A major change is coming to DC Studios as James Gunn prepares to step down from his leadership role and return his focus to filmmaking.
The move raises questions about what happens when a major studio changes leaders, especially when that studio handles some of the world’s most recognizable superheroes.
Gregg Easterbrook, assistant professor of professional practice in the department of film, television and digital media, brings more than 25 years of experience working in the film and television industry. His career includes work with major studios and entertainment companies, including Marvel and Disney.
Easterbrook explains what a leadership change like this can mean behind the scenes, how running a studio differs from making movies and what new leadership could mean for the future of DC.
What does a leadership change this big mean for a studio like DC and the projects already in production?
Projects already in production will be largely unaffected, though how they are ultimately distributed and marketed will get tweaked. A lot of Gunn’s creative vision for DC characters and story arcs will likely still inhabit this next wave of productions in some form, seeping out through the specific characters and films, especially those projects he and Peter Safran, former co-CEO of DC Studios, are directly still connected with.
That is primarily because Gunn’s creative filmmaking is a big part of what elevated Marvel’s success, and what he had done with DC seemed to be succeeding with the fan base and critics.
It will reflect David Ellison’s, Skydance founder and CEO, “tighter ship” priorities following the acquisition of Warner Bros. and DC Studios.
What challenges come with balancing a filmmaker’s creative vision with the business side of running a major franchise?
Well, that is the central dilemma of filmmaking, right? I mean, it’s no small achievement to make a film of any size, with artistic integrity, that’s also an entertaining commercial success. You can’t long sustain either without the other, and it’s pretty rare to find anybody who fully possesses both skill sets.
Personally, I think storytelling has to be the most important, and Gunn seems relieved to be able to focus primarily on that, in which he is obviously extraordinarily talented.
With a longtime Marvel executive taking over DC, what could Jeremy Latcham bring from Marvel’s approach to building connected films and television?
I sense that tapping Latcham’s managerial and strategic decision-making is what this is primarily about.
James had expressed publicly that he did not enjoy that part of the job of running DC, and I suspect that was clear in the C-suite.
I think locking down solid management talent within a larger Skydance conglomerate was important to Ellison, and that he could outsource specific creative projects on a per-project basis.
How different are the skills needed to create films versus oversee an entire studio?
I tell my students that every Walt needs a Roy.
It is a reference to Walt Disney and his lesser-known brother, Roy. Walt was a creative genius, capable of crafting visions of characters, places and stories out of thin air. But he lacked the skill set to implement everything he could dream of.
Roy, however, was a natural logistical genius, and we would not have the vast creative world that is Disney today without Roy’s ability and drive to make it happen. Great filmmaking requires both sets of skills, and I want my students to lean into developing the areas where they are less capable, not just revel in their strengths.