The Warner Bros. Thread | Will NOT merge with Paramount...capitalism is still terrible

[James]

I have a bad feeling in my stomach for the future of WB, unless the new CEO gets his act together. Never really liked the new CEO and his direction to begin with.

Really, because their future looks bright to me once all their new big projects start (2016 onwards). What's so wrong with their new CEO?

[ACCA]

Really, because their future looks bright to me once all their new big projects start (2016 onwards). What's so wrong with their new CEO?

 

He severed ties with some of WB's most talented people, and has green-lighted a lot of sequels and franchise stuff. I don't see a whole lot of interesting original films, or big risks, that WB used to be known for. Jupiter Ascending was already in the works before he was officially CEO.

[James]

He severed ties with some of WB's most talented people, and has green-lighted a lot of sequels and franchise stuff. I don't see a whole lot of interesting original films, or big risks, that WB used to be known for. Jupiter Ascending was already in the works before he was officially CEO.

With this I agree. Basically from 2016 and on they are Disney 2.0. Which is kinda sad considering that after Sony gave up, they were the last studio that spend big amounts of money on original films. But it makes sense for them from a business point of view I guess.

[ACCA]

They're also pushing this DC comic films slate way too soon, especially rebooting Batman so soon after Nolan's trilogy.

 

If the CEO isn't careful, then the studio could possibly lose some big names like Nolan or the Wachowskis. If that happens, especially if the studio loses Nolan, it's all hands on deck at WB because they'll become almost as desperate as Sony.

[Heat Vision]

They're also pushing this DC comic films slate way too soon, especially rebooting Batman so soon after Nolan's trilogy.

If the CEO isn't careful, then the studio could possibly lose some big names like Nolan or the Wachowskis. If that happens, especially if the studio loses Nolan, it's all hands on deck at WB because they'll become almost as desperate as Sony.

Is going to be four years since Batman was on screen. They'll be fine.

[James]

They're also pushing this DC comic films slate way too soon, especially rebooting Batman so soon after Nolan's trilogy.

 

If the CEO isn't careful, then the studio could possibly lose some big names like Nolan or the Wachowskis. If that happens, especially if the studio loses Nolan, it's all hands on deck at WB because they'll become almost as deed their franchisesperate as Sony.

I would't go that far, but I can see your point. They are still among the, if not the most powerful of the six studios and they seem to have resolved their franchises crisis with Fantastic Beasts, DC, The Conjuring and Lego universes (plus they have a big number of huge animated properties to make them money and merchandise rights to them: Scooby-Doo and most of the classics). If they actually bring back Matrix, financially at least, they are golden. In the end, they are a movie studio and like any other one, they want to make cash.

[ACCA]

Is going to be four years since Batman was on screen. They'll be fine.

 

Rebooting only 4 years after Nolan's trilogy? Are you kidding? It's not like his trilogy was an embarrassment for WB, something that they want to wash their hands of. It's a celebrated trilogy, that should have been given several more years to stand firm, before rebooting Batman.

 

This is even more desperate than Sony's reboot of Spider-man.

 

I would't go that far, but I can see your point. They are still among the, if not the most powerful of the six studios and they seem to have resolved their franchises crisis with Fantastic Beasts, DC, The Conjuring and Lego universes (plus they have a big number of huge animated properties to make them money and merchandise rights to them: Scooby-Doo and most of the classics). If they actually bring back Matrix, financially at least, they are golden. In the end, they are a movie studio and like any other one, they want to make cash.

 

The direction they're heading in is that they'll just end up as anonymous studio conglomerate #5 or 6. They're getting away from what made WB, well WB all these decades.

Edited October 25, 2014 by ACCA

[Heat Vision]

Rebooting only 4 years after Nolan's trilogy? Are you kidding? It's not like his trilogy was an embarrassment for WB, something that they want to wash their hands of. It's a celebrated trilogy, that should have been given several more years to stand firm, before rebooting Batman.

