Page 70 of 88 FirstFirst ... 2060686970717280 ... LastLast
Results 1,381 to 1,400 of 1755

Thread: Star Wars Discussion Thread (Spoilers Inside)

  1. #1381
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,620
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    I read a good theory as to why Baby Yoda (I refuse to use the name Grogu as it's stupid) wouldn't have died at Luke's temple.

    First, there's no guarantee he was still there. There's a good chance he's reunited with Mando well before.

    Second, even if he is at the temple, he's likely a nearly fully trained Jedi. We know that Baby Yoda is 50 years old. We also know Original Yoda was a Jedi Master by age 100. To be a Jedi Master you have to train a padawan to Jedi Knight status, a process that takes years (and Jedi Knights rarely get Padawans right away from what I can tell). So there has to be some rapid development at some point for Yoda species for Original Yoda to have gone from 50 year old baby to Jedi Knight to Jedi Master in 50 years.

    We also know that the temple was destroyed about 19 years after Baby Yoda leaves with Luke. So Baby Yoda would be 69 at the time the Temple was destroyed. The likely timeline would make Baby Yoda probably close to full Jedi Knight status.

    Next, there were others that escaped the temple. In the comics the story of, IIRC, three survivors is told. If these escaped, there's a good chance an extremely gifted, near Jedi Knight Baby Yoda would have been able to survive.

    Ultimately I think the answer will be that he leaves the temple early to go with Mando. Disney isn't going to off screen implied kill their single most valuable character.
    I know they wouldn't do that because it's been marketing gold for them, and just like George Lucas wouldn't kill Han Solo, Disney wouldn't kill Grogu. I think you're right that he'll come back, he'll choose to leave Luke because he's developed too much of an attachment to Din Djarin. It was why Ahsoka didn't want to train him. And they'll use it as another proof that the Jedi Order is inherently bad even though they try to be good.
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

  2. #1382
    It's OVER 5,000! striker42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,597
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    387
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,187
    Thanked in
    2,040 Posts

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to striker42 For This Useful Post:

    Tapate50 (02-16-2021)

  4. #1383
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,620
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    You bring an interesting idea that Mr. Miyagi is like Luke.

    He wasn't eager to train Daniel-san. He agreed to do it when pushed far, and did it in unconventional means that his apprentice took odds with where the Master was teaching the student what they needed even at times they didn't realize it.

    Also they shared the same thing, no such thing as bad student, only bad teacher.
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

  5. #1384
    It's OVER 5,000! striker42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,597
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    387
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,187
    Thanked in
    2,040 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by zitothebrave View Post
    You bring an interesting idea that Mr. Miyagi is like Luke.

    He wasn't eager to train Daniel-san. He agreed to do it when pushed far, and did it in unconventional means that his apprentice took odds with where the Master was teaching the student what they needed even at times they didn't realize it.

    Also they shared the same thing, no such thing as bad student, only bad teacher.
    It is an interesting comparison. The reluctant mentor is a common storytelling device and Star Wars has always drawn from such devices. Yoda was a classic example with Luke (and Anakin).

    Luke differs in one large aspect, Miyagi maintained his dignity. I would have been okay with Luke as the reluctant mentor having been burned by Kylo had he not been such an ass. The moment he tossed the light saber I knew I wasn't going to like that version of Luke.

  6. #1385
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,620
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    Throwing the lightsaber wasn't that different than "After After" or "Wax On/Wax Off" it was him trying to distance himself from Rey. Sure a more "appropriate" response would have been to just turn around and shun her. But Star Wars has always had a sense of humor. I don't feel like Luke shirked his dignity. He was surviving on an island as the only person and respecting said island. Even if he didn't believe in the jedi order he kept the sacred texts and couldn't bring himself to destroy them, he respected the keepers, etc.

    Yoda was beyond a reluctant with Anakin, if not for Qui-Gon Anakin wouldn't have been in the order period.
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

  7. #1386
    It's OVER 5,000! striker42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,597
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    387
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,187
    Thanked in
    2,040 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by zitothebrave View Post
    Throwing the lightsaber wasn't that different than "After After" or "Wax On/Wax Off" it was him trying to distance himself from Rey. Sure a more "appropriate" response would have been to just turn around and shun her. But Star Wars has always had a sense of humor. I don't feel like Luke shirked his dignity. He was surviving on an island as the only person and respecting said island. Even if he didn't believe in the jedi order he kept the sacred texts and couldn't bring himself to destroy them, he respected the keepers, etc.

