Classics Wiki

Disney vs. Warner Bros. (Marvel and Star Wars vs. DC, Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network) founders best of known adventure characters for crossover. 

The Greatest Time is the Heroes and Villains. 

If a Roger Rabbit non-popular characters Disney and Warner Bros classic stars.

October 30th 2012 - Disney buys Star Wars owned by Lucasfilm for $4.06 billion. The end of Star Wars trilogy at the 20th Century Fox studios Marilyn Monroe, Simpsons, Futurama, Family Guy, American Dad, Cleveland Show, Ice Age, X-Men, Rio and Anya cries is the RIP "Star Wars" Trilogy (1977-2012), but now is the Disney's the new " Star Wars " trilogy and is perhaps such as Mickey Mouse meets Darth Vader.

Disney, Pixar, Warner Bros, DC, Marvel, MGM and Hanna-Barbera is the greatest including featured characters: Snow White, Woody, Buzz Lightyear, Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Porky Pig, Elmer Fudd, Superman, Batman, Hulk, Spider-Man, Tom and Jerry, Wolf (Tex Avery), Red (Tex Avery), Droopy (Tex Avery) and The Flintstones. 

Disney, Pixar, Warner Bros, DC, Marvel, MGM and Hanna-Barbera is the greatest including supporting characters: Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Goofy, Pluto, Winnie the Pooh, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Ariel, Aladdin, Jasmine, Belle, Elsa, Simba, Pinocchio, Tinker Bell, Disney movie characters, Disney TV show characters, Nemo, Incredibles, Sulley, Mike, Pixar characters, Wile E. Coyote, Road Runner, Taz, Tweety, Sylvester, Granny, Yosemite Sam, Foghorn Leghorn, Pepé Le Pew, Speedy Gonzales, Marvin the Martian, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Flash, Hawkman, Hawkgirl, Aquaman, Martian Manhunter, Justice League, Justice Society, Plastic Man, Captain Marvel (Shazam), Teen Titans, Easy Company, The Outsiders, Wolverine, X-Men, Fantastic Four, Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Avengers, Marvel charcters, Spike and Tyke, Scooby-Doo, Jetsons, Yogi Bear, Top Cat and Hanna-Barbera characters.

Disney vs. Warner Bros.[]

“Warner Brothers Gang” (2015). Seriolithograph in color on paper.

Animation art is beloved around the world, but, if we’re being honest, it’s also underappreciated.

How is that possible? How can it be adored and taken for granted at the same time?

It’s easy to see how much people love animation. Animated films are hugely popular worldwide. Disney and Warner Bros. the creators of Snow White and Bugs Bunny, and then Disney and Warner Bros. characters, They’re often the first movies we fall in love with as children, introducing us to iconic characters like Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny, and so many more.

However, even though those movies and cartoons hold a special place in our hearts, we often overlook the sheer artistry and technical skill that goes into creating animation. Those animated classics aren’t just artistic masterpieces when they’re viewed as a whole. Each animated film is made up of thousands of individual masterpieces, flicking by at 24 frames a second.

“Dink, the Little Dinosaur: Together” (1989). Hand painted production cel with color background.

It’s for those reasons—and many others—why Park West Gallery is proud to offer an impressive collection of animation art.

Initially, Park West offered unique production cels from Warner Brothers, Disney, Hanna-Barbera, and other studios. We later eventually expanded our offerings to include art from most major animation studios and works by renowned animation artists. These works can take a variety of forms, including production cels, sericels, and hand-painted limited edition cels, among others.

“Snow White & Doc” (1990). Sericel.

But, even though everyone loves animation, Park West wants to make sure our collectors recognize the importance of animation art too.

Along with jazz and the Broadway musical, animation is one of the few uniquely American art forms. Animation, as we know it today, was largely created in those early studios in Hollywood, and it has since become a critical component of art, entertainment, culture, and business. There is nothing else like it on Earth.

Animation also exists as a truly artist-driven medium. Some of the greatest artists of the past hundred years have either worked in animation or have been inspired by animation art.

Still don’t believe us? Here are two examples that will give you an idea of just how influential animation has been in the world of contemporary art:


Legendary Spanish artist Salvador Dalí is remembered as one of the innovators of Surrealism, but, when he first came to the United States, he found a kindred spirit in one of the founding fathers of animation.

In 1937, in a letter to André Breton, author of the Surrealist manifesto, Dalí wrote, “I have come to Hollywood and am in contact with three great American Surrealists—the Marx Brothers, Cecil B. DeMille, and Walt Disney.”

If anyone doubts the validity of animation as an art form, keep in mind that Dalí—one of the most famous fine artists of the 20th century—considered Disney’s animation to be on par with his own artistic endeavors.

Disney admired Dalí’s work too and, after meeting at a Hollywood party in 1944, they decided to collaborate on a project.

The partnership between Dalí and Disney resulted in the short animated film “Destino.” Dalí, along with famous animator John Hench, created 22 paintings and over 135 storyboards, drawings, and sketches for the project, calling it “a magical exposition on the problem of life in the labyrinth of time.”

“Destino #81” (2007), Serigraph in color on wove paper.

The project was unfortunately halted before production was finished and languished in the Disney vaults for years until Roy E. Disney, Walt’s nephew, finally resumed production in 1999. “Destino” was released in 2003, garnering numerous awards and an Academy Award nomination.

The art Dalí created for “Destino” is breathtaking. Park West is now offering etchings, lithographs, and serigraphs from Dalí’s original art for “Destino”—both his pre-production art and art capturing quintessential moments from the film.

Dalí’s paintings and sketches from “Destino” have toured museums and galleries all around the world, and they continue to tour to this day.

They have been featured in the exhibitions “Dalí: Painting and Film” at New York’s Museum of Modern Art and “Disney and Dalí: Architects of the Animation” at the Salvador Dalí Museum in St. Petersburg, Florida.

When Dali’s original “Destino” art is not on display, it is returned to Walt Disney Studio’s Animation Research Library (ARL). The ARL is the largest repository of artwork currently in existence, comprised of over 65 million original works.


Patrick Guyton is one of the most exciting young artists working today. His work weaves together a host of influences—Japanese gold-leafing, classic Flemish glazing techniques—but one of the biggest influences on his artistic style is his background in animation.

He started as a commercial artist, but, in 1997, Guyton jumped at the opportunity to work as a background painter for animation legend Chuck Jones.

