DC Franchise sustainability problems

[Lighthammer]

Whoa, it's been a long time since I started a thread on this forum.

With Young Justice and Green Lantern now facing their likely end (bared a miracle) I think it's a good time to really talk about the aftermath in terms of a post mortem analysis.

There's a lot of factors I think we can look when we compare the staggering success of series from ten and twenty years ago with absolute subpar story and animation versus more recent series with absolutely superior stories and animation that is absolutely not unfair to call world class, award deserving series of the recent years.

Given, over the last 10 years we've had some major factors to throw into the mix that after a fashion, I'm no longer convinced are truly the problem. We've had major E/I rule changes that destroyed the non-cable Saturday morning cartoon landscape, we have dedicated "kid" channels that are more widely available then ever and we have online streaming options that are eroding the "security" of network television (not necessarily a bad thing).

As I said, after a fashion, looking back at the last two decades, I don't think any of these are the major problem. I can't deny they have to contribute, but certainly not the biggest factors.

Ratings certainly wasn't a problem overall. We can sit back and analysis all day how well which episodes did against whatever else it was competing against, but after a fashion, none of us can deny the ratings were all overall strong.

I think Giancarlo Volpe, actually hit on the big part of the problem during the DC Meetup on the day of the Finales. He lamented how Green Lantern had a hard time even getting their toys into popular retailers because of the botched Green Lantern live action movie. This seems like the thread that actually explains where everything went wrong.

This got me thinking about past performance in toy lines. Going back to the golden era of toy lines, the 1980s, we had Thundercats, G.I. Joe, Transformers, He-Man, MASK, Super Powers DC Line among others. What did all of these have in common? They were *ALL* done in the same style. It didn't matter that He-Man had a live action movie, all the toys inspired by that movie eventually found their way into standard toy line and the series itself even gave you reasons to buy them.

The thing of it is, you didn't have Walmart, K-Mart, Toys R Us or any of those other retailers being bombarded with the Cartoon Series version, the Movie version, the original 80s version, the Comic book version of any of these toy lines. It was simply ONE SOLID toy line that ultimately unified the entire franchise. If there was a hiccup with a movie not being popular, the OTHER sources picked up the slack and helped "sell" the product.

In the case of Green Lantern, if the series animation style would have been compatible enough with the movie, the toy lines could have empowered one another instead of fought one another. THAT was the big problem. In other words, the TV series should have given you reason to BUY the Movie toys and vice-a-versa.

Even looking back at the 90s / 2000s, the DCAU Batman toys sold right along side with the Batman Movie toys and were easily compatible with one another; the same was absolutely true for the entirety of the Marvel action figures for that time frame; though it did take them forever to update their designs to the popular 90s X-Men series.

Beyond toy merchandising and working harder to match art styles to remain "compatible" --- this last round of series really failed to tap other markets. With the explosive popularity of Young Justice, places like Hot Topic and the Official DC Store saw a huge increase in super hero apparel. None of this was marketed as "Young Justice" or "Green Lantern Series / Movie" apparel and thus neither series ever felt any impact from it, but the sheer increase in these sorts of items is far reaching. Need proof? Walk into Walmart or Target and look at the men's department. This was another absolute misstep by each series.

Finally, a last point that actually really confuses me: Collectible Cards. In the 90s and 2000s collectible cards raged from top to bottom with every series worth its weight having its own dedicated card set. Long have these fads passed generally with cards only having value or desire if they serve a purpose; such as card games similar to Magic: The Gathering. However, I think Young Justice was PRIME for this sort of attention; GW had written in so much detail, so many things that were hints that a truly awesome card set could have been made based around Young Justice just to drop hints about the series. This could have been something released in a very similar way the comic was released: you don't need the cards to enjoy the series nor do you need the series to enjoy the cards, but if you do both, you'll have that much more fun with the series. Heck, the Bios during DC Nation could have EASILY re-enforced these cards.

All things taken into account, the Young Justice and Green Lantern series would have probably been a lot stronger if both teams made it a point to collaborate and utilize similar art style and mesh so both universes worked together. It would have helped strengthen the toy line, strengthen each series and give everyone a much deeper sense of continuity.

After a fashion; isn't this EXACTLY what Marvel is currently striving for?

