Daredevil Netflix (& other show) minimates?

[MisterPL]

In all fairness, as a DC property, Gotham represents the tip of a potentially HUGE iceberg. If these boxed sets are successful, it'll go a long way toward keeping DC's attention.

Netflix's Daredevil represents the tip of an iceberg DST already has a license to. It's not a foot in the door. It's not even the icing on the cake. It's the optional cherry that costs a little more to add.

Marvel movies have huge, multi-million-dollar marketing machines driving them across every media outlet imaginable around the globe. Netflix does not. In fact, they're also riding the success of Marvel's household brand name.

So I totally understand from a marketing perspective how the movies are less risky, and I get why they'd go after a DC property as an opportunity to take a superhero show without superheroes and prove that it can work in their product categories. I'm just not sure I understand Chuck's dismissal of Marvel's TV series in general, whether they're on Netflix or ABC.

If what I've seen coming out of The House of Ideas lately is any indication, like it or not, it would appear that publishing is supporting the studio. Comics are looking more and more like the MCU. If the tail's wagging the dog now, DST might want to give more weight to these live-action properties over their comic book counterparts.

[DSTZach]

Gotham isn't a safer bet because it's DC, Gotham's a safer bet because we know people are watching it. But even saying it's a "safer bet" makes it sound like we chose between them, which is not true. Every deal is individual, and has its owns pros and cons. I have never known Chuck to pick one thing over another when he could have both.

And I think minor genre differences aside (crime/vigilante/mystery/supernatural), Arrow and Smallville have as much to do with Gotham as they do Daredevil. Batman and his foes, for the most part, are non-powered characters, like on Arrow (the most-watched show on the CW, averaging 2.7 million viewers.). And the characters on Gotham have no "costumes," like on Smallville (which was renewed 9 times). They're all still inspired by DC superheroes, which is where a large portion of their audience starts from, I'm sure.

Daredevil may have a costume AND powers, but saying that people would be able to identify Daredevil, Foggy Nelson, Karen Page and the Kingpin in a box set of Minimates OVER four Gotham characters has everything to to do with how many people are watching the shows. And more people probably watch Gotham, based on Gotham viewer numbers (and the regular, high-profile publicity for the show) vs. Daredevil estimates. The average American has no idea who Foggy Nelson is. Maybe they don't know who Edward Nygma is, but they're definitely more likely to.

We signed Gotham after 8 million people watched the premiere. If we knew that 8 million people watched Daredevil, that would probably be a good starting point, but the other things I mentioned earlier all play a factor. I'm sure if it made financial sense to expand our Marvel license to Daredevil and SHIELD and Peggy Carter, we would.

(Also, as Mister PL rightly points out, we already make Daredevil and Kingpin Minimates. We did not previously make Bruce Wayne and Catwoman Minimates, until Gotham.)

[hellpop]

I don't know why this has become a "Gotham vs. Daredevil" argument; I don't see how one impacts the other. I can understand why Chuck (or anyone) would be hesitant to latch onto the Netflix model, since it's still so new. But the reaction to Daredevil was very positive, moreso then Gotham. Perhaps, by now, it's tailed off and the moment has passed (which I think would be the downside to the instant gratification of the binge watch model), but I do agree that looking to make Daredevil products around the time Season 2 is set to drop seems like a smart idea. I guess a lot of it depends on the contracts; does DST need to do something separate for each individual show or film, or is it all-encompassing (I don't expect you to answer that, Zach)? If it's the former, I think looking to release a Daredevil/Wilson Fisk two-pack as an exclusive somewhere would be a really smart idea, with maybe a Final Battle set as another offering to offset costs (like the XO/Bloodshot sets).

[DSTZach]

I have been saying all along that it is not Daredevil vs. Gotham. People have been comparing the two, I've just been defending Gotham whole pointing out the issues with Daredevil.

It is all about the deal. Our license is not for everything Marvel, we add movies and animation and TV on a case-by-case basis. Paying more to get the rights to different versions of characters we already have the rights to may not seem like a great idea, especially given the limitations in any Marvel contract, and the aura of mystery around the show's ratings. We know it did well enough to get a second season, but we do not know what that means, or how many will watch the next one. It may have done well globally, but each territory costs extra.

This is all just me talking. Feel free to ASk DSTChuck this stuff, as well.

[Shanester]

Zach, thanks for chiming in on this. I see A LOT of insight in what you have posted and it is something that really interests me about Minimates. I seriously appreciate you shedding light.

[MisterPL]

Okay, so how many people in the U.S. watched Daredevil? I'm very curious, because I do not know.

