Warner Bros. Discovery sale (Universal? Paramount? Netflix?)

[Jill Sandwich 11,162]

Shared universe crap is often promoted as a coping excuse for these mergers.

[Jill Sandwich 11,162]

[Edmilson 12,370]

Justice League vs Transformers

Batman vs Ethan Hunt

Harry Potter vs Sonic the Hedgehog

A Quiet Place meets The Conjuring Universe

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles vs Teen Titans

[bollemanneke 4,331]

Why can't these companies just work together to make their shared universe crap possible? Like, as in two people having a dialogue, a conversation? Why is that impossible in Hollywood? Or do they need licence fees before they can talk too and because dialogue isn't owned by anyone they can't do that?

[Holko 12,057]

17 minutes ago, bollemanneke said:

and because dialogue isn't owned by anyone

You can rest assured that their lawyers are looking into copyrighting it.

[bollemanneke 4,331]

Right, time to clean up my posts before they sue me.

[Naïve Old Fart 13,017]

THE SOUND OF ALIENS,

INDIANA JONES AND THE MISSION IMPOSSIBLE,

TOP TANGLED,

THE MATRIX VS. HERBIE FULLY RELOADED.

[enderdrag64 1,813]

16 hours ago, Jay said:

Latest update

 

https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/warner-bros-discovery-paramount-skydance-acquisition-bid-1236515351/

Usually I'm against these types of mergers, but I'd actually be really happy to see Zaslav thrown out of leadership, even if it takes an acquisition to do it

[Chen G. 6,138]

But what about Abdyluca? They're proven to be good shephards, and very filmmaker-friendly.

[Jill Sandwich 11,162]

4 hours ago, Holko said:

You can rest assured that their lawyers are looking into copyrighting it.

 

They already banned movie quotes from this forum. You bet the studios will go after anyone who quotes movies elsewhere.

[Edmilson 12,370]

Oh come on

 

 

[Jill Sandwich 11,162]

The sharks are circling in...

[Andy 7,713]

Rather than shared universes, some fresh new stories might be nice.   Homogenization of entertainment under one roof converges towards predictability and sameness.  Sort of like how Everytown, USA has the same plaza of shops as every other town.  And all the junk foods are made by like two companies. 

[Tallguy 7,364]

Oh that's nonsense. Towns don't have shops anymore! 

[Chen G. 6,138]

7 hours ago, Andy said:

Rather than shared universes, some fresh new stories might be nice

 

which ironically is a lot of what Warners seem to be doing nowadays: Sinners just entered the competition for Best Drama at the Golden Globes!

 

It'd be a shame to boot Abdyluca as part of some merger just when they got the studio on the right track.

[bollemanneke 4,331]

11 hours ago, Edmilson said:

Oh come on

 

 

Yeah that's all we need.

[Bilbo 4,294]

12 hours ago, Edmilson said:

Oh come on

 

 

This would be worst case scenario 

[Maurizio 6,913]

On 20/09/2025 at 2:29 AM, Andy said:

Rather than shared universes, some fresh new stories might be nice.   Homogenization of entertainment under one roof converges towards predictability and sameness.  Sort of like how Everytown, USA has the same plaza of shops as every other town.  And all the junk foods are made by like two companies. 

 

The point of gobbling up smaller competitors and scaling up size of the company is meant to raise stock value and basically becoming owners of IPs that can guarantee rich license agreements. Also, this is to have a much bigger leverage when big tech companies will sooner or later start coming for them.

 

One thing is sure: movie business as it we know it will soon be a thing of the past. 

[TSMefford 1,720]

46 minutes ago, Maurizio said:

One thing is sure: movie business as it we know it will soon be a thing of the past. 

 

That ship has sailed. It's basically gone already lol.

[Maurizio 6,913]

6 minutes ago, TSMefford said:

That ship has sailed. It's basically gone already lol.

 

True.

[Slitherjump 154]

 

[bollemanneke 4,331]

How much money do we have?

[Jurassic Shark 16,425]

Dibs on the Korngold scores. 

[Naïve Old Fart 13,017]

How much for the THE WITCHES OF EASTWICK multi track tapes?

