WB openly said as much. Added to that, they have another incentive in withholding this shitty spin-off: not letting the Batman brand be tarnished the way Toy Story was with the flopped Lightyear or the MCU with Love and Thunder.
This is marketing. They're trying to duplicate and appropriate the energy of the "release the snyder cut!" people. They will fake cancel this shitty movie, wokey media will rage about it, this astroturf """grass roots""" campaign will eventually convince WB to do what they would have done anyways - release it - and redditors and twitter twats will be compelled to watch it now because it's a victory over the chuds and Batgirl has finally ended slavery. I can see this coming from a mile away, and you're an npc if you can't.
Holy shit is that?
Looks like a really shitty cut concept art for a Big Daddy from Bioshock
Arkham Origins nailed the experimental jetpack + flamethrower
Yeah, he was played by Pat Hingle, and strangely had a scene in all four Batman movies. He and Batman say all of two words to eachother, they're not friends. He's kind of a bumbling doofus like the 60s version.
Yea so what is JK in the movie? Especially since it was going to release at the end of the year before The Flash movie. Unless Gordon is the same in both those universes
Was… I guess i’m looking at it from the perspective that even if it wasn’t canceled it wouldn’t be understood because the flash hasn’t explained how the universes merged.
yeah and there is another saying keaton is the "alien"
Yea so what is JK in the movie? Especially since it was going to release at the end of the year before The Flash movie. Unless Gordon is the same in both those universes
IGN have taken up the mantle of woke agenda pushing since the likes of Polygon, Kotaku, Gawker, etc died out. Also, IGN are straight up a mouthpiece for Disney, and of course Disney wants their competition to look bad, to continue cranking out bad movies, and to continue spreading the same propaganda.
This feels like when /misc/ started lionizing Clarence Thomas in anticipation, and nothing happened. He's a major executive in Hollywood, he isn't going to be based.
I wish it were true, though. I miss hearing about an adaptation of something I like, and actually being excited instead of filled with dread.
>He's a major executive in Hollywood, he isn't going to be based.
Pretty sure this over the top praise is mostly memes, but the reason people are excited is because all of his actions thus far have been triggering the PC police. I don't think he's an ideologue, and if he felt woke shit was profitable that's the line he'd be towing, but a lot of sources have said that the last regime is frustrated because he's more concerned with making movies based of audience data and research instead of forcing a narrative. And if that research indicates audiences want race and genderswapped superheroes, that's what he will give them, but that never seems to be what audiences actually want.
What principle? That committing a sunk cost fallacy is a good thing? Wonder Woman 1984 was a wake up call that putting out woke female lead bullshit isn't going to be profitable.
>snyderfans can attack and scream at people online and get their wishes granted, with no repercussions to vile behaviour >batgirl fans are left high and dry and its made clear that they don't actually care about representation
They can fix this ship if they release it. The audience is hungry for it
>they don't actually care about representation
Nor should anyone give a frick about that. Somehow you guys forgot that makings films is a business and making money should take precedent. Losing money so that troony's and Dominican women can "Yaaassss Queen" on twitter is a fricking stupid idea.
Capeshit is not art, it's Saturday morning cartoons. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a movie to end up losing money for the sake of art is how moronic broke people think.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Frick off hater
2 years ago
Anonymous
COPE, SEETHE and DILATE
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Film is art, first and foremost
And capeshit isn't film or art.
2 years ago
Anonymous
art has no moral obligation, let alone “representation”
2 years ago
Anonymous
Art for Art's sake.
c**ts like Victoria Alonso, Steve Ditko, Mark Ruffalo, etc, are all cancer.
>The audience is hungry for it
Literally no one cared about this until it was cancelled. It would be more believable if this was all shock marketing and the film does actually get released.
can attack and scream at people online and get their wishes granted, with no repercussions to vile behaviour
WB ignored pajeet cries it was Discovery that pushed for that behind their backs.
Snydergays are obnoxious morons but there are a decent amount of them and they were going to put their money where their mouth was, people crying for batgirl release probably wouldn't even watch it
the ones getting unfairly fricked for being more reasonable than snydergays are ayer cut chads
Oh shut the frick up. They "released" it to the fricking garbage can where it belongs. These shit-tier woke garbage films do nothing but make people NOT want to watch them, or anything similar to them in the future. They canceled it because it damages the genre for the average audience due to being abject woke trash.
