Warner bros announce superhero films through 2020

[JD]

Anybody on the internet can say they know someone but unless real, confirmable names are involved I'm not about to believe them.
My biggest rule about coming to sites like this is I never 100% believe anything anybody says, unless I know for a fact they know what they're talking about, or I've seen it somewhere else I know I can trust. It's not anything personal about anyone here, it's just that literally anyone in the world can come on here and say they have a friend who's in the know and told them something.
Now, I'm not going to deny that DC probably took advantage of Snyder leaving to try to change the movie, but I still doubt that they fired him. With so many other people already have been openly fired, or "leaving over creative differences", I still don't see why they would suddenly lie about Snyder. It was already pretty clear they weren't very happy with the reaction to BvS, so it's not like it would have been some sudden shock for him to have been fired.

 

[Gaith]

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 shouldn't have committed to Snyder's two-part JL before BvS even came out, but, coulda, woulda, shoulda.

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?

A) Snyder probably had warm friendships with the execs in question, and
B) The list of franchises that can get away with outright firing directors mid-stream ranges from Star Wars to... uh, Star Wars. (And even that's yet to be thoroughly tested at the box office.)

I still don't see why they would suddenly lie about Snyder. It was already pretty clear they weren't very happy with the reaction to BvS, so it's not like it would have been some sudden shock for him to have been fired.

See above. Also, given that these same execs put all their chips on Snyder before BvS opened, it's entirely possible that admitting to failure in the form of firing their director might have negatively impacted their pay bonuses (remember that story?).

But, all you skeptics, apart from personally humiliating their friend as he goes through a personal tragedy, overtly sabotaging their own franchise in the public eye, and endangering their own pay, what possible reason would the WB execs have had to not outright fire Snyder? Given that we all know that humans are perfect and capable of seeing into the future, it just doesn't make any sense!​

 

[Christopher]

B) The list of franchises that can get away with outright firing directors mid-stream ranges from Star Wars to... uh, Star Wars. (And even that's yet to be thoroughly tested at the box office.)

Actually it's happened quite a few times, including with both Gone with the Wind and The Wizard of Oz.

Also, given that these same execs put all their chips on Snyder before BvS opened, it's entirely possible that admitting to failure in the form of firing their director might have negatively impacted their pay bonuses (remember that story?).

"Entirely possible" is still just speculation. Many things are possible, so it's a useless thing to assert. And tasteless as hell, considering what Snyder has been through. I've never been a defender of Snyder as a director; I honestly don't understand why he was allowed to make JL at all. But after his tragic loss, he really shouldn't be treated as fair game for fandom's usual meat grinder. We got the movie we got, for whatever reason; let's move on and leave the poor guy alone.

 

[Gaith]

"Entirely possible" is still just speculation. Many things are possible, so it's a useless thing to assert.

That's true. It's not as though you yourself asked others to speculate on this matter, thereby making a hypocrite of yourself when you so nobly castigate the very speculation you invited. That didn't happen at all, no sir.

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?

Heyyyyyyyyyyy -

 

[Christopher]

That's true. It's not as though you yourself asked others to speculate on this matter, thereby making a hypocrite of yourself when you so nobly castigate the very speculation you invited. That didn't happen at all, no sir.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/rhetorical-question?s=t

 

[JD]

They shouldn't have committed to Snyder's two-part JL before BvS even came out, but, coulda, woulda, shoulda.

A) Snyder probably had warm friendships with the execs in question, and
B) The list of franchises that can get away with outright firing directors mid-stream ranges from Star Wars to... uh, Star Wars. (And even that's yet to be thoroughly tested at the box office.)

What about Marvel firing Edgar Wright from Ant-Man, Patty Jenkins from The Dark World, and DC firing Seth Grahame-Smith, and Rick Famuyiwa from The Flash.

See above. Also, given that these same execs put all their chips on Snyder before BvS opened, it's entirely possible that admitting to failure in the form of firing their director might have negatively impacted their pay bonuses (remember that story?).

