Is Disney's Star Wars Franchise In Trouble? (cosmicbook.news)

Disney's Han Solo movie was the first Star Wars movie to lose money. But is there a larger problem? dryriver writes: Comic book news website Cosmic Book News reports that even though Disney put bucketloads of Star Wars out there in 2018, revenues from all things Star Wars have actually fallen, according to Disney SEC filings. Disney made more Star Wars money in 2017 -- when only Rogue One hit cinemas -- than in 2018, when Solo, Last Jedi and SW Battlefront 2 were released.

A Rian Johnson-led Star Wars trilogy appears to have been delayed or cancelled entirely. Rumored spinoff movies for Bobba Fett and Obi-Wan Kenobi appear to have been put on the backburner or cancelled. Disney's CEO has confirmed that the Star Wars movies are being slowed down.

Comments

Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[Anonymous Coward]

Time to be honest. The Last Jedi was SJW force-fed garbage while shitting on the last of the OT characters. This movie destroyed the franchise.

Re:Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[prisoner-of-enigma]

Perhaps the gaping plot holes, illogical character actions, and inconsistency with decades of in-universe lore have something to do with it?

Just a thought.

Re:Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[fazig]

Well, if they criticized that, then they'd actually made a good point. There's tons of stuff that you may not like there.

But if you see post that focus on the SJW aspect, you pretty much know that they just jumped on the bandwagon and don't really have a lot of points on their own. I think it really says a lot about the person's own preoccupation with gender bullshit.

To use an analogy: It's kind of like saying that midi-chlorians ruined the prequels.
Yes, it was a stupid idea. They should not have done it that way. But is that really the main thing you should focus on when levering criticism towards those movies? Would the movies have been better if they did it different? Would Episode 7 and 8 have been better if they changed the gender roles?
Personally I do not think so. Gaping plot holes would still be there. Illogical character actions would still be there. Inconsistencies and or retconning would still be there.

Re:Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[Berkyjay]

You had me until you brought the SJW thing into it. The movie just sucked in it's own right not because you are threatened by women.

Re:Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[Mr. Dollar Ton]

The first three films had originality, actor chemistry and did not take themselves very seriously. At the time, no one had done what Star Wars had in terms of visuals. The actors played as if they lived in the films. Shit was easy to relate to. Most of Lucas's ineptness as a director was "cured" by skillful post production work. They were good, solid fun films.

Almost everything past them, especially the latest few has been super-pretentious, self-conscious in the "oh, look at me greatness" kind of way, but that's all they had. The cast and the fascination of Lucas with special effects killed the prequels. Portman, the new Vader, the vader-boy, young Kenobi, the bad motherfucker should not have been there. The post-RotJ stuff is all shit, everything in it sucks. The stories are a contrived and stupid rehash of the original trilogy. Nobody knows who the people in the new films are. Hamil and Fisher's characters were unrecognizable, Harrison Ford showed up briefly to die, the token black guy and the giftless flat-chested broad are boring and mechanical. I don't even remember the rest.

So no, the original trilogy is nothing like the rest of the crap.

The only acceptable film post RotJ was Rogue One.

Re:Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[hairyfeet]

Sorry but he was right, if the producer AND the director talk nothing but Social Justice and then the entire plot is nothing but Social Justice? Then I don't see how you can call it anything but an SJW movie.

