What is DC Entertainment doing? What is their plan? - Part 1

[jmc]

Agreed, although I'd say it's more of a '...and the adventure continues...' type of thing, I'd equate it to the first Back to the Future film before there were plans for a sequel.

 

[Gabe99]

Warner Bros. on a Caped Crusade
DC Comics Plots Film, TV Comeback vs. Disney's Marvel

'It isn't about a single approach to everything,' says DC Entertainment president Diane Nelson, shown at the 'Man Of Steel' world premiere. Invision/Associated Press

More than a decade ago, a young Warner Bros. executive fretted that the studio's DC Comics unit might lose a generation of young fans if it didn't catch up to rival Marvel in the business of making superhero movies.

"We're not going to let that happen," declared Kevin Tsujihara, then-executive vice president of business development, in 2003.

But over the past several years at the box office, DC Comics has fallen even further behind Marvel, now owned by Walt Disney Co. DIS -1.71%

Mr. Tsujihara, meanwhile, rose to become chief executive of Time Warner Inc. TWX -0.67% 's Warner Bros. Now, one year into his tenure, he has put a revival of DC in movies, TV and other media at the core of his plans for Hollywood's largest movie studio.

"If you want to know how we are going to grow as a company and what's important to us, DC is at the top of the list," Mr. Tsujihara said.

To that end, Warner Bros. is focusing like never before on a DC movie slate that will lead into "Justice League," an "Avengers" style team-up that will include Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman. But the next movie, tentatively titled "Batman vs. Superman," won't come out until 2016. During the interim, Disney will release four new Marvel films.

In the past five years, Disney has released seven Marvel movies, including "Avengers," "Iron Man 3" and the recent hit "Captain America: The Winter Soldier," that have together grossed more than $5.3 billion world-wide. (On Friday, the latest Marvel movie—"The Amazing Spider-Man 2"—comes out, although that is produced by Sony Pictures under a decades-old licensing deal.)

Warner in the past five years released five DC films, among them the flops "Green Lantern" and "Jonah Hex," that grossed a total of just over $2 billion. DC's big-screen success in the past decade has come from Christopher Nolan, who directed the $2.5 billion-grossing "Dark Knight" trilogy and produced last year's hit "Man of Steel."

But the fiercely independent Mr. Nolan didn't work within a larger DC strategy and has declined entreaties to do more superhero movies. Warner has now entrusted its core superheroes to "Man of Steel" director Zack Snyder, who will helm "Superman vs. Batman" and then "Justice League." It also has nine other movies based on DC comics in development.

Progress is faster in television, as Warner has produced a record four DC-based pilots for the coming fall season. They include the Batman prequel "Gotham," already ordered to series by the Fox network, and "Flash," a spinoff of the CW Network's superhero hit "Arrow."

Warner is also looking to accelerate the success it has enjoyed using DC characters in direct-to-DVD animation and videogames, businesses in which it faces little competition from Marvel.

Warner Bros. produces more movies and television shows than any other studio. But like its competitors, it faces long-term declines in movie-theater attendance, DVD sales, and broadcast-TV ratings. And with the "Harry Potter" series over and "The Hobbit" trilogy ending this December, finding new blockbuster franchises is critical to the company's future.

Hollywood's advantage in an age when anyone can make a YouTube video is its ability to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on movies or TV shows featuring well-known characters with established fan bases. In success, those often spur sales of toys and other products. With thousands of superheroes along with more offbeat fare from its Vertigo line of fantasy, sci-fi and crime comic books, 90-year-old DC Comics provides Warner rich fodder.

Warner Bros. has struggled, though, to integrate DC into its operations for many years. Over the past decade, the head of DC has reported to four different executives. Although comic-book sales were falling while the value of superheroes in movies and other media skyrocketed, the unit was run by a New York-based publisher.

In 2009, a long-promised revamp began with the appointment of Diane Nelson as president of DC Entertainment, based at the studio's Burbank, Calif., headquarters. A marketing executive with no background in comic books, Ms. Nelson made her name managing the studio's biggest franchise of the prior decade: Harry Potter.

Ms. Nelson first reported to the film chief, one of three internal contenders for the CEO job at Warner Bros. The succession race hampered her efforts to work across divisions led by rival executives, according to people at the company.

Last year, soon after Mr. Tsujihara's promotion, Ms. Nelson began reporting to the CEO for the first time in DC's history.

"Kevin came into a political, complicated company and made clear DC is a priority, and I expect everyone to figure this out together," said Ms. Nelson.

