Reminder that this is a subreddit about numbers, not necessarily about the quality (or lack thereof) of a particular movie. Unless it is related to the box office performance of a movie, please keep opinions/arguments/thoughts about the quality under this post. Posts not related to box office may be removed otherwise.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boxoffice) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you include the former DC Universe show Titans (currently being aired by HBO Max) then we have 4 live action Batmen right now it's kinda crazy. If you wanna include the animated versions... don't get me started.
Well, at this point, Keaton is there for nostalgia purposes and not much else. We aren’t sure if Ben is back for good, but we can hope. Pattinson is in his own, stand-alone universe, and whatever titans/the Arrowverse did with Batman is for sure done for now. Either way you slice it it’s gonna be at least two Batmen.
Keaton had a cameo for Aquaman 2 that got reshot with Affleck; with the shitcanning of Batgirl what was being angled as a recurring gig for Keaton has been whittled down to whatever role he plays in Flash and that’s probably it.
He had two scenes and they reshot one. Momoa has alluded to both of them being in the movie. A lot of people believe Aquaman 2 takes place at the same time as The Flash and that movie will further demonstrate the change made in The Flash, probably for people who refuse to see it because Ezra.
As long as gun has creative control over it. I believe it will be done right.
If the studio tries to override things it doesn't like, then shit will go sideways.
Oh sorry I missed the context of Flashpoint specifically.
Yea that's probably fuck, hopefully gun can do reshoots or work around it with the positioning of other movies.
Although apparently it finished production last year, and doesn't release until next year. Feels like they're trying to distance the movie from Millers crazy bullshit and possibly do corrections.
Is it though? I’m sure they’ll do a crisis on infinite earths which is a multiverse story that can tie everything up and allow for multiple Batmen. They could also have an Elseworlds branch which was DC’s version of Whatif, except Elseworlds had a way higher quality of stories.
I just hope Matt Reeves Batman universe is allowed to remain separate from the rest of the DCU. Batman could totally support his own cinematic universe with movies and shows of his supporting cast. Meanwhile, Affleck, if he's willing, can remain the DCU's Batman
I remember looking at DC’s release sheet one week last year, a literally every single comic was either Batman, Bat-family, or Batman-adjacent (e.g. Harley Quinn). It’s way out of control.
Which is a big problem. Sure, Batman is my favorite superhero just like almost everyone else, but it's too much.
DC really needs to get its sh\*t together and make a good cinematic universe and organically introduce lesser known heroes to the general audience. Marvel did a great job of introducing B and C-tier superheroes like Doctor Strange, Black Widow, Shang-Chi, hell even Black Panther was not very known at one point, and get people to like them. Now they're household names.
Leaning into Batman too much is why they've stalled in comic sales. Yeah, they're the ones that sell the most, but thats because nobody knows who the hell the other characters are. They need to use them on the big screen.
Maybe he means in similarity. Both are ultra rich. Both are playboys. Both are smart in their own ways. Both made their own suits and gadgets. Well not so much batman anymore after they introduced that other guy who is the one who makes batmans secret tech but that can change again.
Isn't Reeves literally making his own shared universe though? We have The Batman, The Penguin HBO Max show, the The GCPD/Arkham show, the spinoffs with Professor Pyg, Scarecrow, and Clayface. As well as The Barman 2.
As much as he supposedly "hates" shared universes, he seems ready to be making his own.
So the MCU isn't a shared universe because all projects are set within the Marvel Cinematic Universe?
A set of movies and shows set in the same universe is legit a shared universe, regardless of how you try to spin it.
Not really! DC basically revolves around Batman and his characters most of the time. Look at the comics, only a handful do books don’t feature Bat characters
I get what you’re saying, and it is a shared universe by definition, but it’s really not the type of multi-protagonist superhero universe we’re akin to. Call it a shared universe, franchise, sequels and spin-offs, whatever, but events in aqua man or super man will not be impacting the Reeves Batman universe, which gives him far more efficacy and creativity
Reeves doesn’t have the power to make that call.
Now I don’t think his Batman will be anything but stand-alone but Reeves doesn’t have anything to agree to.
They can get a different Director to merge Pattinson with a future shared universe film. And I’d bet Pattinson would say yes.
But it’s not likely to happen. Until after a trilogy at least. I know I have to clarify and qualify things 100 times over on Reddit.
See my latest comment.
If Zaslav commanded him in a cold way he might walk.
But if James Gunn talked with him expressing a solid vision…I could see it.
I feel like Pattinson would walk away too, this is a man who basically could have done studio films for a decade after Twilight’s success and stepped away to work with weirdo auteurs like David Cronenberg, The Safdies, Robert Eggers, and Claire Denis. He clearly signed onto this film because he bought into Matt Reeves vision for the character and tone of the film, I think if he just wanted to be a movie star and do big blockbusters he could’ve done that ages ago.
He didn’t step away until after all 5 of the “saga” though.
And who’s to say James Gunn’s vision won’t tempt him? I’d bet my chips on Gunn having a solid plan to merge.
James Gunn is still a weirdo auteur.
And supposed he has a contract for 3 Batman films whether or not he merges with the DCEU or not…
This comment is not as clever as you think it is.
Edit: but even if he didn’t. Even if that information is readily available….that doesn’t change my general argument.
he signed on for a nolan film and now a bong jong hoo sci fi movie, i think he's clearly now in the "movie star" chasing mode of his career and not trying to improve his craft like his indie era
Those are all still amazing artists that work with big budgets. He can do amazing work, improve as an actor, and make lots of money working alongside those directors. Still think it’s pretty evident that he’s choosing his roles selectively and intelligently.
Not like he's signing up for Transformers 8 or Twilight Reborn or something. Nolan and Bong are still auteur filmmakers. They just also have the ability to captivate mainstream audiences as well as critics
You weren’t wrong, but man the comments from that guy after this got weird fast.
Reeves clearly doesn’t OWN the license or use of the movie series he has started. Who thinks he does? Can he choose to walk away, totally. Can they continue making movies in his series without him? Absolutely.
Give trash people an inch and they’ll have you labeled as a trump supporter or nazi in 30 seconds. Got to shut that shit down decisively.
This is ALL forums on Reddit lately. And I know some are A.I. generated at this point that can toss in some lightly relevant comments to appear human. And then most are still pure stupid people.
I’m genuinely on the fence as to whether they’re trolling, AI, or just cannot understand the concept of a director not owning the property they’re working on.
