What will happen to all of the Warner Bros. talent deals?
Netflix is not averse to talent deals. They have made it a mainstay of their business in the past, overpaying for Ryan Murphy and probably underpaying Shonda Rhimes. But a few months ago, they lost “Stranger Things” creators The Duffer Brothers to Paramount because they did not have a theatrical component to their business. A priority for the duo who want to get back in the movie business. In theory, that has changed. But if the streamer slowly phases out theatrical as a priority, and only releases in theaters half-heartedly, will stars now under the WB umbrella, such as Timothee Chalamet, Tom Cruise, and Margot Robbie (and her LuckyChap production entity), bolt? We’re pretty sure two of those three stars, who have never appeared in a streaming movie, would.
Will Netflix move its prestige and awards efforts to the Warner Bros. brand?
Netflix has had major awards success over the past decade for numerous narrative, animated, and documentary films. It’s won 26 Oscars to date. That being said, it still hasn’t won Best Picture. Granted, there are a lot of factors at play (I mean, it’s always about the movie). And to be fair, other studios have landed many Best Picture nominations and never won or taken Oscar’s top prize in decades (Paramount, Focus Features, Sony Pictures). And, at publication, two Netflix films – “Frankenstein” and “Train Dreams” – are likely nominees in 2026. As an awards machine, Netflix keeps pumping them out. The question is whether the lack of genuine theatrical releases is the reason lauded pictures such as “The Power of the Dog,” “Roma,” or “All Quiet on the Western Front” couldn’t cross the finish line. There is a belief that until that happens, a significant number of AMPAS voters simply won’t vote for a Netflix “film.” Warner Bros. completely changes that. Netflix is a proud company that has built itself into a media powerhouse in 15 years. Would they segue some of their narrative prestige efforts to Warner Bros. at a chance at a Best Picture win? Ponder, pt. 3.
Will James Gunn and Peter Safran continue to run DC Studios?
DC Studios co-Chairman and CEOs Gunn and Safran have a ton of autonomy. So much so that, contrary to public assurances, they have butted heads with HBO Max over upcoming television projects. That being said, they have had an excellent start with two highly rated seasons of “Peacemaker” and profitable box office and public reception for last summer’s “Superman.” Two new films, “Supergirl” and “Clayface,” will hit theaters in the second half of 2026. “Lanterns,” a new HBO program set in the DCU, is expected to arrive sometime this Spring. 2027’s “The Batman: Part II” is now technically under their jurisdiction, but Matt Reeves has been given mostly free rein to continue his alternate world-building after 2022’s “The Batman.” And that show’s spin-off HBO Max series, “The Penguin,” was a ratings and critical darling, taking home 9 Emmy Awards alone (again, a project before Gunn/Safran took over). Gunn, in particular, is a major supporter of the theatrical marketplace. He’s had tremendous success with the “Guardians of the Galaxy” films to “Suicide Squad” and, now, “Superman.” Would he want to stick around if Netflix began to ask for streaming-only movies from the DCU? And if they started demanding even more streaming series than he could oversee, would he walk away? And, from an alternate perspective, how would the aforementioned Lin, who lost the DC Studios job to Gunn and Safran, work with the pair? Would Netflix think other creatives could take DC Studios even bigger, faster? (And, no, Netflix is not handing the reins back over to Zack Snyder). A very “watch this space” topic over the next 24 months.
Will Warner Bros and HBO be forced into the algorithmic creative process?
The legend of the Netflix algorithm has gotten somewhat out of hand. Yes, the streamer uses data to determine renewals and foster the sort of projects it wants to launch, but there is no program determining casting, narrative choices, etc. Episodic and film creatives get to make their show, some with a ton of freedom. And the notes they get are sometimes less intrusive than what Netflix’s peers would submit. But data is a part of the game, and that would be the antithesis for most studios or networks. How Netflix development execs work is a substantially different culture from Warner Bros. On the film side, Abdy and De Luca are Gen X execs who are the bridge between the old school and the new school. Bajaria and Lin are also Gen X, but Netflix has made them work almost inherently with a new school perspective. Can those cultures co-exist?
Will Netflix pull back on licensing other studio and network content?
Netflix is expected to pay $18 billion on content in 2025. Some of that money goes to licensed shows and movies. In fact, Sony Pictures has a very lucrative deal, one that spawned “KPop Demon Hunters,” which is set to expire next year. With Warner Bros. library potentially coming online by the end of 2026, will the streamer renew it? And, if not, where would Sony, the only major studio without a streaming destination, sell its Pay 1 wares? (Wait, is that the Walt Disney Company calling?) On the HBO Max side, that WBD property has been the Pay 1 home for A24, with many of the mini-majors’ films killing it in the streamer’s daily top 10 lists. A24’s deal was just renewed. Would Netflix, which licenses older A24 films, finish that deal on its own streamer? And with WB’s gigantic library available, would this be the end of Netflix licensing popular NBCUniversal (“Suits”), Walt Disney Studios (“Grey’s Anatomy”), and Paramount/CBS (“Young Sheldon”) programs? That begs the question…
Who will take advantage of this merger?
It hasn’t even been 24 hours, but in all corners of the 323-213-818, execs from rival companies are figuring out how this merger could benefit them. We’ve already noted how NBCUniversal could potentially pick up a talent like Bloys (assuming he’s not interested in an early retirement). If Netflix pulls Warner Bros. theatrical output from 13-15 movies a year to 6-8, would Disney empower 20th Century Studios to grab that market share? Can the new Paramount put enough films into production fast enough to meet that demand (judging by all the ones in development being killed left and right, no)? Could Tokyo give Sony Pictures a boost to take more risks in the marketplace? Can A24 or NEON take a big leap? And with Paramount and NBCUniversal hungry to compete with an even bigger Netflix/Warner Bros, are those mini-majors and Lionsgate now legit acquisition targets? Could Starz actually find a buyer now? Are AMC networks in play? Ponder, pt. 4.
What will happen to the historic Warner Bros. lot?
Perhaps the biggest relief of Netflix’s deal is that it includes the Warner Bros. lot. The 20th Century Fox lot has been a shell of itself since Disney acquired the studio, essentially just the home for FOX broadcasting, Fox Sports, and filming of...”The Masked Singer.” The Burbank WB lot is substantially bigger, with a legendary town square standing set that has appeared in hundreds of films, TV shows, and commercials. Despite contributing to new architecture in downtown Hollywood (not mad at it), Netflix has never had its own sound stages in Los Angeles (they own in New Mexico and Korea). This may be a game-changer for more LA productions for the studio. It also means, thankfully, that another buyer or the remnants of WBD would not sell it to developers. Granted, there would be massive political and community pushback if anyone even tried to tear down what is a historical landmark, but it could have become very scary, very quickly.
Follow Gregory Ellwood on Bluesky
Follow Gregory Ellwood on Threads
Follow Gregory Ellwood on Instagram
Sign Up For The Breakdown Newsletter
