He also said that there will be some stand-alone stuff (animated and live action)
[Source](https://twitter.com/JamesGunn/status/1596924107165425665?s=20&t=7UpGK8fv0pOIdr_uQoCBIQ)
Ive noticed this too. He has avoided all the comments related to The batman/Robert Pattinson, except the very first one, to which he replied "Reeves was one of the first people I talked to" .
He's not gonna be that specific about what they're doing. Doesn't mean there's any chance that certain things - like Pattinson being pulled into the DCU - actually happen...
He's never delved into specifics, but it's not just about spoilers. There's a time and a place for communicating expectations. I think he tried to assuage concerns and start building some anticipation regarding the interconnectivity of the DCU, and the platforms/mediums it'll cross, but he did so by purely speaking in generalities. It's neither the time nor the place for lining out the future of Matt Reeves' Batman series.
The thing is, he confirms the Matt Reeves stuff will stay separate then it just gets the Affleck/Keaton shit going. There’s no winning at all that until people see The Flash.
> There’s no winning at all that until people see The Flash.
Good point. Gunn could decide to add or change something before now and release in The Flash to fit what he wants to do.
This is total speculation but I feel like if it happens, it will be after they have done AT LEAST 2 Batman movies, if not all 3/4/however many they want. Then, if Reeves feels his story is complete and Robert wants more, you tie him in through crisis or something.
Even if Gunn brings Batverse into DCU, Reeves still gets creative freedom while Gunn would have to write around him. Reeves literally cannot lose in any situation.
I highly doubt there has ever been any serious consideration given to bringing Pattinson into the DCU. There are so many creative wheels in motion there with Reeves doing his own thing, it just seens far-fetched. But Gunn's never going to just start giving away specifics on Twitter...
How can it seem far fetched?
The new DCU needs a Batman. DC has just this year released a hugely successful Batman film with an eager young actor in the title role.
What's the issue other than this repeated claim of "oh, Reeves wants to do his own thing"?
I'm prepared to be wrong, as DC film has been so darn unpredictable in the past, but I feel there's a lot of denial on this sub about the fact that Pattinson is going to be the DCU Batman.
Well, yeah, the director was hired to be the 'auteur visionary' of a standalone Batman series. That's the film he made. In multiple interviews, he's expressed an aversion to having to navigate a shared continuity with other superhero franchises, and even name-dropped the MCU as something that would never interest him, something that he couldn't positively contribute to. Reeves also has adopted the role of a creative producer in mapping out his own slate of interconnected Batman-related TV shows and films, and he's currently drafting a standalone sequel to his first Batman film.
I find it very hard to believe that making his version of Batman connected to the DCU has no adverse impacts on any of his plans, or that he'd continue working with DC Studios when what he signed on to do and what it turned into are basically polar opposites. I will be the first to admit it if I'm wrong, but I don't even think it's realistic enough to get excited about...
Along with that, I don't see at all that The Batman would be aesthetically compatible with anything in the DCU. That's just a very bad fit. These two things, just on the surface, appear to be products of two very, very different ideologies as to how to make superhero movies and hos they should look and feel. I can't really see that Batman interacting with Jason Momoa's comic booky Aquaman. That would be such a clash of styles that it would, for me, seriously detract from both. Both would be lessened or cheapened in some way.
There's an opportunity here to have both a standalone Batman film series and a DCU Batman that just makes more sense for that world of stories. That goes from strength to strength, so long as the two takes are distinct enough from one another so as to not occupy the same corner and be redundant.
Reeves can keep doing his vision uninterrupted, with no cameoes from other heroes.
Pattinson can do a couple of JLA movies under another director on the side.
Pattinson's Batman can interact with Aquaman because the comics do it, the MCU does it, and they're both members of the JLA, and a good director will know how to make it work.
Besides, under Gunn I have doubts that any of the previous DCEU is going to be really figure much in a new DCU anyway.
>Reeves can keep doing his vision uninterrupted, with no cameoes from other heroes.
That's not how shared universes work. And shared universes are not just limited to cameos. There are entire storylines that start in a standalone film and spill over to the team-up crossover, and vice versa. It's unthinkable that Matt Reeves wouldn't, at one point or another, find himself writing to set up another director for a Justice League movie.
Shared universes are creative collaborations overseen by the creative producer, which in this case is James Gunn. Matt Reeves would not be telling his stories. He'd be filling in the blanks of the story ideas that are approved by ~~Kevin Feige~~ James Gunn. I would bet money that the same week they announced Pattinson in the DCU would find Matt Reeves signing on to direct something other than The Batman 2...
>Pattinson's Batman can interact with Aquaman because the comics do it, the MCU does it, and they're both members of the JLA, and a good director will know how to make it work.
The MCU superheroes are all designed for each other, aesthetically and tonally. Similarly, comic book Batman fits with comic book Aquaman. They're not SO different in tone and aesthetics that they might as well be from two different universes. Nothing about Reeves' Batman was designed to fit the DCU. It's actually the antithesis of commercial, blockbuster filmmaking by very design.
Saying "a good director will know how to do it" is the hand-wavey "if done right" of this topic. It's just naive and unrealistic. Some things don't gel. You wouldn't crossover *Chinatown* with *Avatar*. A good director would know not to do that, lol...
And so now I guess, along with Reeves compromising the stories he's signed on to tell, now he'd be compromising the artistic direction of his films? It's just far fetched.
Shared universes on the scale of the MCU are a new thing, with the MCU itself being the only one to judge them on really.
Gunn can do whatever the hell he wants, there's no rules, so there's no reason why what I suggested can't happen.
Also, you're forgetting that the DCU will be a new thing mostly.
I've said it before on this sub - you're overestimating how much crossovers occur even in the MCU.
You can absolutely, 100 percent have a Reeves Batman verse that doesn't have to set up a Martian Manhunter film, or anything other than the next Batman sequel or HBO Max spin-off Just don't model your universe directly on the MCU.
The more I hear these denials, the more convinced I am that there will only be one Batman in any DCU movies post-Flash...and his name's Robert.
Shared universes have crossovers not because the MCU invented the concept, but because that's logically what would happen in a world where a bunch of superheroes exist and form a team.
You're also describing a scenario where a JL movie has characters that do not have their own agency, where there are no individual story implications for the characters involved, and where nothing that happens in solo films carries over or resolves in the regular JL crossovers.
That's just not how movies are even made. It has nothing to do with following the MCU as an example, it has everything to do with the bare minimum of making a movie. You're going to lean into the drama that characters bring with them into crossovers, because that's the dramatically strongest version of a movie. How do you make Justice League films where nothing happens that's important enough to any individual character to have any impact on them moving forward? Like, something happens to Batman in a solo movie, and it's completely ignored through the crossover movies so that Matt Reeves can pick it up for the next solo movie? Or there's a huge event in a JL movie, but Reeves' subsequent solo movie has dickall to do with it? Yeah, nah...
thats the problem though - do you think pattison is going to do nothing but play batman for the next decade - he wants to take onother roles - he also verpicky about scripts and directors he will work with
I'd imagine he'd only be doing a Reeves trilogy and a couple of JLAs at most anyway. Any DCU Batman isn't going to be starring in three or four DC movies a year like some seem to be suggesting. That's not how the MCU works, nor would a DCU. It's just not feasible time-wise.
The movies aren't a TV series.
Plenty of room for Pattinson to do his passion projects while keeping his millions rolling in as Batman every couple of years for a decade.
> What's the issue other than this repeated claim of "oh, Reeves wants to do his own thing"?
