Is Star Wars dying?

Jump to Last Post 1-12 of 12 discussions (29 posts)
  1. Stevennix2001 profile image87
    Stevennix2001posted 2 months ago

    With the toy sales for Star Wars continuing to drop, the lackluster and mixed reports about Galaxy's Edge at Disney Land and Disney World not living up to expectations, Solo bombing in theaters, and the lack of hype for Episode 9, one has to ask...is Star Wars dying?

    This is something I never thought I'd live long enough to see the day, but it seems like Disney has killed Star Wars, and I'm not sure if there's anything we can do to stop it from happening.   

    While I haven't written a review in years, and I'm not sure if I will anytime soon, but I will tell you that I personally didn't care for the Last Jedi at all.  Not because of the reasons Kathleen Kennedy wants to say why people didn't like it, as it's part of her SJW narrative.  No, I just didn't like it because you had so much potential with the story Abrams set up in Force Awakens that Rian Johnson not only didn't take advantage of any of it, but he subverted our expectations in arguably the most insulting way possible, while ruining characters like Luke Skywalker so bad that even Mark Hamill admitted he couldn't stand how his own character was portrayed in that movie.  It's disgraceful.  They turned arguably one of the most heroic optimistic characters in cinematic history, and they turned him into a coward that tries to kill his own nephew, and wants the jedi to end?  That's not who Luke is, but I digress.

    Honestly, I have my own thoughts on this, and trust me, there's other reasons I don't like the last jedi, and NONE OF THEM have anything to do with Rey being a "Strong independent woman" character.  Although I will say I don't like how they made her an overpowered mary sue, who's so bad ass she needs no training to master the force.  That's the only thing I will say I didn't like about her, but it has nothing to do with her gender.  Hell, I'd say the same thing if she were a man. 

    However, as much as i hate to say this, but I do think Star Wars is dying, and I wouldn't be surprised by the time my two nieces and two nephews are in high school, Star Wars will be as dead to them as something like Flash Gordon was to my generation, but what are your thoughts on this matter?  Am I right about Star Wars possibly becoming an obscure franchise someday at the rate it's going and it's beyond saving?  Or do you think I'm wrong?  Please discuss. 
    https://hubstatic.com/14676728_f1024.jpg

    1. Onusonus profile image78
      Onusonusposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Star Wars died when they introduced Jar jar, and teen aged Anakin. They have nowhere to go from there but up.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image74
        Castlepalomaposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        I think Jar jar was suppose to be a Rastafarian comic relief. I did not find him funny, just confusing.

        1. Stevennix2001 profile image87
          Stevennix2001posted 2 months agoin reply to this

          I don't think anyone found Jar Jar funny unless you were a five year old or younger watching the movie when it came out.

      2. Stevennix2001 profile image87
        Stevennix2001posted 2 months agoin reply to this

        Yeah but the thing is the star wars toys and merchandise still sold like hotcakes in spite how bad the prequels were.   Heck, it even gave birth to arguably one of the best animated series of all time in both versions of the clone wars.  One being by Gendy Tartakovsky and the other being in CGI.   While I agree with you that the prequels were bad for the most part, they still managed to draw in new audiences to the star wars franchise to keep the ip alive.  These days, the new star wars films aren't dong that.  Say what you want about the prequels, but they at least drew in new fans and audiences, while these new batch aren't.  And if this continues then I don't see much of a future for star wars in ten to twenty years from now.

    2. Mark O Richardson profile image67
      Mark O Richardsonposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      I think it is thriving. However, they are overdoing it. People may possibly get sick of it.

    3. Castlepaloma profile image74
      Castlepalomaposted 2 months ago

      Lucas sold out to Disney in 2012 for $4 billion. I did a couple of projects with Disney and Disney wanted to hire my daughter. We talk about it, she decided to be the queen of her own domain and me too, (king that is).

      Lucas's input is mainly concerns the Jedi, yet after losing so much control of concept much of the soul of Star wars has weakened.