If you would like some examples here goes...ALL MEN in the movie are shown as either weak, incompetent, reckless, or just plain idiots. Our supposed male lead (Poe) gets constantly talked down to, treated like shit, ignored and kept out of the loop, and basically treated like a child. Admiral Gender Studies OTOH is brought in after killing a character everyone actually liked for no damn reason (Akbar) and then made out to be a heroine when SHE KILLS MORE REBELS THAN HUX DOES, she kills so many in fact when I first saw it I thought the twist was she was working for the Empire as she was a better killer of rebels than Hux ever was! Then you have Mary Rey who can defeat trained Sith with ZERO studies cuz...vagina I guess? It certainly is never explained in the damn movie how she is able to defeat all these trained warriors when she was literally a scrap rat a week ago. You have Rose Tico whose whole job seems to be to bring in a completely pointless PETA message and to screw Finn out of actually getting to be anything more than a pathetic comic relief. Which is rather insulting that Lando in the 80s got to be a hero and the only black guy in the new trilogy is a pathetic bumbling sidekick but I guess being a guy trumps his being black in the Oppression Olympics. Hell even Phasma which was built up to be this bad ass evil super trooper got stuffed on a bus and run off screen because God Forbid she actually be able to fight as gasp! Shock! that would mean someone would have to raise their hand to a wamens oh noes! Oh did I mention that Laura Dern announced Admiral Gender Studies is a lesbian so they could score a few more virtue points despite whether she even had genitals or not having fuck all to do with the movie?

So I'm sorry but Kennedy and Johnson made it quite clear on social media this movie was down with Social Justice, the entire plot is based on the premise the females are never wrong and all the guys are evil or incompetent, this is right up there with Ghostbusters 2016 on the SJW scale and the ones that made it are quite proud of that and will be more than happy to tell you so so I really don't see how calling a spade a spade can be argued here.

Re:Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[fazig]

Can you aspire to be a toy? A car? A robot? A feeling?
Not really, but Disney Pixar made it work somehow in their respective animated movies.
Have you seen Short Circuit or E.T?
How do they manage that? My hypothesis is that they probably know how to write characters and plots the audience can identify with no matter what the characters are specifically.

Re:Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[thegarbz]

Have you watched Star Wars before? Terrible dialogue and so so acting with the good vs evil story line.

None of that makes for a bad movie. Also none of that is listed in the GP's complaints.

Rogue One was passable but it suffered from incredibly weak writing and poor character development. The worse is Mary Sue ... err I mean Rei .... oh look, slip of the fingers but I made my point anyway.

I know someone who writes Starwars fan fiction and actually included a character named Mary Sue in his books that wasn't as much of a Mary Sue. Zero training, magical use of the force, able to hold her own against EmoVader, it was just lazy writing. The crappy dialogue can stay as it adds charm and character, but man the writers need to go back to highschool. They all would have failed grade 9 English class with this story.

Re:Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[Ol Olsoc]

Perhaps the gaping plot holes, illogical character actions, and inconsistency with decades of in-universe lore have something to do with it?

Just a thought.

Yup, that's a big point. As well, the response to criticism was to insult and belittle those who complained. The people who complained were called unable to handle strong women, called racist and sexist.

Now while I suppose that we might make a case that fans of Star Wars are immature and foolish for attending the movies multiple times, and spending thousands on memorabilia.

But in a different Universe, Ferengi's Rules of acquisition number 57. Good customers are almost as rare as Latinum - treasure them.

The abuse hurled at passionate fans who cared enough to complain show that Kennedy, Johnson et al, who don't take telling and seem to think that the people they insulted will put up with anything. and still open their wallets. The fans said they weren't going to watch Solo. It appears to be true.

And the people the new Star Wars Power Brokers have tried to appeal to don't appear to have the same spending habits as the former fans.

Re:Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[Ol Olsoc]

You can have a good story with strong female characters and weak male characters. I

No, you cannot. For a story to be good, it needs characters that all can aspire to. We have plenty of "strong" female and "weak" male characters in the sequels. And you need no feeling search to know it is crap. Or that you're wrong.

SJWars is simply taking the Television model of the Stupid Dumpy Husband and the Hot Smart Wife and tried to apply it to movies, only substituting not so hot women.

You simply cannot win with the people they are trying to appeal to. Remember what should have been the ultimate strong female movie, Wonder Woman, they enraged the easily offended set because Gadot didn't have armpit hair, and that since she came from a female only culture, she was raped because she couldn't really give consent.

Re:Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[Ol Olsoc]

Who fucking cares? Does having weak male characters threaten you some how?

Seriously, you mistake not likeing something with being threatened by it.

Kennedy and Johnson belittled and insulted anyone who dared to disagree with them.