Although she oversees the small but profitable comics business, where digital publishing has become a priority, Ms. Nelson's focus is coordinating a studio-wide DC strategy.

Her approach is the opposite of Marvel, which maintains a continuing narrative and cast of characters across all of its projects. Samuel L. Jackson, for instance, has appeared as superspy Nick Fury in "Avengers," "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" and the TV show "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D."

Ms. Nelson has instead encouraged Warner producers to develop diverse and even contradictory takes. The Batman in "Superman vs Batman," to be played by Ben Affleck, will be different from the one in "Gotham" and in coming direct-to-DVD animated movies and videogames. A kid-friendly version of Batman even appeared in February's hit "The Lego Movie."

"It isn't about a single approach to everything," said Ms. Nelson. "It's the right character matched with the right talent in the right medium."

DC's chief content officer, Geoff Johns, is tasked with keeping track of it all. A fan-favorite comic-book writer who is the T-shirt wearing geek to Ms. Nelson's polished corporate player, Mr. Johns consults on scripts, visual designs and even titles across the company.

Colleagues say his approach is less nitpicky than his predecessors', with one recalling the time when DC staffers in New York asked an animation executive to change a script because the villain Man-Bat wouldn't be physically strong enough to carry the Penguin (the Batman foe) on his back.

"The restrictions have been swept aside," said Sam Register, the head of Warner Bros. Animation. "We get less 'You mustn't' and more 'Wouldn't it be great if…?' "

 

[TheVileOne]

Let's take a look back to SEPTEMBER 2010!

http://www.ign.com/articles/2010/09/21/dc-were-not-marvel

DC: We're Not Marvel
Is the home of the JLA connecting film properties ala Avengers? Not so much.

If you're a mainstream comics fan, it's all about DC and Marvel. And, of course, that rivalry between the two labels carries over into the film and TV worlds as well. But that doesn't mean that both companies are following the same business plan or strategy. IGN just spoke with Diane Nelson, President of DC Entertainment, and we asked her how DC's movie plans will work vis-a-vis Marvel's.

"People make an assumption that we're going to mirror Marvel's strategy, for example with Avengers," Nelson told us. "We do have a very different attitude about how you build a content slate. And it isn't necessarily about connecting those properties together to build into a single thing. We think we've got great stories and characters that will lend themselves to great standalone experiences, and that's the way we're focusing on it."

The perception among fans is that DC is playing catch-up to Marvel in terms of its feature film output, but that's not a notion that Nelson agrees with.



"You know, it's funny… I really enjoy the healthy competition that exists but also the competition that people assume and, to some extent, project onto us," she said. "There is a healthy competition as there would be in any business. But we do not spend our days thinking about what Marvel is doing. Listen, I've said before, the success of Marvel, or any publisher, is good for us, and ours for them. We want to support the retail business together and there are a lot of things we can do together. But there is not a single thing we've done that has been reactive to Marvel from the creation of DC Entertainment to today. People can speculate, but they are wrong."

Well, well, well

t:

 

[Docker2.0]

Good come back Vileone!

 

[HighFivingMF]

People change their minds within the span of 4 years!? WHAAAAT!?!?!?

 

[random_havoc]

DC apparently has learned nothing.

Marvel has been destroying them with characters for years now and it's going to keep going the exact same way.

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

Not to mention that article came out before Green Lantern bombed and TA became the 3rd highest grossing film ever.

 

[Docker2.0]

People change their minds within the span of 4 years!? WHAAAAT!?!?!?

The problem with that philosophy is that they have been constantly changing their minds in the last decade. Even in this MOS sequel, it's looking more and more like Justice League rather than BVS.

 

[HighFivingMF]

The problem with that philosophy is that they have been constantly changing their minds in the last decade.

The problem with knowing that people are changing their minds is that people are changing their minds?

Even in this MOS sequel, it's looking more and more like Justice League rather than BVS.

How? It's about Batman and Superman having some sort of conflict.

 

[Docker2.0]

I'm not a DC basher but even you have to be admit they have not lived up to their potential when it comes to movies. And if you say they did, man you are living in denial.

 

[HighFivingMF]

I'm not a DC basher but even you have to be admit they have not lived up to their potential when it comes to movies.

Yeah... But that has nothing to do with them changing their minds or the movie about Batman fighting Superman that doesn't feature the formation of the Justice League seems more like Justice League than Batman Vs. Superman.

