Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

‘Batgirl’ Film Axed by Warner Bros., Won’t Be Released on Any Platform

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ‘Batgirl’ Film Axed by Warner Bros., Won’t Be Released on Any Platform

    https://variety.com/2022/film/news/b...ax-1235331897/

    Batgirl,” the feature film adaptation of the DC Comics character, has been killed at Warner Bros., Variety has confirmed. It will not premiere on any platform at the studio — neither theatrically nor on HBO Max.

    The production — starring Leslie Grace as Barbara Gordon (aka Batgirl) and directed by “Bad Boys for Life” and “Ms. Marvel” filmmakers Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah — was greenlit in 2021 as part of a company-wide effort at Warner Bros. to create feature films specifically for HBO Max. But the new corporate regime at Warner Bros. Discovery has pivoted the company’s priorities back to theatrical features, leaving “Batgirl” without a proper home.

    Also on the chopping block, “Scoob!: Holiday Haunt,” a followup to the 2020 film “Scoob!,” has been shelved by the studio. Footage for the animated adaptation of the “Scooby-Doo” series was showcased in a sizzle reel for HBO Max back in December 2021. Sources indicate that the production had cost Warner Bros. $40 million.

    Studio insiders insist the decision to axe “Batgirl” was not driven by the quality of the film or the commitment of the filmmakers, but by the desire for the studio’s slate of DC features to be at a blockbuster scale. “Batgirl” was budgeted to screen in homes on HBO Max, and not for a major global release in theaters. The initial $75 million production budget for the project, which finished principal photography earlier this year and was in post-production, reached $90 million, due in part to COVID-related delays and protocols.

    The decision still comes as a shock, as studios almost never shelve productions outright, preferring to get at least some return on their investment. It also comes as Warner Bros. is still contending with what to do about “The Flash,” a DC adaptation created — and budgeted — specifically for theatrical release in 2023. The film has been utterly hamstrung by repeated allegations of abuse and misconduct by its star, Ezra Miller.

    And it’s not like “Batgirl” was a small movie, either. Along with Grace, J.K. Simmons plays Barbara’s father, Commissioner Jim Gordon, and Michael Keaton reprises his role as Batman (as he also does in “The Flash”). Brendan Fraser plays the villain, Firefly, and Grace told Variety in April that she had preliminary discussions with El Arbi and Fallah about what a sequel “could be.”

    “There’s crazy stunts, crazy drops,” Grace said of the film. “She’s a biker chick, so you’re going to see her do a bunch of badassery… There were a lot of long days, but it was so worth it.”

    The New York Post first reported on Warner Bros. decision to not release “Batgirl.”

  • #2
    Lucky for WB, according to Variety, they can write it all off for tax purposes, as long as the films are never released. It's almost like being a farmer.

    Comment


    • #3
      I guess her crazy stunts, crazy drops, her biker "chick" persona and her "badassery," wasn't enuf for WB to finish the project after it was half completed. How singularly awful must it be for WB to dump those millions down the toilet? I guess the universe is going to have to get by without a yet a reincarnation of yet another Batgirl. At least it saves WB publicity from having to deal with the inevitable woke outrage that will arise for calling her a "Batgirl" rather than a "Batwoman." .

      Comment


      • #4
        Batwoman is a completely different member of the Batoverse than Batgirl. Although, she, too, had her show cancelled by WB.

        Comment


        • #5
          Hmm...I didn't know that. It's not easy living in the real Universe and then trying to keep track of everything going on in the myriad of other "universes."

          Comment


          • #6
            They probably were getting too many demands for a non-gendered Batperson and decided to cut their losses before all hell broke loose.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Martin McCaffery View Post
              Lucky for WB, according to Variety, they can write it all off for tax purposes, as long as the films are never released.
              WTF? Is Warner Bros new to being a corporation or something? Writing stuff off implies that they pay taxes. No corporation should ever pay taxes. It's just not right.