Let me break it down for you >cancel the movie when it’s already basically done >create giant media campaign about movie being cancelled >free publicity everywhere >”how bad could it have been?” “Not my heckin based POC Batgirl movie!!!” >everyone’s curiosity gets peaked for this movie that probably would have limped to the barn and failed completely >ok ok people REALLY want to see this movie! >they release it and make way more money than they would have with the ZERO hype it had from the outset >it probably WILL suck but it doesn’t matter because it was such a hilarious and meme worthy cultural moment where the viewers “forced” them to release this movie
It’s all so tiresome
Not going to happen, they are writing it off as a total loss for tax purposes. They will forever be barred from releasing it in any official capacity, only way it sees the light of day is if it is leaked.
I can remember the Marvin the Martian, Hong Kong Phooey and Deadpool test reels by the directors and crew, so if someone doesn't care about working with WB again they might
What's the deal with those kind of movies? How much actual effort has to go into it? Do you basically have to fool the law into thinking you made a real movie? Could you not literally film a sock for thirty seconds and call it a Fantastic Four movie?
2 years ago
Anonymous
They probably had to make something legitimate enough and reflective of the IP so that if Marvel challenged them in court for the film rights back, a judge wouldn't laugh Eichinger out of the court
2 years ago
Anonymous
So long as you can prove that you produced something with the IP in question, even if you didn't distribute it, then it works
2 years ago
Anonymous
What's stopping them just miming drawings of the characters around on camera?
2 years ago
Anonymous
I would guess they'd need to be able to produce records to show they had made a genuine movie if they were ever challenged by the licensor, and not just something to cheat the contract. Proper cast/crew payslips, production schedules and all the applications for location shooting, insurance documents, that sort of stuff
2 years ago
Anonymous
This is why contracts are so fun, marvel knew they were bullshitting but couldn’t do anything about it.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I mean... it worked for the Incredible Hulk segment of The Marvel Super Heroes in 1966.
2 years ago
Anonymous
90s FF4 is still best live action adaptain, thus is how bad it gotten
What if they were looking at the early cuts and realized, "oh shit, we've made a terrible movie. What the frick do we do now?" And then one of them said, "I've got an idea. We cancel the movie and say it was for vague reasons, but then we'll pay people to post on social media about how it's 'basically finished' and lament that the BIPOC Batgirl actor should have her performance seen for justice reasons." And another guy says, "what will that do for us?" And the first guy says, "If we just releashed a shitty movie without advertizing then nobody would watch it and everyone who did watch it would just say it was shitty and the whole thing would go over like a fart. But if we shelve it and astroturf a campaign to release it, we'll get all these stupid fanboys and SJWs building the hype on social media for us and we won't have to pay big advertizing costs. Plus because of the social commentators getting into a frenzy about the ethnicity of Batgirl nobody but incels and creeps will dare say it's a terrible movie." And then the big executive says, "it's brilliant! They'll beg us to shit in their mouths, and then after we do they'll smile and say it was great because they'd never be able to admit it wasn't!" And the second guy says, "hell yeah, this is basically what they did with the original cut of Justice League, so we KNOW it will work!" All of them high five while cheering, and then OP shows up to Cinemaphile and posts >#ReleaseBatgirl
They shelved it because the final cuts were shifting to the “so bad it’ll be meme’d” angle like TDKR and morbius, but since the main character is a black female, that would mean mocking a black female, and would harm their blackrock ESG score
Only believable explanation. Zaslav isn't woke but he isn't le based alt right ally as morons here think. They going to tone down woke shit not remove it completely.
It's probably the most brilliant marketing strategy yet. WB just announces they're pulling the plug and all of a sudden everyone is talking about it for free.
>IGN >breaking down numbers
lel, when your entire company is built upon venture capital and you haven't made any profit in ages, you're probably not the ones to give financial advice.
I never saw a single thread about this trash until it was cancelled
And all the threads have been about laughing at the said trannies and Kevin Smith crying
I wouldn't be surprised if this move was made to try to artificially create demand and try to get something akin to the release the snyder cut movement going.
Anyway, I'm thinking people writing for IGN surely has a better grasp of economics than a CEO who is running the super successful Discovery network, and to whom WB came crawling, begging him to save them.
This Zaslav dude should hire IGN to run his company.
True.