 

[reflection01]

Do toys and cards sell as well as they did in the 80s and 90s?

I still think reliance on toys and such is strange. Plenty of shows do well without toys.

 

[Medinnus]

So... lets look at licensing and feedback loops. I'm going to over-simplify, because nobody wants to read a 20-page summary of how the licensing market works. So, a Intellectual Property (IP) owner creates something - lets use George RR Martin and Game of Thrones for the purposes of this illustration. Martin makes money by licensing the books (which are the primary medium of creation) to a publisher, who produces the book, markets the book, and sells the book to a combination of distribution channels (Ingram, for example) and direct retailers (Barnes and Noble, smaller booksellers, etc).

Licenses are, for the most part, sold on an exclusive basis - you don't sell the book rights to Bantam and Signet. They are sold covering broad areas within the property - for example, Martin doesn't license t-shirts for one character from the book to one company, and a different character from the book to a second company; all the Game of Thrones characters are included in the main license. Licenses are generally for a finite period of time; a year, three years, five years, etc., and generally include options for renewal.

When a property has third-party licensed merchandise on the shelves, a feedback loop is created. Jimmy goes and buys a Game of Thrones action figure, or card pack, or t-shirt, and his friends are exposed to the brand. His friends, curious, start watching the show. They like the show, and run out and buy toys and cards and t-shirts. This spreads in a viral loop, supplemented by advertisements for the show, the t-hsirts, the cards, the toys, etc.

Card sets do not sell very well, relative to what they did in the 1990's. According to studies, they died when CCGs rose with Magic: The Gathering in 1993 (well, really late in 1993, like September - the game premiered at the 1993 World Science Fiction Convention in San Francisco). CCGs require an underlying game system more complex than rock-paper-scissors, which generally requires a gaming company who wants to license the property.

Certainly one of the hurdles AVENGERS: EARTH'S MIGHTIEST HEROES had to overcome (or not, as the case may be) was the lack of a supporting toy series and/or other third-party merchandise. This is not because they didn't want to promote the show; this was because the licensing department had ALREADY sold the Avengers brand license (based on the movie). They had contractually hedged their bets, selling the THOR and IRON MAN and CAPTAIN AMERICA movie rights under a short-term license, even though they were pretty sure they would be selling the AVENGERS license to the same folks. AEMH had the misfortune of being perfectly timed as a vehicle for promoting the Avengers brand, which was why Marvel committed to two years of the show even before they'd sold the broadcast rights; they didn't care who showed it, as long as it started promoting Avengers brand awareness for the movie, as the Avengers movie had to be successful for their larger media strategy to work.

This is similar to how the GREEN LANTERN movie poisoned the well for the toys based on the animated series (and probably the ratings, as well).

IIRC, the Young Justice figures were not very widely available, and were somewhat more expensive than their shelf competition. Retail outlets have finite space for their displays, and all things being equal, they'll assign display space in accord to how many turns they think they're going to get. If Marvel Universe figures are on the pegs next to Young Justice, and all things are equal, the less expensive unit is going to sell.

 

[PretenderNX01]

Do toys and cards sell as well as they did in the 80s and 90s?

I still think reliance on toys and such is strange. Plenty of shows do well without toys.

You bring up a good point and from what I have found they do not sell as well as the 90s.

I'll have to google for the piece but I found an article after Christmas that said Mattel sales were down this past Christmas as kids were all wishing for iPads instead of action figures. Basically kids want videogames over physical toys and how Mattel was going to have to go more digital to keep Barbie around.

I would assume licensing a DC property was not a priority if propping up Hotwheels and Barbie were becoming a concern for Matty.

Someoneelse said (maybe even one of you guys) that a truly missed opportunity for licensing was clothing and other goods. A YJ folder for your notebook, a St Walker t-shirt and of course DVD season sets

Edit: found the article http://www.businessinsider.com/kids-want-ipads-not-toys-for-christmas-2012-12

Mattel, the world's largest toymaker by revenues, makes toys including Barbie dolls and Hot Wheels cars. However, a source told the Financial Times that its top selling product this Christmas was a mobile phone case.

 

[NightwingAngelo]

Ratings certainly wasn't a problem overall. We can sit back and analysis all day how well which episodes did against whatever else it was competing against, but after a fashion, none of us can deny the ratings were all overall strong.

