What is DC Entertainment doing? What is their plan?

[Raiden]

After Potter, WB eyes magic from DC comics

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - If only they could wave a magic wand, studio executives at Warner Bros. would make their "Harry Potter" film franchise last forever. But movie magic takes more than a whisk of a stick to conjure up.

When "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2" opens on July 15, it marks the beginning of the end for the highest grossing movie series of all time -- $6 billion worldwide box office -- and one that has given Hollywood studio Warner Bros. a stable revenue source since 2001.

The end of "Harry Potter" has led financial analysts to wonder what Warner Bros., a unit of Time Warner Inc., has planned to fill the gap when the series about the young magician, his friends, and their battle against evil comes to an end.

With this eighth movie, Warner Bros. has tapped all the books in the "Harry Potter" series from author J.K. Rowling, which are the backbone of the films.

"Overall, you're not going to capture all the mojo created from 'Harry Potter,' but you've got some real potential there with reboots of existing franchises and sequels of already existing properties," said David Miller, an analyst with Caris & Company.

For summer 2012, Warner Bros can bank on "The Dark Knight Rises," the third Batman movie directed by Christopher Nolan and the follow-up to his 2008 "The Dark Knight," which topped $1 billion in world ticket sales.

Also next year, the studio looks to release its highly anticipated "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey," which is a prequel to its successful "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy.

Last year, the studio's then president and chief operating officer Alan Horn said at an industry event in Las Vegas that as "Harry Potter" fades away, the company would rely more on its rich source of characters and material in its DC Comics unit.

DC SUPERHEROES TO THE RESCUE?

But Hollywood observers point to missed opportunities with some previous movie adaptations using DC Comics superheroes, especially compared to the nearly flawless record of rival Marvel Entertainment, which this summer has seen its "Thor" 3-D movie earn about $440 million at worldwide box offices.

"The jury is still out on whether they've found the right combination from their DC franchise to replace 'Harry Potter,'" said James Dix, an analyst with Wedbush Securities.

One case in point is the low-wattage result for "Green Lantern," a movie based on a DC character that has earned just over $103 million in the United States and Canada since opening on June 17.

Given that some industry watchers pegged the production cost of "Green Lantern" at about $200 million -- a figure Warner Bros has disputed -- the movie is widely viewed as a box office disappointment.

Meanwhile, Warner Bros is busy on the next Superman movie, "Man of Steel," set for release in 2012. The studio hopes to reverse the mediocre performance of 2006's "Superman Returns."

Jeff Bock, an analyst with Exhibitor Relations Co, noted that the studio assigned Nolan, the Batman director with the golden touch, a producing role on the new Superman flick.

And Warner Bros is said to have plans for other DC characters, including a long anticipated Wonder Woman movie.

"That cast of DC characters is probably going to be their crown jewel for the foreseeable future," Bock said.

A Wonder Woman movie? That's the first time I've heard about it.

 

[Lencho01]

Don't they generally have "plans" for everyone, though?

 

[MadVillainy]

Prett much. They always have "plans"

 

[merced]

The commnets below are all fine and good but totally unrealisitc IMO.

First off Potter is a multi-billion dollar franchise. Like 6 billion.

The super-hero genre is simply not going to fill that for WB.

It has the billion dollar Batman franchise but it's other 2 tries so far are not able to pull in the big money and were big disappointments.

SR didn't break 400 million WW and MOS will probably top out at 450 plus million WW. Plus after MOS Superman goes into legal limbo anyway.

GL - don't think so.

Seriously WB could duplicate the success of Ironman and Spiderman and it would not come near to making up for Potter.

That is if DCE can bring forth 2 film franchises that do 600 - 800 million plus WW. Like what are the chances of that?!







WB needs to find more novel to film franchises a la Potter. If they are seriously expecting their superhero characters to fill the Potter void they are more clueless than I would have expected.OS ANGELES (Reuters) - If only they could wave a magic wand, studio executives at WarnerBros. would make their "Harry Potter" film franchise last forever. But movie magic takes more than a whisk of a stick to conjure up.

When "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2" opens on July 15, it marks the beginning of the end for the highest grossing movie series of all time -- $6 billion worldwide box office -- and one that has given Hollywood studio Warner Bros. a stable revenue source since 2001.

The end of "Harry Potter" has led financial analysts to wonder what Warner Bros., a unit of Time Warner Inc., has planned to fill the gap when the series about the young magician, his friends, and their battle against evil comes to an end.

With this eighth movie, Warner Bros. has tapped all the books in the "Harry Potter" series from author J.K. Rowling, which are the backbone of the films.

"Overall, you're not going to capture all the mojo created from 'Harry Potter,' but you've got some real potential there with reboots of existing franchises and sequels of already existing properties," said David Miller, an analyst with Caris & Company.

