The Disney Star Wars Trilogy

["El Gran Magnifico"]

Since there has been some derailment on some of the other threads. Figured I would start this one to discuss the overall arc, storytelling, acting, plot, plot holes, effects, reception, and in general The Star Wars Disney trilogy.

First off, there is no way Disney could have done justice to any of the characters (both old and new) by cramming it all into 3 movies. I get it that Lucas' vision was a 9 episode run, but I think this would have been much better served with 4 possibly 5 movies. So what if the SW story concluded on Episode 11 vs Episode 9? If it told a compelling story and it was spaced correctly (over say 6 - 8 years) it would have worked.

How can there be an expectation to bring back the iconic characters that created a phenomena and do them justice, all the while developing a new series of characters and strive for any type of lasting impact?

IMO the the first 2 movies should have focused on the original trilogy characters. Rey should have been introduced as a character with faults, and the first two movies would have included her struggles and her finding her way in a galaxy where Han Solo, Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia still dominated.

They killed off Han in the first movie. No problem with that. He had a last ride (more than can be said for Luke). The second movie in this trilogy should have ended with a triumphant Luke Skywalker giving the fans a glimpse into the Jedi Luke had become and properly completing his arc.

Somewhere during the third film Luke would pass the torch. We would have seen enough of the struggles, and lessons learned by a properly developed Rey that would have made the payoff bigger. It would have cemented the character as a deserving part of the galaxy (whether her lineage was Skywalker, Solo, Kenobi, Palpatine, or some dude named John Smith) and Mary Sue comparisons wouldn't exist. In short, she would connect.

By the time the 4th movie rolled around the new generation would have been born and it would have set up Disney in a big way. Episode 5 would have ended it. Properly. With enough time to tell the story. With enough time to flesh out and develop characters. With enough time to have both old fans and new properly invested in the story moving forward.

Well done Disney.

 

[BasiltheBatLord]

The sequel trilogy had two main problems (among other minor ones like character development which I won't mention)

1. The plot wasn't mapped out from the beginning, not even a general outline it seems. It was very obvious as the films progressed that they were making up the story as they went along and this made for a very sloppy plot experience where plot points were treated one way by one director and then quickly reversed course by another.

2. There were hardly any meaningful attempts made to effectively worldbuild the era that the trilogy took place in. Concepts like the First Order vs. the Resistance conflict were really poorly explained and it just came off as "rebels vs. the Empire, again" Say what you will of the prequel trilogy as films, but Lucas made a very concentrated effort to worldbuild the Republic and Clone War eras so that they were different and clearly identifiable from the original trilogy.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

1. The plot wasn't mapped out from the beginning, not even a general outline it seems.

And that's what blows my mind. I think the comparison of how MCU was built (and payed off) vs Disney Star Wars - is going to lead to some pretty interesting books, documentaries, and discussions.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Since there has been some derailment on some of the other threads. Figured I would start this one to discuss the overall arc, storytelling, acting, plot, plot holes, effects, reception, and in general The Star Wars Disney trilogy.

First off, there is no way Disney could have done justice to any of the characters (both old and new) by cramming it all into 3 movies. I get it that Lucas' vision was a 9 episode run, but I think this would have been much better served with 4 possibly 5 movies. So what if the SW story concluded on Episode 11 vs Episode 9? If it told a compelling story and it was spaced correctly (over say 6 - 8 years) it would have worked.

How can there be an expectation to bring back the iconic characters that created a phenomena and do them justice, all the while developing a new series of characters and strive for any type of lasting impact?

IMO the the first 2 movies should have focused on the original trilogy characters. Rey should have been introduced as a character with faults, and the first two movies would have included her struggles and her finding her way in a galaxy where Han Solo, Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia still dominated.

They killed off Han in the first movie. No problem with that. He had a last ride (more than can be said for Luke). The second movie in this trilogy should have ended with a triumphant Luke Skywalker giving the fans a glimpse into the Jedi Luke had become and properly completing his arc.