But, all you skeptics, apart from personally humiliating their friend as he goes through a personal tragedy, overtly sabotaging their own franchise in the public eye, and endangering their own pay, what possible reason would the WB execs have had to not outright fire Snyder? Given that we all know that humans are perfect and capable of seeing into the future, it just doesn't make any sense!​

​

I think I might have not been clear here as I thought, I understand why they would have fired him, what I find hard to believe is that they would have lied about it afterwards.
Plenty of other big name directors have been fired before, and nobody has ever found it necessary to lie about it... well beyond the whole "creative differences" code phrase.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

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.

I suspect that he still felt that there was enough of his material in the film and enough of his reputation riding on the film regardless that it was best to not embarrass the production & the studio by Alan Smithee-ing the whole thing. These days, if you publicly piss on your own film before it even comes out, your big studio career is basically over, ala Josh Trank. I can only imagine the shitstorm that would have ensued following Richard Donner's departure from Superman II had the internet actually existed back then.

What about Marvel firing Edgar Wright from Ant-Man, Patty Jenkins from The Dark World, and DC firing Seth Grahame-Smith, and Rick Famuyiwa from The Flash

.​

None of them were fired after the beginning of principal photography.

My biggest disappointment with the lacklustre performance of Justice League is that we'll probably never get Justice League Dark, and I really wanted to see that one. ​

 

[Admiral_Young]

I get wanting "official confirmation" on these stories. The fact of the matters is that rarely ever happens---no studio is going to confirm anything. There's more to this than just "Zack got fired" however we'll probably never know the full extent of the story. Nor should we---but also doesn't mean there's nothing to what has been reported or that folks are stating bullshit for bullshit sake. This isn't 4chan shit here that JA and others are reporting.

 

[Christopher]

I get wanting "official confirmation" on these stories. The fact of the matters is that rarely ever happens---no studio is going to confirm anything. There's more to this than just "Zack got fired" however we'll probably never know the full extent of the story. Nor should we---but also doesn't mean there's nothing to what has been reported or that folks are stating bullshit for bullshit sake. This isn't 4chan shit here that JA and others are reporting.

Yeah, but what you do when you lack confirmation is, you accept that you don't know. You don't arbitarily decide to believe one thing or another and pretend it can't be wrong. There's no requirement to choose an answer in every case. There's nothing wrong with just not knowing.

 

[Admiral_Young]

JA is right---nothing's changed lol.

 

[Morpheus 02]

Yeah, but what you do when you lack confirmation is, you accept that you don't know. You don't arbitarily decide to believe one thing or another and pretend it can't be wrong. There's no requirement to choose an answer in every case. There's nothing wrong with just not knowing.

Well, he also insists that Iris being called a cub reporter in an early episode of the FLash was NOT a reference to Superman Lore (i.e. Jimmy Olsen, CUb Reporter), and insisted that it was term professional journalists STILL use, i did a survey of my many professional journalist friends. Only one had heard the term used in the workplace, and THAT was 30 years ago.

He never responded. Imagine that

 

[JacksonArcher]

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?

I didn't forget those reports, and I doubt others did either.

For what it is worth, there were executives at Warner Bros. that did want to fire him after the critical reception to Batman v Superman. According to TheWrap, production was too far along with Justice League to fire Snyder at the time. The mistake Warner Bros. made was doubling down on Snyder before they could assess Batman v Superman. Snyder was hired to direct Justice League: Part I and Part II before Batman v Superman even entered production. When Batman v Superman was finished, Snyder went directly into pre-production on Justice League. The film started production a month after Batman v Superman opened.

So yes, Geoff Johns and Jon Berg were brought onboard to oversee and overhaul the script and production. The prospective Part II was scrapped, and Warner Bros. decided to focus more on just one singular film. Snyder was definitely reigned in more, which is why it did not surprise me to hear he was eventually fired. Greg Silverman (president of WB production at the time) contemplated firing Snyder after Batman v Superman, but it was just not allegedly feasible given how Snyder was weeks away from filming when the fallout of Batman v Superman occurred. If they did fire Snyder with weeks to go before filming commenced, I'm sure it would have been a PR nightmare for the studio and for the film. Especially after the divisive and polarizing reaction to Batman v Superman and Suicide Squad later that year.

