Bullshit, I've seen the kind of things that get released.
The argument was from the point of view of a streaming release, that it wouldn't have generated much more new subscribers, so, there was actually more money to earn if used as a tax write-off.
It actually fall apart if you consider releasing the movie in actual theatre.
>It actually fall apart if you consider releasing the movie in actual theatre.
No the frick it doesn't. The movie wasn't done, it still had to go through post-production which would cost even more just to earn none of it back because even their best can't do that.
so it wasnt and still needed more time in the oven, not counting the fact that it went from 70 mil budget to 90
releasing that piece of shit would have been a suicide
>more money to earn if used as a tax write-off.
can this meme finally die off? That's not how taxes work, like, at all. Any cent they could have earned from putting this on a channel somewhere, ANY channel, even no name TV channels, would have given them 1 cent more than anything you morons think a tax write-off is
If they actually shot the fight sequences on phones for some "man on the street" shit ... Yeah, I can see why they would scrap that. Your most expensive sequences shot vertically. Put that in theatres. Zoomers might like it. Everyone else?
Using "lost media" as an emotional argument is so weird and autistic. Companies or individuals are absolutely not obligated to reveal all their ideas and projects to you. This is the norm in the world of art and business. You don't sound like a moral hero of art, you sound like a policing petty autist. I am an artist myself, and I can't stand people like this. Respect people's discretion. Frick you.
So do you just like to post this rant randomly or did your wormed brain actually think what you are saying relate to anything anyone actually posted in this thread?
Not the anon, but it's more like the guy who made the commission refusing to show to anyone the art he commissioned.
that being said, no one here in the first place was making the argument that Zaslav had the duty to release the movie, which is the only argument his point argue against.
Here people are more calling out how badly his PR try to rationalise that decision.
>LOL you don't get to hide shit on the internet moron
nta but I have commissioned hundreds of /ss/ of various DC women and none of you will ever lay eyes on any of it.
“Lost media” refers to media that has been destroyed or misplaced and therefore can never be seen again. Like the directors cut of Batman Forever with all the extra Two Face scenes, or all those old black and white reels that were lost in a fire way back. A movie that was 90% finished and then destroyed to prevent another Snyder Cut situation absolutely qualifies as lost media.
If you read Safran's full quote it's not even that harsh
>"As I said, a lot of talented people were involved, but the film just was not releasable. It would not have been able to compete in the theatrical marketplace; it was built for the small screen."
They couldn't put it on HBO Max since Zaslav is against direct-to-streaming films, and they couldn't put it in theaters because it would've bombed due to not being theatrical quality. So, they just decided to not put it out at all
>and they couldn't put it in theaters because it would've bombed due to not being theatrical quality.
I mean, that's what he said. It's done by the same guys who made Bad Boys for Life. Say what you want about this movie, they know how to shoot for the big screen.
The problem is, allegedly, the a large chunk of the movie was framed like it was phone footage. the problem with that is that even when thats done realistically, it looks cheap
The other day I used an example of Brian De Palma's (Phantom of the Paradise, Scarface, Carrie, Untouchables) movie Redacted, which was made to look entirely like found footage and websites. And it looked really amateur, even with De Palma being a highly experienced director. You can take the best director and be completely undersoldif the movie just plain doesn't look good.
They were emphasizing Batgirl to be too realistic to the point things were looking embarrassing(cheap, homemade costume, villains with really stripped down costumes) without the gloss of filmaking I think it ended up looking like a homemade cosplay video than a proper movie.
Yeah, but Bad Boys was shot specifically to play on the big screen. Batgirl was shot specifically to play on TVs and phones, and they could probably tell when screening it in a theater
>It would not have been able to compete in the theatrical marketplace; it was built for the small screen."
This literally states they cancelled Batgirl only because Zaslav is a fricktard who doesn’t want anything to be streaming exclusive and thinks all movies have to be (blockbuster) theatrical releases. It had nothing to do with quality and everything to do with the fact Batgirl was a lower budget streaming movie that had already finished shooting when Zaslav took ever and thus couldn’t be turned into a theatrical release without massive reshoots that would cost too much.
Blue Beetle survived solely due to the fact it didn’t begin filming until after Zaslav had already taken charge and thus could still be converted to a bigger theatrical release.
How about Direct to video? TV movie release? Isn't that fair game too? Does really Zaslo think a movie can only do good in a theatre? Then why didn't he stop WB animation movie division yet?