I think Giancarlo Volpe, actually hit on the big part of the problem during the DC Meetup on the day of the Finales. He lamented how Green Lantern had a hard time even getting their toys into popular retailers because of the botched Green Lantern live action movie. This seems like the thread that actually explains where everything went wrong.

This got me thinking about past performance in toy lines. Going back to the golden era of toy lines, the 1980s, we had Thundercats, G.I. Joe, Transformers, He-Man, MASK, Super Powers DC Line among others. What did all of these have in common? They were *ALL* done in the same style. It didn't matter that He-Man had a live action movie, all the toys inspired by that movie eventually found their way into standard toy line and the series itself even gave you reasons to buy them.

The thing of it is, you didn't have Walmart, K-Mart, Toys R Us or any of those other retailers being bombarded with the Cartoon Series version, the Movie version, the original 80s version, the Comic book version of any of these toy lines. It was simply ONE SOLID toy line that ultimately unified the entire franchise. If there was a hiccup with a movie not being popular, the OTHER sources picked up the slack and helped "sell" the product.

In the case of Green Lantern, if the series animation style would have been compatible enough with the movie, the toy lines could have empowered one another instead of fought one another. THAT was the big problem. In other words, the TV series should have given you reason to BUY the Movie toys and vice-a-versa.

Even looking back at the 90s / 2000s, the DCAU Batman toys sold right along side with the Batman Movie toys and were easily compatible with one another; the same was absolutely true for the entirety of the Marvel action figures for that time frame; though it did take them forever to update their designs to the popular 90s X-Men series.

Beyond toy merchandising and working harder to match art styles to remain "compatible" --- this last round of series really failed to tap other markets. With the explosive popularity of Young Justice, places like Hot Topic and the Official DC Store saw a huge increase in super hero apparel. None of this was marketed as "Young Justice" or "Green Lantern Series / Movie" apparel and thus neither series ever felt any impact from it, but the sheer increase in these sorts of items is far reaching. Need proof? Walk into Walmart or Target and look at the men's department. This was another absolute misstep by each series.

I think we have to be careful with the logic here.

For one, the Green Lantern movie probably sucked, and this is from somebody who has never seen it (and definitely NEVER WILL). You can already tell that it's horrible, and I'm sure most people who saw anything to do with it aside from the film itself feel the same way: they have never seen it, and they definitely never will because it just looks like it is sooo bad. That's on DC/WarnerBros for not respecting the source material and feel of the characters and the mythos. The company should have done everything in their power to ensure that that their launch of a new character into the mainstream movie theatre would be nothing short of great - like Favreau et al did with Iron Man, thus launching a (somewhat) well-known character into superstar status. That's where the ball was dropped. I doubt there was any way that marketing a toy line bearing any resemblance to a clearly horrible product would in any way be effective.

If anything, the matter is that the movie plays a key role in how the character is seen by those outside of the core superhero fandom. What separates Marvel from DC is the painstaking efforts to ensure that they get the characters right, and as they characters are already cool it was merely a matter of highlighting their coolness. DC just does not seem to get it, but they're beginning to try with their re-imaging of Superman (and the Batman films).

In regards to the Green Lantern cartoon, if anything I don't feel that the the director/producers for this show had to cater to such a horrible movie. The character designs for one were ridiculous, with Hal Jordan's Mask being one of the mockeries of the year in film. Campbell and co. should have respected the different nuances that came with the characters (White gloves on Hal Jordan, the variations in costume design, etc...). They didn't though, cause they don't get it. The creators of the cartoon did, and continue to prove it to us time and again in every series they make. There's no reason why seasoned vets who know what they're doing with the characters should have to change up their way of doing things for noobs who want to go out of their way to change everything for the sake of making it 'different'. They have no attachment or care for the product they're handling, and thus no knowledge whatsoever of its meaning. The concept of the Green Lantern Corps is different enough, but alas, it was not for Warner Bros. From my perspective, Campbell and co. should have consulted Timm, Volpe, et al. before going forward with his project because he was clearly in over his head. He obviously didn't know anything about the material he was handling, but went forward with his ideas anyway.