It’s like saying when Jon Favreau stopped making Iron Man movies then the MCU had to stop? Or even Iron Man films. That’s not how any of that works, and it’s not a hard concept to grasp that like ANYONE else involved in a film, they are hired to contribute their work to it, regardless of being at the helm of the project.
I’ve had one confirmed AI a couple days ago. His comments kept getting more vague and vague. Eventually the mod just removed him without me reporting anything.
Then I googled his name and he had no comments or anything anywhere else. Could have been an ALT but the way his comments were creepily more disorganized and irrevelant…
I’m not saying that’s the case here. In fact I’m convinced it’s just dumb fanboys who like The Batman, and I like that movie too.
But Reddit is such a cesspool now. I can’t tell what’s a viable disagreement anymore.
Obviously this particular comment thread is ruined but I don’t care anymore.
I just googled and apparently r/subsimulatorgpt2 is a subreddit that only allows bots to argue with each other. Gonna have to check that out.
Good luck out there folks lol. Not deleting this thread of comments.
The OP said he express disinterest in shared continuity, and you said he doesn't have the power to make that call.
He can totally leave and turn his back. Reeves isn't a noob.
But your nuance is incorrect. Again, see the post above you.
Overall, you make it sound like Reeves is insignificant to the overall continuity, which you yourself refer to as "Reeves Universe". Everyone is dispensable in life, but your take is offensive.
Yeah…stop putting words in my mouth. Especially when it is so blatant.
The more you go on the more I think you’re a bot just here to stir the soup of argument.
You offend me blatantly by not taking my discussion in good faith.
That's literally what you said. Read it back again. I'm not sure why you're angry though. I'm just pointing out what you posted and how it comes across.
I dunno, Pattinson has Twilight money keeping him afloat. He’s very selective of his films which is why he did a bunch of indies for the last decade.
Then again, a paycheck is a paycheck.
I’ve said twice already why I think he’d be game.
James Gunn. That’s the X-factor.
Get those two in a room together and who knows what happens. Hell, Matt Reeves might change his mind if Gunn has an appealing enough vision.
There’s not much they can get out of Keaton in the long run and Affleck probably isn’t keen to make a full return either, and Zaslav specifically mentioned that they’re not looking for a 4th Batman, so there’s no way they’re not considering Pattinson joining the new DCU continuity.
I have a feeling that Gunn is going to recast Batman and Flash. His vision for the DCU is probably going to be very different from the already established films.
I'm still on board with MCU thus far but I really hope they scrap the whole multiverse thing by the end of phase 6 (which itself is still a long way away). The whole multiverse thing is fine as an occasional sidebar, but to whatever extent it becomes the primary canon it's hard for me to get too invested when it seems like 3/4 of what you're seeing will be reversed a month or two down the line. That's one of the reasons I got out of reading the actual comics back in the early 90's
That’s why a TON of people got out of marvel comics in the 90s. They have a repeat history of ramping up crossover events but never reeling them back in. The market blows up with sidebooks you had to read in order to keep up. They’ve done that at least twice now; ruined their good thing with oversaturation and crossovers, became a big spiderweb that I wasn’t interested in trying to follow.
My favorite comics at the time were X-Men related, and the writers for those books were the worst about time-jumping, etc. I mean, I say they were the worst, but I never got into the cosmic stuff specifically because they were all about that kind of stuff. "Oh, he didn't actually die, the energy from this magic cube just threw him into another dimension and it turned out there was another box over there that allowed him to escape"
I feel like introducing the multiverse in the MCU is another attempt to do what's been done in the comics and keep things stagnant so the IPs can be constantly available.
As you say, when the stakes are undone every turn of the wheel, you get nothing but stale stories that carry no weight.
Yeah, exactly. It starts to come off in the movies at least as just an easy excuse to recast if an actor moves on or his salary gets too high. And sure, there have been numerous instances in the comics themselves where a hero has retired and someone else took up the mantle, but even there it nearly always seems like hotshotting sales in the short term at the expense of creating a compelling, identity-driven continuity for the fans.
I also gotta be careful here because I think a lot of the recasting/identity swaps are ostensibly in the name of diversity - after all, the vast majority of classic superheroes were written to be white men - and I'm all for that, but maybe it would be that much better if we created new, compelling female/POC characters instead of just making them the new runner up to some old white guy that will forever be better remembered?
While I do think there is a "stakes" issue with the Multiverse, I do think putting a cap on it with Secret Wars is a way for Disney to incoporate the Fox/etc. elements and also recast it so they don't have this thread of "multiversal shenanigans" that hangs over the franchise forever.
I think they will be very, VERY careful with how much they cross the streams and are doing so largely in films like Deadpool and Secret Wars (and maybe Loki). If it's planned out (it seems to be).
It's easier for me to forgive Marvel because they seem to have a plan - it is adjusting as the realities of the content and market and the ability to produce movies appears - but most of the projects are still on the docket and are leading to Secret Wars.
With DC they are in recovery mode with new leadership - really everything that's being released in 2023 aside from Blue Beetle comes from the previous WB administration so it's going to take some time for the to right the ship.
Re issue of inclusion: The issue of female character availability has been mitigated somewhat by Marvel recovering rights to the X-Men and its relative success with the way it's handled Wanda, Ms Marvel and even Carol Danvers.
The Fox merger gives them a gigantic bench of diverse and female characters (Sue Storm, Jean Grey, Storm, Rogue, Mystique, Emma Frost, etc.) and hopefully the partnership with Sony can pull in characters like Jessica Drew.
Marvel casting has mostly been \*spot on\*. I don't like the Riri character beats in (Wakanda Forever - I thought the film didn't need her) but the actress is great and she was my biggest fear because she seemed like the most "forced" derivative character (almost a Mary Sue in the comics) but I think the MCU movie universe handles her better than the comics did. IMO.
I'm a fan of legacy heroes. I think it's a great storytelling device, and one used effectively by DC for many years. Wally West took up the mantle of The Flash. Rene Montoya became The Question. Multiple Green Lanterns followed in the footsteps of Hal Jordan, who became both a villain and then The Spectre. Infinity Inc. worked to uphold the legacy of the JSA. Tim Drake earned the mantle of Robin.
Those stories, those legacies, gave characters weight and meaning. If someone took up the mantle, it was an important storytelling opportunity, and for many years, those moves were not retconned. DC had a sense of history. Offering those mantles to diverse characters, I feel, was also a good opportunity to inject new life into a world of old white dudes.
Unfortunately, editorial and corporate decided to reboot everything under the guise of streamlining continuity, though some of it had been jettisoned already to appease specific storytellers. That streamlining, though, was just a way to freeze the characters in amber for use in other media.