This is even more desperate than Sony's reboot of Spider-man.

The last 3 Spiderman sucked. Awful comparison.

Also this is a newer and more comic book take on Batman. I'm sure Affleck's Batman will be a whole different animal.

[grim22]

He severed ties with some of WB's most talented people, and has green-lighted a lot of sequels and franchise stuff. I don't see a whole lot of interesting original films, or big risks, that WB used to be known for. Jupiter Ascending was already in the works before he was officially CEO.

 

That is true of most studios though. All studios have basically jumped on the franchise train instead of original fare. The original fare nowadays is lower budgeted movies, less than 50M budget and Oscar fare. Almost every studio survives on franchises now, and any original fare that becomes a hit becomes a franchise whether it makes sense or not.

[Fantomex]

I think WB is in good hands. The new CEO is actually doing something with their DC properties and that's a GOOD thing. They're TV slate of super heroes and vertigo projects is also nice. So far, the announcement of David Ayer (a pretty talented director in his own right) being attached to Suicide Squad is a step in the right direction.

[Gagen Lang]

 I'm sure Affleck's Batman will be a whole different animal.

Me too.

And since for me Bale was the worst thing in Batman and I wouldn`t have watch it if not Ledger and Hardy, I`m glad to see new Batman ASAP.

[Kalo]

is every studio going to be franchise fonder from now on? but has become of WB. there blockbuster of the last few years have all been varying degrees of disappointment. I'm glad they finally got the ball rolling on DC. but a bit to many in such a short time, and would if they don't make them money? they could be facing bankruptcy if things don't go as planed they had a really rough year.  

[James]

is every studio going to be franchise fonder from now on? but has become of WB. there blockbuster of the last few years have all been varying degrees of disappointment. I'm glad they finally got the ball rolling on DC. but a bit to many in such a short time, and would if they don't make them money? they could be facing bankruptcy if things don't go as planed they had a really rough year.  

I seriously doubt that. First of all, Time Warner is a huge multinational media corporation, third biggest in the world behind Comcast and Disney. WB is just a small part of their business (they also have among others New Line, HBO, CN, CW, Bomerang, CNN and most importantly, Hanna-Barbera). Their reported revenue last year was around $ 30B.

Second - they have big franchises besides DC - Potter (or Beasts, that is a guaranteed hit no matter what) and now Conjuring and their successfull start of an animated cinematic line (Lego). Add to that Godzilla and the rumored Scooby-Doo new movies and bang. Even if their DC universe won't work besides Superman, Batman and assemble movies, those alone should provide them with at least one big comic book film per year. 

Edited October 25, 2014 by James

[Kalo]

I seriously doubt that. First of all, Time Warner is a huge multinational media corporation, third biggest in the world behind Comcast and Disney. WB is just a small part of their business (they also have among others New Line, HBO, CN, CW, Bomerang, CNN and most importantly, Hanna-Barbera). Their reported revenue last year was around $ 30B.

Second - they have big franchises besides DC - Potter (or Beasts, that is a guaranteed hit no matter what) and now Conjuring and their successfull start of an animated cinematic line (Lego). Add to that Godzilla and the rumored Scooby-Doo new movies and bang. Even if their DC universe won't work besides Superman, Batman and assemble movies, those alone should provide them with at least one big comic book film per year. 

yeah I guess they are pretty big. they still had a lot of bombs this year though. 

[James]

yeah I guess they are pretty big. they still had a lot of bombs this year though. 

Not really:

 

http://boxofficemojo.com/studio/chart/?yr=2014&view=company&studio=wb-newline.htm

 

If you talk only DOM, I agree, but we should watch the WW numbers. In the end, cash is cash.

