I called Warner Bros early today for confirmation when I heard that Barry Meyer and Alan Horn had re-upped their contracts. And I was lied to by Warner Bros. Just like I was lied to by the studio last summer when I first heard the duo were starting to negotiate, and Jeff Bewkes was balking at giving Meyer and Horn a full 3-year, or 4-year, or 5-year vote of confidence. So instead I’d been discussing this situation with my sources inside parent company Time Warner. I heard from them on March 2nd that Bewkes ultimately would offer to re-sign Meyer and Horn. But the issue was for how long. In the end, after not wanting to renew the pair, Bewkes is keeping them on a 2-year choke chain.
One year in charge, and everyone is waiting for Bewkes to again shake things up in Hollywood. (Like when he re-possessed Bob Shaye’s New Line.) Warner Bros needs a top to bottom earthquake. Let’s face it, tired and cranky Barry Meyer for most of the past year had been threatening to retire, and people were starting to take him at his word. He would have left quite a legacy: Warner Bros TV doesn’t have anywhere near the profit or clout it used to despite a plethora of expensive creative deals. Of course, Time Warner doesn’t break out Warner Bros’ earnings, a convenient legacy dating back to when Bob Daly and Terry Semel ran the studio. Another legacy is that his fellow moguls credit Meyer with singlehandedly prolonging the agony of the writers strike for weeks longer than the CEOs wanted because of his steadfast hardline position of “not wanting to reward the WGA” for the labor action.
Distracted and depleted Horn is just as stubborn: he won’t relinquish control of the film studio. Then again, how can he leave Jeff Robinov solely in charge? (Someone I know once asked Horn why he kept Robinov on board, and Alan replied, “Because he works hard.” As if that’s a reason.) I’ve reported previously that Meyer has been wanting Horn to assume more of the load for television, which is supposed to be part of Alan’s job responsibilities. Horn promised he would, then didn’t.
He wouldn’t even give autonomy to a specialty film division. First, he fired Mark Gill at Warner Independent even though March Of The Penguins made a mint. Then he made it dependent. Then he killed it.
Recently, Horn has been getting bad buzz for his taste in films. If he could, he would make message movies but also money losers like Blood Diamond again and again. He refusefd to put any money behind Clint Eastwood’s Million Dollar Baby until the critics rallied around it. And everyone in Hollywood was convinced that Warner Bros shrugged off Slumdog Millionaire because PC-obsessed Alan “didn’t get it”. (He felt the harrowing poverty of the Indian slum kids didn’t mesh with the uplifting payoff.) Instead, Robinov fell on his sword for the boss’ decision to hand off 50% of the eventual Best Picture Oscar winner to Fox Searchlight. (The official WB backstory is that Robinov had too much product after the integration of New Line and Picturehouse added to Warner Bros Pictures films and the last remaining Warner Independent titles. So he decided not to distribute Slumdog in a very full Q4. ”The issue was not that Alan —or anybody else, for that matter —didn’t ‘get’ the movie. It’s that they couldn’t ‘schedule’ the movie,” one WB exec described to me.)
Good thing, too, because Horn’s studio is incapable of mounting effective Oscar campaigns. Those movies that have won did so in spite of Warner Bros, not because of the studio.
Horn’s film division also was embarrassed by not nailing down the legal rights to Watchmen adequately. Mogul after mogul in Hollywood couldn’t understand how Warner Bros could even have started filming the graphic novel with 20th Century Fox still laying claim to the pic. And Watchmen looks like it won’t earn out with no domestic legs and no interest overseas. (Snarked one rival studio exec: “Now Alan is going to use Watchmen as justification to ban all R-rated films at Warner Bros.) Paramount owns 25% plus is the international distributor. Also Legendary Pictures owns a chunk. And finally Fox will receive up to 8 1/2% gross participation, and a cash payment upfront including recoupment of its development costs and attorney fees. So cutting Fox in at the last minute played havoc with Warner Bros’ economics on the movie.
But Horn’s biggest failure has been to leave the most valuable DC Comics characters in movie development limbo. Of Superman, Wonder Woman, and the Justice League, only Batman has an ongoing live action franchise. And now that director Chris Nolan is working on back-to-back pics, who knows when the threequel will get a start date. Horn and Robinov remain paralyzed by indecision, chaotically starting and stopping work on scripts. Meanwhile, Marvel is exploiting the hell out of its characters with an ultra-ambitious film development slate.