Even if you’re not familiar with his name, chances are, you’re familiar with Jones’ work. He’s responsible for some of the most famous Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck cartoons of all time. He’s a giant, both in animation and in modern popular culture. Hollywood icons like George Lucas and Steven Spielberg frequently cite Jones as an inspiration.

But Chuck Jones might be most famous for creating scores of unforgettable animated characters, such as the Road Runner, Wile E. Coyote, Elmer Fudd, Pepé Le Pew, Marvin the Martian, Michigan J. Frog, and so many more.

“Duck Dodgers” (2016). Sericel with color background.

Throughout his career, Jones received eight Oscar nominations, won three Oscars, and was presented an honorary Academy Award in 1996 for his distinguished career.

It’s easy to see how working with Jones would be a dream come true for a young artist like Guyton.

Guyton later went on to work with other animation legends, including Robert McKimson Jr.—son of acclaimed animator Robert “Bob” McKimson—and Maurice Noble, the celebrated animation background artist who worked on Disney’s “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs,” “Bambi,” “Dumbo,” and “Pinocchio.”

This experience working in animation helped shape Guyton’s personal artistic style. By painting animation celluloids, Guyton gained invaluable first-hand knowledge of how to effectively use negative space, layering, and minimalism.

“Bugs Bunny,” Tom Ray. Acrylic painting on canvas.

Guyton eventually left the animation industry to begin his career as a fine artist, but he will never forget the lessons he learned from some of animation’s greatest Golden Age geniuses.

“They are underappreciated, probably because they did cartoons, but they’re legends nonetheless, and I believe in those years I learned more than what art school could’ve ever shown me,” Guyton says.

As we mentioned, those are just two of many examples of animation’s influence on contemporary art—this doesn’t even get into animation’s impact as its own unique art form.

The background art, design artwork, hand-painted production cels, not to mention the final animation—every aspect of the production of an animated film is a work of art, in and of itself.

“Charlie and Snoopy’s Ride” (2006), Etching in color on wove paper.

It’s also important to note that the world of animation is changing. Virtually every major animated film today is created via a computer, so that iconic background and cel art simply doesn’t exist anymore.

The next time you’re viewing a classic Disney movie or revisiting a favorite cartoon from your childhood—marveling at the perfect timing of a Chuck Jones gag or a brilliant background by James Coleman—take a moment to appreciate the artistry behind what you’re watching. You might not be able to see the technical virtuosity in each and every frame, but you can definitely tell that it was created by artists who love what they do.

Warner Bros. Characters are not necessarily more popular than Disney characters - Marvel starring Hulk and Spider-Man and DC starring Superman and Batman are probably the most universally known superheroes, but Mickey Mouse Clubhouse has introduced a whole new generation to the Mouse and his friends. Mickey is far more recognized than Bugs Bunny and the Looney Tunes these days.

What after from Disney and Warner Bros. includes Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck, my both superheroes Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman and Spider-Man.

That said, the key really is that it isn’t the animated characters that make the money. For both companies, it is the Media Networks (television) that brings in the revenue. And the Turner/HBO/WB networks just don’t match up well to the ABC/ESPN/Disney networks. It’s a little hard to do a direct comparison due to the way each company breaks out their businesses, but looking at Disney’s Quarterly statement for Q3FY17, ( the Media Networks division brought in nearly $6B. Looking at Warner Bros statement for their Q2 (which is a similar time period - Earnings Releases & Related Materials) their entire revenue (everything, all in) was $7.3B, If you only count Disney’s Media Networks and studios, you are at $8.2B. Which is a lot closer than if you add in another $5B for Parks and Resorts, and $1B for Consumer Products & Interactive Media. Basically, Disney right now is doing better at the things they are both doing, and has their fingers in some pies that WB does - particularly the Parks and Resorts side of things that gives them much higher revenues.

I really can’t speak to how popular the cartoon characters are, but the two companies are more than just those cartoon characters nowadays. Disney owns Marvel Comics and Star Wars, while Warner Bros. has DC Comics plus cable services and whatever.

I also don’t know what each company earns.

Yesterday's news about the production company behind "The Dark Knight" and "Man of Steel" movies moving to Universal got some theme park fans dreaming about the DC comic characters also making the move.

Keep dreaming. As I explained yesterday, Legendary Pictures' move does nothing to change the ownership of those icons, which remain the property of Warner Bros. Let's take this opportunity to look at exactly who owns what when it comes to the legal rights to use some of the world's most popular comic characters in theme parks.

DC Comics

(e.g. Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman)

Who owns the characters? Warner Bros.

Who owns the rights to use those characters in theme parks? Six Flags

Warner Bros. used to own the Six Flags theme parks, which corporate parent Time Warner sold to Premier Parks in 1998. As part of that deal, Time Warner also sold Premier (which then renamed itself "Six Flags") the long-term theme park rights to its comic and cartoon characters, including Wonder Woman, Batman, Superman and Bugs Bunny. Warner Bros. and DC Comics the three official characters including Superman, Batman and Bugs Bunny.

Six Flags pays an annual royalty to Warner Bros. to continue using those characters, and must also obtain approval from Warner Bros. for each use of its characters. According to Six Flags' annual report, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, in 2011 (the latest year for which Six Flags has disclosed the figure), Six Flags paid Warner Bros. $3.3 million for its DC ad Looney Tunes license, in addition to an unspecified amount representing 12 percent of the in-park sales of merchandise using those characters.

Want to read the legalese of the deal? Here it is:

"We have the exclusive right on a long-term basis to theme park usage of the Warner Bros. and DC Comics animated characters throughout the United States (except for the Las Vegas metropolitan area), Canada, Mexico and certain other countries. In particular, our license agreements entitle us to use, subject to customary approval rights of Warner Bros. and, in limited circumstances, approval rights of certain third parties, all animated, cartoon and comic book characters that Warner Bros. and DC Comics have the right to license, including Wonder Woman, Batman, Superman, Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Tweety Bird and Yosemite Sam, and include the right to sell merchandise using the characters. In addition, certain Hanna-Barbera characters including Yogi Bear, Scooby-Doo and The Flintstones are available for our use at certain of our theme parks. In addition to annual license fees, we are required to pay a royalty fee on merchandise manufactured by or for us and sold that uses the licensed characters. Warner Bros. and Hanna-Barbera have the right to terminate their license agreements under certain circumstances, including if any persons involved in the movie or television industries obtain control of us or, in the case of Warner Bros., upon a default under the Subordinated Indemnity Agreement."

