Do you think it would be a good idea for Disney to buy DC?

[colonyofcells]

Maybe 20th Century Fox will be interested in buying dc heroes at the cheapest prices.

[Lee Stone]

Absolutely not.

Aside from Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman, all the characters would be in the same limbo with the Crossgen and Ultraverse characters.

[Dispenser Of Truth]

For quality of creative output and for that matter treatment of creators I'm tempted to say yes, but for so many reasons in regards to the legal fallout and the idea of a company having that kind of monopoly, no. Good for the characters and audiences (like Superman wouldn't do better under Marvel editorial than he ever has under DC), but bad for, like, the world as a whole.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

For quality of creative output and for that matter treatment of creators I'm tempted to say yes, but for so many reasons in regards to the legal fallout and the idea of a company having that kind of monopoly, no. Good for the characters and audiences (like Superman wouldn't do better under Marvel editorial than he ever has under DC), but bad for, like, the world as a whole.

Editorial changes hands though. DC is suffering now under the iron fist of Harras, but Levitz's tenure produced some of the best superhero comics I've ever read. Harras wreaked similar havoc while at Marvel in the late 90s to the point where the company almost declared bankruptcy. There's no guarantee that some bad editorial regime won't come along at some point in Marvel's future and repeat history.

[Flash Gordon]

It MIGHT make superhero books take more of a backseat to comics in general, which would be fun. Imploding into itself. Marvel/DC being the big 1 and burning itself out.

It'd likely be catastrophic for the American comic book industry though, which ultimately is what I care about. I like creativity, this would stiffle creativity quickly.

[warzon]

Hell to the nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[Myskin]

I don't think that it's entirely impossible - I really don't know what the legal consequences could be, nor if it could be legal at all (would it be a monopoly?). And I think that Disney gave a thought to it - not much time ago Fox tried to buy WB and they simply didn't come to an agreement about the price.

A downsizing of the series could be possible, but I don't think that it would be as catastrophic as someone apparently thinks. The characters still have a huge fanbase - at least, some of them. DC wouldn't be a new Ultraverse. I suppose that 15-20 series would survive, and IMHO that's enough (do we seriously need 52 series?). I think that Disney could be interested for the very same reason they bought Marvel - movies and TV series. Sooner or later, the Avengers movies won't be as successful as they are right now (and I seriously doubt that the actors are really interested in playing them for many years to come). Disney will look for newer franchises - in a way, they are already doing it with the Star Wars series.

The main problem, as far as I am concerned, is the lack of creative voices. Avengers movies are successful, but they are flat - it's as if they were made by one director and they don't allow any substantial creative input (that's why they fired Edgar Wright). Alternative voices are already difficult to find - Disney created a general prejudice about what superhero movies should be about - and I seriously doubt that future DC movies will have a radically different creative approach. Any hope would become nullified if ALL the movies were produced by the same company.

In a way, we are already living in a monopolistic age: creatively speaking there isn't a real choice as far as movies are concerned, they are mainly superhero movies, SW movies, remakes and sequels. Present-day directors are almost unable to create new cinematic mythologies and IMHO that's WAY worse than having no more Superman solo movies.

[Coin Biter]

It would be a terrible idea now, although purely speculatively Disney/DC, with undivided film rights to the core properties, might have been a better fit for the comics world than Disney/Marvel, where the X-Men and FF have languished. The key figure in the Marvel films sucess from 2008 seems to have been Kevin Feige, who pre-dated the acquisition.

Alternative voices are already difficult to find - Disney created a general prejudice about what superhero movies should be about - and I seriously doubt that future DC movies will have a radically different creative approach. Any hope would become nullified if ALL the movies were produced by the same company.

Disney hasn't created a "general prejudice" - the Snyder/Goyer films were not badly received because people were expecting the Avengers. The Nolan trilogy was universally critically acclaimed, and the Fox-Men films are generally well received, and although obviously I don't know for certain I have little doubt that Suicide Squad will do well.

[Myskin]

Disney hasn't created a "general prejudice"

Disney cemented the idea that superhero movies should be basically movies for family or kids, with little or no experimentation and a script which is generally serviceable but resembles McDonald's fries - sugar and salt in equal parts just to satisfy every single customer, without choosing a distinct direction. That doesn't have anything to do with creativity: they are basically work-for-hire where relatively secondary directors, or rising directors who are looking for more visibility, are put in charge of a production whose steps are already pre-determined.

Do they allow you to spend a couple of hours lightheartedly? They do, but that's not what I look for in a movie, especially if the story begins to fade from my memory a couple of days after the screening. Or, to say it better, that's not what I look for in every single movie which is put on a screen these days.

[Carabas]

No, because eventually Disney would ruin DC comics even more if possible. They have already put their stench on the Marvel Universe by forcing the Inhumans and putting the X-Men into the shadows. As well as forcing new characters and old characters of color/gender for future film franchises. I wish they would leave the comics alone.

