The Flash (movie or return of Batman 89)

[Earth 2 Chris]

One of the staff on Screen Crush saw the version screen at Cinema Con about two months ago, and at that time, they had already removed Keaton and Calle from the ending. I've read confilicting reports that Cavill was on set with Keaton in one version, so I don't know. But there ARE set photos of Keaton, Calle and Miller in front of the courthouse. But the Cinema Con screening had no Keaton, but no Clooney either. Instead, you only saw Bruce Wayne's foot come out of the car, and Miller's Barry Allen react with "Who the BLEEP is that?", and then fade to black. I would have of course preferred Keaton, but this would have worked too, and set up the yet-to-be cast actor Gunn wants for his Brave and the Bold film, with (yuck) Damian. Well, it's yuck to me. I still hate Damian. I know others dig him, but I can't stand him. Just my opinion.

Cavill defintiely seemed to get caught up in the territorial peeing match over the control of DC's movies, with Gunn putting the kibosh on anything Dwayne Johnson had been touting, including Cavill's return as Superman. Both he and Keaton got screwed over a lot of petty squabbling, I feel. Keaton went from a two-picture deal to an aborted one-picture deal, cobbled by reshoots. And you think WB would remember how much money Keaton made them on Batman '89. Those current 100th Anniversary documentaries are certainly waxing his Batmobile.

[MIB41]

I really have grown to dislike the ending. At the very least, even without Cavill and Gadot in the scene, Keaton and Calle should have showed up, as filmed, because Gunn is going to wipe this all away anyhow. Yes, a few regimes back, Keaton was intended to stick around indefinitely as the DCEU's Batman (like in the Batgirl film), but since everything's being tossed out, they could have at least let us know, somewhere, Keaton and Calle are out there, and did not just die over and over. Clooney was a fun gag, but it shouldn't have been at the expense of the movie. Gunn's sense of cheeky humor is usually fun, but I can't help but feel this was kind of an F-U to just about everyone before him. That last end-credit scene was awful to me from the get-go, and undid a lot of the character growth from James Wan's Aquaman film.

As for this being the REAL 1989/1992 Batman, in my head canon, it isn't. Keaton's Batcave never had the huge waterfall, that's a Bale/Nolan thing. So this is a variation of Batman that's closer to Batman '89 than any other, but it's not THE '89 Batman. At least for me.

EXACTLY!!! From everything I have read, this was only inserted weeks before the public release and so much of what people saw in the early screenings had the Cavill, Kara, and Keaton ending instead of this travesty. With everyone talking about how this was a celebration of Keaton and if you were a fan you would really like it, I felt really duped when I walked out of the theater. Its like Gunn set everyone up to be disappointed, all for a gag.

Now obviously I was not there for any of these internal discussions, but the way the studio talked and the way Cavill expressed a renewed investment in the Superman role (after thinking he was done), it certainly seemed like keeping Cavill was the direction they had attached themselves to while this film was being made. So when Gunn was hired, suddenly he makes all of these very dismissive remarks that Cavill was never going to continue as Superman, which lacked any sensitivity or dignity for the actor and skewed on a more personal level. So now having seen the movie and had time to consider the nonsensical logic of the ending, a flip off seemed like the choice selected by Gunn so he could show a complete indifference to Cavill's Superman as being merely a dead baby in space that never became anything. And killing Keaton's Batman would silence any talk of him coming back. So it felt like it was all done not for creative choices that would benefit the film, but ones to remove any legitimacy to the previous DC universe in favor of his new vision.

And what can we say for the fate of Aquaman 2 now? Send that puppy to streaming because its DOA at theaters. Great start Gunn... You can BANK WB execs are already nervous wondering if they created a Snyder 2.0 with Gunn. That seems to be the history of their choices. They always put all their eggs in one basket.

[Earth 2 Chris]

^All valid points Tom. We never learn who killed Barry's mother. In the comics, it was Reverse Flash, but they theorize here it's just a random robbery gone wrong, and the guy thought the house was empty, but how does he know that? And great point about confronting the killer. I honestly figured Young Barry was going to be the Dark Flash, and that he would go nuts enough to kill DCEU Barry's mom over some kind of betrayal.

While I did enjoy the movie, it doesn't hold up to a lot of scrutiny, and a lot of that is the puppet strings showing. Why was Keaton's Batman disheveled and reluctant to help, but still in great enough shape to kick butt in the kitchen, and later as Batman? Given the other costumes we see in his vault, I can imagine this Batman had more "out-there" adventures, so the time-travel theorist part works a bit better for me, but it is kind of strange for Keaton's Batman.

I really have grown to dislike the ending. At the very least, even without Cavill and Gadot in the scene, Keaton and Calle should have showed up, as filmed, because Gunn is going to wipe this all away anyhow. Yes, a few regimes back, Keaton was intended to stick around indefinitely as the DCEU's Batman (like in the Batgirl film), but since everything's being tossed out, they could have at least let us know, somewhere, Keaton and Calle are out there, and did not just die over and over. Clooney was a fun gag, but it shouldn't have been at the expense of the movie. Gunn's sense of cheeky humor is usually fun, but I can't help but feel this was kind of an F-U to just about everyone before him. That last end-credit scene was awful to me from the get-go, and undid a lot of the character growth from James Wan's Aquaman film.

