Rian Johnson still in the mix for new Star Wars Movies

[Disney Irish]

Disney has a long, established history of killing profitable projects because they were not profitable enough. Why is Star Wars so different?

They haven't killed the franchise completely, despite what some fans think, they've just gone in a different creative direction. Sure they may have killed certain projects within the Star Wars franchise, but the franchise is still here and new projects are still being created out of it. Also its not been completely confirmed that content from the sequel trilogy have been completely killed. There were rumors that Daisy had signed on again to reprise her role as Rey in an upcoming project, now whether that goes anywhere remains to be seen.

As for Rian's project, its clear he believes the project hasn't been killed yet.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

I can't imagine they would commit to a Rian trilogy given the backlash. Give him a single movie with the possibility of a follow-up, or a Disney+ series.

 

[Disney Irish]

There will always be Star Wars fans because of what George Lucas and Jon Favreau have created.

It has nothing to do with Ruin Johnson, JJ "Bad Reboot" Abrams and Kathleen "Put my name on it Honey" Kennedy. They have screwed up what was seen as a Billion Dollar "Can't Miss" moneymaker. And in the process have made the prequels look better in comparison.

I appreciate your opinion and response.

 

[erasure fan1]

Unfortunately its hard for so many fans to separate out the "financial" from the "creative". Too many think because there is clear creative failures with Disney Star Wars that it must mean its also a financial failure, despite what the actual financials are.

I personally think a lot of fans can separate them. The problem is the definition of failure. Would I say the sequels were a financial failure? No. But at the same time I wouldn't call it a success either. The mainline movies were not going to lose money at the box off. Too many fans, even if they hated last jedi, were going to see it. The failure in my eyes was, since they had a creative misfire you lost a lot of repeat business. You see that in the boxoffice with each movie doing less. Nothing was going to match force awakens. It was too much of an event. But I would have expected 8 & 9 to land somewhere closer to the 1.7ish billion each. Not just barely squeak past rogue one.

 

[Professortango1]

Fans are clearly the worst thing to happen to Star Wars. Audiences and critics loved 7 & 8, but some vocal manchildren have fits over black stormtroopers, Mary Sue's, and that Space Jesus wasn't as bland and boring as he was in the books they read until the pages stuck together.

 

[Disney Irish]

I personally think a lot of fans can separate them. The problem is the definition of failure. Would I say the sequels were a financial failure? No. But at the same time I wouldn't call it a success either. The mainline movies were not going to lose money at the box off. Too many fans, even if they hated last jedi, were going to see it. The failure in my eyes was, since they had a creative misfire you lost a lot of repeat business. You see that in the boxoffice with each movie doing less. Nothing was going to match force awakens. It was too much of an event. But I would have expected 8 & 9 to land somewhere closer to the 1.7ish billion each. Not just barely squeak past rogue one.

Well in that mindset, then the problem would be the definition of success then too.

If success is only defined by doing better than the previous films in a franchise, then no franchise is going to be deemed successful not even the MCU. The problem comes from expectations set by fans that every sequel film had to have the same or a bigger box office than the one before it. Not every franchise film is going to do better than previous films in the franchise, that is just a fact.

However if you define a film/franchise financial success by normal Hollywood standards which is earning its money back and turning a profit, then its clear Disney Star War has been a financial success overall. Could it have been "more" financially successful if they made different creative decisions, 100% yes. But that doesn't take away the fact that it has and continues to be a financial success overall.

 

[Disney Irish]

Fans are clearly the worst thing to happen to Star Wars.

This I would agree, especially the Fandom Menace folks.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Well in that mindset, then the problem would be the definition of success then too.

If success is only defined by doing better than the previous films in a franchise, then no franchise is going to be deemed successful not even the MCU. The problem comes from expectations set by fans that every sequel film had to have the same or a bigger box office than the one before it. Not every franchise film is going to do better than previous films in the franchise, that is just a fact.

