Talk:DC Extended Universe/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

→

Screenwriting credit system

Just a heads up, this is incorrect. Per WGA screenwriting credit system, a team is identified by the use of an ampersand ("&") between the names of the members of the team. The names of writers (or writing teams) who wrote individually of one another are separated by the word "and." An individual writer who works on a script independently of a team or another independent writer will also have his/her name joined to the list of credits by an "and." "Later additions and rewrites" are not the only cases. -- /Alex/₂₁ 11:48, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

@Alex 21: are you WP:HOUNDING me?... what I stated was an abbreviated version of the exact quote of what you said. Teams/collaborations are separated by an '&' symbol while additional writers who did not work with a collaboration or an independent writer is presented with 'and' between the names. That's what I was trying to say when I made the short statement.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:44, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

I've been editing this article for months, your accusation is baseless. Am I not allowed to comment on any of your edits? The statement was false, and thus needed correcting. The screenwriting credit system has nothing to do with later additions or rewrites. -- /Alex/₂₁ 03:47, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

@Alex 21: you are welcome to comment on any edits, as is anyone. Your amount of time editing the article is 'baseless'/and irrelevant I asked you if you are WP:HOUNDING me as a question. Not a statement. Also, re-read your definition. It absolutely has to do with later additions and re-writes. --DisneyMetalhead (talk) 15:57, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Cast/characters

The table with each of the characters has a solid format as-is. However, I have attempted adding character's full names as presented in the films and yet they continue to be reverted. Where this article is specific to the franchise as opposed to just and individual film - listing the character's complete name is both constructive, and good form. A character's first and last names, intercepted by their nickname (with quotes) has been and should be the format here. Aliases (if there are any [i.e.: Batman for example]) should follow below the character name.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:40, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Please read WP:FILMCAST. JOE BRO 64 11:50, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

@TheJoebro64:, Ther is nothing within that section says anything about excluding character's full names within a franchise's character table.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 15:46, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

It says All names should be referred to as credited, or by common name supported by a reliable source. Lex Luthor is not referred to as "Alexander 'Lex' Luthor Jr." in the credits or reliable sources. JOE BRO 64 19:00, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2019

This edit request to DC Extended Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

there is an "on april 2019" = "in" month year) 2605:E000:9149:8300:51B:BBA8:9377:9822 (talk) 09:36, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Done NiciVampireHeart 14:47, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Time to split?

This article is currently 246k bytes long. WP:SPLIT says that articles over 100k bytes should almost certainly be divided, and I'm sure most will agree that the Films and Future sections are bloating the article as-is. Any opposition to creating List of DC Extended Universe films at this point? JOE BRO 64 20:03, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

This article is already basically a list of films. There's nothing much outside of that.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:50, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

It isn't supposed to just be a list though. As I've said before, it's supposed to be about the production, marketing, performance, and reception of the franchise as a whole, and the equivalent MCU page was much smaller when it was split. I do have a draft I've slowly been building to rewrite this page, as I've noticed it's missing a lot of important information (e.g. how Snyder conceived it as a standalone five-film series and tons of critical commentary). JOE BRO 64 21:48, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

The MCU isn’t a fair comparison as it is a lot more than films. This is basically just films.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 22:52, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

The MCU also has TV shows, such as Agents of Shield. Faromics (talk) 23:32, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

The equivalent MCU page you quote is 300k bytes long. So what exactly is your point? -115.66.196.146 (talk) 04:57, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

The page does not need to be split as the entire thing is essentially 6 films. Faromics (talk) 19:16, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Definitely oppose this. The MCU has a variety of mediums of media by which installments are released. Also as noted by User:115.66.196.146 - that page as-is is already monstrous in size. This page, though a 'franchise/shared universe' is essentially a film series. Not at all necessary.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 22:21, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Have any of you even read WP:SPLIT? It makes it very clear that articles that are over 100k bytes should be split. It shouldn't matter if the majority of the article is the list; there'd still be plenty for a standalone article, especially if a reception/analysis section is added. It is going to be necessary, and it's better to do it now rather than later. JOE BRO 64 22:41, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I've read it. Again no, it is not necessary. The MCU page (as-is) after various breaks is well over that 100k you refer to.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:15, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

April 2019

Why the franchise will not have television series based on DC Extended Universe? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.222.84.72 (talk) 16:53, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

...that's a question perhaps for WB...?--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:18, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Batman disappeared since Suicide Squad?

"Since the events of Suicide Squad, Batman has disappeared, leaving Gotham City unprotected from crime, and Harley Quinn has left the Joker."

He appeared on Justice League, so that doesn't make any sense. Of course movies doesn't necessarily make sense, but I checked on those references and it doesn't corroborate it. I think it should be better to change "Since" by "After". --2620:0:1000:8010:C362:EA95:728E:8F0D (talk) 17:18, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Totally agree this phrasing is incorrect. Suicide Squad was chronologically before Justice League... so the wording makes no sense at all.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 04:49, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

It does, actually. The key word here is "since". It means in the time after the events of Suicide Squad, not directly after. "After" would make it incorrect, actually. Justice League is not mentioned at all in the section, so it won't confuse the reader. JOE BRO 64 19:12, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

It would be less confusing if we didn't specify the movie. Batman appeared in Gotham during Justice League. SeanWheeler (talk) 03:19, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@TheJoebro64: agree that the word "since" does not mean immediately after; but does the average reader understand that from just reading this article? Probably not. Better to just state that 'Since Batman has gone missing, vigilantes are taking matters into their own hands'. Good point, @SeanWheeler:.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 01:10, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

New Gods inclusion

I have repeatedly added this film to the 'in development' section as there are various reliable sources that state the film is a part of/an expansion on the unofficially named DCEU. The sources I have applied in the past are more recent/up-to-date than the original announcement of the project which stated there is no connective materials to other films, which simply stated means that the film will be standalone in nature to the rest of the franchise (for now). I would liken this approach to Guardians of the Galaxy to the MCU (when it first came out). Repeatedly removing the information with how much supports its validity is unfounded.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 22:32, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

the original announcement of the project which stated there is no connective materials to other films, which simply stated means that the film will be standalone in nature to the rest of the franchise.

