I am not too familiar with that continuity but it doesn't seem like the Spider-Geddon short condradicts anything. Some people consider it non-canon due to the fact that someone that looks like Green Goblin from UMS exists in the short (argued in the show's specific fanmade wikia) and apparently...
Usually it is the stuff they contribute officially to a collaboration project that is respected, not Tommy Westphall level stuff. Furthermore, there is also no official ackowledgement from WB that the two share a universe, so...
Well going by Google images, office nameplates more often than not...
Yeah but this is just one creator out of many. DCEU is a joint project.
I wasn't talking about the DC and Marvel Multiverse but rather that Marvel can get away with the Clark Kent cameo because of its genericness.
It was a cameo appearance though, wasn't it? And like I said they shied away...
I seriously doubt paying for IP is necessary for a character just because they have the same name and occupation as another when what was shown in Shazam was so generic. Even Marvel Comics occasionally puts Clark Kent easter eggs in their comics, I haven't heard they got into legal trouble over...
I'm sure Emma from Lights Out as an IP is not protected on the same level as Spider-Man or Wolverine. You say IP is more than just the same actor, name and job, what was so descriptive about the character seen in Shazam beyond those qualities?
Furthermore, aren't both franchises entirely...
I suppose extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I doubt it is illegal for one actor to play roles with the same first name or has the same job. The character sounds generic enough.
And what official connection does TCM and Hatchet have? (Genuine question) An easter egg or a cameo doesn't automatically mean same continuity.
The word of god thing is more arguable when there are multiple creators and the franchises are so separate.
Yet they shied away from showing the full...
Yet apparently she's not even called by the same name in the two movies??? ("Emma" in Lights Out and "E.B. Glover" in Shazam). It's just implied that E. stands for Emma. That alone seems to show it is an easter egg and not necessarily a canon confirmation.
Just because they let the director...
Yeah but it's still the word of one director working on a franchise (DC) helmed by multiple people. If both franchises in a large part were helmed by him, that would be another matter, but only Lights Out is apparently.
IMO, the franchises are too unconnected, even if owned by Warner Bros. Realistically, if a Conjuring movie was to somehow reference Batman and Superman, it would be as fictional characters and not as real people. Just one director in large franchises like these probably couldn't decide which...
@selfishmisery
I have a feeling most if not all DCU tie-in media will be non-canon. This comic has been confirmed non-canon for example.
https://dcuniverse.fandom.com/wiki/Peacemaker_Presents:_The_Vigilante/Eagly_Double-Feature
In his MCU days, James Gunn said that Guardians of the Galaxy...
I think the first parts had weird pacing where it kind of felt like a TV show (I guess because it introduces a lot of things), but the rest of the movie had normal pacing IMO, and it was a good movie.
In Rise of the Dark Spark like others said, in Beast Diorama Story where Bayverse characters get transported to Japanese version of Beast Wars, in FunPub stories and in a recent toy pack-in comic involving versions of Cliffjumper and the multiverse.
I found this regarding the timeline thing. At some point, they wanted to reveal DCEU still existed separately from Post-Flashpoint in the Flash Post-Credits apparently.
But it seems the plan changed.
I should watch the DCEU movies I haven't watched.