Yeah I don’t envy WB where Ezra Miller is considered. It’s a shame I really enjoyed their performance in the Snyder Cut and looked forward to this film. But in today’s climate I can’t imagine they’d make a lot money anyway if they retain Miller. And if its too expensive to reshoot with another actor? I would scrap it which would be really unfortunate.
If they go with the first option it has to be one heck of an apology tour.
A bit of the numbers game…
The CEO of Warner Bros Discovery has recently completed his “gap year” – the mandated lull between his official takeover of key segments of the former AT&T empire and the moment when he actually implements his decisions. Surely this is an ideal time to assemble some Hitchcockian perspective.
Zaslav presently finds himself staring at a sea of daunting data: content write-offs approaching $500 million and another $330 million in development write-offs plus $200 million representing personnel turnover. Translated into titles, this entails the termination of several active productions like Batgirl.
The launch of a free, ad-supported streaming service would also be on the boards with the aim of reaching a total of 130 million paid subscribers by 2025 – ambitious goals in a bumpy economy with ad spending heading south. Despite rising churn and cord-cutting, Disney+ optimistically predicted 260 million subscribers by September 2024, lately scaling it back to between 215 million and 245 million (the company’s theme park division continues to expand).
But for WBD, a cloud of debt will also have to be confronted – it totaled $55 billion when AT&T’s WarnerMedia division was combined with Discovery. The company presently expects to generate a $3 billion cash flow in 2022 and to have repaid $6 billion in debt by the end of August.
This exercise has nurtured a new lexicon of corporate “right-sizing,” embracing the likes of “synergy realization” and “content engineering.”
So they’ll slowly but surely be climbing out of that massive debt. And I thought it was $45 billion. No, it’s $55 billion.
Zionks, indeed. What was AT&T doing? Good lord. 
And Variety is saying…
Marvel Studios’ style of integrated film and TV storytelling would also be far more complicated to implement at Warner Bros. Discovery. Feige runs his own fiefdom at Disney, but any TV productions for DC would also need to flow through HBO/HBO Max chief Casey Bloys and/or Warner Bros. TV chair Channing Dungey, stymieing the independence of whomever would try to coordinate DC’s film and TV storytelling. And whoever takes the job will likely inherit the unceasing headaches with “The Flash,” which faces unprecedented challenges caused by allegations of abuse by and multiple arrests of its star, Ezra Miller.
Even with those hurdles, Zaslav remains steadfast in his plan for a single DC vertical led by an executive reporting directly to him. Until that position is filled — and it likely won’t be for months — the status quo continues at the company, with Hamada overseeing DC Film under Abdy and De Luca, the latter of whom has demonstrated his fanboy bona fides in meetings and impressed people at DC with his knowledge of comic book arcana. When he was an executive at New Line, De Luca developed the “Blade” franchise and even tried to get an “Iron Man” movie off the ground well before the character launched the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
In fact, the future of DC Film could very well be its present: De Luca and Abdy have made no secret that they want Hamada to remain at the helm of the unit. A fellow New Line alum, Hamada was brought on to stabilize DC’s film slate in 2018 and has been credited in guiding the likes of “Aquaman” and “The Batman” to box office success. Hamada is widely respected on the lot for his keen story sense and relationships with talent. He also keeps a low profile in a business of big egos, which has endeared him to staff.
But Warner Bros. rank-and-file also believe that Hamada has been mistreated even before Discovery bought the company from AT&T. They note that Hamada had to endure death threats after “Justice League” star Ray Fisher publicly accused the executive of undermining an investigation into misconduct allegations related to reshoots on that film. Many staffers believe the studio did not do enough the back their embattled executive and feel it was unfair that he became the target of Snyder-verse fans because that film was completed before he took over at DC.
The last straw appears to have been the decision to cancel “Batgirl,” which caused Hamada to nearly resign. De Luca and Abdy convinced him to remain at the studio at least until “Black Adam” opens in October. Whether Hamada stays any longer appears to be entirely up to the executive.
Even if Hamada does remain in his job, Zaslav still plans to transform DC’s film and TV efforts from a confederation of semi-integrated productions into a single, MCU-style creative endeavor. Doing so, however, complicates plans for a host of TV titles. Reeves is still planing a spin-off TV series of “The Batman” focusing on Colin Farrell’s Penguin, and James Gunn is still set to make a second season of “Peacemaker,” a spin-off of his 2021 DC film “The Suicide Squad.” Neither of those projects, however, have anything to do with each other, nor with Phillips’ “Joker” movies.