That's the epitome of WP:SYNTH. The Deadline source (which is not outdated, especially considering how little we know about the project) is very clear in stating it has no connections to the DCEU. Also, your Guardians of the Galaxy example makes no sense. That was always intended to be part of the MCU. Since WB has multiple DC franchises planned we shouldn't add films here when it's ambiguous; we should add them to the respective character articles or to Draft:Untitled DC Comics film series. Stop edit warring to restore your revision when it's disputed, especially when your preference is based on SYNTH. JOE BRO 64 22:47, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

@TheJoebro64:: No, you obviously misunderstood what I just said. Guardians of the Galaxy was always a part of the MCU - but the first film was standalone in nature (a.k.a.: not all interconnected with the other films). What I am stating in my comparison - is that the statement from Deadline simply says, verbatim: "There is no connection to the other DC worlds..." and then continues to talk about how Jack Kirby's comic arc was similar in nature. Nowhere in their announcement do they state that the film is not DCEU (fyi: source). Because of this, your assumption that the film is not DCEU is actually the perfect example of, what you called the "epitome of WP:SYNTH". Again, I re-state that because the Deadline comment says nothing about it being outside the DCEU, and because two very reliable sources - (i.e.: Variety and the Huffington Post) - reported that Ava DuVernay is directing a DCEU film: it is accurate, constructive, and not at all "based on SYNTH". New Gods belongs in the list of films in development, as - at this moment in time, and as far as we know per reliable sources - it is an installment/expansion within the DCEU.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:13, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Don't try to misrepresent what I said, because it won't work. You said that the Deadline source simply states that it's standalone in nature but still part of the DCEU, which is not true. It clearly says: "There is no connection to the other DC worlds being exploited for film right now by Warner Bros." You understand what that means? It means it's not connected to the DCEU. As I said, we can't add films here when it's ambiguous if they're in the DCEU or not, which it is here. The same thing goes with Blackhawk. JOE BRO 64 10:35, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Also, your argument that the Deadline source is old and therefore outdated is incorrect. The Variety source you added was published on the exact same day as the Deadline one, and the HP source (which is just citing the Variety one) was the day after. That only strengthens my argument that we shouldn't be listing it because it's ambiguous. JOE BRO 64 15:20, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

@TheJoebro64: Again, you have misunderstood what I am saying. Nothing about the quote from Deadline states that it won't be in the DCEU. Tabloids following that news questioned whether it would be a part of the non-existent Joker-non-universe. What I am saying, is that Variety which is a reliable/constructive/accurate source, and Huffington Post - also a reliable source (regardless of whether they cited Variety or not), both have stated that it was DCEU. Neither of the sources that I provide, and that you provided state that New Gods won't be in the DCEU - that's an indisputable fact, my friend. "There is no connection to the other DC worlds..." doesn't state "this is not DCEU". In the examples Variety clearly broke the news that the film is DCEU. It belongs on this page. Cheers, mate.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 15:41, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Additional note: Even following your argument, that if Deadline had meant "DCEU" when they stated "There is no connection to the other DC worlds.." their quote continues: "...right now by Warner Bros". Their quote literally means (in your interpretation) - that they cannot report where it stands at that time. You then take Variety - who states simply that the film is DCEU. All that tells us is that though Deadline broke the news of the film, Variety is the one that exclusively broke news that it's a DCEU movie. So again, it still belongs here.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 16:03, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

That's some interesting original research there. Can you back that up with a source, as I have? I really don't see how you can't understand the Deadline quote is pretty clear it's not going to have shared universe connections. JOE BRO 64 00:15, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

@TheJoebro64: LMFAO, man. There is zero WP:OR going on here. I have quoted your source, and quoted my sources. Yours merely says "there is no connection to the other DC worlds at this time"..... the emphasis here is 'at this time'. Then, Variety explicitly broke news that it is DCEU. You cannot pick and choose which reliable sources you listen to. Your source says nothing about the DCEU.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:14, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Since discussing this with you seems to be going absolutely nowhere, I'm pinging other users active on this talk page to see what they think: @Alex 21, Prefall, Adamstom.97, and TriiipleThreat. I'll concede if they think it should be listed. JOE BRO 64 19:14, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Is there a source that clearly states the film is set in the DCEU? - adamstom97 (talk) 01:06, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

The Variety article says DuVernay is joining the DCEU, but the problem is that the Deadline was published on the exact same day and says it has no connections to the shared universe. That's why I think we should list it at the New Gods page or Draft:Untitled DC Comics film series because it's unclear if it is. JOE BRO 64 02:04, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't really watch this page so I won't keep up with the conversation moving forward, but my suggestion is to err on the side of caution and say that since there is conflicting sources we should just wait until it is clearer and leave it off this page for now. - adamstom97 (talk) 02:11, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: Variety (a reliable source) states it is DCEU, while Deadline (a reliable source) states "no connection to the other DC worlds at this time". There have since been various other sources that refer to Variety report in calling it DCEU. @TheJoebro64: you just stated that the film should be at an 'untitled DC Comics film series' - which is a non-existent thing.... where are you getting a source for such a film series? Likewise, how is the offhanded statement that there is no connection to other DC worlds a definitive inclusion of some unnamed/non-existing film series? --DisneyMetalhead (talk) 14:11, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

TF? Have you not seen any source that discusses this year's Joker movie? It's supposed to be starting a new franchise of standalone films unrelated to the DCEU. JOE BRO 64 21:37, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

I've been thinking a bit more about this, and I've come up with a potential compromise. Either:

1. Keep it out of both pages and just list it at the New Gods page, or

2. List it at both, but add a note that it's unclear. This could be used as a source to back that up.

Personally prefer option #1, fwiw. JOE BRO 64 22:02, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

@TheJoebro64: I read the tabloids as much as anyone, but WB/DC has not confirmed any Black Label/Elseworlds series of standalone films. If Joker is successful theres no doubt they'd continue to do one-off stories, but that doesn't make a 'film series' a thing yet. So when I say "non-existent film series", that is what what I mean. Additionally, Time is one of the sources I have spoken about confirming New Gods as a part of the DCEU. There are more sources that state it is, than the one Deadline report that I feel like you're reading too much into. A compromise of some sort would be best - seeing as films which are in development are always influx/changing. Simply stating that "Deadline first reported the film as having no connection to DC properties at at this time, but a number of sources have since reported the film to expand the DCEU" would suffice. No need for a footnote, nor too much exposition. --DisneyMetalhead (talk) 01:25, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

WB/DC has not confirmed any Black Label/Elseworlds series of standalone films—Geoff Johns and Diane Nelson confirmed it's planned in this Vulture interview. JOE BRO 64 11:47, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Article's official title

On the teaser poster for Birds of Prey (and the Fantabulous Emancipation of one Harley Quinn) there is the first 'official' naming of the franchise with "DCU" above the release date. Though we still don't know what WB/DC calls the franchise - it will eventually be revealed. We will wait to see what they name it.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 22:22, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

I did notice this too. While we should wait for official confirmation as to what it means, I'm assuming it's just going to be a way of disambiguating the DCEU from the upcoming movies that aren't connected to it (e.g. Joker and the others under the planned Elseworlds-like film label, DC Super Pets). JOE BRO 64 22:29, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Definitely have to wait for what it means/stands for, but agree that it will probably distinguish the installments from the standalone/offshoot movies. It shouldn't be long before we hear exactly what the film franchise's official name is.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 01:08, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

The "DCU" logo was added by a fanpage, as explained here. Compare to an actual photo of the poster. Prefall 23:22, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Remove Steppenwolf and Zeus from cast section

Both of these characters are only in two films, one of which involves their portrayal through CGI only. In the case of Steppenwolf, he's only in the home release version of the film, again as a CGI-only character. I think these characters are both extremely minor and don't warrant inclusion even if they were portrayed by actors in both films, but the fact that they were CGI leads me to think they should be removed. Sock (~~tock~~ talk) 16:34, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