Somewhere during the third film Luke would pass the torch. We would have seen enough of the struggles, and lessons learned by a properly developed Rey that would have made the payoff bigger. It would have cemented the character as a deserving part of the galaxy (whether her lineage was Skywalker, Solo, Kenobi, Palpatine, or some dude named John Smith) and Mary Sue comparisons wouldn't exist. In short, she would connect.

By the time the 4th movie rolled around the new generation would have been born and it would have set up Disney in a big way. Episode 5 would have ended it. Properly. With enough time to tell the story. With enough time to flesh out and develop characters. With enough time to have both old fans and new properly invested in the story moving forward.

Well done Disney.

There are things I, or anyone, would have done differently but this notion that Disney did it wrong and a different approach would somehow result in a perfect series of movies that united the fans, is absurd.

Having said that, Rey's story arc is the one I would tweak. Her sith powers should have materialized by the second movie, in a way that there would have been some conflict (for example, she uses force lighting to save her friends from a Tie Fighter attack, and thinks, hey - this is a useful power to have!).

Instead, she used the power and is immediately horrified. She was a good person before, and good after. There's no mystery or tension as to whether or not she'll join the Emperor. There could have been more of a possibility that she and Kylo would team up, as rulers of the galaxy. Similar to Anakin's story, he wanted to be a supreme ruler too, but there was a logic behind it, in his mind he was doing it for the right reasons of bringing peace to the galaxy.

Kennedy has said they're not going to be beholden to a trilogy format going forward. This should have been the approach. I enjoyed The Last Jedi as a movie, but it didn't advance the story the way the middle act of the trilogy should have, and we get a lot crammed into Rise of Skywalker as a result. Rey's lineage is a mystery that only gets revealed halfway through the third movie, that's too late for it to matter, and it didn't. It felt like a twist for twist's sake. The fact she's a Palpatine has no impact on the overall story. They could have just said, we need a 10th episode, and that would have been fine.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

There are things I, or anyone, would have done differently but this notion that Disney did it wrong and a different approach would somehow result in a perfect series of movies that united the fans, is absurd.

That's a little naive. Disney screwed this up royally. We can reference this on either side of the argument. They could have made a trilogy that did nothing but pay service to fans OR they could have taken it a different direction altogether, understanding they would alienate some of the fan base. They couldn't commit so:

They did both. They tried to appease both camps and that is why this Trilogy failed. Sure, made money, but in no way, shape, or form lived up to any of the expectations Disney had (much less the fans). You had 2 directors, and the individual in charge engaged in a tug-o-war for the last 3 years. It even alienated the cast (if you'd care to look up some of Hamill's interviews and the recent things that are coming out from Boyega).

Disney 100%, without a shadow of a doubt - Did it wrong.

Now we have 3 camps. The Abrams Camp. The Johnson Camp. And the camp that thinks the whole thing stinks.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

That's a little naive. Disney screwed this up royally. We can reference this on either side of the argument. They could have made a trilogy that did nothing but pay service to fans OR they could have taken it a different direction altogether, understanding they would alienate some of the fan base. They couldn't commit so:

They did both. They tried to appease both camps and that is why this Trilogy failed. Sure, made money, but in no way, shape, or form lived up to any of the expectations Disney had (much less the fans). You had 2 directors, and the individual in charge engaged in a tug-o-war for the last 3 years. It even alienated the cast (if you'd care to look up some of Hamill's interviews and the recent things that are coming out from Boyega).

Disney 100%, without a shadow of a doubt - Did it wrong.

Now we have 3 camps. The Abrams Camp. The Johnson Camp. And the camp that thinks the whole thing stinks.

If you think Disney was 100% wrong there's nothing for anyone to discuss with you. This is an absurdly absolute statement.

Nor are there "3 camps". I enjoyed all 3 movies, and there are things in each I liked and disliked.

