Gone (Bat)Girl

First of all, let me apologize for the title. Secondly, did you see that the Batgirl movie just got, I don't know, what's the word? Cancelled? Shelved? Locked in a drawer? 

It'll be nestled securely between that unreleased Fantastic Four movie
someone made just to keep the rights, and the Arc of the Covenant. 

It's not a movie unless you're watching it in
a recliner with a thirty-two ounce sugar water,
and some asshole kid kicking your seatback. 

The point is Warner Bros, the studio that put out Superman Returns with a straight face, has decided not to release Batgirl despite the film being nearly completed. According to Variety--sorry, I know how I sound, I don't read Variety or anything, that's just where I saw this story--anyway, according to Variety, it's not because the movie sucks but rather it's because Warner Bros. decided that going forward, their DC movies should be "at a blockbuster scale." Batgirl, evidently, was going to be released directly to HBO's streaming service and so just doesn't fit their...I don't know, standards? 

And look, I don't particularly care about comic book movies, especially DC's comic book movies, but I'd have watched this. I like Batman and Batman-related things. Well, except for that Joker movie with Joachim Phoenix. I had no interest in that whatsoever. But sure, I'd watch Batgirl. I wouldn't care that it's not "blockbuster" scale, whatever that means.

He's the Joker, not Hamlet. I'm sorry, but I don't need a two hour psychological thriller
about a murder clown whose most interesting character trait is that Batman punches him.

Which, again, this is the same company
that brought us The Green Lantern.

Doesn't matter. What I want to know is, if it's not a question of quality, why not just put it out there? Like, it's done (or nearly) done, right? There are dozens of middling quality animated movies and TV series based on DC characters, what's one more? This is where I've got to think that maybe they're being less than honest and maybe the movie just isn't working. I'm not like a film industry person (I don't even read Variety), but I'd have to think that someone at the studio would have to be worried that the film's quality would somehow damage ugh...the brand.  

"Because Justice is Gray."

-subtle metaphor

It has to be that. Batgirl cost ninety million dollars. To just save it to a hard drive and lock it in a drawer forever seems like a tremendous waste of time, money, and effort. It would have to kill anyone who watches it within seven days for this move to make sense. Remember when they released the Justice League movie? And it bombed, so caving to internet pressure, they spent another twenty-five million to re-release it as an interminable streaming release which was a marginal improvement? At best? And then they re-re-realeased it black and white? They took three swings at it, but can't give Batgirl even one?

And beyond the financial investment, hundreds of artists and technicians worked on this thing for months. People's careers are affected. It was Leslie Grace's first big thing since In the Heights. It would have been Brendan Fraser's first film role in ten years. Even Micheal Keaton was coming back as Batman. All I'm getting at is given the quality of the DC movies to date, how much damage could it possibly do?

Warner Bros.' treatment of Batgirl is only slightly better than
DC's, so I suppose in some ways we should be grateful.