He thinks expensive movies can only do well in theaters. The direct-to-video movies are very cheap, about $2-3 million apiece, and always make their money back in DVD sales, so there's no problem with those. They're a far cry from Batgirl, which cost $90 million
Keep in mind. The woke JJ Abrams/Ta Nahesi Coates Superman movie is still greenlit and in production.
So how bad did this have to be that even the incredibly woke WB executives decided to go 'nope!' and memory hole the whole thing? It had to have been a Velma level destroy the franchise failure to be considered impossible to salvage.
>So how bad did this have to be that even the incredibly woke WB executives
Once they discovered wokeness pissed off the chuds who pirate their material, nothing could be woke enough. Now they seek out your favorite IPs and "fix them up" pirate-san.
>The woke JJ Abrams/Ta Nahesi Coates Superman movie is still greenlit and in production.
Nope, it's in development. Gunn/Safran haven't even seen a script for it yet.
Worked on the art department. I watched the film when was streamed for the ones who worked on it. He is right, is really bad and would hurt the brand. Steel with Shaquille O'Neal was more faithful and a better film than Batgirl, which is so bad make Catwoman feels like art house cinema.
big talk, let's see what they come up with
The argument was from the point of view of a streaming release, that it wouldn't have generated much more new subscribers, so, there was actually more money to earn if used as a tax write-off.
It actually fall apart if you consider releasing the movie in actual theatre.
>It actually fall apart if you consider releasing the movie in actual theatre.
No the frick it doesn't. The movie wasn't done, it still had to go through post-production which would cost even more just to earn none of it back because even their best can't do that.
>The movie wasn't done
It was actually almost completely finished.
so it wasnt and still needed more time in the oven, not counting the fact that it went from 70 mil budget to 90
releasing that piece of shit would have been a suicide
>and still needed more time in the oven
Basically none. wouldn't have made a significant difference in term of cost.
>more money to earn if used as a tax write-off.
can this meme finally die off? That's not how taxes work, like, at all. Any cent they could have earned from putting this on a channel somewhere, ANY channel, even no name TV channels, would have given them 1 cent more than anything you morons think a tax write-off is
You still have to subtract Taxes from your future earning.
They have to earn with that movie at least more than the value of the tax write-off for them to earn more than just canning the movie.
Bullshit, I've seen the kind of things that get released.
>Bullshit, I've seen the kind of things that get released.
Imagine how bad something has to be for WB to consider it unreleasable.
They must've had a scene where Batgirl flings her own shit at people and screeches like a chimp
If they actually shot the fight sequences on phones for some "man on the street" shit ... Yeah, I can see why they would scrap that. Your most expensive sequences shot vertically. Put that in theatres. Zoomers might like it. Everyone else?
Zaslav suckups
Using "lost media" as an emotional argument is so weird and autistic. Companies or individuals are absolutely not obligated to reveal all their ideas and projects to you. This is the norm in the world of art and business. You don't sound like a moral hero of art, you sound like a policing petty autist. I am an artist myself, and I can't stand people like this. Respect people's discretion. Frick you.
>Using "lost media" as an emotional argument is so weird and autistic
So do you just like to post this rant randomly or did your wormed brain actually think what you are saying relate to anything anyone actually posted in this thread?
You lost, friend?
Do you take commissions and then just take the money and never deliver the art piece requested?
Not the anon, but it's more like the guy who made the commission refusing to show to anyone the art he commissioned.
that being said, no one here in the first place was making the argument that Zaslav had the duty to release the movie, which is the only argument his point argue against.
Here people are more calling out how badly his PR try to rationalise that decision.
Shut up homosexual LOL you don't get to hide shit on the internet moron, frick off if you want muh privacy
>LOL you don't get to hide shit on the internet moron
nta but I have commissioned hundreds of /ss/ of various DC women and none of you will ever lay eyes on any of it.
The FBI will leak it after you've been locked up, as a honeypot.
Not a single fricking post before yours said anything about lost media you schizo.
“Lost media” refers to media that has been destroyed or misplaced and therefore can never be seen again. Like the directors cut of Batman Forever with all the extra Two Face scenes, or all those old black and white reels that were lost in a fire way back. A movie that was 90% finished and then destroyed to prevent another Snyder Cut situation absolutely qualifies as lost media.
Doubt.
If anyone from DC is reading this, just leak the damn thing.