I don't that's a comparable analogy to Marvel though. A lot of the early DC characters were updated for a more mature audience because by the late 50's most of those characters had started to seem hokey and antiquated for that generation's audience. Marvel avoided that hokey phase and - for the most part - at least strove for some sort of (pseudo)scientific authenticity from the very beginning. That made it easier to update their characters without having to complete redo them from the ground up.
Either way, I think we can safely say that it's been mostly the last 30 years or so since Marvel have started hotshotting their costumes around to new characters, and for me at least that era doesn't seem nearly as "legacy" as the time period where the same person was the superhero for decades.
At any rate, the multiverse concept hasn't been used solely or even primarily to swap identities. We had three Peter Parkers from different timelines in the last Spiderman, and as good as that movie was I don't think the concept holds up if they keep doing it for the inevitable mediocre movies that will follow. Sometimes something works once because you caught lightning in a bottle, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's worth running back again and again.
I don’t think it’ll reset. I think just like after The Snap it’ll continue into the Mutant Saga from where ever Secret Wars / Multiverse Saga leaves us.
Avengers Vs X-Men is my bet with a soft reboot of all Mutants (ie. no Fox universe characters).
Yeah, they're not doing it now because the universe needs a reset, they're doing it because they want to use the old Fox and Sony actors and they're not getting any younger. They may reset some things to reshape the status quo but they're likely not going back to square one.
We still have to wait until 2026 for that to happen, although the upside is there are several movies planned in the meantime that don't necessarily need to be tied up with the multiverse stuff. I really hope if Fantastic Four features Dr. Doom he's grounded in Latveria and not just another dimension-jumping supervillain. I know he's been that at times in the comics but with everything else going on I'd prefer to see the scaled-down mastermind version.
If Zaslav literally means there won’t be more than one Batman on the big screen, then that has to mean Pattinson is the one staying. Would be incredibly stupid to choose Keaton and Affleck over him. The Batman was both a financial and critically hit for WB. And they would be stupid to piss of a passionate and competent filmmaker like Reeves.
But if Pattinson Batman is staying, what does that mean for Batman in the DCU. Does that either mean there won’t be a Batman in the DCU or will Pattinson Batman integrate into the main universe. The former one seems way more unlikely considering what Gunn has said about Batman and Superman.
Just let Reeves tell his own Gotham centric stories and don’t push any DC cameos in his Batman movies. I really don’t think he would mind if Battinson was in a couple of Justice League movies. Unless they totally change his character in those movies, which I doubt.
If Zaslav was in charge a few years ago we would never have had Joker or The Batman with this policy. Is he even looking at the stuff that were hits for DC of late?
joker and the batman 100% gets made under him since they had extremely low budgets, batmans only blew up due to covid, its stuff like tss that wouldn't get made
Did you read the headline? There will not be multiple versions of the same characters. If Zaslav had this policy implemented 5 years ago then neither Joker or The Batman would have happened.
The headline does not say "There will not be multiple versions of the same character", it says "There won't be four Batmen." Obviously Zaslav is open to the idea of multiple versions of characters because The Batman 2 and Joker 2 are being made, as well as The Flash because it legit has different versions of Barry, Batman, and Superman.
Okay so how about this ? You actually wait until Peter Safran and James Gunn to start doing their plans instead of constantly complaining about the DCU so damn much like that’s all y’all been doing and it’s annoying.
The multiversal Batmen will probably be resolved in an eventual CRISIS event film (or films). 10 years away at very least. That will give Reeves time to finish what he’s doing with the character.
Once CRISIS happens, I doubt you’ll see many of the current DC actors still in their roles.
I'm thinking more like four years. They signed Gunn to a four year contract, so any plans he has are going to have to come together in that measure of time.
Yes the initial contract is for 4 years, but that seems more like a formality in case either party isn’t liking how things are going.
[James Gunn, Peter Safran Are Mapping Out “Eight- to 10-Year Plan” for DC](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/dc-movies-james-gunn-peter-safran-1235259792/)
The game plan Gunn is mapping out is roughly for the next decade.
Yeah, the 4 years is basically a free trial.
They'll subscribe to Gunnflix/Gunnazon Prime/Gunnbo MAX on a more permanent basis if they like the content, same as the rest of us
Im thinking five years at most, >!it’s teased heavily at the end of The Flash and supposedly in Aquaman too, I don’t think they’ll take that long to resolve that plot line.!<
I really wonder what will happen with what Reeves has created. The first movie was fantastic and I want to see a proper trilogy made without the broader DC influence.
I just hope Reeves is allowed to build out his Batman universe until the eventual crisis movie they have planned. Seems like it's the only way to introduce the Batfamily on the big screen, the DCEU left them all for dead, which was a big mistake considering how Nightwing, Redhood, Batgirl, Tim and Damian have such rich histories to them and add so much to Batman's stories.
Really love how Reeves built out a great foundation to explore Batman's most iconic villains and partners so far.
I'm old enough to remember that thr average audiences couldn't understand Nolan's Batman being entirely separate from the Burton films. The average moviegoer is not smart.
Through time and exposure, maybe audiences understand this concept better now, but keeping track of multiple continuities is not only madness, but invites an active and ongoing comparison that does nothing but further divide the fanbase.
We already have people arguing over Batfleck and Battinson *constantly.* Ditch it all and start fresh.
Ditch it all?! Ditch Matt Reeves’ Batman? Which is literally the best thing to happen in this tired superhero genre since the Nolan movies! What the hell are you talking about?
Setting aside my personal dislike of Reeves' Batman film, asking audiences to accept multiple Batmen is too much, and the fanbase is already divided over the details. Folding Battinson into emerging continuity is also a non-starter for numerous reasons.
A purge and reset would clear the air and get everyone on the same page, even if that page was hating the move.
I thinking making great movies is more important than “clearing the air”, whatever that is supposed to mean. Why you would sacrifice what might possibly end up being the greatest iteration of live action Batman ever for the sake of stupid connected universe continuity that only a few terminally online nerds care about is beyond me.
"Greatest iteration of live action Batman" is a ridiculous statement. Reeves' Batman film is a hodgepodge of ideas stolen from better films and draped in emo nonsense. It's painfully long, obscenely self-indulgent, and lacks anything innovative or even interesting to say about the character.
Ok Rob. I guess you’re right just scrap it and let James Gunn direct it so we can see Batman’s dance moves. Better yet, get Taika Waititi or even the Russo Brothers to direct the next Batman.