I’ve always liked Walter Hamada.
The Joker and The Batman came under his watch.
Anyway, fascinating stuff. I learned a few things today.
And yeah, I don’t get the sense that David Zaslav is going to be all that steadfast on everything connecting. The first thing he greenlit was Joker: Folie à Deux.
So some things will connect, and some things won’t – I think they’ll be able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
I always liked Hamada too.
I would be really energized by a plan like this.
I want to keep what works and expand the universe. Simplifying things are key for the normies!
I would be really energized by a plan like this .
I want to keep what works and expand the universe. Simplifying things are key for the normies!
Yep, and I like #5 in the video – “Still Allow For Side Projects.”
Because if you connect everything, everything better be good.
Because if one or two things start to slip, then you might be in a little bit of trouble – or a lot. Because your entire universe could collapse.
And organizing things is the easy part. Anyone with a functioning brain can do that.
And the lore is the easy part too. Anyone can Google that, or ask any of the experts working at DC Comics.
No, the hard part is the story. That’s the catch.
Everything can be nice and connected, but the story has to be engaging too.
And for people who may not care about what you’re doing, then it’s nice to have something for them too.
Some people may not care about seeing Superman, and Batman and Wonder Woman and the rest together. But something like the Joker is right up their alley.
So always allow for things like that.
And arguably the best things that DC has ever done have been alternate takes on things: WATCHMEN, THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS… maybe KINGDOM COME, those sorts of things.
Interesting #7 in his plan: “Prioritize Green Lantern.”
Well… good luck with that.
No, I’ve always felt that something like what they did in GREEN LANTERN: EARTH ONE might work.
And I’m still waiting for the second volume to come to DC Universe Infinite. I guess it must have fallen through the crack or something.
Anyway, I liked their take on John Stewart:
JOHN STEWART
An Earth physicist working on propulsion systems for spacecraft, he jumped at the opportunity to study an alien craft first-hand when a Llaran vessel visited the Sol system. Too bad he was on board when an intergalactic incident broke out. He’s relentlessly curious about his chosen discipline, with a deep understanding of the physics behind energy as it applies to space travel. This gives him the ability to recognize that the Yellow energy is not from our dimension. And meeting Arisia gives him a reason to use it as a force for good.
Either way, Green Lantern could work, but you better have an incredible story, because it’s going to cost a ton of money to do whatever you’re going to do.
His #9: “Stick. To. The. Plan.”
Yep, sometimes that works, like with Christopher Nolan. Sometimes not, like with Zack Snyder.
So they usually stick with the plan… until it stops working.
And sticking with something that’s not working, in hopes that it will eventually start to work, can cost hundreds of millions of dollars. So that’s a big ask.
So yeah, that’s always the trick. And again, it all comes back down to story.
The only thing that I can think of them doing is adapting that 12-issue JUSTICE limited series over three movies or whatever…
Just keep it nice and simple.
Beyond that, though… just give me Ta-Nehisi Coates’ Black Superman and I’m happy.
And they can do whatever they want with the rest. 
I would LOVE to see John Stewart be this new era’s Green Lantern. If they’re still really squeamish about bringing in a GL he’d be a great way to liven things up a bit. I have not read Earth 1 but that sounds fabulous.
I don’t know about that.
I’ll be annoyed that they just race change a popular silver age character like Clark Kent when in reality there is a black superman already and he is called Val-Zod of earth 2.
Understand it’ll be like changing peter Parker to be Asian or black when we do have Cindy Moon and Miles Morales in the comics.
But better example would be doing what Batgirl did and change the race of a character for brand recognition but also to reflect diversity when they didn’t need to do that either.
Just use Cassandra Cain for Batgirl.
I would LOVE to see John Stewart be this new era’s Green Lantern. If they’re still really squeamish about bringing in a GL he’d be a great way to liven things up a bit. I have not read Earth 1 but that sounds fabulous.
Yeah, I kind of want both he and Hal Jordan for some reason.
I did just want John, but I want Hal now too. And Guy, and Jessica… and Kyle, and Simon.
I’ve gone from just wanting one to wanting them all.
EDIT:
Oh, and Sojourner “Jo” Mullein. I want to see her too. I want to see her most of all. And obviously Janelle Monáe to play her.
And of course you can easily fudge it in the movies, just say that Earth has a whole squad of Green Lanterns and that’s just how it is – it’s team Green Lantern or whatever. Easy.
