I voted yes, but think yes and no. Joker was fine all alone. There’s more than enough to adapt to have it both ways. Adapt TDKR and have it be it’s own thing. Better yet do Batman Beyond and have it set in the Batman 89’ universe.
Seriously. That would be the end of me.
I think found a live action version of Superman/Batman: Apocalypse would be great and us the Trinity and Big Barda as a way of interconnecting heroes in the universe. Really use that as an introduction to Darkseid and the 4th world. And use the knowledge gained by that experience, to show (a) Darkseid has his eye on the conquest and (b) use that as the catalyst to bring together a new JL movie where Darkseid and his minions (who we all get to see a bit of in S/B Apocalypse).
JL itself left a bad taste in the mouths of many comic book fans and gen pop as well. Don’t go back to it. Build something different. Build a new JL not bound by a “controversial” take in those characters to begin with.
I think I’m gonna have to support you in moving on from the original JL. Don’t mind Cavill coming back, but they don’t really have to build on the events of that movie.
Really, what I have no desire to see is a serial type of storytelling like Marvel. I don’t mind the universe and interconnectedness, just don’t make it so that to understand movie B you have to watch movie A. As successful and enjoyable as Endgame was, it makes no sense without watching several of the movies that came before it. In that sense I’m finding that the staying value of the movie is a bit limited… I hardly feel like rewatching it. Whereas I can rewatch Superman the Movie on a loop. Give us movies with complete stories. Acknowledge the existence of other characters and events if you want to. Do the team-up movies without the 10 movie buildup. It can be done.
So, one and done stories, not six issue arcs and Brave and the Bold and DC Comics Presents for movies. Nah, crazy talk. You can’t possibly tell a superhero story in anything less than a trilogy. The answer is out there. 
Doesn’t necessarily have to be one & done. I’m ok with the concept of a trilogy… just less interested if the trilogy tells one story vs three stories set in the same universe.
I’m rambling… shutting up now.
I think stuff like Superman the movie, has more of a nostalgia factor playing into it though. That is why we can watch those movies on loop. I like the serial type storytelling of Marvel, and I think the general population would like it to see that from DC as well. I also think that is what we had in mind that we wanted before Man of Steel hit, but it was a different type of Superman, set in (my opinion) a darker world. There was no fun it. That’s what Marvel brings to the table, Fun. I think the light should shine just a little be brighter in the DC movies.
Yeah you’re right; can’t deny the nostalgia. Perhaps that colors my opinion. I too like the Marvel approach and agree that the public, including myself, was expecting that when the DC shared universe was announced back in 2013 (when BvS was announced). Heck if DC pulled it off, perhaps I wouldn’t even be making these comments now. They didn’t pull it off… it’s been 7 years since then… and I feel a certain fatigue from that type of storytelling. I’m still going to watch whatever Marvel are doing next because, well, they’re good at what they do.
I just personally would like to see an approach from DC that is a little more their own. I mean they’ve been kinda doing it with their current animated films… they’re obviously connected, but stand on their own. It’s refreshing.
I understand. I agree with you somewhat as well. I was just hoping for a DC shared universe similar to what Marvel was doing. I like the idea, and love the DC characters waaay more than Marvel. I was just hoping to have that experience.
Never say never!
@moro @ashleywilbanks Maybe it’s the tone of the shared universe? I agree with Ashley that I like the lighter tone of the MCU which does allow for both light comedy and heartfelt moments. The DCEU’s misstep IMO was the decision to key in on the grim and gritty aspects of prior movies like the Nolan trilogy and Watchman. Dour Superman in MOS was no fun. If I want depressing reality I’ll watch the news. I want my heroes to uplift me and provide a standard that I should be striving for.
Notice how Wonderful Woman (1/2 light 1/2 dark) led the way to Aquaman and Shazam (both much lighter). And all those movies did better or as well as Justice League (even in 2D as 72% of all Americans agree ). You need a little levity and suspension of disbelief when you have people in outrageous costumes doing incredible things. They don’t have to be Gods that walk amongst us. They can have some down to earth problems.
