Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Fiery Debate Erupts Over Batgirl Set Photos

When a movie or TV series gets canceled, scrapped, or pulled, the world normally gets over it in a day or two. They have their field day on Twitter, yelling at whoever they need to yell at, but stories fade when the next dumpster fire begins. That's not the case with "Batgirl." The scrapped Warner Bros. project still finds itself in the headlines, and users on the bird app are (justifiably) not letting the story die.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, "Batgirl" was nixed because it didn't match the magnitude and look of recent DC Entertainment films. This is directly associated with its $90 million budget, a significant drop from most DC movies' nine-figure budgets. Slowly but surely, this explanation transformed on Twitter, with many saying "Batgirl" was canned because it looked cheap. Collider's Steve Weintraub confirmed this, writing, "Spoke to people that saw #Batgirl and they said it was a huge disappointment. Also that the costumes looked cheap, especially Keaton's Batman costume."

The "cheap" discussion continues on social media as set photos from "Batgirl" are being shared, sparking debate.

New Batgirl set photos have some thinking it film doesn't look cheap

A "Batgirl" account on Twitter (which is not associated with Warner Bros. or DC Entertainment) shared four set photos to their feed on August 9. "I've seen tweets saying BATGIRL looked too cheap because it was a $90 million movie. That's further from the truth. It was one of the rare comic films with real sets. Workers worked tirelessly to transform Glasgow into Gotham. How is this cheap looking?!" the post asked. Among the photos were two underground sets with shacks set up; one inside an intricate building like a church, and another of director Adil El Arbi standing on a roof.

To be fair, these aren't the most incredible sets in the world, but they are very real. There is not a green or blue screen in sight. Many comments on the popular post cited that two test audiences did not like the film and felt it looked terrible, suggesting the photos mean nothing. According to the New York Post, those test screenings went horribly, which prompted the studio to scrap it. One Twitter user responded to the set photos, saying they hold no water. "Doesn't matter how expensive it looks, what matters are the shots, staying on budget, and the talent doing their jobs," the user wrote. Others shared the same sentiment, and it looks like more and more people are coming around to the cancelation.

Some still wish to see the final cut of "Batgirl," however. Like Kevin Smith. "They said 'Batgirl' looked too cheap because it was a $90 million movie. How do you make a cheap-looking $90 million movie? If it looked slightly better than an episode of 'Arrow' then why couldn't we see that?" the director recently said on his "Hollywood Babble-On" podcast.

We'll never know if "Batgirl" looks cheap or not cheap, as this project will never see the light of day.