Hey, there's actually interesting stuff in there. Most interesting, Warner Bros. has some ways to get out of the deal. Presumably, as in any contract, if Six Flags were to breach the contract by not paying its royalty or not obtaining or adhering to Warner Bros.' approval for use of the characters, Warner Bros. could terminate the deal. But the language above explicitly mentions two other ways that Warner Bros. could pull the license.

The complicated one has to do with what's called "the Subordinated Indemnity Agreement." That's a section of the contract under which Time Warner sold the parks to Premier that obligates Premier to spend a minimum annual amount improving the original Six Flags parks and to make certain payments to Time Warner for the next 15 years. If Six Flags defaults under those terms, it loses the DC and Looney Tunes rights (among a bunch of other penalties). But given that Six Flags kept spending enough money on its parks and making its payments to avoid default while it went through bankruptcy, it's hard to imagine that Six Flags would default on that deal now, given the much stronger financial position the chain now enjoys. (As of today, Six Flags has a market capitalization of $3.5 billion.)

But it's Warner Bros.' other way out of the deal that most affects Six Flags' future. Six Flags would lose the rights to use the DC and Looney Tunes characters if the amusement park chain were to be acquired by any other business in the movie or TV business.

Warner Bros. and DC Comics including Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman, from the studios cartoons and comic books from Time Warner.

In other words, Disney or Universal.

Warner Bros. doesn't want the theme park rights to its characters falling into the hands of a studio competitor without its approval. As Six Flags' annual report states, "This could deter certain parties from seeking to acquire us." If Disney or Universal wanted to buy Six Flags as an end run to get the theme park rights to Batman and Bugs, they couldn't do it. All they'd end up with would be a bunch of freshly unnamed, unthemed roller coasters and flat rides. That's a pretty substantial "poison pill" against a takeover, given that Disney and Universal are the number-one and number-three largest theme park operators in the world, by annual park attendance.

The DC/Looney Tunes license is "long term," and not "in perpetuity," according to Six Flags' legal documents. So if Warner Bros. wanted to regain control of these theme park rights, perhaps to sell them to another company, the value of that buyout presumably would be diminishing over time, as we approach the year in which the license deal would expire anyway. (I've not found a public document that states when that happens, though other terms and obligations between Warner Bros. and Six Flags expire in 2027 and 2028.)

Until that does happen, Six Flags owns these rights.


(e.g. Spider-Man, Hulk, X-Men, Fantastic Four and other Marvel superheroes and supervillains characters)

Who owns the characters? Disney

Who owns the rights to use those characters in theme parks? In Japan and the United States east of the Mississippi: Universal. Elsewhere in the world: Disney

Disney bought Marvel Comics in 2009 for $4 billion. But years before, Marvel had sold the theme park rights to its characters to Universal Studios. Two years before Disney bought Marvel, Universal opted not to renew those theme park rights for the western half of the United States, and the Marvel characters left Universal Studios Hollywood in at the end of 2007.

Universal retained the rights for the eastern United States, where it had built Marvel Super Hero Island in its Islands of Adventure theme park in Orlando, as well as for Japan, where Universal's Japanese development partner had built a clone of IOA's Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man ride in Osaka's Universal Studios Japan. (I've not found any public documents that reveal what Universal is paying Disney, or paid Marvel, for these rights.) The theme park rights for Japan are under a long-term deal, said to last into the 2020s, while the Orlando rights are in perpetuity, meaning that Disney never will be able to secure the rights to use its Marvel characters in Walt Disney World's theme parks until it can convince Universal to give up those rights.

And in the business world, "convince" means to write a very large check or to fork over other capital assets that Universal would want more than to continue to be able to run Marvel Super Hero Island.

Disney has the rights to bring Marvel characters to Disneyland, Hong Kong Disneyland and Disneyland Paris (or to any other company's theme parks outside the eastern US or Japan), but it can't do anything with those characters inside theme parks in the eastern US or Japan. That's why the Walt Disney World monorail wraps promoting Marvel movies had to stay on the Magic Kingdom line. The Epcot monorail line goes into that park, so if a Marvel character were depicted on those trains, Disney would be in breach of contract with Universal, and liable in what could be a nasty, expensive lawsuit.

So unless you hear about another deal coming, don't get too caught up daydreaming about a Gotham Island at Universal or an Avengers ride at Disney's Hollywood Studios. Absent any making someone else an offer they can't refuse, the DC characters will remain in the Six Flags theme parks, and the Marvel characters at Universal Orlando, for years to come.

Well then... your just a party pooper. thank you for clearing all that up. The owning rights in this day and age can be a bit confusing at times. I do have a question though... Could Universal just outbid Six Flags for the theme park rights? I mean lets look at the big picture, Universal has deeper pockets than Six Flags could ever dream of nice.

Robert Niles writes: "The Epcot monorail line does into that park, so if a Marvel character were depicted on those trains, Disney would be in breach of contract with Universal, and liable in what could be a nasty, expensive lawsuit."

It's not up for bid, though. Six Flags has a contract. Universal would need to offer Warner Bros. so much more than $3.3 million/year that Warner Bros. would in turn be inspired to make Six Flags an offer to buy out those rights that would be large enough that Six Flags would decide to accept. (That would be Universal paying Warner Bros. to pay Six Flags.) And Six Flags would have every right to say no, just as Universal would have every right to say no to Disney on the Marvel characters.

The theme parks Disney and Warner Bros. cartoons, computer-animation, epic space opera and comics characters including Snow White, Woody, Buzz Lightyear, Spider-Man, Darth Vader, Bugs Bunny, Tom and Jerry, The Flintstones, Superman and Batman.

Because they aren’t. Bugs Bunny is mostly a logo now, while Disney have a much larger body of characters and stories to draw from. We don’t see a lot around the classic characters like Mickey and Donald anymore, but what we do see from Disney is them leveraging film characters like the Disney princesses, and these characters are far more popular now than the Looney Tunes, who haven’t really had a successful outing since the 50’s.

Actually, they are not. I saw a survey a few years ago (I’ll try to find it and post it here) that showed that the recognition of Bugs Bunny and his lot has waned a lot with the younger generations. I’m not really sure why, since I don’t really see Mickey or Bugs anywhere nowadays and Looney Tunes was really big in the ’90s but for whatever reason…whether it’s the availability of the classic cartoons or the “magic” (prevalence and/or fandom) of Disney; your child is much more likely to recgnise Mickey than Bugs. I know that a lot of the old Looney Tunes cartoons have been pulled for political correctness (violence and racism) but, other than that, I’m not sure…

Edit: I couldn’t find whatever poll or report I saw; I also think the stats I saw included the international market as well which may be a factor… I did find this which states that 34% of Americans can’t recognise Bugs Bunny…but I can’t follow the source, Shed a Tear: 34 Percent of Americans Don't Know Bugs Bunny.

