Wow, first person other than me I’ve seen say that they don't like Batman Beyond.

I’m so not a fan, like what we’re supposed to just assume the hundreds of heroes that failed to be mentioned died or retired?

The creators who made Batman Beyond don’t even like it that much. Bruce Timm said out of everything they made Batman Beyond had the worst writing, while Alan Burnett said it wasn’t a Batman cartoon it was a Spiderman cartoon disguised as a Batman cartoon. Which is spot on given how many people want a Batman Beyond movie in the style of into the Spiderverse. Batman Beyond is a perfect example of the warped and twisted version of Batman that Bill Finger and Bob Kane had issues with, it’s simply not Batman

Do you have any confirmation of Timm saying that he didn't like Batman Beyond?

The best “evidence” I can find is someone on reddit saying he said it was “uneven”.

That's it? "Uneven"? That's just a criticism. It's not an outright condemnation.

Now, I can understand why people would call Batman Beyond a Spider-Man ripoff because Spider-Man is the prime example of a teenage superhero (I myself have referred to Smallville as a Spider-Man show with a Superman veneer), but that doesn't diminish its value as a piece of entertainment.

Stories and characters are created when creators take elements from previous stories and mix them up to form something new, lest we forget Superman was inspired by the stories of Hercules, Moses and Samson.

@Leader Vladimir I’d have to look up the exact quote because it’s two different interviews one with Alan and one with Bruce and the quotes are a bit long, but what Bruce said was that season 2 and 3 of Batman Beyond had the worst writing of any of the shows that they did and that it wasn’t up to their normal standards. If he had to do it over again he would completely scrap the second and third season and start from scratch. I.E he doesn’t like 2/3rds of Batman Beyond

Meanwhile in a different interview Alan Burnett confirmed that they literally took inspiration from and in some cases straight up copied stuff from Spiderman. Going on to say that members of the team were starting to get burnt out at that point and leaving, which resulted in them not really paying attention to where they were going or what they were making, they were just trying to keep things moving forward

Thus Alan saying Batman Beyond is a Spiderman Cartoon not a Batman Cartoon and Bruce saying season 2 and 3 of Batman Beyond have the worst writing in the DCAU and that he would completely scrap them and start from scratch if he had to do it all over again

Alan left the team after season 2 or 3 of Batman Beyond because he too was burned out on DC, but the takeaway I got from both interviews was that Alan wasn’t all that invested in Batman Beyond once they started production and that he views the Batman Beyond concept as inherently flawed from the start because they borrowed too much from Spiderman and non Batman sources. If you asked Alan he’d probably tell you Batman Beyond needs to be completely overhauled from the ground up using Batman as the main inspiration instead of Spiderman. Meanwhile Bruce Timm believes the Batman Beyond concept they came up with is a solid one, and that only the second and third seasons would need to be completely redone from scratch

No word on what Paul thinks about any of this, but given what I know about him and his work on the DCAU I have my suspicions

Timm and Burnett are entitled to their feelings, but we can't use their words to condemn Batman Beyond because that would be unfair to the people who genuinely liked it, and this is coming from someone who doesn't even like Batman Beyond that much.

By that logic, I should dimiss the marriage of Clark Kent and Lois Lane because Jerry Siegel didn't that want Superman to reveal his secret identity to Lois.

The Arrowverse.

@Leader Vladimir I don’t know where you got that idea because Jerry and Joel literally wrote the K-Metal from Krypton in 1940 where Lois figures out Clark’s secret Identity and was then supposed to gain powers and become his partner in the next issue. DC were the ones who didn’t like the idea and refused to publish the issue. Jerry and Joel wanted Lois to figure it out on her own over time because she’s an investigative reporter known for uncovering secrets, so Clark telling her would be an insult to her skills and intelligence

Batman Beyond is not the same because its creators don’t really like it, and it’s the type of warped twisted Batman that Bill and Bob had issues with. So it’s absolutely fair to disregard it as a Batman story, people are still free to like it, but that doesn’t change that what they like isn’t Batman, it’s Spiderman disguised as Batman

According to Super Boys: The Amazing Adventures of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster – the Creators of Superman (2014), Jerry said "If Lois should ACTUALLY learn Clark's secret, the strip would lose about 75% of its appeal—the human interest angle. I know that a formula can possibly prove monotonous through repetition but I fear that if this element is removed from the story formula that makes up SUPERMAN, that this strip will lose a great part of its effectiveness.".

I've never found any evidence to Jerry and Joe wanting to reveal Superman's ID to Lois, but it would be nice if it was available. You can't just say "this happened" without providing evidence. Your evidence sounds like this...

• Statement: Jerry and Joe wanted Lois to learn Superman's secret ID all the way back in the 1940s."

• Source: "Trust me, dude."

As someone who doesn't like Batman Beyond that much, I think disregarding it as a chapter in Batman's history would be unfair. You can't even use the words of Timm and Burnett because they don't own Batman Beyond. They work for DC, which is owned by Warner Bros Discovery, which itself is a publically traded company tasked with releasing content and making money to appease their investors and shereholders.

DC and WB aren't monolithic entities that have remained unchanged through the passage of time. They are financial companies with ever-changing infrastructures and hierarchies and that they operate within the highly competitive market that is the entertainment industry. In our modern society, people have virtually unlimited forms of entertainment at their disposal, which means WB and DC have to make a lot of... controversial decisions to grab their audiences' attention for more than just a few microseconds. I may not agree with some of their decisions, but I do understand them.

As a fan of Superman, I dislike Smallville, but I don't go out of my way to dimiss its existence or legitimacy as a chapter in the history of Superman. I just acknowledge its existence and focus my attention on the things I like.

As far as DC and WB are concerned, BB is a legitimate chapter in the history of Batman, so why should we believe otherwise? In 1999, DC and WB tasked Timm, Burnett and their co-workers to make a Batman show that would attract new audiences while also respecting the history of Batman. Whether they succeeded or not is a matter of opinion, but this show's status as a legitimate chapter in the history of Batman is not.