      Once Lucas came me to create alien creatures. At the time I was up to my neck with Muppet like puppets for stage and film, gave up 3d animation and mostly busy with sandsculptures. I told Lucas nobody has ever proven to experience an alien, how am I to make them feel real. Did I make a mistake?. Well my business has continue for 40 years today along and the last 15 years with tiny houses. Lucas is 10 years older than me, he may die with Star wars soon. When any project last 10 years that is a huge success. Very few people can make anything last 4 decades. Luke Skywalker turned into Dark Vander, brilliant concept!. Most start out with good intentions and often with big success we turn into Dark Vander. I excaped the mouse trap of Dark Vander finally, they can keep the cheese.

      1. Stevennix2001 profile image87
        Stevennix2001posted 2 months agoin reply to this

        Wow you got to work with George Lucas?  What was he like out of curiosity?    I heard stories he was a bit of a control freak from people that claimed to have worked on the prequels with him. Is that true?

        1. Castlepaloma profile image74
          Castlepalomaposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          George seen me doing sand sculptures in LA.  Then phone me up because he liked my series of hobbit caritures I made for a company called WizArt sold every where.  Alot of large companies offered me work, but none as director of operations, or I would accept Lucas offer. Likely I could end up like a robots in an art factory by control freaks.

          1. Stevennix2001 profile image87
            Stevennix2001posted 2 months agoin reply to this

            hmm that's interesting.  sounds like you had quite the career.

    4. FatFreddysCat profile image98
      FatFreddysCatposted 2 months ago

      I don't know if Star Wars is "dying" but I definitely think it's in dire need of a cooling-down period after "Rise of Skywalker" is released, for two reasons:

      One, Disney is risking audience burnout at the rate they've been pumping out new Star Wars related stuff. (Witness the lukewarm reception to "Solo.") I realize that they need to make back the billions they paid for Lucasfilm, but if they don't put the brakes on for a while  they're likely to hit the wall.

      Two, "Star Wars" has the most toxic fan base of any film franchise in history, hands down. I'm dead serious. NOTHING makes these mofo's happy. Whenever something Star Wars related doesn't match up to the elaborate fan-fictions these guys have been carrying around in their heads since they were kids in the '80s, they immediately rush to the Interwebs to harass the producers, the cast and the crew on social media.

      I grew up on the original trilogy. I had the trading cards, read all the comic books, had tons of action figures, etc., etc.  I didn't care for Lucas' "prequel" trilogy at all, simply because I thought they were bad movies.  I didn't send George Lucas hate mail or wish death upon him for "ruining my childhood" or whatever, I just went, "(shrugs) Well, that sucked. Better luck next time, George."

      I was fine with Disney taking over the franchise. It had been a long dry spell between films. and absence makes the heart grow fonder, as they say. Whatever your feelings may be about the House of Mouse, you gotta admit, they certainly know how to make big splashy spectacles, and on that front they've delivered.

      I liked "Force Awakens," I didn't mind "The Last Jedi." I even liked "Rogue One," which some fanboys claimed had an anti-Trump message (I'm not sure how they came to that conclusion). Therefore, I'm down for "Rise of Skywalker," bring it on. 

      Apparently to some, my enjoyment of current Star Wars means I've fallen for Kathleen Kennedy's SJW agenda, or whatever the f*** their problem is.  I dunno, maybe I'm just easy to please. When I go to a Star Wars movie, I don't look for hidden messages. I'm there to see robots, laser gun fights, light saber battles, and lotsa s**t blowing up.

      It's a movie franchise, they're not sacred texts, no matter how many Twitter trolls and YouTubers may try to tell us otherwise..

      1. Stevennix2001 profile image87
        Stevennix2001posted 2 months agoin reply to this

        I don't know if I buy into the burnout excuse simply because by that logic people should have been burned out by the mcu films ages ago yet they're still going strong as they release upwards of three to four films a year now and soon to release Disney plus streaming shows that you'll be forced to watch if you want to follow the story. 

