Rumor: 'Back to the Future' director Robert Zemeckis in talks for 'The Flash'

By

·

April 27, 2017

Update 4/28/17: It doesn't look like Robert Zemeckis will be directing The Flash, unless Warner Bros. is willing to wait until at least 2020. Universal and DreamWorks Pictures just announced that Zemeckis will be directing a movie for them for a November 2018 release.

Warner Bros. has parted ways with two directors for The Flash over the last couple of years. They're currently rewriting the script and trying to find a third. According to a new rumor, they may be getting close.

In the video above, Screen Junkies says they've heard that Robert Zemeckis, director of the Back to the Future franchise, has had several meetings with Warner Bros. about directing The Flash. The Wrap reporter Umberto Gonzalez confirmed that the two parties have met, but cautioned that Warner Bros. is meeting with other directors as well.

The guy who directed a trilogy about time travel sure seems like he'd be a good fit for The Flash. Would you like to see Robert Zemeckis take over The Flash? Let me know in the comments below.

This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com

63 comments

StarTheory
April 27, 2017
That would be a great win for DC and it will definitely make up for the delay.
My favourite film from him is Cast Away.
I'm Batman Man 39
April 27, 2017
http://25.media.tumblr.com/...
Yes!! I really love watching those Back to the Future movies! (The third one was just okay, though) I also enjoyed Robert's more recent movie The Walk too. I really hope this happens, and WB can get the Flash movie going! And, like you said, Chris, he definitely has experience with time travel. ;)
Seb
April 27, 2017
He's a great director, but is he the right fit? Idk...
1. OGmacrazy
  April 27, 2017
  Tonally, I think he'd be great for it. Though, back in his A-day I would definitely have loved for him to do a Superman movie.
  1. Seb
    April 27, 2017
    If they eventually do go with him, this is good news no matter how you spin it. But I just can't help but feel he's not really the right guy. The same way that I wouldn't want Nolan to direct a Lobo movie or something. It seems they are considering him just because he showed he could do time travel with Back to the Future. But the thing is, those movies (and I like them) don't make any sense when you think about it. If they really wanted to nail the time traveling aspect, I don't think I've ever seen a movie doing it any better than Predestination. Now, it's not a masterpiece or anything, but at least the time traveling makes sense (ignoring that travelling to the past is scientifically impossible). I feel like Zemeckis is not capable of that "level". The Flash TV series is guilty of this too btw (as is Legends of Tomorrow. Heck, that show makes no goddamn sense, haha).
    1. Jon Bunting
      April 27, 2017
      Actually, "scientifically impossible" is not the right phrase. "Currently impossible," or "currently technologically impossible" are better phrases. We have no idea if time travel is something that can be achieved. A lot of physicists a lot smarter than I am have written about the bending of space and time.
      1. Seb
        April 27, 2017
        No, it's about as possible as going slower than 0 mph. It's about as possible as going colder than 0 Kelvin. Which is to say it is *completely* scientifically impossible. In a 3 dimensional reality, time simply can't be reversed. To add to your final sentence, I actually have never seen any respected physicist (who know what they are talking about) ever claim that *reversing* time "could" ever be a possibility. Bending space time would never result in reversing time. Travelling to the future is indeed a possibility, which is easily supported by actual science. Travelling back however, is scientifically unsound and a child's fantasy at best. Not to mention, you don't have to be particularly intelligent to figure this out for yourself. Not only is it paradoxical, but let's say you traveled back 1 day. That would mean you've basically copied yourself and that contradicts the law of conservation of mass. Matter cannot be destroyed, nor can it be made. Travelling back in time would completely ignore this law, which is already impossible. But if you want a more philosophical explanation: Imagine you went back in time to stop WW2 (your motive being to avoid said catastrophe). So you go back, kill Hitler before he rose to power and WW2 never happens. Okay, you've just changed history... but remember, that means your "past" self (whom exists in the future, 2017 and not 1920) will never have the motivation to go back in time to change something, because nothing ever happened. Result? You never went back in the first place. But if you never went back, WW2 still happens. Rinse and repeat, it never ends. It never gets there. It doesn't make any sense.