The OP Batgirl doesn't look like she could be the daughter of the existing Gordon.
Secondly, the purple suit and the god awful bright reflective cape makes no sense in-universe.
That hair is just waiting to be grabbed in a fight.
It makes plenty of sense when you're trying not to waste tens of millions on advertising a bad movie that no one wants or would watch. It also makes sense to scrap all this woke dogshit if you're trying to actually salvage the brand and want people to be interested in DC movies and characters going forward instead of letting them be so tarnished in sludge that they can't live down the stench.
I for one am sure that IGN, a reputable publication, has hired journalists with years of Hollywood business experience and tax code expertise to write this article. I look forward to reading it.
>Probably some suit sabotaging the company before quitting.
That's a possibility since all of the past execs have been given their walking papers. Also titless Batgirl and manbreasts for Batman. It does look like sabotage
they are afraid that the film will damage the DC brand.
this is especially true now since people are used to seeing big movie premieres at home thanks to the pandemic. the plan was for the movie to release on the streaming platform as a feature that's elevated beyond a straight to video release or tv movie, while audiences still understand that what they're watching isn't a top-billed feature.
now that WB's big slate had to release direct to streaming since all the theaters shut down, there is a big risk that most people will mix up what this movie is supposed to be while they watch it, mistaking it for the kind of top billed feature they saw a few months ago.
WB can't take that risk - it would wound the brand too deeply at a time when DC movies are consistently considered ranked even beneath Marvel's Sony diffusion brand features
I don't think they said it wouldn't make any money, just that it was brand damaging and they didn't believe in it. If the rumor about killing Keaton's Batman is true then I can see why.
Are the people insisting the cancelation is to drum up buzz for a later release the same morons who were saying the shitty sonic model was intentional marketing? when this inevitably never comes out will they realize they were wrong about sonic as well
If you kill a movie for tax reasons like this, how does it work? Can you ever get it back from the grave at a later time without losing the tax benefit?
like the saying goes you can't spell ignorant without IGN.
the movie was a straight to streaming movie wasn't it? that means it makes ZERO.
no commercials, no ad revenue
will it drive subs? probably not
will it make people cancel their subs? highly unlikely because the people that really want to see this probably want to see house of dragons.
so that's 90 million in taxes saved
but but a theatrical release?
ok assuming zero marketing whatsoever the movie will have to max double it's budget of 90m. Studios don't keep 100% of sales more like 50%. 180/2=90
every test screening says the movie is awful. Twitter activists and søyed journos are loud but couldn't draw 180m
You take the risk of releasing a stinker that will most likely lose you money or you tax the guaranteed 90m tax break.
they're trying to turn a profit at Warner and shelving that movie for 90m is the only sane option.
It was originally set for streaming but the Brain boxes at WB switched it to being a theatrical release. So that means it looked like a streaming movie and was not theatrical quality
If Zaslav wanted to placate the fans and keep the tax break, have somebody illegally release the film.
send an employee to India, drop a burn of it near the designated shitting street, that or a thumb drive. Raj will have it up in a matter of days, poos love capeshit.
if it's good it'll be a cult classic and you can take the penalty and release it, if it suck you look like a genius for never releasing it.
I can jack off to Yvonne Craig in her Batgirl costume or a legion of loose cosplayers in Batgirl outfits. This movie has a frumpy Batgirl in that lame Batgirl of Burnside costume. So, nothing of value is lost.
Tax dodging.
fpbp
Although its actually just a write off and dodging is technically different but still.
Anyone posting anything different is a moron.
WB openly said as much. Added to that, they have another incentive in withholding this shitty spin-off: not letting the Batman brand be tarnished the way Toy Story was with the flopped Lightyear or the MCU with Love and Thunder.
How worried can they be about tarnishing the brand when they curled out a few seasons of that Batgirl TV show?
Nah, it still needed like $40-$50m to complete and advertise
>t. based Zaslev, canceling garbage SJW projects, making woketard media shills seethe uncontrollably.
You love to see it.
>SJW!
>woke!
>shills!
Didn't this get shitcanned because test audiences "didn't like Michael Keaton"?
>Michael Keaton
Who?
The pendulum is swinging back, b***h.
What are you talking about? Trump is getting jailed.
>based
>lets a filthy homosexual keep his flash movie
That's going to get axed or something very soon.