    Yoda was beyond a reluctant with Anakin, if not for Qui-Gon Anakin wouldn't have been in the order period.
    There's a whole scene of Luke milking a space walrus and angrily drinking the blue milk. It was less than dignified.

    People compare Luke's exile to Obi Wan's or Yoda's to explain why he would leave. Obi Wan lived in the desert for 20 years and managed to be just as classy as he'd ever been (in spite of the trauma of cutting his "brother's" legs off). Yoda lived in a swamp for 20 years and was the same wise teacher he was in the Jedi Temple (in spite of his spectacular failure to protect the Jedi and the Republic from Palpatine). Neither one turned their backs on the Force, neither one was bitter and sullen.

    Luke turned his back on the Force and became bitter and sullen. Being the reluctant mentor is fine. That would fit Luke's past experience with Yoda and his failure with Kylo. Luke shutting himself off from the Force and becoming bitter made him seem completely unfamiliar. It was a completely different character just wearing the same face.

  8. #1387
    It's OVER 5,000! striker42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,597
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    387
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,187
    Thanked in
    2,040 Posts
    Rian Johnson said his trilogy is still on with Lucas Films in spite of not being mentioned when Disney announced a ridiculous number of new Star Wars projects. I think that's a really bad sign for its chances.

    A lot will depend on what happens with Kennedy. Her contract is set to expire in October and her handling of Star Wars hasn't been as great of a success as Disney would have liked. The sequel trilogy was profitable but the revenues declined with each successive movie. Solo was an absolute low point for the franchise. The success of The Mandalorian hasn't been her doing as Favreau has had a free hand there. You have to wonder if Disney will stick with Kennedy or if they'll try to find a Kevin Feige type for Lucas Films. Someone to bring order to the galaxy.

    If Kennedy gets a contract extension and retains her current power then I think Johnson's trilogy gets made. He's a favorite of hers and I could definitely see her championing his project. If her contract isn't extended or her power over Star Wars is somehow curtailed, I think Johnson's trilogy dies. I could see one of the first things new leadership doing to try to eliminate controversy is to kill that project.

    Currently, I see three possibilities as equally likely.

    1- Kennedy is extended and the current state of affairs continues. Lucas Films has still been a cash cow for Disney in spite of the sequel trilogy's dwindling returns. Disney might not want to mess with things and potentially disrupt what they have going.

    2- Kennedy is shunted off to a different role with less input on day to day operations or else keeps her current position but has her influence over creative choices curtailed. Disney might want to avoid a messy divorce with Kennedy or might want to keep her around for her handle on the business side of Lucas Films but might want someone else controlling creative direction. Combined with Kennedy's age (68 when her contract expires) and a twilight job with a lofty title (CEO or some such) might be the best way to handle things.

    3- There is a "mutual decision" for Kennedy to leave. She departs Lucas Films and starts her own studio.

    I could see any of these three happening at this point but the only way I see Johnson's trilogy happening is if number 1 occurs.

  9. #1388
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,620
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    There's a whole scene of Luke milking a space walrus and angrily drinking the blue milk. It was less than dignified.

    People compare Luke's exile to Obi Wan's or Yoda's to explain why he would leave. Obi Wan lived in the desert for 20 years and managed to be just as classy as he'd ever been (in spite of the trauma of cutting his "brother's" legs off). Yoda lived in a swamp for 20 years and was the same wise teacher he was in the Jedi Temple (in spite of his spectacular failure to protect the Jedi and the Republic from Palpatine). Neither one turned their backs on the Force, neither one was bitter and sullen.

