitter landmine just waiting to be stepped on -
they're gonna actually shelve the (probably bad) movie with the black female lead but put out the (probably bad) movie with the female-abusing white male sociopath?

https://movieweb.com/batgirl-footage-offers-new-look-leslie-grace-brendan-fraser-in-canceled-dc-outing/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZDyd9y_w8w

meanwhile, joss whedon and bryan singer never directed another movie...

https://variety.com/2022/film/news/armie-hammer-hotel-concierge-caymans-1235310475/

probably living a little too large thinking no way were the checks just going to stop.

it is

I had no interest in it before this all happened

When the reason it wasn't release is very likely because its trash.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

>When the reason it wasn't release is very likely because its
>trash.

First, most of the DC films are trash and it's not the end of the world.

But how do you know this was trash??

Hell Morbius was "trash" and made like $160 million worldwide on a $90 million budget.

I'd take that ROI.

It’s saving Warner Discovery a metric fuck ton of money.

If the production budget was 90 million - they get to write that off as a loss. Not to mention, you usually look at a 2-3x production budget for marketing that they no longer have to (at least fully) spend.

Being trash has never stopped DC, Warner, or most other places to shelve something. It’s always something else.

i'd watch it even though this version wasn't on my radar until it was cancelled. three reasons: keaton as batman; curious about the directors; brendan fraser as firefly (could be awful or pretty good).

i understand the tax writeoff. batgirl probably would suck, but our nature is to find out for ourselves or at least let others so they can report back to us.

my understanding was that it tested with audiences and was irredeemable. now the directors are saying it still needs VFX and some more scenes shot. (maybe to reconcile these stories, those would be reshoots, but the assessment was that it would take more budget than "the snyder cut" to finish, so the two stories don't add up to me.)

on that subject, i still think they should release the ayer cut and the schumacher cut. now that marketing budget is such a concern, the win-win is as follows. those with a digital copy of either movie would get the workprint as an extra or be able to redeem it with their code for the theatrical version. the workprints would also be uploaded to hbo max with no paid promotion. if they prove popular, they could be commodified and packaged for digital distribution similar to how unrated, extended, and director's cuts sit side by side with the theatrical version. then they've profited off of something that already existed and satisfied the fans, even showing them a gesture of goodwill after recent events.