I think it's interesting to think back that in 2005 Batman Begins was considered a bit of a financial disappointment, underperforming though not outright failing, even though the critics liked it and the comics fans liked it or loved it; I think the general explanation was that B&R was so bad that a lot of people avoided BB or were otherwise just not interested in more Batman films even eight years later and even with the marketing making it look really different. And also to consider that then just three years later TDK was a huge financial success.
DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond
- Thread starter dahj
- Start date
Producer Peter Safran as said that The Suicide Squad will be a "total reboot" rather than a sequel or soft reboot. I wonder what this will mean for Birds of Prey, or any other future appearances of Harley Quinn?
I think they will reboot everything as the DCEU is pretty much dead. Sorry @DigificWriter
Last I heard, Harley was the only one getting a cameo.
Wonder if TPTB changed their mind?
Oh look, bait for an ‘Aquaman’ response. How appropriate.
(Sorry to ignore you Wonder Woman, but you’d wreck the pun.)
Wonder if TPTB changed their mind?
Oh look, bait for an ‘Aquaman’ response. How appropriate.
(Sorry to ignore you Wonder Woman, but you’d wreck the pun.)
Not sure what the joke is. Those two will be pretty much standalone movies from now on. Just like Batman. And one day, Superman.
Yeah, the new WW oddly not being a sequel (?), SS reboot, unrelated Joker movie(s), DC intent to focus on 'stand alone' - if only some of that is accurate, it's dead.
Kevin Tsujihara has stepped down as WB CEO
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/warner-bros-kevin-tsujihara-exit-as-studio-chief-1054951
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/warner-bros-kevin-tsujihara-exit-as-studio-chief-1054951
I think the WW description just means that it's a new, standalone story about the same character, rather than a continuation of specific story elements from the first film. There's a difference between a sequel and just a subsequent episode. For instance, TNG's "Peak Performance" is the episode right after "The Emissary," but it's not a sequel to that episode, whereas the later "Reunion" is.
As for the SS "reboot," it's hard to say, because I think people in the industry don't use that term as narrowly as fans do. Fans insist on using it exclusively to mean something set in a different reality altogether, but creators see stories less as "realities" and more as narratives. So for this, as with the "sequel" thing, it may be more a question of whether they're narratively linked, whether they share specific story elements, rather than whether they're in the same "universe." So when they say SS is a "total reboot," they may just mean it's a fresh start narratively, a story that's independent of the first and doesn't continue any of its specific narrative or character threads. Much like how The Wrath of Khan is narratively independent of Star Trek: The Motion Picture, basically agnostic about its existence but still featuring the same cast and many of the same visual elements.
"Dead", eh?
Any evidence that it's not? There is tons of evidence that it is.
Unsurprising.
Apparently they mean that it’s a sequel in the sense that TNG is a sequel to TOS. Not direct continuation of the previous movie, a la TSFS
So basically: theyve finally thrown up their hands, and gone for the MCU approach. Including not technically disavowing the failures, but treating their place in continuity as being...malleable.
Like, we’ll never directly reference these events again, and our new Superman will be very different, but...Michael Shannon may get a Zod cameo 18 movies from now.
If it keeps up, we might get another stab at Justice League in under a decade.
1. “Prove a negative for me, why don’t you? That’s a good chap.”
2. Ha. You should hawk your talents to the like of comicbookmovie. They’ll pay you for stuff like this.
I think @Christopher is absolutely right about the term "reboot," here. "Reboot" is a very pliable term that could mean a great many things. But first and foremost, the studio wants you to think that they intend to make SS2 even more awesome than you thought it was going to be, based on SS1.
Wow.... this is some global warming denying level shit there... Embarrassing post!
Some people even argued ( wrongly ) that it fit into the continuity of the original films. The DVD ended up with bargain bin prices at one point IIRC.
Lets keep the flirting to a minimum, shall we?
I jthought it was an interesting turn of phrase given recent discussion in this thread.
There are lots of movie series that bring back actors while ignoring the continuity of previous installments in the series, like several of the Halloween sequels including the most recent one, or most of the Highlander sequels after the second one.