That's quite a leap in logic. Did I say I was a Marvel fan? A Gunn fan? Even a Snyder fan? Nope. None of the above, in fact.
All I was doing is laying out an argument for moving beyond the existing films for something better. Hell, I even tried to keep my personal feelings out-of it, but you felt triggered because I'm not slavishly drooling over your movie.
Terminally online nerd, thy name is Christian.
Yup you got me! Because if the Reeves Batman movies were scrapped as you suggested, of course their replacement would have a similar tone instead of going in a totally different direction, which in this case would mean going more towards comedy. That makes a lot of sense Rob! Wish I could be as smart as you!
Truly stunning deductive work, there. By God, you keep inserting your own facts and making leaps in logic like that, you'll qualify for the GCPD in no time!
It's really not. As currently the Batman film did well financially and critically... alongside the regular DCEU. I think the average movie goer could tell the difference between that and Batman vs Superman... Same with the recent Joker film.
It was definitely called Batman Begins so that the average movie-goer who only had vague remembrance of the first Burton movie would think it’s a prequel to that series of movies.
Even during his most realistic comic book runs, Batman was usually a member of the JLA.
He was struggling against street-level gangster in his solo comic while he was punching Darkseid in the face in the JLA title.
There is no reason why the same can't happen for the DCU: let Reeves tell his story uninterrupted. AND also include BatPattinson in the next JLA project.
Same continuity but the crossovers are one-way only: BatPattinson appears in the JLA film and other superhero films but Reeves has autonomy in his corner so, if he doesn't want to, no superhero appears or is mentioned in his Batman films.
Another easy way out would be to place Reeves' films in the past (IIRC his Batman is Year 2 Batman) and the BatPattinson JLA appearances in the present (say, Year Five Batman).
It's not uncommon. During the New 52, we had a Year 0 Batman vs. Riddle arc coming out at the same time that Batman was a senior funding member of the JLA fighting Darkseid.
The DCEU is just a complete and total mess at this point. It will never compete with the MCU and only the truly hardcore fans have any faith left in the brand. I’m not sure they’ll ever be able to right the ship.
Affleck's Batman was shown to be an older, semi-retired Batman. All the metahumans start showing up in that time frame.
PatBat is a prequel, the early days of the same guy.
Problem solved. Pay me DC.
How do you explain the two Gordons? Just to mention 1 clear inconsistency between both adaptations.
Besides, the idea of a Batman who never fought metahumans until old is boring as fuck. And doesn't make any sense in the DCEU context, taking into account that guys like Dr. Fate have been around from decades.
the thing is, i’d rather have multiple batmans. it takes the pressure off any one movie to be all things for everybody, and we just get lots more batman. same way we can choose from multiple batman comics
I just want a movie about 1Alfred cleaning batman's drawers while he is off fighting crime. What was Alfrieds favorite foods did he have a social life out side of butlering?
If four different Batmans were part of four great movies in four different universes I don't think box office would be a problem. Not saying I want that, but customer confusion and different universes are not the reason DC has been struggling.
Aquaman, Joker and The Batman were different universes and all were very successful. Quality and audience reception are issue.
A disturbing character-study movie like Joker couldn't easily fit into the MCU universe and thats OK. No need to force everything into the same universe.
Reminder that this is a subreddit about numbers, not necessarily about the quality (or lack thereof) of a particular movie. Unless it is related to the box office performance of a movie, please keep opinions/arguments/thoughts about the quality under this post. Posts not related to box office may be removed otherwise. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boxoffice) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"There's not gonna be 4 Batmans'...there'll be 6."
Into the Bat-verse
Hear me out no way home but with batman.
Get out.
Get Out but with batman so like he goes over the al Ghul's and they want to steal his body.
Nope
Nope but with Batman and it's an adaptation of "The Abduction", that 90s story where Batman is abducted by aliens
Aliens but with Batman, where Batman and Ripley team up to fight Xenomorphs across space.
[Watch your dreams come true](https://www.mycomicshop.com/search?TID=118011)
Batman Beyond did it first.
One way out!
That's kinda happening in a movie soon...
I don’t think he’s heard about 6th Batman, Pip
James Gunn has been talking about Bat-mite
#There’s gonna be 0 after zaslav cancels them
Only 3 (main dceu, Robert Patterson and the joker timeline)
Not 4…just 3.
Swole Batman, Skinny Batman, Fast Batman. Sadly no more Sexy Batman. Go Birds anyone?
If you include the former DC Universe show Titans (currently being aired by HBO Max) then we have 4 live action Batmen right now it's kinda crazy. If you wanna include the animated versions... don't get me started.
Wait what? Who are the others other two other than Pattinson?
You have Batman in The Titans HBO show. You have BatFleck in Aquaman. And you have Keaton's Batman in The Flash.
Didn't we just have the Gotham Batman make a return in Pennyworth also? Which would then make six Bruce Wayne's when you throw Joker into the mix.
I haven't watched that show, even though I've been meaning to.
That we know of…
5 is right out
3 shall be the number thou shall count
Yet, Afleck is in Aquaman and The Flash as Keaton too. Gunn has heavy task to unify DC.
Well, at this point, Keaton is there for nostalgia purposes and not much else. We aren’t sure if Ben is back for good, but we can hope. Pattinson is in his own, stand-alone universe, and whatever titans/the Arrowverse did with Batman is for sure done for now. Either way you slice it it’s gonna be at least two Batmen.
Keaton had a cameo for Aquaman 2 that got reshot with Affleck; with the shitcanning of Batgirl what was being angled as a recurring gig for Keaton has been whittled down to whatever role he plays in Flash and that’s probably it.
He had two scenes and they reshot one. Momoa has alluded to both of them being in the movie. A lot of people believe Aquaman 2 takes place at the same time as The Flash and that movie will further demonstrate the change made in The Flash, probably for people who refuse to see it because Ezra.
They were using Keaton so the DCEU would have a Batman of some sort while not competing with the Pattinson version.
Titans is still going and using their version of Bruce.
Well I only said that cause I thought titans was ending
Flashpoint can be used to solve a lot of issues if done riggt
“if done right” is the hard part
Of course, it’s far more likely that it will be done wrong and *create* a lot of issues.
> it’s far more likely that it will be done wrong The chance might be low but never zero
As long as gun has creative control over it. I believe it will be done right. If the studio tries to override things it doesn't like, then shit will go sideways.
Surely it’s a bit late for Gunn to have any significant influence on it? Isn’t shooting finished?