I hoped Bewkes would bring in new blood atop Warner Bros. With this humiliating 2-year extension, he is. Because the jockeying to replace Meyer and Horn begins now.
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.


Well, they tried to do something with Superman but that was a dud. The backlash fallout singed their hair off so it’s not surprising that they’re wary of falling off a cliff on next one. They’ve looked into the abyss and realized that as much upside as there is to the property, there is the same amount of downside possible. They’re doing the smart thing for once and waiting until they get the right angle on the character. A Superman film will always cost 40% more than the average Batman film and usually 20% more than the average superhero film. Showing off Superman’s powers to best effect requires it.
The other DC superheroes should require much less in production costs and have the added advantage of never having their own movie before. There is potentially lots of built up demand. Audiences will see the movie regardless of critics and WOM, because it might be their one and only chance. It is a mystery why these 2nd tier characters aren’t being fast tracked. As of this moment Flash and Wonder Woman have a lot more upside than Superman. He’s had a recent movie to act as a release valve to what was built up demand. The steam has been let out of Superman. The other characters haven’t had this and are ready to pop like Iron Man.
you are leaving out one key, politically slippery executive who is in charge of ALL of the big talent deals and has paid overhead galore. Yet none of these stars are making movies at warners, he hasn’t moved one thing forward. In fact he pushed hardest against slumdog because he had a similar depp project, which hasn’t gone anywhere
Is Warner Bros. being run by the retards Obama joked about on Leno?
It’s not hard to do a good SUPERMAN movie. Just ADAPT THE COMIC BOOKS! That bore-fest SUPERMAN RETURNS didn’t work because it was a virtual remake of the ’70s movie, only made more boring and stupid and with added “let’s add a kid to the cast!” shit that they usually only do for failing sitcoms.
ADAPT THE COMIC BOOKS FOR ONCE! That’s exactly what Marvel does, and it seems to be working well for them. It’s not rocket science. It’s reading a bunch of comic books and then doing that, but with sound and movement. The SUPERMAN movies haven’t even scratched the surface of the SUPERMAN comic books. You did it for WATCHMEN, why can’t you do it for your crown jewels? Unlike the main DC Comics properties like SUPERMAN, BATMAN, GREEN LANTERN, etc, the WATCHMEN comic books weren’t even aimed at a general audience!
And they should feel lucky that WATCHMEN made ANYTHING, let alone nearly $100 million domestic. I liked it, but it was the weirdest (in a bad way) big budget movie of all time and the mirror universe version of a crowd-pleaser. They should be jumping for joy if it breaks even. That’d be, like, a miracle of marketing.
Mindy, IMO, they can’t figure out how to do a superhero movie unless it’s a sequel or a known property. That’s the mantra of WB. When they’ve tried, they’ve failed miserably. Shoot, they failed with known properties like Superman.
WB should stick to Clint movies (though he’s not happy with the studio) because he’s always under-budget, on time and profitable, the one dumb summer movie they have every year and Harry Potter. That’s all they have. They turned Speed Racer from a dark plot to a “Light Bright” on acid for 10 year olds. Robinov got his previous clients to direct that one. Yeah, the Warchowskis are great at kid movies. Great move Jeff. Slumdog, Speed Racer, Watchman? I know what you really spent for your marketing budget. OUCH!
The same that Robinov blamed women for some flops (The Brave One, Invasion) in 2007 for being the leads, so I don’t see Wonder Woman anytime unless he’s the star of it. He’s unfortunately not tall enough to fit into her heels.
The place is making money now but I’m seeing the cracks and there are a ton of holes in the dike and only so many fingers.
Nikki, rip on Robinov, Horn and Meyer all you want (is Superman Returns in the black yet?), but knocking the studio for ineffective Oscar campaigns? What planet would that be on exactly? Five best picture nods in the past four years: Michael Clayton, The Departed, Letters from Iwo Jima, Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby. And two wins: The Departed and Million Dollar Baby. I’m sorry, what studio has a better record than that in the same period? I know a couple of studios that haven’t even had ONE NOMINEE from their major divisions during that period (and I didn’t count WIP’s Good Night, Good Luck) Come on Nikki. You’re way better than that. That deserves a correction — big time.
Mindy is right as it seems they got singed by Superman and now they’re scared, because there’s obviously something they’re not getting about how to market to a Gen Y audience.
