Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Yeah, but that is the arc of the character. Everyone is acting as though this is a desperate reaction to BvS flopping, but it didn't and this isn't. I am as tired of the media coverage of the DC movies as I am their coverage of politics.

652 (edited by Informant 2017-08-21 20:30:11)

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

So, Joss Whedon's ex wife has written an essay! … cole-says/

It says nothing that we didn't know if we were paying attention to Joss' career. Basically, he's an asshole who uses feminism as a way of hiding his misdeeds.

As I said, I've known this stuff for a long time. Anyone who knew about how he treated Charisma Carpenter would know that he wasn't a feminist. Add to that, his many un-feminist themes (which seemed to celebrate abuse and rape at times, which made for great TV sometimes, but not a feminist angle at all). The man has been using the feminist act to build up his own career and ego for a long, long time. So I'm happy to see that it's finally being discussed openly.

The question is, what does this mean for Batgirl? He was obviously hired because "Feminist!", so what does the studio do with it now? Do they stand by the man who apparently drove his wife insane an, to some degree, did it on purpose? What would that look like, having him as the director of an iconic female superhero?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I'd love to read the article, but every time I click on it, it's a full page ad for Westworld that I cannot click out of.  I maximize the screen, scroll all over, and there's nowhere to click out of.  Thanks, thewrap!

Honestly, I don't think this affects anything.  Unless Joss is somehow responsible for the Justice League movie failing, I think he's locked in if he wants to be.  He might even get his stock risen higher if he gets credit for Justice League's success, especially if some of the female characters (Diana, Lois, Iris, Mera, etc) have great scenes with Joss' fingerprints on it.

At this point, I think his reputation is cemented, and this interview won't affect much.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Informant wrote:

The question is, what does this mean for Batgirl? He was obviously hired because "Feminist!", so what does the studio do with it now? Do they stand by the man who apparently drove his wife insane an, to some degree, did it on purpose? What would that look like, having him as the director of an iconic female superhero?

Well, if he touches on The Killing Joke mythology, then he could present Barbara being shot, paralyzed from the waist down and then stripped naked so that Joker can use the photos as part of an attempt to drive her father crazy.  Actually sounds like something that would fit into the Snyder-depressionverse.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

If I were Warner Bros., I would fire Whedon off BATGIRL immediately and hire Joe Wright (HANNA) to direct and Doris Egan (HOUSE) to write the script -- not because I believe the stories about Whedon, but because the optics are too bad to ignore.

I don't have much behind the scenes knowledge of Whedon's behaviour. I've heard two versions of the Charisma Carpenter firing; the first is that she was fired for getting pregnant. The second is that she became difficult to work with following a miscarriage due to her depression and grief, resulting in highly acidic behaviour towards the other cast and crew that led to her removal from the series.

I have always found it strange to accuse Whedon of celebrating abuse and rape in his writing when fictional characters are designed to suffer for dramatic purposes. Being a feminist and having sex with lots of different women are not mutually exclusive values.

But having sex outside of the committed marriage to which you've agreed is unacceptable. If you want to be a player, don't marry someone as your one and only. It is also unacceptable to engage in romantic or sexual relationships with women whom you employ and whose careers you control; there are inherent power imbalances that are destructive.

I hope that Kai Cole's account isn't true. Whedon's non-denial denial, however, was so empty that it made Cole's account of being gaslit and traumatized to be all the more credible. As far as the world is concerned, Whedon cheated on his wife constantly and he had affairs with people with whom he was in a position of authority and control. He allowed his wife to think they were monogamous, meaning she had no knowledge of what STDs she might be exposed to, and he knowingly and indifferently traumatized her with his infidelities.

If you have any details, please share them. However, if this is going to be another Wil Wheaton situation where you allude vaguely and never offer specifics, please don't.

In the Bryan Singer case, Singer was unequivocal in declaring his innocence and was able to prove that he had been in Toronto when his accuser claimed Singer had raped him in Hawaii. The plaintiff in that case was later exposed as a serial liar and conman. In this instance, Whedon has refused to comment, allowing these accusations to stand unchallenged.