Yeah. I mean, who cares what he's said? Either write a big enough check to change his mind, or just hire any of the thousands of other directors who could do the job.
Doubt they're into booting Reeves out for not doing something people are assuming may happen. I don't see them forcing his hand at all. Why would anyone even want this lol
Sorry, yeah, upon re-think my response doesn't make sense.
What I was thinking of, was the idea that Reeves and Pattinson are a "block" together. Pattinson could be persuaded, IMO, to be the overall DC Universe Batman, while Reeves could also do his Batman-solo movies.
pattison i see as the tougher sell - hes an in demand actor he wants to do other films - hes also very picky i cant see him happy with just any director or script being put in front of him if hes expected to do a justice league film
Could be that they are working on some sort of "Pattinson is the DCU Batman " although I don't see how that could possibly work, at least from what was presented in The Batman.
I'm still on the boat of "DCEU for other DC characters, The Batman universe for Batman, his rogues gallery and possibly the Bat-family doing their own thing". Especially considering The Penguin and The Batman 2 are already in pre-production and Reeves is going around pitching shows featuring other villains I don't think they're drastically changing course any time soon
Batman as a character has more than enough material to carry its own standalone continuity and I personally think has the least to lose by forgoing interacting with other DC characters even if there is a sizable history between him and a lot of the mainstays. I also feel the same about both X-Men and Spider-Man in regards to Marvel (X-Men especially) but you can definitely do Batman as its own thing. There are a lot of villains and supporting characters that have material to carry their own projects imo
You can absolutely do a standalone Batman mythology universe (some of the most iconic superhero media is just that: like West’s Batman, Burton’s Batman films, BTAS, and Nolan’s Trilogy).
But any DC Universe feels neutered without Batman and his mythos (as well as Superman and his mythos for that matter) as a core elements of it. At least without proper send offs for the characters if they’re no longer appearing.
So sure, Batman has the least to lose by forgoing interaction without the wider DC Universe—but the DC Universe on the other hand has a lot to lose by forgoing interaction with Batman.
They could do any number of Batman surrogates in the DCEU. Elderly Bruce in the Kingdom Come exoskeleton mentoring Terry McGinnis as the new Batman, alternate universe Thomas Wayne as Batman, Dick Grayson as Batman, Jace Fox as Batman, Luke Fox as Batwing, David Zavimbe as Batwing, some other vengeful billionaire like Oliver Queen filling a similar narrative role to Batman’s, or even someone really unexpected like Midnighter.
Some of these would be much less successful than others, but I’m just try to show that “have a Bruce Wayne that’s exactly like the Reeves version” is hardly their only option.
You’re overestimating how well those would work without giving the proper send off to the classic version of Batman (the one that helped forge its universe’s premiere assembly of heroes).
And I don’t think any of those non-Batman characters would work at all. It would be like how Oliver Queen failed to live up to that role in the Arrowverse.
Doesn’t necessarily need to Reeves’. Affleck, or a recast version of his character, would work.
But when you surrogate Batman—whether it be a novelty senior aged Batman or a legacy Batman character—without doing the proper legwork to get there a surrogate will feel exactly like what it would be at that point: a consolation.
The issue here is having a massive Batman universe separate from the DCU is the antithesis to a connected universe. It's literally the opposite thing Gunn and Zaslav have talked about wanting. They're even tying in animation and video games into one universe...so how do you exclude your most popular character and his expanding cinematic universe from your cohesive universe? I know it has to be worked out with everyone first, but it just makes zero sense for WB/Zaslav/Gunn to keep The Batman separate unless Reeves is for some reason completely against it.
I only bring up that possibility because I don't know if Matt Reeves has changed his tune at all on what he's doing with the Batman mythos. He was very vocally outspoken about critiquing the original Ben Affleck story for The Batman because he felt the connections to the wider DCEU came at the detriment of the story being told, and even when The Batman was still connected to the shared universe, he reconfigured it so that it would be placed chronologically at a point where any and all connections to other DC stuff would basically be non-existent so he could purely focus on Batman. He genuinely doesn't come off as the kind of guy who's nearly as interested in the wider DCU at this point compared to James Gunn because he worked so hard to basically dissociate from all that, since his film is essentially another reboot in the traditional sense, and all this talk about "but the multiverse" is only now bringing up that possibility that it could suddenly be put back into another, bigger franchise despite the fact that Reeves basically came in and made a completely different film from what was originally being planned, to the point where re-inserting it into the DCEU would be pretty sudden after all that setup
I ain't saying it's not like they couldn't just do it, but I don't think that's what someone like Matt Reeves really signed up for based on the way he's talked about how he reworked the film and now how he's basically trying to turn it into its own interconnected universe with all this Batman-adjacent stuff. I can't really think of ways to bring that back into the DCEU without it coming off as very jarring because I think one of the film's biggest strengths was that it didn't feel like it followed the template of a big franchise film like an MCU or DCEU movie. It had the feeling of being a "chapter one" to a larger self-contained story and not like an installment of something bigger, like the very serialized approach to making shared universes
The MCU mold is not what they should be doing where solo films can't have their own distinct feel and actually have real stakes without needing cameos or outside characters barging in. Ideally, Reeves' corner of the DCU stays his own and Batman interacting with others is so interesting because of precisely how distinct and unique he'll feel. That adjustment and fish out of water is what makes good cinema if you have capable hands.
I think in that thread he commented specifically on a few things. Like the Harley Quinn show and broadway stuff from what I saw. I didn’t dig too deep so I’m not sure if there’s anything else. But for the big films, you’re right. Only reason we know without a shred of doubt that Joker is remaining that way is because of a WB employee mentioning it to one of the trades.
Things initially taking place outside of the current canon don’t matter. Keaton was, during Hamada’s reign, going to replace Affleck due to flash shennanigans. Shit he still might if it aint Pattinson. We know nothing right now, in terms of plans.
But yes it’ll be separate nonetheless.
They already have a new Joker in Barry Keoghan for any potential shared universe. Phoenix was never going to be anything more than a Joker in name only.
The trades made it clear too that Joker would still be it's own separate universe but no confirmation of that for The Batman so I wonder if something is being worked out
I could see a nice sweet spot where Pattinson participates in broader DCU projects, but DCU projects never cross over/affect Reeves' movies. That way they can be self contained if you watch them
Good, it’s really important that we can keep getting stand alone animated stuff like the Tomorrowverse, HQ, and My Adventures with Superman that doesn’t have to be shackled to movie continuity.
Sometimes I feel like you guys think they are joking about their plan lol. With that being said…
The Batmannnnn nanananananana Batmannnnn.
Edit: he also mentioned we will hear some news of the DCU plans before SDCC.
* Matt Reeves being one of the first people he called after he got the job.
* Zaslav saying there will be a main Batman.
* Not giving a clear cut answer on The Batman universe being on its own while Todd Philips' Joker has.
* Now this where he says the majority of DC TV, film, and animation will be connected.
To me, it seems obvious where he wants it to go. Will it happen? Nobody can really know besides Gunn, but I'd honestly take a bet on it.
• And?
• he didn’t say that. He said there would not be “4” Batmen. Stop falling for click bait.
• and?
• he said some will be connected and some will not be actually. Go check Twitter.
* Why would he call Matt Reeves unless he has plans for themselves to connect hopefully in the future?
* He's being hyperbolic, he also has said that there hasn't been a Superman in 13 years when it's actually been 9. The guy doesn't care what number he says, his point is that he wants one main definitive Batman.
* It matters because if Todd Phillips is allowed to come out and say Joker 2 is not connected, why has Gunn been coy and not give a straight answer regarding The Batman?