+1 JOE BRO 64 18:10, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm fine with removing them. Also, this table is going to need to be restructured soon, with the increasing number of films making it overbearingly scrunched. Prefall 09:41, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Averages

All franchises should have their averages in the critical reception section removed . This should be done to show consistency and lack of bias fan favouritism. It should be done to prevent trolling and or agendas from causing edit warring . It makes sense to apply the no average rule to all franchise films . Lord of the rings , Harry Potter Wizarding world main page had their averages removed - the same should apply to marvel and dc and their respective main pages . The ongoing belief is that averages add no meaning to an article or critical reception in any way and is acctually original work . What makes marvel so special that they have averages unless theirs a pro disney agenda going on at Wikipedia. Despite my belief which contradicts what expert editors think , averages are being removed . I hope this issue is resolved. Hpdh4 09:59, 19 September 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HPDEATHLYHALLOWS4 (talk • contribs)

The Marvel articles (films and TV series) already removed averages as well. I think this article is one of the last ones that has it. I've gone ahead and WP:BOLDLY removed it. Prefall 10:13, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Man of Steel 2, Green Lantern Corps and Justice League (Reboot) in the future table

J.J. Abrams signed a millionaire contract with Warner Bros to join to the DCEU. An this are the films that he is going to do with his company. The Man of Steel sequel, the Green Lantern Corps films and the Reboot of the Justice League.They don′t have realese date. but the films ar confirmed by DC & Warner. And Geoff Johns is working on the Green Lantern Corps script.Elmisterioso1979 (talk) 21:14, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Are you sure? I took a look and it seems like they're nothing more than rumors. We also don't add films to the future table unless they have a confirmed release date. JOE BRO 64 21:17, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Nothing has been reported about Abrams joining a DC project, just speculation that he may. Johns was hired to write GLC in June 2018. Prefall 21:19, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, these are rumors. There are no confirmations nor reliable reports of those films being made. Green Lantern is listed in the 'In development' section as it has been in varying stages since the start of the DCEU. The only films that go into the 'Future' table are the ones with release dates.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 02:42, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

The Trench

Why was the information for The Trench removed from the In Development section? It was announced like all of the other films there, has writers attached, and has even been spoken about by both James Wan and Peter Safran. FaceOffTournament (talk) 05:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

I noticed this as well. I re-added the film a while back.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 02:44, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Cast in The Suicide Squad

There are a number of edits that have been done within the sub-section titled as such. The edits have removed members of the cast, that were released by the writer/director. The editors' statements have repeatedly been that in paragraph sections we only list 'notable/main cast'. The issue with this however, is that none of the cast's roles have been named. Because of this - there is no way to discern which roles are 'notable'/main cast. Because of this, to remove cast members based off of this decision is categorically WP:OR. We cannot make decisions for studios/films/articles from our own drawn conclusions.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 02:24, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

1. They're notable because they're bluelinked. That's literally how notability works on Wikipedia. You're completely misapplying OR here.

2. We shouldn't be listing every single actor who's been added to the film here. That's for the Suicide Squad article. This article is supposed to include brief overviews, not monotonous proseline of actors and the roles they're playing.

3. Repeatedly reverting multiple editors to your own preferred revision is disruptive editing and a sign of WP:OWN.

JOE BRO 64 18:51, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

In Development section

Honestly, I feel the "In Development" section should be scrapped entirely. It seems Warner Bros is just throwing ideas out to see what will stick. With the exception of Wonder Woman 3 and possibly The Trench, I don't see any of those movies getting made given very little movement has been reported on most of them in quite a while, and reading that section is too confusing. IF WB comes out and announces a film has entered the filming stage and has a release date, then add it back in. 75.170.250.46 (talk) 12:25, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

They aren't just "ideas", the "films in development" section covers projects which have creatives working on them but no set release date. JOE BRO 64 20:36, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

20 "films in development," seriously. Personally, I don't believe a film is happening unless I see filming (or pre-production at least) has started and there's a semi-firm release date attached. Doesn't mean all of them will see the silver screen, and they're still ideas because WB doesn't have a firm plan. Deathstroke, Green Lantern Corps, Cyborg? No movement on those. Pointless to have an in development section when almost none of those are likely to materialize. 75.170.250.46 (talk) 01:09, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

That's just your opinion. These films are in development, so they should be listed whether you like it or not. JOE BRO 64 19:15, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

While it's obvious most of these films will not happen, they haven't been confirmed to be dead and it's nice to have a bit of history in the franchise's overall development and trajectory. The In Development section should stay as is (and include New Gods). FaceOffTournament (talk) 13:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

The Deadline article announcing New Gods says "There is no connection to the other DC worlds being exploited for film right now by Warner Bros"—which means it's not DCEU. JOE BRO 64 14:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Zatanna

Zatanna's movie development Mohamadwolf (talk) 16:22, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

The Batman vs. New Gods

Recently there was a discussion regarding whether New Gods is in the DCEU. I personally found it a bit ridiculous to single it out and exclude all of its information simply because there was no concrete confirmation that it takes place in the DCEU, although there's no reason to think it won't be. Not to mention, there are other films listed here that haven't explicitly been said to be in the universe either. But fine, I'll accept that. But I have to ask: By that logic, why is The Batman's information still included? That film has had more evidence that it won't be in the DCEU since Matt Reeves joined the project, especially with today's news of Jeffrey Wright in talks to play Commissioner Gordon, yet it remains on this page. What's up with that? FaceOffTournament (talk) 22:58, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Uh, Reeves explicitly said The Batman is going to take place in the DCEU. The only sources I've seen that state it won't be DCEU are unreliable and can't be used. JOE BRO 64 23:07, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Ah, touche. Although that was in 2017 and since then he's made choices that contradict those statements. But yeah, those tweets are reason enough to keep The Batman here for now. Thanks, Joe! New Gods should absolutely be on this page, though! FaceOffTournament (talk) 01:34, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Just came across an interview with Reeves right before finishing the script, and he said The Batman will still be connected to the DCEU. Also, just because Gordon was recast doesn't mean it's not in the same continuity; by that logic, Batman Forever wouldn't be a sequel to the first two films because Val Kilmer and Tommy Lee Jones replaced Michael Keaton and Billy Dee Williams. JOE BRO 64 17:45, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

@TheJoebro64: But this page doesn't consider The Batman as a DCEU film.--Dipralb (talk) 21:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

So? The movie hasn't started production yet. And that's Wikipedia, not a secondary reliable source. JOE BRO 64 23:42, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@TheJoebro64: I know. But I think there should be consistency.--Dipralb (talk) 00:48, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Dipralb: Agreed. There's no consistency with what people on this page decide to include. Like I said originally, New Gods is excluded just because there was no explicit statement that it'll be in the DCEU, even though the Blue Beetle film, the Lobo film, the Plastic Man film, and the Supergirl film don't have any "explicit" confirmation either. My point is that there's more reason to believe all of these films will be in the DCEU than there isn't (and there's a weird apparent bias against New Gods), whereas there's more reason to believe the opposite for The Batman. FaceOffTournament (talk) 13:11, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

@FaceOffTournament: Agreed.--Dipralb (talk) 13:13, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