    Luke turned his back on the Force and became bitter and sullen. Being the reluctant mentor is fine. That would fit Luke's past experience with Yoda and his failure with Kylo. Luke shutting himself off from the Force and becoming bitter made him seem completely unfamiliar. It was a completely different character just wearing the same face.
    Why do we assume Luke would exile like Yoda or Obi Wan? Also do you remember how Yoda interacted with Luke? Obi Wan also went into exile for a different reason than Luke and Yoda. Obi Wan went into exile to watch over Luke. Not because he failed. Yoda was a Jedi Master for like 700 years and head of the Jedi Council. How can you compare that to Luke? Also Yoda had a path forward, Luke and Leia. What path forward could Luke see after his nephew destroyed his temple, killed his students, etc.
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

  10. #1389
    **NOT ACTUALLY RACIST
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,614
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    84
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    552
    Thanked in
    440 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    Rian Johnson said his trilogy is still on with Lucas Films in spite of not being mentioned when Disney announced a ridiculous number of new Star Wars projects. I think that's a really bad sign for its chances.

    A lot will depend on what happens with Kennedy. Her contract is set to expire in October and her handling of Star Wars hasn't been as great of a success as Disney would have liked. The sequel trilogy was profitable but the revenues declined with each successive movie. Solo was an absolute low point for the franchise. The success of The Mandalorian hasn't been her doing as Favreau has had a free hand there. You have to wonder if Disney will stick with Kennedy or if they'll try to find a Kevin Feige type for Lucas Films. Someone to bring order to the galaxy.

    If Kennedy gets a contract extension and retains her current power then I think Johnson's trilogy gets made. He's a favorite of hers and I could definitely see her championing his project. If her contract isn't extended or her power over Star Wars is somehow curtailed, I think Johnson's trilogy dies. I could see one of the first things new leadership doing to try to eliminate controversy is to kill that project.

    Currently, I see three possibilities as equally likely.

    1- Kennedy is extended and the current state of affairs continues. Lucas Films has still been a cash cow for Disney in spite of the sequel trilogy's dwindling returns. Disney might not want to mess with things and potentially disrupt what they have going.

    2- Kennedy is shunted off to a different role with less input on day to day operations or else keeps her current position but has her influence over creative choices curtailed. Disney might want to avoid a messy divorce with Kennedy or might want to keep her around for her handle on the business side of Lucas Films but might want someone else controlling creative direction. Combined with Kennedy's age (68 when her contract expires) and a twilight job with a lofty title (CEO or some such) might be the best way to handle things.

    3- There is a "mutual decision" for Kennedy to leave. She departs Lucas Films and starts her own studio.

    I could see any of these three happening at this point but the only way I see Johnson's trilogy happening is if number 1 occurs.

    Never understood all the hAte for Kennedy. She didn’t have final say on scripts, budgets or marketing.

  11. #1390
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,620
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    Rian Johnson said his trilogy is still on with Lucas Films in spite of not being mentioned when Disney announced a ridiculous number of new Star Wars projects. I think that's a really bad sign for its chances.

    A lot will depend on what happens with Kennedy. Her contract is set to expire in October and her handling of Star Wars hasn't been as great of a success as Disney would have liked. The sequel trilogy was profitable but the revenues declined with each successive movie. Solo was an absolute low point for the franchise. The success of The Mandalorian hasn't been her doing as Favreau has had a free hand there. You have to wonder if Disney will stick with Kennedy or if they'll try to find a Kevin Feige type for Lucas Films. Someone to bring order to the galaxy.

    If Kennedy gets a contract extension and retains her current power then I think Johnson's trilogy gets made. He's a favorite of hers and I could definitely see her championing his project. If her contract isn't extended or her power over Star Wars is somehow curtailed, I think Johnson's trilogy dies. I could see one of the first things new leadership doing to try to eliminate controversy is to kill that project.

    Currently, I see three possibilities as equally likely.

    1- Kennedy is extended and the current state of affairs continues. Lucas Films has still been a cash cow for Disney in spite of the sequel trilogy's dwindling returns. Disney might not want to mess with things and potentially disrupt what they have going.

    2- Kennedy is shunted off to a different role with less input on day to day operations or else keeps her current position but has her influence over creative choices curtailed. Disney might want to avoid a messy divorce with Kennedy or might want to keep her around for her handle on the business side of Lucas Films but might want someone else controlling creative direction. Combined with Kennedy's age (68 when her contract expires) and a twilight job with a lofty title (CEO or some such) might be the best way to handle things.

    3- There is a "mutual decision" for Kennedy to leave. She departs Lucas Films and starts her own studio.