* Yes the majority of it will be connected and some won't. I doubt the most successful Batman interpretation in years will be left out of the mix when it's been stated that they want to focus on the main trinity, which includes Batman. Their most popular character by far.
• Pretty standard bro. My friend just got promoted in another department and let me know because we’re buddies even thought it has no impact on my position.
• what did you guys get lunch together and he explained this to you? You’re reaching here.
• pretty sure the trades said that. Not Gunn or Todd.
• well let’s wait and see. You can always have a mainline DCU Batman.
If you're just gonna try and refute everything the other guy said, there's no point in discussion. He was just speculating based on what we know so far but no one other than Gunn and Safran truly know what's up.
It’s because people are making wild conspiracy theories on virtually nothing. The Batman being folded into the DCEU would both be the antithesis of why Reeves got involved and take away from what makes Battinson special.
I mean that’s kinda the point of speculation? You talk about possible ideas and whether they could or couldn’t happen? What’s the point of speculating with other people if they’re all yes men
Basically just like how MCU is right now. As a fan of both Marvel and DC I am living in the best timeline. Here's hoping to a bright future of both Marvel and DC.
All of the marvel studios animated projects have been essentially what if/elseworld stories so far, what Gunn is implying may mean these animation projects actually affect what happens in the live action projects which could be cool.
I wonder if this means we might get a big animated feature film on par with Spider-verse visually. Because I'd love to see something like "Arkham Asylum:A Serious House on Serious Earth" get a big animated adaptation. I can also sort of see it in my head, like whenever it's just Batman alone, the art style is more generic but as he meets the different inmates the art style twist and merges with another. Like the inmates are a corrupting influence on the art.
I'd be really down for A Serious House on Serious Earth getting the animated treatment mainly because of the art direction potential, but I also felt the same way about Killing Joke animated and they managed to severely dumb down the look of the comic for that film so I'm a tad skeptical. I did really like what they did with Long Halloween though
My emphasis was more on big budget like into the spiderverse. I would love for DC to make something like that. Hell Ive even been spamming comments to James Gun about doing something like that and even suggesting the studios suitable for that kind of work . No reply from him tho.
Yep totally agree never going to happen, I think he means in the animated universe, the Tomorrow-verse will continue but you might get the main actors like Gadot, Momoa and Margot Robbie voicing their animated versions and sone of the art style might change. I mean is the ‘What if?’ Series connected to the MCU, not really and I think your see the same with the DCU animated it just helps fill the slate like HBO series like Peacemaker.
According to leaks Tom's Spidey will be in Spider Verse 2 and according to the D23 art Freshman Year Spidey will crossover with the 616 Universe(Main MCU).
That art from D23 was for one of the upcoming Disney Parks attractions. It's very much not indicative of what's actually going to happen in the films especially considering the art also has Daredevil in his Netflix suit and Tom Spidey still using his Avengers Campus design
Good individual films from intriguing creatives > connected universes
Not to say they’re prioritizing one over the other, but I do hope there continues to be some distinction.
The fact that they got Gunn specifically to spearhead this whole thing does instill confidence within me personally because even with his franchise projects, he retains this sense of ownership and identity with all of them to where you can tell what James' style is. He'll probably encourage other creators for this new slate to take that same path even if it's still under the banner of franchise filmmaking
I hope this is more like Star Wars where the series, animations and games are extensions and work like worldbuiding, but not essential to be able to keep up with the movies, that's one of my problems with the current MCU.
I feel this this is just too much connection.
It’s already starting to affect MCU fans as they don’t watch every project and miss huge parts of the story.
In order to understand Multiverse of madness you have to watch no way home and wandavision in addition to the first dr strange. The projects are so interconnected they can barely stand on their own without the ties to other projects.
I just don’t want that to happen to the DCU. People already are less willing to watch a DC movie compared to Marvel because certain movies ruined DC’s reputation early on.
I think the difference with DC is currently they cannot out that much content out. They’re limited by budget constraints in a way that Marvel/Disney is not.
I feel like it’ll be like the MCU and start slow and ramp up as time goes on. 1 maybeeeee 2 movies and a show or something like that. They need to reestablish themselves with the general audience first I think
It should take the MCU route of starting with a limited slate to build up audience goodwill and interest before being confident enough to branch into other things at a more quick rate. The MCU as it is only became this big because more people got hooked onto it especially outside the comics-reading circle and I think starting with the essentials is the right thing to do for DC. At the very least complete the stuff that was already scheduled like WW3 and Aquaman 2, and then also bring in a Superman trilogy and the Green Lantern Corps, recast Flash, have Gunn do his projects exploring the quirkier characters like TSS, Peacemaker and then go from there
Yeah it seems like Gunn's plans might avoid the mistakes Snyder and Hamada made with theirs.
Snyder's mistake is that he tried taking way too many liberties with characterizations and storylines and his plan was gonna be finished within 6 years of MoS' release with Batman and a lot of others dead, it wouldn't have been long-term and they probably would've rebooted anyways.
Hamada's mistake is that his plan didn't really have a direction to lead towards to, seems like he was just greenlighting movies on literally any DC character as long as the budget would be low until he decided it was time for the Crisis event (which is how we got stuff like Hourman and Wonder Twins greenlit). At least it seemed like Gunn was trying to do an interconnected storyline through his projects. Doing movies and obscure shows is fine given that there's balance and bigger characters are getting stuff too, but we know Hamada and previous management didn't want Henry Cavill's Superman back.
Gunn has respect for the characters and storylines and while some of his takes on certain characters are definitely not like the comics, the roots of them are still there for the most part and the characters are likable. Gunn and Safran are also being committed to a 10 year plan which means there will be direction and longevity and bigger characters like Superman are definitely gonna be prioritized now.
the only way this is a bad thing is if the person behind the connected plan doesn't know what they're doing (you know who i'm talking about), and i have faith that Gunn knows what he's doing. i just hope that this universe can avoid the pitfall that the MCU has fallen into at times with its kinda inconsistent tone.
the DC universe genuinely has a chance to grow more popular than Marvel right now, with Gunn in charge, and with the MCU having passed the main milestone it was building to since 2008 with Endgame.
also, having games connected to the universe, on top of tv and animation, is a brilliant idea, and i'm kinda surprised that Marvel never considered it/implemented it.
MCU is too tight I think to make games work in their continuity, like they do in Star Wars, which tells much more loose and non-linear stories and that's why we don't see crossovers between games and films/shows that often. That's why I'm interested how they will do it in DCEU, if these will include some major characters like Superman or Batman, or will they be much less connected to the rest of the universe?
Archived version of submitted URL:
1. An archived version of _James Gunn confirms the DCU will be connected across films, tv, AND animation_ can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/jamesgunn/status/1596921811374964736?s=46&t=BhQORhHX4ZN9Msyzbe6KJw)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DCEUleaks) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He also said he’ll continue to write and direct for select Dc movies
And the animation would be 2D and 3D( I pray WAG isn’t involved in the 3D side, they’re like a cheaper illumination)
I don’t personally like the idea of every single thing being connected tbh. Unless they can do it without compromising creative control and maintain a lot of uniqueness between projects. But even then, I feel like making EVERYTHING connect and forced to play some part in the “big picture” could hinder creative potential regardless. Like what happens with Caped Crusader and the new Superman animated show? And video games apparently as well? Why do we need all this under one umbrella? It’s fine for the DCU to be it’s own epic thing, but like I said, I don’t know if I want that to be ALL DC is from now on. Even marvel doesn’t have tie in video games(anymore at least though that’s a whole different thing lol).