It’s silly though, since what they’re not getting is a simple concept (actually two concepts). Pick a property well suited for a movie adaptation and stay true to the icon. There it is.
Watchmen: True to the icon, but not well suited for movie adaptation.
Superman: Well suited for movie adaptation, but they didn’t stay true to the icon. (Superman having a kid out of wedlock? Lois Lane with another man throughout the entire film? This isn’t Superman!)
Batman, Iron Man, Spider-Man: Well suited for adaptation, and stayed true to the icon.
It makes me laugh how the very successful SUPERMAN RETURNS has become the revisionist punching bag of superhero films despite largely positive critical and public acclaim at the time. I think it’s a fantastic film that does carry over the innocence and excitement of the character-driven 1978 Richard Donner original. Singer knew X-MEN (just try and watch the third X-MEN movie for proof) and was true to Superman. I’d like to see him tackle a sequel with the same solid cast and a lot more action after the set-up of this reboot, but that looks unlikely.
Anyway, there are MANY reasons these clowns are foundering. The all-too-sudden dismantling of New Line — particularly when the company has what’s likely to be its most successful fiscal year to date — is just the tip of the iceberg.
If Warners are guilty of anything it’s being too bloated. They are a success, no doubt about it but they could do with being ‘leaner and meaner’. And if that means a change at the top, so be it.
Their ‘franchise cupboard’ is an embarrasment of riches and that’s before you factor in their DC Comic properties. But they continually drag their feet on projects that other studios would kill for.
Why has it taken so long for them to put together a Green Lantern film? Why are WB looking to reboot ‘The Fugitive’ when they have so many other fresher projects vying for attention?
As for Slumdog Millionaire. Let’s see WB try and open a comedy before they tackle an Oscar baiting drama.
@ Warner Borg:
I think Meyer and Horn saw Marvel giving the greenlight to IRON MAN and didn’t make a sound decision until they saw its profits roll in. GL will be their answer to IM and widen the public’s knowledge of the DC superhero canon in addition to their revitalized Batman franchise.
However, Warners is going to have to re-up their game in a few years. After the sixth HP movie comes out this July, the two-part finale will be all that’s left WB can milk J.K. Rowling’s books. Then, they have that “Hobbit” franchise courtesy of the New Line merger to last them until 2012.
Still, I think it’s time to give these two vets the boot and bring in some fresh blood to liven up Warner Brothers’ film productions. (And perhaps someone who’s ballsy enough to leave the opportunity open for R-rated superhero pics.)
ya, everyone can take a shot, but just look at how much they’re making by folding NL into Warners?!?! seriously folks, that was the best money making action they’ve taken recently. sucked for NL, and the industry as a whole, but a huge win for WB……and Meyer/Horn as it definitely buttresses their bottom line…
WB 2005 Worldwide Box office: $3.3 billion
WB 2006 Worldwide Box Office: $2.4 billion
WB 2007 Worldwide Box Office: $3.7 billion
WB 2008 Worldwide Box Office: $3.6 billion
What is the issue here? I would have loved to have that kind of performance from my studio. And, regardless of the failure of Watchmen, 2009 is shaping up to be another big year.
I just don’t think that DC characters outside of Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman are as well known as even the second tier Marvel characters. GL is a big character and a movie could do very well but saying it’s the equivalent of Iron Man is wrongheaded. People also mistakenly minimize Iron Man’s prominence in the Marvel pantheon before the success of the movie – which Favreau and Marvel leveraged into inspired casting in ALL the roles and some meticulous filmmaking/storytelling.
Warners proved they could do it right with the Bale Batman movies but if they go the Fox route and try to make another two hour energy drink commercial (there have to have been meetings with Mountain Dew for this already right?) they will fail miserably.
Jack Burton – maybe you should read some Superman. Superman Returns was awful, a terrible movie and a terrible Superman movie. Donner’s films weren’t that good either.
You know, over in my pitiful end of the internet, I’ve publicly (and frequently) stated that Time Warner is the most poorly ran entertainment company on the planet. While Nikki will argue that title belongs to NBC Universal, I’m with full agreement that the Watertower needs a top-to-bottom shakedown in the worst kind of way, especially Jeff Bewkes, Mr. I-Hate-Synergy himself.
Bugs Bunny? Who’s he?