DC seems to be making the mistakes that Marvel already have. Like Fantastic 4 (which can also take on that kind of cosmic-like magnitude), the cast was not as much of a problem as the director. Hopefully they both improve in this regard, as it's FOX rather than Marvel in-house that produces these films. It's a little late for Green Lantern for the next (long) while though. That was the character's big step into the mainstream, and DC didn't handle it like it should have - like a baby.

Finally, a last point that actually really confuses me: Collectible Cards. In the 90s and 2000s collectible cards raged from top to bottom with every series worth its weight having its own dedicated card set. Long have these fads passed generally with cards only having value or desire if they serve a purpose; such as card games similar to Magic: The Gathering. However, I think Young Justice was PRIME for this sort of attention; GW had written in so much detail, so many things that were hints that a truly awesome card set could have been made based around Young Justice just to drop hints about the series. This could have been something released in a very similar way the comic was released: you don't need the cards to enjoy the series nor do you need the series to enjoy the cards, but if you do both, you'll have that much more fun with the series. Heck, the Bios during DC Nation could have EASILY re-enforced these cards.

All things taken into account, the Young Justice and Green Lantern series would have probably been a lot stronger if both teams made it a point to collaborate and utilize similar art style and mesh so both universes worked together. It would have helped strengthen the toy line, strengthen each series and give everyone a much deeper sense of continuity.

After a fashion; isn't this EXACTLY what Marvel is currently striving for?

I agree! DUDE!!! Where have those gone?! Also, agreed on the similar art style, but I think in the case of DC where it's Animation is the strong link, the movies should in some way take cues from its excellent writing, not the other way around. If anything, it's animation is the only media outside of comics that are actually somewhat relevant in the mainstream.

 

[reflection01]

Seems like Young Justice apps would have been a better investment than a toy line.

 

[Fancyarcher]

DC seems to be making the mistakes that Marvel already have. Like Fantastic 4 (which can also take on that kind of cosmic-like magnitude), the cast was not as much of a problem as the director. Hopefully they both improve in this regard, as it's FOX rather than Marvel in-house that produces these films. It's a little late for Green Lantern for the next (long) while though. That was the character's big step into the mainstream, and DC didn't handle it like it should have - like a baby.

What could DC have done with the GL movie? Nothing. They didn’t even make it. It’s all WB’s fault.

 

[Medinnus]

The retailers don't care about whether or not something is quality - they care about history. Green Lantern movie toys sat on the shelves until clearanced or until the inventory cost was written off and the toys liquidated (either destroyed, donated, or bundled and sold to an inventory liquidator). Retail lives and dies on product turns per square feet, and they are professionals with long memories; why buy more Green Lantern, when the last Green Lantern stuff didn't sell for beans? They don't know from movies, or animated series, or comics - they just know sales levels.

 

[NightwingAngelo]

What could DC have done with the GL movie? Nothing. They didn’t even make it. It’s all WB’s fault.

My apologies. I wasn't consistent enough with using DC/WarnerBros in my post (it started off like that, but kind of faded off). The point stands though.

This does bring up something to address though: how much power does DC have over it's property in its relationship with WarnerBros when compared to Marvel with Disney? Do they have a similar deal in place, or is it just WarnerBros that calls the shots?

If I was part of those representing the main Green Lantern property and saw what my blood, sweat and passion was going to become on the big screen, I'd have almost died and tried to do something about it. From what I'v seen, it's possible that they don't have that kind of control.

Also, this just goes to show an old adage is wrong: any publicity is NOT always good publicity.

 

[TheVileOne]

The problem I'm seeing here is that a lot of people here are looking at a from a fan perspective and an emotional perspective. I understand that. At the same time, these companies are trying to run a business.

As far as DC/WB and Green Lantern, Geoff Johns looked like he had a strong creative presence at DCE and over the Green Lantern movie.

Something else I heard from a cartoon creator once is that retailers dictate to toy makers what goes on their shelves pertaining to why we weren't seeing certain toys for certain shows on the shelves.

