· 23 comments · Save ·
For Sale Apr 7, 2026 at 5:26 PM

Why J.J. Abrams Is Downsizing: “They haven’t had anything of note in a while, and other movies weren’t using the facilities,”

Posted by Ripclawe

Why J.J. Abrams Is Downsizing
The Hollywood Reporter
Why J.J. Abrams Is Downsizing
His Bad Robot banner went from a $250 million Warners deal to scrapping its Santa Monica HQ in just a few years.
🚩 Report this post

23 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
lectroid Apr 7, 2026 +68
That he’s ‘downsizing’ and not folding is further proof that he can’t deal with an ending.
68
riegspsych325 Apr 7, 2026 +12
reading the article, it does seem like a lot of things were out of the his and the company’s hands. Like the WB-Discovery merger and how consolidation caused a lot of projects to be canceled. Among them was an HBO show that had scripts ready and was gearing up to shoot Then there’s the handful of DC projects he tried to get off the ground that wound up going nowhere because the revolving door of execs at the time. Even Caped Crusader got shifted over to Amazon because WB didn’t want to pay to distribute it
12
vafrow Apr 8, 2026 +4
I'd counter with the fact that if the projects were stronger, they'd probably find a way through. JJ Abrams is a big name. Its not like a first time director or showrunner having their project lost in the shuffle. Especially on DC. If he was doing anything interesting with his projects, he could have been the person they wanted to lead. They might be some unfair expectations, but when you consider where he sat in the Hollywood hierarchy not that long ago, its notable how little power he has that he's downscaling his production company.
4
Purp1eC0bras Apr 8, 2026 +2
It will involve time travel
2
hoser33 Apr 7, 2026 +28
Absolutely mind blowing the last Star Wars movie basically killed his career. Note- It was justified, but no less shocking
28
Cool_Objective_7829 Apr 7, 2026 +20
It was definitely the final nail in the coffin. He had been on a downward trend for a few years prior to ROS. The Star Trek film franchise was petering out at the box office, The Mission Impossible franchise wasn’t setting the world on fire anymore, and he hadn’t had a big hit on TV for a few years. “Westworld”, which he produced, was the exception but by season three, the shine had worn off which is kind of a common thread for all of his projects.
20
OtherUserCharges Apr 8, 2026 +25
West world was fun until you realize they had no clue where they were going with it, like everything he touches.
25
compukiller Apr 8, 2026 +9
That was clear to me after the first season, which I felt was a pretty looking disaster.
9
Lfsnz67 Apr 8, 2026 +2
That was Nolan
2
Every-Summer8407 Apr 8, 2026 +1
The 4th season did a good job at explaining all of the nonsense of season 3 and set up the final season to go back to Westworld for a huge ass battle for humanity. It basically tied everything up in a neat bow for a good payoff if they could execute that last season, then HBO pulled the plug. It’s a shame S2 + S3 were wacky and lost the audience because it could have been a good end product with rewatchability.
1
MoonOut_StarsInvite Apr 9, 2026 +1
I was drinking a lot at that point in my life, but yeah I got lost on that show and couldn’t pay attention so we quit.
1
Every-Summer8407 Apr 9, 2026 +1
Ahh a fellow pandemic drinker eh? Did you get through season 4?
1
Ozymandius34 Apr 8, 2026 +3
The two Star Trek movies he made were bangers. But yeah, ROS kind of killed his career.
3
almostcyclops Apr 8, 2026 +5
They were bangers from a production level. The man can direct the hell out of action. But both had considerable writing flaws. My personal opinion was that the first film still succeeded whereas the second did not, but opinions vary from liking both to not liking both in large part because both have the same strengths and flaws just to different degrees. Honestly this trend shows in a lot of work, whether he directly writes it or not. Incredible ideas and showmanship; but with terrible world building, plot lining, and general structural work and planning underneath.
5
Ozymandius34 Apr 8, 2026
They were by far the best Trek entries since the 80s at least. And they’re still better than what’s being put out these days.
0
almostcyclops Apr 8, 2026 +1
Neither was better than Undiscovered Country (1991). Not by the longest shot. I would argue Into Darkness was better than Nemesis but not any of the other TNG films, however I understand why you might feel differently. It was at least cinematic and exciting. ST '09 I really like as a standalone film but I do recognize its significant writing flaws. It didnt really understand what makes Star Trek tick, but it did its own thing very well.
1
compukiller Apr 8, 2026 +2
I’m sure it wasn’t all his fault but that was an abomination. It should have taught the decision makers many lessons.
2
OtherUserCharges Apr 8, 2026 +8
Thank god. What a hack. I knew rings of power would suck when the show runners for it were his underlings.
8
SillyMikey Apr 9, 2026 +2
It was embarrassingly bad. I’m pretty sure you can get someone who posted something on Listnook about what he would’ve done as a story instead and it probably would’ve been better than that f****** atrocity.
2
walkupe Apr 8, 2026
To be fair, he wasn’t even supposed to direct Episode 9 in the first place, meaning the lack of planning there wasn’t exactly his fault. Plus, something pretty unexpected happened when Carrie Fisher died. Who could have planned for that?
0
Lucky_Cl0ver777 Apr 8, 2026 +6
God I hate this guy so much
6
Jinkii5 Apr 9, 2026 +2
Has he done anything since he "Improved" Star Wars? Or do we have to play Fortnight to find out the key points of the plot again?
2
Melodic_Crow_3409 Apr 12, 2026 +1
He personifies destroying beloved properties with halfassed content slop. 
1
← Back to Board