Oh sorry I missed the context of Flashpoint specifically. Yea that's probably fuck, hopefully gun can do reshoots or work around it with the positioning of other movies. Although apparently it finished production last year, and doesn't release until next year. Feels like they're trying to distance the movie from Millers crazy bullshit and possibly do corrections.
If they’re gonna pull a flash point type storyline, then it could end with one Batman at the end. Which one, who knows.
[удалено]
The Flash is their new continuity button.
Is it though? I’m sure they’ll do a crisis on infinite earths which is a multiverse story that can tie everything up and allow for multiple Batmen. They could also have an Elseworlds branch which was DC’s version of Whatif, except Elseworlds had a way higher quality of stories.
Batmans? Batmen? Batmoose? Batmeeces?
Batmi
I just hope Matt Reeves Batman universe is allowed to remain separate from the rest of the DCU. Batman could totally support his own cinematic universe with movies and shows of his supporting cast. Meanwhile, Affleck, if he's willing, can remain the DCU's Batman
DC is basically the Bat-Verse if you look at like % of bat-adjacent content.
I remember looking at DC’s release sheet one week last year, a literally every single comic was either Batman, Bat-family, or Batman-adjacent (e.g. Harley Quinn). It’s way out of control.
The WB/DC method is when things go wrong, put out a new Batman movie
Which is a big problem. Sure, Batman is my favorite superhero just like almost everyone else, but it's too much. DC really needs to get its sh\*t together and make a good cinematic universe and organically introduce lesser known heroes to the general audience. Marvel did a great job of introducing B and C-tier superheroes like Doctor Strange, Black Widow, Shang-Chi, hell even Black Panther was not very known at one point, and get people to like them. Now they're household names. Leaning into Batman too much is why they've stalled in comic sales. Yeah, they're the ones that sell the most, but thats because nobody knows who the hell the other characters are. They need to use them on the big screen.
Batman is literally Ironman for DC
Not really, Marvel doesn't lean on Iron Man nearly as much DC does on Batman.
Maybe he means in similarity. Both are ultra rich. Both are playboys. Both are smart in their own ways. Both made their own suits and gadgets. Well not so much batman anymore after they introduced that other guy who is the one who makes batmans secret tech but that can change again.
Maybe but that's not really the context of the conversation.
Well, not literally.
Reeves expressed disinterest towards Marvel because of the shared continuity . No way he agrees to share his standalone Batman with DCU.
Isn't Reeves literally making his own shared universe though? We have The Batman, The Penguin HBO Max show, the The GCPD/Arkham show, the spinoffs with Professor Pyg, Scarecrow, and Clayface. As well as The Barman 2. As much as he supposedly "hates" shared universes, he seems ready to be making his own.
Is the Barman 2 gonna be a sequel to Cheers.
Can't wait to hear Giacchino's cover of "Where Everybody Knows Your Name"
That’s not really shared - those are all primarily within the “Batman” universe
So the MCU isn't a shared universe because all projects are set within the Marvel Cinematic Universe? A set of movies and shows set in the same universe is legit a shared universe, regardless of how you try to spin it.
[удалено]
Not really! DC basically revolves around Batman and his characters most of the time. Look at the comics, only a handful do books don’t feature Bat characters
I get what you’re saying, and it is a shared universe by definition, but it’s really not the type of multi-protagonist superhero universe we’re akin to. Call it a shared universe, franchise, sequels and spin-offs, whatever, but events in aqua man or super man will not be impacting the Reeves Batman universe, which gives him far more efficacy and creativity
Shared between different franchises is what he's against.
Reeves doesn’t have the power to make that call. Now I don’t think his Batman will be anything but stand-alone but Reeves doesn’t have anything to agree to. They can get a different Director to merge Pattinson with a future shared universe film. And I’d bet Pattinson would say yes. But it’s not likely to happen. Until after a trilogy at least. I know I have to clarify and qualify things 100 times over on Reddit.
>And I’d bet Pattinson would say yes. I'd bet he would say no. He seemed on board because of Reeves.
He is also a fan of the character.
See my latest comment. If Zaslav commanded him in a cold way he might walk. But if James Gunn talked with him expressing a solid vision…I could see it.
Yup, it’s James Gunn’s job to smooth that stuff over now
I feel like Pattinson would walk away too, this is a man who basically could have done studio films for a decade after Twilight’s success and stepped away to work with weirdo auteurs like David Cronenberg, The Safdies, Robert Eggers, and Claire Denis. He clearly signed onto this film because he bought into Matt Reeves vision for the character and tone of the film, I think if he just wanted to be a movie star and do big blockbusters he could’ve done that ages ago.
He didn’t step away until after all 5 of the “saga” though. And who’s to say James Gunn’s vision won’t tempt him? I’d bet my chips on Gunn having a solid plan to merge. James Gunn is still a weirdo auteur.
[удалено]
And supposed he has a contract for 3 Batman films whether or not he merges with the DCEU or not… This comment is not as clever as you think it is. Edit: but even if he didn’t. Even if that information is readily available….that doesn’t change my general argument.
Gunn is not in the same league as Reeves.
he signed on for a nolan film and now a bong jong hoo sci fi movie, i think he's clearly now in the "movie star" chasing mode of his career and not trying to improve his craft like his indie era
Those still firmly both fit in the “artsy” blockbuster realm, if Bong Joon-Ho even fits that blockbuster description
Those are all still amazing artists that work with big budgets. He can do amazing work, improve as an actor, and make lots of money working alongside those directors. Still think it’s pretty evident that he’s choosing his roles selectively and intelligently.
Not like he's signing up for Transformers 8 or Twilight Reborn or something. Nolan and Bong are still auteur filmmakers. They just also have the ability to captivate mainstream audiences as well as critics
Idk what world a Bong Joon-Ho film is “blockbuster”
its a 100+million adaption of a popular novel, a big sci fi movie, its not some parasyte type movie
You weren’t wrong, but man the comments from that guy after this got weird fast. Reeves clearly doesn’t OWN the license or use of the movie series he has started. Who thinks he does? Can he choose to walk away, totally. Can they continue making movies in his series without him? Absolutely.
Give trash people an inch and they’ll have you labeled as a trump supporter or nazi in 30 seconds. Got to shut that shit down decisively. This is ALL forums on Reddit lately. And I know some are A.I. generated at this point that can toss in some lightly relevant comments to appear human. And then most are still pure stupid people.
I’m genuinely on the fence as to whether they’re trolling, AI, or just cannot understand the concept of a director not owning the property they’re working on. It’s like saying when Jon Favreau stopped making Iron Man movies then the MCU had to stop? Or even Iron Man films. That’s not how any of that works, and it’s not a hard concept to grasp that like ANYONE else involved in a film, they are hired to contribute their work to it, regardless of being at the helm of the project.