 

[Docker2.0]

Yeah but that's all Vileone was saying. I'm just saying, don't get your hopes up. DC/WB supposedly has over 10 movies in development.............most of those 10 have been in development for awhile now and over 5-7 years. As much as I would love for them to step it up, I just don't understand why they haven't.

 

[TheVileOne]

Don't take it so personally HighFivingMF.

It's just that I find it amusing they have changed their minds and taken such a dramatic shift that is trying to duplicate the Marvel Studios model almost exactly.

At the time it was being made, I was critical of Nolan and with the Green Lantern project for not taking similar steps.

And I'm sorry, I will always believe that the Nolan trilogy also should've gone this route.

 

[The Guard]

I just can't really see Marvel doing better in terms of quantity as "destroying" DC.

If that's the case, then how many porn franchises are destroying both of them?

 

[Docker2.0]

I just can't really see Marvel doing better in terms of quantity as "destroying" DC.

If that's the case, then how many porn franchises are destroying both of them?

Box office says other wise. But just to entertain you because I know you are going the "quantity over quality" excuse because that's all it is. Take out TDK series, what has DC/WB done?

 

[TheVileOne]

To me it's not a quantity over quality issue.

I mean in terms of quality, my issue is now that they want to duplicate the Marvel model, it seems DCE is trying to do it even quicker and force it even quicker. I want to believe they are ready to do this.

On the same token, it seems like they were forced into this because of Avengers. All that hemming hawing before and they said "No. We're not connecting these things."

OK so now they are.

I just find the politics of all that interesting.

 

[The Batman]

WB is just trying to ride a wave. Universe building is the fad now, and WB just wants to capitalize.

 

[Docker2.0]

To me it's not a quantity over quality issue.

I mean in terms of quality, my issue is now that they want to duplicate the Marvel model, it seems DCE is trying to do it even quicker and force it even quicker. I want to believe they are ready to do this.

On the same token, it seems like they were forced into this because of Avengers. All that hemming hawing before and they said "No. We're not connecting these things."

OK so now they are.

I just find the politics of all that interesting.

That's the thing: Whenever Marvel has a hit on their hands, they seem to announce something major but then back out at the last minute or change their mind. I feel BVS was only reactive to the Avengers but now that they had time to think it over, they now want to do a JLA. It seems they don't really have a plan at all. The Flash could be their Spiderman but yet they seem intent on depending on Batman for everything!

 

[TheVileOne]

WB is just trying to ride a wave. Universe building is the fad now, and WB just wants to capitalize.

Sony's doing it too.

 

[The Batman]

And Fox.

Days of Future Past is the first official response to The Avengers.

 

[Mr.M]

I fail to see what DC is going to offer audiences that Marvel has not already exposed the GA to. I don't think a hundred plus million Flash film would be a worthy investment. Unless they are going to do something edgy with it and slightly more grounded, it will come off as cheesy. That's why Marvel has to make Ant-Man a heist film with a heavy hitter actor. It won't be purely comic booky, action/comedy entertainment. If DC tries this route with Flash, it's going to be either too cheesy or too similar to Ant-Man (if they go with a mentor/protege thing with Allen/West).

Not making excuses here. They dropped the ball with GL and Marvel beat them to the punch with other concepts they could have used. What's done is done.

Going forward, how are they going to pull off Justice League? I think they have to do it slowly. Don't bring in the more staple characters like Flash and Lantern until they get some pre-development. That's why I think JLA will be a glorified Trinity movie. Once Affleck steps down, you can re-introduce Flash and GL, but not before. Take it slow. Don't **** it up and B&R yourself WB.

But I like the fact they are going with TV for Flash. Even Gotham. It's low risk, high reward. Marvel is a joke compared to DC on television. Only now is Marvel trying to get their act together. Meanwhile Gotham can dominate network television, while Flash can build a solid fanboy niche that possibly exceeds Smallville, since it will be fresher and edgier, much like Arrow. This is simply smart business folks.

 

[Docker2.0]

I fail to see what DC is going to offer audiences that Marvel has not already exposed the GA to. I don't think a hundred plus million Flash film would be a worthy investment. Unless they are going to do something edgy with it and slightly more grounded, it will come off as cheesy. That's why Marvel has to make Ant-Man a heist film with a heavy hitter actor. It won't be purely comic booky, action/comedy entertainment. If DC tries this route with Flash, it's going to be either too cheesy or too similar to Ant-Man (if they go with a mentor/protege thing with Allen/West).

Not making excuses here. They dropped the ball with GL and Marvel beat them to the punch with other concepts they could have used. What's done is done.

