Why James Gunn’s DC Era Was Less Than Super

I’m not in the business of second-guessing movie-studio executives. But after the bombshell announcement that James Gunn and Peter Safran would be stepping down as the CEOs and chairman of DC Studios, I flashed back to the moment when I first questioned what these two were up to in their new executive roles.

It was Jan. 31, 2023, the day they announced their grand plans, unveiling the vast roster of DC projects they were going to be shepherding. There were promising ideas in the mix, and there were a lot of ideas (that’s long been a James Gunn asset and liability — his compulsion to give you too much of what he thinks is a good thing). But the one that set off my alarm bell was that Gunn and Safran were planning an all-new “Batman” series, one that, within the realm of Warner Bros., would run alongside “The Batman” and its sequel.

Can you say entertainment headache? I love the character of Batman as much as anyone, but by the time that announcement was made, it felt as if we’d already had 15 Batmans — a number of which, in the ’90s, felt like reboots. With each new actor (Val Kilmer, George Clooney), the series was starting over, and not all that well (a sensation that would extend into the era when Ben Affleck donned the cowl and the husky voice). But, of course, the interchangeable flow of Batmans was magnificently transcended when Christopher Nolan made his “Dark Knight” trilogy. And then, against all odds (since “The Dark Knight” was the greatest superhero movie ever made), Robert Pattinson teamed up with director Matt Reeves to make “The Batman,” and that movie turned out to be spectacularly good. It was clear that Pattinson and Reeves now owned the Batman karma.

But no! After 35 years of revolving-door Batman-franchise identity games, Gunn and Safran were going to do their very own version of “Batman,” competing with “The Batman,” turning the Warner Bros. release schedule into its own…