        Or for that matter, superhero films in general.    Although I do think people will grow tired of them eventually but it's not happening anytime soon.   At least not yet anyways.   

        I just think a lot of it has to do with Kathleen Kennedy's leadership and overall direction of the franchise thus far.  Your right that star wars fans can be assholes but you can literally say that about almost any fanbase.  Heck I could name a couple of fanbases that are even worse than the star wars ones but that's another topic for another day.   While I do respect your opinion, I do not think your an sjw or whatever.    Your free to like what you want but I think the main reason some fans probably feel that way about people who like the new movies is in large part due to Kathleen kennedy, jj Abrams and Rian Johnson labeling anyone who doesn't like the new Star wars films as sexists, misogynistic and etc.   

        Honestly I'm starting to develop a way of thinking that if your a filmmaker promoting your film, and your film isn't out yet, and your going around saying shit like "toxic manbabies won't like this movie because they're intimidated by strong independent women" (.i.e. any of the new Star wars films that aren't anthology ones and the new Terminator film), then basically your telling me your film sucks and your using this as an excuse to where if the film bombs that you can easily blame the alleged sexist audience rather than yourself for making a bad film.  That's what your telling me when you say stuff like that.    But I digress. 

        I do hope your right but I think star wars is dying whether we want to accept that or not.  Castalopoma is right.     When star wars got sold to Disney, it was like the soul of the franchise got sold as well.   

        As much as I liked force awakens too, the reality is that most of that film is nothing more than a rehash of a New Hope.    Except a new hope was a lot better because the villains were a lot more competent and intimidating.  No offense to crybaby kylo but I'd take president scroob and dark helmet, from Spaceballs, way more seriously as a threat than him.    Kylo ren is supposed to be the ex pupil of Luke Skywalker, arguably one of the most powerful Jedis of all time, yet he can barely beat Finn, who's an ex Storm trooper in a light saber duel and gets his ass handed to him by a girl like Rey who barely figured out she can use the force literally almost that exact same day?   Seriously? 

        Yes I know the official explanation by Kennedy is that she's a prodigy just like Anakin Skywalker was in the prequels which is why she quickly learns to use her force powers with little to no training.   First of all even though Anakin was a prodigy, he still needed training to maximize his potential.  In attack of the clones, he literally got his ass handed to him by count dooku because of his lack of experience yet in revenge of the sith, he's finally able to defeat him in combat after his years of training.    The point is Anakin didn't just become powerful overnight.   He had to train and work for his power, while all Rey does is just use her powers and she's already on par with some of the best Jedis ever known with little to no training which makes her hero's journey feel unearned and uninspired.   Heck if it wasn't for the fact that they made such a big deal about her parents being a mystery I would have hated her completely in force awakens but last Jedi fucked that up too by making them nobodies which made all the build up from force awakens seemed anti climatic. 

        I didn't hate rogue one but as I said in my review before about it, I didn't like it mostly because the characters lacked any personality apart from the robot.    Seriously I never felt so bored watching people die on screen in my life and the truth is the way they were dying I should have cared but the movie never gave me a reason to so I didn't.   

        Say what you want about the prequels but at least with them, George at least knew what direction he wanted to take them and didn't care if people liked it or not.   You have to respect a man like that to be honest even if you think the prequels sucked.  You have to at least respect the guy for having a vision of what he wanted and sticking to his guns. 

        Kathleen kennedy doesn't seem like she knows what she wants to do with star wars and it's been obvious from the beginning.  For starter, jj Abrams has already said that when he came onboard for force awakens, there was no definitive plan on what to do with the franchise other than a rejected script idea Lucas originally had for the new trilogy that was never used.   Therefore a lot of the story for force awakens was conjured up Abrams and his team. He leaves and Rian Johnson not only never consults Abrams about the sequel but he decides to do his own thing and subvert a lot of the expectations that audiences had.  Heck even mark Hamill himself said he had to pretend he was Jake Skywalker instead of Luke in his mind because he's right.  The last Jedis Luke Skywalker wasn't Luke Skywalker.   Luke would never even think about killing his own nephew to begin with.  Ever.   Seriously this is the same character who had opportunities to kill Darth Vader in return of the Jedi yet he didn't and even suffered through palpatines wrath to plea to his father to turn back to the light even though by that point most characters have already given up on Darth Vader but Luke never did.   You see Darth Vader had already been so immersed into the dark side that he was barely a shadow of what he once was in the original trilogy yet Luke didn't give up on him in the final movie of that trilogy once he learned the truth. 

        So why would Luke just be like "well I just had a vision of my nephew turning to the dark side.  Time to kill him in his sleep.  Dur dur".   Why?  Luke would never do that?  Yes I know Luke decided not to do it at the last minute before kylo woke up but even still.  Luke never should have been in that situation to begin with.   

        Heck Rian Johnson even said that Abrams is going to retcon a lot of things he did in last Jedi which only feeds into the narrative that Kathleen doesn't know what she wants or what she's doing as there's a general lack of direction with the new trilogy.   

        Plus when you follow all the behind the scenes drama for solo, rogue one and the cancelled boba Fett film, it makes you wonder if Kathleen Kennedy even screens these people she hires or if she just hires them based on their names.   

        Honestly unless Kathleen kennedy is fired effective immediately I think star wars will die over time.  And no it has nothing to do with her gender.  It has everything to do with her incompetence as a leader and unprofessionalism of the franchise itself

      2. Stevennix2001 profile image87
        Stevennix2001posted 2 months agoin reply to this

        plus while I do agree with you that the prequels left a lot to be desired as well, the point is that objectively whether you liked them or not, they still attracted new fans to the franchise.  Kids still bought the star wars toys and video games because the prequels created new fans for star wars to continue on even longer.  This new era of star wars isn't doing that, as nobody is buying the toys.  The sales for them have gone down drastically, and Galaxy's Edge at both Disney Land and Disney World aren't living up to the hype according to various news outlets, so that's not a good sign.  It's a sign that this new generation of star wars movies isn't drawing in the new fans like the prequels and the original trilogy did.  And with Kathleen Kennedy and everyone else at Lucas studios turning off old fans with their mouths, it's only going to get worse.  You can laugh at me if you want, but I'm calling it now.  Unless Kathleen Kennedy is fired immediately after the next movie, then I predict Star Wars will be dead in a few years, and by the time both my nephews and nieces are in high school (they're all babies now with the oldest one being 2) that star wars will be as foreign to them as Phantom and Flash Gordon were to my generation.

    5. Noel Penaflor7 profile image82
      Noel Penaflor7posted 2 months ago

      I don't think SW is dying, but I did think after Rogue One and Solo they risked Marvel-izing the main franchise. While I like the Marvel movies, I think most would agree that not every one of the 23 movies were home runs. I thought that Rogue One and Star Wars made the trilogies less special since you're going to get one every year, just like you get 2-3 Marvel movies every year. BTW- I did like Last Jedi, simply because it didn't follow the typical formula and was an improvement of JJ's nostalgia porn TFA. I am looking forward to Rise of Skywalker, No matter what happens, I'm sure SW fanboys will be really upset. Excellent piece.

      1. Stevennix2001 profile image87
        Stevennix2001posted 2 months agoin reply to this

        I agree with you that not all the mcu films have been homeruns.  In fact, I'd argue that over 98 percent of them have been average films at best, with only maybe only three or four of them actually being great movies.   A lot of that has to do with them playing it safe and making them formulaic.  Tony Stark for instance can never evolve as a character because of marketing reasons, which is part of the reason that the sequels to Iron Man never lived up to the first one.   

        Say what you want about the Fox X-men films.  Yeah they made some duds, but they also took a lot more chances with that franchise, and it resulted in some of the best films of all time.  Heck, Logan is easily better than any MCU film ever made if you ask me.

        Having said all of that, I think time will tell. 

        I did like Force Awakens admittingly when I first saw it, but it's become like "300", where it's great at first, but as you watch it repeatedly you start to notice more and more of it's flaws to where you start to realize it's not as great as you think it is.

        "Last Jedi" was a huge disappointment to me for all the reasons I already said.  I don't mind characters changing and evolving in films.  However, the problem is the changes they made weren't executed that well, and I can't take the villains seriously in these  new movies because of how utterly incompetent they're portrayed.   Yes, I know making it to where Rey was able to easily kick Kylo Ren's ass from day one was made to make fans be impressed by her, but all that really does is make the villains seem less threatening and the stakes almost non existent.  That's all your doing when you have a hero that's able to overtake the villain right away like that, and most of all it didn't feel earned.  We at least saw Luke Skywalker train with both Obi Wan and Yoda to earn his place to being on par with Vader.  We never see that with Rey, which is why her being able to master the force so easily doesn't feel earned, and it makes it harder to connect with her as a character. 

        While I still expect the next star wars film to do well in theaters, I wouldn't surprised if "Jumanji:  Next Level" does better this year.  Not saying it will, but I wouldn't be surprised.

    6. Castlepaloma profile image74
      Castlepalomaposted 2 months ago

      Maybe South Park gang message was Lucas was raping Star wars along with Harrison Ford other films involved. " by making the metaphorical literal.

      The episode that aired that night depicted the filmmakers sodomizing Indiana Jones, the character played by Harrison Ford. Critics have accused Steven Spielberg and George Lucas of desecrating beloved films and franchises by reworking them to remove politically incorrect items (no more guns in "E.T."), and adding content (more alien creatures in "Star Wars").

      Some people thought that portraying Spielberg and Lucas as rapists was one joke gone too far. New York's Daily News located a number of people who objected to the use of rape as a cartoon punchline and also thought the scheduling of the episode on Yom Kippur was anti-Semitic.

    7. Live to Learn profile image81
      Live to Learnposted 2 months ago

      The last few Star Wars I've seen were dark and depressing. If they continue on that thread I'd say it's in trouble.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image74
        Castlepalomaposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        Too dark can make it not work.

      2. Stevennix2001 profile image87
        Stevennix2001posted 2 months agoin reply to this

        I think that's one problem with star wars these days is that lucas films and kathleen kennedy are forgetting that star wars is supposed to be based on escapism.  This isn't the godfather or planet of the apes. This is star wars. It's supposed to be a fun adventure through space to take us out of our mundane lives.  Not to preach a liberal message about female empowerment while downgrading characters like Luke to make new ones like Rey look good.

    8. Dean Traylor profile image95
      Dean Traylorposted 2 months ago

      I don’t think it’s dying, I think the filmmakers are trying to emulate the success of another franchise instead of being true the story line and what the films represented. The MCU currently has a major hold on people’s imaginations  and idealism (we want to be those superheroes) and it’s captured the attention of those that would have gone to a Star Wars film. The Star Wars franchise of late has been attempting to veer away from the original story line with stand-alone films that seem rushed into production and sometimes creating more holes for the original canon than was anticipated. In a sense, possibly overloading its fan with confusion.

      They need to realize what made their franchise work in the first place. While the original trilogy’s setting was  in a galaxy far, far away, there were a lot of allegories to an era and place much closer to home. The Vietnam war had ended only a few years before  A New Hope came out and the film reflected some of that (a technological giant against desperate rebels). In addition -- as I learned in a screenwriting certificate program at UCLA that was coordinated by Lucas’ USC classmate, Richard Walters -- the story was also a personal story  about a problematic father/son relationship. According to Walters (who also wrote a treatment for Lucas second film American Graffiti),  Lucas and his father had an extremely strained relationship. Walters could  point out that Luke is close to Lucas’ name; Skywalker is that of a dreamer; and Darth Vader is an off-shoot german translation for Dark Father.  And let’s not forget that the story was cultivated by Lucas’s interest in the world’s mythologies as revealed by the writing of Joseph Campbell.

      While the prequels have been ridiculed, the last one (which I consider the most underrated) shifted and became an allegory for what was happening in the 2000s (remember the line “ if you are not with me, you’re against me.” Does it sound familiar to all you political junkies?)

      Somebody suggested the problems are the diehard fans. I agree that they may be causing some of the decline. Sometimes they go way too far wanting things to go their way (however, I think the Star Trekkies are the worst, especially when they get into heated arguments about the sounds the doors make when they slide open). I also believe that they just want a real escape from reality and revel in the fantasy world.  They don’t want to be bogged down by symbolism and their meanings. But, Star Wars is part political commentary (Episode III made this apparent), part escapism, and part personal journey.

      1. Stevennix2001 profile image87
        Stevennix2001posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        First of all, I want to say thank you for giving us your input, as you definitely pointed out a lot of things that I didn't think of before starting this topic.  And you're right that there have been some political symbolism associated with Star Wars in the past, as I won't deny that, nor will I deny what you said about the estranged relationship between Luke and Darth Vader.

        There's a lot of truth in what you said, but the part where I will disagree with you is about the fans causing the decline.   While you're right that the fans can take things way too far sometimes, we need to remember that fans are what make these movies what they are.  Without the fans support, Star Wars never would've became the giant IP that it was prior to Disney's version ruining it.   

        To put this into a sports analogy, let's take an American football team.  A quarterback can be the best quarterback in the NFL, but the reality is without the fans going to see his games, or buying his jerseys, he'd be a nobody like everyone else, and that's a fact. 

        While I do agree with you that "Revenge of the Sith" isn't too bad, the problem is your kind of missing the point.  While the prequels weren't that great critically, the reality is they still created vast new worlds and concepts introduced to expand the franchise, which lead to an increase in toy sales and video game sales.  Nowadays, nobody is buying the toys.

        Say what you want about the prequels, but at least they made kids want to play with the Star Wars video games and toys.  This new trilogy isn't doing that.  And while there's certainly other factors that contributed to Galaxy's Edge at both Disney Land and Disney World flopping, the truth of the matter is Disney theme parks have literally had to fire and cut back on hours because of Galaxy's edge. This isn't opinion either.  This is fact. 

        Heck, the President of Disney's theme parks literally had to step down recently this year in part because fans didn't support Galaxy's Edge. 

        https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ … ce-1242748

        You can say the fans are partially responsible all you want, but the reality is without the fans, Star Wars wouldn't have gotten to where it is today without them.  The original trilogy never would've been as successful as it was without the fans supporting it. 

        Heck if you had told me that there was going to be a star wars theme park at Disney land or Disney world about ten years ago, I would've told you that sounds like arguably the most sure thing you could ever do as a  business move.  Just the idea of it would make any die hard fan wet his pants, and almost anyone would've told you that Disney doing that would be the equivalent of just straight up printing money.  That's how much of a sure thing this theme park attraction should've been, but instead it's flopping and it's damaging the Star Wars brand even more.

        Personally, I blame a lot of this on Kathleen Kennedy, as I stated before.  You can sit there and like the new sequel trilogy if you want, and that's fine.  After all, I'm sure you and I can both agree that all films are subjective and if you like them, then good for you. 

        However, even if you did like those movies, you can't tell me objectively that the CEO of Lucas films doesn't deserve to be fired, as I'll state various reasons why she should be fired, and why she's contributing the most to why Star Wars is dying.

        First of all, it's been reported that she literally had no clue what she wanted to do with Star Wars, as JJ Abrams even admitted that he had to come up with a story from scratch for them.   

        And after he left to finish Star Trek Beyond, to make way for Rian Johnson to take over, he not only abandoned a lot of the ideas that Abrams planted in the Force Awakens, but he did it so much to the point that now it's being reported that Abrams is going to retcon a lot of the concepts and ideas that Rian Johnson did in the Last jedi.  That reeks of the new sequel trilogy not being organized as well as it should, nor as well as the previous two trilogies were in the past.

        And if you want to take this further, Colin Trevarrow was originally hired to direct episode 9, but he left after a few months because of creative differences.   You might be thinking, no big deal right? 

        But the problem is that this seems to be a rotating pattern with Kennedy.  With Rogue One for instance, Gareth Edwards wanted to make Rogue one arguably the darkest star wars film ever made, but when Kathleen Kennedy saw the finished product prior to it's release, she ordered reshoots because it didn't seem "star wars" enough, so she brought in Tony Gilroy to handle the reshoots to give it that "Star wars" touch if you will.  Granted, you'll probably bring up things like how the MCU did the same thing with "Thor the Dark World" with them bringing in Joss Whedon to touch up a scene or two, yet it doesn't make Kevin Feige look bad.  Fine.  I'll give you that, but let's delve deeper into the rabbit hole before you say I'm crazy.

        Then we can look at the cancelled Boba Fett movie.  Yes, at one point, Josh Trank (the director of Chronicle and Fant4tic) was assigned to direct a Boba Fett solo movie for Disney and Lucas films. However, after he was hired, Kathleen Kennedy fired him because of the rumors and allegations that came out about his unprofessional behavior making "Fantastic Four" over at Fox, and how he conducted himself there. Granted, it was never proven Josh Trank did what he was accused of as far as I know, but it was enough for Disney and kennedy to fire him immediately after they hired him.  Did they not do a background check on this person before they hired him?

        And of course, that's going to bring us to "Solo:  A Star Wars Story."  Originally, Phil Lord and Chris Miller, who were hot off their success from directing both "The Lego Movie" and both "21 Jump Street" films, but here's the thing.  They were both fired by Kathleen Kennedy after they had shot almost the entire film itself.  Why you may ask?  Because she felt the movie they were making was not the movie she was promised by them, so she brings in Ron Howard, who reshoots like 80 percent of the movie because the footage both Lord and Miller shot was deemed "unusable", and we know how that turned out.  The reshoots added to the films already pricey budget, which ended with Solo being such a huge bomb that Disney and Lucas film literally had to cancel all their planned anthology films from that point on.

        Granted, you could argue that maybe both Phil Lord and Chris Miller may have acted unprofessionally for allegedly not giving Kennedy the movie they promised her, and mostly going off script when shooting the film, but here's the thing.  As I just told you earlier, this seems to be a track record for Kennedy.  She hires someone, but fires them later for something else. It reeks instability and makes it look like she doesn't know what she's doing.   I can forgive this if it only happened maybe once or twice in a blue moon.  that's fine, as shit happens.  However, when it happens all the time on your watch and your the boss in charge running things?  That reeks of bad leadership. 

        And keep in mind, I haven't even brought up her unprofessional behavior labeling anyone who doesn't like the new star wars films to be sexist and misogynist either.   I haven't even brought up how she even allows people that work under her like Abrams and Johnson to do that too.

        Again, I'm not saying the decline of star wars is entirely her fault, but it mostly is because it's happening on her watch.  It just comes with the territory when your the leader of a group or company.  To use another sports analogy again if Michael Jordan's Bulls win a title it's because he masterfully willed and inspired his team to victory, since he's the captain of the team, so it's natural that most of the credit for his team's success falls on him.  But when Michael Jordan loses, it'll be because he failed to inspire his team to win.  It doesn't matter if he scores over a 100 points in that game, and plays great on both ends of the floor either.  The fact of the matter is he's the leader of the team, so any shortcomings the team has is on him.  When the team wins, it's because of him. When they lose, it's because he failed to lead them.  It's just that simple.  Same goes for Kathleen Kennedy.  You can defend her all you want on the Solo film for example, but the reality is that still happened on her watch, so  that film bombing in theaters is partially her fault; whether you want to acknowledge that or not. 

        Star Wars is barely a few months away, and hardly anyone is talking about it.  The toys aren't selling at all like they used to.  Say what you want about the prequels, but they at least made kids want to buy the toys.  The sequel trilogy doesn't even do that.  And the last trailer wasn't even a trailer at all practically.  They just used a bunch of old footage from past star wars film to play on people's nostalgia senses in hopes of bringing us back to the theaters to see episode 9.  Why?  It's almost like Disney themselves aren't even confident in the film, so they're trying to hide it.

    9. Stevennix2001 profile image87
      Stevennix2001posted 3 weeks ago

      Then how do you explain the toy sales for star wars not being anywhere near as popular as they used to be under George Lucas?   Also explain why Galaxy's edge at Disney isn't doing so well at any of the Disney theme parks?

    10. Mark O Richardson profile image67
      Mark O Richardsonposted 3 weeks ago

      In my opinion, kids may not like action figures as much as they used to.  Galaxy's Edge only has one ride,  so that may have a lot to do it.  I meant the movies are doing well

      1. Stevennix2001 profile image87
        Stevennix2001posted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

        You are aware apart from captain marvel toys, all the other marvel based toylines do extremely well right?    It's one of the main reasons why Disney absolutely refuses to share any of the merchandising rights with Sony as Sony can only make money on Spider-Man through the box office take and off any 30 + minute TV show series it produces.   That's a large reason why some fans like myself sided with Sony when Disney tried playing hardball with them over the Spider-Man renewal sharing agreement.   

        Originally under the old deal, Disney kept all the merchandising rights and profits to themselves.  Meaning Sony doesn't get one penny from the Spider-Man toys, t shirts, and etc from that.   None.   And on top of that Disney took I believe anywhere from ten to five percent of whatever Spider-Man solo films that were part of the mcu like Spider-Man homecoming and Spider-Man far from home.   And all Sony got was whatever was left of the box office take from there once Disney got their small cut.   However Disney got greedy and wanted more of the cut up to 50% of the box office take for Spider-Man solo films in the mcu and Disney still wanted to keep the merchandising rights to themselves.   Hence why Spider-Man left the mcu for awhile according to the news. 

        However a deal was worked out and now I think Disney gets like 25% of the profits from Spider-Man solo films in the mcu and they still get to keep the merchandising rights to the toys and etc which is what they wanted.   

        The point is if toys weren't that hot of a commodity then why would Disney care so much about not allowing Sony to have just a tiny piece of that pie?   Hmm?   

        Also that doesn't explain why the marvel toys are still selling well; apart from captain marvel who kids don't like if toy sales for her is to be an indication.

        1. Mark O Richardson profile image67
          Mark O Richardsonposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

          Hmmm. Good to know. I didn't realize. Its in my mind that Star Wars was one of the movies that had a lot more merchandise and if I remember correctly, George Lucas made most of his money from those sales and not as much with the movies.

    11. John Plocar profile image95
      John Plocarposted 2 weeks ago

      @Sam

      Out of all the Star Wars flicks to come out since 2015 (hell, since 1999 for that matter) 'Solo' is actually my favorite of this latest bunch.

    12. Sam Shepards profile image96
      Sam Shepardsposted 2 weeks ago

      I actually enjoyed Solo more than any of the other recent outings.

    13. filipe baiao profile image97
      filipe baiaoposted 9 days ago

      I agree with most of what has been said. It's not dying, it will never truly die for a very long time, but people are becoming somewhat unphased by the new installments. I liked Solo too, quite a lot actually, Rogue One too, Force Awakens was fine, and even though I don't like Last Jedi, it certainly wasn't horrible or money going to waste. I think Disney needs to take a step back and consider where they want to take the franchise going forward. Taking the kid-friendly approach I think would be a mistake because Star Wars survives through the support of the original fans, in my opinion. And revisiting what has been done before will not excite viewers who can just go see the original trilogy. So maybe, instead of banishing the extended universe, embrace it, get weird with it. I think The Mandalorian was a good idea, I hope they manage to make it work and that they keep that mindset for future projects.

     
    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)