From a public relations standpoint, it looks true. If Whedon isn't going to defend himself, then he needs to wrap up his work on JUSTICE LEAGUE, then leave film, TV and comics. His reputation as it stands will now damage every female-forward project he touches.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I've seen suggestions of behavioral problems with Charisma in the past, but I've never seen anyone who actually knew what they were talking about. It all seemed like people making wild guesses based on the fact that she was fired. If you have a more legit version of that story, I'd be really interested in seeing it.

However, the story from Charisma is that she had been dealing with her own personal stuff (there may have been more than one miscarriage) which probably contributed to the stress, but Joss actually got mad at her when she revealed that she was pregnant, because it ruined his plans for the season. Not only did he fire her... he didn't actually tell her that he fired her. She found out about it in the press, and she found out about it after she'd missed pilot season, which was a sh*tty move on the part of the Angel producers. Especially since they'd been working with her for seven seasons by that point.
So the next year, they asked her to return to the show. She was hesitant, because she didn't want to come back if she was just going to be killed off. They swore that they weren't going to kill her off, and eventually, they talked her into signing. After she signed, they told her that she was going to be killed off.
Charisma tells the story in a joking manner, saying that she actually liked the approach once they told her, but the fact is, they lied to her and manipulated her into coming back.

That story is relevant to me because it reminds me of what they did with Robia LaMorte. After season 2 of Buffy, Robia had a life changing experience where she became a born-again Christian (she is now a minister, so it was a huge deal for her, not some subtle event). She signed on to appear on season 3 of Buffy, believing that she would be playing some form of Jenny Calendar. Instead, she found out (after signing) that she was going to be playing the Buffyverse equivalent of Satan. It was something that she was very uncomfortable with. It was another example of the bait and switch that Joss and his team used, which I find distasteful (it's Hollywood, so I'm not shocked by it. I just think it's in poor taste to sign someone under false pretenses when you know they will be uncomfortable).

To be clear, I don't care if Joss isn't a feminist. I'm not a feminist. I don't like the militant feminists that Joss has always pretended to be, so that's not what bothers me about him. It's the con he pulls with it. He used feminism to sell his work and to turn himself into some sort of feminist icon, and I have always found it frustrating because I've always seen right through it. I've always seen the "hot girl on girl" vibe  in his work while other people were going on about "empowering lesbian relationships". I've always seen the flaw in his presenting his work as feminist, while depicting abuse toward women in a strangely positive light. Buffy went from one very abusive relationship to the next, and it was played as romance. Echo was a mindless sex slave who didn't even develop a personality until somewhere in season 2 (by which point they were just falling back on old apocalypse stories on Dollhouse, because they had no original stories to play). Cordelia was impregnated by demons something like three times on Angel! And in one early idea for Firefly, Joss wanted to show us a syringe that Inara kept on hand in case of an attack. Essentially, she would inject herself and whoever sexually assaulted her would die. In the early episode pitch, Joss suggested that Inara would be captured by reavers and taken to their ship. When Mal found her, every reaver on the ship would be dead, suggesting that they had all raped Inara... and only at this point would Mal begin to treat Inara as a woman, rather than a whore.

Again, I'm not saying that it's not valid to put women through crap in stories. I'm just saying that it always seemed strange to me that Joss was going on about being a feminist activist while telling these stories. The feminist angle was BS from the start. Anyone who reads his tweets will see him comparing women to dogs, or criticizing the appearance of teenage girls who survived cancer (!!!!!). So when he gets jobs like Batgirl because of his feminist street creds, I get annoyed. Not even because the feminist stuff is an act, but because Joss hasn't produced anything worthwhile since Firefly was on TV. His Avengers movies are crap. Dollhouse was crap. Most of Angel was crap. Even Serenity fell far, far below the level of writing found on the Firefly series. Joss has taken to fluffing his ego rather than telling stories, as I've been saying for years.

I don't really care about Justice League. I think people are probably blowing his role as stand-in director way out of proportion. What he's filming was probably approved of and planned by Snyder before he left (which is probably why he was working with Joss in the first place), and it's actually not that unusual for someone else to direct bits and pieces of movies that are officially directed by someone else. I think the media is running with it because it feeds into the narrative of the DCEU being a flop, but in reality, it's just someone filling in after something truly horrible happened. And if the rumors are true that Joss is taking this opportunity to change the tone and purpose of the movie without Snyder's blessing, it just confirms that he is a douchebag on a truly massive level. And we will be able to tell, because Joss' writing style is pretty distinctive (meaning that he doesn't really write different characters and styles. They all just talk like Joss). We'll have to comment on Justice League after we see it and know how it turns out.
Batgirl is a different story. He got that job for one reason, and he doesn't deserve it. He was never the best choice for that job, and Kai Cole's essay just highlights that point.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I don't have any more information or opinions about Joss except that I believe Kai Cole's allegations to be true because Joss has failed to refute them.