Anyway, if they do just go with John, which I would be more than fine with, then I do have a fan cast for John Stewart…
John David Washington.
And I guess that’s because I have the GREEN LANTERN: EARTH ONE John Stewart on my mind.
Traditional comic John Stewart I don’t have any fan cast for, but John David Washington would be fine for that for me as well.
I don’t know about that.
I’ll be annoyed that they just race change a popular silver age character like Clark Kent when in reality there is a black superman already and he is called Val-Zod of earth 2.
Understand it’ll be like changing peter Parker to be Asian or black when we do have Cindy Moon and Miles Morales in the comics.
But better example would be doing what Batgirl did and change the race of a character for brand recognition but also to reflect diversity when they didn’t need to do that either.
Just use Cassandra Cain for Batgirl.
Yeah, the thing with the Ta-Nehisi Coates Black Superman is that I don’t believe for one second that it was ever intended to be a replacement and become the main Superman.
I don’t think that was ever what it was going to be. Whatever the Superman that David Zaslav and his people come up with is who is going to be the main Superman. Not Ta-Nehisi Coates’.
No, I think Ta-Nehisi Coates’ Black Superman was going to be like the Joker – it’s own separate thing.
A one-off movie, and if it did well, then they may do another one. And that’s all I thought it was ever going to be.
And going by what’s been rumored that it’s going to be about: “can’t fly, only able to leap tall buildings in a single bound. Mach 7 speed. Champion of the people. Ultra-humanite as the possible villain, and love letter to Siegel and Shuster. And written with Oscar potential in mind.”
Yeah, that’s not going to be part of any shared universe. That’s it’s own thing.
And that’s exactly how I would want it too. I wouldn’t want it to be part of a shared universe. And I personally think that they shouldn’t do that.
Now, I guess with Val-Zod they could do that, they could make that part of a shared universe. Of course, Ta-Nehisi Coates’ thing is not Val-Zod.
No, Michael B. Jordan’s production company is working on Val-Zod. Who knows if that’s still happening though. Although, it is early enough on that that they can still make it whatever they want it to be, and make it so that it works with whatever the new 10-year plan is going to be.
And I’m not sure if Val-Zod could survive if it’s it’s own thing. Although, I imagine it’s all in what it would be about.
Anyway, again, David Zaslav and company’s Superman will probably be a young Clark Kent, or perhaps even Jon. But almost assuredly a young Clark Kent. And that would be the main and only Superman for their shared universe movies.
Hot take: Cindy Moon and Miles Morales are unnessary charactors though Miles has potental
Clark Kent is Golden Age
I kinda want a DC to make a Blaxploitation style Superman film and just call it Black Superman
I kinda want a DC to make a Blaxploitation style Superman film and just call it Black Superman
I would absolutely love that.
And yeah, don’t beat around the bush, just call it Black Superman and be done with it.
And I would say just set it in the early 70s too… a period piece.
Of course, one of my favorite movies, Judas and The Black Messiah:
That was set in 1969 and that was perfect…
John Ridley’s sequel to THE AMERICAN WAY:
THE AMERICAN WAY: THOSE ABOVE AND THOSE BELOW was set in 1972…
If they wanted to, I guess they could have Black Superman dressed in a black leather jacket and have a jetpack. And a black turtleneck sweater and some goggles.
He would be a cool motherf***er. 
No, but seriously, that would be awesome. And play it straight too, don’t camp it up or anything.
Of course, I wanted Ta-Nehisi Coates’ thing to be a period piece. Set in the 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, any time. In any of those periods you could tell a great story.
It was rumored that it could possibly be a period piece, but it’s now rumored that it’s not going to be a period piece, but that of course can easily be changed.
While not blaxploitation, I’m reminded of my first, and one of my top two favorite Superman stories:
From 1978, and two greats in the great Denny O’Neil and the great Neal Adams – SUPERMAN VS. MUHAMMAD ALI…
https://www.si.com/extra-mustard/2016/06/16/superman-muhammad-ali-origin-comic-book-history
Ehhhh nooooo. Blaxploitation has not aged well. Go back and it has the cliche’ angry black man trope and every black woman is portrayed as a hooker essentially. They may cite and claim ‘black empowerment’ but they still fall back on racist stereotypes.
‘Black Superman’ 
Talk about a PR nightmare if you go that route, from so many people.