You don't like that they tried to balance the old and new? Fine, but if they had gone completely old school with the classic characters some people would have hated that. Some people would have hated a new trilogy with entirely new characters. This notion that they could have pleased everyone is absurd.

Did they do a perfect job? No, but there are things about the new films I love and things I don't. I can't imagine being of the mindset where I think a trilogy of movies is 100% good or bad, one way or the other.

 

[erasure fan1]

1. The plot wasn't mapped out from the beginning, not even a general outline it seems. It was very obvious as the films progressed that they were making up the story as they went along and this made for a very sloppy plot experience where plot points were treated one way by one director and then quickly reversed course by another.

I'm not sure what happened behind the scenes with JJ and Disney/Lucasfilm. But JJ has publicly said he had a rough outline and idea of where this story would go. And I believe him. So why didn't they get him for all 3 movies? Was it JJ or Disney? He agreed to come back to try and "fix" and finish this. So I have a hard time believing he wouldn't have just done all 3. Or at least have him be the creative lead for all 3. So for whatever reason they chose the 3 different creators approach, that is why things ended up the way they did. No matter how you slice it, the mistake was made before any of this was ever started.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

1. The plot wasn't mapped out from the beginning, not even a general outline it seems. It was very obvious as the films progressed that they were making up the story as they went along and this made for a very sloppy plot experience where plot points were treated one way by one director and then quickly reversed course by another.

Disney was extremely luck that the MCU had already been planned by Kevin Feige and set into motion by the time they bought Marvel.

They didn't even have to pay for and distribute the first several movies. Paramount did. All Disney had to do is stay out of Marvel's way.

 

[Joesixtoe]

They didn't put Luke in the films because he stole the scenes.. how absurd is that? Also how could you break apart Han and Leia?? Like these don't make sense. Who greenlit these ideas? Happily never after is how our heroes of old fell. All 3 of them died after being depressed in one way or another. I just feel like Disney wanted to replace the old with their own characters. I like the characters don't get me wrong, just not as much as I would have.

 

[WhatJaneSays]

Disney was extremely luck that the MCU had already been planned by Kevin Feige and set into motion by the time they bought Marvel.

They didn't even have to pay for and distribute the first several movies. Paramount did. All Disney had to do is stay out of Marvel's way.

The extent to which the early MCU was pre-planned has been greatly exaggerated over the years. There were a LOT of things that went by the wayside and had to be reworked at very late moments all throughout phase 1 and into phase 2. The mythology that everything was outlined and masterminded has served Marvel Studios extremely well, so it's natural that they perpetuate that thinking now that things are much more on rails.

 

[erasure fan1]

They didn't put Luke in the films because he stole the scenes.. how absurd is that?

Its very. Luke should have been the focus. It's what the majority expected. He is the one who could have ushered in the new heros.

The extent to which the early MCU was pre-planned has been greatly exaggerated over the years. There were a LOT of things that went by the wayside and had to be reworked at very late moments all throughout phase 1 and into phase 2. The mythology that everything was outlined and masterminded has served Marvel Studios extremely well, so it's natural that they perpetuate that thinking now that things are much more on rails.

I think that is partly true. It is very similar to what Lucas did with star wars originally. Marvel, or I should say Feige, had a plan and a vision from the start. Did it evolve? Well of course it did. Spider-Man and inhumans are perfect examples of the plan changing. Feige knew the story he wanted to tell, made a rough plan, and adjusted where he needed to. Lucas did the same. He had a roadmap of where he wanted to go. Sure he took a left or two when he planned to go right. But whats most important is the vision. I say it a lot because it's so important and Lucasfilm/disney never had it with star wars. Feige did.

 

[LSLS]

You don't like that they tried to balance the old and new? Fine, but if they had gone completely old school with the classic characters some people would have hated that. Some people would have hated a new trilogy with entirely new characters. This notion that they could have pleased everyone is absurd.