... honestly, it makes me think about ME, because I am a ridiculously self-involved person. There's a lot of bad behaviour in my past, and while I was equally terrible to all people, some of them were women and every time I see someone taken down publicly, I wonder how long it is before my own misdeeds come back to bring me crashing down.

And every time the Joss Whedons and Devin Faracis and Brian Woods of the world come crashing down, I wonder if and when the consequences of my poor choices from the person I used to be will blow apart the person I've become. That said, I never assaulted anybody and my misdeeds are more spoken than acted.

Which may be why I always liked how Dan Harmon presents himself as a defective, malfunctioning wreck. “I am not a good person; that's why I want to make a good show for good people,” he declared once. “A fan of COMMUNITY doesn't have to be a fan of Dan Harmon. I am a creepy jerk.” Well, so was I. I think I’m better now, but changing myself never seems to change what I did.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Nobody is perfect. Everyone has done something horribly naive or selfish or stupid, and hopefully we learn and grow because of it. The problem with Joss is that he got some attention from Buffy, and rather than downplay this god-like reputation that he developed, he fed into it. He altered stories in order to feed into the praises that he was getting for himself. And this wasn't just a phase that he went through, it's been the last 15 years. As I've always said, it's not that Joss is untalented. He has a lot of talent and I learned a lot from what he created. The problem is that he put aside the talent and the art at some point, and he began to build himself more than his stories. In doing so, he began to treat others as less than him.

When Buffy became more about pandering to whichever group was giving Joss the highest praises at that moment, the show's quality fell hard and fast. When Serenity was less about honoring Firefly, it's characters and the things that people loved about the show and supported for so long, the movie turned into something that was almost insulting.

I can separate my feelings between a writer/director/actor and the work they put out. I don't have to like them in order to like their work. With Joss, it became pointless to try separating the two. That's a problem.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant … e#/slide/1

If any of this is true, what do we think?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Reeves claims that he was misquoted and it will absolutely be in the DCEU.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I was going to look into the comment more, since it made such little sense. Glad to see that he clarified it himself, so I don't have to do any work. smile

It's weird how the reporting on these geeky movies has gotten so political. The media outlets and the fans behave the same way toward them as the media reports on political issues, and people follow their party lines. It's fascinating. Do geeks take these things too seriously, or do people not take politics seriously enough?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant … e#/slide/1

I'm kinda glad that this was cut, but it's a cool tie-in to Justice League.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Yeah, I don't think they need that stuff. It seems like the thing to do because Marvel does it, but even the Marvel stuff is a waste of time more often than not.

I'm still holding out hope for a Special Edition of Wonder Woman that deletes the Ares crap at the end though.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Wonder Woman: Special Edition - Now featuring NO THIRD ACT!

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The General dude was set up as a villain that Diana could fight. They should have let him be that, while having Doctor Poison work on a weapon that she called Ares. It would have tied the plot together better this way. Actually showing Ares cut the legs out from under the movie.

I demand my Special Edition! smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant … e#/slide/1

667 (edited by Slider_Quinn21 2017-09-07 08:34:38)

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Can someone help walk me through what DC is doing here?  They're making:

- Suicide Squad 2 (with Harley Quinn and Jared Leto as Joker)
- A Joker/Harley movie (with Harley Quinn and Jared Leto as Joker)
- A Gotham City Sirens movie (with just Harley Quinn, maybe a Joker?)


- A Joker origin movie by Martin Scorsese not related to the DCEU and not played by Jared Leto

Elseworlds are cool and I think studios need to be more creative with these properties, but it's a bit odd to do 4 Joker movies with one out of continuity.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think Warner Bros. has a policy of letting people develop ideas and see where they go, and then they pull the plug when they don't go anywhere. I really don't invest too much thought in the early parts of their process, but I like that they at least keep their minds open to different ideas (and I'm equally thankful that they are willing to delay or cancel projects).

