Warner Bros appears ready to do Lantern 2 AND the Flash

[MIB41]

Mattel makes their money when they sell product to merchants. If nobody was buying them, merchants would not be ordering them, thus Mattel would make no money. Keep in mind too that merchandise has been out since early spring...PLUS they just recently added new merchandise as well. Thunderbolt, I realize you truly hate everything associated with this film. But I think common sense wins the day here. Mattel and Warner Bros made money off the Lantern license. Guess what? Their going to do it again and make another movie... Those crazy capitalists!

[Brazoo]

I'm not sure my questions or Thunderbolts questions were influenced by our feelings about the film in any way. The first article quote was simply not worded clearly. It seemed to be pointing out the success of Cars 2 specifically.

The issue about Mattel's profits vs. retail profit's is totally legit. I haven't heard anything regarding the toyline's retail sales - and I was wondering if you had since you've been following it.

[Earth 2 Chris]

In our little microcosm here at our local Wal-Mart, the GL stuff moved at first. But it has since stalled. It did move better than Thor merchandise (other than that foam hammer, which sold out). The Captain America stuff has went over much better, with all of the regular figures gone except for a few stragglers. The other formats have sold well too, but for some reason, Wal-Mart has already marked down the deluxe figures with big accessories to $9.

So it's possible stores will get stuck with GL items. If they are stuck with too many, then they may not get behind Mattel for a sequel. I think retailers took a gamble that GL was going to be a huge seller for them, and ordered as such. Hence Mattel's profits.

Chris

[thunderbolt]

Yeah, I doubt retailers will want to get burned twice with GL stuff. THe reason I dislike the GL movie is because it sucked( I did see it on a bootleg dvd) and was really dissapointing especially after Nolan demonstrated what could be done with the DC characters. If the same care was taken with GL ( a character I really do like in his classic incarnation), it would have been a much better film.

[MIB41]

I'm not sure my questions or Thunderbolts questions were influenced by our feelings about the film in any way. The first article quote was simply not worded clearly. It seemed to be pointing out the success of Cars 2 specifically.

The issue about Mattel's profits vs. retail profit's is totally legit. I haven't heard anything regarding the toyline's retail sales - and I was wondering if you had since you've been following it.

I realize that with you Brazoo. That's why I did not bring your name into it. No big deal. I just don't think it's realized that quarterly reports are for the investors. If they mention a merchandise line that helped their bottom line, it's NOT a throw away remark. Cars 2 and Lantern helped grow their profits by 41%... PERIOD. That's incredibly significant. Publicly traded companies have to be making money on these licenses to invest more revenue. And merchandising is often the bigger stake in films these days. Revenue from ticket receipts flows through a lot more hands than licensed merchandise. It's crystal clear that Warner Bros is going to give this another go because of their profits off the Lantern license.

[UnderdogDJLSW]

I agree on the GL as a brand thing. I think they see a potential in this along the way Star Trek has been for Paramount rather than they way the heros have been for Marvel. ST got a second chance movie and did much better than the motion picture, I think they are hoping for something like that. Plus, even if the script development or future revenues dictate something else, they can always slash budget, go with animation or a different actor and do a straight to video release to pick up the smaller audience. But I do think they will release as a feature because there are a bunch of happy meal and shelf toys to be made.