[Edmilson 12,370]

The only thing I hope does NOT happen is Netflix buying Warner. That would be an absolute, unmitigated disaster.

 

Scott Mendelson wrote it better in his Substack, but since the post is paywalled, I'll post it here so that you guys understand the gravity of the situation.

 

The Cold, Cruel Logic Behind Netflix Potentially Buying Warner Bros.

 

Buying one of the five remaining theatrical heavyweights for the purpose of removing the most aspirational theatrical distributor from the board would be in line with the streamer's recent history.
 

Quote

The notion of Netflix attempting to buy Warner Bros. (just the studio, not the cable channels) at this exact moment makes grimly perfect sense. Yes, it’s mere speculation and gossip at this juncture, but why not? After all, having essentially won the streaming war, Netflix (understandably) sees its biggest competition (at least in terms of movies) not as other streaming platforms or even YouTube, but rather theater chains. WB has become a comparative titan of the theatrical experience, scoring aspirational success with non-franchises (Sinners), new-to-cinema IP (A Minecraft Movie), and old-made-new franchises (Superman). As such, buying the studio mostly to take it off the board as a theatrical contender would frankly fit the company’s recent strategy.

 

This is all media chatter, presumably pushed by those who stand to benefit financially. I’ve long argued that the streaming giant views movie theaters as an existential threat, or a significant obstacle to becoming the “everything, everywhere, all at once” choice for mainstream professionally filmed entertainment. In pursuit of that goal, Netflix has a habit of making (feature film-specific) moves that are less about boosting its own fortunes and more about undercutting theatrical releases. Yes, this is amoral, macro-sized, cutthroat capitalism. No, these giant corporations (none of whom have been on their best behavior of late) do not love you back. That said, buying WB to at least partially bury it would be par for the course.

 

When the Knives came Out

 

Netflix didn’t pay $450 million for Rian Johnson’s first two Knives Out sequels because it expected a tangible profit from the films. Cash-in-hand revenue was non-existent, save for its limited theatrical engagement (allegedly around $13 million domestically) in 600 theaters over Thanksgiving week. However, even then, the film just happened to open on the only August-to-December 2022 weekend that qualified as “crowded,” stealing the buzz and media attention from Sony’s Devotion, Universal’s The Fabelmans, and Disney’s Strange World. It will try that game again in Thanksgiving 2026 with Greta Gerwig’s first Narnia movie, natch. Also, without any expectations of a “big movie debut = subscription upsurge,” the goal was to take the franchise off the table for theaters.

 

The price paid for 2022’s Glass Onion and this year’s Wake Up Dead Man was entirely predicated on the blow-out theatrical success of 2019’s Knives Out. That was true in ways both obvious (Knives Out was popular, so Knives Out 2 will also be popular) and borderline insidious (Knives Out’s $312 million global gross undercut the idea that Hollywood could no longer pull such hat tricks). After all, Netflix has nabbed most of its biggest feature-film hits from direct sequels to once-theatrical titles (Happy Gilmore 2) or big-budget genre flicks (Red Notice) meant to resemble the past-tense Hollywood blockbuster (Don’t Look Up), primarily starring actors first made popular by the Hollywood system (Back in Action).

 

Yes, slight digression, that’s what makes KPop Demon Hunters so unique. That’s also why it’s slightly hilarious that the film’s popularity took the streamer by surprise. A musical cartoon adventure fantasy featuring a trio of hot-and-cool female KPop rock stars who use their powers and their music to fight otherworldly demons… Who the hell would ever want to watch that? Anyway, while Knives Out is the most high-profile example, the streamer has spent much of the last few years on a festival-buying spree, overpaying for almost any remotely crowdpleasing festival breakout not just as a show of force but, at least partially, for the purpose of preventing those films from becoming non-franchise theatrical sleeper hits.

 

A whiff for Netflix > A hit for theaters.

 

When streaming shows can cost $8-$20 million for an episode or three, paying that much for a well-liked festival title, knowing that most studio rivals can’t compete or won’t because they carry an expectation of a return on that investment, is almost a tax write-off. Buying up the likes of Fair Play ($20 million), Woman of the Year ($11 million), Hit Man ($20 million), and What’s Inside ($17 million, just months after A24’s Talk to Me became one of the biggest-grossing Sundance festival pick-ups *ever*) is less about “This will play great on Netflix” and more about just keeping them off the AMC marquee on the offhcance they might become a non-franchise sleeper hit.