Yeah sure it is
This is marketing. They're trying to duplicate and appropriate the energy of the "release the snyder cut!" people. They will fake cancel this shitty movie, wokey media will rage about it, this astroturf """grass roots""" campaign will eventually convince WB to do what they would have done anyways - release it - and redditors and twitter twats will be compelled to watch it now because it's a victory over the chuds and Batgirl has finally ended slavery. I can see this coming from a mile away, and you're an npc if you can't.
People do actually like Snyder as a film maker though. There was at least some genuine buzz around that whole thing.
My favorite scene is the flashback of all of humanity and its old gods fighting Darkseid and his army.
Everything else is pretty bad.
The flashback mightve been cool if gal Godot didn't narrate the entire 10 minute sequence.
Please do not badmouth my wife like that
Thank you
>"AMAZONS!!!!"
Still gets me.
For me, it's turning back time.
Sure. But they have their new marketing template now, and you're going to see a lot of very inorganic, inauthentic recreations of the same thing.
Were they planning that same magic on Scoob! Holiday Haunt?
this is what they took from you
i only feel bad for brandan
He got his paycheck and nobody has to see this awful movie that will only further harm his career prospects, seems like a win-win to me
> I don't want you to tell all your friends about me.
Good riddance.
>Batmanbreasts
>batman has more breasts than batwoman
amazing job, WokeBros
also it's pretty clear there's no ass either
What the frick is Sideshow Bob doing there?
He's one of the directors.
did they bring back batman's pointy nipples for this one?
That's Firefly ? It's straight up god awful, like a mixture of Nolan Scarecrow and Psycho Mantis. There's nothing that says "bug" about that
Holy shit is that?
Looks like a really shitty cut concept art for a Big Daddy from Bioshock
Arkham Origins nailed the experimental jetpack + flamethrower
Le gritty and "realistic" batman was a mistake.
The trick is a Batman that is gritty and real, but a rogue's gallery that becomes progressively more fantastic.
Not really. Their abilities are just as grounded, with a few exceptions.
How did the same show that did THIS have a better Firefly than the movie?
Forgot pic frick
post the firefly
I just don’t understand why the have JK there? Canonically it makes no sense.
Hail to the king.
It's even weirder because he's younger than Batman.
Idr but was there a Jim Gordon in Keaton’s films? I know Harvey Dent was & the mayor.
Yeah, he was played by Pat Hingle, and strangely had a scene in all four Batman movies. He and Batman say all of two words to eachother, they're not friends. He's kind of a bumbling doofus like the 60s version.
His affleks Gordon.
Keaton is from another world
Yea so what is JK in the movie? Especially since it was going to release at the end of the year before The Flash movie. Unless Gordon is the same in both those universes
Batgirl is in the same universe as JL
Was… I guess i’m looking at it from the perspective that even if it wasn’t canceled it wouldn’t be understood because the flash hasn’t explained how the universes merged.
yeah and there is another saying keaton is the "alien"
He's the same one from justice league
Why not? It's the DCEU. He's Gordon in that.
finally my time to sh
JUST
Looks like shit, minus Keaton's Batman, but he is in for 2 minutes and only talks, so good riddance.
Thank God.
I’m fine, thank you.
wait what Brendan was part of this? i dont even watch capeshit but frick now i want this movie
You realize he plays Robotman on Doom Patrol, right?
JUSTman can’t catch a break.
Where the frick did all that money go?
If that's bane, can we agree this is the worst bane design ever?
It's Firefly.
Its not bane, fatass
And the worst bane design is tom hardy
she looking cute tho
>Brendan Fraser
JUST give the man a break…
He doesn't fit as Firefly. He'd be better in the JUSTice League.
Why does she look white
Strong studio lighting or camera flash
Now I understand. This was all performed to engage in further psychological warfare with brendan fraser. Hasn't he been through enough?
the damage woke revisionism has one big franchise goes into the billions.
I thought Gordan was a Nig in that one as well, hence the Black Batgirl
>non-white batwoman
all worth it.
>from the creator of honey boo boo
what about the damage it would have done to the brand or whatever
Billions would have poured out to watch it
Why do they care so much?