As far as availability of Young Justice toys, from what I could tell their availability was widespread. However the line was garbage. The 6" figures were decent but they were overpriced because they came with like this diorama set. You could already get a lot of these characters in the DCUC format which were much better figures. So they should've gone with the DCUC format and maybe having a build-a-figure piece instead of a big honking diorama set so you don't hav eto drop $25 to get one character. The rest of the line were these dinky little figures that had their hands in this awkward crooked position. Poor paint apps, little articulation, etc. They didn't look anywhere as appealing as the JLU figures. Those figures were fairly simple but at least they didn't have crooked hand positions.

Same thing with Thundercats. Bandai totally blew it with that line. Kids didn't want to buy the toys. Their collectible versions were awful and fans didn't want to buy those either. The line flopped and WB had little incentive to continue with the series as a result.

Now something else I would point out, while Green Lantern might've poisoned the well for the series, at the same time the movie getting made probably played a large role in the animated series getting greenlit as well. So there you go.

 

[NightwingAngelo]

The problem I'm seeing here is that a lot of people here are looking at a from a fan perspective and an emotional perspective. I understand that. At the same time, these companies are trying to run a business.

As far as DC/WB and Green Lantern, Geoff Johns looked like he had a strong creative presence at DCE and over the Green Lantern movie.

Something else I heard from a cartoon creator once is that retailers dictate to toy makers what goes on their shelves pertaining to why we weren't seeing certain toys for certain shows on the shelves.

As far as availability of Young Justice toys, from what I could tell their availability was widespread. However the line was garbage. The 6" figures were decent but they were overpriced because they came with like this diorama set. You could already get a lot of these characters in the DCUC format which were much better figures. So they should've gone with the DCUC format and maybe having a build-a-figure piece instead of a big honking diorama set so you don't hav eto drop $25 to get one character. The rest of the line were these dinky little figures that had their hands in this awkward crooked position. Poor paint apps, little articulation, etc. They didn't look anywhere as appealing as the JLU figures. Those figures were fairly simple but at least they didn't have crooked hand positions.

Same thing with Thundercats. Bandai totally blew it with that line. Kids didn't want to buy the toys. Their collectible versions were awful and fans didn't want to buy those either. The line flopped and WB had little incentive to continue with the series as a result.

Now something else I would point out, while Green Lantern might've poisoned the well for the series, at the same time the movie getting made probably played a large role in the animated series getting greenlit as well. So there you go.

Good point, but now they're both gone. The cartoon got made (and very well so), but how soon do you think it will be until another Green Lantern cartoon series is made again? That's a possible indicator of the amount of effort DC/WB will have to go through to wash off some of the stench that the movie has left on the franchise.

 

[Lighthammer]

The retailers don't care about whether or not something is quality - they care about history. Green Lantern movie toys sat on the shelves until clearanced or until the inventory cost was written off and the toys liquidated (either destroyed, donated, or bundled and sold to an inventory liquidator). Retail lives and dies on product turns per square feet, and they are professionals with long memories; why buy more Green Lantern, when the last Green Lantern stuff didn't sell for beans? They don't know from movies, or animated series, or comics - they just know sales levels.

Realistically thats the overall point; they didn't have the ability to cross promote the line because the line was made too rigidly to reflect the movie.

It's like moving ahead with Marvel's grand unified universe where if, say, Iron Man 3 doesn't do well in the toy line, then the next avenger's movie or the up coming avenger's series is a way to support, build and rejuvenate that old toy line. It even adds greater value down the road where as a toy line about a failed movie with no cross promotional power is simply going to sit and lose value.

From a toy collectors point of view, there's serious reasons why action figures like the 80s TMNT Toy collection or the 80s Super Powers collection have greatly increased in value over the years. The DCAU action figures have even retained and continue to grow in value but yet the Young Justice figures could barely find interest.

The problem really tracks back to having multiple ways to promote the product line (note SINGULAR).

Personally, as I noted, Marvel is very much on a solid track to be able to offer dominance for it's toy lines for the up coming movies, animation series, tv series and games. They all draw from the same source content. I tend to think Marvel really had this dream of a grand unified universe and may only now be starting to realize how much it forfeits their collectible market.

 

[TheVileOne]

Good point, but now they're both gone. The cartoon got made (and very well so), but how soon do you think it will be until another Green Lantern cartoon series is made again? That's a possible indicator of the amount of effort DC/WB will have to go through to wash off some of the stench that the movie has left on the franchise.