The Deadline article announcing New Gods says "There is no connection to the other DC worlds being exploited for film right now by Warner Bros"—which means it's not DCEU. JOE BRO 64 14:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

That does not specifically mean it's not in the DCEU, that's your personal takeaway from the quote. That could refer to the fact it takes place off-world or that its characters have their own story separate from the Justice League characters. We don't know. FaceOffTournament (talk) 16:26, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

The Variety Article confirms that New Gods will be in the DCEU: https://variety.com/2018/film/news/ava-duvernay-superhero-movie-new-gods-dc-1202725043/ One of the writers of the script has liked tweets asking if the film will continue what we saw of the Fourth World in Justice League. There is more evidence that New Gods will be in the DCEU than there is to the contrary.Popfox3 (talk) 20:03, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

I know of the Variety article, which is more reason why we should exclude it—it's not clear it's a DCEU film since we have reliable sources reporting different things. And writers liking tweets is not any sort of confirmation; that's pure WP:OR. JOE BRO 64 20:15, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

With all the recasting and the fact that the latest Joker movie was a standalone, I think we should take The Batman off this page unless this film is confirmed by Warner to exist in the same universe. At this point, it would not be possible for this version of Batman to exist alongside the other characters, and he is even considered disappeared in Birds of Prey. Just saying.

--Julian1Seguin8 (talk) 03:42, 9 December 2019 (UTC)Julian1Seguin8

Joker and Joker & Harley Quinn

I think that these movies should be removed from the In Development section as it has been confirmed that both projects were shelved when Jared Leto quit the role of the Joker in the DCEU. At the very least an extra sentence should be added clarifying that Leto is no longer involved with either projects. 96.32.2.157 (talk) 23:33, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

None of that is confirmed. FaceOffTournament (talk) 18:34, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

RfC: Should the untitled Batman (2021) film be listed as part of the DCEU?

There is no consensus in this RfC about whether the untitled Batman (2021) film be listed as part of the DCEU. Editors have provided conflicting sources: some sources say the film will be part of the DCEU and some say the film will not be part of the DCEU. Editors disagree on whether Matt Reeves' tweets are sufficiently clear to say whether the film will be part of the DCEU.
Cunard (talk) 08:26, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There is disagreement about whether the director of the as-yet unmade Batman film is tying the film to the larger DC Extended Universe of films. Subsequent RS commentary argues that, like 2019's The Joker, not all films need to be within the subset of DCU of DCEU. Should this film be listed in this article, or no-wiki'd until we have definitive and explicit statements as to the setting of the film? Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:02, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

The tweets at issue

In the interest of clarity, here are the two tweets in question (courtesy of Prefall's earlier posting):

"Jeez, what'd I miss, guys...? 😀 Just to be clear: Of COURSE Batman will be part of the D.C. Universe. Batman will be BATMAN... In my comments from a while back about not being part of the DCEU, I was talking about The Batman being a story specifically about Batman… not about the others in the Universe. That it wouldn’t be filled with cameos servicing other stories — that it would be a BATMAN story."
— Matt Reeves, - August, 2017

"There are ways in which all of this connects to DC, to the DC universe as well. We’re one piece of many pieces so I don’t want to comment on that except to say that I’m focused very specifically on this aspect of the DC world."
— Matt Reeves, - August 2018

- Jack Sebastian (talk) 21:20, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Survey

Yes per Reeves in 2017 and 2018. This should take precedence until we get another update. JOEBRO64 17:06, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
- ~~And James Gunn said it will be set in the DCEU as well, less than two months ago. JOE BRO 64 17:36, 15 December 2019 (UTC)~~
  - Gunn retracted that and said he read the comment too quickly. [1] (Bad source, I know. But I can't find any better publication who covered this part.) Prefall 18:04, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
    - I wasn't aware of that. Thanks. JOE BRO 64 18:15, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Yes per Reeves' comments in Joe's post. The director has explicitly said it will be in the DCEU, and at the moment, we have no definitive statements from reliable sources contradicting his previous comments. Speculation based on casting choices and potential plots are not acceptable. This can be a full reboot of the Batman continuity and still be in the DCEU if WB wants it to be. Prefall 18:04, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Yes per what Reeves has stated from Joebros' post. It's been said to be in the DCEU by Reeves and more recent sources claiming it isn't are based on the castings and rumors without any actual confirmation from WB, DC, or anyone involved stating it isn't in the DCEU. Until it is officially confirmed that it is not in the DCEU, it should stay on the article. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:13, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
No - Reeves' own comments about the film are - at best - vague about its inclusion within the DC Extended Universe. To be clear, he is absolutely not saying that the film is within the DCEU. That is what we need for inclusion within this article. It is Synthesis to take those two tweets about the film from Reeves and extrapolate from it. As there have been other films and programs that are within the DC Universe that are not part of the DC Extended Universe, there is a precedent for keeping this out; The Joker is one of those examples, and it is not within this article. Until we have explicit and clear sources otherwise, neither should Batman 2021. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:55, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
- I don't think Joker is a fair comparison because it was never intended to be part of a larger shared franchise. It was always clear that WB envisioned it as a one-off in its own separate universe—unlike The Batman, which was announced as a DCEU production and has not been confirmed to be a separate entity since. JOEBRO64 20:59, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
  - Respectfully, the film has not been confirmed as a DCEU production; we are both seeing the same tweets, and if they are vague enough that two reasonable people (like you and I) can disagree on what they say, they are too vague to draw conclusions from. The only conclusion we can make is that Reeves wanted to avoid all the cameos, etc. that are a hallmark of the DCEU set of films. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 15:17, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
No This shouldn't be based off a few tweets from a year or so ago. Find solid sources (not circular) or just wait until it is definitively confirmed. For now, mention the unclear nature of its inclusion in the DCEU.HAL333 23:00, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
- The tweets are the only official information we have regarding The Batman's status in the DCEU, and they say it's in the DCEU. JOEBRO64 02:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
  - And yet, the tweets themselves do not explicitly place the film within the DCEU. Please do not stipulate an untruth, please. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 15:14, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
    - The entire purpose of the tweets is to clarify that it is set in the DCEU, and sources agree. THR, Entertainment Weekly, /Film, Gizmodo, Collider, IGN, Polygon, etc. The tweets make no sense otherwise. Prefall 16:05, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
      - If the sole purpose of the tweets was to clarify, Reeves did an extraordinarily bad job of it. Every single source you noted is from 2017.

And an interpretation of what Reeves said.

Just like the more recent sources that I provided that say the opposite.

You would think that somewhere in the almost two years since, that either Reeves or DC would actually clarify the matter. But no. We are operating on stale sources that use Olympic-level gymnastics to twist and contort what Reeves tweeted.