        Lastly, if travelling back were indeed a possibility "some time in the future", then we would've known by now. You're thinking too conventional. If such a thing "could" happen, it wouldn't matter how far in the future this would be because the very essence of time travel basically eliminates our basic understanding of time. Let's say they invented time travel in the year 1 million. These time travelers could easily go back to any time they wanted. Hence why Stephen Hawking said: "If time travel were real at some point in the future, prove it by going back to the day I said this" (paraphrasing, I don't remember the exact words). Because this statement would last for millions of years, till to end of times. Yet no one has ever come back. Because it's not possible. And Hawking proved his point.
      2. Jon Bunting
        April 27, 2017
        Didn't mean to ruffle your feathers. And I read too quickly and missed the "to the past" part of your original post. No arguments with the above.
      3. Seb
        April 27, 2017
        ?? I just gave you an explanation as to why it's impossible. Nothing more. I don't see why you would think you "ruffled my feathers". But yeah, since you now appear to agree with my argument that travelling *back* in time is impossible, it doesn't really matter.
      4. Jon Bunting
        April 27, 2017
        It's hard to know in writing what tone is intended. It seems I just thought a tone was present that you had not intended, hence the perceived feather ruffling. It's all good.
      5. Cerberus_Unleashed
        April 28, 2017
        You seem to conveniently ignore the comic plot point in the flash story line..i.e. any change in the timeline creates an alternative time line converging from that point. Therefore, the future self of you (or rather the past self) wouldnt be the same guy who had the idea of stopping the world war... your hypotheses/point is agreeable if you consider only a single time line i.e. the grandfather paradox.. but flash stories consider multiple and alternate timelines...the future can be changed by changing the present.. but the present cannot be changed by changing the past because it has already happened.. what can happen is new set of circumstances and incidences will be set in motion from the point of convergence...running seperate to the old timeline.. so there will be 2 selfs of you on the present day who will never interact with each other..
      6. Seb
        April 28, 2017
        No, I think you completely misunderstood the point of my comment. First of all I would like to state this again, reversing time is scientifically impossible. It will never be possible. No amount of vague comic book """logic""" will ever change that fact. Don't believe me? Read Einstein's theory of relativity. But that doesn't mean time travel movies shouldn't exist anymore just because it's not scientifically possible. We are talking about movies. Suspend your disbelief like you're meant to. What I am saying is this: even if travelling back in time were possible, the Back to the Future movies (while fun) didn't do a particularly good job at rationalizing this process (because they were kids movies). Whereas Predestination does make complete sense. The entire movie, or the timeline of the main character, is one closed loop. It's a continuous process that repeats for all of time. There are no real time paradoxes in the movie, except for the main character itself (which is the point of the movie).
        As for Flash, suppose you're right... What the hell does that have got to do with the scientific fact that reversing back time is impossible? I was making a scientific argument. You're making a comic book argument. There is a difference I'm afraid. Furthermore, your argument basically rests on entire fallacies to begin with.
        You're basically saying "Well, you'd have a point that you can't go slower than 0 mph, but you conveniently forgot that Flash has the ability to bypass this impossibility". It. makes. zero. sense.
        I've often found that people just can't grasp the meaning of time that well. Which is completely normal, because it drives me nuts as well just thinking about it. But at the very least, I have some theoretical and scientific basis on which to rest my argument. I've had lessons years ago concerning this very subject.