Going forward, how are they going to pull off Justice League? I think they have to do it slowly. Don't bring in the more staple characters like Flash and Lantern until they get some pre-development. That's why I think JLA will be a glorified Trinity movie. Once Affleck steps down, you can re-introduce Flash and GL, but not before. Take it slow. Don't **** it up and B&R yourself WB.

But I like the fact they are going with TV for Flash. Even Gotham. It's low risk, high reward. Marvel is a joke compared to DC on television. Only now is Marvel trying to get their act together. Meanwhile Gotham can dominate network television, while Flash can build a solid fanboy niche that possibly exceeds Smallville, since it will be fresher and edgier, much like Arrow. This is simply smart business folks.

You don't need $150M to make the Flash. It just seems like a character(Wally West)that can be Spiderman like. Plus with the public being kind of Spiderman fatigued, a Flash which is movie new could take over this spot. WB is missing out on a golden opportunity.

 

[Mr.M]

You don't need $150M to make the Flash. It just seems like a character(Wally West)that can be Spiderman like. Plus with the public being kind of Spiderman fatigued, a Flash which is movie new could take over this spot. WB is missing out on a golden opportunity.

Stop... Spider-Man has plateaued at the box office so now a guy with a lightning bolt on his shirt will take up Spidey's mantle for Hollywood? Typical fanboy speak.

At some point, you just have to acknowledge the limitations of the genre. You have a Spidey franchise that is near being mined to completion. You have Batman solo films that have been mined for the remainder of this decade (I don't see Affleck doing a solo movie or WB rebooting any time soon), you have a MoS franchise that couldn't even produce a stand alone character sequel. The writing is on the wall.

I give credit to Marvel Studios for maximizing their Avengers staple. But I don't expect an IM4 movie any time soon. They mined him and got the best possible result. The only way Marvel Studios will survive long term is if they branch out in different sub genres, or different genres all together, pulling from new and original material. They will do exactly that once Avengers comes and goes.

It's too late for WB to produce 100 million dollar superhero films without Bats/Supes in the mix. We are far too late in the game for that. Those films will eventually come with a solid long term approach, but right now, the market will not allow for that. Marvel has over saturated it, so I'd be prudent to exercise caution and strike at a more opportune moment.

 

[113]

You don't need $150M to make the Flash. It just seems like a character(Wally West)that can be Spiderman like. Plus with the public being kind of Spiderman fatigued, a Flash which is movie new could take over this spot. WB is missing out on a golden opportunity.

I agree. A Flash movie should really be the easiest movie to make. A likable, wisecracking, hero that is already somewhat recognizable (more recognizable than GL is) to the GA.

That movie should have been in development a looong time ago. Hopefully it's one of the 9 other films "in development." I'm skeptical that that means anything beyond ideas tbh, given WBs track record.

 

[Docker2.0]

Stop... Spider-Man has plateaued at the box office so now a guy with a lightning bolt on his shirt will take up Spidey's mantle for Hollywood? Typical fanboy speak.

At some point, you just have to acknowledge the limitations of the genre. You have a Spidey franchise that is near being mined to completion. You have Batman solo films that have been mined for the remainder of this decade (I don't see Affleck doing a solo movie or WB rebooting any time soon), you have a MoS franchise that couldn't even produce a stand alone character sequel. The writing is on the wall.

I give credit to Marvel Studios for maximizing their Avengers staple. But I don't expect an IM4 movie any time soon. They mined him and got the best possible result. The only way Marvel Studios will survive long term is if they branch out in different sub genres, or different genres all together, pulling from new and original material. They will do exactly that once Avengers comes and goes.

It's too late for WB to produce 100 million dollar superhero films without Bats/Supes in the mix. We are far too late in the game for that. Those films will eventually come with a solid long term approach, but right now, the market will not allow for that. Marvel has over saturated it, so I'd be prudent to exercise caution and strike at a more opportune moment.

They rebooted it to soon to keep the rights and you are seeing the effects of it. It will do well but I predict the Box office numbers will continue to decrease with each movie. Webb's movies have not been great. Decent but not great.

I agree. A Flash movie should really be the easiest movie to make. A likable, wisecracking, hero that is already somewhat recognizable (more recognizable than GL is) to the GA.

That movie should have been in development a looong time ago. Hopefully it's one of the 9 other films "in development." I'm skeptical that that means anything beyond ideas tbh, given WBs track record.

Thank you sir. Flash is a gold mine waiting to happen if used right. Same with GL if WB knew how to use him. They just don't have a clue!