You know exactly why.
it's the standing order on their mailing group
IGN have taken up the mantle of woke agenda pushing since the likes of Polygon, Kotaku, Gawker, etc died out. Also, IGN are straight up a mouthpiece for Disney, and of course Disney wants their competition to look bad, to continue cranking out bad movies, and to continue spreading the same propaganda.
you know
Female lead
muslim director
flash not getting canceled as well
coping with Mera being inevitably out after aquaman 2
>ha chuds now we have our own campaign like your sneederverse and ayers, now we can highjack that energy with muh batgirl
Ok, Redditors and trannies, now it's your time to shine. Campaign to get the Batgirlcut to be released.
Who is we? Did IGN have full access to WB financial statements and tax filings?
No.
I mean it’s public records but they probably didn’t dive to deep
They should just finish up and release it. Let them put their money where thier mouths are
David "wasting no more cash on Batgirl just to please some blue-haired fat girls" Zaslav
David "Ain't gonna see your ass in tights unless you're straight and lily-white" Zaslav
David "if you chopped off your dick or breasts you're not allowed in Gotham City" Zaslav
David "I'd rip this studio asunder before I'd cast a brown Boy Wonder" Zaslav
David "JJ should have known I'd intervene when he said 'BIPOC Constantine'" Zaslav
David "Our profits won't be bigger if we give every role to Black folk" Zaslav
David "If you're Latin, black or trans I hope you got a backup plan" Zaslav
David "You have to be straight, white and cis to defend Metropolis" Zaslav
David "the man with the authority to fire a minority" Zaslav
David "Ezra can choke bawds all night long, being a troon is where he's wrong" Zaslav
David "you think capeshit should be woke? Is this your idea of a joke?" Zaslav
Just keep Fraser happy and well paid and we are cool
don't trip all the actors are getting new movie deals.
We will still get Fraser kino and JK simmons will return for the snyderverse
>"if you chopped off your dick or breasts you're not allowed in Gotham City
Fricking lost it
This feels like when /misc/ started lionizing Clarence Thomas in anticipation, and nothing happened. He's a major executive in Hollywood, he isn't going to be based.
I wish it were true, though. I miss hearing about an adaptation of something I like, and actually being excited instead of filled with dread.
>He's a major executive in Hollywood, he isn't going to be based.
Pretty sure this over the top praise is mostly memes, but the reason people are excited is because all of his actions thus far have been triggering the PC police. I don't think he's an ideologue, and if he felt woke shit was profitable that's the line he'd be towing, but a lot of sources have said that the last regime is frustrated because he's more concerned with making movies based of audience data and research instead of forcing a narrative. And if that research indicates audiences want race and genderswapped superheroes, that's what he will give them, but that never seems to be what audiences actually want.
Respect.
magnificent
Releasing that movie would have brought nothing but shame and financial ruin. I don't know why twitter troony's keep arguing otherwise.
Because of the principle
What principle? That committing a sunk cost fallacy is a good thing? Wonder Woman 1984 was a wake up call that putting out woke female lead bullshit isn't going to be profitable.
>snyderfans can attack and scream at people online and get their wishes granted, with no repercussions to vile behaviour
>batgirl fans are left high and dry and its made clear that they don't actually care about representation
They can fix this ship if they release it. The audience is hungry for it
>they don't actually care about representation
Nor should anyone give a frick about that. Somehow you guys forgot that makings films is a business and making money should take precedent. Losing money so that troony's and Dominican women can "Yaaassss Queen" on twitter is a fricking stupid idea.
Film is art, first and foremost
Capeshit is not art, it's Saturday morning cartoons. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a movie to end up losing money for the sake of art is how moronic broke people think.
Frick off hater
COPE, SEETHE and DILATE
>Film is art, first and foremost
And capeshit isn't film or art.
art has no moral obligation, let alone “representation”
Art for Art's sake.
c**ts like Victoria Alonso, Steve Ditko, Mark Ruffalo, etc, are all cancer.
both movies are turbo garbage what's the point
>The audience
What audience? The legions Snyder bots & pajeets? lmao
>The audience is hungry for it
Literally no one cared about this until it was cancelled. It would be more believable if this was all shock marketing and the film does actually get released.
>batgirl fans
Would want an actual ginger actress
can attack and scream at people online and get their wishes granted, with no repercussions to vile behaviour
WB ignored pajeet cries it was Discovery that pushed for that behind their backs.
Snyder has an actually fans poojeet or not while Batgirls has none.
