I think Their “analysts” picked a path that they thought would yield the most longterm…as business people tend to do…
If they really were straight simple direct questions then you wouldn't try to twist words around to "win" with a "gotcha". Sorry not going to do it.
Ah maybe this is the problem, the expectation for the ST was maybe too high. Instead of expecting just popcorn films, which is what I've always seen them as, a large portion of fans were expecting "quality cinema" as you put it. To me Star Wars has ALWAYS been flawed, they've ALWAYS been popcorn films that were like the old Saturday afternoon serials that George was paying homage to like Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon. And so I've always liked them for what they were, not holding them up on some pedestal as the pinnacle of cinema.
If I'm being honest if I was in Disney's position I would have probably done the same thing. I would have been like, ok fine then I'll take my toys and go home and just wait until you've had a chance to calm down. And then after a number of years I would have put out a new set of movies that have nothing to do with anything Skywalker related and watch the money roll in. Which appears to be exactly what Disney is doing. Just waiting, putting out some D+ series to tide fans over until the overall mood improves and then release some new movies later.
It's never been an issue that the sequels weren't the Shawshank redemption. It was more about, at least for me, how they treated the legacy. You only need to watch something like cobra kai to see how legacy characters should be treated. The other complaint was they had zero narrative direction.
Kennedy said that this star wars wasn't for us, the old fan. That's why they went the direction they did so they could move on from the OT. Something had to change though. Was it we are more important than they thought because the fans they were courting didn't care as much as they thought? The argument has been the sequels were fine and Disney was happy with them as they were profitable. But the reality of it is they dropped it. So they can't think as highly of it as I'm told.
Personally, while a great film, I never thought Shawshank was the pinnacle of cinema either. But to me that is what is great about Hollywood, they put out all sorts of content for all sort of audiences. There isn't a single type of film or a single type of story being told. There is literally something for everyone.
Well I probably wouldn't have put it that way, but I agree with her sentiment. I would have said something like we're trying to move Star Wars in general forward to bring it to the next generation of fans. The OT and PT will always be there, and so we're trying to use the ST to bridge the OT and PT to the future as we want to move beyond the Skywalker family and tell new stories in this universe.
All most of the OT fans wanted, was one last adventure with their heros.
It was the constant antagonizing of the fans that caused a lot of backlash. I think most fans wanted to move on. Like I said above, we just wanted our heros to have that last adventure. Instead hey were used to prop up the new crew. Personally I think we all want the same thing in the end. New star wars, with new adventures, that embody the spirit of the franchise. Where we disagree I think, is the capability of Disney and Lucasfilm to accomplish it. I just don't think Kennedy is capable of getting it done.
Personally I always thought it was 30 years too late for that. That is the story George should have told instead of doing the PT. And at least 1/3 of the actors playing those heros wanted no part of that story anyways, not really Disney's fault on that one. For that character we're lucky we got what we got.
Part of that I blame the messaging, the other part of that I blame the internet as "constant" is a bit overblown here. If it had been prior to the internet it would have been a comment or two to some no name industry reporter that wouldn't have been retweeted a gazillion times to make it seem like its "constant".
I think Disney/LFL is plenty capable of it, Kennedy aside. The real question is their desire to do it. Right now I don't think there is any desire until there is some distance. We're still only a little less than 3 years removed from RoS, I know it seems like longer but its really only been 3 years.
I agree. If the steaming numbers for the sequels were good, I'm sure we would see the story continuing. Not only on D+ but in the theaters. The question that gets pushed to the side is why, if they were so successful, has Disney abandoned them? We're told that the general public and fan enjoyed the sequels, and the people complaining are the vast minority. If that were true, we would not have seen a full stop in my opinion.
deadline.com
This is an older post but I feel the need to comment. Harrison Ford wanted Han Solo to die since way back in ROTJ. He agreed to come back for TFA provided his character would be killed off once and for all since he felt there was nothing left for Han's character. If we wanted to see Harrison again as Han, he was going to have to die. Personally, I'm glad he was willing to come back for a cameo in TROS as well, probably since Carrie wasn't around so they needed him.
I hope that if Rogue Squadron does come into being that it is the Top Gun of Star Wars movies.Patty Jenkins comments on the status of Rogue Squadron -
"Patty Jenkins is clearing up what happened with Wonder Woman 3 and her return to Rogue Squadron.
“Sigh… I’m not one to talk about private career matters, but I will not allow inaccuracies to continue,” Jenkins shared in a statement on Twitter."
“Here are the facts: I originally left Rogue Squadron after a long and productive development process when it became clear it couldn’t happen soon enough and I did not want to delay WW3 any further. When I did, Lucasfilm asked me to consider coming back to RS after WW3, which I was honored to do, so I agreed. They made a new deal with me. In fact, I am still on it and that project has been in active development ever since. I don’t know if it will happen or not. We never do until the development process is complete, but I look forward to its potential ahead.”
Full article below.
Patty Jenkins Says She “Never Walked Away” From ‘Wonder Woman 3’ & Gives Update On ‘Rogue Squadron’
Patty Jenkins Says She “Never Walked Away” From ‘Wonder Woman 3’ & Gives Update On ‘Rogue Squadron’
I can understand that but I also think it's unrealistic for every legacy character to get a happy ending, especially considering how most Star Wars characters end up. Out of the main trio, Han always seemed the most expendable especially considering that his cliffhanger ending in TESB was deliberately because George wasn't sure Harrison would return for ROTJ. I don't think it would have been feasible to not bring back Han in the ST. If Disney didn't do it, fans would complain endlessly (the same way they complained that Luke and Han never reunited onscreen in what we did get). The other issue was that out of the three, Han was always the most popular character to the general public and Harrison Ford the biggest star, hence why he gets top billing in TFA. Harrison had a lot of influence over the movie, for example most people assume Ben Solo was named after Ben Kenobi but that was more of a coincidence than anything. It was Harrison who requested his onscreen son be named Ben because one of his own sons is named Ben.
I think the issue comes down to the planning of the trilogy. If the force awakens started with a focus on luke, han and leia together. Then if han bites it at the end, I really don't see people all that upset about it. But because of how poorly the sequel trilogy was planned out, hans death ticked off so many people in my opinion. Personally I think if they weren't going to give the fans, or really the world, what they expected. Which was the gang together one last time. Then just go so far out you don't need to worry about legacy characters.