    I could see any of these three happening at this point but the only way I see Johnson's trilogy happening is if number 1 occurs.
    Sequel Trilogy paid for Disney buying Lucas Film. Like on their 1 billion budget in Box office Alone they took in 4.5 Billion. The did exactly what Disney wanted. When you factor in Rogue One and Solo's 800M or so in box office profit, there's nothing about her tenure that's been a failure aside from people bitching online. Guess what, nothing is different aside from the volume of platform from when the prequels came out. People took to the internet and complained their asses off. It's literally no different aside from the scale of internet usage and the coordination of trolls

    Johnson's trilogy will kick ass. He will get to play in his own arena and it will be fantastic. I would love for his to be 80 years in the future, everyone is dead who you know and we get a new set of heroes. Remember the fun of KOTOR? Granted that was in the past of course, btu the fun of playing in a world that wasn't bound by someone else's expected character arcs and conflict. Why the Mandalorian works is because it plays in a time and place they can do ****. They have some bounds, but not the same level as any film that takes place near the Skywalker Saga.

    I think if Kennedy leaves it's by her choice. Disney won't can her given the success of the films, Mandalorian, etc. If Lucasfilm has a chink in their armor it's games where EA has squandered their contract making few good games. But that's gone and hopefully soon we'll be getting more quality games. She is older so she may leave, but not many executives who've made 5+ billion dollars for their business, are let go because of a bunch of butt hurt fanboys. Butt hurt fanboys may have gotten Lucas to retire, but they won't stop the Disney money machine.
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

  12. #1391
    It's OVER 5,000! striker42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,597
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    387
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,187
    Thanked in
    2,040 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by zitothebrave View Post
    Sequel Trilogy paid for Disney buying Lucas Film. Like on their 1 billion budget in Box office Alone they took in 4.5 Billion. The did exactly what Disney wanted. When you factor in Rogue One and Solo's 800M or so in box office profit, there's nothing about her tenure that's been a failure aside from people bitching online. Guess what, nothing is different aside from the volume of platform from when the prequels came out. People took to the internet and complained their asses off. It's literally no different aside from the scale of internet usage and the coordination of trolls

    Johnson's trilogy will kick ass. He will get to play in his own arena and it will be fantastic. I would love for his to be 80 years in the future, everyone is dead who you know and we get a new set of heroes. Remember the fun of KOTOR? Granted that was in the past of course, btu the fun of playing in a world that wasn't bound by someone else's expected character arcs and conflict. Why the Mandalorian works is because it plays in a time and place they can do ****. They have some bounds, but not the same level as any film that takes place near the Skywalker Saga.

    I think if Kennedy leaves it's by her choice. Disney won't can her given the success of the films, Mandalorian, etc. If Lucasfilm has a chink in their armor it's games where EA has squandered their contract making few good games. But that's gone and hopefully soon we'll be getting more quality games. She is older so she may leave, but not many executives who've made 5+ billion dollars for their business, are let go because of a bunch of butt hurt fanboys. Butt hurt fanboys may have gotten Lucas to retire, but they won't stop the Disney money machine.
    The question is not whether the sequel trilogy was financially successful. That was never in doubt. A banana slug could have overseen them and they'd have been profitable. The question is whether they were as profitable as they should have been. Businesses can have obscene earnings yet still miss expectations and see changes in leadership. The question is whether that will happen here.

    The Force Awakens earned $2.066 billion at the box office. The Last Jedi earned $1.33 billion at the box office. Rise of Skywalker earned $1.074 billion at the box office. They declined with each successive movie.

    Then you have the anthology films. Rogue One came out in between The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi and earned $1.056 billion. That was pretty good considering it wasn't a main saga film. Solo, on the other hand, came out after Last Jedi and made just $393 million at the box office.

    It's a fact that the movies clearly trended in the wrong direction. The problems with the sequel trilogy and the disappointing product that was Solo led to increased disinterest in the franchise. Instead of building up to a grand finale of the decades long Skywalker Saga with all the power of Disney behind it, the saga ended in a mess that made half of what it should have.

    So the issue isn't that the movies didn't make money, they did. The issue is they didn't make as much as they should have had they been run competently. Think of how much money these movies would have made had they been run with a consistent vision and a Star Wars savant consulting on continuity. Think of what Solo could have done if they didn't have to change directors and rework the script midstream.