For summer 2012, Warner Bros can bank on "The Dark Knight Rises," the third Batman movie directed by Christopher Nolan and the follow-up to his 2008 "The Dark Knight," which topped $1 billion in world ticket sales.

Also next year, the studio looks to release its highly anticipated "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey," which is a prequel to its successful "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy.

Last year, the studio's then president and chief operating officer Alan Horn said at an industry event in LasVegas that as "Harry Potter" fades away, the company would rely more on its rich source of characters and material in its DC Comics unit.

DC SUPERHEROES TO THE RESCUE?

But Hollywood observers point to missed opportunities with some previous movie adaptations using DC Comics superheroes, especially compared to the nearly flawless record of rival Marvel Entertainment, which this summer has seen its "Thor" 3-D movie earn about $440 million at worldwide box offices.

"The jury is still out on whether they've found the right combination from their DC franchise to replace 'Harry Potter,'" said James Dix, an analyst with Wedbush Securities.

One case in point is the low-wattage result for "Green Lantern," a movie based on a DC character that has earned just over $103 million in the United States and Canada since opening on June 17.

Given that some industry watchers pegged the production cost of "Green Lantern" at about $200 million -- a figure Warner Bros has disputed -- the movie is widely viewed as a box office disappointment.

Meanwhile, Warner Bros is busy on the next Superman movie, "Man of Steel," set for release in 2012. The studio hopes to reverse the mediocre performance of 2006's "Superman Returns."

Jeff Bock, an analyst with Exhibitor Relations Co, noted that the studio assigned Nolan, the Batman director with the golden touch, a producing role on the new Superman flick.

And Warner Bros is said to have plans for other DC characters, including a long anticipated Wonder Woman movie.

"That cast of DC characters is probably going to be their crown jewel for the foreseeable future," Bock said.

 

[KangConquers]

The commnets below are all fine and good but totally unrealisitc IMO.

First off Potter is a multi-billion dollar franchise. Like 6 billion.

The super-hero genre is simply not going to fill that for WB.

It has the billion dollar Batman franchise but it's other 2 tries so far are not able to pull in the big money and were big disappointments.

SR didn't break 400 million WW and MOS will probably top out at 450 plus million WW. Plus after MOS Superman goes into legal limbo anyway.

GL - don't think so.

Seriously WB could duplicate the success of Ironman and Spiderman and it would not come near to making up for Potter.

That is if DCE can bring forth 2 film franchises that do 600 - 800 million plus WW. Like what are the chances of that?!

 

[jmc]

^ Some valid points are brought up. The notion that WB's stable of superheroes was going to fill in the void Potter leaves financially, that was never going to happen. Potter is beast on a completely different level, it's fan base is bigger than all of the comics book fan bases combined, the average box office for the series is probably close to $700-800 million per film, it's a phenomenon.

 

[merced]

^ Some valid points are brought up. The notion that WB's stable of superheroes was going to fill in the void Potter leaves financially, that was never going to happen. Potter is beast on a completely different level, it's fan base is bigger than all of the comics book fan bases combined, the average box office for the series is probably close to $700-800 million per film, it's a phenomenon.

Exactly.

WB is not primarily a super-hero film studio. Marvel is.

WB shouldn't be thinking from the perspective that the DCE properties are it's core business. They are not.

Hobbit is another thing. That film could turn into a Harry Potter. Billion dollare BO is a possibility.

The studio needs to tie up novels with the idea of turning them into franchises - at which they have had success.

A film light Twilight can be a huge moneymake beacuse of it's braod young appeal and it's relatively small cost to make.

WB definitely has strength as a studio but DCE characters are not the driver of that success. With the possible exception of Batman.

 

[chiefchirpa]

^ Hawkman starring Robert Pattinson?

 

[merced]

^ Hawkman starring Robert Pattinson?

I was thinking - always a dangerous thing, but this is what came to me.

WB/DC and fans are tying to find the next super-charged super-hero franchise that can join Batman and the other big boys. The 500 million crowd.

Note as good as Thor was it will far short of that number but it's coming close to X3 which was the biggest grossing Marvel superhero film apart from the big 2 (Ironman and Spiderman).

Thor was so well received it is likely poised to do bigger numbers in 2 years. Could top 500 million and join the elite club.

Capain America is interesting. I think it may be bigger than Thor. 500 million WW? It'll be hard but I think there is a slight chance it could do it.

So as regards DC and their looking for the next Batman franchise could everyone be looking in the wrong places? Does it have to be GL, WW or Aquaman or Flash?

Why not Hawkman or some of the characters just below the GL/WW/Flash tier.

Such a film could be made for less and it could become an Ironman of sorts. Ironman was a 3rd tier Marvel character, came out of nowhere and voila did around 600 million.

Just saying that DCE should expand it's horizon when looking for a franchise that can do 500 million numbers or better and give them another Bats franchise..