Dismissing sources that say the film isn't part of the DCEU is just as OR as accepting those that do. The question is FAR from clear here, and we aren't in a hurry to get a scoop or whatever; we're an encyclopedia and if it means waiting to have more explicit references, then we should wait. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 02:56, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

... and we explained to you how the sources you provided were unreliable and/or opinion pieces. Your responses are comparable to just covering you ears and saying "lalala I can't hear you!" JOE BRO 64 03:15, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

... and I heard you, JoeBro. Each and every time. It still doesn't make it accurate. Granted we both have provided less-than-ideal sources, but I have provided at least four that are solidly reliable. And while you look at my sources and say, 'gee, that's just speculation,' I look at the sources you provide and see that they are providing just as much speculation for the opposite point of view. It isn't a view you like, so it becomes speculative and opinion. Your view of your sources is that they are "interpretive."

And I am going to ask you out in the open to be more civil, please. Accusing me of IDHT is counter-productive. I just have a different view of the matter than you do, and I'm not being accusatory, So knock it off. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 05:11, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm not being "uncivil", I'm genuinely having a hard time understanding your line of reasoning. Reeves' tweets/comments are clearly linking it to the DCEU, and he even uses the term "DCEU" in one. Only two of the sources you provided to support your claim were reliable, and even then they were just opinion pieces and not actual reports. All the sources Prefall provided are high-quality, and as far as we know nothing has changed regarding its status in the DCEU since then. The crux of your argument lies in the fact that there have been no recent updates, which makes no sense (why would we remove it if the last update confirmed it was in the DCEU?). JOE BRO 64 17:07, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Maybe we could just say at the end of the The Batman section that its inclusion in the DCEU has been "disputed" (or something like that) by many sources, where we could cite all those opinion pieces about it not being in the DCEU. El Millo (talk) 16:54, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

The problem with that is that the article's presence in the article would show a preference for believing (on the part of wiki editors) an interpretation it is part of the DCEU. If we were responsible stewards of the encyclopedia, wouldn't have to argue so hard for the film to be no-wiki'd until we have adequate sourcing. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 02:56, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

But there is more evidence in favor of it being a part of the DCEU than the opposite. We have official sources that, to some of us and to most reliable sources, say it will be. We have opinion pieces that suspect it won't be. But official statements and reliable sources' interpretations have more weight than speculation. El Millo (talk) 03:53, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I will ask the most obvious question here: what to you is the difference between someone's interpretation and speculation? To me, they seem like the same thing, with either better or worse lighting. And it gets worse when folk err on thinking DCU = DCEU. When they do that, anything that says 'DCU' magically transforms into 'DCEU.' For clarity's sake, I will repeat the difference: Joker, Swamp Thing, Gotham and Green Lantern are all DCU movies. They just aren't part of the DCEU. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 04:59, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Alright, they are kind of the same. I still think the interpretations, or maybe "explanations" of the tweets have a bit more weight, but I will remain neutral on this subject from now on. El Millo (talk) 05:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Threaded Discussion

I have suggested previously that the Batman 2021 film should be no-wiki'd until we have explicit and clear sourcing that the film will be within the DC Universe subset called the DC Extended Universe. This takes into account that we do not know if the film will be part of the DCEU, and allows us to be prepared to reveal the listing in case subsequent sourcing confirms it. Until we do, however, it shouldn't be here in active article space in the encylopedia.
Additionally, we have multiple sources (1, 2, 3, 4) that reason it is not. Weighed against Reeves' two vague tweets, including it here is both undue weight and fortune-telling as to the film's placement almost 2 years from now.
So, just no-wiki Batman 2021 until we have sufficient citation for inclusion. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 21:05, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm going to repost what's been said above—WeGotThisCovered is unreliable, and the other three are opinion pieces and not reports (CheatSheet's reliability is also questionable). I also don't really see how Reeves' tweets are vague; it's clear he's referring to the film universe, and he even used the term "DCEU" in one. JOE BRO 64 21:18, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Could you please link to the discussion at RSN where the WGTC was deemed unreliable? If not, could you perhaps share your opinion as to why you think it is 'unreliable'?

I believe I have already stated as to why the tweets by Reeves are vague; they are noted above. Respectfully, I believe you are imparting clarity on two statements that provide very little clarity. I am not alone in this view; it is shared by many, many reliable sources, including this one from 2017 and this one from 2019, which also notes DC Entertainment's official stepping back from the DCEU concept en toto in order to afford witers and directors the creative freedom to "craft bold new stories."

Lastly, I utterly reject the assertion by another editor that the DC Universe and the DC Extended Universe are synonyms; they are absolutely not. The DC Universe contains all DC characters, including Swamp Thing, The Joker, and almost all of the Arrowverse. The DCExtended Universe is a subset of the much larger DC Universe. I suggest that any assertions to the contrary be accompanied by explicit references. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 13:54, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Of course "DC Universe" and "DC Extended Universe" can be used as synonyms. "DCEU" is not the official name of the universe, and here are just a few examples of "DC Universe" being used instead. JOE BRO 64 12:35, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Again, you are incorrect. Using your own sources (in the order you presented them), we can see the distinction between the two:

"In terms of connecting it to the bigger DCEU, I didn't want to shoehorn in anything from the larger universe because I felt like I was creating my own universe within that and my characters were going to go on their own journeys, which has nothing to do with the other stuff. And because of that, it actually freed me up to tell the story I wanted to tell." (1)
Your second source doesn't even mention the DCEU (its an article comparing DC and Marvel movie successes), so you cannot compare uses of terms when you don't even use the two terms. (2)
Your third source, a review of Aquaman, does use both terms, but distinguishes between the two, but does so as I have. The DC cinematic universe draws fromt he larger DC Universe of characters and concepts to create the movies. An example would be how The Atom is a DC character within the DC Universe, but not within the DC Expanded Universe
Your last source again fails to use both terms to distinguish the difference between the two.

I am not sure why you are conflating the two terms, but the very best way to look at this is that while all DC properties are within the DC Universe, not all of them are within the DC Extended (or Expanded) Universe.

As well, to rebut your claim that the DCEU is not an "official" name of the film part of the DCEU, I would say that I agree, in part. While DC doesn't call it that (opting instead for the far more unwieldy "Worlds of DC" umbrella)([ 3]), the term was first coined by a reviewer reacting from the fan term for the cinematic offerings from DC(4), although acknowledging that the term DCEU:

"The DC Extended Universe, also known as DCEU, has been in use for years, but was a term coined by a journalist and was never what DC actually called their film universe. This new term allows them to make movies under one brand, but have them take place in different universes so they don't have to all be necessarily connected."(5).

So, if you really want to be specific about it, the article should be renamed "Worlds of DC," and not just a destination of a redirect for such. But you know why we don't do that? Its because the DCEU is the most common term for the specific part of the DC Universe that makes films and TV shows.

Tl;dr: your sources either avoid the comparison or reinforce my original argument. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:27, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

We don’t call this article “Worlds of DC” because that’s not an official name either. It was the name of a SDCC booth about the DCEU, and has never been the name of the universe itself. JOE BRO 64 21:28, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Also, where on earth are you getting the “difference” from in the third THR article? I read it and it does not say what you said it says. And the other three sources call the DCEU simply the DC Universe and use both terms interchangeably. You’re either misreading them or using your own synthesis. JOE BRO 64 21:35, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Regrettably, you are again incorrect:

"Warner Bros.' Hall H panel at Comic-Con 2018 introduced its DC Films segment with the message 'Welcome to the Worlds of DC,' indicating that the DC movie franchises have now been officially branded 'Worlds of DC,' replacing the unofficial name 'DC Extended Universe.'" (1, 2, 3). And even if you want to ignore that, the unofficial term - not used synonymously, I might add, is DCEU. (4).