This is as close as we're going to get to an answer for now.

Keep in mind those statistics are for smart phones, tablets, and computers but not televisions.

[Valo487]

I just don't understand why we're even debating about this, I can understand perhaps before the show came out, although I would imagine the fact that everything Marvel has put out has been successful would speak for itself, but even Agents of SHIELD, which I think would make for boring product, has the numbers to back up pursuing it. And considering the relationship that already exists with Marvel, I can't imagine not at least having a conversation about the Netflix shows when you know there are going to be three more plus a big team up. I can understand if DST wants to wait for the right moment, but Chuck's answer doesn't sit well with me.

Edited June 18, 2015 by Valo487

[DSTZach]

Exactly. They're based on a sampling of 2500 people. I assume globally. I do not know Netflix's US-only viewership.

[hellpop]

Okay, so how many people in the U.S. watched Daredevil? I'm very curious, because I do not know.

This is as close as we're going to get to an answer for now.

Keep in mind those statistics are for smart phones, tablets, and computers but not televisions.

And, of course, we don't know (and may never know) how beneficial these original series are to Netflix. Do people subscribe, or keep a subscription, just for them? Or do they already have a subscription and just check out new stuff when it comes out? It's hard to say, and it's the same argument TV insiders have had about HBO and the other pay channels' original programming for years.

However, if I was a potential licensor, the one thing I'd really be looking at is the conversation around the show. Is the word of mouth positive, and are people talking (by which I mean posting things online) about it? In the case of Daredevil, the answer seems emphatically yes. I'm not saying that I'd base my decision to pursue something on that, but it's a factor to take into account. Daredevil was a much bigger success, and generated a lot more buzz outside of just geek circles, then I anticipated. That at least should rate a merchandising look.

[Valo487]

To me it just seems like a weird line to draw, if we're going to say that we don't know how many people watched Daredevil and whether it would be successful, can't you apply that to almost every movie Marvel makes outside of the big players? We don't know how much money Ant Man will make, we don't know if Black Panther will be successful, Captain Marvel could go either way, Dr. Strange could be too weird for most audiences, where do we draw the line at this line of thinking?

[MisterPL]

Ant-Man seems like more of an unknown quantity than Daredevil. Even though it's tied into the MCU (just like SHIELD and Agent Carter and the Netflix shows), the behind-the-scenes drama is pretty well known among fans (IE - the core consumer base). There's still a lot of skepticism about it. But that's not keeping DST from adding that property to their Marvel portfolio and offering a couple 4-packs long before they know how many people are going to see it in the United States.

[karamazov80]

In defense of Zach though, he never said it was a line being drawn in the sand. In fact, he went out of his way to demonstrate that that would not be the only consideration, and goes one step further as to suggest that this is just informed speculation on his part anyway, since Chuck makes the ultimate decisions. I think it's reasonable to factor in viewership, and to treat a lack of data as a lack of support one way or another to an argument that you should pursue a given license.

DD TV mates would be swell. I would probably buy them, but I'm happy enough with my comic versions that it doesn't bug me much not having them. I won't buy the Gotham-Mates because I think the character designs are boring as sin, and. . .I don't like or watch the show. But lots of other geeks do. And I think the ultimate strategy with a company like DST is always going to be--focus on the geek-side of the collector spectrum of course, but not so far away from the middle that you alienate casual geek fans. And doing Minimates from a network TV show loosely based around a comic character/book just seems like a great idea that fits right into that mindset from that perspective.

[DSTZach]

To me it just seems like a weird line to draw, if we're going to say that we don't know how many people watched Daredevil and whether it would be successful, can't you apply that to almost every movie Marvel makes outside of the big players? We don't know how much money Ant Man will make, we don't know if Black Panther will be successful, Captain Marvel could go either way, Dr. Strange could be too weird for most audiences, where do we draw the line at this line of thinking?

Not knowing if a TV show on Netflix is going to do well is a different beast from knowing whether the next installment of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, a regularly successful, highly promoted franchise playing at a theater near you, is going to do boffo box office. The fact that DD acknowledges the MCU does not put it in the same ballpark.

If it's in question, a major retailer who lets us know in advance that they will want product tied to it would probably swing the pendulum. No major retailer came to us and said "You gotta get the DD license." They did with Ant-Man.

Ant-Man seems like more of an unknown quantity than Daredevil. Even though it's tied into the MCU (just like SHIELD and Agent Carter and the Netflix shows), the behind-the-scenes drama is pretty well known among fans (IE - the core consumer base). There's still a lot of skepticism about it. But that's not keeping DST from adding that property to their Marvel portfolio and offering a couple 4-packs long before they know how many people are going to see it in the United States.

The core consumer base is just that, a core. The core of the Earth is much smaller than the actual Earth. The number of people who know who Edgar Wright is, and that he was once directing Ant-Man is relatively small (compared to those who go see Marvel movies), and the number who still hold that against the film is smaller. I LOVE Edgar Wright. I love all of his films. I love Scott Pilgrim. But not a lot of people saw Scott Pilgrim. I think his Ant-Man could have been great, but I am not concerned about his absence from the project affecting attendance and enjoyment. If GOTG had done poorly, not being directly connected to the Avengers, I could see people being concerned.

[Politician]

The comparison between Gotham and Daredevil are that both shows were coming down the pipeline last year and highly anticipated. DST put its eggs in the Gotham basket because of ratings numbers? That's the safer bet still? Whatever the reason, it's irrelevant because of Chuck's answers on the subject of DD.

How about before DD even being aired though, there was confirmation of Marvel doing multiple shows with multiple characters leading to Defenders? Did Gotham confirm a second season before it aired? Nope. Also don't try and downplay the significance of Daredevil in the MCU, it's HUGE and it means a lot that Marvel has their house in order and can offer fans a richer experience with its heroes.

Also Netflix is NOT a new thing, it is literally setting the standard for how we watch tv shows and movies. Their original shows are watched and talked about almost everywhere. I just think it's funny when all these Marvel Netflix shows are done and it's the Defenders and villains and all sorts of goodness, that DST will have missed the boat. We'll be thinking about that old Gotham show that got cancelled years earlier because WE KNOW that Netflix and Marvel are going to keep going forward. Marvel's tv future is more secure than Gotham by far and with the success of DD it's gonna be a fun ride.

[Valo487]

I suppose then we will have to agree to disagree, I feel like it will be a major missed opportunity if DST does not pursue the Netflix shows as they continue to get bigger. I feel like some of the points made are valid, but I also feel like some of them are retroactively justifying the decision that was made, I don't mean Zach specifically, just the counter-arguments in general. You hear frequently about how movies in theaters are losing money because you can just stay home and watch Netflix for less than the cost of a ticket, but then you hear people say that Netflix is an unproven commodity in terms of its viewership.

I also don't understand this mentality that claims there was doubt whether Daredevil would be successful, maybe it's just the circles I travel in, but I don't recall anyone thinking that DD would not be a quality show and successful. The only concern I had was would we only get the red suit in the last 30 seconds, which was not the case, and the show exceeded every expectation I had, and I've heard nothing but praise for it. Hasbro scheduled their Marvel Legends Daredevil to hit shelves right as the series was debuting, which is not a coincidence, and other licensees jumped onboard and announced DD merchandise right as the show was coming out as well. There are also very strong rumors that DD will be getting more Marvel Legends very soon.

At the end of the day, DST is a business and it's their money to pursue whatever they choose to pursue, but I think it's very shortsighted to not pursue the Netflix shows, and I find it somewhat ironic that as much as the comic base that all this pulls from is taking a backseat to the cinematic versions, when an aspect of that cinematic universe is in demand, there's a very dismissive attitude towards it. I do feel like Chuck would have done himself a favor to phrase his response a different way, but he's also just giving his opinion. It just comes off as dismissive as opposed to keeping an open mind for the future.

It's just a bit disappointing, when Civil War comes out we're going to get wave after wave of movie versions of characters we JUST HAD in AOU, with one or two new additions, but Daredevil will still be absent.

[Politician]

One more thing I have to add and it has to be its own post.

Zach you said that Gotham has a guy who might be Joker and a guy who might be Scarecrow and that they're teasing a lot? Well Daredevil has a guy that is actually Daredevil and a guy that is actually Punisher, in look AND name for that name recognition that retailers love. They're both going to be in costume, and presumably fight each other and it's going to be huge. It's not a knock or anything, just trying to give DD some praise for doing great stuff where as in my opinion, I can't see Gotham being able to follow.

EDIT: Valo, wish I could buy you lunch.

Edited June 18, 2015 by Politician

[MisterPL]

I'm thinking we all need to Ask DST.

[TENIME_art]

To me it just seems like a weird line to draw, if we're going to say that we don't know how many people watched Daredevil and whether it would be successful, can't you apply that to almost every movie Marvel makes outside of the big players? We don't know how much money Ant Man will make, we don't know if Black Panther will be successful, Captain Marvel could go either way, Dr. Strange could be too weird for most audiences, where do we draw the line at this line of thinking?

