CyberpunkCentra

Guys, just because Spider-Man did it, doesn't mean the same will happen with Batman. I've been hearing about this since this morning. Lets not make it a thing. It's just studios starting to finally acknowledge the multiverse elements from comics and using it as a tool. Nothing more.

Mike86

I mean the multiverse is essentially confirmed for DC though. The Flash will have both Affleck and Keaton as Batman. Pattinson’s Batman though I think is going to remain separate.

CyberpunkCentra

Yeah that's what I mean. WB is using the multiverse as a tool to have both a more realistic Batman and a fantastical Batman all at the same time. Doesn't mean a big crossover will happen.

DJariya

There is a new report that Batgirl might change gears and move to theaters first.

milo bloom

Ride some of the energy from The Batman.

stingermck

They need to, stupid not to even try. Especially if Keaton is in it.

PhantomStranger

It's believed WB has holes in its theatrical schedule thanks to various delays and this is Discovery's solution to the problem.

Mike86

I don’t really know why this was ever intended for HBO Max to begin with. A character out of the Bat Family featuring Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne/Batman should be bigger than a straight to streaming release.

Eric F

More proof Warner has absolutely no idea what to do with their DC characters.

Michael Corvin

Seriously, they put two Suicide Squad movies and a Birds of prey out and we're going to relegate Batgirl to HBOMax? Kinda bizarre choice.

Why So Blu?

Why is everyone surprised? HBO MAX was the original plan. Talk is whether to also have it in theaters.

stingermck

We know, and it was a stupid plan from day one.

Mike86

Yeah, it’s not that I didn’t know it was intended for HBO Max. It was just dumb to put it there and bypass a theatrical release in the first place. Especially considering some of the names involved (Michael Keaton, J.K. Simmons).

Plus while not the biggest character Batgirl is a character you should be able to make fairly popular if done well. It’s not like she’s some random b list character.

Jay G.

There's real distribution and marketing costs to releasing a film theatrically, and a studio isn't going to commit to that if they don't think the film will recoup the investment on that alone. Think of all the films that were meant to be theatrical, but ended up going straight to video outside of a token theatrical run in one city/theater to fulfill a contractual obligation.

Not to mention that WB had tried and failed with a theatrical Batgirl before, after hiring Joss Whedon to helm one in 2017. I also think that WB may have felt the CW show Batwoman may have stole some of Batgirl's thunder; it's not like they're racing to make a Green Arrow or Supergirl movie.

Additionally, the way the various divisions have their money budgeted out means that WB maybe didn't have money for a theatrical Batgirl, but HBO Max had money to make an original "exclusive" movie for its service to draw in/maintain subscribers. It's no different that Netflix making big-budget films like Bright streaming-only.

Here's talk about how, in 2020, they lined up plans to make 2 DC movies a year as HBO-Max exclusives:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/27/b...es-movies.html
Now, it's not exactly clear where the adjective "riskier" came from, since it's not a quote, but it seems like it came from Hamada, not the author of the article. People might disagree with that assessment for Batgirl, and one might even suggest it's sexist, but it's what the head of DC Films considered such a film project to be back in 2020. They could afford to take a risk as a HBO Max streaming film, but not for the added investment of a theatrical release.

To me, the idea that they're now going to release Batgirl theatrically likely speaks to just how well the film is turning out. It's like how Toy Story 2 was originally intended to be a DTV sequel, but got upgraded to theatrical release after Disney saw the results. It may mess with the budget across divisions though, since HBO Max is now "down" an exclusive film after spending the time/money producing one.

New Lurker

Exactly. This was created with the purpose of being exclusive content on HBO Max. Keep in mind it's budget and scope are also probably in line with a streaming platform and not a blockbuster movie. If they've seen some of it and are blown away by it, sure take a chance on it being a theater release. But on principal alone it's a pretty erratic move to take a movie made on a streaming budget and throw into in the theater.

Opinions on the character's star power are a moot point. That's not what's at play here. They were making this with the purpose to drive HBO Max numbers / give value to HBO Max customers. Just because Keaton is in it doesn't mean it should be automatically a theater movie no matter what. If it's good, go for it. But the confusion here kind of amuses me.

Jay G.

Well, streaming movie budgets can be insane. I already mentioned Bright on Netflix, which reportedly had a budget of $90-100 million. Batgirl reportedly has a budget of $70 million. In contrast, the first Deadpool had a budget of $58 million. Joker had a budget of $55-70 million. So I don't doubt that Batgirl will look just fine in a theater.
https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/bat...ith-streaming/

However, the promotion and distribution budget for a theatrical release can easily be equal to the production budget, if not higher. So you're no longer just committing $70 million to the film, but $140 million or more.

What's crazy is that WB/HBO Max referred to this film and Blue Beatle as "mid-budget" films.
https://theplaylist.net/blue-beetle-...ives-20210609/

IBJoel

Mid-budget films in the late 90s cost $40-60M, so that tracks. And in fact is on the low end when inflation is taken into account ($45M from 1995-2022)

milo bloom

The last Bat-project to be upgraded from direct to video to theatrical was Mask of the Phantasm. It didn't do good numbers at first, but has become a fan favorite over the years. Maybe they're hoping for more of this.

Eric F

If only the MotP production crew were involved with modern day DCEU projects. At least Bruce Timm is still involved with some of the animated DC DTV stuff.

Mike86

Eh.. Bruce Timm has lost some of his touch in my opinion. I’m a huge fan of the DCAU and things he was involved with back in the day, but he’s made some weird/questionable decisions on some of the more recent animated movies he’s been involved with.

Eric F

The last one he did that was officially part of his Timmverse continuity was pretty good. I wasn’t big on the Batman Harley one tho.

whotony

Which one was that?

PhantomStranger

The Harley and Batman one had a weird vibe. I probably would have enjoyed it more if they had cut out the stupid farting scene.

Mike86

The more disturbing part of that one is the sex scene with Nightwing and Harley. It’s not actually seen obviously, but it’s an awkward scene. She has him chained up and it’s basically implied that she has her way with him.

I don’t completely hate that movie, but that scene along with the farting scene in the Batmobile and some other jokes that don’t land make it weird.

Eric F

Justice League vs The Fatal Five was the DTV that does and doesn’t take place in his Timmverse series continuity. It’s one of the better DC DTV releases ar any rate.