 

[MadVillainy]

I think Flash, WW, Aquaman, and maybe GA have the most potential out of non Bat-Supes films

 

[HighFivingMF]

I think the big 6 (other than GL) have the most potential out of non Bat-Supes films

Big 6? Green Lantern, Flash, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Martian Manhunter ... Green Arrow?

 

[MadVillainy]

Big 6? Green Lantern, Flash, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Martian Manhunter ... Green Arrow?

well I miscalculated I included Bats and Supes...
My blunder

 

[KangConquers]

^ Some valid points are brought up. The notion that WB's stable of superheroes was going to fill in the void Potter leaves financially, that was never going to happen. Potter is beast on a completely different level, it's fan base is bigger than all of the comics book fan bases combined, the average box office for the series is probably close to $700-800 million per film, it's a phenomenon.

The average box office of the Spider-Man series was nearly that of Potter; HP just had 5 more movies than Spidey.

I think the combined worth of the DC Universe can more than compensate for Harry Potter...maybe not on a spending to box office level.

 

[Airwings]

OFF-TOPIC: If Warner bros desperately want another franchise after Potter, why are superheroes the right thing? Perhaps something in the same genre as Potter will be better?
Why not buy the rights to Narnia? I know that franchise has already started. But it's being tossed around at different studios, and two good sequels could not live up to the commercial success of the first. Narnia needs a compass, to be guided right. WB have experience in this kind of films. And Narnia could fill the empty space after Potter to be the world's biggest fantasy franchise. There are actually four more books to adapt, so I think it's worth the investment.

 

[Raiden]

OFF-TOPIC: If Warner bros desperately want another franchise after Potter, why are superheroes the right thing? Perhaps something in the same genre as Potter will be better?
Why not buy the rights to Narnia? I know that franchise has already started. But it's being tossed around at different studios, and two good sequels could not live up to the commercial success of the first. Narnia needs a compass, to be guided right. WB have experience in this kind of films. And Narnia could fill the empty space after Potter to be the world's biggest fantasy franchise. There are actually four more books to adapt, so I think it's worth the investment.

WB had already explored non-superhero adaptation from comics and graphic novels; movies like Constantine, V For Vandetta, The Losers, and Jonah Hex. Even the most successful ones like V For Vandetta were only modest hits, but both The Losers and Jonah Hex were box office duds. As for Narnia, I don't see why WB would want this franchise, since even Disney didn't think it was that viable and gave up the rights to another studio.

 

[TheVileOne]

It's called The Hobbit and Time Warner will be releasing two of those movies.

So back to Middle Earth to carry the load after Harry Potter is over.

It is sort of sad but the superhero/comic book movie bubble is starting to burst. Green Lantern did not help matters.

 

[jmc]

The average box office of the Spider-Man series was nearly that of Potter; HP just had 5 more movies than Spidey.

I think the combined worth of the DC Universe can more than compensate for Harry Potter...maybe not on a spending to box office level.

No it can't.

 

[KangConquers]

No it can't.

You don't think the entire DCU can hit 6 billion?

 

[KalMart]

You don't think the entire DCU can hit 6 billion?

Maybe if they're all versions of Batman.

 

[jmc]

You don't think the entire DCU can hit 6 billion?

Nope. No chance.

 

[Captain Marvel]

You have to take into account production budget. 15 DC movies might make the same amount, but they'll probably cost twice as much as the Harry Potter movies, so the end profits won't be nearly as much.

 

[MadVillainy]

I dont think it's impossible. Not incredibly likely but I wouldnt completely write it out

 

[solidsnake86]

Comic books just don't have the reader base that Harry Potter does. Look at the monthly sales and the industry is slowly declining. Maybe in the 90s when they were selling a million copies if they had the movies coming out they could have really made a lot. There just aren't enough fans like some of these book series have such as twilight and potter. Look at the twilight movies, the sheer amount of fan base has willed those movies to make a fortune.

I think what hurts comic book films in a way is that they have no ending and if you read the message boards its a laundry list of things you can't do with the character. Thats why its hard creating a film thats suprising, something I think the dark knight managed to pull off for once. That's why its exciting to see Nolan end it.

Do we really need to see a rebooted batman after this series? Probably not, there is only so much you can do with the character. They really need to give it a rest for a good 10 to 20 years.

 

[The Batman]

The last thing I wanna see is Batman trotted out and rebooted constantly, just because of greedy fanboys and executives. I too would prefer not to see a Batfilm franchise for a long time.

 

[Lobo]

Well DC DOES have a character whom could potentially fill the HP void. Although this character precedes HP, he'd likely be viewed as a ripoff. I give to you Timothy Hunter

It is going to be hard to find another Potter, though. Percy Jackson obviously didnt do it and could have been a good franchise (I never read the PJ books) to follow.