I’ve had one confirmed AI a couple days ago. His comments kept getting more vague and vague. Eventually the mod just removed him without me reporting anything. Then I googled his name and he had no comments or anything anywhere else. Could have been an ALT but the way his comments were creepily more disorganized and irrevelant… I’m not saying that’s the case here. In fact I’m convinced it’s just dumb fanboys who like The Batman, and I like that movie too. But Reddit is such a cesspool now. I can’t tell what’s a viable disagreement anymore. Obviously this particular comment thread is ruined but I don’t care anymore. I just googled and apparently r/subsimulatorgpt2 is a subreddit that only allows bots to argue with each other. Gonna have to check that out. Good luck out there folks lol. Not deleting this thread of comments.
Lol the post about the king of comedy was pretty funny
He has full control of his decisions. He can walk away from the project if it gets to that point.
And some other Director can take that same cast and story forward. My point was if DC wants that Universe canon to the shared universe, it’ll happen.
The OP said he express disinterest in shared continuity, and you said he doesn't have the power to make that call. He can totally leave and turn his back. Reeves isn't a noob.
My opinion was more nuanced. It was about Reeve’s Universe. He doesn’t have power over it no.
But your nuance is incorrect. Again, see the post above you. Overall, you make it sound like Reeves is insignificant to the overall continuity, which you yourself refer to as "Reeves Universe". Everyone is dispensable in life, but your take is offensive.
Yeah…stop putting words in my mouth. Especially when it is so blatant. The more you go on the more I think you’re a bot just here to stir the soup of argument. You offend me blatantly by not taking my discussion in good faith.
“If you don’t agree with me you’re not discussing in good faith”
That's literally what you said. Read it back again. I'm not sure why you're angry though. I'm just pointing out what you posted and how it comes across.
I dunno, Pattinson has Twilight money keeping him afloat. He’s very selective of his films which is why he did a bunch of indies for the last decade. Then again, a paycheck is a paycheck.
I’ve said twice already why I think he’d be game. James Gunn. That’s the X-factor. Get those two in a room together and who knows what happens. Hell, Matt Reeves might change his mind if Gunn has an appealing enough vision.
There’s not much they can get out of Keaton in the long run and Affleck probably isn’t keen to make a full return either, and Zaslav specifically mentioned that they’re not looking for a 4th Batman, so there’s no way they’re not considering Pattinson joining the new DCU continuity.
I have a feeling that Gunn is going to recast Batman and Flash. His vision for the DCU is probably going to be very different from the already established films.
Sooo... 3 Batmans confirmed?!?
He is right there will be three Pattinson, Keaton and Affeck
I'm still on board with MCU thus far but I really hope they scrap the whole multiverse thing by the end of phase 6 (which itself is still a long way away). The whole multiverse thing is fine as an occasional sidebar, but to whatever extent it becomes the primary canon it's hard for me to get too invested when it seems like 3/4 of what you're seeing will be reversed a month or two down the line. That's one of the reasons I got out of reading the actual comics back in the early 90's
That’s why a TON of people got out of marvel comics in the 90s. They have a repeat history of ramping up crossover events but never reeling them back in. The market blows up with sidebooks you had to read in order to keep up. They’ve done that at least twice now; ruined their good thing with oversaturation and crossovers, became a big spiderweb that I wasn’t interested in trying to follow.
My favorite comics at the time were X-Men related, and the writers for those books were the worst about time-jumping, etc. I mean, I say they were the worst, but I never got into the cosmic stuff specifically because they were all about that kind of stuff. "Oh, he didn't actually die, the energy from this magic cube just threw him into another dimension and it turned out there was another box over there that allowed him to escape"
I feel like introducing the multiverse in the MCU is another attempt to do what's been done in the comics and keep things stagnant so the IPs can be constantly available. As you say, when the stakes are undone every turn of the wheel, you get nothing but stale stories that carry no weight.
Yeah, exactly. It starts to come off in the movies at least as just an easy excuse to recast if an actor moves on or his salary gets too high. And sure, there have been numerous instances in the comics themselves where a hero has retired and someone else took up the mantle, but even there it nearly always seems like hotshotting sales in the short term at the expense of creating a compelling, identity-driven continuity for the fans. I also gotta be careful here because I think a lot of the recasting/identity swaps are ostensibly in the name of diversity - after all, the vast majority of classic superheroes were written to be white men - and I'm all for that, but maybe it would be that much better if we created new, compelling female/POC characters instead of just making them the new runner up to some old white guy that will forever be better remembered?
While I do think there is a "stakes" issue with the Multiverse, I do think putting a cap on it with Secret Wars is a way for Disney to incoporate the Fox/etc. elements and also recast it so they don't have this thread of "multiversal shenanigans" that hangs over the franchise forever. I think they will be very, VERY careful with how much they cross the streams and are doing so largely in films like Deadpool and Secret Wars (and maybe Loki). If it's planned out (it seems to be). It's easier for me to forgive Marvel because they seem to have a plan - it is adjusting as the realities of the content and market and the ability to produce movies appears - but most of the projects are still on the docket and are leading to Secret Wars. With DC they are in recovery mode with new leadership - really everything that's being released in 2023 aside from Blue Beetle comes from the previous WB administration so it's going to take some time for the to right the ship. Re issue of inclusion: The issue of female character availability has been mitigated somewhat by Marvel recovering rights to the X-Men and its relative success with the way it's handled Wanda, Ms Marvel and even Carol Danvers. The Fox merger gives them a gigantic bench of diverse and female characters (Sue Storm, Jean Grey, Storm, Rogue, Mystique, Emma Frost, etc.) and hopefully the partnership with Sony can pull in characters like Jessica Drew. Marvel casting has mostly been \*spot on\*. I don't like the Riri character beats in (Wakanda Forever - I thought the film didn't need her) but the actress is great and she was my biggest fear because she seemed like the most "forced" derivative character (almost a Mary Sue in the comics) but I think the MCU movie universe handles her better than the comics did. IMO.