Now, we have heard stories where directors have voluntarily left or been fired weeks before principal photography was slated to commence - I'm thinking of Matthew Vaughn leaving X-Men: The Last Stand over creative differences weeks before filming was slated to begin, for example - but it was ultimately Warner Bros. CEO Kevin Tsujihara's decision to keep Snyder on Justice League. There has been a change in leadership recently over at DC Films, so clearly the decision to keep Snyder has affected how DC Films will be ran henceforth.

Lastly, it is safe to say Justice League will be the last Zack Snyder directed DC film for a while, even though he is still attached as producer on some projects, such as Wonder Woman 2. I'm sure his involvement with those projects will be minimal at best going forward.

 

[Admiral_Young]

The trouble in reality is that Warner Brothers has always been a reactionary studio when it comes to their superhero films. This isn't just the case with the current DCEU/Snyder'Verse whatever you want to call it---they've been this way going back to "Batman Returns".

There are deeper issues here that I don't want to get into---because I've covered them on the board before and they've either been ignored or dismissed.

As for choosing to accept things or not accept things...well...that's people's prerogative certainly. I have NEVER been one to do that---thus being a "digger". I have NEVER blindly accepted everything I am told or is reported to me as fact---that'd just be silly. However I do trust the sources I have and they've RARELY been wrong---especially on the DCEU situation which continues to be ongoing.

So yeah I'm right there with JA and others who do know what is going on.

 

[Set Harth]

The trouble in reality is that Warner Brothers has always been a reactionary studio when it comes to their superhero films. This isn't just the case with the current DCEU/Snyder'Verse whatever you want to call it---they've been this way going back to "Batman Returns".

Like when they shitcanned the Brandon Routh Superman Returns universe because the film didn't make enough money?

 

[dahj]

I hate to interrupt the latest round of bitching about Snyder and WB, but here's Captain Marvel's hair:

Also, first Aquaman test screenings reportedly went well.

 

[Captaindemotion]

Joss Whedon exits the Batgirl film:

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

 

[Christopher]

Joss Whedon exits the Batgirl film:

I can't say I'm disappointed. I was excited when it was first announced, but then I heard him say he was interested in what "damage" drove Barbara Gordon to become a vigilante, and that's fundamentally misunderstanding the character. What makes Batgirl work is that she was the first member of the Bat-family who did it out of idealism and altruism rather than personal tragedy. She proves the value of what Batman does by showing what it can inspire in others.

Maybe that's why Whedon couldn't find a story that worked -- because he was approaching the character from the wrong direction.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I can't say I'm disappointed. I was excited when it was first announced, but then I heard him say he was interested in what "damage" drove Barbara Gordon to become a vigilante, and that's fundamentally misunderstanding the character. What makes Batgirl work is that she was the first member of the Bat-family who did it out of idealism and altruism rather than personal tragedy. She proves the value of what Batman does by showing what it can inspire in others.

Maybe that's why Whedon couldn't find a story that worked -- because he was approaching the character from the wrong direction.

I’ve a suspicion that he perhaps also reacted to social media outcry that they didn’t hire a woman for the role.

 

[kirk55555]

I hate to interrupt the latest round of bitching about Snyder and WB, but here's Captain Marvel's hair:

Also, first Aquaman test screenings reportedly went well.

Well, since that's not Brie Larson I have to call the validity of that pic into question I have no serious comment on the pic though, since my opinion on "Shazam" is probably well known and I don't need to rant about it again right now.

Also, I hope Aquaman does well. He felt like it had at least a little potential in JL, so I'll be interested in seeing it.

 

[crookeddy]

I can't say I'm disappointed. I was excited when it was first announced, but then I heard him say he was interested in what "damage" drove Barbara Gordon to become a vigilante, and that's fundamentally misunderstanding the character. What makes Batgirl work is that she was the first member of the Bat-family who did it out of idealism and altruism rather than personal tragedy. She proves the value of what Batman does by showing what it can inspire in others.

Maybe that's why Whedon couldn't find a story that worked -- because he was approaching the character from the wrong direction.

Thing is the people behind the DC movies still think that they are making Watchmen. They approach things from the angle that only crazy people would become superheroes, and make the movies with the goal of showing us what it is that drove them to this madness.