@ Joe:
What I meant in comparing GL to IM is that compared to the Nolan/Bale Batman movies, GL is a more lighter superhero film. That doesn’t mean the character can become dark and serious at times, and a lot of chatter about the script suggests it has solid potential for a brand-new DC superhero for Warner Brothers to milk. (And there is plenty of room for spin-off movies for different GL characters like Guy Gardener, John Stewart, etc.. after a couple of GL films. You can’t exactly do the same with Batman or Superman.)
My guess is that WB will get off their laurels and make a Wonder Woman film when they see how Marvel’s THOR does (a legendary mythic character with magical powers in a modern world) in two years.
DC is a mess. They drive away their best people (Neil Gaiman, Garth Ennis, Alan Moore) and work the good ones they have left to death (Grant Morrison, Geoff Johns). They’re terrified by anything new or innovative and require creators to huckster for their own books rather than run competent marketing campaigns. Karen Berger’s Vertigo is the only interesting imprint of the bunch, and nobody has made a decent movie off one of the Vertigo books.
And “Watchmen!” On what planet is the hack who made “300″ a “visionary?”
“It’s not hard to do a good SUPERMAN movie. Just ADAPT THE COMIC BOOKS! That bore-fest SUPERMAN RETURNS didn’t work because it was a virtual remake of the ’70s movie, only made more boring and stupid and with added “let’s add a kid to the cast!” shit that they usually only do for failing sitcoms.”
Could not agree with you more Wiley Schlub.
The problem is these assholes in charge don’t know what they have. They’re living in a bubble. Green Lantern should’ve came out years ago. Do you know how many people would love to see that, excluding the fanboy base? MILLIONS!!! THE FLASH — I can’t believe that hasn’t been in production yet. Wonder Woman is a little tough to crack. Her origin lacks gravitas in my opinion. You would have to totally reinvent her backstory in order to prevent it from becoming cheesy. William Goldman said it best…”nobody knows anything.”
Wiley Schlub, your argument makes no sense. You argue that WB should “adapt the comic books” and that “they did it with Watchmen,” but then you turn around and say that WB should be lucky that Watchmen made “anything.” Clearly ‘adapting’ the comic books can be a huge mistake sometimes…
And I guarantee you that WB lost far less money (if any at all) on Superman Returns than the tens of millions it will lose on Watchmen. I doubt too many people will be buying Watchmen action figures, for instance.
Two questions:
1) Nolan is doing back-to-back pictures? What’s the second one?
2) Warner Borg: what’s this about a Fugitive Reboot?
@ Jim:
About question #1, I guess when Nolan decided to do his next project “Inception” at Warners, he has a deal to write, direct and produce a third Batman film (which won’t hit theaters until 2012 now).
I’m not sure about the deal (Nikki, correct if I’m wrong), but guessing at how phenominally well “Dark Knight” did, I guess Warners agreed to make “Inception” for next summer in exchange to doing another Batman film afterwards.
I’m just happy Warners is seeing the light when it comes to their DC properties and that they’re not just sticking to Batman and Superman for cash. (And regardless of what Meyer and Horn have done, they at least had the sense to cancel the half-assed “Justice League” film.)
Dan Rader:
“Wiley Schlub, your argument makes no sense.”
It makes perfect sense, it just needs clarification. In my opinion, WATCHMEN shouldn’t have been made, at least not at a budget above $50 million. As I said, it’s not a crowd-pleaser, the WATCHMEN comic books were never meant to be aimed at a wide audience. It makes no sense to invest in a big-budget WATCHMEN movie. They might as well have put $100 million into AMERICAN SPLENDOR 2. They treated an artsy weirdo alternate history murder mystery like it was X-MEN, just because it had superheroes in it.
I was pointing out how insane it was that they not only made WATCHMEN at a gigantic budget, but they shot it almost panel-for-panel from the comic books, while they’ve never tried the same thing with their crown jewels like SUPERMAN and the rest of the DC Universe, all of which have been designed to appeal to a wide, young general audience since they first leapt onto the newsstands. Not all comic books translate directly into blockbuster movies (see WATCHMEN), but most of the mainstream DC Comics universe does with a smart screenwriter behind the laptop.
Obviously, there’s decades of comic book issues to choose from with SUPERMAN and GREEN LANTERN and WONDER WOMAN, but that only means they can pick and choose the best material just like Marvel did with IRON MAN.