        "so there will be 2 selfs of you on the present day who will never interact with each other.."
        Yeah this basically proves you wrong. Imagine you went back a day to stop yourself from eating too much fat or something (ridiculous argument I know). This means you've stopped yourself from doing something. So you've already bypassed the aforementioned law of conservation of mass. Because you've just created mass. This is not possible, regardless of how many "alternate realities" or "parallel universes" you create. The core laws of physics should still be valid in each one of those "realities". But AGAIN, these are *comic book* movies for crying out loud. I really don't care whatsoever about this scientific bs. I just want them to try their hardest to have it make sense. Flashpoint is a great example (this also features your "alternate reality" reasoning). The Flash TV series (not to mention the Back to the Future movies) don't even bother to make it reasonable. But Legends of Tomorrow is by far the worst in that department.
      7. Alan Conn
        April 28, 2017
        Oh shut the fuck up. U think u know everything. Such a fucking clown.
      8. Seb
        April 28, 2017
        No, but I do know for a fact that travelling back in time is scientific NONSENSE. What exactly is your point? Are you denying my statement? I don't think so, because you clearly don't know what you're talking about. It wasn't even meant to be a discussion, merely an *explanation*. It was just a scientific argument.
      9. Seb
        April 28, 2017
        "You are discussing einstein in a comic book related community. "
        Well yes, but you were the one who responded with comic book logic to a purely scientific argument. Did you even read my previous comment in its entirety or not? Or the comment to which I replied? Because it was extremely clear at that point I was merely explaining the scientific fact that reversing time is impossible. Why? Because the previous person questioned this. That's all. That's why I said you misunderstood my comment, because it wasn't meant to be an argument in favor or against the proposed Flash director. It was solely a "scientific" response to a scientific question. Nothing more. And yes I realize that comic books don't "need" to be scientifically accurate, which I have said multiple times now.
        "you talked about predestination movie.. without mentioning that the movie itself is a paradox"
        Umm, I did. I said the main character is a paradox. And the movie is literally about the main character being a paradox. I guess you missed that part.
        "if you seem so convinced by predestination movie theory"
        It's not a theory, mate. Neither am I "convinced" by anything. I am merely making the argument that within the rules of the Predestination movie, the story does indeed make sense. Whereas the rules set forth in the Back to the Future movies for example, directly contradict what happens on screen on a numerous occasions.
        "You wldnt be able to coz there is none.."
        Yeah, it's not like I *LITERALLY* said that, right? Come on.
        "its not a closed loop which happens continuously like you said... its an infinite loop leading to the same result"
        There is no difference. A loop is *by definition* infinite. See: elementary maths.
        I don't really understand what point you're trying to make here. You seem set on "exposing" my hypocrisy while you simply refuse to understand the basis of my argument. I am not saying Predestination is scientifically (or even logically) accurate. I am saying - for a time travel movie - it makes a whole lot more sense than BTTF (or the Flash TV series, etc).
        "...one entity trying to stop the paradox and one (same entity) perpetrating it..that makes no sense..thts what a paradox is"
        In case you didn't know, that was the point of the movie. "The Ultimate Predestination PARADOX" - Noah Taylor's character.
        "coz neither science nor einstein has been able to prove or even hypothetically explain the source of energy at the origin of time."
        There are actually several hypotheses to explain the origin of time... But ignoring that, this literally has nothing to do with anything. Not to mention, you just said you didn't want to go off-topic yet you continuously do so by presenting non-arguments about the origin of time and the laws of our solar system and whatnot. Who cares? You simply don't realize why I made the scientific argument to begin with. Please read the comment before mine, and you'll understand.
        "rules of physics may change."
        Impossible.
        "who knows no one cant vouch for it"