Snydergays are obnoxious morons but there are a decent amount of them and they were going to put their money where their mouth was, people crying for batgirl release probably wouldn't even watch it
the ones getting unfairly fricked for being more reasonable than snydergays are ayer cut chads
Sunk cost fallacy is what many people crying about this can't grasp.
>I don't know why twitter troony's keep arguing otherwise.
Because the lead was some sort of brown
It's not finished. It would take 20m of VFX, 10M of reshoots, and 50m of marketing. IGN are morons
VFX are done, you fricking misinformed moron
No. Stop being a silly billy.
Nope, they weren't even started
Oh shut the frick up. They "released" it to the fricking garbage can where it belongs. These shit-tier woke garbage films do nothing but make people NOT want to watch them, or anything similar to them in the future. They canceled it because it damages the genre for the average audience due to being abject woke trash.
Let me break it down for you
>cancel the movie when it’s already basically done
>create giant media campaign about movie being cancelled
>free publicity everywhere
>”how bad could it have been?” “Not my heckin based POC Batgirl movie!!!”
>everyone’s curiosity gets peaked for this movie that probably would have limped to the barn and failed completely
>ok ok people REALLY want to see this movie!
>they release it and make way more money than they would have with the ZERO hype it had from the outset
>it probably WILL suck but it doesn’t matter because it was such a hilarious and meme worthy cultural moment where the viewers “forced” them to release this movie
It’s all so tiresome
Not going to happen, they are writing it off as a total loss for tax purposes. They will forever be barred from releasing it in any official capacity, only way it sees the light of day is if it is leaked.
*when it is leaked
Has there been a leak of that nature since the previz rough cut of Wolverine was leaked out way back when?
I can remember the Marvin the Martian, Hong Kong Phooey and Deadpool test reels by the directors and crew, so if someone doesn't care about working with WB again they might
You had that Fantastic 4 movie from the 90s that Fox made and then shelved solely so they could hold onto the film rights for the IP.
What's the deal with those kind of movies? How much actual effort has to go into it? Do you basically have to fool the law into thinking you made a real movie? Could you not literally film a sock for thirty seconds and call it a Fantastic Four movie?
They probably had to make something legitimate enough and reflective of the IP so that if Marvel challenged them in court for the film rights back, a judge wouldn't laugh Eichinger out of the court
So long as you can prove that you produced something with the IP in question, even if you didn't distribute it, then it works
What's stopping them just miming drawings of the characters around on camera?
I would guess they'd need to be able to produce records to show they had made a genuine movie if they were ever challenged by the licensor, and not just something to cheat the contract. Proper cast/crew payslips, production schedules and all the applications for location shooting, insurance documents, that sort of stuff
This is why contracts are so fun, marvel knew they were bullshitting but couldn’t do anything about it.
I mean... it worked for the Incredible Hulk segment of The Marvel Super Heroes in 1966.
90s FF4 is still best live action adaptain, thus is how bad it gotten
Why the frick does this board cannot understand that incompetency is a thing and hanlon razor is a great heuristic
>Why the frick does this board cannot
game was rigged from the start
esl? drunkposting?? both???
siri is always good 4 tha lulz
You're seriously overestimating the "publicity" this is getting.
Honestly I hope it gets the morbius treatment but it won't as they'd have to sink 60-80m in to it to finish it
>curiosity gets peaked
'We broke down the numbers that we pulled out of our ass'
Lol.
It got shit canned cos it looks like some cheap TV show.
What if they were looking at the early cuts and realized, "oh shit, we've made a terrible movie. What the frick do we do now?" And then one of them said, "I've got an idea. We cancel the movie and say it was for vague reasons, but then we'll pay people to post on social media about how it's 'basically finished' and lament that the BIPOC Batgirl actor should have her performance seen for justice reasons." And another guy says, "what will that do for us?" And the first guy says, "If we just releashed a shitty movie without advertizing then nobody would watch it and everyone who did watch it would just say it was shitty and the whole thing would go over like a fart. But if we shelve it and astroturf a campaign to release it, we'll get all these stupid fanboys and SJWs building the hype on social media for us and we won't have to pay big advertizing costs. Plus because of the social commentators getting into a frenzy about the ethnicity of Batgirl nobody but incels and creeps will dare say it's a terrible movie." And then the big executive says, "it's brilliant! They'll beg us to shit in their mouths, and then after we do they'll smile and say it was great because they'd never be able to admit it wasn't!" And the second guy says, "hell yeah, this is basically what they did with the original cut of Justice League, so we KNOW it will work!" All of them high five while cheering, and then OP shows up to Cinemaphile and posts
>#ReleaseBatgirl
No, its really going into the trash. They are going the nuclear option, tax write off.