And the three sources that you say use DC Universe and DCEU interchangeably is provably false. While I am not going to suggest that the sources were cherry-picked, I am going to point out - yet again - that the three sources do not in fact compare the two terms. Ergo no comparison equals no conflation. In short, your sources do not define what you seek to define.

However, this argument over terms is largely unimportant, except as a frame for defining that Reeves' has not enclosed the film within the DCEU or Worlds of DC umbrella. As Reeves has not done so, and subsequent reliably-sourced commentary during his conspicuous silence is also usable in defining the film's place. The film doesn't belong here. Not yet. Maybe not ever. I think its prudent to no-wiki the entry pending better sources relegating it to DCEU or WoDC. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 22:09, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

The sources I'm providing show that the two terms are interchangeable because they use them interchangeably. You don't need to compare the terms to see it. And although it's not a great source, Batman News provides a concise summary of how "Worlds of DC" isn't the official name of the DCEU. JOE BRO 64 23:43, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Batman-news.com is a pretty bad source, Joe; I think you already know that, so don't bother using it here. The two sources you provided do not use them interchangeably; objective views by others will clearly note that, as well.

Having said that, I think you and I have pretty much exhausted our viewpoints. I remain unconvinced that a) the DCEU is synonymous with the DCU, and b) that Reeves' Batman project has been determined to be a part of that. I can see that you are clearly unswayed by my data points as well. Therefore, I think we should allow others the opportunity to weigh in on the subject. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 05:29, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

I know BatmanNews isn't a good source. I literally said that. But FlickeringMyth and MovieWeb are also terrible sources, which you cited above. JOE BRO 64 11:53, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

"They, at least, have editorial oversight. Now, since you seem keen on pointing out what was said vefore, please not that i said we should give others the opportunity to weigh in...unless you have a problem with that? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 13:15, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

In my opinion, JoeBro's examples do support his view, to some degree. Both terms aren't required to be in the same article in order to see they are being used as the same, you just need to see an example where they are clearly referring to the DCEU, but just calling it differently, especially since "DCEU" isn't the official term. The title in the Aquaman review says it "Expanded the DC Universe by Leaving It Behind", where I feel it's clear that by "DC Universe" it's referring to the shared universe of DC films, excluding everything before Man of Steel; later in the article, however, it says that Nicole Kidman "come[s] back" to the DC universe, clearly referring to all DC films including Batman Forever, so that example won't help. The second example simply refers to the DCEU as "DCU", and it separates those films from earlier ones like Superman Returns and The Dark Knight. The third example refers to this group of films as "DC cinematic universe", except in the very title, where it does call it "DC Universe"; by not even alluding to earlier films that Man of Steel, it shows it's talking about the cinematic universe when it says "DC Universe". In the case of the fourth one, the sample is too little to know what they're referring to when they say "DC Universe". So, the first one uses it sometimes interchangeably with DCEU, sometimes to refer to every DC film. The second one uses "DCU" as if it were "DCEU", and the third one uses them interchangeably. The evidence isn't conclusive, but I think it still favors the case that The Batman will be in the DCEU. In addition, I found that Collider, a reliable source, concluded from Reeves' tweets and statements that it will indeed be in the DCEU. El Millo (talk) 15:14, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Reeves' Batman movie may very well end up being part of the DCEU (or its official name, "Worlds of DC") at some future date. My point is that it is not declaratively, explicitly within it now. We are not prognosticators. Until we have solid references putting it within the DCEU, we cannot put it there ourselves. Thus the suggestion of the no-wiki until we have aforementioned confirmation. Assuming that will come along without supporting citation is contrary to our mandate as editors.

I am not going to re-argue the claim that DCU = DCEU. I have made a pretty solid case as to why it is not, and it is a tangential argument designed to muddy the waters about the discussion. The fact remains that the DCEU is a subset of the DCU. If there is a shred of doubt about that, refer to the DCU wiki article first paragraph:

"The DC Universe (DCU) is the fictional shared universe where most stories in American comic book titles published by DC Comics take place. DC superheroes such as Superman, Batman, Martian Manhunter, The Flash, Green Lantern, Aquaman, Green Arrow, Booster Gold, Captain Atom and Wonder Woman are from this universe, and it also contains well-known supervillains such as Lex Luthor, the Joker, Brainiac, Professor Zoom, Mister Mind, Black Adam, Sinestro, Deathstroke, Anti-Monitor and Darkseid. In context, the term "DC Universe" usually refers to the main DC continuity."

But, as I said, that's a distraction. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:39, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

"Worlds of DC" is not the official name, just a welcoming banner at SDCC that people misunderstood. Outside of that, it has—as far as I'm aware—never been corroborated by WB or anyone associated with the franchise.

Anyway, I wouldn't argue that DCEU and DCU are synonymous, however DCU has been used in shorthand to refer to it. You're taking his usage of "DC Universe" much too literally—it wouldn't even make sense in the context you're assuming. His tweets were in direct response to fans being upset that Batman wouldn't connect to the DCEU, and this is him clarifying that it would be set within the DCEU, they just won't be doing any crossovers in this film. Sources interpretations of his tweets agree that is what he was saying. Prefall 20:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

The opinion that DCU has been used as shorthand for DCEU is in fact your interpretation, correct? I am finding very different sources that do not interpret anything but vagueness on the part of Reeves; most that I have found believe the film is not part of the DCEU.

But again, that is not the point. Sans an explicit tweet (and really, how hard can it be? It's 100+ characters, ffs) placing the film in the DCEU, we cannot take that OR/SYN leap to pretend its been absolutely said. It has not. How much trouble is it to no-wiki an entry until we have explicit sourcing? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 01:09, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Arbitrary break

Others keep commenting on how there are lots of sources that interpret Reeves' tweets that the resulting film will be part of the DCEU, and that anything other than that are just speculative.

I think we have established that one man's opinion is another man's speculation. Both sides of this would seem of equal value, so what would tip the scales to allow more weight to be given to one set of RS opinions over another?

Recent reliable sources have more weight. than otherwise equivalently-positioned sources.

So, here are some sources that happened after 2017 that note that the film isn't part of the DCEU:

I could go on, but its unnecessary. I am not trying to prove that 'Battinson' won't be a DCEU-entrenched film; I am pointing out that there are enough opposing views that we cannot use fanswirl guesstimation and assume it will be. We are an encyclopedia, not a fan forum. We use sources alone to determine inclusion or exclusion.
By placing the entry inside no-wiki, we are holding onto the entry so we don't have to reinvent the wheel if new, more concrete sourcing lands the film in the DCEU. If it turns out that it is something more akin to Joker, we can then decide whether to remove it completely then.
It bears repeating: we are only preserving the integrity of the wiki by awaiting better sourcing that places the film within the DCEU. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:59, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't really think those sources support what you're arguing:

1. That's an opinion piece solely based around the fact they recast Gordon. By that logic, Batman Forever wouldn't be in the same continuity as Batman because they recast Two-Face.