If you read Safran's full quote it's not even that harsh
>"As I said, a lot of talented people were involved, but the film just was not releasable. It would not have been able to compete in the theatrical marketplace; it was built for the small screen."
They couldn't put it on HBO Max since Zaslav is against direct-to-streaming films, and they couldn't put it in theaters because it would've bombed due to not being theatrical quality. So, they just decided to not put it out at all
>and they couldn't put it in theaters because it would've bombed due to not being theatrical quality.
I mean, that's what he said. It's done by the same guys who made Bad Boys for Life. Say what you want about this movie, they know how to shoot for the big screen.
The problem is, allegedly, the a large chunk of the movie was framed like it was phone footage. the problem with that is that even when thats done realistically, it looks cheap
The other day I used an example of Brian De Palma's (Phantom of the Paradise, Scarface, Carrie, Untouchables) movie Redacted, which was made to look entirely like found footage and websites. And it looked really amateur, even with De Palma being a highly experienced director. You can take the best director and be completely undersoldif the movie just plain doesn't look good.
They were emphasizing Batgirl to be too realistic to the point things were looking embarrassing(cheap, homemade costume, villains with really stripped down costumes) without the gloss of filmaking I think it ended up looking like a homemade cosplay video than a proper movie.
Yeah, but Bad Boys was shot specifically to play on the big screen. Batgirl was shot specifically to play on TVs and phones, and they could probably tell when screening it in a theater
>It would not have been able to compete in the theatrical marketplace; it was built for the small screen."
This literally states they cancelled Batgirl only because Zaslav is a fricktard who doesn’t want anything to be streaming exclusive and thinks all movies have to be (blockbuster) theatrical releases. It had nothing to do with quality and everything to do with the fact Batgirl was a lower budget streaming movie that had already finished shooting when Zaslav took ever and thus couldn’t be turned into a theatrical release without massive reshoots that would cost too much.
Blue Beetle survived solely due to the fact it didn’t begin filming until after Zaslav had already taken charge and thus could still be converted to a bigger theatrical release.
Zaslav is a fricking indiot. He's the reason there's all those fricking reality shows
How about Direct to video? TV movie release? Isn't that fair game too? Does really Zaslo think a movie can only do good in a theatre? Then why didn't he stop WB animation movie division yet?
>Does really Zaslo think a movie can only do good in a theatre?
YES.
>Then why didn't he stop WB animation movie division yet?
Because it’s kiddy TV shit and WB wasn’t already competing with Disney and Pixar on cartoon features and he’s not going to start trying to.
He thinks expensive movies can only do well in theaters. The direct-to-video movies are very cheap, about $2-3 million apiece, and always make their money back in DVD sales, so there's no problem with those. They're a far cry from Batgirl, which cost $90 million
And yet Black Adam was fine
>"It would have hurt those people involved."
But you could have said that about any DCEU flick in the last 15 years.
They’re just trying to justify cancelling it and using it as a tax write off. There’s plenty of bad streaming exclusive movies.
Keep in mind. The woke JJ Abrams/Ta Nahesi Coates Superman movie is still greenlit and in production.
So how bad did this have to be that even the incredibly woke WB executives decided to go 'nope!' and memory hole the whole thing? It had to have been a Velma level destroy the franchise failure to be considered impossible to salvage.
>So how bad did this have to be that even the incredibly woke WB executives
Once they discovered wokeness pissed off the chuds who pirate their material, nothing could be woke enough. Now they seek out your favorite IPs and "fix them up" pirate-san.
A dish best served cold.
We pirate because you make wokeshit.
Not the other way around.
>The woke JJ Abrams/Ta Nahesi Coates Superman movie is still greenlit and in production.
Nope, it's in development. Gunn/Safran haven't even seen a script for it yet.
honestly the fan made trailer is probably better than the real thing anyway.
And yet they put of Whedon’s Justice League and Black Adam
It's so dumb that I would want to see how bad it could have possibly been now but would have had no interest if it made it to cinemas.
I don't doubt him
You don't doubt him
Literally everyone forgot about batgirl but you're keep trying to make it a thing again
Was anyone expecting him to badmouth his boss's decision? lmao
what are you laughing at, OPanon?
Brendan Fraser's career ending just as it was about flourish again
Worked on the art department. I watched the film when was streamed for the ones who worked on it. He is right, is really bad and would hurt the brand. Steel with Shaquille O'Neal was more faithful and a better film than Batgirl, which is so bad make Catwoman feels like art house cinema.
How close was it to Batgirl Year One?