They are so fricked morally now at WB
>IGN
You might as well have posted a source from a lobotomized monkey for as good as this does, OP.
Expert financial analysis from IGN
They shelved it because the final cuts were shifting to the “so bad it’ll be meme’d” angle like TDKR and morbius, but since the main character is a black female, that would mean mocking a black female, and would harm their blackrock ESG score
Only believable explanation. Zaslav isn't woke but he isn't le based alt right ally as morons here think. They going to tone down woke shit not remove it completely.
he has to be at least somewhat woke to not cancel and talk up Ezra troony homosexual's Flash movie.
Maybe Etza just very good at blowjobs
>and morbius
Batgirl literally says "It's Battin time" and I'm not joking
IGN vs. the Warner Bros finance department, hmm let me think
#hows about no
Batgirl would have been a massive bomb. Who are they trying to fool?
Not now it's been advertised to the world
Themselves and trying to force WB/Discovery to release the turd.
I'm glad we live in a magic world where the cost of advertising doesn't exist.
You know nothing about taxes
Who are you talking to?
I smell a marketing campaign to sell their traah movie. Kinda like with cats, the movie so shot that people got curious.
Why can't people cope that it sucked. Move on
next time you create a thread OP, try adding a fricking link
Why are people so upset about this
if it came out people would either
1) not watch it or
2) hate on it for being shit
It's probably the most brilliant marketing strategy yet. WB just announces they're pulling the plug and all of a sudden everyone is talking about it for free.
Based Zazlav shelved it because he fricking hated the whole confusing “New DCEU Hyperverse” that The Flash movie was creating.
Zazlav just wants one clear DCEU with a strong Superman, Wonder Woman, and Batman. He hated Hamada’s dumb multiverse idea
Zaslav not giving a frick about his ESG score lmao
Isn't ign full of midwit game journos? Can they even afford a financial analyst kek
>Isn't ign full of midwit game journos?
Yes.
>Can they even afford a financial analyst kek
Nope
i’d do it if they hired me
i am firmly 100% unabashedly in favor of any decision that causes kevin smith to cry tears of unhappiness
if his clit/taint/brown area is in distress and his groin p0wned, i am one happy anon
that is all
and frick the hell out of seth rogan also
dollars and cents sense
I'm journalizing!
>IGN
>breaking down numbers
lel, when your entire company is built upon venture capital and you haven't made any profit in ages, you're probably not the ones to give financial advice.
>I know how we can generate buzz.
>We will cancel it and wait for the people to demand we release it.
>stupid goyim
the only people demanding this are woke trannies on Twitter
Then why did we have previous threads about this huh
I never saw a single thread about this trash until it was cancelled
And all the threads have been about laughing at the said trannies and Kevin Smith crying
Nah, I'm super not woke and I still want this released on principle (and also cause I was starting to care about seeing it).
dumb chud
I wouldn't be surprised if this move was made to try to artificially create demand and try to get something akin to the release the snyder cut movement going.
Anyway, I'm thinking people writing for IGN surely has a better grasp of economics than a CEO who is running the super successful Discovery network, and to whom WB came crawling, begging him to save them.
This Zaslav dude should hire IGN to run his company.
If Barbara looked like she is suppose too, I'd be on your side.
True.
The OP Batgirl doesn't look like she could be the daughter of the existing Gordon.
Secondly, the purple suit and the god awful bright reflective cape makes no sense in-universe.
That hair is just waiting to be grabbed in a fight.
It makes plenty of sense when you're trying not to waste tens of millions on advertising a bad movie that no one wants or would watch. It also makes sense to scrap all this woke dogshit if you're trying to actually salvage the brand and want people to be interested in DC movies and characters going forward instead of letting them be so tarnished in sludge that they can't live down the stench.
Yeah, let the IGN fatass nerds lecture Warner Brothers seasoned accountants and execs about what is profitable and what isn't
better off as a tax writeoff, obviously.
I for one am sure that IGN, a reputable publication, has hired journalists with years of Hollywood business experience and tax code expertise to write this article. I look forward to reading it.