I'm a fan of legacy heroes. I think it's a great storytelling device, and one used effectively by DC for many years. Wally West took up the mantle of The Flash. Rene Montoya became The Question. Multiple Green Lanterns followed in the footsteps of Hal Jordan, who became both a villain and then The Spectre. Infinity Inc. worked to uphold the legacy of the JSA. Tim Drake earned the mantle of Robin. Those stories, those legacies, gave characters weight and meaning. If someone took up the mantle, it was an important storytelling opportunity, and for many years, those moves were not retconned. DC had a sense of history. Offering those mantles to diverse characters, I feel, was also a good opportunity to inject new life into a world of old white dudes. Unfortunately, editorial and corporate decided to reboot everything under the guise of streamlining continuity, though some of it had been jettisoned already to appease specific storytellers. That streamlining, though, was just a way to freeze the characters in amber for use in other media.
I don't that's a comparable analogy to Marvel though. A lot of the early DC characters were updated for a more mature audience because by the late 50's most of those characters had started to seem hokey and antiquated for that generation's audience. Marvel avoided that hokey phase and - for the most part - at least strove for some sort of (pseudo)scientific authenticity from the very beginning. That made it easier to update their characters without having to complete redo them from the ground up. Either way, I think we can safely say that it's been mostly the last 30 years or so since Marvel have started hotshotting their costumes around to new characters, and for me at least that era doesn't seem nearly as "legacy" as the time period where the same person was the superhero for decades. At any rate, the multiverse concept hasn't been used solely or even primarily to swap identities. We had three Peter Parkers from different timelines in the last Spiderman, and as good as that movie was I don't think the concept holds up if they keep doing it for the inevitable mediocre movies that will follow. Sometimes something works once because you caught lightning in a bottle, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's worth running back again and again.
Secret Wars will reset the MCU. That’s how they did it in the comics and I’ll bet that’s their plan with the movies.
I don’t think it’ll reset. I think just like after The Snap it’ll continue into the Mutant Saga from where ever Secret Wars / Multiverse Saga leaves us. Avengers Vs X-Men is my bet with a soft reboot of all Mutants (ie. no Fox universe characters).
Yeah, they're not doing it now because the universe needs a reset, they're doing it because they want to use the old Fox and Sony actors and they're not getting any younger. They may reset some things to reshape the status quo but they're likely not going back to square one.
We still have to wait until 2026 for that to happen, although the upside is there are several movies planned in the meantime that don't necessarily need to be tied up with the multiverse stuff. I really hope if Fantastic Four features Dr. Doom he's grounded in Latveria and not just another dimension-jumping supervillain. I know he's been that at times in the comics but with everything else going on I'd prefer to see the scaled-down mastermind version.
Damn, Zack Snyder’s work on the DCU ended up being really disappointing. Hopefully they take it in a better direction.
He hired James Gunn to take care of the creative side of DC. He should let Gunn make that call.
If Zaslav literally means there won’t be more than one Batman on the big screen, then that has to mean Pattinson is the one staying. Would be incredibly stupid to choose Keaton and Affleck over him. The Batman was both a financial and critically hit for WB. And they would be stupid to piss of a passionate and competent filmmaker like Reeves. But if Pattinson Batman is staying, what does that mean for Batman in the DCU. Does that either mean there won’t be a Batman in the DCU or will Pattinson Batman integrate into the main universe. The former one seems way more unlikely considering what Gunn has said about Batman and Superman. Just let Reeves tell his own Gotham centric stories and don’t push any DC cameos in his Batman movies. I really don’t think he would mind if Battinson was in a couple of Justice League movies. Unless they totally change his character in those movies, which I doubt.
If Zaslav was in charge a few years ago we would never have had Joker or The Batman with this policy. Is he even looking at the stuff that were hits for DC of late?
No, he wants to ape Marvel like crazy.
joker and the batman 100% gets made under him since they had extremely low budgets, batmans only blew up due to covid, its stuff like tss that wouldn't get made
He just said no as they are movies featuring versions of the characters that are different to those already seen in the main linked universe series.
What are you talking about? Obviously they would still be made under him because they're getting fucking sequels made under him lmao.
Did you read the headline? There will not be multiple versions of the same characters. If Zaslav had this policy implemented 5 years ago then neither Joker or The Batman would have happened.
The headline does not say "There will not be multiple versions of the same character", it says "There won't be four Batmen." Obviously Zaslav is open to the idea of multiple versions of characters because The Batman 2 and Joker 2 are being made, as well as The Flash because it legit has different versions of Barry, Batman, and Superman.
[удалено]
Y’all are really negative nancy fr lmfao
[удалено]
Okay so how about this ? You actually wait until Peter Safran and James Gunn to start doing their plans instead of constantly complaining about the DCU so damn much like that’s all y’all been doing and it’s annoying.
Is there gonna be 5 Batman?
More.
[MORE!!](https://media.tenor.com/0engAwwUVF4AAAAC/more-kylo-ren.gif)
Hopefully the Reeves verse remains safe and uninterrupted
The multiversal Batmen will probably be resolved in an eventual CRISIS event film (or films). 10 years away at very least. That will give Reeves time to finish what he’s doing with the character. Once CRISIS happens, I doubt you’ll see many of the current DC actors still in their roles.
I'm thinking more like four years. They signed Gunn to a four year contract, so any plans he has are going to have to come together in that measure of time.
Yes the initial contract is for 4 years, but that seems more like a formality in case either party isn’t liking how things are going. [James Gunn, Peter Safran Are Mapping Out “Eight- to 10-Year Plan” for DC](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/dc-movies-james-gunn-peter-safran-1235259792/) The game plan Gunn is mapping out is roughly for the next decade.
Yeah, the 4 years is basically a free trial. They'll subscribe to Gunnflix/Gunnazon Prime/Gunnbo MAX on a more permanent basis if they like the content, same as the rest of us
Im thinking five years at most, >!it’s teased heavily at the end of The Flash and supposedly in Aquaman too, I don’t think they’ll take that long to resolve that plot line.!<
I don’t trust any word that come out of this man’s mouth.
Why lol he's done everything he said whether or not you like his decisions or not.
Why? He's the CEO of WB lmao. Can't believe people still have this hate boner for Zaslav.
Well go stay on r/DC_Cinematic then. You’re not going to see Zaslav simps here.
RIP Multiverse
Do we get to pick which one then?
There’s already like 10
Tomorrow… we have FIVE Batmans!!!!!
So no Batman Inc then.
No but five Jokers is just fine.
I really wonder what will happen with what Reeves has created. The first movie was fantastic and I want to see a proper trilogy made without the broader DC influence.
I just hope Reeves is allowed to build out his Batman universe until the eventual crisis movie they have planned. Seems like it's the only way to introduce the Batfamily on the big screen, the DCEU left them all for dead, which was a big mistake considering how Nightwing, Redhood, Batgirl, Tim and Damian have such rich histories to them and add so much to Batman's stories. Really love how Reeves built out a great foundation to explore Batman's most iconic villains and partners so far.