        Educate yourself (hate that expression, this is not meant to be condescending) on the meaning of a scientific theory.
        "mass is not getting created.. it is remaining constant.. in one time line i have consumed mass.. in another timeline..i havent"
        Dude... I was talking about YOURSELF. If you go back in time to change something about yourself, there are *TWO* versions of you. You understand? *TWO* times the same person in the same timeline. Not a possibility I'm afraid.
        "law of conservation of mass assumes that it is an isolated system."
        Do you even know what that means? Or are you just going to blindly throw these Wikipedia answers "buttt itsss closhed shyshtemm". You remind me of creationists who arrogantly assert the laws of Thermodynamics disprove the big bang theory, ignoring the very meaning of a "closed system". I will never berate anyone for not knowing science. Heck, despite my degree, I feel like I still know nothing. But don't make these types of arguments if you haven't really researched the meaning of it.
      10. Cerberus_Unleashed
        April 28, 2017
        "Did you even read my previous comment in its entirety or not? Or the comment to which I replied?" - We both are clear on that.. so i dont know what you were trying to explain to the other guy who said that
      11. Seb
        April 28, 2017
        Let me explain this to you in detail.. lol.
        me: Time travel didn't make much sense in BTTF (*ignoring the fact that travelling back in time is not possible*). I'm not sure Zemeckis is the right man based on his experience with time travel movies, when Predestination did it so much better.
        other guy: you don't know that. It's just not a possibility yet (responding to this statement: "gnoring the fact that travelling back in time is not possible")
        me: blabla... purely scientific argument as to why it's not possible. This had nothing to do with the Flash movie.
        other guy: I missed the "back in time" part. I agree with the rest.
        Suddenly you: "But Flash is able to do all kinds of things, etc etc".
        me: "All well and good, but this doesn't have anything to do with the argument I was making".
        That's why I say you don't understand the point of my comments.
2. Alan Conn
  April 28, 2017
  Oh god of course... here u and the haters go again. What do u even care? U will hate anything that they do or u even think they will do so why do u care? In fact why do u even keep track of any of this bc all u and these others do is talk nothing but massive amounts of bullshit.
  1. Seb
    April 28, 2017
    "U will hate anything that they do or u even think they will do so why do u care?"
    Hahahahaha... Except when I've praised Joss Whedon and Batgirl announcement, JL trailer, BvS UC, etc. It's really ironic you say I will "hate anything" despite the fact that I elaborated and *literally* said "If they eventually do go with him, this is good news no matter how you spin it."
    Yeah sure... I'm "such a fucking hater". Or more accurately, you cannot deal with a difference of opinion (even when it's not even remotely controversial to begin with) because you're weak and easily triggered. Grow up.
jrvc
April 27, 2017
If this happens to be true, I will totally be in for it! A director with experience in time-travel stories together with a character well-known for his time-travelling antics. What could be a better match?
OGmacrazy
April 27, 2017
Would be a great fit, actually. As long as they don't do to him what Marvel tried to do with Edgar Wright.
I don't know, though. Two directors have already been fired over creative differences for this movie. There's also definite concern regarding the quality of his more recent movies...
Still, it would be a major upgrade from the previous choices.
papasanchez
April 27, 2017
Perfect fit.
Carl
April 27, 2017
Holy freaking coincidence batman! It would have been awesome to hear it confirmed after the episode this week from The Flash series.
Canucks Fan
April 27, 2017
Cool that we got some news although doesn't confirm other than talks with him and other directors. Still great to here progress is being made regarding The Flash movie.
qownsqud
April 27, 2017
Love the choice but to be frank, I think there's way too much hoopla about the kinds of movies that director's have done in the past. Adhering to these standards, Christopher Nolan was a terrible fit for Batman. If you make good movies, you make good movies. A better advocate for Zemeckis than a movie he did 30 years ago, are the strings of good stories that hes told afterward. Two of his most iconic being Cast Away and Forrest Gump, which have criminally not been mentioned.
