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

[excel1]

3 hours ago, charlie Jatinder said:

Nolan is 2nd biggest director in industry. He can do whatever he want. TENET doing $360mn in middle of pandemic is Blockbuster.

 

If Disney can burn millions on stuff like a Wrinkle in Time, Nolan is much safer.

 

Only catch is Disney makes Disney things i.e. optimistic, family-friendly fare. They moved on the Touchstone/Bruckheimer days a while ago. Nolan probably liked WB because they truly gave him a blank check and full creative control. WB was known as the filmmakers studio. 

 

ONLY issue is that there is always a financial side and WB simply does not release the films with the potency of Disney. So many terrible release dates, odd trailers, etc. WB did pull IT and JOKER out of their ass but their handling of DC has jus been laughably bad. The DC IP was so much better known than Marvels mostly D-List characters pre 2010 and yet look where it is now.

 

I no way WB can really move forward with this plan. They need to begin framing the messages for reevaluating their position post WW84.

[Legion Again]

15 minutes ago, xiazhi said:

Do you realize they do this at the cost of everyone involved in the film making and distributing chain?

You asked who Diamondz meant it was good for, and I answered. If you want to get into the merits of the claim I suggest you take it up with they who made it, not I who explained it.

[TerwillikerInst]

The same could apply for 90% of the people posting here lol.

[Mango]

1 hour ago, TerwillikerInst said:

The same could apply for 90% of the people posting here lol.

 

Seems like a really patronizing and douchey line of thought for someone seemingly no more qualified than anyone here tbh. (the Twitter post not yourself) 

[charlie Jatinder]

9 hours ago, excel1 said:

Big $$$$$, would challenge DA FORCE AWAKENS

Now see that's why you aren't on WB board but on BoT thread boards.

[filmlover]

2 hours ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

But does Disney want to take the risk. They don’t seem much interested in much non IP films from their branches outside of animation. 20th Century seems to be downsizing to smaller mid budget films anyways. Besides I don’t think Nolan would be that interested in a deal with them. Mainly because I don’t see there cultures clashing well.

They have projects with Spielberg, Ridley Scott, and David O. Russell that were originally supposed to release this year arriving in 2021. Seems like Disney's using that label to give directors creative freedom to make what they want away from the "brands."

[xiazhi]

3 hours ago, WandaLegion said:

You asked who Diamondz meant it was good for, and I answered. If you want to get into the merits of the claim I suggest you take it up with they who made it, not I who explained it.

So you can answer for someone else but can't take a question that is directed to yourself?

[Napoleon]

People are overreacting, this is only for their 2021 films. Nolan can simply demand in the contract for his next film that it plays exclusively in theaters for some time, and so can other directors and stars. The only way Warner/AT&T continue to release movies in HBO Max beyond 2021 is if they make more money this way, and if that's the case, talent will make more money as well. The only people screwed would be theater chain owners, but they are on board with WB's plan for 2021.

[clockwork]

5 hours ago, excel1 said:

ONLY issue is that there is always a financial side and WB simply does not release the films with the potency of Disney. So many terrible release dates, odd trailers, etc. WB did pull IT and JOKER out of their ass but their handling of DC has jus been laughably bad. The DC IP was so much better known than Marvels mostly D-List characters pre 2010 and yet look where it is now.

In addition to messing up their DC stuff their attempt to revive the Harry Potter/wizarding world IP in the past few years has not gone as well as they hoped, with those lackluster Fantastic Beasts movies and the involvement of controversy-glutton JK Rowling.

 

Warner Brothers has been fumbling around a lot lately and occasionally they'll score a few wins, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see what comes of this bold move. As the saying goes "expect the unexpected".

Edited December 9, 2020 by clockwork

[Noctis]

25 minutes ago, clockwork said:

In addition to messing up their DC stuff their attempt to revive the Harry Potter/wizarding world IP in the past few years has not gone as well as they hoped, with those lackluster Fantastic Beasts movies and the involvement of controversy-glutton JK Rowling.

 

Warner Brothers has been fumbling around a lot lately and occasionally they'll score a few wins, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see what comes of this bold move. As the saying goes "expect the unexpected".

Rowling's "controversies" is in no way a correlation of her abilities as a screenwriter. That is where she has fumbled upon. 

 

But the WW universe is fucking enormous...they can get a new director, a basic story approval from Rowling, and a new writer and create something completely new and it would do gangbusters. 

 

A genuine shame the Grindelwald-Dumbledore epic was shoehorned into the FB series. They should have been completely separate. Anyway, if FB3 is received with merely an okay response, then they should simply end it with the fourth. 

[Chicago]

42 minutes ago, clockwork said:

In addition to messing up their DC stuff their attempt to revive the Harry Potter/wizarding world IP in the past few years has not gone as well as they hoped, with those lackluster Fantastic Beasts movies and the involvement of controversy-glutton JK Rowling.

