More from Variety:
View: https://twitter.com/Variety/status/1554622574658723840
[...]
In other words, the movie was nearly finished, and already building awareness among fans. Why would Warner Bros. Discovery throw all that away?
According to sources with knowledge of the situation, the most likely reason: taxes.
[...]
"Batgirl" found itself on the bad end of that decision, apparently neither big enough to feel worthy of a major theatrical release nor small enough to make economic sense in an increasingly cutthroat streaming landscape. Spending the money to expand the scope of "Batgirl" for theaters — plus the $30 million to $50 million needed to market it domestically and the tens of millions more needed for a global rollout — could have nearly doubled spending on the film, and insiders say that was a non-starter at a company newly focused on belt-tightening and the bottom line. (Spokespeople for Warner Bros. and Warner Bros. Discovery declined to comment for this story.)
Releasing the movie on HBO Max would seem to be the most obvious solution. Instead, the company has shelved "Batgirl" — along with the "Scoob!" sequel — and several sources say it will almost certainly take a tax write-down on both films, seen internally as the most financially sound way to recoup the costs (at least, on an accountant's ledger). It could justify that by chalking it up to a post-merger change of strategy.
Doing so, however, would mean that Warner Bros. cannot monetize either movie — no HBO Max debut, no sale to another studio.
View: https://twitter.com/Variety/status/1554622574658723840
[...]
In other words, the movie was nearly finished, and already building awareness among fans. Why would Warner Bros. Discovery throw all that away?
According to sources with knowledge of the situation, the most likely reason: taxes.
[...]
"Batgirl" found itself on the bad end of that decision, apparently neither big enough to feel worthy of a major theatrical release nor small enough to make economic sense in an increasingly cutthroat streaming landscape. Spending the money to expand the scope of "Batgirl" for theaters — plus the $30 million to $50 million needed to market it domestically and the tens of millions more needed for a global rollout — could have nearly doubled spending on the film, and insiders say that was a non-starter at a company newly focused on belt-tightening and the bottom line. (Spokespeople for Warner Bros. and Warner Bros. Discovery declined to comment for this story.)
Releasing the movie on HBO Max would seem to be the most obvious solution. Instead, the company has shelved "Batgirl" — along with the "Scoob!" sequel — and several sources say it will almost certainly take a tax write-down on both films, seen internally as the most financially sound way to recoup the costs (at least, on an accountant's ledger). It could justify that by chalking it up to a post-merger change of strategy.
Doing so, however, would mean that Warner Bros. cannot monetize either movie — no HBO Max debut, no sale to another studio.
Why Warner Bros. Killed ‘Batgirl’: Inside the Decision Not to Release the DC Movie
'Batgirl' was nearly finished and building awareness among fans. Why would Warner Bros. Discovery throw it all away? Taxes.
variety.com