    The handling of the Star Wars films has been largely bungled since Kennedy took over. Her mistakes are clear for everyone to see. Those mistakes ended up costing Disney billions in revenue they should have earned.

  13. #1392
    It's OVER 5,000! striker42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,597
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    387
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,187
    Thanked in
    2,040 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by zitothebrave View Post
    Why do we assume Luke would exile like Yoda or Obi Wan? Also do you remember how Yoda interacted with Luke? Obi Wan also went into exile for a different reason than Luke and Yoda. Obi Wan went into exile to watch over Luke. Not because he failed. Yoda was a Jedi Master for like 700 years and head of the Jedi Council. How can you compare that to Luke? Also Yoda had a path forward, Luke and Leia. What path forward could Luke see after his nephew destroyed his temple, killed his students, etc.
    I actually would assume Luke wouldn't exile. He was always one one rush in to save the day. Exile is against his character. The only argument I've seen that makes sense in support of Luke exiling is that it's what his mentors did. His mentors hid away to preserve hope for the future but maintained their prior character. I could see Luke doing that. I can't see him running away, hiding, closing himself off from the Force, and becoming a bitter old man. That just made no sense to me.

    If Luke didn't see a path forward through exile, why did he exile? Everything we know about Luke would have had him throwing himself at Snoke and trying to turn Kylo back. Kylo's inner conflict would have been painfully obvious to Luke. More obvious than Vader's. If he saw no path forward, he wouldn't have hidden and waited for death. He'd have sacrificed himself in an attempt to overthrow Snoke.

    Which is why I think if you're going to have Luke exile, it should have been due to a Force vision telling him that he can't defeat Snoke but one will arise who can.

  14. #1393
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,620
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    The question is not whether the sequel trilogy was financially successful. That was never in doubt. A banana slug could have overseen them and they'd have been profitable. The question is whether they were as profitable as they should have been. Businesses can have obscene earnings yet still miss expectations and see changes in leadership. The question is whether that will happen here.

    The Force Awakens earned $2.066 billion at the box office. The Last Jedi earned $1.33 billion at the box office. Rise of Skywalker earned $1.074 billion at the box office. They declined with each successive movie.

    Then you have the anthology films. Rogue One came out in between The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi and earned $1.056 billion. That was pretty good considering it wasn't a main saga film. Solo, on the other hand, came out after Last Jedi and made just $393 million at the box office.

    It's a fact that the movies clearly trended in the wrong direction. The problems with the sequel trilogy and the disappointing product that was Solo led to increased disinterest in the franchise. Instead of building up to a grand finale of the decades long Skywalker Saga with all the power of Disney behind it, the saga ended in a mess that made half of what it should have.

    So the issue isn't that the movies didn't make money, they did. The issue is they didn't make as much as they should have had they been run competently. Think of how much money these movies would have made had they been run with a consistent vision and a Star Wars savant consulting on continuity. Think of what Solo could have done if they didn't have to change directors and rework the script midstream.

    The handling of the Star Wars films has been largely bungled since Kennedy took over. Her mistakes are clear for everyone to see. Those mistakes ended up costing Disney billions in revenue they should have earned.
    I've discussed this before. The first film was the top grossing film in every trilogy. Ep 4 Inflation Adjusted domestic gross was 1.3 Billion, ESB 704M, RotJ 723. TPM 757, AotC 464, RotS, 529. The failure of Rise of Skywalker is on itself. It was ****ing miserable. We've deep dove into this plenty of times.

    Reality is these movies made more money than George Lucas's prequel trilogy, which had a unified vision. Disney made great money makers.

    Solo didn't rework the script as much as change directors, and that was a screwup. Mainly because the directors they hired weren't right ofr Star Wars, they basically were pissing away money.

    There's no evidence of billions lost by Disney because of Star Wars, only evidence of the billions made.
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

  15. #1394
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,620
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    I actually would assume Luke wouldn't exile. He was always one one rush in to save the day. Exile is against his character. The only argument I've seen that makes sense in support of Luke exiling is that it's what his mentors did. His mentors hid away to preserve hope for the future but maintained their prior character. I could see Luke doing that. I can't see him running away, hiding, closing himself off from the Force, and becoming a bitter old man. That just made no sense to me.