 

Warner Brothers has been fumbling around a lot lately and occasionally they'll score a few wins, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see what comes of this bold move. As the saying goes "expect the unexpected".

JK Rowlings tweets are only controversial to a limited few. It wont effect the Potter Brand in any way.

[reddevil19]

17 minutes ago, Noctis said:

Rowling's "controversies" is in no way a correlation of her abilities as a screenwriter. That is where she has fumbled upon. 

 

But the WW universe is fucking enormous...they can get a new director, a basic story approval from Rowling, and a new writer and create something completely new and it would do gangbusters. 

 

A genuine shame the Grindelwald-Dumbledore epic was shoehorned into the FB series. They should have been completely separate. Anyway, if FB3 is received with merely an okay response, then they should simply end it with the fourth. 

Agreed. The second FB was before the big backlash anyway - it was just a mess of a script. 

If the script is good, with Depp gone (not because of any personal issue, but because he was just soooo wrong in the role - he was listless compared to the charming menace of Farrell), there is potential for the rest of the series.

[Gazer365]

1 hour ago, reddevil19 said:

If the script is good, with Depp gone (not because of any personal issue, but because he was just soooo wrong in the role - he was listless compared to the charming menace of Farrell), there is potential for the rest of the series.

 Eh, even if the script is better this time around I'm just not jiving with what story they're trying to tell. Sure there's potential but right now it's buried under a fair amount of baggage. Ideally I would like them to pull a soft-reboot like WB is doing with the next suicide squad movie and just something fun and low stakes for once.

 

1 hour ago, Chicago said:

JK Rowlings tweets are only controversial to a limited few. It wont effect the Potter Brand in any way.

If she wasn't still involved with the brand then maybe, but she is (for now) and the post-HP content she's been involved with has not been super well received. So whether it's for disagreement regarding her personal beliefs or disappointment with recent Potter content the brand has taken a few hits.

Edited December 9, 2020 by Gazer365

[cdsacken]

3 hours ago, clockwork said:

In addition to messing up their DC stuff their attempt to revive the Harry Potter/wizarding world IP in the past few years has not gone as well as they hoped, with those lackluster Fantastic Beasts movies and the involvement of controversy-glutton JK Rowling.

 

Warner Brothers has been fumbling around a lot lately and occasionally they'll score a few wins, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see what comes of this bold move. As the saying goes "expect the unexpected".

No doubt. Seems like ATT/WB is actively trying to destroy hbo. Impressive

[WittyUsername]

The Fantastic Beasts movies fell apart before the transphobia controversy with Rowling happened, although the movies already had plenty of other controversies before that. The most notable one was the inclusion of Johnny Depp, whether justified or not. Of course, the DC movies have been no stranger to controversy either. 

[Chicago]

6 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

The Fantastic Beasts movies fell apart before the transphobia controversy with Rowling happened, although the movies already had plenty of other controversies before that. The most notable one was the inclusion of Johnny Depp, whether justified or not. Of course, the DC movies have been no stranger to controversy either. 

Yeah i feel like the transphobia controversy may only be a thing in the states and doesnt actually travel worldwide. The last movie got bad reviews and the box office suffered as a result. Its really that simple 

[YM!]

5 hours ago, clockwork said:

In addition to messing up their DC stuff their attempt to revive the Harry Potter/wizarding world IP in the past few years has not gone as well as they hoped, with those lackluster Fantastic Beasts movies and the involvement of controversy-glutton JK Rowling.

 

Warner Brothers has been fumbling around a lot lately and occasionally they'll score a few wins, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see what comes of this bold move. As the saying goes "expect the unexpected".

Not to pile on but their lackluster marketing for their animation arm Warner Animation Group, combined with the mishandling of The Lego Movie franchise (as they should’ve done a sequel before flooding the market with spin-offs) probably hurt too.

[lorddemaxus]

22 minutes ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

Not to pile on but their lackluster marketing for their animation arm Warner Animation Group, combined with the mishandling of The Lego Movie franchise (as they should’ve done a sequel before flooding the market with spin-offs) probably hurt too.

The Lego Movie franchise really only suffered from the same fate as most modern-day non-Disney animated franchises have suffered from. Doubt the franchise would've had more than two successful movies regardless of what the 2nd movie was.

Edited December 9, 2020 by lorddemaxus

[YM!]

4 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

The Lego Movie franchise really only suffered from the same fate as most modern-day non-Disney animated franchises have suffered from. Doubt the franchise would've had more than two successful movies regardless of what the 2nd movie was.

To be fair 4 movies, two with IP properties that are already flooding in the home entertainment market diluted the value. I feel if LM2 came out earlier, it would’ve fared better. Maybe it wouldn’t be like DM2 or Shrek 2 but it wouldn’t have fell as bad.

[filmlover]

Sources: Directors Guild rebukes Warner Bros. in sharply worded letter criticizing streaming plan https://t.co/39fo8ZQP9t pic.twitter.com/7fi1wSxUji

— The Hollywood Reporter (@THR) December 9, 2020