2. That source is quoting a Deadline article that has a line that's vague at best. It says that "This film will in no way carry on the work that Ben Affleck did as the older Batman in Batman Vs. Superman and Justice League," but that doesn't mean it's not a DCEU film; it's more possible, given what Reeves has said, it merely means the film won't be restricted by what we learned about Batman in previous DCEU films because it's a prequel. (The source also seems to support this notion with the sentence "Reeves’ film tracks Bruce Wayne in the formative stages of Batman, which is why they needed an actor in his early 30s.") Also, Todd Phillips said Joker doesn't exist within the same continuity as The Batman and the two would never cross over.

3. That's not even about The Batman, it's about Joker. It also refers to The Batman as part of the DCEU: "But thanks to the convoluted nature of the DC Movie Universe, it's no surprise that casual fans are confused. There's a Suicide Squad reboot and Batman reboot both in the works".

4. I don't think BoundingIntoComics is reliable; their staff page doesn't list writer credentials (most of them just say "I like Star Wars" or something similar), and I'm not finding anything in the way of writer credentials. Ignoring that, it's another opinion piece (which is clear from the "Theory" in the title). JOE BRO 64 12:39, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Again, you might have missed earlier whereI noted that the difference between opinion and speculation boils down to your position on a subject. Now, i could simply refute each of your points, like how BoundingIntoComics.com has editorial oversight and isn't user-generated, or that you seem to keep attacking sources that offer different interpretations of Reeves' tweets that fail to favor your pov. And the personal attacks on me aren't really helping your argument, either.

I could go on and on, but the inescapable fact is this:

There is no statement from either Reeves or the studio that explicitly places 'Batman 2021' within the DCEU.

Everything beyond that is speculation: my viewpoint, your viewpoint, or RS viewpoints. The sole question being posed here is that if we have RS sources that say contradictory things, do we favor one view or the other? I get that fan-gushing is going to play an (illegitimate) part in that decision, but I think that - as an encyclopedia - we only add information that is provable by explicitly-stated, reliably-sourced material. People can argue 'til they're blue in the face about how they think 'Batman 2021' is within the DCEU, but without sourcing, we don;t get to make that call. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:29, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Reeves explicitly said it, and the "he says 'DC Universe' instead of 'DCEU'" argument just isn't good enough when reliable sources back it up. Prefall 17:45, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Ditto. Also, stop accusing me of "personal attacks" to discredit my arguments. Nowhere in my above posts have I made one. I have no idea what you're considering a personal attack (which is something directed at you, not your arguments). Also, just because a source has an editor doesn't mean it's automatically reliable. There needs to be editorial policy and writer credentials, which BoundingIntoComics doesn't offer. JOE BRO 64 18:14, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Please feel entirely free to point out where Reeves explicitly states that the film will be in the DCEU. DC Universe is not the same as DCEU, in the same way that Phantom Stranger and Swamp Thing are part of the DCu while not being part of the subset of interlinking DCEU films. Your argument - oft-repeated, does not magically become true. Additionally, just because a source doesn't share its writer qualifications or editorial policy (but has an editor and staff) doesn't make it unreliable...esp. if it offers a view that you personally disagree with.

It does not go unnoticed that you failed to address the main point of all this. We are an encyclopedia, and if there is disagreement about what a source says, that source is - by definition - not a good source. Reeves' tweets do not say what you dearly wish them to say. They just don't. Until Reeves or the studio says something more explicit, the 2021 film shouldn't be on display as if it is. It clrearly violates WP:SYN and WP:CRYSTAL, due to the lack of explicit sourcing.

Lastly, I have made it a specific point not to bring up on this page your little jabs at my expense, because personal issues are not meant for article space discussions. Your comments suggesting that I "followed" you to the article and went about "blindly" reverting you are pretty bad manners, or that I am "refusing to get the point" are personal attacks. When you address the editor instead of the subject, it is a personal attack. I've tried to address this on your talk page several times, but you choose to ignore and delete my requests for both AGF and civility.

The first sign that someone's argument is weak is that they attack the person contesting them. Focus on the edits, and not the editor. Please consider this your third and last warning. It is also the last time I will discuss the matter in article discussion. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 19:32, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Reeves said it in the tweets and at the 2018 panel. It's as clear as day to see that he's referring to the DCEU even if he doesn't use the term itself. He said it in response to questions about its status in the DCEU, and if he wasn't talking about the DCEU his claims would make no sense.

I know you want to move on from your NPA allegations, but I'm just responding once more. Again, I feel you're just accusing me of making personal attacks to discredit my argument. The fact you showed up to this article by reverting a valid edit I made, with seemingly no prior history here, after we'd been in a dispute for a little while was suspicious. The course of action you're taking here also closely resembles what's described at WP:IDHT—you haven't convinced anyone that we should remove The Batman from this page, and it's getting tiresome to have to keep explaining to you why we shouldn't. And I removed your comments because I asked you to keep the discussion here, not on my talk page. JOE BRO 64 19:50, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Again, what part of '(this) the last time I will discuss the matter in article discussion' were you having the most difficulty with? Just stop. You know what you did, I called you on it. The only thing you need to do in response is stop the passive aggressive nonsense. Stop doing it. Full stop. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:49, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

You're ignoring the full content of the tweets, and the circumstances surrounding why he sent them out. The suggested ambiguity with DC Universe makes no sense in context. Why do you think every reliable source covering the tweets agree that he said Batman is set in the DCEU? Prefall 20:00, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Not sure who you are talking to, Prefall, but if you were talking to me, I would point out that it is not in our mandate to suss out what someone meant; it is up to reliable sources to do that, and we report that. Anything less than that is either OR or Synthesis. Presuming something will come to pass falls under WP:CRYSTAL. And we also have just as many reliable sources saying it is not within the DCEU.

And again, I am not arguing that it might not end up within the DCEU; I am saying that until we have explicit sourcing that says it does, it shouldn't be in the article. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:49, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Reliable sources say Reeves said it is in the DCEU. That's what I'm talking about. Whether sources are now speculating that it won't be is a different matter completely. My main focus has been on the validity of Reeves' tweets, which is the only official word we have one way or another. Prefall 21:01, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

I disagree - as do reliable sources - that the Reeves tweets say anything other than being in the DC Universe because "Of COURSE Batman will be part of the D.C. Universe". The DC Universe as has been pointed out previously, is the larger group of which DCEU is a subset. There is no doubt what Reeves's said; it is posted above as it appeared on Twitter. What is at odds is the lack of specificity in those tweets. That's why we can't Sherlock a meaning from that. Sources do that for us, and they disagree. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 21:12, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean about sources disagreeing. As I posted in the section above:

The Hollywood Reporter: "Yes, 'The Batman' Exists in the DC Extended Universe, Director Says"
Entertainment Weekly: (less definitive) "So you can interpret Reeves’ clarification as a kind of compromise. Yes, we will be in the same universe as Justice League; no, we will not see any other characters from Justice League."
/Film: "Director Matt Reeves Clarifies That 'The Batman' Will Be Part of the DCEU"
Gizmodo: "But today, Reeves decided to put the rumor to rest, at least for now: he just took to Twitter to confirm that The Batman is firmly entrenched within the timeline of the DCEU continuity."
Collider: "Today, the director hopped on twitter to clear things up, revealing that the film will indeed be a part of the existing cinematic universe, it just won’t focus on cameos, world-building, and other universe tie-ins. It will be a Batman movie and a Batman movie alone."
IGN: "The Batman Is in the DCEU, Director Matt Reeves Clarifies"
Polygon: "Reeves comments seem to confirm that, much like Wonder Woman, The Batman will have to abide by the rules set in place by the DCU."