But to ignore those years of comic book history completely, as WB decided to do with SUPERMAN RETURNS (immediately putting the audience into a deep nostalgic sleep), is like flushing money down the toilet and spitting in the face of millions of fans at the same time.
That’s my argument. I hope it makes more sense now.
“I just don’t think that DC characters outside of Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman are as well known as even the second tier Marvel characters.”
Who cares? Why do people even mention that? That’s what the tens of millions in marketing costs are for, to MAKE them well known. Most movies aren’t based on household names.
The MEN IN BLACK comic books sold about 3,000 copies combined. The two MEN IN BLACK made about a billion dollars combined.
WATCHMEN wasn’t a failure because most people hadn’t heard of Nite-Owl. It was a failure because it was a weirdo artsy murder mystery set in an alternate 1985 where Nixon was still president for some reason. When one of the superheroes they sell action figures of is shown assasinating JFK before the main titles end, you know you’re not watching a mainstream popcorn flick. And when he RAPES one of the other superheroes on his team, you start to wonder who thought it was a good idea to spend $130 million to produce this movie.
(It really could’ve been made for under $50 million, too. The biggest star in it was BILLY CRUDUP! And he wasn’t even IN it! Dr. Manhattan didn’t have to be a CG creation. Paint Doug Jones blue, add a little glow-glow effect, and it’s the same damn thing for a shitload less money!)
@Jack Burton: “It makes me laugh how the very successful SUPERMAN RETURNS has become the revisionist punching bag of superhero films despite largely positive critical and public acclaim at the time. I think it’s a fantastic film that does carry over the innocence and excitement of the character-driven 1978 Richard Donner original. Singer knew X-MEN (just try and watch the third X-MEN movie for proof) and was true to Superman. I’d like to see him tackle a sequel with the same solid cast and a lot more action after the set-up of this reboot, but that looks unlikely.
Anyway, there are MANY reasons these clowns are foundering. The all-too-sudden dismantling of New Line — particularly when the company has what’s likely to be its most successful fiscal year to date — is just the tip of the iceberg.”
AGREED. Very well said. WB should do an action-driven sequel to Superman Returns directed by Singer. I have no doubt it would have been what X2 was to XMen, and even better. Ugh, WB are making a HUGE mistake here.
Remember, Superman Returns made more WW at the BO than both Watchmen and Batman Begins. Which means the film was popular and deseving of a sequel.
“AGREED. Very well said. WB should do an action-driven sequel to Superman Returns directed by Singer. I have no doubt it would have been what X2 was to XMen, and even better. Ugh, WB are making a HUGE mistake here.
Remember, Superman Returns made more WW at the BO than both Watchmen and Batman Begins. Which means the film was popular and deseving of a sequel.”
People also forget that Superman Returns’ second weekend was pitted against the sequel to Pirates of the Caribbean. The revisionist history is hilarious because the movie was doing better numbers than Batman Begins before Depp showed up with one of the most anticipated sequels in years.
Superman Returns was an attempt to re-establish a franchise that had long gone off the tracks. Imagine if the new Edward Norton version of Incredible Hulk had ended up opening against The Dark Knight. Does no one want to acknowledge the rave reviews Hellboy 2 had just before The Dark Knight destroyed it on opening weekend?
Returns may have lacked better action, but dramatically it hit the mark. Covering “the business”, I checked several showings opening weekend and saw people clapping at the end of every screening. It seemed to hit pretty strong with the female demos too. Internet geeks who would have been even more angry at the aborted McG version managed to convince themselves it was a bomb, but I bet if Singer had been given the chance to do his X2 style follow up… they would be raving right now.
Instead, we have typical studio apathy and instead of a Superman Unleashed (or whatever they call it now), 2/3 of their DC Comics offerings next year are from the guy who made Batman & Robin. THAT’S RIGHT, FOLKS. LOOK IT UP. THE LOSERS. JONAH HEX. Enjoy!
It’s kind of sad that in all of these posts, not one mention of WB’s unforgivable neglect of some of the greatest cartoon characters in history. WB Feature Animation has been a joke for years and still is. (Please don’t mention that piece of crap that won an Oscar a few years back…that was pure Academy politics.) These guys should have hired the brightest comedic writers in Hollywood to come up with scripts that would make Chuck Jones, Bob Clampett and Fritz Freleng laugh out loud. So turns the screw…