I'm not sure the difference... are you saying if Gotham wanted to use Deathstroke, they probably could?
Warner bros announce superhero films through 2020
- Thread starter JoeZhang
- Start date
What he's saying is, if Gotham wanted to use Deathstroke, DC and WB would decide on that particular case. There's no permanent rule, only case-by-case rulings.
It seems to me that DC and WB prefer to avoid two equivalent live-action versions of the same character at the same time, but they'll okay it if it's a variant form of the character -- for instance, young Bruce Wayne instead of Batman. So maybe some DC show could get away with a version of Slade Wilson who wasn't Deathstroke yet.
Although if Deathstroke were to show up on TV outside the Arrowverse, it would make more sense for Titans to use him than Gotham. Well, aside from the fact that nothing in Gotham makes sense.
Although if Deathstroke were to show up on TV outside the Arrowverse, it would make more sense for Titans to use him than Gotham. Well, aside from the fact that nothing in Gotham makes sense.
Actually, Gotham is the exception to this case-by-case rights situation, as they were given 100% unrestricted access to the Batman license and all characters associated with it.
I don't know if Deathstroke is officially considered a Batman character, but if he is, Gotham could use him without having to ask permission.
Deathstroke originated in The New Teen Titans, but he seems to have become a frequent Batman foe.
That's a nice advertising soundbite from whoever it was at FOX that said it, but ultimately Gotham is produced, made and distributed by the WB, so if they really don't want something to happen, it's not gonna happen...
"The WB" refers only to the now-defunct TV network owned by Warner Bros. Entertainment and Turner Broadcasting. For all other incarnations of Warner Bros., the abbreviation is just "WB." The network added the definite article to the studio's familiar abbreviation to differentiate itself.
I like this current direction of this thread. It's like we're trying to out-pedanticing each other.
They probably just did that for Gotham because it's so batshit (or should that be Batshit?) crazy that nobody is going to confuse it for one of the other versions.
The fact that Gotham can literally do whatever it wants and use whatever characters it wants so long as they fall under the Batman property license is what, IMO, makes it so great.I
I know that not everyone likes it, but it's doing something right because it keeps getting consistent-enough ratings for FOX to keep renewing it.
I know that not everyone likes it, but it's doing something right because it keeps getting consistent-enough ratings for FOX to keep renewing it.
Depends on which version of Michael Bay. If it's the Michael Bay that directed 5 pieces of metal diarrhea called Transformers, I'll pass. But if it's the Michael Bay that gave us the piece of comedic genius known as Pain & Gain, I may have to try it out.
I love Gotham, how many Bataman adaptations have a story arc about The Penguin being in love with The Riddler, and have Leslie Thompkins running an underground fightclub in the Gotham slums. The fact that the show is so Batshit crazy is the main reason I love it.
Both of the things you mention are awesome, but my favorite batshit crazy thing the show has done is turn Jim Gordon's first comics-Canon wife, Barbara Kean, into a clinically insane psychopath.
An apology MAY be in order.... this just revealed today:
https://www.cbr.com/rumor-zack-snyder-fired-justice-league/
Still a rumour, but it at least means there is no absolutel truth in our debate with the information we have.
If Warner Bros. had fired Snyder, the obvious thing to do would have been to seek DGA arbitration to get his name scrubbed from the film. That did not happen, so I call bullshit on this having any legitimacy whatsoever.
Lolol you and your dgu shit. Lay off the crack pipe buddy.
Why does it matter when he was fired? If he was fired, it wasn't because of his daughter. I'm sure he already got paid for the work he did, I'm betting he wasn't on a salary so he didn't lose some kind of consistent paycheck by getting fired. Where they suppose to wait a certain amount of months after the admittedly terrible event to fire him? If he was going to be fired and not keep working on the film, they pretty much had to do it at that point. Was he supposed to stick around and watch reshoots over Whedon's shoulder?
I'm truly sorry for what happened to his family. But I'm glad he got fired, and since I'm very sure his daughter's death wasn't connected to the reason he was fired I don't consider his personal tragedy as being related to my happiness over him being fired. His career is fine, he'll be directing some pile of crap action movie before too long. The firing didn't hurt his overall career, it didn't put him into financial trouble, and it didn't occur because of what happened to his daughter. So, yeah, trying to bring his daughter into this is ridiculous.
Do some research, dude.
Everything I have said and continue to say about DGA procedures and policies is 100% factual and can be proven as such with even the most cursory of searches.