> Let's say Batgirl costs another $20 million to finish and $10 million to promote.
Lol!
https://www.ign.com/articles/why-batgirls-cancellation-makes-zero-cents
its like film school 101 that female leads only work if they give white men a hard on, the producers of this trash should be facing criminal charges
They stand to make more money writing it off. It was never going to make money anyway, even with Keaton.
It was so utterly shit that they estimated the damage to their brand wouldn't be worth it.
I mean they cast a negress and hired two literal arabs as directors. Probably some suit sabotaging the company before quitting.
>Probably some suit sabotaging the company before quitting.
That's a possibility since all of the past execs have been given their walking papers. Also titless Batgirl and manbreasts for Batman. It does look like sabotage
VIDEO GAMES?
this
they are afraid that the film will damage the DC brand.
this is especially true now since people are used to seeing big movie premieres at home thanks to the pandemic. the plan was for the movie to release on the streaming platform as a feature that's elevated beyond a straight to video release or tv movie, while audiences still understand that what they're watching isn't a top-billed feature.
now that WB's big slate had to release direct to streaming since all the theaters shut down, there is a big risk that most people will mix up what this movie is supposed to be while they watch it, mistaking it for the kind of top billed feature they saw a few months ago.
WB can't take that risk - it would wound the brand too deeply at a time when DC movies are consistently considered ranked even beneath Marvel's Sony diffusion brand features
sjw dont believe that tarnishing the brand doesn't equate into destroying future financial prospect of the brand.
it does if you're also planning to shelve the flash
I don't think they said it wouldn't make any money, just that it was brand damaging and they didn't believe in it. If the rumor about killing Keaton's Batman is true then I can see why.
It was pozzed shit and Disney has proved more than anyone that shit is on the way out.
Jesus christ who cares about Batgirl? That movie looked so shit to begin with. Fricking SJW morons.
I want to see how shit it is.
Are the people insisting the cancelation is to drum up buzz for a later release the same morons who were saying the shitty sonic model was intentional marketing? when this inevitably never comes out will they realize they were wrong about sonic as well
They are trying really hard to pull a ZSJL here. Going as far as guilt tripping Snyder fans for not harassing WB.
>falling for a thinly disguised reshooting delay of a movie that otherwise had zero hype
Never change Cinemaphile
If you kill a movie for tax reasons like this, how does it work? Can you ever get it back from the grave at a later time without losing the tax benefit?
>Can you ever get it back from the grave at a later time without losing the tax benefit?
No
Surely there must be a backdoor somewhere, if this was a great work of art it would be a loss for culture, I guess releasing it for free?
like the saying goes you can't spell ignorant without IGN.
the movie was a straight to streaming movie wasn't it? that means it makes ZERO.
no commercials, no ad revenue
will it drive subs? probably not
will it make people cancel their subs? highly unlikely because the people that really want to see this probably want to see house of dragons.
so that's 90 million in taxes saved
but but a theatrical release?
ok assuming zero marketing whatsoever the movie will have to max double it's budget of 90m. Studios don't keep 100% of sales more like 50%. 180/2=90
every test screening says the movie is awful. Twitter activists and søyed journos are loud but couldn't draw 180m
You take the risk of releasing a stinker that will most likely lose you money or you tax the guaranteed 90m tax break.
they're trying to turn a profit at Warner and shelving that movie for 90m is the only sane option.
It was originally set for streaming but the Brain boxes at WB switched it to being a theatrical release. So that means it looked like a streaming movie and was not theatrical quality
why must they assault fraser? because he refused gay sex with a israeliteducer? is that all?
If Zaslav wanted to placate the fans and keep the tax break, have somebody illegally release the film.
send an employee to India, drop a burn of it near the designated shitting street, that or a thumb drive. Raj will have it up in a matter of days, poos love capeshit.
if it's good it'll be a cult classic and you can take the penalty and release it, if it suck you look like a genius for never releasing it.
what fans does he need to placate? twitter trannies?
It's not about the money, it's about sending a message
It makes monetary sense because they have a valuable IP and releasing a bad movie would tarnish that IP and make it less valuable.
Release the Topher Grace cut.
I can jack off to Yvonne Craig in her Batgirl costume or a legion of loose cosplayers in Batgirl outfits. This movie has a frumpy Batgirl in that lame Batgirl of Burnside costume. So, nothing of value is lost.