Guardians of the Galaxy was expected to be Marvel's first flop before it became the highest grossing August movie ever, and Minimates were planned before it even premiered overseas...

[Mnemosis]

I'll echo the sentiment that the REAL irritation here is that Chuck sounded excessively dismissive of the Netflix properties which, frankly, do stand to be better and longer lived as a whole than DC's TV Universe. Flash is great, Arrow's hit or miss, Gotham is mediocre at best, and the two newly slated shows look promising but far from perfect. And that's what almost anyone will tell you Daredevil was - perfect.

We understand he differences between the licenses, we just don't understand how a person/company with faith in Gotham to move product seems to have no such faith in Daredevil. It would be like announcing a toy line for a Discovery Channel has how about dinosaurs but saying "Eh, we're not so sure about this Jurassic World movie"

One more thing I have to add and it has to be its own post.

Zach you said that Gotham has a guy who might be Joker and a guy who might be Scarecrow and that they're teasing a lot? Well Daredevil has a guy that is actually Daredevil and a guy that is actually Punisher, in look AND name for that name recognition that retailers love. They're both going to be in costume, and presumably fight each other and it's going to be huge. It's not a knock or anything, just trying to give DD some praise for doing great stuff where as in my opinion, I can't see Gotham being able to follow.

EDIT: Valo, wish I could buy you lunch.

Do we KNOW Punisher will be in costume? I'd guess he will, if only a tactical vest with a spray painted skull, but do we KNOW? I haven't heard, personally.

[Politician]

Well I mean yeah, it's just black and a skull on the shirt or body armor but I can't imagine them NOT having him wear it at any point. Every store I go to and see superhero related clothing, I always see the Punisher skull on hats, shirts and wallets, workout clothing.

It's without a doubt in the top 5 iconic superhero logos ever, obviously Marvel knows that. I don't think they'd get such a great actor for the role specifically calling him Punisher and not give him the skull, that'd be almost useless.

[stack32]

I'd have to agree that the tone of the response probably prompted most of the reaction. Granted, we sometimes ask for some pretty crazy things, but I think some of us feel pretty frustrated when reasonable requests seem to be treated as though we're suggesting a Moon Knight boxset; especially when DST turns around and announces Howard the Duck.

[MisterPL]

HEY! Howard enjoyed a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo in one of last year's highest grossing films if you stayed for the credits. That and he's got a comic book that's currently selling over 35,000 copies a month!

When Daredevil gets his own top-selling comic and blockbusting post-credits cameo, maybe his TV series will be considered for an exclusive 2-pack. Until then, never say never!

[buttheadsmate]

I've read the recent Howard comics & all I'll say is that once you've loved anything never ever go back . What a load of crap .

As for the Minimate that we're getting .......I'll put him alongside my 'Batroc' & 'Brock Rumlow' minimates . Huey Dewie & Louie .

[Kostisfire]

...we're suggesting a Moon Knight boxset..

Why hold on a second there cowboy. I happen to know for a fact that an MK set would sell like hotcakes! I mean, EVERYONE's asking for it. Right guys?

Right?

*Goes in his corner and curses Disco Dazzler for stealing Mr. Knight's spot...*

HEY! Howard enjoyed a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo in one of last year's highest grossing films if you stayed for the credits. That and he's got a comic book that's currently selling over 35,000 copies a month!

When Daredevil gets his own top-selling comic and blockbusting post-credits cameo, maybe his TV series will be considered for an exclusive 2-pack. Until then, never say never!

I know right? MK's book was one of the best of last year, was selling around the 40k-50k mark for at least the Ellis era, was in every comic site (either in the recommendations, reviews or articles) but he's obviously less well known than a Duck with 2 vols under his belt...

Yeah, he appeared for a few seconds in GotG and he's got a comic that's not setting any fires tbh. This and Disco Dazzler baffle me.

[hellpop]

The lack of comics history in here is stunning. Mirymate, wherever he is, would be pitching a fit. Howard the Duck was a genuine pop culture phenomenon. Granted, this is 35 years ago, but that's more then Moon Knight can say. Or Daredevil, frankly, since that book was never a top seller. Yes, Howard certainly peaked a long time ago, but he's a very important character in Marvel, and comics, history. Probably not ahead of Daredevil, but certainly ahead of Moon Knight.

As for his new comic, I haven't read it yet, but the artist, Joe Quinones, is brilliant.