Let's take a restaraunt for example. If you order a rare steak and it comes out well done, and you complain, so the manager comes out and calls you an asshole, upbraids you publicly, and if you don't like it you just aren't man enough to handle a well done steak - are you going to come back?

Unless you are a masochist - probably not.

Why don't you ask these presumably threatened males if they like the Alien Trilogy. Or if they like the early Terminator movies. TThere is a disconnect between how "strong women" were portrayed then, and the insecure vibe you get from present day movies, which has a strong undercurrent of misandry.

By the way - manshaming doesn't work any more.

Re: Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[cyber-vandal]

Luke faces Vader and gets his ass kicked despite some training from Yoda. Rei has no training in anything but can fly the Falcon without any pilot training, manages to escape captivity using the Force and easily beats a well-trained Force user despite never having wielded a lightsaber. But not a Mary Sue oh no.

Re:Rian Johnson killed Star Wars

[Mr. Dollar Ton]

I think that Force Awakens and Last Jedi movies were phenomenal.

This must be some new meaning of "phenomenal" that is not in the dictionary.

Also, you don't know the original films very well.

Luke did not come off as a whiny, entitled baby. He was a hard-working country boy with a dream, to be a pilot. Between a sunrise and a sunset, he met a war hero and a member of a brutally destroyed legendary cult (Guinness); learned that his family was at the center of the most epic galactic story of his time; fell in love with a beautiful girl (Fisher), who was a hero and a princess (ah, that truly American obsession with royalty); and had his foster family, the closest people to him, destroyed by the person who killed his father.

Did he turn into a hero overnight? No. He chose the hero's way, but he remained relatable. He was a good pilot with some awareness of "the Force", but he did not become insta-Jedi by touching a light saber. He had to spend an episode and a half - an epoch in cinema - to become one. He was mocked by everyone, but his visions of his dead mentor. Solo laughed at him, Yoda mocked him, Vader told him, "you're not a Jedi yet", the mobster lizard dismissed his "mind tricks" and the evilest creature in that universe nearly killed him.

He faced real enemies and in number - he saved a princess only to have her fall for the other guy, fought a space battle or two, got nearly killed several times, spent a long time in exhausting Jedi training, had his hand cut off, and found out the girl he loves is his sister. Yet he did not despair. He won his battles, he learned the Jedi ways, he put on a glove and managed to do a trick no Jedi before him could - destroy the Dark Side couple, which in that universe is finding the Grail. In the end, he congratulated his sister and went on to party with two dead men and a dead lizard. Now, that's what I call a true, selfless hero.

What parts in the "phenomenal" sequel movies come even close to this epic journey? How did the sexless character of that Emma Watson wannabe became a "hero"? What "heroic" things did she accomplish that compare to the story of Skywalker? And what's the story of her getting there? Remind me, for I can't recall, those movies were that bad.

Like I said, you claim to take the movies "at face value", but it appears you don't know their faces very well. If at all.

It's the SEGA effect

[DontBeAMoran]

Release too many things, too quickly, without enough time between your releases, and people get tired of it and lose interest.

Re:It's the SEGA effect

[prisoner-of-enigma]

Disney tried to copy Marvel's success a bit too much and it bit them. However, I'd argue the enormous decline in quality to be at least as responsible as the rapid release schedule.

Perhaps the two are related? With a bit more time between releases, TLJ's script might've gotten in front of more people and given them more chances to tell Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy they were supposed to be making a Star Wars movie instead of contemporary political commentary. Lord knows Mark Hamill did everything he could to tell them it was dreck.

Re: It's the SEGA effect

[Anonymous Coward]

The other AC mentioned that they do generally go hand in hand. But it's not a given. Which is true.

The problem is, ultimately it feels like none of it matters.

Take the Marvel movies where one of the 'rules' is "it's all connected" and it feels like it's all planned. Now it may not all really be connected or all really be planned. But it feels enough that way to keep people engaged.

Take Solo for instance. When they brought Darth Maul on screen my thought was 'Who the fuck cares? It means nothing anyway.'