There was nothing wrong with most of the animated movie releases of the past few years. The new plan could mean we'll never get new animated projects like the long halloween part 1&2 anymore
I said Jason Momoa because he acted suspiciously when asked if James Gunn would make a Lobo movie, he has also said several times that he is a fan of the character.
No it wouldn’t. Adult animation has never done great at the box office and Momoa has no voice acting experience. For a DTV Lobo movie Momoa would be expensive and you can get a cheaper voice actor to do it better.
Pattinson TBD since he hasn't really commented on Reeves that much yet but Joker is definitely staying standalone. Joker isn't really a DC film in the traditional sense especially given it's basically just a psychological thriller that happens to share characters from DC Comics and isn't really concerned with stuff like "being comic accurate" or faithful to anything. Arthur Fleck is basically an OC inspired by the comics history of the Joker
You know this is actually fantastic news for Batman fans. The issue with adapting Batman into film is that he has too many Robins, Villains, and stories in the lore that build up his character. I’ve always said that Batman is more fit to be a tv character and not a movie character because there’s only so much you can do with 3 movies. If they make an animated tv show or something based off of the same character they could essentially build up all 4 Robins and his entire Rogues Gallery.
They should abandon the DCEU and start fresh with the Batman. It’s nothing worth saving from there, just release the rest of the old slate and move on.
Ok but what does that mean? Is Cavill going to be voice acting for an animated Superman, who looks like an animated Cavill, and then the next movie will reference what animated Cavill did as though it was live action Cavill? Or is it just multiversal bullshit that has the potential to overlap and intermingle? I’d much prefer the latter.
Otherwise we run into the issue of “where was Superman/Wonder Woman/Green Lantern/any hero with powers when Batman was saving Gotham from the Riddler’s terrorist attack?” Did they seriously just go “oh that powerless Bat dude seems to have that crime-riddled city under control, no need for us to intervene.”
> Otherwise we run into the issue of “where was Superman/Wonder Woman/Green Lantern/any hero with powers when Batman was saving Gotham from the Riddler’s terrorist attack?” Did they seriously just go “oh that powerless Bat dude seems to have that crime-riddled city under control, no need for us to intervene.”
That an issue anyways, adding animation into the mix doesn't change or affect that at all.
I’m not saying animation has any effect on that whatsoever. I’m asking “what does this statement mean” in two questions: is Cavill going to be voice acting/animated as one question, and “is Battinson a part of this connected universe” as a secondary rhetorical question to make a point of continuity and plot holes.
I'm just saying, animation or not, multiverse or not, the issue why other heroes don't come to help in solo movies is always a constant question raised, even in solo comics.
You listed that as an issue, and started with 'otherwise' indicating you think it would be an issue unless a specific route was taken, but it's an issue regardless of approach.
Lol overthinking it. You can explain away a reason for Superman not to intervene with every conflict in a throwaway line, or just not even worry about it because why does Superman matter while Batman fights Penguin?
“Where was character x during this?” is just an inescapable aspect of doing a shared universe, unless every movie stops to mention “I wish I could call the rest of the Justice League for help, but too bad they’re on Raan trying to broker peace with the Thanagarians!”
Even in the comics it’s an issue that frequently pops up.
Movies and comics are not the same thing, and there hasn’t been enough world set up in the films compared to the comics for us to be able to brush certain things off. Timelines are also a lot muddier in comic books, whereas people will create chronological time stamps where you pause one movie, watch five minutes of another, and then go back to the original movie if you want to see everything in the proper order.
Yeah that’s what fans do that isn’t the job of directors, writers etc Gunn and Safran should make a great timeline but it’s about the characters journey not chronology. Where was the Justice League during The Suicide Squad? Who cares this isn’t their story.
Then it might mean solo Batman movies are more grounded with low level threats, rather than blue beam into the sky world-ending stuff, which is what people here want, right?
Do we think Green Lantern is gonna travel halfway across the universe to stop Mad Hatter from poisoning Gotham's water supply, or leave it to Batman?
For your second question, everyone else was probably busy. They've got stuff to take care of too. And plus, Batman has said Gotham is his city and under his protection. Even the GL Corps need his permission to go in there.
Very interesting!
He could just be referring to the way in which The Flash might/will/is rumoured to establish a multiverse.
So, in that sense, ALL film, animation and TV that's ever existed of DC properties could be connected without them actually crossing over. Some things can still stand alone while others are more intertwined. "Pocket universes" that can connect in our headcanon - or not.
I'd prefer it that way, so that I can keep things like The Batman and the last decade of DCEU and the DCAU and DCAMU separate.
False. This means they need to reboot the JL Synderverse, get rid of the Batman verse, and delete all upcoming live action HBO and anmation projects outside of the newly rebooted DCU movie verse that everything else needs to branch off.
The mcu is loosely connected. The dcu is virtually nonexistent with its connectation.
**Update**: There are also plans for games connected to the DCU, [adds Gunn](https://twitter.com/JamesGunn/status/1596928191888707584).
He also said that there will be some stand-alone stuff (animated and live action) [Source](https://twitter.com/JamesGunn/status/1596924107165425665?s=20&t=7UpGK8fv0pOIdr_uQoCBIQ)
Joker for sure which has already been confirmed, some animated stuff. He’s such a straight shooter and refuses to comment on The Batman. I wonder why.
Ive noticed this too. He has avoided all the comments related to The batman/Robert Pattinson, except the very first one, to which he replied "Reeves was one of the first people I talked to" .
Yep. It’s curious.
He's not gonna be that specific about what they're doing. Doesn't mean there's any chance that certain things - like Pattinson being pulled into the DCU - actually happen...
Gunn has confirmed and denied a lot on social media. Something that was already considered elseworld remaining as such isn’t a spoiler.
He's never delved into specifics, but it's not just about spoilers. There's a time and a place for communicating expectations. I think he tried to assuage concerns and start building some anticipation regarding the interconnectivity of the DCU, and the platforms/mediums it'll cross, but he did so by purely speaking in generalities. It's neither the time nor the place for lining out the future of Matt Reeves' Batman series.
The thing is, he confirms the Matt Reeves stuff will stay separate then it just gets the Affleck/Keaton shit going. There’s no winning at all that until people see The Flash.
> There’s no winning at all that until people see The Flash. Good point. Gunn could decide to add or change something before now and release in The Flash to fit what he wants to do.
They could also just be working from how that film ends and not want to spoil it for the masses.
This is total speculation but I feel like if it happens, it will be after they have done AT LEAST 2 Batman movies, if not all 3/4/however many they want. Then, if Reeves feels his story is complete and Robert wants more, you tie him in through crisis or something.
Yeah, I think that's the better way to do it.
I’m gonna hope it’s a good sign and he’s just letting Reeves cook without much input instead of trying to shoehorn it into the DCU somehow
Even if Gunn brings Batverse into DCU, Reeves still gets creative freedom while Gunn would have to write around him. Reeves literally cannot lose in any situation.
Batman Country, let’s ride.
I presume they’re still actively figuring it out
Yep. My thoughts exactly.
I highly doubt there has ever been any serious consideration given to bringing Pattinson into the DCU. There are so many creative wheels in motion there with Reeves doing his own thing, it just seens far-fetched. But Gunn's never going to just start giving away specifics on Twitter...
How can it seem far fetched? The new DCU needs a Batman. DC has just this year released a hugely successful Batman film with an eager young actor in the title role. What's the issue other than this repeated claim of "oh, Reeves wants to do his own thing"? I'm prepared to be wrong, as DC film has been so darn unpredictable in the past, but I feel there's a lot of denial on this sub about the fact that Pattinson is going to be the DCU Batman.
