This cinematic universe is NOT officially called the DCEU.

DC cinematic universe it is then!

So basically it’s still a shared Universe but each standalone film won’t have much of a connection.

They're doing what I've been saying for a long time should be done. The movies are still connected, but it's just that the movies won't be just ads for the next movie (like MCU does) or just have a bunch of dumb, useless cameos (like Civil War had or like SMH had with those dumb Captain America videos - Cap is supposedly a fugitive from the law so why the hell would ANY high school show a PSA with a criminal like Cap in it; it would be as dumb as a high school football coach showing his team a motivational video with O.J. Simpson in it!) but will be stand-alone movies like Wonder Woman (which is still connected to the DCEU but isn't an ad for the next movie and doesn't rely on lame gimmicky cameos like MCU does).

And DC's "director-driven" approach is much better than MCU's Kevin Feige as Dictator approach. MCU's Kevin Feige as Dictator approach leads to talented directors like Patty Jenkins and Edgar Wright quitting, resulting in MCU making dud movies like Thor: The Dark World and Ant-Man. A "director-driven" approach gives directors the creative freedom to create better and greater movies. Without directors having creative freedom, we would've never gotten such great movies like The Dark Knight or Wonder Woman.

MCU has made plenty of mediocre to awful dud movies, but critics and MCU fans all say "Well, since it's all connected, we'll call it a great movie even though it's shitty." Me, I prefer a great stand-alone movie, like The Dark Knight or Wonder Woman, over a shitty, connected movie (like most of MCU's movies) any day.


www.cinemablend.com/news/1708659/how-the-dceu-is-treating-its-cinematic-universe-model-after-wonder-woman

"Moving forward, you'll see the DC movie universe being a universe, but one that comes from the heart of the filmmaker who's creating them."

That filmmaker-driven approach is already something that makes DC considerably different from other superhero franchises. Only recently, Nightwing movie director Chris McKay touted DC Entertainment's willingness to take a more auteur-focused method, highlighting the A-list names that have signed on to DC projects. It makes sense in the long run; reduced emphasis on continuity increases creative freedom, and increased creative freedom brings in some of Hollywood's biggest names.


www.cinemablend.com/news/1708700/one-way-aquaman-will-feel-similar-to-wonder-woman-according-to-geoff-johns

Before those of you with a deep-seated love for continuity start to worry about what this could mean for Aquaman's connection to the DCEU, it seems important to note that this doesn't mean it won't connect to other DC films at all. Even Wonder Woman, a movie set during World War I, still managed to find ways to reference other DC heroes -- such as the reference to Wayne Enterprises in the film's opening scene. The intention here isn't to ignore the fact that the other DC franchises exist; it's just an attempt to place more emphasis establishing these distinct worlds without becoming bogged down in other stories

There's room for multiple approaches in this silver screen world, and it looks like Aquaman merely wants to veer closer to Wonder Woman in how it handles its continuity.

If DC decides to have more elseworld type stories like the Joker origin film, they should call it The Multiverse, or DC's Multiverse.

Dude, it was talked about in the movie why Peter Parker's school shows PSA's of Captain America, thanks for confirming to us that you did not actually watch the movie. 



You continue to illustrate that you do not understand how the film industry works. Its the producer's job to make sure quality of a franchise is consistent and that the other filmmakers are not straying too far or else they might risk alienating their audience. If a director wanted to make a movie that rewrites Iron Man's to being an alien from Mars with biological-based armor it's just not going to fly and it doesn't matter how great that director is because if they actually finance it and release it in theatres it can potentially harm the Iron Man brand as a whole and confuse audiences who are not going to be told directly that its an elseworlds story, totally distant from the main MCU( Because trailers do not do that, nor do posters or other advertisements, if there have been in cinema history please provide a link). Edgar Wright spent years on Ant-Man and didn't get the ball rolling till the MCU had already been introduced and developed on the screens, and his style no longer gelled with the material. It's really his fault, because Marvel Studios got tired of waiting to introduce Ant-Man and The Wasp, they actually tried to get The Wasp into the first Avengers but Wright put his foot down and they decided against the idea. Jenkins' version of Thor 2 wasn't well-developed and there was no script or conceptual art produced in her time as its hired director. Many directors are attached to projects and sometimes stay on for a while but then depart out of creative differences, Jenkins and Wright are no exceptions. But if you want to play that game, then allow me to ask if I have the right to criticize DC for not granting Michelle McLaren the freedom to create her own version of Wonder Woman? Which she described as being very much in vein of Braveheart but lost the gig for, what's the phrase? Oh yes, "creative differences". Or what about David Ayer? Let's not ignore the fact that David Ayer only got two weeks to write a whole script for Suicide Squad and the whole movie was recut last minute by a trailer company, the movie we saw was definitely not his "true" vision of the film. So much for being filmmaker friendly, right? "They're not similar!" you might say, so if they're not similar to Jenkins or Wright explain why...I'll wait. 



I have never ever come across an individual who has said "eh, since its in the MCU I'll give it a pass! It's an automatic winner!" Most people I have ran into genuinely dislike one, two, to even five MCU films and some of them have avoided most of the television shows. 



Wonder Woman is definitely a connected movie, the photograph is from BvS and we see the Wayne Enterprises logo more than once in the film. Not only that, but the amazons play a role in Justice League and the set up of the Greek Gods and Goddesses and related mythology will no doubt have a role one way or the other in future DC movies with or without Wonder Woman. The Dark Knight is the only true film you cite that is stand alone because its not tied to a larger universe, in it only Batman related characters were present and they were the ones who could arguably be made to be "grounded" for the "realistic" aesthetic. 



In my opinion the decision to make the movies less tied to one another and more "filmmaker driven" reads to me like "You know what? We don't have the patience for this..." Which is their biggest flaw, and its shared by every other studio trying to compete with Marvel's Cinematic Universe - they want that money as soon as possible but don't want to wait it out like Marvel did with their first wave of movies, they want to dump lots of Easter Eggs and set up future installments and try to say "oh, we've got a big baddie coming you better get hyped up!" Basically, two hour plus commercials...This year's The Mummy, Transformers: The Last Knight,  and King Arthur: Legend of the Sword spring to mind that fit this bill, last year DC had BvS and Suicide Squad to be that. 

JLU is good for the acronym.