Warner Bros. Considering Making Less Movies After ‘Batman v Superman’ Box Office Numbers

By April 6, 2016

Note to self: when a blockbuster movie is panned critically, and underperforms at the box office, it’s because the studio is making too many non-blockbuster films.

At least, that’s what Warner Bros. seems to think from the sounds of this new report because so far, despite bringing in numbers that for any other film would make a studio very happy, Batman v Superman not becoming the kind of box office, all-timer that everyone had predicted may be the reason for some big changes at the studio moving forwards. Even though they did just come out and say they weren’t worried by the film’s disappointing second weekend numbers.

THR is reporting that due to the BvS numbers, Jupiter Ascending‘s failures last year, In the Heart of the Sea‘s dismal performance, and Pan‘s critical panning (see what I did there?), the studio is reportedly considering cutting back on all of their “filmmaker-driven” films, to focus entirely on their three head franchises: DC, Harry Potter, and the Lego Movies.

Considering that WB also has the incredibly filmmaker-driven, extraordinary Midnight Special out right now too, you can understand why I’m a little bit peeved by this news.

Honestly, the reason for Batman v Superman‘s box office underperformance so far, is not because the studio has been less focused on their franchise films, the reason is that they’ve given the reigns to the DC Cinematic Universe to the wrong people. So I don’t know if the problem can be fixed by just completely ripping Zack Snyder’s hands off any and all future DC films, or cleaning house in some serious ways internally, but it’s definitely not by cutting back on their original properties and projects.

Even more worrying is that despite recognizing Batman v Superman‘s problems, Warner Bros. is still planning on letting Zack Snyder have carte blanche with Justice League moving forwards. Read the full excerpt from THR’s report below:

Now, with DC movies dated through 2020, the outcome has led to a flurry of rumors that the studio will make adjustments — maybe add a new producer? — rather than allow BvS director Zack Snyder to proceed with the two-part Justice League. But sources with firsthand knowledge of the situation say the studio has no such plans. One says the filmmakers naturally will evaluate what went wrong with BvS, but when it comes to Justice League, “we’re not going to take a movie that’s supposed to be one thing and turn it into a copycat of something else.”

So the one thing that fans and critics are practically begging Warner Bros. to do moving forwards… they’re not going to? Cool. Awesome.

With Suicide Squad, Clint Eastwood’s Tom Hanks-led Sully, and Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them though, Warner Bros. may be looking at a much brighter year ahead of them, but it’s disappointing to hear that a studio which has focused so heavily on filmmaker-driven films is now planning not to anymore.

It’s even more worrying when you realize that after failing to make Batman v Superman into a billion-dollar movie, which united the three most popular comic book characters of all time for the first time onscreen, Warner Bros. is more worried about looking like they’re copying someone than actually fixing the problems, which they admittedly know are there, and will instead be cutting down on the only movies that keep them from being a franchise-only machine.

Batman v Superman is in theatres everywhere now.

Make sure to keep checking back for more updates — right here on GeekNation.

The following two tabs change content below.
Alex Welch

Alex Welch

Alex dreams of meeting a girl with a yellow umbrella, and spends too much time* staring at a movie screen. His vocabulary consists mostly of movie quotes and 80s song lyrics. *Debatable
  • Oneijack

    Zack Snyder the new Uwe Boll. /facepalm

    • David Johnson

      Bad thing is I think that’s actually insulting Mr Boll! 😉

  • David Johnson

    That’s why when they announced MAJOR re-shoots on Suicide Squad I get scared! Amazing how the people at the top never understand They’re probably part of the problem!!!

  • Gareth Ginge Savage

    FEWER movies. Bloody idiots. You’re supposed to be geeks so please use a little more intelligence and proofread before posting.
    Also, from the reviews I’ve read and heard about, I don’t think they could make any less of a movie than Batman vs Superman.

  • Jonathan Malamy

    It should be fewer movies, no? “Less movies” is plain wrong and to make “lesser movies” would deepen the problem.

  • mechakaiju

    How is this even being fact checked as an article, especially when the box office is nearly 1B worldwide? Not to mention WB has announced more movies, not less. Shoddy reporting, or just yet another example of clickbait?

    • What other facts are you looking for? This comes directly from WB’s own report, echoing reports made by THR, based on those reports.

      It’s a known fact that numbers dropped in the 2nd week. Cheers.

      • mechakaiju

        I guess when the source article used speculation “One agent notes BvS likely won’t get to $1 billion despite launching the universe with “two of the most iconic characters in history.”,” and then the revenue is actually almost 1B, subsequent reporting would go back to the studio rather than report again on something weeks old. Just seems shoddy.

        • Well first, the ‘speculation’ by execs and agents are based on reports – It’s all speculation, but that doesn’t mean guessing. Furthermore, it’s not IF it will hit a billion, it’s all in how long it will take – That’s the telltale sign of how much it will actually make in longevity. Not to mention, that billion will come in many different forms – They clearly are not happy with the form.

          No offense, but I think you may have jumped the gun in your statements, obviously in an overzealous defense of BvS. Cheers.

          • mechakaiju

            I don’t think I was defending BvS, but rather talking about the actual revenue. The cited article is from before the numbers came in, and this article is after they’ve generated more than speculated.

          • Again, no offense, but I don’t think you would have been on the attack, had the article been favorable to the movie – That’s how your comment reads anyway.

            Maybe your missing something: The entire article, and their reports, are based on THEIR [not our] reaction to the box office. Mainly, the massive drop from 1st to 2nd week that they’ve claimed doesn’t concern them. yet they think their non-blockbuster-like slate is causing the problem.

            We’re not reporting on the numbers here; we’re reporting on WB’s reaction to it, which a lot of people in this industry want to hear about.