Before behind characters such as Mickey Mouse, Mario, Sonic the Hedgehog, Superman, Batman, Bugs Bunny, Spider-Man, Kool-Aid Man, Ronald McDonald, Jollibee, Colonel Sanders, Adolf Hitler, Cereal Mascots, Pac-Man, Mega Man, Santa Claus, M&M's, Kermit the Frog, The Cat in the Hat, Darth Vader, Donald Trump, Marilyn Monroe, Angry Birds, Minions, Woody Woodpecker, Fred Flintstone and SpongeBob SquarePants.

If the storytelling goes downhill, then the MCU will fall. “Wokeness” seems to erect artificial barriers to good storytelling. For example, look at the Charlie’s Angels movie. All the women are Mary Sues and can all do just about everything. All the men are awful and easy for the women to beat. The old white guy turns out to be the villain and this surprises no one. The movie tanked and was deservedly mocked.

“Batwoman” is another recent cringeworthy example. Good storytelling takes a back seat to woke button-pushing, and it is one of the lowest rated things in the DC realm.

Having said all this, there are many macho-crap films, stuff as far from “woke” as possible, out there that suck as badly as Batwoman. They feature one-dimensional, steroid-jacked heroes and hot women posing merely damsels in distress. I have just never heard anyone insist that those examples of film-making are great. Not in the way people insist that Last Jedi or Rise of Skywalker is great storytelling when the plot holes in those films are gaping and their characters demonstrably less realistic.

The best of the older, cheesy action films didn’t suffer from macho or woke posturing. Commando didn’t take itself very seriously, but neither of the females comes across as a fearful damsel-y character, but rather tough characters with courage. Rae-Dawn Chong actually uses a rocket launcher to free Schwarzenegger from a paddy wagon. But if Chong was shown beating all these military guys up with Arnold sitting there cheering her on that would have ruined the story. I feel like there are a bunch of woke fans that want that, i.e., ruin the story for the sake of a narrative that shows that men need to take a back seat to women, not that men and women can work together, using different talents, to beat the bad guys. “Edge of Tomorrow” is a good example of a more recent example of this, along with the first “Avengers” film of course.

“Falcon and the Winter Soldier” is a good example of the latest MCU project which was not sure what it wanted to be. Quirky action romp or preachy geopolitical / racial statement? Fortunately, the great action scenes provided enough cover for fans like me to ignore the cringe-worthy monologuing and confusion about who really is the “bad guy”. But here’s the thing: I’m a hardcore comic movie fan. If the MCU takes the wrong message from its decent ratings and injects more statement and less fun into their products, they are going to lose a lot of audience. You have got to get normal people to see your movies. If you are just able to count people like me coming through to door then woke or not, you’ll go broke.

Future State Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Justice League details officially revealed by DC

Mascots united[]

This week’s Drunk Cartoon from Bob Eckstein brings us the Oddburgercouple.:

(#1) The Burger King and Ronald McDonald share a moment of post-coital bliss

Two creepy mascots for competing burger behemoths seize a moment of forbidden love — Romeo coupling with Julio, Tony with Mario — and share an after-cliché.

“Why does something so wrong feel so right” finds its true home in sweaty romance lit, as here:

(#2) The dad: “Why does something so wrong feel so right? And would this mean, I lose my daughter forever?” (Goodreads site)

The mascots:

(#3) Who is that masked man?

The Burger King was retired in 2011, but was, alas, revived for appearances in 2015 and 2017.

(#4) The big astonished eyes, the manic smile, the hair in flames

Clearly they deserve each other. May they be locked in an embrace forever, in endless love. Then they’d be out of our way.

(It’s probably a sign of the times that a coupling between Burger King and McDonald’s is way more shocking than two male celebrities doing it. Some taboos should never be violated, the walls of commerce should ever be unscaled.)

Companies locked in competitions all have logos, but only a few have animate mascots that you could imagine screwing each other. That moment of fantasy is one of the pleasures of Bob’s cartoon.

But even logos can be indissolubly united, as in this Micrapple logo:

(#5) Applesoft would also work, but it’s been taken for another purpose, and anyway, the crap in Micrapple is hard to beat

The amount of business competition that resolves itself into just two big rivals facing off against one another (with other, smaller, competitors serving local or specialized audiences) is astounding. From an assortment of sites on great business rivalries, this list of reasonably recent pairings:

In some types of businesses, big rivals tend to avoid direct competition by filling somewhat different niches: big supermarkets and clothing stores, in particular, tend to seek out different sorts of customers. When this doesn’t happen, the products or services that companies offer are often hard to distinguish on objective grounds, and the competition can become primarily a matter of marketing strategies — still a competition, but of another sort, in which slogans, music, logos, and mascots play significant roles.

In this world, we can be amused by the coupling of the Ronald McDonald (representing McDonald's) with The Burger King (representing Burger King), or of Darth Vader (representing Star Wars) - or maybe a two-way of Snow White (representing Disney) with Bugs Bunny (representing Warner Bros.) — or maybe a three-way of Spider-Man (representing Marvel) with Superman and Batman (representing DC) - or maybe a but way of SpongeBob SquarePants (representing Nickelodeon), Mario (representing Nintendo), Sonic the Hedgehog (representing Sega), Mega Man (representing Capcom), Pac-Man (representing Namco), Fred Flintstone (representing Hanna-Barbera), Kermit the Frog (representing Jim Henson), The Cat in the Hat (representing Dr. Seuss), Santa Claus (representing Christmas), Woody and Buzz Lightyear (representing Pixar), Marilyn Monroe (representing 20th Century Fox) and Rocky and Bullwinkle (representing Jay Ward).

Share this:[]

The Walt Disney Company made its mark in 1928 when it introduced the iconic character who would become its symbol/mascot. Micky Mouse debuted in the short film Steamboat Willie in 1928. Throughout the 1930s and into the 40s, Disney established itself as the dominant masters of cinematic animation. Other popular characters like Donald Duck, Minnie Mouse, Goofy and Pluto, among others, appeared to enthrall kids and amuse adults. The animated shorts were so successful the company started to make longer films. No one could compete with Disney in the genre of animation. Walt Disney was riding high, with no competition.