Ehhhh nooooo. Blaxploitation has not aged well. Go back and it has the cliche’ angry black man trope and every black woman is portrayed as a hooker essentially. They may cite and claim ‘black empowerment’ but they still fall back on racist stereotypes.
No, just use the aesthetic of that era.
But when it comes to the actual story, you do something that’s worthwhile, something that’s meaningful. Something that is actually “black empowerment.”
I mean, come on, use some common sense.
‘Black Superman’
Yeah, it’s all depends on what the movie would be about.
Having the word “Black” in the title would not necessarily equal a PR nightmare.
Last year Warner Bros. released Judas and The Black Messiah.
It got six Oscars nominations including Best Picture. So no PR nightmare there.
And it won two: Best Original Song, and Best Supporting Actor – Daniel Kaluuya as the real life Fred Hampton, Chairman of Illinois Black Panther Party in the late 1960s; the “Black Messiah” in title of the movie.
It was scaled-down in 2021 due to COVID-19, but still, nobody got slapped that year at the Oscars. Wow.
(I was never much of a Will Smith fan before then, and am certainly not now… And talk about a negative image for Black people… )
Anyway, of course, like William Shakespeare and Romeo and Juliet…
What’s in a name?
That which we call a rose. By any other name would smell as sweet.
So yeah, a hypothetical movie set in the era of Blaxploitation films, and using the same aesthetic of that time (meaning it would just be a period piece), and have a positive message of “black empowerment,” and a positive human message above all. And have him be a champion of the people…
Yeah, just call it Black Superman.
Embrace that, don’t run from it. And no matter what you call it there will be people against it regardless of what it’s called and what it’s about it. So it really doesn’t matter.
Of course, again, this is all speaking in the hypothetical. This is not something that Warner Bros. is planning on doing, we were just having fun.
No, Ta-Nehisi Coates is not writing anything like that from all indications.
His Superman movie is rumored to be about…
1. while the project was originally intended to be a period piece, the final draft submitted by Coates recently is not a period piece
2. It’s not about a black superman being a victim of racism, rather it uses Superman’s alien heritage as a parallel to racism. They are, however going through with colorblind casting.
3. Superman is heavily nerfed, being taken back to his golden age roots. He can no longer fly, but he can instead “leap tall buildings in a single bound”, He also lacks heat vision, frost breath and x-ray vision. He’s also described as moving at Mach 7
4. They do have descriptions of the characters in the script which gives away their races. Lois Lane is written with an Asian Actress in mind Perry White is written as an African American man and Jimmy Olsen is described as a freckled redhead (no racebending with Jimmy)
5. The Film is currently utilizing The golden age version of The Ultra-Humanite as the main antagonist although this may change. At no point in the story does he use the Albino Gorilla body.
6. The script is rather long, clocking in at 165 pages. This may be due to the fact that the film is being written as an awards contender rather than a regular Superhero film. It portrays Superman as a champion of the opressed. The government hates him but the people love him.
7. The film is a love letter to Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster’s original comics. It also has a dedication to them. Pa Kent’s character is based off of Jerry Siegel. It actually has a dedication to a lot of writers such as Jack Kirby, who serves as the inspiration for Dan Turpin.
I’ve half-jokingly said that they should probably call this The Super-Man.
Or I guess maybe The Superman without the hyphen because it looks more pleasing to the eye.
Either way, because this version of “Superman” does not really sound like Superman as we have come to define him, just more of a super man; a man that’s… super powered or whatever. Or a version of an early Golden Age Superman, I guess.
But thinking about it, they could call this Black Superman as well. That title probably won’t fit that well for this though, unless of course it was set in the early 70s. No, for what this looks to be there’s way better titles that they can come up with, but whatever… none of what we’re saying here kind of matters on it anyway, it’s just opinions.
Well, a bit more of the future… or less of it, if you will…
The CW is getting new ownership.
The broadcast network, currently run as a joint venture between Warner Bros. Discovery’s Warner Bros. TV and Paramount Global’s CBS Studios, is selling a 75 percent stake to the local broadcast giant Nexstar. Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery will each retain a 12.5 percent stake in the venture.
The CW will also continue to order programming from the two entertainment giants, though Nexstar is likely to look elsewhere for originals as well.
With the deal just announced and regulatory approvals likely months away, The CW will need to operate with a business-as-usual attitude for the time being. Pedowitz has renewed All American, The Flash, Kung Fu, Nancy Drew, Riverdale, Superman & Lois and Walker for next season.
I guess that’s how it’s done.
And I imagine The CW will be rebranded as something else in the near future.
And I imagine at some point Warner Bros. will move the shows that they want from there to whatever their new HBO Max and Discovery+ merged service will be called. And the shows that they don’t want they’ll most likely cancel.
Saw this article this morning. All the cost cutting news, pleasing as it may be for investors, doesn’t give me the warm & fuzzy as a fan. Certainly not in the short term.
If all goes to ■■■■, at least I have the movies and shows I like purchased on iTunes. I’ll just be the grumpy old man clinging to his dated entertainment .
Saw this article this morning. All the cost cutting news, pleasing as it may be for investors, doesn’t give me the warm & fuzzy as a fan. Certainly not in the short term.
Yeah, David Zaslav himself has bought a million dollars in Warner Bros. stock, and the CFO a half a million.
I see that the stock is up since the lows after the earnings report.
So yep, it’s all about the Benjamin’s, as someone with puffy cheeks once said.
Dollar, dollar bills, y’all.
If all goes to ■■■■, at least I have the movies and shows I like purchased on iTunes. I’ll just be the grumpy old man clinging to his dated entertainment
And that’s what it’s all about for me. Just make stuff that I like.
And of course they always have.
I look back at what Warner Bros. has done in the past, and I was just a little toddler when it came out, but I do remember seeing it later on, but going back as far as something like Enter the Dragon – the classic Bruce Lee movie…
And The Exorcist – I remember I was a little kid visiting relatives and they had something called Home Box Office, or HBO for short, and The Exorcist was on and that was like the scariest thing that I had ever seen in my life…
And then of course along came Superman: The Movie and all was well…
(And yep, Superman is who he is, and Clark Kent is the mask. Kill Bill was right.)
Anyway, every decade since Warner Bros. have done movies that I’ve liked and loved, and some that I didn’t care about one way or the other.
And I fully suspect it will continue under David Zaslav and his group. They’ll continue to do stuff that I like and love, and do things that I don’t care about one way or the other.
Of course, if one is primarily interested in Warner Bros. for super-hero movies, then yeah (spoiler alert), they’re eventually just going to do Batman stuff.
They’ll try this other stuff, and it probably won’t work, but it might, but it probably won’t.
Either way, once they’ve tried this other stuff they’ll eventually go back to just doing Batman.
It’s how it always ends… back in Gotham City.
It happened with Burton, it happened with Nolan, and it happened with Reeves, and it’ll happen again with the next one.
I see where you’re coming from given the past 30 years or so, but I look at things a bit differently. I would argue Man of Steel, BvS, and ZSJL were all successful movies. May be not $1b juggernauts (which I believe ZSJL could have been if it was released in 2017 as it was meant to be), but successful nonetheless. Regardless though, they pivoted and here we are.
Throughout those 30 years there was Lois & Clark, Smallville, The Flash, all the Arrowverse shows, Titans, Doom Patrol, Sandman, and Peacemaker. So they’ve had success with non-Batman characters on the small screen. It shouldn’t be that hard to take what worked there and translate that to the big screen.
Also, before the MCU, we only had Spiderman and X-Men movies as successful examples of movies based on Marvel properties. If history truly always repeated itself, we wouldn’t have all the Marvel stuff we have today (love it or hate it).
Focusing on profits is important, essential actually, but love for the characters and source material, a desire to entertain, good production values, competence, and patience is what will lead to future successful DC movies. Just throwing Batman out there because he sells… eh… that’s weak sauce (and I like the character very much, mind you). The Batman’s box office shows it, too. I don’t think the movie is as universally beloved by audiences as it may seem based on online praise.
Personally speaking I don’t think executives who are in control of a company’s finances should be allowed to buy stock in their own company. Ecspecially not when they were the cause of the stock price to fall allowing them to buy cheap shares. Thats just shady as heck!
But getting back on topic, its true every decade has good and bad movies, but with someone as incompetent as Zaslav at WB’s helm I don’t see them having many hits in the next decade. If he’s ever replaced with someone less controversial and more in tune with how to actually run q company/studio like WB then maybe.
But yeah I don’t see a very bright future for things moving forward.
Ah, no. If only that were the case. When you buy digital media, you’re actually just buying a license to watch that media until such time as the seller decides to revoke said license. Which can happen at any time, for any reason. If you truly want to own your media, you gotta buy physical. And if it doesn’t exist in physical, well… you’re outta luck.