The Joker thing is weird, but with all of the anti-DCEU media coverage, I am just going to ignore the reports of doom until they're more substantial.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I mean it's not even about's just bizarre.  I think it'd work in-continuity too....just have it be the story of the *real* Joker that Batman faced.  Get Leonardo DiCaprio if that's who you how he became the Joker and how the Batman took him down and he died.

Jared Leto is still the Joker...just a Tim Drake or Jason Todd version that went crazy and became the new Joker.

To spend all this time making a shared universe and then immediately start doing out-of-continuity movies with characters that are in other movies at the same time is going to be super weird.  Why not do a "Heart of Ice" movie about Mr. Freeze?  He's certainly not going to be in the DCEU.  Or a Harvey Dent movie.  Or a Penguin movie.

Batman has tons of cool villains that could be protagonists in their own movie.  The Joker is literally the worst because he's better the less you know about him.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

It will probably never happen though, so I have no idea how it would work. Marvel has used some characters that 20th Century Fox was using, so it's been done. Yeah, it's weird, but if they can make money with it, I guess they will.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Let's do a Suicide Squad 2 with more Joker/Harley and see if that works before we do a Cinematic Jokerverse.  That's all I'm saying big_smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Oh, I agree. I don't like the idea. I'm just at a point where I can't really react to DCEU news anymore.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I just read an article which stated that Warner Bros. is waiting to see how Justice League does before they make a final decision on whether to make the Flash movie or not.

So this movie that we've all been expecting to be scrapped for some time now is going to be the big tell on how doomed the DCEU is. LOL.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The Flash movie is a bit of a mess and has been.  I don't think it needs to be scrapped, but I do think it needs to be done correctly.  I'm curious to see how Barry comes off as a character in Justice League.  Is he the comic relief that Wally was in the Justice League animated series?  Is he just goofy or kinda dumb?  It's really hard to tell based on the trailers, where he's been the comic relief and socially awkward.

Right now, the focus needs to be on Justice League, then Aquaman (which is setting up to be really cool), the Batman, Green Lantern Corps, and a Wonder Woman sequel.  Suicide Squad 2, Shazam, and the Flash should be the next tier.  I think a Joker/Harley movie, a Deadshot movie, a Nightwing or Batgirl movie, a Man of Steel sequel and some of the other spinoffs need to put on hold until they've had a couple more wins.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

In other news, I've decided to start avoiding anything related to Justice League until it comes out.  After the BvS marketing spoiled damn-near the entire movie, I like that I know basically nothing about what role Superman plays in this (aside from having some sort of interaction with Alfred).

I might get to see it early again.  If I do, I'll review it ASAP smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Yeah, I stopped watching trailers a while ago. Trailers ruin movies these days, because the marketing people have no idea who they're marketing to, or what these franchises are all about.

I don't think the DCEU has had any real failures, so I don't know that they need more wins before they make plans. I just prefer that they don't set some random release date and rush to put out half-baked movies (like Disney does).

Zachary Levi was just cast in the Shazam movie. That should be interesting. I can see him pulling off the whole "superhero body with a kid's mind" thing.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well, even if we disagree about misses, I think putting out all 20 or whatever rumored movies is a bad idea.  Consistently doing movies is fine...flooding the market is a bad idea IMHO.

These are fine, and I'm looking forward to all of them (although I'd heard Cyborg has been shelved) … e#Upcoming

These can come after or should be incorporated in some other manner. … se#Undated

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think we can debate back and forth about how good the movies were, but they've consistently performed well at the box office. The studio has nothing to be ashamed of when it comes to the box office numbers.

What I think Warner/DC is doing is developing ideas and seeing what works. There are a lot of movies in Hollywood that have directors attached and get through the scripting stage, but never actually get made. I think it's fine and even good for them to see where some of these ideas can go, but I don't think that we need all of them. Even Batgirl, as it stands now, should probably be scrapped. Incorporate her into a Batman movie, or even a Harley movie, but I don't know if that project sounds appealing on its own, at least to me. I'd rather see Nightwing. Or a Bat family movie.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

It's possible.  An optimist would say that they're trying to find whatever talent they can to make whatever properties they can.  If Lobo works and the Flash doesn't, make Lobo.  If we get Nightwing but no The Batman, that's fine.  Make the best movies they can with the best talent they can.