Warner Brothers changed all that! They started their animation department in 1930 in an attempt to duplicate the success Disney was having. They began with their “Merry Melodies” shorts, which were cartoons made to promote their music (They had acquired four music publishing companies). However, they didn’t hit their stride until the mid-late 1930s when they initiated their more satiric, rough-and-tumble style that would become known as the “Looney Tunes”. (Alternately spelled “Looney Toons”.) Porky Pig was the first of the famous Looney Tunes characters to debut in 1935. He was followed by others, such as Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Elmer Fudd, Sylvester & Tweety, Yosemite Sam and many others, most notably the most popular “Toon” of them all, Bugs Bunny who debuted in 1940.

Throughout the 1940s and into the 50s, Disney’s roster of characters competed with the WBs Looney Tunes for animated supremacy. The competition was far less one-sided back then than it is today. Unlike the current situation with the superhero films, Warner Bros was able to find the niche that the public wanted and overtook Disney, becoming more popular than the House of Mouse. Even today, decades later, Bugs and the Looney Toons win in almost every poll when pitted against Mickey and company.

How did the upstart Warner Bros animated characters overtake Disney in popularity? Ironically, they did it by using the same method which is failing them today…They went edgier! If you look at the old Looney Tunes cartoons, they were hyper-violent; used occasional adult humor and even subtle innuendo; and were very non-PC.  Their take-no-prisoners style of anarchy was a marked contrast from Disney.

Although some of the early Mickey Mouse cartoons had the same sort wild energy that Looney Tunes had, Disney soon settled into a more innocent, wholesome style. Their characters were more sympathetic and usually were the victims of circumstance. What people liked about Bugs Bunny was that he was not sweet and sympathetic…he was a bad boy! He was a mischievous prankster who enjoyed inflicting his brand of vengeance on Elmer Fudd or Yosemite Sam or anyone else who got on his bad side. In his own words, “Ain’t I a stinker!”

New characters kept popping up, such Roadrunner and the Coyote or Foghorn Leghorn.  Viewers loved to watch the Coyote getting repeatedly crushed by boulders and falling off cliffs in his unsuccessful efforts to catch and eat the roadrunner. The more overtly violent the WB got, the more fans oved it. Characters like Speedy Gonzales may have been overtly racist, but the WB was unapologetic and kept the non-PC humor coming. Pepe Le Pew was practically an attempted rapist.

Warner Bros continued to be the fan favorite in short animation (a different genre from feature films) until the age of television ended the long-time trend of showing short cartoons before theatrical films. Once TV made cinematic shorts obsolete, Warner Bros ended their lucrative Looney Tunes series and reintroduced the characters to a new generation of kids in the 1960s (including myself, by the way) when the Looney Tunes shorts were rerun as weekly animated TV shows.

As for Disney, they also ended their production of short films and focused on full length theatrical movies, most of which were live action at this point. (Disney went through a long slump in animation until 1989 when The Little Mermaid jump-started a new era of Disney domination at the box office.) The Looney Tunes conquered a new medium in the 60s/70s; whereas Mickey, Donald, Goofy and the others were relegated to corporate symbols. At the end of the day, Warner Bros and the Looney Tunes won the first round of the feud with Disney. Now we come to Round Two and the WB is not doing nearly as well this time. Warner Bros actually had the early head start in the superhero film genre when it began making the Superman movies with Christopher Reeve in the late 70s-early 80s, and the Batman movies with Michal Keaton/Val Kilmer/George Clooney in the late 80s-early 90s.  However, the WB hit a snag when both those franchises fizzled out due to bad sequels (Superman 4: The Quest for Peace and Batman & Robin). They took a pause in their comic adaptions.

This left the door open for another studio to muscle in and become the new king of comic book adaptations. Fox and Sony both tried to fill the gap but it was when Disney bought Marvel and began the ambitious MCU that they became the reigning lords of super hero cinema. The WB has been playing catch-up ever since. Their recent efforts to catch up have not been overly successful.

Why is the formula that helped the WB defeat Disney in years past failing them now? Why are they getting bad reviews? Why did Man of Steel and Dawn of Justice underperform?  Why is the ‘dark and edgy’ strategy backfiring on WB? Why can’t Spider-Man do what Mickey did and Superman and Batman do what Bugs did? But it's why can't Spider-Man and Marvel superheroes do what did Mickey did and Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman do what Bugs and Daffy did? But it's why can't your Spider-Man, Hulk, X-Men, Fantastic Four and Marvel heroes from Mickey Mouse for Disney and Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman from Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck for Warner Bros.

Warner Bros and Disney own two biggest comic-book publishers DC and Marvel, respectively. While in comics, the competition is breakneck, in films based on the same characters Marvel has taken a lead. We should not discount Warner Bros and DC as they have given us the greatest superhero film in history, The Dark Knight. They are also the pioneer of the superhero movie genre as Richard Donner directed 1978’s Superman, the first modern superhero film.

The current rivalry between Marvel and DC is only the latest chapter in the battle between the two of the most iconic studios, Warner Bros and Disney. This cat-and-mouse game goes back almost 100 years. To put current DC vs Marvel in context, let us talk in brief about how it all began. Interestingly, both the studios were founded in 1923 and the first phase of their rivalry began in 1930s. Disney won it hands down with their Mickey Mouse family of characters like Mickey Mouse himself, Minnie Mouse, Donald Duck, and so on. Warner Bros, while late to the game, quickly occupied the top spot in 1940s and 1950s and demolished the competition. The reason was Looney Tunes characters. They may have arrived late in the game but gained unprecedented popularity, especially Bugs Bunny. Bugs Bunny became so popular that it became the official mascot of Warner Bros, the Disney equivalent of Mickey Mouse.

Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck is three of the most popular cartoon characters from two studios Disney and Warner Bros. in history.

Both Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny survive to this day, but Bugs Bunny has clearly been more successful and famous. The reason? Bugs Bunny and other Looney Tunes characters were different from what Mickey Mouse’s audience was used to. While Disney’s cartoon characters were childlike, innocent and nice, Looney Tunes were bad boys, prone to roguery. Bugs Bunny, for example, was a hero and villain in himself. He is the lead character of his cartoon shorts and films, and yet he does things that typically a villain would do. He plays mischievous pranks, indulges in dark humour, and is not too averse to violence. Children and adults alike loved avant-garde style of Looney Tunes. It does not mean that Disney and Mickey Mouse were doomed. They were merely sidelined, and were biding their time.