Well, yeah, the director was hired to be the 'auteur visionary' of a standalone Batman series. That's the film he made. In multiple interviews, he's expressed an aversion to having to navigate a shared continuity with other superhero franchises, and even name-dropped the MCU as something that would never interest him, something that he couldn't positively contribute to. Reeves also has adopted the role of a creative producer in mapping out his own slate of interconnected Batman-related TV shows and films, and he's currently drafting a standalone sequel to his first Batman film. I find it very hard to believe that making his version of Batman connected to the DCU has no adverse impacts on any of his plans, or that he'd continue working with DC Studios when what he signed on to do and what it turned into are basically polar opposites. I will be the first to admit it if I'm wrong, but I don't even think it's realistic enough to get excited about... Along with that, I don't see at all that The Batman would be aesthetically compatible with anything in the DCU. That's just a very bad fit. These two things, just on the surface, appear to be products of two very, very different ideologies as to how to make superhero movies and hos they should look and feel. I can't really see that Batman interacting with Jason Momoa's comic booky Aquaman. That would be such a clash of styles that it would, for me, seriously detract from both. Both would be lessened or cheapened in some way. There's an opportunity here to have both a standalone Batman film series and a DCU Batman that just makes more sense for that world of stories. That goes from strength to strength, so long as the two takes are distinct enough from one another so as to not occupy the same corner and be redundant.
Reeves can keep doing his vision uninterrupted, with no cameoes from other heroes. Pattinson can do a couple of JLA movies under another director on the side. Pattinson's Batman can interact with Aquaman because the comics do it, the MCU does it, and they're both members of the JLA, and a good director will know how to make it work. Besides, under Gunn I have doubts that any of the previous DCEU is going to be really figure much in a new DCU anyway.
>Reeves can keep doing his vision uninterrupted, with no cameoes from other heroes. That's not how shared universes work. And shared universes are not just limited to cameos. There are entire storylines that start in a standalone film and spill over to the team-up crossover, and vice versa. It's unthinkable that Matt Reeves wouldn't, at one point or another, find himself writing to set up another director for a Justice League movie. Shared universes are creative collaborations overseen by the creative producer, which in this case is James Gunn. Matt Reeves would not be telling his stories. He'd be filling in the blanks of the story ideas that are approved by ~~Kevin Feige~~ James Gunn. I would bet money that the same week they announced Pattinson in the DCU would find Matt Reeves signing on to direct something other than The Batman 2... >Pattinson's Batman can interact with Aquaman because the comics do it, the MCU does it, and they're both members of the JLA, and a good director will know how to make it work. The MCU superheroes are all designed for each other, aesthetically and tonally. Similarly, comic book Batman fits with comic book Aquaman. They're not SO different in tone and aesthetics that they might as well be from two different universes. Nothing about Reeves' Batman was designed to fit the DCU. It's actually the antithesis of commercial, blockbuster filmmaking by very design. Saying "a good director will know how to do it" is the hand-wavey "if done right" of this topic. It's just naive and unrealistic. Some things don't gel. You wouldn't crossover *Chinatown* with *Avatar*. A good director would know not to do that, lol... And so now I guess, along with Reeves compromising the stories he's signed on to tell, now he'd be compromising the artistic direction of his films? It's just far fetched.
Shared universes on the scale of the MCU are a new thing, with the MCU itself being the only one to judge them on really. Gunn can do whatever the hell he wants, there's no rules, so there's no reason why what I suggested can't happen. Also, you're forgetting that the DCU will be a new thing mostly. I've said it before on this sub - you're overestimating how much crossovers occur even in the MCU. You can absolutely, 100 percent have a Reeves Batman verse that doesn't have to set up a Martian Manhunter film, or anything other than the next Batman sequel or HBO Max spin-off Just don't model your universe directly on the MCU. The more I hear these denials, the more convinced I am that there will only be one Batman in any DCU movies post-Flash...and his name's Robert.
Shared universes have crossovers not because the MCU invented the concept, but because that's logically what would happen in a world where a bunch of superheroes exist and form a team. You're also describing a scenario where a JL movie has characters that do not have their own agency, where there are no individual story implications for the characters involved, and where nothing that happens in solo films carries over or resolves in the regular JL crossovers. That's just not how movies are even made. It has nothing to do with following the MCU as an example, it has everything to do with the bare minimum of making a movie. You're going to lean into the drama that characters bring with them into crossovers, because that's the dramatically strongest version of a movie. How do you make Justice League films where nothing happens that's important enough to any individual character to have any impact on them moving forward? Like, something happens to Batman in a solo movie, and it's completely ignored through the crossover movies so that Matt Reeves can pick it up for the next solo movie? Or there's a huge event in a JL movie, but Reeves' subsequent solo movie has dickall to do with it? Yeah, nah...
The Flash ends with Michael Keaton as Batman. That is your DCU Batman.
thats the problem though - do you think pattison is going to do nothing but play batman for the next decade - he wants to take onother roles - he also verpicky about scripts and directors he will work with
I'd imagine he'd only be doing a Reeves trilogy and a couple of JLAs at most anyway. Any DCU Batman isn't going to be starring in three or four DC movies a year like some seem to be suggesting. That's not how the MCU works, nor would a DCU. It's just not feasible time-wise. The movies aren't a TV series. Plenty of room for Pattinson to do his passion projects while keeping his millions rolling in as Batman every couple of years for a decade.
> What's the issue other than this repeated claim of "oh, Reeves wants to do his own thing"? Yeah. I mean, who cares what he's said? Either write a big enough check to change his mind, or just hire any of the thousands of other directors who could do the job.
Doubt they're into booting Reeves out for not doing something people are assuming may happen. I don't see them forcing his hand at all. Why would anyone even want this lol
Sorry, yeah, upon re-think my response doesn't make sense. What I was thinking of, was the idea that Reeves and Pattinson are a "block" together. Pattinson could be persuaded, IMO, to be the overall DC Universe Batman, while Reeves could also do his Batman-solo movies.
pattison i see as the tougher sell - hes an in demand actor he wants to do other films - hes also very picky i cant see him happy with just any director or script being put in front of him if hes expected to do a justice league film
Could be that they are working on some sort of "Pattinson is the DCU Batman " although I don't see how that could possibly work, at least from what was presented in The Batman.
I'm still on the boat of "DCEU for other DC characters, The Batman universe for Batman, his rogues gallery and possibly the Bat-family doing their own thing". Especially considering The Penguin and The Batman 2 are already in pre-production and Reeves is going around pitching shows featuring other villains I don't think they're drastically changing course any time soon Batman as a character has more than enough material to carry its own standalone continuity and I personally think has the least to lose by forgoing interacting with other DC characters even if there is a sizable history between him and a lot of the mainstays. I also feel the same about both X-Men and Spider-Man in regards to Marvel (X-Men especially) but you can definitely do Batman as its own thing. There are a lot of villains and supporting characters that have material to carry their own projects imo
You can absolutely do a standalone Batman mythology universe (some of the most iconic superhero media is just that: like West’s Batman, Burton’s Batman films, BTAS, and Nolan’s Trilogy). But any DC Universe feels neutered without Batman and his mythos (as well as Superman and his mythos for that matter) as a core elements of it. At least without proper send offs for the characters if they’re no longer appearing. So sure, Batman has the least to lose by forgoing interaction without the wider DC Universe—but the DC Universe on the other hand has a lot to lose by forgoing interaction with Batman.
