"The WB is simply keeping DC alive because of a love of comic books."

They're keeping DC alive because it still makes money.  That's it.

As far as R&D goes, how many characters created by DC in the last 20 years have gone on to do anything in any other media?  I can think of the Hispanic Blue Beetle and Static.  After that, I'm at a loss.  And if they were evaluating the characters based on their performance in comics, they wouldn't have done anything with two failures like HBB and Black Lightning Jr.

Mike

"No interest at all in creating new characters that they can use elsewhere."

I didn't say there was NO interest.  That's obviously not the case.  I'm fairly sure it plays a significant role in Vertigo publishing.  But, if you notice, Vertigo barely publishes more titles in a year than Marvel does in a single week.

Answer the question.  How many DC characters created in the last 20 years have gone on to do anything in other media/formats?  How many of the characters used in THE BRAVE AND THE BOLD cartoon were created after 1990 and how many were created before 1970?

Mike

Matt, I think you're right and you phrased it perfectly. Disney will use Marvel for R&D (as Warners does with DC), along with expoiting the currently popular stable of characters and the "Marvel" brand. I doubt Disney is going to do much to change Marvel as it is today and they certainly didn't buy it to shut it down or neuter it in some way.

This article http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Disney-to-buy-comic-book-apf-7 30717139.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=1&asset=&am p;ccode= says that Marvel made $206 million in its last fiscal year on revenue of $676 million. Not too shabby.

It is a small world after all.

What could be interesting if given Disney's strict policy when it comes to likeness if they will start to enforce that upon Marvel.

'The characters that are running around having monthly adventures in the comics need to look like the characters on the kid's t-shirts they wear while running around re-enacting those adventures.'

I could quite easily be happy living in a world were there were a few more John Romita Sr clones are being published.

Might be a good way to get rid of those artists that can't stay 'on model' or that just have a generic face for Man/Woman Boy/Girl.

Anyone think of any suggestions for an artist to work on the model sheets....?is

You seem to be under the impression that a company is only R&D based on how much we, the public, see at the movie theatre.  That's simply not the case.  Marvel was R&D for itself before this deal.  Do you honestly think they published new comics starring new characters simply because of their love of comics or that it would only generate money as a comic book?  Do you honestly think the history behind the creation of Bishop is an aberration?  Do you honestly think that simply because new characters created in the last 20 years can't compete with Superman, Batman, Spider-Man and the X-Men, that it totally negates the idea of Warner Brothers and now Disney using their comic book publishing arms as R&D?  Really?  That's ridiculous, Mike.  As I stated earlier, Marvel was its own R&D for decades.  Try out a new character.  See if they succeed.  If they do, utilize them in other media. They didn't just publish comics.  They didn't only worry about how much money they generated from publishing.  They tried new characters, either through editorial or higher mandate or hired creators known to create compelling characters for their company, and they did that not just to publish comic books.  They did it in the hope that they strike gold or, at the very least, create a character popular enough to help sell toys and other merchandise they can connect them to. 

Just because you don't see new characters carrying their own series or movie doesn't, in any world, mean that these companies aren't engaging in research and development.  Just because Green Lantern gets an animated movie and, soon, a live action theatrical release where Simon Dark does not doesn't mean the latter wasn't an attempt to see if that character strikes a chord with readers such that it can then be exploited in any of a number of different ways.  You speak as though DC is autonomous.  That they are only around to make money and, hey, if they create a new character that works for Warner Brothers, that's just a bonus.  Couldn't be farther from the truth based, as I do, on having friends at Warner Brothers, Sony, and Fox. 

••

All comes down to the WHY. Are Disney interested in this deal because someone out there loves all these characters and stories? Or is this the idea of a room full of people with pocket calculators?

If the latter, which seems most likely, the primary interest will be making as much money as possible, whilst spending as little as possible. Best way to do that, shut down the Condo of Concept and license out the properties. This assuming Disney wants to keep the comicbook part of this alive. Mickey and Co. seem to fare quite well without comics to support them (on this side of the Pond, anyway!).

Once again, how many DC characters created in the last 10 or 20 years have gone on to do anything or generate any revenue in any other medium or format?  If Warner is keeping DC around to any significant extent for R&D, they've been getting a worse return on their investment than Bernie Madoff's clients.

Mike