The DCEU Needs a Batman Beyond Film to Move Past the Affleck Era

Warner Bros. isn't having the best year. Two of its biggest stars are rumored to no longer be playing Batman and Superman, and its latest crossover has been universally panned — even by stalwart Snyder fans. In addition, three of its other four DC films over the past five years have proven schismatic, dividing fans and critics like no other superhero movie ever has before.

If the studio's recent production choices are any indication, Warner Bros. is currently dissatisfied with its original plans for the DC Extended Universe, and has since tried to reshuffle its formula to cope.

And yet, this has only given rise to more problems. Instead of refocusing its efforts on creative cohesion and tonal improvements, and on fixing its relationship with on-again, off-again director Zack Snyder, the studio is plagued by a ceaseless need to reboot, in its hopes to finally realign DC's overarching movie narrative and satisfy its divided audience.

Unfortunately, Warner Bros.' constant indecision has resulted in a fragmented vision for the DCEU, and a brand of leadership that has begun to adversely affect DC Comics' most beloved properties. Warner Bros.' Batman solo film, for instance, has been on hold for God knows how long, and despite reports of Warner Bros. supposedly loving director Matt Reeves' initial screenplay, the movie is plagued by production problems of its own.

For one thing, actor Ben Affleck is reportedly not playing the caped crusader anymore, and there hasn't been any word on who will be taking his place. Little has also been said about the type of Batman, or Gotham, the film intends to portray, other than a subtle change in tone.

This has led fans to actively speculate on the actual status of Reeves' solo Batman film, if the movie has somehow fallen prey to Warner Bros.'s splintered leadership and constantly changing plans for the DCEU. So far, Warner Bros.

has confirmed — and denied — nothing.

However, there is a way out of the rabbit hole dug by Warner Bros., and that is to set Reeves' Batman film as far away from the Affleck era as possible — in setting, storyline and tone — allowing the character and its surrounding lore to grow away from all the production problems while still releasing quality movies. Doing so would buy Warner Bros. just enough time to come up with a more lasting solution.

And what better out-of-this-world story to adapt than Bruce Timm, Paul Dini and Alan Burnett's 1999 hit Batman Beyond?

Page 2: [valnet-url-page page=2 paginated=0 text='How%2C%20and%20Why%2C%20Warner%20Bros.%20Should%20Take%20Batman%20Beyond%20Bruce%20Wayne']

Warner Bros.' current problems revolve around its present vision for the DCEU. Whether or not Snyder's vision was actually tasteless is debatable; the point is, Warner Bros. no longer wants anything to do with it and is looking for a way out. A live-action Batman Beyond is not exactly a permanent way out, but it is a temporary escape while Warner Bros. desperately tries to reprogram and understand its ideas.

A Batman Beyond film could also allow the DCEU to work out its studio-wide writer's block — pretty much the one thing keeping Warner Bros. idle, erratic, and stubbornly unyielding — and enable some of its films to finally move forward. In short, Warner Bros. needs to temporarily get away from its present vision of the DCEU to wriggle itself out of the rut.

Batman Beyond action pose from the animated series

One way of sidestepping this would be to set The Batman on a different point in the timeline or on a different Earth, similar to The CW's Flash and Patty Jenkins' Wonder Woman. The Flash is set on different Earths and time periods, while Woman Woman is set far flung into the past.

Aquaman features the same idea. Arthur Curry's origin film is set years before the events of Justice League, allowing the story some degree of flexibility. Todd Phillips' untitled Joker film is conceptually identical, being set in a different version of Batman's world and acting as something that may or may not be Jared Leto's Joker's origin story.

Refocusing the film on a future event that is not affected or in any way limited by other stories occurring in the same time period will allow a Batman film to become much more standalone and stylistically independent.

There's no risk of messing up the bigger narrative, and the cast and crew are free to tinker with the elements as they wish, which is why developing something like Batman Beyond -- set many years after the Justice League's glory days, and featuring a retired and elderly Bruce Wayne -- would be such a game-changer.

Opting for a live-action Batman Beyond instead of a prequel film also allows filmmakers to sidestep Bruce Wayne — by far the biggest element of contention in Matt Reeves' The Batman. A Batman Beyond film allows Warner Bros. to set aside worries about Wayne for a little while and refocus on another player with a similar character trajectory; namely, a protégé that could also, theoretically, take on the same mantle.

Page 3: [valnet-url-page page=3 paginated=0 text='Batman%20Beyond%20Is%20Terry%20McGinnis%20-%20But%20He%20Doesn%27t%20Have%20To%20Be']

There are several characters that could replace Bruce Wayne as Batman in a future version of Gotham City, of course. The first Robin, Dick Grayson, is best known as Nightwing, but he already has a solo film planned, while the two subsequent Robins, Jason Todd and Tim Drake, are better known as Red Hood and Red Robin, respectively.

This leaves us with two other contenders: Commissioner Jim Gordon and Damian Wayne. Gordon debuted as Batman in Scott Snyder's Batman #41, while Damian adopted the cowl in Grant Morrison's Batman #666, set in a nightmarish future Gotham City.

Both were decidedly good runs, but these two are nowhere near as well-liked as Terry McGinnis, Wayne's other son and the Batman of Batman Beyond.

Relegating Batman Prime to a mentor-type role and shoving another Batman into the foreground will allow Warner Bros. to finally produce a Batman film without necessarily having to use Bruce Wayne, basically working around the original problem without actually dropping the glue that holds everything together.

This is exactly the same idea behind canceling Marvel's Iron Fist, yet promising that he will continue to appear in other Marvel properties — spinoffs included; or Hank Pym still existing in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, yet handing the mantle of the Ant-Man to Scott Lang while Pym becomes his mentor.

This method allows the character to live on in a story set in the same universe, without actually needing to focus the spotlight on that same hero. It's a nifty workaround, and might just be what Warner Bros. needs to get over that block, move on from Affleck, and get out of that rabbit hole.

The script for Matt Reeves' The Batman has reportedly already been written, so all this might be moot. But if Warner Bros. truly intends to carve a future away from the Affleck films, as well as everything else within the same breadth, then a live-action Batman Beyond is the way to go.

As the original Beyond has proven, sometimes what might seem like the end could also be a new beginning. In the case of Warner Bros. and the DCEU, maybe the solution can be found by stepping forward, rather than doubling back.