              Comment


              • #8
                There has to be a pretty severe level of incompetence combined with over-inflated egos within a movie studio to allow $75 million to be budgeted for a TV movie, ultimately blow $90 million and then kill the project when it is in post production.

                I suspect the movie must be objectively terrible for WB to kill it at this late stage in production. How many movies finish principal photography and get into post production only to be permanently shelved? The whole situation seems a little fishy to me. The only scenario that makes sense is the movie must have been bad to an extreme. Maybe bad enough where a "contagion" would spread from it and affect other Batman-related properties. If the movie never sees the light of day it won't become part of the Batman canon.

                As for The Flash, I'm wondering if that movie will ever get finished either. How far did they get with that production? The star, Ezra Miller, has reportedly been creating all sorts of problems on set and off set. It wouldn't surprise me if WB had to go back to square one with a different actor.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Bobby Henderson View Post
                  The only scenario that makes sense is the movie must have been bad to an extreme. Maybe bad enough where a "contagion" would spread from it and affect other Batman-related properties..
                  You mean like Catwoman?

                  I'm waiting for the first lawsuit. Actors like Michael Keaton surely have participation points and other financial deals that are dependent on a theatrical release. ScarJo sued and won about the release of Black Widow when they wanted to do streaming only on that. I think this is going to take a lot of money to put on the shelf. I hope the tax breaks are worth it. Maybe IMDB can change the credits to give the Accounting Firm top billing.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Bobby Henderson View Post
                    As for The Flash, I'm wondering if that movie will ever get finished either. How far did they get with that production? The star, Ezra Miller, has reportedly been creating all sorts of problems on set and off set. It wouldn't surprise me if WB had to go back to square one with a different actor.
                    Hey now with what they can do with CGI, and what I saw just last week on 60 Minutes about deepfake capability (https://youtu.be/Yb1GCjmw8_8) -- they could capture enough of Miller's facial expressions and enough vocal information from what has already been acquired for the film, in order to finish the film with his CGI animatronic self and they'll never need to have his puny self anywhere near on set. As explained in the piece, seems like in the not to distant future, actors can just sell a studio a digital "package" with enough facial and vocal data in it that they won't even need to show up on the set at all; the studio can just create them digitally and make them do whatever is needed.

                    Originally posted by Bobby Henderson View Post
                    There has to be a pretty severe level of incompetence combined with over-inflated egos within a movie studio to allow $75 million to be budgeted for a TV movie, ultimately blow $90 million and then kill the project when it is in post production.
                    Between tax holes and insurance, you can bet WB's lawyers have insulated them from any serious losses.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The suspiciousdly cynical side of me is wondering if this isn't some sort of a
                      marketing plan. One of the best ways to inflate a demand for something is
                      to tell people they can't have it. I'm just sayin.....

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Why aren't they following the grand Hollywood tradition of butchering a film beyond recognition and then releasing the "restored" version to critical acclaim a few years later?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Jim Cassedy View Post
                          The suspiciousdly cynical side of me is wondering if this isn't some sort of a
                          marketing plan. One of the best ways to inflate a demand for something is
                          to tell people they can't have it. I'm just sayin.....
                          Jim, cynically say away -- it is either them being financially covered by the well-written corporate tax laws that the conglomerates have plied Congress with Wind Women and lots o MONEY to pass for them plus a hefty completion insurance coverage, or as the cynic side of your brain has sussed out, it could very well be that tried and true "make 'em want it" marketing trick, al la The Rodent: "Get it now, because after this, it will be returned to The Vault (oooh...scary)and it will stay there until you lot are willing to pay whatever we ask for it." I'm just sayin ditto!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            They'll put it in the vault next to Disney's "original Star Wars movies" and "Song of the South" and wait till the marketing is right to release it. Batgirl....the forbidden film!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I think Discovery is just going around killing a bunch of projects that were in the works before they took over Warner. Warner had spent $300M on CNN+. Discovery killed it shortly after taking over. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/24/b...ry-warner.html


                              Harold

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X