 

Yes, that applies to Emilia Pérez ($8 million), last season’s major awards contender (even winning Zoe Saldaña an overdue Oscar), which still pulled almost non-existent viewership. To be fair to the filmmakers, money is money and going to Netflix avoids “The Argylle Treatment,” whereby even Universal’s $25 million M3GAN 2.0 gets far more “Egad, what the hell happened?!” media ink than Netflix’s $320 million, panned and (comparatively) ignored The Electric State. In a world where far fewer consumers show up for “just a movie,” a mostly just-streaming release removes concerns about actual rate-of-return success. Conversely, WB’s Wuthering Heights, opening February 13, 2026, now has expectations of achieving tangible domestic and worldwide box office success.

 

Margot Robbie’s LuckyChap production company turned down Netflix’s $150 million offer for writer/director Emerald Fennell’s Wuthering Heights, opting for $85 million and promises of a theatrically worthy marketing campaign. Speaking of which, the streaming giant often threw unholy amounts of money at the filmmaker(s) behind various late-2010s surprise theatrical success stories for the purposes of making a follow-up, which (comparatively) no one sees. Alongside, more obviously, Greta Gerwig getting big bucks following Lady Bird and Little Women (which meant her post-Barbie flicks would be Chronicles of Narnia films), Bradley Cooper’s post-A Star is Born follow-up, Maestro, debuted on Netflix to comparatively indifferent viewership. Ditto, kinda-sorta, Nighcrawler helmer Dan Gilroy’s Netflix whiff, Velvet Buzzsaw.

 

Will Warner Bros.’ aspirational success become an accidental poison pill?

 

Whatever momentum might have been sustained after Taylor Swift and Beyonce’s theatrically successful concert docs evaporated when Sabrina Carpenter and Olivia Rodrigo went to Netflix for late-2024 (little-watched) music specials. It’s not a zero-sum game, as Martin Scorsese, Spike Lee and Guillermo del Toro might attest. If Netflix wants WB’s theatrical fortune and glory to go into the company’s own coffers, alongside post-theatrical revenue and related IP-specific profits, so be it. Netflix doesn’t release movies theatrically, so we’ll still have five major studios. However, noting that this is macro-sized cuthroat capitalism and none of these giant studios love you back, I’m inclined to presume that motivations are less “good for Netflix” and more “bad for theaters.”

 

WB spent the last six months making fools of those prematurely predicting Mike DeLuca and Pam Abdy’s commercial doom. The studio’s successes debunked conventional wisdom about what was possible at the multiplex. Even in 2025, an R-rated original horror melodrama like Sinners can pull Sixth Sense-level domestic grosses while F1 outgrosses every Marvel/DC flick and A Minecraft Movie becomes the first blockbuster-sized new-to-cinema franchise since The Hunger Games. This, right alongside New Line’s horror output posting best-case-scenario grosses, on the eve of WB dropping One Battle After Another, the movie of the year, in terms of both cultural zeitgeist and possibly Oscar glory. It all flies in the face of every “theatrical is dead” narrative.

 

I fear that Netflix wants Warner Bros. not to revel in its success but to snuff it out. If WB falls, then so too might theaters crumble. Beyond Netflix ridding itself of a key macro-sized entertainment competitor, the proverbial demise of theaters would cost Tinseltown the distribution outlet that allows it to collect revenue on its movies, and, since theatrical releases post better viewership on non-Netflix platforms than SVOD originals, boost its respective streaming platforms. That might be overly dramatic and/or Rube Goldberg-ian in terms of overall consequences. But considering what we’ve seen thus far this decade, it’s not 100% tinfoil paranoia. If rumor becomes reality, will Netflix find itself joining Hollywood or destroying it?

 

[Xander Harris 9,665]

Why the hell should Warner Brothers or Fox or any of this stuff be for sale anyway? They’re the juggernauts of movies and TV. Like Kevin McCallister’s mom once said, it must be really bad.

[Yodaschild 1,582]

.