Disney and Warner Bros. companies two publishers DC and Marvel, but your Disney and WB characters such as Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, Snow White, Woody, Buzz Lightyear and Bugs Bunny.

Disney, Marvel, Warner Bros. and DC buy owns. Disney including Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck, Warner Bros. including Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck, DC Comics including Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman, and Marvel Comics including Spider-Man, Hulk and Wolverine.

Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight is considered as the best superhero movie ever made.

Coming back to superheroes, Superman starring Christopher Reeve was the first modern superhero film as mentioned above. Warner Bros and DC maintained their supremacy in superhero movies even after severely panned Batman films directed by Joel Schumacher and reinforced their top spot with Christopher Nolan’s acclaimed The Dark Knight trilogy. Marvel had lost the rights to many of their characters, and their fortunes were in slump. Then began Marvel Cinematic Universe which would go on to become history. Today, Disney-owned MCU is the biggest superhero franchise and its future looks bright. In response to it, Warner Bros and DC created their own DC Extended Universe with Man of Steel, but their success has been mixed at best. The first big DCEU film, Justice League, received negative reviews and only Wonder Woman can be called an outright success, both commercial and critical.

1978’s Superman starring Christopher Reeve was the first modern superhero film.

The funny thing is, Warner Bros tried the same thing with their DCEU that they had tried with Looney Tunes. They made their characters more palatable to adult audiences with dark tones and tried to be avant-garde again. This time, though, it did not work. This is simply because while characters like Bugs Bunny were original characters and built to be ‘bad boys’, Superman and Batman had precedents and previous adaptations, Respectively had as Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman built to be do. Superman, for example, was a cheerful and optimistic superhero. In fact, he embodies the entire superhero genre because of looking at things with a smile. He had a precedence with Richard Donner’s classic film. But Henry Cavill’s Superman in DCEU was hardly distinguishable from Ben Affleck’s Batman. Gone were the smile and the good cheer. Superman fans hated this and the films were badly written and directed. The result is before us. If you remove Wonder Woman from DCEU, what is left is a smoking ruin.

2008’s Iron Man kicked off Marvel Cinematic Universe.

But like I said, we should not count Warner Bros and DC out yet. As the history of Warner Bros and Disney suggests, these two are perennial rivals and we can only guess as to what will happen in future. We may be looking at a drastically altered scenario ten years from now. One thing is certain that this tug-of-war between these two respected studios is expected to go on for decades at least.

Possibly it's of course from your companies Disney and WB characters Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, Darth Vader, Snow White, Woody, Buzz Lightyear, Bugs Bunny, Tom and Jerry and The Flintstones.

Possibly it’s because Bugs Bunny, Tasmanian Devil and the rest of the Looney Tunes weren’t made to be nice. They were created to be “Looney” anarchists who cause hilarious mayhem wherever they go. The same can’t be said for Superman. Although the “Dark and Edgy” style worked in the Christopher Nolan solo Batman films, it misfires badly every time they to pull Superman into shadowy territory. Superman should just not be dark! Bugs Bunny can blow up Elmer Fudd with dynamite and we love him for it. When Superman breaks Zod’s neck, fans just howl in protest. Maybe this is why Suicide Squad is making a good profit…because these characters were meant to be dark.

There’s another aspect of WB’s problem that should be addressed. Some would argue that the WB are in too much of a hurry to catch up to Marvel/Disney’s 10-year run of success, which is why Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was so cluttered and unfocused—they were trying to cram 10 years into one film. Instead of a slow build, they wanted to rocket to victory but they were too ambitious and the tactic failed. Back when they were doing their cartoons, they took 10 years from the time they began “Merry Melodies” until their efforts culminated in the creation of Bugs Bunny, who was their main weapon in defeating Disney. The WB today should have taken this lesson to heart and used some patience. Hopefully, they’ve learned their lesson now.

So the WB won Round One while Disney is far ahead during Round Two, but it’s not over yet. Suicide Squad is doing well financially (if not critically) and many have high hopes for Wonder Woman. Can the WB once again do what they did all those years ago and topple Disney to become the king of the genre?  

  • TAGS
  • animation
  • cartoons
  • Cinelinx
  • DC COMICS (Superman, Batman and other titles)
  • DISNEY (Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Toy Story and other titles)
  • industry news
  • MARVEL COMICS (Spider-Man and other titles)
  • movide history
  • movie editorial
  • movie news
  • short films
  • The History of the Disney and Warner Bros. (before two famous launched animated cartoon characters introduced Snow White and Bugs Bunny)
  • Walt Disney Studios
  • Warner Bros (Looney Tunes, Merrie Melodies and other titles)
  • wb
  • Disney versus WB (Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Toy Story, Disney and Pixar vs. Looney Tunes, Merrie Melodies and Warner Bros.)



Previous articleEight Terrible Casting Choices in Films

Next articleFans Are Not Too Thrilled With Possible PS4 Slim Design

Rob Young


Movie Buffs

Sequels vs. Prequels vs. Remakes[]

Movie Buffs

The Ten Worst Sequels of All Time[]

Movie Buffs

The Ten Best Sequels of All Time[]

  • TAGS
  • animation
  • cartoons
  • Cinelinx
  • industry news
  • movide history
  • movie editorial
  • movie news
  • short films
  • The History of the Warner Bros and Walt Disney feud
  • Walt Disney Studios
  • Warner Bros
  • wb
  • WB versus Disney

Originally Answered: When will there be another movie like Who Framed Roger Rabbit where Disney and Warner Bros. characters appear together?

Based on the current climate between studios, I doubt it. Yeah, it was cool to see Mickey Mouse parachuting with Bugs Bunny and Donald Duck piano playing with Daffy Duck. But aside from the legal issues they already had trying to use the characters in the first place, Disney is in a different position then they were in 1988.

People tend to forget that the 1980s was a dark period for the company. Disney was in a state of chaos when Jeffrey Katzenburg and Michael Eisner were hired to spearhead the studios. Animated movies were taking longer to make, a bunch of artists were lost when Don Bluth and 9 animators left during the production of The Fox and the Hound, and thier “comeback” project The Black Culdron was such a flop, when it opened, it was beaten out by The Care Bears Movie. The live-action department wasn’t much better with big projects like The Black Hole, Tron, The Island at the Top of the World, and even a collaboration project with Paramount, Popeye, flopping. The one part of the studio that was doing well was Touchstone Pictures. The was Disney’s way to make adult movies without the “Disney” label ruining its mature intention.