    If Luke didn't see a path forward through exile, why did he exile? Everything we know about Luke would have had him throwing himself at Snoke and trying to turn Kylo back. Kylo's inner conflict would have been painfully obvious to Luke. More obvious than Vader's. If he saw no path forward, he wouldn't have hidden and waited for death. He'd have sacrificed himself in an attempt to overthrow Snoke.

    Which is why I think if you're going to have Luke exile, it should have been due to a Force vision telling him that he can't defeat Snoke but one will arise who can.
    Take it up with JJ and Kasden, the story they painted was Luke going into exile because of failing and hiding so well that no one could find him.If you wanted something different, JJ should have done it differently.
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

  16. #1395
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,620
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

  17. #1396
    It's OVER 5,000! striker42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,597
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    387
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,187
    Thanked in
    2,040 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by zitothebrave View Post
    I've discussed this before. The first film was the top grossing film in every trilogy. Ep 4 Inflation Adjusted domestic gross was 1.3 Billion, ESB 704M, RotJ 723. TPM 757, AotC 464, RotS, 529. The failure of Rise of Skywalker is on itself. It was ****ing miserable. We've deep dove into this plenty of times.

    Reality is these movies made more money than George Lucas's prequel trilogy, which had a unified vision. Disney made great money makers.

    Solo didn't rework the script as much as change directors, and that was a screwup. Mainly because the directors they hired weren't right ofr Star Wars, they basically were pissing away money.

    There's no evidence of billions lost by Disney because of Star Wars, only evidence of the billions made.
    Comparing the trilogies in terms of money is difficult. Each trilogy encountered different problems. I don't think anyone at Disney, however, would find a drop of 35% between Force Awakens and The Last Jedi to be acceptable. If the product was great then that would be one thing. But the sequel trilogy made nobody happy and had glaring problems that can be traced back to leadership.

    The simple fact that the sequels were profitable isn't enough. They were going to be profitable no matter what. The issue is whether they performed up to expectations.

    Imagine you purchase a Picasso at a yard sale for $10 and find out it's worth $50 million. You then give it to my auction house and we sell it for $5 million. Are you going to be happy? There's no evidence of money lost there, only evidence of money made. You made nearly $5 million dollars. Shouldn't you be happy? Of course not. You should have made $50 million.

    The same is true with the sequels. The fact that they made Disney money isn't enough. The question is whether they lived up to expectations. I don't they did.

    One thing that I think was telling was that Kennedy pivoted back to JJ Abrams after The Last Jedi. I think the Force Awakens performed up to expectations in the box office and she was hoping to recapture that. If the dropoff from VII to VIII was as expected, I don't think they bring back Abrams.

  18. #1397
    It's OVER 5,000! striker42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,597
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    387
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,187
    Thanked in
    2,040 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by zitothebrave View Post
    Take it up with JJ and Kasden, the story they painted was Luke going into exile because of failing and hiding so well that no one could find him.If you wanted something different, JJ should have done it differently.
    The exact nature of Luke's exile was still up in the air after The Force Awakens. We knew some stuff but not a lot of the details. There was nothing indicating that Luke had become a bitter hermit who had cut himself off from the force and was waiting to die. That was Johnson's choice.

    In any event, I can't defend JJ either. The handling of Luke was botched from the beginning.

  19. #1398
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,620
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    Comparing the trilogies in terms of money is difficult. Each trilogy encountered different problems. I don't think anyone at Disney, however, would find a drop of 35% between Force Awakens and The Last Jedi to be acceptable. If the product was great then that would be one thing. But the sequel trilogy made nobody happy and had glaring problems that can be traced back to leadership.

    The simple fact that the sequels were profitable isn't enough. They were going to be profitable no matter what. The issue is whether they performed up to expectations.

    Imagine you purchase a Picasso at a yard sale for $10 and find out it's worth $50 million. You then give it to my auction house and we sell it for $5 million. Are you going to be happy? There's no evidence of money lost there, only evidence of money made. You made nearly $5 million dollars. Shouldn't you be happy? Of course not. You should have made $50 million.