[Jill Sandwich 11,162]

I still like saying "20th Century Fox" because the new variant sounds so bland, generic, and neutered.

[Gabriel Bezerra 775]

1 hour ago, Lady Dimitrescu said:

I still like saying "20th Century Fox" because the new variant sounds so bland, generic, and neutered.

Well, most studios are a "20th Century Studio" so yeah

 

Seems like Zaslav got what he wanted. Spliced the company and sold the profitable part without the weight of TV so he could leave with a profit.

[Edmilson 12,370]

As Warner Bros Goes Up for Sale, Where Would Hollywood Be Without the Iconic Studio?

[Jill Sandwich 11,162]

It's litchurally ikonik!!

[Jill Sandwich 11,162]

 

 

[Naïve Old Fart 13,017]

Unlike Americans, I prefer not to get my bad news from CNN.

[Xander Harris 9,665]

Well, they’re all compromised anyway and beholden to corporate overlords. They’re not reliable sources of information and most people aren’t watching or trusting of those institutions. It’s mainly the elderly AKA Boomers and the ad breaks which are targeted at people with dementia who piss themselves in the night and live alone in houses now valued over a million dollars and balk at new developments and are terrified they’ll lose their home reflect that.

[Jill Sandwich 11,162]

https://variety.com/2025/biz/news/paramount-warner-bros-discovery-arab-sovereign-wealth-funds-1236584624/

 

[Chen G. 6,138]

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/12/04/media/netflix-paramount-wbd-bidding-war-warner-bros-discovery

 

I hope this is just to get Paramount all hot and bothered...

 

Are we thinking regulation would allow this?

[Bilbo 4,294]

12 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/12/04/media/netflix-paramount-wbd-bidding-war-warner-bros-discovery

 

I hope this is just to get Paramount all hot and bothered...

 

Are we thinking regulation would allow this?

This is worst case scenario IMO. This could be the final nail for cinemas and physical media. 

[Chen G. 6,138]

Yeah, out of the available options this is by far the worst one.

 

But do we think this will pass by the regulator? The general feeling seems to be a definitive "no."

[Bilbo 4,294]

Well the president of the US is pals with the head of Paramount isn’t he? 
 

But it shouldn’t happen anyway. Netflix is the number 1 streaming company and HBOMax is number 3. That shouldn’t be allowed to happen. 

[Jill Sandwich 11,162]

I want Warner/Paramount crossover movies. Exorcist meets The Godfather.

[Chen G. 6,138]

13 minutes ago, Bilbo said:

Well the president of the US is pals with the head of Paramount isn’t he? 

 

Paramount yes. But I'm talking the Netflix thing. As you say, in terms of streaming (discounting YouTube for the moment) it prety much creates a monopoly.

 

[Andy 7,713]

I’m old enough to remember when the color red we associate with Netflix meant their red envelopes coming in the mailbox with a DVD or two inside.  What a concept, placing your disc rental order on “The Net”. 
 

Sigh. 

[Bilbo 4,294]

39 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

Paramount yes. But I'm talking the Netflix thing. As you say, in terms of streaming (discounting YouTube for the moment) it prety much creates a monopoly.

 

Yeah but isn’t there the potential for the president to put pressure on the regulators to stop the Netflix deal because of his ties with paramount?

[Chen G. 6,138]

Even better! 

 

Not that consolidating Paramount and Warner is the best thing for the film industry either. But if a filmmaker like James Cameron can say "it's the best possible choice" then I can make my peace with it, at least.

[Bilbo 4,294]

1 minute ago, Chen G. said:

Even better! 

 

Not that consolidating Paramount and Warner is the best thing for the film industry either. But if a filmmaker like James Cameron can say "it's the best possible choice" then I can make my peace with it, at least.

The lesser of two weevils 

[Chen G. 6,138]

Three: Comcast is also in the running.

[Jill Sandwich 11,162]

https://about.netflix.com/en/news/netflix-to-acquire-warner-bros

 

It's over

[Chen G. 6,138]

No it's not. Lets see what the regulator says.

[Jill Sandwich 11,162]

Netflix wants blu-ray dead.

[Xander Harris 9,665]

Anyone else never subscribed to Netflix?