Or take TLJ, it takes place right after TFA, but for a lot of people it doesn't FEEL like it does. It feels like all the plot threads got dropped.

And so on.

It feels like they are just throwing darts at a wall for plot points. Or rolling a die. Or have a monkey at a typewriter. It doesn't matter which it is. But it feels like they're just doing stuff to keep doing stuff.

They need to have a real plan or at least it needs to feel like they have a plan. And it needs to be one that we care about. Whatever quantity of movies it takes to get to that point, is what it is. If it's one movie every 10 years, that's fine. If it's 10 movies a year, that's fine too. But it needs to feel like we're actually watching a story unfold and not just random shit being tossed on the screen.

Weird, I actually liked Solo

[drinkypoo]

Solo was no Episode IV or V but it was easily of the same quality as VI, and IMO, far more enjoyable than literally any of the other films.

I think Star Wars was a product of its time, and what made it great was the lack of competition. These days, eye-popping special effects are a dime a dozen, and audiences are used to aliens and blasters. It had nowhere to go but down.

It definitely can't help that the Star Wars video games are there to sell microtransactions these days, either. Over half the American public plays video games, don't tell me it doesn't matter.

Re:Really shouldn't blame Solo

[omnichad]

I didn't bother with Solo. Partly because of TLJ. But also partly because I had just seen a Star Wars movie and there was no anticipation or build up to wait for it. No anticipation means no drive to go. The mindset is that there's always a current Star Wars movie and it doesn't matter.

Disney killed most of what it thouched

[bobbied]

How's this a surprise?

Disney is about making money, not about art or entertainment. Their primary focus is to turn a profit on the movie they are making. So, if cutting corners makes them more money, if not consulting with the creators of the franchise or taking their advice looks like it will produce more profit, they are going to do it.

But let's face it. The original Star Wars concept was at best 3 movies and it's been down hill since The Empire Strikes Back and we are waiting for installment 9? This franchise has been driven into the ground and milked for all it was worth and then some (pun intended). Few franchises last this long with Rocky and Star Trek being about all I remember.

Disney bought an old used up sports car, that had 200,000 miles, poor tires and a bad front end out of somebodies barn. I'm not surprised they are having difficulty making money on it's restoration. Such work is a labor of love, not profit, and Disney is about the latter. I'm thinking this franchise is about over.

Re:I never understood

[magusxxx]

Not to sound too inappropriate...

But I think after we see what they do with Leia in the next movie we're going to wish she would have stayed in space.

Re:Solo was actually good

[omnichad]

Rogue One was better than any of the 3rd trilogy. First one was just a rehash, while the second was just trash.

No planning

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Disney acquired the rights to the greatest movie franchise of all time and flooded the market. On top of this, they decided to make the tentpole of their investment (the sequel trilogy) without even so much of a sketch of a story arc. (Marvel people must be stunned at their incompetence.) And instead of sourcing great material from a vast and wonderful expanded universe to make the best proper sequel trilogy possible, they decided to make everything up as they go film-by-film, giving too much liberty to the creators. This ultimately resulted in Last Jedi. Just from a literary perspective, how did a script that broke the conventional trilogy story arc get greenlit? It's great, for example, when stories are successful with a non-conventional arc but those are the exception, and the "rule" exists for a reason. You don't bet the farm by taking a risk like that. But that's what Disney did.

Re:Really shouldn't blame Solo

[prisoner-of-enigma]

Solo had nigh-impossible shoes to fill. Han Solo is one of the most iconic characters in cinema. Unless they could grow a younger clone of Harrison Ford and have him star in it, there's virtually no actor in existence who could satisfy fan expectations. Disney unwisely took a huge risk in even trying.

A much better idea would've been something more like Rogue One, focusing on less well known characters who inhabited the same universe and were integral to the plots of the original trilogy. Alas, Hollywood is bereft of original ideas these days. They think the "safe bets" are reboots, retreads, and re-use of classic cinema. Personally I'm glad Solo flopped. Maybe it'll force Hollywood to come up with something at least partially original for a change.