And some others:

Screen Rant: "Matt Reeves Confirms The Batman Is Part of the DCEU"
CinemaBlend: "Seemingly realizing that he has officially kicked a hornet's nest of geek anxiety, the War for the Planet of the Apes director has taken to Twitter to clarify his remarks and reaffirm The Bat's place in the DCEU [...] This is a DCEU Batman movie, but it's only going to focus on Batman."
Newsarama: "Matt Reeves has backtracked on his earlier statement that the film would not be part of the DC Extended Universe, saying now on Twitter that the film would be in-continuity with the other DC Films but would not feature any non-Batman characters."
ComingSoon: "Now, however, Reeves has taken to Twitter to clarify his remarks and confirm the film will be part of the larger cinematic universe, just that it won’t have ties to the other films."
AV Club: "Reeves has now clarified his comments, explaining that by “not part of the extended universe” he meant that the movie would solely be about Batman, not any of the other Justice League heroes."
ComicBookResources: "The Batman Will ‘Of Course’ Be in the DCEU, Director Says"
Starburst: "Now, the director has taken to social media to clarify his comments and ensure us all that the upcoming solo movie for the Caped Crusader will indeed be a part of the DC Extended Universe."

You're getting too caught up in a shorthanded form of DC [Extended] Universe, and ignoring everything else. Prefall 22:20, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

While I remain thoroughly convinced at the (largely WP:OR) assertion that DCU Universe is the same thing as DC Extended Universe, I am going to relent at this time. If at some juncture it does not become crystal clear that this is within the DCEU - described as interconnected set of movies taking place within the DC Universe, we will revisit this matter, and I will point out that no further clarification has come from neither Reeves nor the studio. I will further point out that all of the above sources are speculating. I will probably not relent at that point. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 04:00, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Heads up about status changes

Some of these movies have tentative or no release dates. And that's okay. There is no rush until we have solid references that indicate such. I point this out because I just had to point this out to at least two regular editors who changed the Shazam 2 article without adding a reference regarding its change in status. You absolutely must include this; this is not a fan forum and we don't Sherlock our way through articles. If you don't have the time to properly cite something, do not add it. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 04:52, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Once again, the reference for the title is already on the page: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/shazam-sequel-lands-april-2022-release-1262245 It's used to source this sentence: "for a scheduled release date of April 1, 2022." In THR source, it states "New Line and Warner Bros. announced Thursday that DC's family friendly Shazam! 2 is officially a go, and will hit theaters April 1, 2022." Trailblazer101 (talk) 05:07, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

I appreciate you taking the time to some to the talk page and explain yourself. Clearly, had this been done beforehand, the back-and-forth could have easily been avoided, don't you agree? Conversation via edit summary never, ever works.

As an aside, I've developed a healthy skepticism when it comes to April 1 releases; they are sometimes practical jokes by the studios who sometimes use early April dates as 'soft' release dates in the industry (see The New Mutants (film) for an excellent example of this). I would be willing to be good coffee and donuts that Shazam! 2 will not be released in April. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 06:39, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

The first Shazam! was released in April too. It may end up getting shifted around due to competition, but I'm sure it's a genuine date. Prefall 07:06, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

they are sometimes practical jokes by the studios who sometimes use early April dates as 'soft' release dates in the industry—WP:OR. I also have no idea why you followed me here and blindly reverted my edit. It was abundantly clear I was citing a reference that is already present in the article, and you provided no reason as to why you did. JOE BRO 64 17:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

I'd like to ask you to take a firm grip on WP:AGF and allow it to guide your posts, TheJoeBro. No one "followed" you here, and I certainly didn't "blindly" revert your edit. I knew precisely what I was doing, and I stand by the edit. No one is out to get you. Focus on the edits, and not the editors, and you will find your time here a lot more enjoyable. Trust me on this.

After reading your comment, I did a little research, however. I am now aware that you have a ton of time invested in developing out the sandbox article for the Batman 2021 film, judging by the fact that you have shown up with edits promoting it in three separate areas where I have been editing for years. I would suggest that you are jumping the gun a little bit in this regard. There isn't that much to say about the barely-formed film yet, and you should probably wait until more information comes to light that gives you more than just a whisper of connection. I think you are going to find that treating Wikipedia like some crufty fanboy gossip mill is going to meet with a lot of resistance.

Lastly, the bit I added about studio practices was an aside to show that the industry often does things like this; yes, its my personal knowledge, having worked in production scheduling for two different major studios in the LA area. You don't have to believe it, but your lack of belief doesn't make it any less true. Ans you will note that I wasn't trying to add it to the article; it was meant as advice on being patient and awaiting further evidence. There is no hurry to rush out the article for a film that isn't even scheduled for release for another year and a half. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 19:03, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

I apologize if I'm coming off as assuming bad faith (I just found it a bit odd we bumped into each other here as well, as your username didn't pop up in the archives), but as I've spent a ton of time reading up on the film I haven't yet seen a compelling reason to label it as part of a separate franchise yet. It was envisioned as a DCEU film when development began, and Reeves hasn't said anything to indicate that's changed (quite the opposite, in fact). The only sources I've seen that say it won't be part of the DCEU are unreliable sites like WeGotThisCovered (which get their "sources" via banana phone) and opinion pieces (not actual reports). I'm not trying to "promote" the film, it's just me trying to keep things consistent on Wikipedia and with reliable sources. JOE BRO 64 19:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

I am really glad to hear that, TheJoeBro64; we'll just call it a misunderstanding. :)

I made a point earlier about the over-reliance of an older, vague reference about the connection of Batman 2021 to the DCEU. I would suggest adding the film as a no-wiki (rendering it invisible in article space) until we have better sources that conclusively connect it to the DCEU. If we get them, we simply uncover the film. If not, we can finally love it to where it should be. Do you think that is a fair solution for now? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 19:30, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

We couldn't create an article for Shazam! 2 even if we wanted to. Future films only become notable when filming has started. El Millo (talk) 19:18, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

In fairness, WP:OSE comes into play here a bit. There have been films that never saw the light of day from their spot within Development Hell, while others were cannibalized for source material for other films and/or tv series. We could start an article, where it be a stub that grew up into an article as information was added to it. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 19:30, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Well, yeah. But all articles for canceled films I've seen became notable for all the media coverage it received and for the long time it was supposed to be released. The only example that comes to mind now is Gambit (unproduced film). El Millo (talk) 19:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)