Who Framed Roger Rabbit was a major gamble, as not only live action/animation movies were scarce and hard to do, but it was a Steven Spielberg production, so it was technically an outside idea. But it was given a go-ahead from Michael Eisner, who wanted to revive the animation department. So when did Warner Brothers come in?

Warner Brothers was the opposite of Disney at the time. Along with an extensive catalog of movies, the Looney Tunes were still popular with shorts, syndicated TV airing, and it’s compelation movies. Eisner knew that since Who Framed Roger Rabbit was set in Hollywood, it would make sense to have a variety of toons from various studios walking around, similar to movie stars running into each other. A deal was made with Warner Brothers in which while less popular Looney Tunes like Tweety and Yosemite Sam could appear on their own, guys like Bugs Bunny not only had to appear at the same time with Mickey Mouse, but the two would have to have the same amount of dialogue, making them equals. Disney buying DC Comics 2021. Last week, reports surfaced that Warner Bros., DC Comics and DC Brand are officially being sold. CNBC first reported that the merger of WarnerMedia and Discovery, is the trojan horse to have the deal completed.

The new company, WarnerDiscovery, has given flexibility for a sell of both entities to Walt Disney Company. The move could have both DC Comics and the DC brand under Disney and Marvel.

Apple, Amazon and Netflix are also inquiring about the sale, but the Disney move looks to be legit. Here’s the explanation of how the move is going to get done, with no interruptions. Now, AT&T, parent company of WarnerMedia, is looking to get completely out of entertainment.

With AT&T is expected to retain majority shares in the WarnerDiscovery merger, the former NBC Universal executive is expected to play a major name. Current CEO of Discovery, David Zaslav, would include NBC, Peacock Streaming and other factions within the company sold in the WarnerDiscovery deal.

Now, this comes off the heels of the controversial report last year; that Marvel was looking to take over DC, in this now confirmed major sale. Kevin Feige, who runs the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe, could assist in the development of the DC Universe.

Imagine seeing Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman and the Justice League teaming up with the Avengers. Why are we posting this days later? Simply, because a close friend at AT&T confirmed this deal is actually in the works.

Look for this to gain heavy steam in the coming months.

The gamble paid off and Who Framed Roger Rabbit was a hit! So what about today?

Let’s start off first with the first complication: company image. Warner Brothers is a part of the Time Warner corporation that includes AOL, Turner Broadcasting and DC Comics. With Disney, we all know how giant it’s become with ESPN, ABC, Marvel, Lucasfilm, and it’s upcoming deal with 20th Century Fox. Disney and Time Warner view each other as competitors with the goal to try and have hit after hit. For the two of them to work together would be hard as they would never figure out how profits would be shared. Shareholders from both sides would not be as viable for them to work together.

Secondly, while the Disney characters are just as popular, The Looney Tunes have fallen from grace. It’s clear that Warner Brothers does not see Bugs Bunny or his friends of having that same market appeal that they did before. While a lot can be blamed on the company, I think they simply don’t know what to do with them. Thier too difficult to put in their own movies, shorts are seen as an old novelty and they’ve had several television shows that have not reached the same heights as before Disney, Warner Bros. and Fox the creators of Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck and Simpsons family.

That’s a little hard to say. Both Disney and Warner Bros. have quite an iconic library, specially when you consider their subsidiaries.

But even if I’m biased in this opinion, I will say Disney. Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck and Goofy are part of the childhood of countless people and even if you’re not a fan you can name their characters quite easily (though the same applies to Warner’s Looney Toons). But in the end my answer goes to Disney, as not only the characters themselves are iconic, what has come from them often is the definition of magic and nostalgia. For example there’s the Disney Afternoon, that had some of the most iconic cartoons of all time, heck, DuckTales which many can argue is the quintessential Disney cartoon was rebooted for modern audiences and did what few other reboots have done… ACTUALLY improve over the original! The nods to the classick Duck comics and the original cartoons in the new series can’t be ignored and show great passion from the creative team.

And I can go on and on, the Disney Renaissance, the Disney Revival, and more! Even if in their bad days Disney isn’t as bad as other studios (but’s that not to say that I defend some of their lower quality products). Disney is and always be a part of me.

Warner Bros. has no business incentive for buying Marvel from Disney. Warner Bros. already has their own comic book franchise, DC Comics, which they have been developing their own “cinematic universe” around Disney, Warner Bros., DC and Marvel characters introduced Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny, Superman, Batman and Spider-Man.

Besides, Warner Bros. wouldn’t be able to afford whatever price Disney would be willing to sell it for. Disney bought Marvel in 2009 for $4 billion. As of 2015, the total international box office of Marvel films was $8.5 billion — which doesn’t count revenues from home video comic books, consumer products, Universal’s licensing fees for use of the characters in it’s them parks, and so on. Analysts estimate that Marvel is now worth at least twice what Disney paid for it, and given that Disney is making plans to build an entire Marvel-themed land in its Disney California Adventure park, the company probably wouldn’t part with Marvel unless they were offered many times what it was worth. Disney and Marvel can't your superheroes Mickey, Donald, Goofy and Pluto meets Spider-Man and Marvel heroes and Warner Bros. and DC can't your superheroes Bugs and Daffy meets Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman.

The what the hell man, WHAT THE HELL, what is it about Disney that makes you think they’re about as rich as the Rothschild(they’re not, the Rothschild fortune combine equals over a trillion dollars) Disney is not as rich as you think it is, AT&T just finished buying Warner Brothers, they have enough money to buy out Disney, and Universal is owned by NBC.

Let me break down the assets of the 3 companies for you, then introduce you to the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. AT&T total assets is half a trillion dollars, Disney’s total assets is $139 Billion, and NBCUNIVERSAL is $70 Billion, now understand the context, ma Bell can buy both Disney and Universal and still have money to spare but they’re not, and why would that be, because in the 1970s, AT&T ended up having to break up because they were at one point a MONOPOLY on the business of Telephones, their unfair unregulated business practice forced to break up into smaller phone companies referred as the baby bells companies like Pacific Bell, Southern Bell, Sprint, Verizon, and still AT&T, If disney tries to buy one more major studio now that they have the 40% market share on movies, their next acquisition, will trigger a letter from me to senator Feinstein and Senator Harris to start anti-trust procedures against Disney. stop acting like Disney is the richest, it is not. Disney had to sell fox sports or they couldn’t get the fox studios and fox animation shows.