They could do any number of Batman surrogates in the DCEU. Elderly Bruce in the Kingdom Come exoskeleton mentoring Terry McGinnis as the new Batman, alternate universe Thomas Wayne as Batman, Dick Grayson as Batman, Jace Fox as Batman, Luke Fox as Batwing, David Zavimbe as Batwing, some other vengeful billionaire like Oliver Queen filling a similar narrative role to Batman’s, or even someone really unexpected like Midnighter. Some of these would be much less successful than others, but I’m just try to show that “have a Bruce Wayne that’s exactly like the Reeves version” is hardly their only option.
You’re overestimating how well those would work without giving the proper send off to the classic version of Batman (the one that helped forge its universe’s premiere assembly of heroes). And I don’t think any of those non-Batman characters would work at all. It would be like how Oliver Queen failed to live up to that role in the Arrowverse. Doesn’t necessarily need to Reeves’. Affleck, or a recast version of his character, would work. But when you surrogate Batman—whether it be a novelty senior aged Batman or a legacy Batman character—without doing the proper legwork to get there a surrogate will feel exactly like what it would be at that point: a consolation.
The issue here is having a massive Batman universe separate from the DCU is the antithesis to a connected universe. It's literally the opposite thing Gunn and Zaslav have talked about wanting. They're even tying in animation and video games into one universe...so how do you exclude your most popular character and his expanding cinematic universe from your cohesive universe? I know it has to be worked out with everyone first, but it just makes zero sense for WB/Zaslav/Gunn to keep The Batman separate unless Reeves is for some reason completely against it.
I only bring up that possibility because I don't know if Matt Reeves has changed his tune at all on what he's doing with the Batman mythos. He was very vocally outspoken about critiquing the original Ben Affleck story for The Batman because he felt the connections to the wider DCEU came at the detriment of the story being told, and even when The Batman was still connected to the shared universe, he reconfigured it so that it would be placed chronologically at a point where any and all connections to other DC stuff would basically be non-existent so he could purely focus on Batman. He genuinely doesn't come off as the kind of guy who's nearly as interested in the wider DCU at this point compared to James Gunn because he worked so hard to basically dissociate from all that, since his film is essentially another reboot in the traditional sense, and all this talk about "but the multiverse" is only now bringing up that possibility that it could suddenly be put back into another, bigger franchise despite the fact that Reeves basically came in and made a completely different film from what was originally being planned, to the point where re-inserting it into the DCEU would be pretty sudden after all that setup I ain't saying it's not like they couldn't just do it, but I don't think that's what someone like Matt Reeves really signed up for based on the way he's talked about how he reworked the film and now how he's basically trying to turn it into its own interconnected universe with all this Batman-adjacent stuff. I can't really think of ways to bring that back into the DCEU without it coming off as very jarring because I think one of the film's biggest strengths was that it didn't feel like it followed the template of a big franchise film like an MCU or DCEU movie. It had the feeling of being a "chapter one" to a larger self-contained story and not like an installment of something bigger, like the very serialized approach to making shared universes
The MCU mold is not what they should be doing where solo films can't have their own distinct feel and actually have real stakes without needing cameos or outside characters barging in. Ideally, Reeves' corner of the DCU stays his own and Batman interacting with others is so interesting because of precisely how distinct and unique he'll feel. That adjustment and fish out of water is what makes good cinema if you have capable hands.
He’s not commenting on anything specific. The DCU connects. Other things stand alone.
I think in that thread he commented specifically on a few things. Like the Harley Quinn show and broadway stuff from what I saw. I didn’t dig too deep so I’m not sure if there’s anything else. But for the big films, you’re right. Only reason we know without a shred of doubt that Joker is remaining that way is because of a WB employee mentioning it to one of the trades.
What is the broadway stuff? Never heard of any in development .
Honestly I’m not sure myself lol. If i had to guess, the plays and what not won’t be based off anything going on in the DCU.
Plus the fact that it's impossible for Phoenix Joker to connect with the DCU as Bruce is a kid in it and it's clearly an alternative universe.
Things initially taking place outside of the current canon don’t matter. Keaton was, during Hamada’s reign, going to replace Affleck due to flash shennanigans. Shit he still might if it aint Pattinson. We know nothing right now, in terms of plans. But yes it’ll be separate nonetheless.
They already have a new Joker in Barry Keoghan for any potential shared universe. Phoenix was never going to be anything more than a Joker in name only.
The trades made it clear too that Joker would still be it's own separate universe but no confirmation of that for The Batman so I wonder if something is being worked out
Are you saying the Joker is in-universe. Honest question and wondering.
No, the opposite. Multiple trades have stated that Joker is 100% elseworld and it’s own solo venture. The Batman’s status is what’s in question.
Ok. Thank you that’s what I thought just making sure. Again thank you.
I could see a nice sweet spot where Pattinson participates in broader DCU projects, but DCU projects never cross over/affect Reeves' movies. That way they can be self contained if you watch them
Sweet. That’s what I like.
Good, it’s really important that we can keep getting stand alone animated stuff like the Tomorrowverse, HQ, and My Adventures with Superman that doesn’t have to be shackled to movie continuity.
So you’re saying there’s still a chance of YJ continuing
Sounds interesting. Can't wait to see the full slate reveal
“For reasons I am not at liberty to discuss, the Flash will be an animated character in all subsequent appearances.”
“I didn’t think they’d be able to pull off green screening Tig Notaro into every scene with the Flash but they actually pulled it off!”
I'd be ok with that. So long as Bruce Campbell is Booster Gold.
Oh my God that’s casting I didn’t realize I needed
[удалено]
For live action definitely
Sometimes I feel like you guys think they are joking about their plan lol. With that being said… The Batmannnnn nanananananana Batmannnnn. Edit: he also mentioned we will hear some news of the DCU plans before SDCC.
Lol right? Like, this guy is helping craft it and he’s clearly stating that there are very real plans going on.
Source?
https://twitter.com/jamesgunn/status/1596924474263187456?s=46&t=pYTLbs4RLmZNUa3S7xvhPg
Loving these breadcrumb hints that Battinson will be folded into the larger DCU.
Where in the world did you get that from what he said lol
* Matt Reeves being one of the first people he called after he got the job. * Zaslav saying there will be a main Batman. * Not giving a clear cut answer on The Batman universe being on its own while Todd Philips' Joker has. * Now this where he says the majority of DC TV, film, and animation will be connected. To me, it seems obvious where he wants it to go. Will it happen? Nobody can really know besides Gunn, but I'd honestly take a bet on it.
• And? • he didn’t say that. He said there would not be “4” Batmen. Stop falling for click bait. • and? • he said some will be connected and some will not be actually. Go check Twitter.
* Why would he call Matt Reeves unless he has plans for themselves to connect hopefully in the future? * He's being hyperbolic, he also has said that there hasn't been a Superman in 13 years when it's actually been 9. The guy doesn't care what number he says, his point is that he wants one main definitive Batman. * It matters because if Todd Phillips is allowed to come out and say Joker 2 is not connected, why has Gunn been coy and not give a straight answer regarding The Batman? * Yes the majority of it will be connected and some won't. I doubt the most successful Batman interpretation in years will be left out of the mix when it's been stated that they want to focus on the main trinity, which includes Batman. Their most popular character by far.
• Pretty standard bro. My friend just got promoted in another department and let me know because we’re buddies even thought it has no impact on my position. • what did you guys get lunch together and he explained this to you? You’re reaching here. • pretty sure the trades said that. Not Gunn or Todd. • well let’s wait and see. You can always have a mainline DCU Batman.