Who knows. Look how long it took just to get this Green Lantern animation off the ground. If we can wait that long, we can probably wait for anything. Pushing Green Lantern isn't on the agenda right now. Green Lantern kind of had his trial run with the DTV's, movie, and series, and it basically failed. Maybe in a few years they release Justice League and Green Lantern's in it and that could help turn things around.

 

[RoryWilliams]

Part of the problem is that as much as fans complain about the constant rehashes of franchises that have had their moment in the spotlight (the various Batman, Spider-Man and X-Men shows), traditionally, those tend to be the most successful. And in general comic book cartoons these days seem dictated by what is happening on the movie front, which makes things a lot more difficult for DC fans since WB has had a hard time building a successful movie out of anyone not named Batman. Green Lantern certainly would not have gotten his own show were it not for the live-action movie (of course they had no idea that the film would flop) and looking at the most recent slate of upcoming shows, that trend doesn't look to be going away anytime soon. The obvious exception would be Teen Titans Go, which fits more with CN's emphasis on comedy.

 

[Lighthammer]

Who knows. Look how long it took just to get this Green Lantern animation off the ground. If we can wait that long, we can probably wait for anything. Pushing Green Lantern isn't on the agenda right now. Green Lantern kind of had his trial run with the DTV's, movie, and series, and it basically failed. Maybe in a few years they release Justice League and Green Lantern's in it and that could help turn things around.

Green Lantern First Flight actually did extremely well. It's still one of the top grossing DTVs DC has done so far.

The problem is, DC really should have taken it's success and build upon it; instead the very next DTV went a completely different direction, then the Movie went an even more different direction and then the animated series went on even another different direction.

After a fashion, I can forgive the movie for not following the same direction as First Flight, though it should have taken a lot better cues from the animated film; what I have a lot hard time justifying is why the second DTV movie was an anthology that pretended the first movie didn't take place and then why the animated series didn't take cues from the great success of the movie.

I said this before earlier on in the DC DTV campaign and everyone said I was nuts back then; but after a fashion, I think a lot of people are realizing that DC has been taking missteps all along since the beginning of DC DTV campaign in 2007. All along the way, DC could have been tailoring the DC DTVs, Young Justice and Green Lantern to all feel like they were taking place in the same universe very easily without stepping on anyone's toes and all the time along had a unified merchandise line that each addition to the universe would have helped to poster that merchandise franchise.

If DC were doing the same sort of marketing they were doing with the current DCU as they were doing back with the Super Powers collection, they would have been doing something really cool for the fans buying the DVDs like giving away a free special edition toy some how unique to that movie that you could send away for or register on a website to get; it would be yours free after paying shipping. Imagine how much something like that would helped the toy line and bolstered DC's advertising campaign!

DC just --- bluntly --- isn't doing the awesome things they did back in the 80s to bolster their merchandise lines. I'm gonna sound like a broken record saying that in this thread, but its really, really true.

Part of the problem is that as much as fans complain about the constant rehashes of franchises that have had their moment in the spotlight (the various Batman, Spider-Man and X-Men shows), traditionally, those tend to be the most successful. And in general comic book cartoons these days seem dictated by what is happening on the movie front, which makes things a lot more difficult for DC fans since WB has had a hard time building a successful movie out of anyone not named Batman. Green Lantern certainly would not have gotten his own show were it not for the live-action movie (of course they had no idea that the film would flop) and looking at the most recent slate of upcoming shows, that trend doesn't look to be going away anytime soon. The obvious exception would be Teen Titans Go, which fits more with CN's emphasis on comedy.

I'd absolutely disagree that Green Lantern couldn't have got it's own show without the movie.

The DTV IT SELF showed us how cool and viable it was but if that wasn't enough --- we seem to be forgetting that right before the New 52 relaunch, we had some of the coolest comic book stories in history unfolding in "Darkest Night" and "Brightest Day". Beyond animation style finally catching up to do a truly great Green Lantern series, they land mark comic series were more then enough to prove Green Lantern was ready to headline his own animated series.

That being said, I'll admit, though I didn't dislike the Green Lantern TAS we got and I DID enjoy it, I was very much disappointed by it. I feel TPTB missteped greatly with that series where they should have been taking cues from the highly successful DTV and the even higher successful comic series.