It's not Disney that is forcing this Inhuman stuff. That would be Ike Perlmutter, old school Marvel monomaniac and publisher.

Disney is the one that stepped in and made sure Perlmutter can't influence the movies anymore (which is all they care about) because nobody except Perlmutter actually likes these new Inhumans.
He is pretty much the guy that runs the company though, so it's not as if anybody can do anything about it.

[Coin Biter]

Disney cemented the idea that superhero movies should be basically movies for family or kids, with little or no experimentation and a script which is generally serviceable but resembles McDonald's fries - sugar and salt in equal parts just to satisfy every single customer, without choosing a distinct direction. That doesn't have anything to do with creativity: they are basically work-for-hire where relatively secondary directors, or rising directors who are looking for more visibility, are put in charge of a production whose steps are already pre-determined.

Do they allow you to spend a couple of hours lightheartedly? They do, but that's not what I look for in a movie, especially if the story begins to fade from my memory a couple of days after the screening. Or, to say it better, that's not what I look for in every single movie which is put on a screen these days.

Days of Future Past was a commercial and critical success. R-rated Deadpool was a commercial and critical success. The Nolan Trilogy was a commercial and critical success.

All of these films have a different tone to the general run of Marvel/Disney films, and none of thm fit your description.

What evidence, beyond (for the sake of argument) the flawed Snyder films, is there to suggest that Disney has created a brand where the only acceptable superhero films are family films?

[The Darknight Detective]

The time to talk about Disney acquiring DC was before they acquired Marvel. Therefore, there is only one possible answer to the OP's question - no.

[Myskin]

Days of Future Past was a commercial and critical success. R-rated Deadpool was a commercial and critical success. The Nolan Trilogy was a commercial and critical success.

All of these films have a different tone to the general run of Marvel/Disney films, as, incidentally, did the Winter Soldier.

What evidence, beyond the Snyder films, is there to suggest that Disney has created a brand where the only acceptable superhero films are family films?

Believe it or not, Days of Future Past is not a huge creative achievement and its approach is not radically different from Marvel movies - if Marvel movies are synonymous with "Avengers". Some of the most interesting points in First Class (as it always happens, when a franchise is dying the directors have a bit more creative freedom than usual, and in fact FC is more interesting than most superhero movies nowadays) are watered down in DOFP (and at least one of the most interesting character in FC - The Beast - is pretty useless in DOFP).

The Nolan trilogy was, in fact, a well-deserved success even from a creative standpoint. But this happened mainly because Nolan is a very talented director and when he made his movies the superhero genre wasn't as strongly codified as it is now. This allowed him to make a movie like the Dark Knight (which was screened just some time after Iron Man 1 if I remember it well, that is a long time ago), which is probably a once in a lifetime achievement, since it is basically a relatively sober noir movie where the main character is the villain and it incidentally includes superheroes, too.

Deadpool is the exception that proves the rule; in a market which is entirely dominated by a certain type of movies, when a film attempts some politically uncorrect moves (and satirizes superheroes, too), it stands out. Hopefully the same will happen with Suicide Squad - which is not a strictly superhero movie, by the way.

Batman v Superman has several issues - mainly concerning the editing and the pacing - but a lot of criticism comes from the fact that adding dark overtones to a movie which includes Superman is prejudicially considered wrong. If I remember it well, Leonard Maltin's review is rather revelatory in this concern. As for the future movies, we'll see - maybe WB will be able to propose an alternative way to create superhero movies and Disney films will lose influence, but I personally think that at one point both the companies will make movies focused on stronger and stronger artistic compromises and the tones will become almost indistinguishable (the same thing happened in the comic books, by the way - more or less).

IMHO We will have a Nolan-level director on a superhero movie only when the genre will begin to fade. I don't think that it will happen for the next 5-6 years (at the least), and in the meanwhile franchises based on brand new mythologies will be harder and harder to find. Personally speaking, the only high-budget movie which I have some hope in is the next Blade Runner because the director is an extremely talented guy... And that's a sequel, too.

[Thomas Crown]

I'll leave you one last thing for the week, and it's not Marvel news, but certainly big industry new. This past Saturday, DC Comics unveiled the full picture of the lineup for their Rebirth initiative -- do you have any thoughts to share on their plans?

Alonso: I think the entire industry is better when DC is healthy.

"...now, let me talk about the dozens of retailers variants that Marvel will release to make sure that we will top DC's Rebirth in June".

[Myskin]

By the way, now that I think about it: if Disney really bought WB, there would be a way to strongly differentiate DC movies from Marvel movies. That is, if DC adaptations became animated feature films.

Personally speaking, I'd surely give a chance to such approach - with some notable exceptions, in the US market there aren't notable animated movies these days (at least, from a creative standpoint) and I am cautiously optimistic about the animated Spider-man movie which will come out in 2018.