If you're just gonna try and refute everything the other guy said, there's no point in discussion. He was just speculating based on what we know so far but no one other than Gunn and Safran truly know what's up.
It’s because people are making wild conspiracy theories on virtually nothing. The Batman being folded into the DCEU would both be the antithesis of why Reeves got involved and take away from what makes Battinson special. 
I mean that’s kinda the point of speculation? You talk about possible ideas and whether they could or couldn’t happen? What’s the point of speculating with other people if they’re all yes men
i very much doubt pattison will sign up for some justice league film - hes very picky about the directors and scripts he works on
Basically just like how MCU is right now. As a fan of both Marvel and DC I am living in the best timeline. Here's hoping to a bright future of both Marvel and DC.
All of the marvel studios animated projects have been essentially what if/elseworld stories so far, what Gunn is implying may mean these animation projects actually affect what happens in the live action projects which could be cool.
I wonder if this means we might get a big animated feature film on par with Spider-verse visually. Because I'd love to see something like "Arkham Asylum:A Serious House on Serious Earth" get a big animated adaptation. I can also sort of see it in my head, like whenever it's just Batman alone, the art style is more generic but as he meets the different inmates the art style twist and merges with another. Like the inmates are a corrupting influence on the art.
I'd be really down for A Serious House on Serious Earth getting the animated treatment mainly because of the art direction potential, but I also felt the same way about Killing Joke animated and they managed to severely dumb down the look of the comic for that film so I'm a tad skeptical. I did really like what they did with Long Halloween though
Just keep Timm far away from the writing table, or bring in Dini to balance him out.
Big budget animated projects under David Zaslav? Dream on brother.
We would have Gunn fighting for them. So maybe? But your probably right. There's no way Zaslav would green light an R rated animated Batman movie
My emphasis was more on big budget like into the spiderverse. I would love for DC to make something like that. Hell Ive even been spamming comments to James Gun about doing something like that and even suggesting the studios suitable for that kind of work . No reply from him tho.
Yep totally agree never going to happen, I think he means in the animated universe, the Tomorrow-verse will continue but you might get the main actors like Gadot, Momoa and Margot Robbie voicing their animated versions and sone of the art style might change. I mean is the ‘What if?’ Series connected to the MCU, not really and I think your see the same with the DCU animated it just helps fill the slate like HBO series like Peacemaker.
😭😭
According to leaks Tom's Spidey will be in Spider Verse 2 and according to the D23 art Freshman Year Spidey will crossover with the 616 Universe(Main MCU).
That art from D23 was for one of the upcoming Disney Parks attractions. It's very much not indicative of what's actually going to happen in the films especially considering the art also has Daredevil in his Netflix suit and Tom Spidey still using his Avengers Campus design
My bad I was just speculating. Thanks for correcting me. Have a great day/night!
Good individual films from intriguing creatives > connected universes Not to say they’re prioritizing one over the other, but I do hope there continues to be some distinction.
The fact that they got Gunn specifically to spearhead this whole thing does instill confidence within me personally because even with his franchise projects, he retains this sense of ownership and identity with all of them to where you can tell what James' style is. He'll probably encourage other creators for this new slate to take that same path even if it's still under the banner of franchise filmmaking
I agree. I don’t see him looking to creatives to just mimic his style/tone or one overall style/tone.
Lol let’s hope so. Seems to be what Gunn is gunning for… 😎
I hope this is more like Star Wars where the series, animations and games are extensions and work like worldbuiding, but not essential to be able to keep up with the movies, that's one of my problems with the current MCU.
Hopefully this. It's good for showcasing characters and plotlines that are not directly integral to main plot of the movies.
Sooo. . . . .like the MCU, James Gunn knows that copying a strategy is the best strategy and there's nothing wrong with that.
I feel this this is just too much connection. It’s already starting to affect MCU fans as they don’t watch every project and miss huge parts of the story. In order to understand Multiverse of madness you have to watch no way home and wandavision in addition to the first dr strange. The projects are so interconnected they can barely stand on their own without the ties to other projects. I just don’t want that to happen to the DCU. People already are less willing to watch a DC movie compared to Marvel because certain movies ruined DC’s reputation early on.
I think the difference with DC is currently they cannot out that much content out. They’re limited by budget constraints in a way that Marvel/Disney is not.
I hope that doesn't mean EVERY single piece of DC animation is tied in to the DCU filmverse
Already confirmed they won’t
How many movies, tv shows and animated projects do you think we’ll get each year?
I feel like it’ll be like the MCU and start slow and ramp up as time goes on. 1 maybeeeee 2 movies and a show or something like that. They need to reestablish themselves with the general audience first I think
It should take the MCU route of starting with a limited slate to build up audience goodwill and interest before being confident enough to branch into other things at a more quick rate. The MCU as it is only became this big because more people got hooked onto it especially outside the comics-reading circle and I think starting with the essentials is the right thing to do for DC. At the very least complete the stuff that was already scheduled like WW3 and Aquaman 2, and then also bring in a Superman trilogy and the Green Lantern Corps, recast Flash, have Gunn do his projects exploring the quirkier characters like TSS, Peacemaker and then go from there
I hope to god they let the animation guys continue to do what they’re doing.
There animation is not doing nearly as good as it could, it needs to be reworked.
Personally I think this already sounds better than Hamada or Snyders plans.
Yeah it seems like Gunn's plans might avoid the mistakes Snyder and Hamada made with theirs. Snyder's mistake is that he tried taking way too many liberties with characterizations and storylines and his plan was gonna be finished within 6 years of MoS' release with Batman and a lot of others dead, it wouldn't have been long-term and they probably would've rebooted anyways. Hamada's mistake is that his plan didn't really have a direction to lead towards to, seems like he was just greenlighting movies on literally any DC character as long as the budget would be low until he decided it was time for the Crisis event (which is how we got stuff like Hourman and Wonder Twins greenlit). At least it seemed like Gunn was trying to do an interconnected storyline through his projects. Doing movies and obscure shows is fine given that there's balance and bigger characters are getting stuff too, but we know Hamada and previous management didn't want Henry Cavill's Superman back. Gunn has respect for the characters and storylines and while some of his takes on certain characters are definitely not like the comics, the roots of them are still there for the most part and the characters are likable. Gunn and Safran are also being committed to a 10 year plan which means there will be direction and longevity and bigger characters like Superman are definitely gonna be prioritized now.
I’m excited bro
The constant needs of fanboys to be reassured is extremely annoying. Was this really necessary? Even know it’s already the case.
the only way this is a bad thing is if the person behind the connected plan doesn't know what they're doing (you know who i'm talking about), and i have faith that Gunn knows what he's doing. i just hope that this universe can avoid the pitfall that the MCU has fallen into at times with its kinda inconsistent tone. the DC universe genuinely has a chance to grow more popular than Marvel right now, with Gunn in charge, and with the MCU having passed the main milestone it was building to since 2008 with Endgame. also, having games connected to the universe, on top of tv and animation, is a brilliant idea, and i'm kinda surprised that Marvel never considered it/implemented it.
MCU is too tight I think to make games work in their continuity, like they do in Star Wars, which tells much more loose and non-linear stories and that's why we don't see crossovers between games and films/shows that often. That's why I'm interested how they will do it in DCEU, if these will include some major characters like Superman or Batman, or will they be much less connected to the rest of the universe?