As for this being the REAL 1989/1992 Batman, in my head canon, it isn't. Keaton's Batcave never had the huge waterfall, that's a Bale/Nolan thing. So this is a variation of Batman that's closer to Batman '89 than any other, but it's not THE '89 Batman. At least for me.

[MIB41]

SPOILERS***
SPOILERS***
SPOILERS***

I struggled with Barry's thinking that having his dad at home would have changed the outcome. If you have the power to go back in time to save your mom, who was murdered, wouldn't your first thought be to confront the killer, not worry about a can of beans in the grocery store so your dad doesn't have to go out to get them? I understand he is not supposed to tamper with history, but how does he know that everything hinges on a can of beans when he didn't actually see who did it and why? It was such a ludicrous leap of logic, because his thinking is all based on his dad's alibi with that video rather than just getting to the root cause.

His arch nemesis is the Reverse Flash and he is abandoned for a can of beans plot device? Ouch... And when did Keaton's Bruce Wayne become a theorist on time travel to explain it to Barry Allen like Tony Stark? That was completely outside his parameters established in the Tim Burton films, so I could never believe that. Allot of things just happened to advance the story, not because they made any sense. Plus since Barry Allen never learned his lesson with the infamous can of beans to exonerate his dad, we don't know what timeline he is truly in now since Keaton's Batman does not exist again.

Adding Clooney might have made for a good laugh, but it really messed up what could have been a satisfactory landing with Cavill's Superman standing there with Kara and Keaton's Batman, eliminating all the bad things that happen to them. Instead I am left with the last cinematic image of Keaton's Batman having blood come out of his mouth, while dying in Flash's arms?! I don't accept that as canon. It all feels like a movie that was originally made with an entirely different objective, then changed endlessly to satisfy the next head honcho in charge. Maybe we should call this Justice League 2.0? Better yet, can we go back in time and eliminate James Gunn? Move those cans of beans to a different shelf so he misses the call to become the head of DC? (;

[Earth 2 Chris]

^Yeah, the director said he had to cut a lot out. Considering some people are saying the Multiversal cameos were distracting, maybe they were right to cut them down. But they should have got Lynda Carter in there.

[jwyblejr]

Word is there's a four-hour version with more cameos. More stuff from '66 Batman,Marlon Brando and Lynda Carter are in that.

[palitoy]

Took the whole family today and really enjoyed it. So many meta moments but I think the film hinges on if you like what Miller is doing. If you don't, then it's likely hell.

[mego maniac mark]

I saw it Friday and loved it too. It’s fun and has great call backs. The wonky CGI is from Barry’s perspective. Loved Keaton’s return to the big screen.

[supes]

I saw it today and absolutely loved it!! Keaton was awesome! Can't wait to see it again!

[Wee67]

For me, I'm glad they went with the CGI look, because if they'd tried a deepfake-type look, it may have been ghoulish with Reeves, Reeve, West, etc.

Agreed. At first, I thought it was bad CGI until I realized it was a choice. And given the other options, I think it was a good one for all the reasons you've listed.

I really enjoyed the movie. Even Ezra Miller. I wonder if it's because I don't have a strong history with the Flash. I didn't read the book much as a kid, so any variations from cannon wouldn't bother me.

[Earth 2 Chris]

Now the part with the Multiverse was too CGI heavy and it didn't have to be. Even the Arrowverse COIE & Titans multiverse stories were told better because they used real footage and actors. That Earth 2 Flash was wrong, he was Zoom in the Arrowverse. Now seeing that unaired Superman movie was a nice touch, but the rest just didn't look right.

For me, I'm glad they went with the CGI look, because if they'd tried a deepfake-type look, it may have been ghoulish with Reeves, Reeve, West, etc. Everything in the Speed Force "Chrono Bowl" looked that way from the very first scene there, so it was established, even moments of the film we saw just minutes ago had that look. It was a controversial choice that's going to get them a lot of flack, but for me in the end, it was a more consistent one than "fake Chris Reeve looked creepy". That's just my opinion.

As for Teddy Sears' Jay Garrick, I'm guesing that was a chocie to "right a wrong" like Nicholas Cage as Superman, and Chris Reeve and Helen Slater actually being on screen together. Sears got screwed out of not really being Jay for a big twist reveal. It's either that, or he pulled a Walter Koenig/Chekov move and didn't mention he wasn't REALLY Jay Garrick!

[monitor_ep]

This morning boyfriend & I went and watch The Flash. It was alright, but I did not go to see The Flash.

I went to see Batman 89 and that was the best part of the movie. Even wore my new Batman '89 t-shirt:
batman 89.jpg
https://www.ebay.com/itm/364065681077?var=633403710749

Now the part with the Multiverse was too CGI heavy and it didn't have to be. Even the Arrowverse COIE & Titans multiverse stories were told better because they used real footage and actors. That Earth 2 Flash was wrong, he was Zoom in the Arrowverse. Now seeing that unaired Superman movie was a nice touch, but the rest just didn't look right.

[thunderbolt]

If I was the creators of the 90's Fox TV Show Sliders, i'd seriously start thinking about a lawsuit

Comics have been doing multiple realities etc for far longer than Sliders

[Werewolf]

The story seems more like a butterfly effect kind of thing.

[Mikey]

If I was the creators of the 90's Fox TV Show Sliders, i'd seriously start thinking about a lawsuit