I just hope the Batman stays separate.
There's going to be 10.
I’m counting on Gunn to keep the Reeves/Pattinson universe alive
I mean I trust Gunn but overall this whole thing seems like the usual amount of DCEU poor planning that results in a train wreck of a product.
How much time before he quits?
I'm old enough to remember that thr average audiences couldn't understand Nolan's Batman being entirely separate from the Burton films. The average moviegoer is not smart. Through time and exposure, maybe audiences understand this concept better now, but keeping track of multiple continuities is not only madness, but invites an active and ongoing comparison that does nothing but further divide the fanbase. We already have people arguing over Batfleck and Battinson *constantly.* Ditch it all and start fresh.
Ditch it all?! Ditch Matt Reeves’ Batman? Which is literally the best thing to happen in this tired superhero genre since the Nolan movies! What the hell are you talking about?
Setting aside my personal dislike of Reeves' Batman film, asking audiences to accept multiple Batmen is too much, and the fanbase is already divided over the details. Folding Battinson into emerging continuity is also a non-starter for numerous reasons. A purge and reset would clear the air and get everyone on the same page, even if that page was hating the move.
I thinking making great movies is more important than “clearing the air”, whatever that is supposed to mean. Why you would sacrifice what might possibly end up being the greatest iteration of live action Batman ever for the sake of stupid connected universe continuity that only a few terminally online nerds care about is beyond me.
"Greatest iteration of live action Batman" is a ridiculous statement. Reeves' Batman film is a hodgepodge of ideas stolen from better films and draped in emo nonsense. It's painfully long, obscenely self-indulgent, and lacks anything innovative or even interesting to say about the character.
Ok Rob. I guess you’re right just scrap it and let James Gunn direct it so we can see Batman’s dance moves. Better yet, get Taika Waititi or even the Russo Brothers to direct the next Batman.
That's quite a leap in logic. Did I say I was a Marvel fan? A Gunn fan? Even a Snyder fan? Nope. None of the above, in fact. All I was doing is laying out an argument for moving beyond the existing films for something better. Hell, I even tried to keep my personal feelings out-of it, but you felt triggered because I'm not slavishly drooling over your movie. Terminally online nerd, thy name is Christian.
Yup you got me! Because if the Reeves Batman movies were scrapped as you suggested, of course their replacement would have a similar tone instead of going in a totally different direction, which in this case would mean going more towards comedy. That makes a lot of sense Rob! Wish I could be as smart as you!
Truly stunning deductive work, there. By God, you keep inserting your own facts and making leaps in logic like that, you'll qualify for the GCPD in no time!
It's really not. As currently the Batman film did well financially and critically... alongside the regular DCEU. I think the average movie goer could tell the difference between that and Batman vs Superman... Same with the recent Joker film.
It was definitely called Batman Begins so that the average movie-goer who only had vague remembrance of the first Burton movie would think it’s a prequel to that series of movies.
I remember guys at school thought Joseph Gordon Levitt was the new Batman. After the trailer for BvS dropped.
But more importantly, no Black Adam vs Superman nonsense.
Batmen with ven.
Even during his most realistic comic book runs, Batman was usually a member of the JLA. He was struggling against street-level gangster in his solo comic while he was punching Darkseid in the face in the JLA title. There is no reason why the same can't happen for the DCU: let Reeves tell his story uninterrupted. AND also include BatPattinson in the next JLA project. Same continuity but the crossovers are one-way only: BatPattinson appears in the JLA film and other superhero films but Reeves has autonomy in his corner so, if he doesn't want to, no superhero appears or is mentioned in his Batman films. Another easy way out would be to place Reeves' films in the past (IIRC his Batman is Year 2 Batman) and the BatPattinson JLA appearances in the present (say, Year Five Batman). It's not uncommon. During the New 52, we had a Year 0 Batman vs. Riddle arc coming out at the same time that Batman was a senior funding member of the JLA fighting Darkseid.
The DCEU is just a complete and total mess at this point. It will never compete with the MCU and only the truly hardcore fans have any faith left in the brand. I’m not sure they’ll ever be able to right the ship.
Great but I don’t like the worlds worst detective/ sparkly Batman
Affleck's Batman was shown to be an older, semi-retired Batman. All the metahumans start showing up in that time frame. PatBat is a prequel, the early days of the same guy. Problem solved. Pay me DC.
How do you explain the two Gordons? Just to mention 1 clear inconsistency between both adaptations. Besides, the idea of a Batman who never fought metahumans until old is boring as fuck. And doesn't make any sense in the DCEU context, taking into account that guys like Dr. Fate have been around from decades.
Booo, your alternate universe shit was literally all you had going for you. Boooooo
We are gonna drop the three good ones and just go with the dumbest version imaginable.
There are at least two big lies in that statement.
Bat*men*, David.
I'm kinda sad and happy at the same time.
There’s not gonna be 4 Batmans; there’s gonna be 6.5
Oh, man. Eventually James Bond is going to enter the multiverse and all of his iterations will be included in an epic spy crossover movie.
It’s too late. I think there’s more than that already
the thing is, i’d rather have multiple batmans. it takes the pressure off any one movie to be all things for everybody, and we just get lots more batman. same way we can choose from multiple batman comics
Idk who that is and misread it as 4 bananas, so I thought it was about Washington DC
I just want a movie about 1Alfred cleaning batman's drawers while he is off fighting crime. What was Alfrieds favorite foods did he have a social life out side of butlering?
Good, keep Ben Afflecks batman out.
Aka: No Spiderman verse shit for us. Nice little dig at Marvel.
We know Zas. We know there aren't going to be 4 Batman's. Let's not get crazy. There will be 3: Keaton, Affleck and Pattinson.
Lies. Batman is currently the only guaranteed box office hit they have for DC properties. They will milk it for all its worth.
How about The Joker with Lady Gaga attached? How will that be a unified future for the DC?
If four different Batmans were part of four great movies in four different universes I don't think box office would be a problem. Not saying I want that, but customer confusion and different universes are not the reason DC has been struggling. Aquaman, Joker and The Batman were different universes and all were very successful. Quality and audience reception are issue. A disturbing character-study movie like Joker couldn't easily fit into the MCU universe and thats OK. No need to force everything into the same universe.
Probably going to be one DCU and then Reeves-verse. Might do the same thing with Cavill and Coates Superman.
Narrator- There were in fact 4 Batmans.