Sure you aren't going to please 100% of people. But it's equally ridiculous to think there would be a giant schism no matter how this was done and executed. There would be obvious outliers as to how people felt about the movies no matter how they were done. But the schism isn't a few outliers, it is appearing to be a larger divide. They could have gone all new essentially for the trilogy, and some old school would never accept it. They could go all old players, and some would never accept it. They could have straddled the line, and some wouldn't have accepted it. But I don't think any of that was done here. It started that way in the Episode 7. Then the old was completely thrown out. Then the new was thrown out and all old brought back. What you did was not only alienate the few on both sides, but also those who wouldn't have cared had they not seen such a stark contrast. The issue wasn't that they wanted old, or new, or a combination. The issue was the execution of three films that were supposed to be cohesive that felt extremely separate.

 

[Screamface]

It still blows my mind that Disney made a sequel series to Star Wars, with the original actors and never put a scene including all of them. Just short interactions between Han and Leia. Another short interaction with Luke and Leia. None of that would have changed if Carrie didn't die.

If you were to write down a list of the things people would have wanted to see in a sequel trilogy to Star Wars. The very reasons people would want a sequel trilogy to exist. Disney utterly failed in achieving any of it. The trilogy never justified why it needed to have existed from a story or character perspective.

People may try and dismiss such criticisms as, "fans upset they didn't get exactly what they wanted." But that's missing the point. There was a general sense of what Star Wars is, who the characters are. What their lives would be post ROTJ. Scrapping the EU from canon doesn't erase this. You could have told any sort of story, with the originals in as big or small roles as needed and kept their integrity intact. They made a choice to undo their integrity.

The way Luke was handled was astonishing disrespectful to Star Wars and its fans. I've come to the view that they intentionally wanted to go back and undo the legacy and the legend of the Luke Skywalker character. Tear him down, destroy the cultural hero, in order to prop up their new central character. So new audiences to Star Wars would not get the same Luke as old audiences and Rey would come out to be the central hero of the saga.

That seems to be the point of this trilogy, the reason for its existence. To remake the legacy of Star Wars to be around Rey, put her in the place Luke has been for 40 years. At the centre. That's what we're left with, TROS ends exactly where ROTJ ended, but with Rey in Luke's role. It wasn't about building anything new, a great new story, adding anything to Star Wars. This seems to be the reason the trilogy existed. Whether it was intentional or just how it ended up, I don't know. Either seems plausible.

 

[erasure fan1]

If you were to write down a list of the things people would have wanted to see in a sequel trilogy to Star Wars. The very reasons people would want a sequel trilogy to exist. Disney utterly failed in achieving any of it.

That seems to be the point of this trilogy, the reason for its existence. To remake the legacy of Star Wars to be around Rey, put her in the place Luke has been for 40 years.

You got it. It was never about what was best for star wars. It was all about making sure Disney star wars was the main star wars. Unfortunately because of Disneys arrogance, we have a disjointed trilogy with a plethora of missed opportunity. The funny part is, all fans wanted was one last go with their heros, and then move on to the new.

 

[Joesixtoe]

It still blows my mind that Disney made a sequel series to Star Wars, with the original actors and never put a scene including all of them. Just short interactions between Han and Leia. Another short interaction with Luke and Leia. None of that would have changed if Carrie didn't die.

If you were to write down a list of the things people would have wanted to see in a sequel trilogy to Star Wars. The very reasons people would want a sequel trilogy to exist. Disney utterly failed in achieving any of it. The trilogy never justified why it needed to have existed from a story or character perspective.

People may try and dismiss such criticisms as, "fans upset they didn't get exactly what they wanted." But that's missing the point. There was a general sense of what Star Wars is, who the characters are. What their lives would be post ROTJ. Scrapping the EU from canon doesn't erase this. You could have told any sort of story, with the originals in as big or small roles as needed and kept their integrity intact. They made a choice to undo their integrity.

