Warner bros announce superhero films through 2020

How does one get fired before they depart? Is that like showing up before you arrive?

 

Once she went nuts Barbara went from being the worst part of the show, the being one of the absolute best.

I'm calling bullshit on the story about Snyder being fired. WB has been firing DCEU directors left and right, so I don't see why they would need to cover it up with Snyder.

 

Yeah, female love interests in superhero shows tend to get way more hate than any other kind of character. Barbara as is was doomed...so they made her a villain instead.

 

^ If you rewatch Season 1 with the knowledge of where she ends up, it becomes pretty clear that the writers were always going to make her a villain, so it's not really something they decided based on fans disliking her as she was originally presented.

Which, incidentally, makes her transformation all the more awesome.

 

I was saying he was fired on these forums over a year ago. Many of you attacked me for simply reporting what I heard at the time.

I'm not pointing fingers, but Snyder was fired long before he officially departed the project. I've known this as fact for a year now, and I was wondering when other news outlets would start reporting this. This has been known for quite some time, but out of respect for Snyder and his family many journalists and reporters were simply sitting on this information.

I'm not here to say "I told you so" to any of you guys. I'm just saying that based on what knowledge I have of this situation, I can corroborate these reports. For what it is worth. Take it or leave it. I hope you guys have been doing well in my absence.

 

Umm... A rumor is not a fact. A rumor is not "information." Nothing has been confirmed. It's just something somebody said, and that is meaningless. There was a time when journalists knew better than to report rumors as if they were news. They never reported anything unless it could be confirmed by at least two sources. Unfortunately, those days of journalistic integrity are long gone, and it's all just about spreading gossip to generate hits. CBR in particular has gone dreadfully downhill in the past year or two, and its "news" is little more than clickbait anymore.

 

Yeah, rumors are really easy. I know a guy on another forum who back in 2012 wrote his own fan version of MoS and posted it as such on the internet. Somebody took it, claimed it was the real one leaked, and several news sites fell for it. And that was 2012, when the clickbait was way less of a problem than it is now.

And now, I know that happened for a fact, because I saw it happen as somebody who was in the know. But to anybody else here, you should not treat this as a fact. You don't know me, and for all you know, I could be misremembering, I could be overstating, or I could be outright lying. But that's how easy it is to start rumors on the internet.

 

Same old Christopher. Nothing ever changes, huh?

 

Rumors, News, Facts... words have(/d) meanings.

 

If you're referring to the need for evidence-based reasoning and healthy skepticism, no, that need will never change.

 

This not, of course, a "rumor."

Dickey simply doesn't identify his sources.

This is frequently true of the NYT and WP as well.

One can evaluate the likelihood that Dickey's reporting is accurate, one supposes, if one is willing to spend time researching his previous performance as a journalist. And people of good faith might well disagree on his reliability then. But dismissing reporting as "just rumors" in order to avoid the possible need to concede a point in an online conversation is not really, ah, sensibly detached.

 

It's still just one person making an unofficial statement. I tend to always take any story just coming from one person on twitter or instagram or whatever with a huge grain of salt. Unless it's coming directly from one of the people or groups who can be confirmed to be involved, or from a source like the Hollywood Reporter, Deadline, or Variety, I tend not to take any of these kinds of stories as a definite fact.
It's also worth pointing out that the CBR article does have RUMOR in bolded all caps in the headline, so even they aren't treating it as a confirmed fact.

 

The information I received comes directly from someone who works at WB. So the information I have is, for all intents and purposes, factual. Of course, I don't expect any of you to believe that. It is ultimately my word. Some of this board who I have known since I've been a member in 2001 know my word holds a bit of weight. Understandably, some of you do not know me as well, so I will totally understand the skepticism.

Christopher, this will be the last I speak of this issue, but back in June you outright attacked me for simply reiterating what I had heard. You said I should be "ashamed" for manipulating the facts to suit my theories, when I stated over and over that I had sources to back my claims. This parcel of information will likely never be confirmed, given the nasty way production was handled on Justice League. As an example, Zack Snyder still hadn't seen the finished film as of November 2017. He did not attend the premiere. His "cut" does not exist because he did not finish it.

I don't take issue with your skepticism. I am all for skepticism and the (admittedly incessant) need for evidence-based facts, as you have demonstrated over your many years as a member here. I do take issue with being insulted, especially when there are now sources backing up what I said nearly eight months ago. I guess expecting an apology would be too much, but the way you treated me is what partially influenced my decision to go into self-exile from these boards back in June. If you've noticed (I'm sure you haven't), I haven't posted since. Until now.

Anyway, I felt the need to get that off my chest. Apologies to all for the intrusion.

 

Cue the clowns to tell us this story is impossible because of some toothless Director's Guild. Dudes, sorry but Snyder was clearly fired, but was allowed to save face because it made both him and WB look better. Justice League was completely chopped up from what it originally was, and we got what amounts to a different movie.

The above aren't facts, but simply the most likely scenarios given 1) the movie we got 2) the evidence we now have

The real truth is only know by Zack Snyder and by WB executives.

 

If it makes any difference (and it probably doesn't) I once again back up what JacksonArcher posted in that original thread (I think it was the "Justice League" discussion thread). I have heard similar things (not from the same source as his but from folks I trust) and heard a great deal of rumor and innuendo during production and prior. Some of which I dismissed, and some I accepted based on the merit of my sources.

Can dismiss these stories as "rumors and innuendo" all we want---but now several outlets are posting about them---Warner Brothers has done a pretty good job of clamping down them and we will probably NEVER hear the full truth of what went down either---similar to the rumor and innuendo that went on during the filming and post production of "Age of Ultron" (something I've talked to JacksonArcher about personally on multiple occasions). But yeah i fully support JA on what he knows.

 

It's someone doing reporting. What do any official statements necessarily have to do with truth?

They can title their articles however they please; they're just aggregating shit. One can just read the source reporting instead and evaluate that.

 

The differences in the released Justice League and Snyder's previous films say it all. If this was only the horrible situation of a family tragedy, than very easily a replacement director could have been hired to finish it in Snyder's style.

My question is why did it take WB so long to make a change? Another director should have been brought on before JL went into production. They saw BvsS and they knew what to expect from Snyder work.

It's a more disrespectful scenario to assume WB used the death of Zack Snyder's daughter and his willingly stepping away to release a different film from his style once he was out of the way. When the timeline of Whedon's involvement shows WB was slowly moving away from Snyder having complete creative control before the tragedy.

 

People keep forgetting that we were hearing reports of people like Geoff Johns being brought in to ride herd on Snyder and revise the JL script before it was even shot. After the train wreck that was BvS, it was inevitable that the studio would at least try to rein in Snyder's excesses even if it was too late in the game to change directors. So it's not like this was some latter-day secret plan. We knew all along that Snyder wouldn't have utterly free rein. So if they'd wanted to fire him, why not do it way back then?

 

He tried to make a traditional "fun" superhero movie, but it just isn't this thing. The movie was turning out not very good, and very Snyderish. So, WB agreed to secretly let him go, as the article says MONTHS before it was announced. In other words the DGA rules didn't apply - the movie was not yet done.

 

I have a quick question ...when we say he was fired...was it as director of Justice League or more as the pseudo showrunner of the DC F U ?

The death of Snyder's daughter seems more like "good luck" as far as the studio is concerned in that this helped give Snyder a dignified exit and execs more than happy to not subject anyone to humiliation.