    The same is true with the sequels. The fact that they made Disney money isn't enough. The question is whether they lived up to expectations. I don't they did.

    One thing that I think was telling was that Kennedy pivoted back to JJ Abrams after The Last Jedi. I think the Force Awakens performed up to expectations in the box office and she was hoping to recapture that. If the dropoff from VII to VIII was as expected, I don't think they bring back Abrams.
    Literally everything you said in your first paragraph was true about how people reacted to the prequels.

    I think you're not getting what the point of the sequels was. The point of the sequels was to recoup costs. They thought about going experimental a bit but then reeled it back in. After recouping costs, they can now go a little more experimental. A little more different. That's where the Mandalorian comes in. That's where the Johnson trilogy, Rogue Squadron, Taika Waititi's film, and the Kevin Feige movies which are more labors of love films that may not do as well in the box office.
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

  20. #1399
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,620
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    The exact nature of Luke's exile was still up in the air after The Force Awakens. We knew some stuff but not a lot of the details. There was nothing indicating that Luke had become a bitter hermit who had cut himself off from the force and was waiting to die. That was Johnson's choice.

    In any event, I can't defend JJ either. The handling of Luke was botched from the beginning.
    I mean do you think spending long amount of time in a film talking about a prophecy is good filmmaking?

    Reality is Occam's razor is true, the reason Luke went into exile was shame.
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

  21. #1400
    It's OVER 5,000! striker42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,597
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    387
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,187
    Thanked in
    2,040 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by zitothebrave View Post
    Literally everything you said in your first paragraph was true about how people reacted to the prequels.

    I think you're not getting what the point of the sequels was. The point of the sequels was to recoup costs. They thought about going experimental a bit but then reeled it back in. After recouping costs, they can now go a little more experimental. A little more different. That's where the Mandalorian comes in. That's where the Johnson trilogy, Rogue Squadron, Taika Waititi's film, and the Kevin Feige movies which are more labors of love films that may not do as well in the box office.
    The sequel trilogy was about one thing, making tons of money. Everything Disney is doing with Star Wars is about making tons of money. Box office, streaming, merchandise, amusement parks, etc. Disney showed how successful monetizing existing IP could be with Marvel. Star Wars was the next logical step.

    Disney has recouped its investment at this point. That was never in question. But Disney isn't going to stop there in their analysis of Kennedy's leadership. You better believe they've drilled down into the numbers and know whether they've come up short, met expectations, or exceeded expectations in all areas.

    And Kennedy has some things that should be worrying. The sequel trilogy was profitable but was, in all, a mess that divided the fan base to such a degree they almost put a stop to new Star Wars projects. A better trilogy probably makes at least a billion more in the box office.

    Then you get into the toys. Yeah they've sold a lot of toys from the sequel trilogy but nothing ever really caught fire. Then Favreau walks in with Baby Yoda and that little guy is everywhere. No one from the sequel trilogy had a fraction of the merchandising potential that Baby Yoda has created.

    I think what it might come down to is how much credit she's able to get for The Mandalorian. That one series salvaged Star Wars. It unified the fan base and showed that the market isn't over saturated with Star Wars, it's just the recent projects had been bad. It also launched Disney+ and created probably the most marketable Star Wars character ever.

    If Kennedy gets credit for The Mandalorian, she'll keep her job. However, if it's seen that The Mandalorian's success was independent of her influence then it just makes her Star Wars projects look bad in comparison.

Similar Threads

  1. Great Star Wars 7 news
    By Krgrecw in forum Fulton County Fire & BBQ
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 12-25-2019, 11:51 AM
  2. General Music Discussion Thread
    By zitothebrave in forum Fulton County Fire & BBQ
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-10-2018, 09:43 PM
  3. 2017 NFL Draft Discussion Thread
    By CrimsonCowboy in forum Fulton County Fire & BBQ
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 04-30-2017, 06:33 PM
  4. 2016 NFL Draft Discussion Thread
    By CrimsonCowboy in forum Fulton County Fire & BBQ
    Replies: 133
    Last Post: 05-21-2016, 09:37 PM
  5. Star Wars movies schedule leak... Including a movie no one saw coming
    By Krgrecw in forum Fulton County Fire & BBQ
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-20-2014, 07:58 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •