Movies Disney puts the brakes on "A Star Wars Story" anthology films

[nublood]

I think Solo is just the beginning of Disney not meeting their expected profits for a SW movie. Yes, they've made like a cajillion dollars on the franchise thus far. But I think SW movies will continue to decline and disappoint with people like Kathleen Kennedy and Rian Johnson hanging around.

[Brick]

I think this was a rash decision to put the A Star Wars Story films on hold just because Solo underperformed at the box office, especially when it had quite a few things going against it.

[johnny]

2 hours ago, number305 said:

The two announced teams currently working on trilogies have not been cancelled at this point... however I would not count Rian's trilogy as a slam dunk at this point.  I think Disney is taking a step back to figure everything out.  Ep 8 was divisive for the fan base, I would not be surprised for them to move on from Rian.  There are a lot of quality directors out there who would not bring pre-existing baggage to a new very expensive trilogy.  

Why would they move on from the guy who made over a billion dollars and had a movie that was reviewed excellently because of some nerds with a grudge 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

They need to give the entire franchise to Dave Filoni to have sole control of the cannon. 

[Reputator]

5 hours ago, sblfilms said:

 

Disney likes making money, Johnson’s entry made well over a billion dollars at the box office alone. They don’t care about divisiveness in the fan base as long as they sell tickets and merch.

 

It also made less than The Force Awakens and I'm sure they were hoping for an increase.

 

They're also not looking two seconds ahead. If a film soured a significant chunk of the fanbase that can hurt their long-term revenue.

[Iculus]

2 minutes ago, Reputator said:

 

It also made less than The Force Awakens and I'm sure they were hoping for an increase.

 

They're also not looking two seconds ahead. If a film soured a significant chunk of the fanbase that can hurt their long-term revenue.

Hoping, maybe, but it's hard for me to imagine that they were expecting an increase.  TLJ didn't sour a significant chunk of anything. Most people loved the movie.

[Reputator]

1 minute ago, Iculus said:

Hoping, maybe, but it's hard for me to imagine that they were expecting an increase.  TLJ didn't sour a significant chunk of anything. Most people loved the movie.

 

Why would they expect a decrease?

[Iculus]

13 minutes ago, Reputator said:

 

Why would they expect a decrease?

History.

[Reputator]

3 minutes ago, Iculus said:

History.

 

What, based on the prequels? What about Iron Man 1, 2, and 3? Transformers? Spider-Man 3 versus its predecessors? Lord of the Rings? Nolan's Batman films?

[johnny]

Maybe the fact that TFA was a historic event and the first Star Wars movie in a long time after an acquisition to take control away from Lucas who created three shit movies. Maybe that’s why they would expect a decrease with TLJ. I’m not sure why anybody would expect an increase. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Reputator said:

It also made less than The Force Awakens and I'm sure they were hoping for an increase.

 

They weren't. They are a business, they do actual forecasting looking at historical data and trends. I can’t say exactly what they were projecting heading into release, but it ended up within the range of their expectations and only slightly below the midpoint of that range. It did what they expected, and RJ handled the production like a veteran of the mega blockbuster which given all the production issues they’ve been dealing with...that’s a big deal.

 

1 hour ago, Reputator said:

 

What, based on the prequels? What about Iron Man 1, 2, and 3? Transformers? Spider-Man 3 versus its predecessors? Lord of the Rings? Nolan's Batman films?

 

Starting with the performance of the second film in relation to the first of the previous two trilogies in the series, maybe?

 

Even the Star Wars Story flicks have now followed that same pattern

[Reputator]

8 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

Starting with the performance of the second film in relation to the first of the previous two trilogies in the series, maybe?

 

Even the Star Wars Story flicks have now followed that same pattern

 

But do you believe they were only looking at data from Star Wars movies and not other franchises?

[Guest]

Just now, Reputator said:

 

But do you believe they were only looking at data from Star Wars movies and not other franchises?

 

“Starting” indicates that’s not the only thing. But past franchise performance is kind of a big indicator for future franchise performance when you’re 9 films in.

[SaysWho?]

Every second Star Wars movie made less than the previous one. And each initial Star Wars movie was an event unlike its sequels (Star Wars was the first period, Phantom Menace was the first new Star Wars movie in a decade and a half, Force Awakens was the first new one in 10 years and the first to feature the initial main cast since 1983).

 

Look at Batman 1989: that was an event movie. Batman Returns made more in its opening weekend but ultimately less in the long-run.

 

Avengers 1 made more than the second because the first was an event and the first time we saw all the heroes together. The second was just a sequel and not Infinity War levels of a sequel (and also coming off event movie Black Panther who was featured in the movie). Black Panther is going to outgross Infinity War in North America. Are you going to tell me Black Panther is more popular than the Black Panther hero and everyone else? Of course not: Black Panther was an event film domestically.

[Brick]

It should be noted and stressed of course that Disney/Lucasfilm have not confirmed this, so this news may be inaccurate, and the stand alone spin offs may still be on. 

[Reputator]

15 hours ago, SaysWho? said:

Every second Star Wars movie made less than the previous one. And each initial Star Wars movie was an event unlike its sequels (Star Wars was the first period, Phantom Menace was the first new Star Wars movie in a decade and a half, Force Awakens was the first new one in 10 years and the first to feature the initial main cast since 1983).

 

Look at Batman 1989: that was an event movie. Batman Returns made more in its opening weekend but ultimately less in the long-run.

 

Avengers 1 made more than the second because the first was an event and the first time we saw all the heroes together. The second was just a sequel and not Infinity War levels of a sequel (and also coming off event movie Black Panther who was featured in the movie). Black Panther is going to outgross Infinity War in North America. Are you going to tell me Black Panther is more popular than the Black Panther hero and everyone else? Of course not: Black Panther was an event film domestically.

 

You've found some examples of sequels that didn't make more than the first entry, just as I found some that did. Regardless of whether there's evidence to support both arguments, I do agree with your point about "event films".

 

Now, what will be interesting is Episode 9. There are even more examples of third films that grossed more than the originals, but I would be very surprised if 9 even meets the earnings of Episode 8.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Reputator said:

 

You've found some examples of sequels that didn't make more than the first entry, just as I found some that did. Regardless of whether there's evidence to support both arguments, I do agree with your point about "event films".

 

Now, what will be interesting is Episode 9. There are even more examples of third films that grossed more than the originals, but I would be very surprised if 9 even meets the earnings of Episode 8.

 

There are not two arguments. There is no rule. There exists in nearly equal measure every permutation of boxoffice performance for movie trilogies.

 

I would hapily drop the gentleman’s wager that 9 outgrosses 8 :p

[Gavin King]

On 6/21/2018 at 2:51 PM, sblfilms said:

 

Disney likes making money, Johnson’s entry made well over a billion dollars at the box office alone. They don’t care about divisiveness in the fan base as long as they sell tickets and merch.

 

- I think you saw some of that divisiveness bubble up in the box office until Solo hit theaters. People didn't know they would have issues with VIII until after they paid their money. I think the 3 legged stool of not lower box office from Solo was fan response from Episode VIII, timing (too soon since last star wars movie, to close to other geek movies), and not sure how 'origin' stories will play when beloved characters are recast.

 

In my opinion, Disney should stick with 1 star wars movie a year every December. Own the holiday time, make it a traditional thing family do every year, go see the new star wars film. Let Disney Marvel own the spring/summer. Let Star Wars be a special event. Have a main trilogy every other year, stand-alone film every other year. After the Rey trilogy is done, do one of these new trilogies for 6 years, and then come back to the main timeline again. Need to give people time to breathe, also need time to really develop the films and strategy... need films to coordinate.

[Kal-El814]

I can't believe that people are still clinging to the notion that anything other than a small, very vocal minority disliked The Last Jedi.

[Reputator]

3 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

I can't believe that people are still clinging to the notion that anything other than a small, very vocal minority disliked The Last Jedi.

 

Nope. Significant chunk.

[Kal-El814]

3 minutes ago, Reputator said:

 

Nope. Significant chunk.

Not by any objective measure, but okay.

[number305]

Just now, Kal-El814 said:

Not by any objective measure, but okay.

But your opinion is super objective... 

[Reputator]

Just now, Kal-El814 said:

Not by any objective measure, but okay.

 

Sure.

[Kal-El814]

Just now, number305 said:

But your opinion is super objective... 

 

2 minutes ago, Reputator said:

Sure.

 

CInemascore isn't my opinion. You don't end up with an A there if a "significant chunk" of moviegoers dislike something. I think Episode II is a fucking abomination and the prequels are generally really bad, but... audiences fucking love them despite what enthusiasts on the internet say. I don't know why this just gets chronically ignored when talking about fan reaction to TLJ.

 

[CitizenVectron]

32 minutes ago, Reputator said:

 

Nope. Significant chunk.

 

DO you have any research to back this up? I am genuinely asking, not meaning to be snarky. I ask because online forums can't count for either side since it is 100% self-selecting (you only go online with the intent of sharing your opinion, so only the opinionated share them). The only evidence that can be used is that collected from people who were not self-selecting themselves.

 

As far as I know, the only research of his nature that has been done is by Cinemascore which showed TLJ was very popular with the general audience (A). While I do believe that there is a divide amongst longtime fans (I would agree that it's probably a 50/50 split for and against the movie in this group), hardcore Star Wars fans probably only comprise 5% or less of the movie-going audience in general.

[HGLatinBoy]

Who the fuck saw the Solo Trailers and got excited and couldn't wait to see it? NO ONE! If anything Star Wars fans went because its Star Wars, general public wanted to see something that's playing and even then between Avengers and Deadpool you would see what you probably wanted to see more. Solo bombed because it had Zero hype, and it sucked critically because they're doing goofy shit with the movies to begin with and the Fans themselves aren't happy, not even that there is a bit of a fatigue going in and people had a bad taste in their mouth from TLJ and probably weren't feeling up seeing another Star Wars movie 5-6 FUCKING MONTHS after the last Star Wars movie.

 

Also, who the fuck saw the Last Jedi and fucking loved it? NO ONE. People maybe were okay with it, didn't care or didn't like it. Some even hated it. I know I didn't like it and I went in with a lot of hype especially after Rogue One. There was hype going in to seeing  The Last Jedi, especially after Fisher had just pass. I wouldn't say i was too happy with TFA but I had high hopes for the TLJ after TFA.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, number305 said:

But your opinion is super objective... 

 

An opinion is subjective, but what isn’t particularly subjective is what the aggregate opinion of the audience was.

 

An A Cinemascore and a high 80s “recommended” via Posttrak are both collected with standard scientific polling methods.

 

And as @Kal-El814 mentioned, that doesn’t really tell you anything about it being good or not. People love the prequels, even Episode 2 which is not even a fully functioning movie.

[CitizenVectron]

As sblfilms has also said, all we know about TLJ is that it was widely liked by audiences from the only two scientific polls we have. Anything else is anecdotal, especially internet forum feedback since it is self-selective. That doesn't mean it is a good movie (or bad or okay), as there is no such thing as an objectively good or bad movie. But in terms of being liked and enjoyed, TLJ is universally both by the public.

[Mercury33]

I’m not sure how this could ever be proven but I’d wager a large sum that the reason for Solos poor performance had almost ZERO to do with any perceived dislike of Episode VIII. To think that a large chunk of people would abandon such a beloved franchise with some of th most loyal fans on the planet because Luke isn’t a Ninja is ludicrous. 

[Kal-El814]

1 hour ago, HGLatinBoy said:

Also, who the fuck saw the Last Jedi and fucking loved it? NO ONE. 

Again, this is demonstrably false.

 

We can have (and have had, to the consternation of our glorious leader) discussions as to whether or not TLJ is a good movie. But the general moviegoing public loved it and there's evidence for this.

[SaysWho?]

2 hours ago, HGLatinBoy said:

Also, who the fuck saw the Last Jedi and fucking loved it? NO ONE. 

 

Some of you live in strange bubbles.

[johnny]

If you talk to people who don’t spend hours on the internet every day, you’ll find a lot of people that like the prequels. So of course they’ll like an actual good movie like TLJ  

[CitizenVectron]

1 hour ago, Mercury33 said:

I’m not sure how this could ever be proven but I’d wager a large sum that the reason for Solos poor performance had almost ZERO to do with any perceived dislike of Episode VIII. To think that a large chunk of people would abandon such a beloved franchise with some of th most loyal fans on the planet because Luke isn’t a Ninja is ludicrous. 

 

And if this pattern were actually true, then TFA should have bombed since there was a generally perceived feeling amongst the fanbase (though not public) that the entire PT sucked. But these sorts of things don't really hold up unless it's the same director, series, etc. So if Rian Johnson had made two Star Wars in a row and then the third bombed, we could reasonably believe that maybe the first two had something to do with it (assuming other conditions weren't in play). But Solo was a separate movie by separate people starring separate actors. I don't think the general movie-going audience really pays attention to this stuff like we do, and they just weren't excited for Solo.

 

Honestly, I expect IX to do very well, probably a little below VIII. Audiences are going to want to see what happens to Luke now that he's dead, and I'm sure a large part of the marketing will go towards that.

[johnny]

A bunch of people from the KKK (Knights of Kathleen Kennedy) up in here!!!!!!!! 

[HGLatinBoy]

2 hours ago, SaysWho? said:

 

Some of you live in strange bubbles.

I stand by what I said. I cant imagine anyone ever saying "The Last Jedi is my favorite Star Wars movie and its also my favorite movie of all time"