A pessimist could look at it and wonder if DC is just throwing ideas at the wall and hoping that people get behind them.  That instead of being proactive, they're being reactionary.  "You loved Batman in the trailers? MORE BATMAN!"  "You loved the humor in the Suicide Squad trailer.  MORE HUMOR!"  "You liked Wonder Woman?  MAKE HER THE STAR OF JUSTICE LEAGUE"  Stuff like that.

It's probably somewhere in the middle.  I just don't want DC to oversaturate the market.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant … ion-poster

With a 13-month gap between Justice League and Aquaman, 2018 will be a “reset year” for the studio to recalibrate their DC slate with more filmmaker-driven pictures focused on individual characters. They are deviating from their Marvel Studios competition by dumping the corporate mandate to put out particular films in a certain order. Right now the priority is the Flashpoint solo movie with Ezra Miller, Whedon’s Batgirl, Matt Reeves’ solo Batman movie, the Green Lantern Corps film, and two different Joker movies (one with Jared Leto and Margot Robbie’s Harley Quinn, and director Todd Phillips’ unconnected solo Joker movie set in the ’80s).

Sounds like Suicide Squad 2, Cyborg, and any Man of Steel followup are on the backburner.  What's weird is that the SHH article doesn't mention Shazam or the Black Adam movie, which we know are both moving forward.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I don't take seriously anymore. Their coverage of the comic book movies has been ridiculously biased, to the point where they fail to report details or fill in gaps with huge leaps in logic. As you said, we know that there are movies and details that aren't being reported in the report that you quoted. Warner Bros/DC has been doing the filmmaker-driven thing all along, and then you get articles about how Justice League is somehow reverting to a failed form because they have dumped the Patty Jenkins style.

It makes no sense.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well I'm quoting SHH because the WSJ article was paywalled and I don't enough to pay smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Yeah, i hate clicking headline links that lead there. smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

So Justice League is getting torn to shreds by the press, which is to be expected. The thing that makes it hard for me to take the reviews seriously is the fact that they're holding Wonder Woman up as the high point of the franchise, when that movie has more issues than probably any other DC movie.

The critical want it to be a Marvel movie and then slam it when it's not. They criticize Ben Affleck for being to dour as Batman... But that is Batman's role in the group. And some critics seem to be trying to spare Whedons work by picking out bits that sound like he would have added them, and praising those bits.

I may end up agreeing with the critics. If the studio tried to "correct" the franchise, it might suck. However, the reviews that I've seen are using phrasing that doesn't sit well with me.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

From what I've read (and I'm trying to stay away from reviews), the characters are great (including a new take on Superman and a great start for Flash/Aquaman/Cyborg) and their interaction really works.....but that the plot and villain are pretty weak.

It really makes me wonder why they went with Steppenwolf.  I know they don't want to start with Darkseid but there's tons of DC villains that would be a stepping stone to Darkseid.  Why someone so obscure?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think they've been trying to explore more obscure characters and storylines, keeping in mind that we have been exposed to a lot of these characters, in one form or another, for decades. Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman did the same thing.

The question is, are these just mainstream film reviewers who don't like the plot, or do comic book fans hate it too?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well, even the very positive reviews (and they're all tweet-length so no room for nuance) commented that the villain was weak. 

And going away from Luthor/Doomsday/etc is fine for me, but I think they might've gone way to the other side.  What about Mongul?  He's a guy who is less obscure, is a big-enough threat to create the Justice League, and is a smaller threat to Darkseid (so they can bring him in for a sequel to raise the stakes).  And he'd be visually-different enough from Doomsday/Darkseid/Ares/other giant grey villains.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Justice League has a Rotten Tomatoes score of 37%! Things are looking up! smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well, I thought JUSTICE LEAGUE was really fun and a good movie.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Slider_Quinn21 once remarked that he didn't see Marvel movies as 'real' films as much as Saturday morning cartoons in live action. Temporal Flux had the same view of SMALLVILLE. That's how I saw JUSTICE LEAGUE. It was good-natured, cheerful, speedily-paced fun with a focus on putting favourite characters in the same room and the plot either a framework or an afterthought. (It's the main flaw in my writing, too.)