The way Luke was handled was astonishing disrespectful to Star Wars and its fans. I've come to the view that they intentionally wanted to go back and undo the legacy and the legend of the Luke Skywalker character. Tear him down, destroy the cultural hero, in order to prop up their new central character. So new audiences to Star Wars would not get the same Luke as old audiences and Rey would come out to be the central hero of the saga.

That seems to be the point of this trilogy, the reason for its existence. To remake the legacy of Star Wars to be around Rey, put her in the place Luke has been for 40 years. At the centre. That's what we're left with, TROS ends exactly where ROTJ ended, but with Rey in Luke's role. It wasn't about building anything new, a great new story, adding anything to Star Wars. This seems to be the reason the trilogy existed. Whether it was intentional or just how it ended up, I don't know. Either seems plausible.

I feel the same exact way. You just say it better than me . Although I would not have minded if they just skipped ahead 200 years to a new set of characters.

 

[erasure fan1]

Although I would not have minded if they just skipped ahead 200 years to a new set of characters.

I've said it before, that would have been the smarter way to go. Especially with Disney wanting the focus on their characters. That way you don't mishandle the original heros. Sure you would still have some fans who wouldn't have wanted "new". But at least you don't mess up the legacy for the original characters. Because that is one of the biggest issues with the sequels, if not the biggest.

 

[Cosmic Commando]

You know, I just watched ESB last night, and that whole bit with Obi-Wan and Yoda telling Luke not to go to Bespin? Where they said he could save his friends, but he would destroy everything for which they have fought and suffered, and he would become an agent of evil? Maybe it came true.

 

[Joesixtoe]

I've said it before, that would have been the smarter way to go. Especially with Disney wanting the focus on their characters. That way you don't mishandle the original heros. Sure you would still have some fans who wouldn't have wanted "new". But at least you don't mess up the legacy for the original characters. Because that is one of the biggest issues with the sequels, if not the biggest.

Definitely the biggest gripe is the treatment of the original characters. Skip ahead or treat em right.

 

[Screamface]

Definitely the biggest gripe is the treatment of the original characters. Skip ahead or treat em right.

It'll be interesting to see where they go next. Will they just start doing animated shows set between the trilogies that just kind of ignore what is to come?

If I was running Lucasfilm, I'd be looking at the success DC has had with it's animated films. Where they can just make a whole bunch of different films that don't fit into one canon. There's a golden opportunity for Lucasfilm to start adapting EU material into animation. Just called it, "Star Wars Legends" people are savvy enough to understand what it is.

Set up a proper writers room and story group. Just work on doing a faithful adaption that smooths over various issues that material had. Don't be agenda-driven, just aim to make a good adaption.

Although someone will have to inform Kathleen the EU material exists. As according to recent interviews she's unaware that there were Star Wars books and comics that took place after ROTJ.

 

[Joesixtoe]

It'll be interesting to see where they go next. Will they just start doing animated shows set between the trilogies that just kind of ignore what is to come?

If I was running Lucasfilm, I'd be looking at the success DC has had with it's animated films. Where they can just make a whole bunch of different films that don't fit into one canon. There's a golden opportunity for Lucasfilm to start adapting EU material into animation. Just called it, "Star Wars Legends" people are savvy enough to understand what it is.

Set up a proper writers room and story group. Just work on doing a faithful adaption that smooths over various issues that material had. Don't be agenda-driven, just aim to make a good adaption.

Although someone will have to inform Kathleen the EU material exists. As according to recent interviews she's unaware that there were Star Wars books and comics that took place after ROTJ.

Lol yeah I couldn't believe she said that... I love the DC animated movies, they outshine everyone in that category. I think it's hard to do legends movies, because Star Wars is a world building galaxy(if that makes sense lol). Like each story is a piece of the puzzle. You can still totally do awesome stories in between 6-7.. that's 30 years.. Mandalorian is doing this now.