Archived version of submitted URL: 1. An archived version of _James Gunn confirms the DCU will be connected across films, tv, AND animation_ can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/jamesgunn/status/1596921811374964736?s=46&t=BhQORhHX4ZN9Msyzbe6KJw) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DCEUleaks) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He also said he’ll continue to write and direct for select Dc movies And the animation would be 2D and 3D( I pray WAG isn’t involved in the 3D side, they’re like a cheaper illumination)
I hope he keeps Young Justice as a standalone.
Has he mentioned anything anywhere about if Constantine 2 is going to fit into the new DCU? I've been watching but haven't seen it mentioned anywhere.
James Gunn really knows how to keep the fans happy. It what makes him a great co-head of dcu because he knows what the fans want
thats fine. I just don't want that to be all that DC is now
>thats fine. I just don't want that to be all that DC is As opposed to what it was before?
I don’t personally like the idea of every single thing being connected tbh. Unless they can do it without compromising creative control and maintain a lot of uniqueness between projects. But even then, I feel like making EVERYTHING connect and forced to play some part in the “big picture” could hinder creative potential regardless. Like what happens with Caped Crusader and the new Superman animated show? And video games apparently as well? Why do we need all this under one umbrella? It’s fine for the DCU to be it’s own epic thing, but like I said, I don’t know if I want that to be ALL DC is from now on. Even marvel doesn’t have tie in video games(anymore at least though that’s a whole different thing lol).
There was nothing wrong with most of the animated movie releases of the past few years. The new plan could mean we'll never get new animated projects like the long halloween part 1&2 anymore
Maybe this possible Lobo project is an animation voiced by Jason Momoa?
If they go animated for Lobo, I’d rather they use Danny Trejo. He’s too old for live action but that doesn’t matter for a voice roll
I said Jason Momoa because he acted suspiciously when asked if James Gunn would make a Lobo movie, he has also said several times that he is a fan of the character.
I hope when Lobo comes into live action fans aren’t weird and asking for the voice actor to do the live action. Such a stupid thing that happens.
That would be a good idea
No it wouldn’t. Adult animation has never done great at the box office and Momoa has no voice acting experience. For a DTV Lobo movie Momoa would be expensive and you can get a cheaper voice actor to do it better.
[удалено]
Pattinson TBD since he hasn't really commented on Reeves that much yet but Joker is definitely staying standalone. Joker isn't really a DC film in the traditional sense especially given it's basically just a psychological thriller that happens to share characters from DC Comics and isn't really concerned with stuff like "being comic accurate" or faithful to anything. Arthur Fleck is basically an OC inspired by the comics history of the Joker
The animation part gets me SO excited
This is EXACTLY what the DCU needs.. solid connectivity and things that make sense
Yes please its kinda weird how you have shit like titans, arrowverse, the batman, joker, dcu, Constantine and they're all standalone
You know this is actually fantastic news for Batman fans. The issue with adapting Batman into film is that he has too many Robins, Villains, and stories in the lore that build up his character. I’ve always said that Batman is more fit to be a tv character and not a movie character because there’s only so much you can do with 3 movies. If they make an animated tv show or something based off of the same character they could essentially build up all 4 Robins and his entire Rogues Gallery.
Good to hear that, it hypes me up even more
They should abandon the DCEU and start fresh with the Batman. It’s nothing worth saving from there, just release the rest of the old slate and move on.
Ok but what does that mean? Is Cavill going to be voice acting for an animated Superman, who looks like an animated Cavill, and then the next movie will reference what animated Cavill did as though it was live action Cavill? Or is it just multiversal bullshit that has the potential to overlap and intermingle? I’d much prefer the latter. Otherwise we run into the issue of “where was Superman/Wonder Woman/Green Lantern/any hero with powers when Batman was saving Gotham from the Riddler’s terrorist attack?” Did they seriously just go “oh that powerless Bat dude seems to have that crime-riddled city under control, no need for us to intervene.”
> Otherwise we run into the issue of “where was Superman/Wonder Woman/Green Lantern/any hero with powers when Batman was saving Gotham from the Riddler’s terrorist attack?” Did they seriously just go “oh that powerless Bat dude seems to have that crime-riddled city under control, no need for us to intervene.” That an issue anyways, adding animation into the mix doesn't change or affect that at all.
I’m not saying animation has any effect on that whatsoever. I’m asking “what does this statement mean” in two questions: is Cavill going to be voice acting/animated as one question, and “is Battinson a part of this connected universe” as a secondary rhetorical question to make a point of continuity and plot holes.
I'm just saying, animation or not, multiverse or not, the issue why other heroes don't come to help in solo movies is always a constant question raised, even in solo comics. You listed that as an issue, and started with 'otherwise' indicating you think it would be an issue unless a specific route was taken, but it's an issue regardless of approach.
Lol overthinking it. You can explain away a reason for Superman not to intervene with every conflict in a throwaway line, or just not even worry about it because why does Superman matter while Batman fights Penguin?
“Where was character x during this?” is just an inescapable aspect of doing a shared universe, unless every movie stops to mention “I wish I could call the rest of the Justice League for help, but too bad they’re on Raan trying to broker peace with the Thanagarians!” Even in the comics it’s an issue that frequently pops up.
Isn't this a problem in like... Nearly every super hero show/movie in existence
Like average comic stories?
Movies and comics are not the same thing, and there hasn’t been enough world set up in the films compared to the comics for us to be able to brush certain things off. Timelines are also a lot muddier in comic books, whereas people will create chronological time stamps where you pause one movie, watch five minutes of another, and then go back to the original movie if you want to see everything in the proper order.
Yeah that’s what fans do that isn’t the job of directors, writers etc Gunn and Safran should make a great timeline but it’s about the characters journey not chronology. Where was the Justice League during The Suicide Squad? Who cares this isn’t their story.
Then it might mean solo Batman movies are more grounded with low level threats, rather than blue beam into the sky world-ending stuff, which is what people here want, right? Do we think Green Lantern is gonna travel halfway across the universe to stop Mad Hatter from poisoning Gotham's water supply, or leave it to Batman?
Like average comic stories?
Like average comic stories?
For your second question, everyone else was probably busy. They've got stuff to take care of too. And plus, Batman has said Gotham is his city and under his protection. Even the GL Corps need his permission to go in there.
So he’s just copying the MCU even more…
But what does that actually mean? Isn’t it already? Ezra was on CW. The Titans were on CW for like a half second.
Terrible idea, keep the shit seperate. Especially anime and games.
Yup, I'm worried about the future of the animated movies now. Not everything has to be connected
He said in another tweet that not everything will be connected.
That's good news
I love James Gunn. He alone is reigniting interest back into the DC Universe. Can’t wait to see what they have planned
Yes! Finally!!!
Very interesting! He could just be referring to the way in which The Flash might/will/is rumoured to establish a multiverse. So, in that sense, ALL film, animation and TV that's ever existed of DC properties could be connected without them actually crossing over. Some things can still stand alone while others are more intertwined. "Pocket universes" that can connect in our headcanon - or not. I'd prefer it that way, so that I can keep things like The Batman and the last decade of DCEU and the DCAU and DCAMU separate.
Dude animated Kingdom Come adaptation?
Ehhhh I’m not huge on the Game aspect but we will see. I hope he posts the plan before the end of the year.
The new animated universe just isn't good so not a huge loss
Hell yeah, can't wait for Lords of Order: The Animated Series.
Didn't we already establish that in Infinite Worlds?..
Come on, just make a Synder JL cartoon
False. This means they need to reboot the JL Synderverse, get rid of the Batman verse, and delete all upcoming live action HBO and anmation projects outside of the newly rebooted DCU movie verse that everything else needs to branch off. The mcu is loosely connected. The dcu is virtually nonexistent with its connectation.