 

[Yojimbo]

After a fashion, I can forgive the movie for not following the same direction as First Flight, though it should have taken a lot better cues from the animated film; what I have a lot hard time justifying is why the second DTV movie was an anthology that pretended the first movie didn't take place and then why the animated series didn't take cues from the great success of the movie.

If it's any consolation, Emerald Knights was originally planned to in-canon with First Flight but corporate meddling squashed that and Hal Jordan was forced into the movie as the person telling Arisia the stories. I guess "they" wanted a stronger tie-in to the live action movie and didn't care for Hal's pre-existing appearances in the movie - quick origin story cameo or getting murdered by the Sinestro Corps cameo.

 

[TheVileOne]

Green Lantern First Flight actually did extremely well. It's still one of the top grossing DTVs DC has done so far.

The problem is, DC really should have taken it's success and build upon it; instead the very next DTV went a completely different direction, then the Movie went an even more different direction and then the animated series went on even another different direction.

As I recall, here is what Bruce Timm said on First Flight: "With Green Lantern, it didn’t perform nearly as well as what they had hoped it would. In the long run it eventually made its money back, but the sales weren’t there right away during its release. Hopefully with the release of the Live Action film next year, that will open up the doors for more Green Lantern relate material."

After a fashion, I can forgive the movie for not following the same direction as First Flight, though it should have taken a lot better cues from the animated film; what I have a lot hard time justifying is why the second DTV movie was an anthology that pretended the first movie didn't take place and then why the animated series didn't take cues from the great success of the movie.

If you mean the animated movie, because the animated movie was its own separate deal. The series was its own separate deal made to capitalize on the movie. Obviously the success on First Flight wasn't that great. The success of the live action movie was not too great either.

I said this before earlier on in the DC DTV campaign and everyone said I was nuts back then; but after a fashion, I think a lot of people are realizing that DC has been taking missteps all along since the beginning of DC DTV campaign in 2007. All along the way, DC could have been tailoring the DC DTVs, Young Justice and Green Lantern to all feel like they were taking place in the same universe very easily without stepping on anyone's toes and all the time along had a unified merchandise line that each addition to the universe would have helped to poster that merchandise franchise.

I understand what you are saying, but I respectfully disagree. I like that the animated movies aren't all necessarily the same style or direction and we can see some different elseworld stories like Year One and The Dark Knight Returns. Or All-Star Superman. I think that's a good thing we can get out of the animated movies. I don't think they all have to be in the same canon in order to work.

If DC were doing the same sort of marketing they were doing with the current DCU as they were doing back with the Super Powers collection, they would have been doing something really cool for the fans buying the DVDs like giving away a free special edition toy some how unique to that movie that you could send away for or register on a website to get; it would be yours free after paying shipping. Imagine how much something like that would helped the toy line and bolstered DC's advertising campaign!

I'm not sure this strategy would've worked. For one thing, most of the DTV movies are darker and edgier and go for an older demographic. I think that was one of the good things about them since they weren't specifically trying to cater just to kids and younger viewers.

I'd absolutely disagree that Green Lantern couldn't have got it's own show without the movie.

The DTV IT SELF showed us how cool and viable it was but if that wasn't enough --- we seem to be forgetting that right before the New 52 relaunch, we had some of the coolest comic book stories in history unfolding in "Darkest Night" and "Brightest Day". Beyond animation style finally catching up to do a truly great Green Lantern series, they land mark comic series were more then enough to prove Green Lantern was ready to headline his own animated series.

While some of the comic stories are good, most comic sales are a drop in the bucket compared to the type of sales that the movies and toy and merchandise need in order to be successful. Comics are a niche market these days.

 

[Lighthammer]

You can see the stats right here clear as day:
DC Universe Animated Original Movies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Green Lantern wasn't the strongest, but it's certainly up there and certainly when you compare its ratings against the other movies it did a very good job.