However if you define a film/franchise financial success by normal Hollywood standards which is earning its money back and turning a profit, then its clear Disney Star War has been a financial success overall. Could it have been "more" financially successful if they made different creative decisions, 100% yes. But that doesn't take away the fact that it has and continues to be a financial success overall.

Again, you are creating distinction that don’t exist. Hollywood, and Disney in particular, have killed projects because the one before wasn’t profitable enough. So no, Hollywood is not just fine and dandy with making a bit of a profit.

 

[erasure fan1]

If success is only defined by doing better than the previous films in a franchise, then no franchise is going to be deemed successful not even the MCU.

I specifically said that they wouldn't do better than force awakens. That wasn't the expectation. But it's not unfair to think that 8 & 9 should have done significantly better. I don't think it's wrong though, to expect a finale of a series to be as big or close to the first. The MCU did it.

Could it have been "more" financially successful if they made different creative decisions, 100% yes.

I think we actually agree on that. I just don't see Disney agreeing with it. I'm sure they're glad they didn't lose money. But I don't see them thinking it was a financial success.

 

[Disney Irish]

Again, you are creating distinction that don’t exist. Hollywood, and Disney in particular, have killed projects because the one before wasn’t profitable enough. So no, Hollywood is not just fine and dandy with making a bit of a profit.

I get that some are not happy unless everyone agrees that Disney Star Wars was an utter failure, but I'm sorry you're not going to get everyone to agree to that.

And again, its not like they killed off Star Wars completely. When Hollywoord, or Disney in particular, kills projects due to not being "profitable enough" it tends to mean the end of that franchise. They clearly haven't ended the franchise. Nor does it look like its the end of some of the characters from the sequels.

So lets just agree to disagree here.

 

[Disney Irish]

I specifically said that they wouldn't do better than force awakens. That wasn't the expectation. But it's not unfair to think that 8 & 9 should have done significantly better. I don't think it's wrong though, to expect a finale of a series to be as big or close to the first. The MCU did it.

I think we actually agree on that. I just don't see Disney agreeing with it. I'm sure they're glad they didn't lose money. But I don't see them thinking it was a financial success.

We're just not going to see eye-to-eye here, so lets just agree to disagree...

 

[erasure fan1]

Fans are clearly the worst thing to happen to Star Wars. Audiences and critics loved 7 & 8, but some vocal manchildren have fits over black stormtroopers, Mary Sue's, and that Space Jesus wasn't as bland and boring as he was in the books they read until the pages stuck together.

I don't agree with any of this. Most fans thought 7 was a good start, although it borrowed too much from the originals. The vast majority of the fans liked Finn until Rian turned him into a fool. There are bad fans in EVERY fandom, star wars is no exception. The fans are the best thing to happen to star wars. If it wasn't for them it wouldn't be what it is. We kept it alive when it was completely out of the pop culture consciousness. The vast majority of the complaints with the sequels are valid. I'd say the worst thing to happen to star wars, was zero plan Kennedy.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I get that some are not happy unless everyone agrees that Disney Star Wars was an utter failure, but I'm sorry you're not going to get everyone to agree to that.

And again, its not like they killed off Star Wars completely. When Hollywoord, or Disney in particular, kills projects due to not being "profitable enough" it tends to mean the end of that franchise. They clearly haven't ended the franchise. Nor does it look like its the end of some of the characters from the sequels.

So lets just agree to disagree here.

I didn’t say anything about Star Wars being an utter failure. I didn’t say anything about franchises being killed completely. So no, I will not agree to you repeatedly mischaracterizing my point.

 

[Disney Irish]

I didn’t say anything about Star Wars being an utter failure. I didn’t say anything about franchises being killed completely. So no, I will not agree to you repeatedly mischaracterizing my point.

No I actually got your point, that Disney isn't happy with the money they made from Star Wars because it wasn't "profitable enough". If that is not the point you're trying to make, then it wasn't clear enough.

I'm saying in my opinion that its just not that clear cut. Whether you agree with that or not, well that is your opinion and I have a different one.

