Should Warner Bros. Fire Kevin Tsujihara?

The question of whether Warner Bros.'s CEO, Kevin Tsujihara, should be fired is a complex and multifaceted one. The decision to delay Justice League and eventually fire Tsujihara has been a topic of considerable debate. This article explores the different viewpoints and evaluates the potential impact of such a decision on the future of the studio.

Problems with Decision-Making

Warner Bros. faced a significant dilemma with Justice League. The report suggesting that the movie was delayed due to a bonus issue raised eyebrows. However, the consequences of delaying such a large production abound:

Multimillion dollar financial risks Harm to contracts with production houses and advertisers Impact on other DC projects and actors' schedules

Delaying Justice League in an attempt to creatively fix the movie might have seemed like a viable option. However, given the significant cost involved, this choice became questionable. The studio might have opted to:

Allow Zack Snyder to continue his vision, facing potential backlash Cancel the movie during production and start fresh, with unknown outcomes

Without a time machine, it's challenging to determine which decision was the best. Each choice had its own set of drawbacks. Cancelling the movie could have resulted in a better final product but at a much higher cost.

Universe-Building and Strategic Goals

Warner Bros. had long-term strategic goals, including building a cohesive DC universe. Justice League was crucial for this vision. The studio likely aimed to creatively adjust the movie during filming to align better with future projects, especially considering the connection to Wonder Woman.

The decision to force a 2-hour runtime was another controversial choice. This arbitrary move could have reflected a rushed and underprepared decision-making process, leading to potential negative consequences for the quality of the final product.

Business Decisions and Risk Management

Business-wise, delaying Justice League and incurring significant additional costs would not have guaranteed success. The risks were enormous, and the potential revenue gains might not have justified them. Thus, keeping Tsujihara in his position allowed the studio to navigate these challenges without immediate recourse to cancel the project.

However, the move to fire Tsujihara suggests that the studio was dissatisfied with the outcome and the management of the project. This decision may have been influenced by public perception and investor confidence.

In conclusion, the decision to fire Kevin Tsujihara is a reflection of the complex and high-stakes nature of the entertainment industry. While the studio faced significant challenges, the decision to fire Tsujihara is a pots-of-questions issue that warrants further scrutiny and deeper analysis.