 

Lego was obviously a huge succes, Godzilla also made good money and granted a sequel, 300 tripled it's budget WW, Edge of Tomorrow probably lost them money, but not much (with DVD sales and TV they shoul acually make money of it). Tammy was a succes. Annabelle is pure profit. If I Stay made 75M on a 11M budget. Blended made 130M on a 40M budget. Of course you have TIWILY, Winter's Tale and The Judge, but those where cheap movies (20M, 60M, 50M). Last year, they had a similar bunch in the first months of the year. Their only big buget bomb was Transcendence, and even that only had a 100M budget and made more than that.

 

Not a great year compared to 2013, but they still have The Hobbit and the OS revenue from Interstellar and Horrible Bosses 2 (and with auxiliary revenue even disappointment might become money makers). Plus, they got 2 franchises running: Lego and Godzilla.

 

Overall, a nice year for them and they'll finish 2nd after Fox DOM.

[Goffe]

If they actually bring back Matrix, financially at least, they are golden. In the end, they are a movie studio and like any other one, they want to make cash.

a new Matrix would probably make less than 400m WW. Matrix is like POTC and Shrek, I doubt people care anymore

[Neo]

a new Matrix would probably make less than 400m WW. Matrix is like POTC and Shrek, I doubt people care anymore

Not like those at all.

[Neo]

Not really:

 

http://boxofficemojo.com/studio/chart/?yr=2014&view=company&studio=wb-newline.htm

 

If you talk only DOM, I agree, but we should watch the WW numbers. In the end, cash is cash.

 

Lego was obviously a huge succes, Godzilla also made good money and granted a sequel, 300 tripled it's budget WW, Edge of Tomorrow probably lost them money, but not much (with DVD sales and TV they shoul acually make money of it). Tammy was a succes. Annabelle is pure profit. If I Stay made 75M on a 11M budget. Blended made 130M on a 40M budget. Of course you have TIWILY, Winter's Tale and The Judge, but those where cheap movies (20M, 60M, 50M). Last year, they had a similar bunch in the first months of the year. Their only big buget bomb was Transcendence, and even that only had a 100M budget and made more than that.

 

Not a great year compared to 2013, but they still have The Hobbit and the OS revenue from Interstellar and Horrible Bosses 2 (and with auxiliary revenue even disappointment might become money makers). Plus, they got 2 franchises running: Lego and Godzilla.

 

Overall, a nice year for them and they'll finish 2nd after Fox DOM.

Some people think if a movie doesn't make 1B its a bomb.

[James]

a new Matrix would probably make less than 400m WW. Matrix is like POTC and Shrek, I doubt people care anymore

Uh... the last POTC made over 1B and the last Shreak 750M. People don't care anymore?

[Kalo]

Not really:

 

http://boxofficemojo.com/studio/chart/?yr=2014&view=company&studio=wb-newline.htm

 

If you talk only DOM, I agree, but we should watch the WW numbers. In the end, cash is cash.

 

Lego was obviously a huge succes, Godzilla also made good money and granted a sequel, 300 tripled it's budget WW, Edge of Tomorrow probably lost them money, but not much (with DVD sales and TV they shoul acually make money of it). Tammy was a succes. Annabelle is pure profit. If I Stay made 75M on a 11M budget. Blended made 130M on a 40M budget. Of course you have TIWILY, Winter's Tale and The Judge, but those where cheap movies (20M, 60M, 50M). Last year, they had a similar bunch in the first months of the year. Their only big buget bomb was Transcendence, and even that only had a 100M budget and made more than that.

 

Not a great year compared to 2013, but they still have The Hobbit and the OS revenue from Interstellar and Horrible Bosses 2 (and with auxiliary revenue even disappointment might become money makers). Plus, they got 2 franchises running: Lego and Godzilla.

 

Overall, a nice year for them and they'll finish 2nd after Fox DOM.

I guess your right, I guess I was mostly thinking of transcendence, which was a major bomb, but overall not to bad. But Fox this year.. even with HTTYD 2 under-preforming (Which still made them a huge profit I'm sure thanks to the OS market.) is killing it!