Durr, John Campea said so it must be true! You can check see that WB (unlike Disney) co-finances almost all of their pictures including their surefire blockbusters, certainly all of their DC movies. The Dark Knight Rises, a surefire moneymaker coming of the The Dark Knight was co-financed by Legendary pictures. So it's nothing new that they did for the Joker; They simply do it all the time. Here, look at all these movies and tell me which ones aren't co-produced:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...%80%93present)
I mean all of WB's movies in the last decade have been co-produced. That's simply how they do business. They don't look it as a "dice roll" at all.
Besides there's something else that know nothing bloviators like Campea ignore, why would companies agree to co-finance only the riskiest and least profitable movies from a studio's slate? Why would they take so much risk for so little return? What would be in it for them? Doesn't sound like the soundest business model. Of course if you had read the HRW article I posted, you would realize it's because movies like the Joker are used as bait for co-producing companies. In return for a piece of Joker, Creative Wealth Media (One of the two co-producers) agreed to provide the rights to some prestige pictures WB wanted as well as co-financing riskier movies in WB's slate (Like "The Kitchen", which bombed). Probably the same with Village Roadshow the other co-financier, but then again, they are a long time WB partner and co-produced the Matrix among many other with WB. Of course, you addressed absolutely none of this in my post and simply ran in bellowing about how WB must be kicking themselves and must be sooo angry for losing out on money because Campea and clickbait sites like comicbookmovie (Unlike actual credible Trade sites) are reporting as much.