Lastly, I think Len Wien said “continuity ties your best writer to your worst writer.” We don’t have to be slavish to the minute details, just get the personalities and behaviors consistent to the established characters. Time also can be an enemy as we build more and more continuity. The balancing act is to provide nods to the universe, but not make it a requirement to understand the movie you’re watching. Did someone mention company-wide event comics, oops sorry, off subject. Nick Fury at the end of Iron Man and Tony Stark at the end of The Incredible Hulk didn’t add or subtract to those movies, it just gave you a wink and a smile that something is going on. Flash forward to Infinity War and End Game and you begin to be totally lost in the continuity and dozens of characters. If you hadn’t been paying attention it’s hard to keep up.
TL;DR Lighter tone for the universe and keep the characters consistent and don’t get bogged down in minutia.
This 
. Thank you for expressing my thoughts more succinctly.
Regarding the lighter tone. I fully concede. While I’m a big fan of Man of Steel and BvS for the action and imagery, time has proven that those movies’ approach did not work.
I agree. The DCAU understands it so well. BTAS has backgrounds painted on black paper, just in case you didn’t get the hint that Batman never (or almost never) comes out during the day and Gotham is a scary place for the average citizen. STAS is light and airy, modern Art Deco buildings all around. Metropolis is a safe (or relatively so) city protected by the most power and good hearted hero on the planet. Superman can be presented in a much lighter tone and be as good if not sometimes better than Batman. Lean into their strengths. Don’t paint everyone with the same brush.
I think they should have been building towards something with these films. They are in a shared universe, but none of them are leaving the audience “wanting more” or looking forward, they just end and maybe we see the character within the next 3 years. With the exception of Joker (the only DC stand alone film) and Aquaman, the box office for these films has been lower and lower each film. That is reflective of the audiences interest. There is no “ooh, what’s the avengers initiative?” Or “what’s with that hammer in the desert?” That first wave of MCU, you dont NEED to see the other films, but you got more out of them if you did. DCU has no momentum because there is no destination. I’m sure WW 2 will do great, but I think they’re putting all their bets on a Bat-verse
One of the challenges faced by the DCEU that the MCU didn’t have to face is that there are loads of previous incarnations of DC characters to be factored in. Superman had Christopher Reeve, Dean Cain, Tom Welling, etc. Batman had Tim Burton, Christopher Nolan, and Adam West, etc. That creates expectations and comparisons that need to be addressed when setting up continuity. Conversely, Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, etc. basically got their first big-screen treatment in the MCU, and didn’t have to worry about previous audience expectations.
I think the DCEU should be unified and maintain continuity. It doesn’t need to be as ambitious in its cross-references as the MCU, but it keeps creative options open. (Gal Gadot could cameo in a Batman movie, for instance.)
I think a semi and presently, an occasional nod to another character is fine.However, I think DC also doing specifically Elseworlds like Gotham by Gaslight or Red Son would be great. It shows the versatility of the characters and makes it clear that alternate universes exist. This is a subtle way to build continuity as part of some films.
Second that. I would absolutely lose my mind in excitement over a Kingdom Come film. Just use the book as the storyboard. I’d be thrilled!
I wouldn’t mind straight up Elseworld stories. My only worry is creating confusion in the general movie public’s eye. Maybe if they literally create an “Elseword” movie label, things would be clear. You can have your “main universe” on one side, and “alternative takes” on the other side.
Isn’t Joker already “elseworld?” Did I watch yet another movie the wrong way?
I’m pretty sure it is. And a good example of an Elseworld movie working, at that.
I can certainly see titles like Elseworld: Gotham By Gas Light, Elseworld: Red Son, Elseworld: Kingdom Come. Elseworlds become their own “brand” and the supposition that if it is not the Elseworld brand it falls into a form of shared continuity.