No doubt experience in telling time travel stories is a nice plus, but that was from a bygone era of cinema and he is a totally different moviemaker now than 3 decades ago
Reverse_Flash
April 27, 2017
Please yes. It's time to raise the bar when it comes to filmmakers in the DCEU. If they want a director oriented universe then they need top notch directors.
Captain DC
April 27, 2017
https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
Pablo Alberto Escalante
April 27, 2017
the problem isnt the director , the real problem is that ezra miller , will never be the flash ¡¡¡¡
1. UltimateEdition
  April 27, 2017
  Ezra miller hasn't even been prominently featured in the movie yet and he still better then Grant Gustin… You can have that CW soap opera drama
2. towblerone
  April 27, 2017
  He IS The Flash, doofus. TV is TV. Movies are the movies. Grow up.
3. OGDickGrayson
  April 27, 2017
  O look. It's one of those people that jerks off Grant Gustin and totally ignores that Ezra is a blatant better actor.
4. Sense
  April 27, 2017
  STFU
5. Ezee23
  April 28, 2017
  He is the Flash though.
UltimateEdition
April 27, 2017
https://media0.giphy.com/me...
https://media3.giphy.com/me...
towblerone
April 27, 2017
As crazy awesome as this would be, it's not going to happen.
residentgrigo
April 27, 2017
https://media.tenor.co/imag...
He can still direct too. No more "meetings". Money truck, NOW!
residentgrigo
April 27, 2017
How often does this happen btw? Someone called Deadpool a DC film in an interview with Ayer.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media...
1. BatmanNewsChris
  April 27, 2017
  Is that real?!
  1. residentgrigo
    April 27, 2017
    Looks to be a version of The Sun. Reddit finds one of these every few months.
    Here is a topical Spidey page btw. and they have a Clark Kent in their universe.
    http://i.imgur.com/V7ox4aa.png
    http://www.marvunapp.com/Ap...
    1. BatmanNewsChris
      April 27, 2017
      Wow
2. Canucks Fan
  April 27, 2017
  I would apologize being Canadian myself but i have zero care to help out Calgary so i will just laugh at this little tidbit
  1. residentgrigo
    April 27, 2017
    Ah come one, Marvel invented comic adaptation in 2008. And humor and the concept of teams and cross continuity and...
    1. Canucks Fan
      April 27, 2017
      dance offs :)
      1. residentgrigo
        April 27, 2017
        Great film but Guardians rubbished the Marvel space comic line due to it. The quality of Annihilation and co. will only come back once that film sub-series stops. A bummer. Even the good-ish TT game just apes the film.
3. Pit
  April 28, 2017
  Generally people don't give a crap wether it's Marvel or DC. Only us fanboys do.
  1. residentgrigo
    April 28, 2017
    Most people don´t even know the difference but these don´t usually write for newspapers either. Both the writer and editor slept on the job here.
Jarin Downing
April 27, 2017
Come on Warner Bros just hire a director, can't go without a solo flash... number 1 superhero
Malcolm
April 27, 2017
At first, I was thinking of the tune of the BTTF movies and how great that'd work for a Flash film, but then of course there's the time travel. Man, I gotta rewatch that trilogy.
IamTheOneWhoKnocks
April 27, 2017
It would fit perfectly. Hope they make it happen.
maxman
April 27, 2017
Flash to the Future
SΛŁIM
April 27, 2017
Barry McFly...
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-...
... I'm already hearing "¡run Barry, run!".
I hope it does not end up being a simple rumor and the own Robert Zemeckis is who finally directs The Flash. It would be fucking cool.
LordofFlies
April 27, 2017
Make this happen, please. This is going to be so perfect.
Sense
April 27, 2017
Great Scott!!!!!
Fan
April 27, 2017
I thought he'd be a great fit for a Superman movie
Zappy
April 28, 2017
This happening would be like density - I mean, destiny. A director who can tackle sci-fi elements but instill a sense of wonder, as well as heart? I hope WB isn't too...chicken!
UniteTheLeague
April 28, 2017
CGI on this one is so amazing!
Ezee23
April 28, 2017
Watching this gif in a loop is really mesmerizing.
FUN
April 28, 2017
Lol, yeah! And how they got him to be one of their "Yes Men" directors remains a mystery.
WhitnAle01
April 28, 2017
I only want three things from this movie. 1) Able to watch it before Batman vs Superman. 2) Has time travel. 3) It's just a good movie.
thefallen83
April 28, 2017
I'm down! He's a great director!

Browse By Topic

Browse By Year

This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com