That being said, I'll concede that looking back on it now compared to the other DTVs DC has released, its numbers look a lot better but when the DC DTV Campaign started up, at the time of its release, it was one of the weakest movies; though over time we've seen that that's probably because there was more excitement coming off the first few movies after DCAU closed it's doors. Let's face it, when Superman: Doomsday was released, the common misconception from a lot of people was it was a continuation of the DCAU franchise and people quickly brought it up in ignorance. Batman: Gotham Knight was easily riding the success of the Batman Movies and its hard to fairly compare that one either. After normalizing for these two anomalies, Green Lantern really did kick butt and was much more easily comparable to the other higher rated DTVs.

---

Re-reading parts of this thread there's something I feel someone obligated to touch on. I think its hard for us as the collective residences of this forum to disagree that the movie sucked, but why did it suck?

Let's face it, the first half of the movie was pretty darn good; where the movie faltered was it reeked towards the end of whoever the scribe was for the movie or who ever changed the story really didn't know much about the Green Lantern mythos and thus the strong beginning faltered because someone winged the story and didn't know the history of the characters he was writing / directing / producing for. I'm not going to claim I know who specifically messed it up, but I will admit one thing, it wasn't Ryan Reynolds (unless I am naive to a fact that he some how changed the story).

In keeping with my assertions that a more unified (key word "more") I really do have to ask; why didn't someone who actually fully grasped the Green Lantern mythos helm the project or at the very least consult on it? Bruce Timm has been called in for HOW MANY projects now to "fix it" --- why didn't someone like him jump in to help?

/frusterated

 

[PretenderNX01]

I'm not sure this strategy would've worked. For one thing, most of the DTV movies are darker and edgier and go for an older demographic. I think that was one of the good things about them since they weren't specifically trying to cater just to kids and younger viewers. .

Best Buy offered an exclusive paint of Green Lantern figure with it's BluRay but those sold out quick.

I think they did this for Wonder Woman too.
I think they once did a Hotwheels Impala for a Supernatural boxed set. Even older people like those things (or is it just me still living out my childhood in my 30s?)

I would have sent in a coupon to get that figure. Of course I would have purchased online exclusive figures for the GL TV series had they existed. I'm that kind of fan. I got the JLU sets of Green Lantern Origins, the one with Guy and the one with Alan.

why didn't someone who actually fully grasped the Green Lantern mythos helm the project or at the very least consult on it? Bruce Timm has been called in for HOW MANY projects now to "fix it" --- why didn't someone like him jump in to help?

Why did they let Bryan Singer run amok on Superman Returns? I guess they were blinded by the success of their previous work (Singer on X-2 and I believe the guy who did GL did Casino Royale). It was always an odd choice to me. Maybe they though the Corps was a cosmic MI5?

 

[Hordesman]

Best Buy offered an exclusive paint of Green Lantern figure with it's BluRay but those sold out quick.

I think they did this for Wonder Woman too.
I think they once did a Hotwheels Impala for a Supernatural boxed set. Even older people like those things (or is it just me still living out my childhood in my 30s?)

I would have sent in a coupon to get that figure. Of course I would have purchased online exclusive figures for the GL TV series had they existed. I'm that kind of fan. I got the JLU sets of Green Lantern Origins, the one with Guy and the one with Alan.

Why did they let Bryan Singer run amok on Superman Returns? I guess they were blinded by the success of their previous work (Singer on X-2 and I believe the guy who did GL did Casino Royale). It was always an odd choice to me. Maybe they though the Corps was a cosmic MI5?

There is an adult collector base that does support collector product from Mattel and Hasbro and such. I ordered multiple subscriptions to help reach the minimum but I do notice I have a much easier time setting off He-Man figures atcost than DC. I definite think DC has some cannibalization issues with licensing - I'm not sure releasing 3 Dawn Granger Doves between dcd, Mattel and Tonner within the same year was a great idea. There definitely is a move towards composite marketing as well- like how the YJ style Superboy logo tee was sold under a DC banner, or how quite a bit of the figures in Batman Unlimited and the DC sub correspond to Brave and the Bold. The toys are done in comics styling, sometimes in current comic costumes... But I am curious as to how the animated styles fare as well. There's a Batman line like that at retail, as well as a target exclusive Jla line based on the comics but clearly using BATB bucks, plus batman unlimited will have bats and Anarky in btb toon style this fall. I do wonder if a straightforward toon line is on the way out, at least for year one. Ult Spider-Man didn't have a toy line until recntly, although some of its cast was in the 4" marvel line.