 

[lazyboy97o]

No I actually got your point, that Disney isn't happy with the money they made from Star Wars because it wasn't "profitable enough". If that is not the point you're trying to make, then it wasn't clear enough.

I'm saying in my opinion that its just not that clear cut. Whether you agree with that or not, well that is your opinion and I have a different one.

I said nothing about Disney’s happiness with Star Wars. My issue was with your base definitions to define success.

 

[Disney Irish]

My issue was with your base definitions to define success.

I'm sorry but your cryptic message about Disney killing projects didn't convey that. Sometimes its just better to come straight out and post your point.

So I pose this question to you. I'm using just pure BO to define the financial success of the sequel movies, you know the same thing that we use for all other Disney movies including the MCU. Its either they were a financial success or they bombed, there is no qualifiers here because we don't use them with other films. Why is Star Wars different?

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'm sorry but your cryptic message about Disney killing projects didn't convey that. Sometimes its just better to come straight out and post your point.

So I pose this question to you. I'm using just pure BO to define the financial success of the sequel movies, you know the same thing that we use for all other Disney movies including the MCU. Its either they were a financial success or they bombed, there is no qualifiers here because we don't use them with other films. Why is Star Wars different?

This right here is what I am taking issue with. What you are using to define financial success is not what is always used by the studios. It’s not always about what we would consider to be a success using an objective, consistent metric. They do act inconsistently and do deem profitable projects to be financial failures.

 

[Disney Irish]

This right here is what I am taking issue with. What you are using to define financial success is not what is always used by the studios. It’s not always about what we would consider to be a success using an objective, consistent metric. They do act inconsistently and do deem profitable projects to be financial failures.

Well this is where we're just going to disagree. I get your point, and appreciate your opinion, but just disagree. I can understand decisions within the studio are made on projects due to various reasons, including "not profitable enough". But that doesn't mean externally we can't say they weren't financially successful. So whether you take issue with it or not, I'll continue to say that the sequels were a financial success but not a creative success.

 

[Professortango1]

The fans are the best thing to happen to star wars. If it wasn't for them it wouldn't be what it is. We kept it alive when it was completely out of the pop culture consciousness. The vast majority of the complaints with the sequels are valid. I'd say the worst thing to happen to star wars, was zero plan Kennedy.

That's the attitude which has turned the fans tyrannical. They think they own SW and SW should serve them. Its why we saw Mando season 2 go down the rabbit hole of character cameos replacing storytelling. Its why so many actors have said they would never do another SW film after harassment and toxicity. They are the reason Lucas sold it to Disney.

The sequel trilogy isn't perfect. I enjoy TLJ, but it has some issues. But making Luke interesting and complex isn't one of them. But the rabid fans had a meltdown and review bombed it and future installments.

And lets also admit that the OT isn't perfect either. Even my beloved New Hope and Empire have some issues.

I love Indiana Jones, but its odd that nobody sent death threats to those who were involved with Crystal Skull. They just didn't like the movie. I love Back to the Future, but us fans are not demanding more sequels and prequels and spin offs. We are content with loving the trilogy. The Trekkies didn't revolt with the new trilogy of Star Trek films being different than what they were hoping for. There seems to be something very specific about SW fans. The movies are aimed at 12 year olds, and I feel a large portion of the uber fans have matured a day since.

And let me say this: I have friends who are fans of SW, so I know its not ALL fans. We play our Star Wars RPG's and nerd out. They watch all the cartoons and everything and can still look at the films objectively.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Well this is where we're just going to disagree. I get your point, and appreciate your opinion, but just disagree. I can understand decisions within the studio are made on projects due to various reasons, including "not profitable enough". But that doesn't mean externally we can't say they weren't financially successful. So whether you take issue with it or not, I'll continue to say that the sequels were a financial success but not a creative success.

You saying you think they were a financial success is different from saying Disney considered them a financial success. You were previously saying Disney must have considered them a success because they were profitable.