The plot is just an excuse to justify Wonder Woman shoving Batman for bringing up her dead boyfriend, Batman hinting at a secret weapon to stop Superman which turns out to be Lois, the Flash frantically confessing to Batman that he's never been in a fight, Batman protesting to Superman that he in no way dislikes Clark, Aquaman confessing all his insecurities because he sat on Wonder Woman's lasso of truth, the Flash saving one truck and feeling emasculated by Superman saving an apartment building, Batman saying his superpower is being rich and, my favourite moment -- when Batman pulls his disappearing act on Commissioner Gordon but the Flash lingers awkwardly.

The complaints about the movie being disjointed are, I feel, the result of viewers being overly aware that Zack Snyder left the film before the reshoots and trying to identify which scenes are Whedon's and which are Snyder's and overly fixating on the computer alterations to Henry Cavill's face (which only looked awkward to me in two shots because I wasn't looking for problems). To me, this movie was made like the Season 6 paintball episode of COMMUNITY: the plot was full of holes and gaps and leaps of logic because the story was about the people, not the events..

I liked JUSTICE LEAGUE more than AVENGERS because where Whedon seemed to linger for far too long on getting the gang together for Marvel (despite four movies of setup), JUSTICE LEAGUE makes it happen rapidly.

I had a lot of fun. It's not a film filled with insight and inspiration; it's got way too many characters to service for that due to Cyborg, Flash and Aquaman lacking a solo debut in their own films, but it does a good job with its task list. It's too bad the movie isn't doing so well financially; I suspect that the audience, aware of the production difficulties and change of directors, is understandably not eager to spend crazy cineplex money on what they assume is a mis-matched wreck of two directors who could not be more different. I think it works. The world disagrees.

I feel like Informant.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The problem, I think, with shared universes is the same problem that serialized TV series have.  Back in the day, you could watch shows at whatever pace you want whenever it was convenient for you.  To my point, my friend is binge-watching Star Trek: The Next Generation.  Knowing I'm a Trek fan, he would periodically text me and ask me questions or make references to certain episodes.  When I realized that I hadn't seen between 1/3 and 1/2 of the episodes he'd randomly discuss, I realized something: I hadn't seen 1/3 to 1/2 of TNG.

It's funny because I consider it a show that I've "completed", but since it was a show made in the 80s/90s, I "watched the entire show" but didn't watch every episode.  I've watched a patchwork quilt of episodes from all 7 episodes but not every single episode. 

That wouldn't fly today because shows are so dependent on serialization.  I could watch a season 4 episode of TNG and understand just about everything without seeing a single episode before that.  Try doing the same with LOST or even something cheap like Legends of Tomorrow.  I watched an episode of Arrow with my fiancee and didn't even bother trying to explain who any of the characters were - it would've taken too long.

Nowadays, shows *are* like long movies, and we're inclined to "turn them off" and never return if we don't like something.  I hated watching the first season and a half of House of Cards - I found it infuriating to watch two people I despised continually come out on top, eliminating characters I found redeeming, and I couldn't take it anymore.  I stopped watching in the middle of season two, and I haven't returned.  Season 4 could be great, and I literally wouldn't care.  I'm not putting in any more time, and I don't want to be completely lost without having seen the rest of season 2 or season 3.

And I think these cinematic universes have that same effect.  You don't necessarily have to see every DCEU movie to enjoy subsequent films, but it helps.  And if you don't like one or two of them, you might not be willing to watch later ones.  It might end up like a coworker of mine (big comic book fan) who disliked Man of Steel and BvS so much that he skipped Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman (even though I told him he'd like it).  Even though he admitted being intrigued by the tonal change in direction and the trailers, he said he wasn't planning on seeing Justice League.

He'd hit the eject button.

I think this happens with Marvel movies too.  I had trouble convincing a friend of mine to see Civil War because he hadn't seen anything since the Avengers....he was suddenly about a dozen movies behind.  When you suddenly have a movie that's building on movie after movie after movie, people are less likely to jump in midstream.  And they're more likely to judge your new movie by the standards set by the old movie.

Movies become TV become movies.