Disney’s $71.3 billion purchase of the film and TV assets held by 21st Century Fox — the company behind everything from the Alien movies to The Simpsons— is one of the biggest media merger ever. It also marks the first time a major movie studio has simply ceased to exist as an independent entity since the delay of MGM in the 1980s, taking the number of big movie studios in Hollywood from six down to five (Disney, Warner Bros., Sony, Universal, and Paramount).

And as of 12:02 am Eastern time on Wednesday, March 20, 2019, the merger is officially complete.

In this era of ever-accelerating media consolidation, the implications of this deal are pretty staggering — not to mention alarming to anyone who’s at all concerned about said consolidation. And if you’re an employee of either Disney or the former Fox, the threat of expected layoffs hangs over your head. So the deal comes complete with lots of dark portents.

But not everything is set in stone about how this new mega-company will function. There’s still plenty that even the people working for Fox and Disney don’t know about how the company will be structured. There are early plans, of course, but making something work on paper is very different from making it work in reality, and more questions are sure to be raised. Many of these questions will be answered in the coming months, while some will take years to figure out.

I will generally agree with Jason Brentner’s answer, but I’d like to add this…

Quite some years ago, I was pleasantly surprised to hear that the Walt Disney Company was going to put this out on DVD –

- And, never having seen it ever, I bought it. The day it arrived, I settled down to watch it, and it blew me totally away, right off the charts. Seeing it, painstakingly digitally remastered by Disney, CineSite and Lucasfilm, it was literally like seeing the best illustrated story book come to breathing, vibrant life. You could see the artistry and the love in every frame (no computers!). That, combined with everything else (voice work, Frank Churchill’s classic music score), left me with a few tears in my eyes.

Get back to THAT level, and you’ll get cel movies back. Then again, if no-one liked IRON GIANT…

The current series is called ‘Looney Tunes Cartoons’. They released 10 episodes back in May, a holiday special last month, and they have 10 episodes that will be released later this month.

How would traditional 2D animation like the Looney Tunes, Mickey Mouse and Disney animated films of the last century ever make a comeback?

But then, team-up crossovers including DC's Superman, Batman and Justice League, Marvel's Spider-Man, X-Men, Fantastic Four and the Avengers, Disney's Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Toy Story and Disney and Pixar characters, Hanna-Barbera's Tom and Jerry, The Flintstones and Hanna-Barbera characters and Warner Bros.' Looney Tunes, Merrie Melodies and Warner Bros. characters.

The original studio well known Disney and Warner Bros. two most animated cartoon characters the creators of Snow White and Bugs Bunny in origins 1937 and 1938/1940 respectively.

Disney vs. Warner Bros. vs. 20th Century Fox[]

Disney - Heroes (Protagonists): Mickey Mouse, Minnie Mouse, Donald Duck, Daisy Duck, Goofy, Pluto, Winnie the Pooh, Tigger, Woody and Buzz Lightyear

Disney - Heroines (Protagonists): Snow White, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Ariel, Belle, Mary Poppins, Jessie (Toy Story) and Elsa

Marvel Comics - Heroes (Protagonists): Hulk, Spider-Man, Wolverine, Fantastic Four, Iron Man, Captain America and Thor

Marvel Comics - Heroines (Protagonists): She-Hulk and Spider-Girl

Warner Bros. - Heroes (Protagonists): Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Porky Pig, Elmer Fudd, Granny, Road Runner, Taz, Tweety, Sylvester, Foghorn Leghorn, Yosemite Sam, Speedy Gonzales and Pepé Le Pew

DC Comics - Heroes (Protagonists): Superman, Krypto the Super Dog, Batman and Robin

DC Comics - Heroines (Protagonists): Supergirl, Batgirl and Wonder Woman

20th Century Fox - Heroes (Protagonists): Homer Simpson, Marge Simpson, Bart Simpson, Lisa Simpson, Maggie Simpson, Fry, Bender, Leela, Peter Griffin, Chris, Meg, Lois, Brian Griffin, Stewie Griffin, Manny, Sid, Diego and Scrat

20th Century Fox - Heroines (Protagonists): Marilyn Monroe and Anya

Disney - Villains (Antagonists): Pete, Evil Queen, Witch, Lady Tremaine, Ursula, Syndrome, Underminer, Zurg, Lotso, Hopper and Stinky Pete

Marvel Comics - Villains (Antagonists): Green Goblin, Venom, Abomination and Doctor Doom

Warner Bros. - Villains (Antagonists): Wile E. Coyote, Witch Hazel, Gossamer and Marvin the Martian

DC Comics - Villains (Antagonists): Joker, Catwoman (antihero or hero or villain), Darkseid, Lex Luthor and Cheetah

20th Century Fox - Villains (Antagonists): Mr. Burns, Sideshow Bob, Mom, Kang and Kodos, Bertram and Ernie the Giant Chicken

Company Copyright Studio[]

DC Comics - Founded in 1934 - by Malcolm Wheeler-Nicholson Marvel Comics - Founded in 1939 - by Martin Goodman Disney - Founded in 1921 or 1923 - by Walt Disney and Roy O. Disney Warner Bros. - Founded in 1903 - by Four Warner Brothers Hanna-Barbera - Founded in 1939 or 1940 (pre-HB) or 1957 - by William Hanna and Joseph Barbera Pixar - Founded in 1979 - by Edwin Catmull and Alvy Ray Smith Lucasfilm's Star Wars - by George Lucas The Jim Henson Company - Founded in 1958 - by Jim Henson and Jane Henson Dr. Seuss characters - by Dr. Seuss 20th Century Fox - Founded in 1914 (as Fox Film) and 1933 (as Twentieth Century Pictures) founded in 1935 - by William Fox, Joseph M. Schenck, Darryl F. Zanuck and Rupert Murdoch 
Popular two most famous characters Popular one most famous character Popular one most famous character Popular one most famous character Popular characters Popular two most famous characters Popular one most famous character Popular one most famous character Popular one most famous character Popular one most famous character
 " Superman and Batman " Spider-Man  Snow White " Bugs Bunny Tom and Jerry and The Flintstones " Woody and Buzz Lightyear " Darth Vader " Kermit the Frog " The Cat in the Hat " Marilyn Monroe 

The masterpiece two most famous studios of Disney and Warner Bros since 1923.

  1. Official popular characters