Sign In

The Rise of Skywalker box office results: predictions and expectations — Page 3

Author
Time

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Huh I guess Star Wars really is dead and TLJ killed it. Good job, you proved it. Haha

Nope, Star Wars is in decline, and I’ve said nothing about TLJ being the cause, just that Disney’s strategy hasn’t worked, which is a reasonable conclusion, if the objective is growth, a conclusion supported by the recent analysis of bloomberg:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-07/star-wars-is-struggling-to-win-over-the-marvel-generation

This is how you do an objective scientific analysis. Numbers don’t lie, haha.

I think the issue is not decline per se but one of more exposure. More films, more often. My experience was that the OT was this one off amazing trilogy that sat alone and in which we, as fans, could revisit without thoughts about other films expanding on its story.(before the PT and ST of course, obviously). Whatever you think of the PT, the SW universe changed after it and certainly after the two episodes of the ST so far. It’s more familiar now and part of a much larger culture of films and art we currently experience. SW is still huge but not as unique and mysterious as it was.

I, for one, am happy to watch more SW if the price is less of that mystery and uniqueness.

As for Marvel. I am a fan but own exactly two of the films…FTR I am superheroed out.

Author
Time

It’s also worth noting that we’d already gotten, off the top of my head, at least fifteen Marvel-based films in the span of nine years before the MCU even came along.

We will have gotten as many big-budget Star Wars films in the span of only four years as we got in the franchise’s first twenty-five.

Author
Time

So far the performance of the Star Wars movies has not surprised me in the slightest. There really aren’t strong figures to go on for the OT and with all the re-releases of Star Wars in those early years it really slants things. It was a game changer on many levels. The rest of the OT had to live up to that and did a great job. They were able to craft a sequel that was better than the original in many ways, though the younger version of myself did not appreciate it.

But since TPM, I have been tracking things. Box Office numbers can be fun to look at. TPM had along run. AOTC had a shorter run. ROTS had the shortest run, but the biggest opening. Just from what I’ve seen, this is likely to be the trend for the ST.

Another trend I’ve noticed is that complaints reduce over time. As time goes on the lasting impression of the films improves. The initial complaints mellow out and more attention is paid to what was done well.

Ultimately the only two statistics that we can track long term are box office numbers and home video numbers.

But here are some variables to consider to interpret the Google stats presented here. Age of fans. Social media use of fans. Dedicated online sites for fandom. Quality of trailer. Quality of toys. Variety of toys. Collectableness of toys. Well, I could go on and on with different things that can very widely and affect stats. Harry Potter fans were largely young when the first books came out and were of an internet savy generation. Marvel fans came in all ages. There had been a few movies, but mostly comic books. But the age of some of the characters means you have a mix of fans covering a wide range of ages and duration. Star Wars has a huge and varied fan base. Fans have come on board with every film and every decade. The thing Star Wars has are many online communities (like this one). So when looking at statistics from Google we have to ask if things are different. What stats are going to give the full picture.

For instance, you can wander over to YouTube to the official Star Wars channel and look up how many views the various trailers have had. The thing you have to keep in mind is that those numbers are not static and keep growing. And the channel isn’t old enough to cover the PT, much less the OT, so it is only useful for comparing the ST and the stand alones. The first teasers in order of release are:
TFA: 24 million
R1: 45 million
TLJ: 44 million
Solo: 13 million
TROS: 31 million
There was a second teaser for TLJ that has 82 million

Then there are the official trailers, not including TROS which hasn’t come out yet:
TFA: 103 million
R1: 38 million
TLJ: 53 million
Solo: 18 million
There was a second trailer for Rogue One that has 27 million

And then the box office from Box Office Mojo (adjusted domestic gross and including all the films):
ANH: 1,286,033,500
TESB: 710,548,800
ROTJ: 729,660,300
AHH SE: 271,395,100
TESB SE: 132,691,800
ROTJ SE: 89,256,800
TPM: 764,280,500
AOTC: 468,630,500
ROTS: 534,514,500
TCW: 44,123,400
TFA: 974,117,000
R1: 544,579,000
TLJ: 609,026,300
Solo: 205,860,700

Of the new films, Solo has done the worst in all areas. If you go by this list and the number of views just of the first trailer for TROS, I’d predict the teaser gets 5-10 million more views by the time the movie is released, the full trailer will have 50-60 million views, and the box office will be better than TLJ, but under $700,000,000.

And to me it isn’t a mystery why Solo bombed. It was the combination of too close to TLJ, the casting, the subject matter, and stiff competition in the theaters. The views of the trailer show the lack of interest.

But my question again is if the Google stats are so informative and show a lack of interest in TROS, why the views of the trailer are so high? And if it is so accurate, why didn’t Rogue One overtake TFA at the box office? Rogue One made more than ROTS, but less than TFA or TLJ, even though by these graphs it should have made more than at least TLJ. But it didn’t. Statistics can be very flawed. The trick is to find solid and repeatable statistics that do provide useful predictive information.

And as a side note, Avengers Endgame is #16 for adjusted box office for all time, between Avatar and ROTJ.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

Mocata said:

It’s an event movie, it’s a holiday release, I don’t see them struggling. Nothing’s impossible but I see the failure of Solo as something caused by timing and marketing rather than SW as a brand.

A brand which lately has been struggling to reach a new generation of fans, whilst alienating a fraction of the previous generations of fans:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-07/star-wars-is-struggling-to-win-over-the-marvel-generation

TROS will likely make a profit, but the question is whether it will break the $1B mark. If not it will be seen a failure nonetheless.

It should world wide. I’m very confident it will do better than TLJ. I will be very surprise if it fails to do that. That means in the US it should get about $630 million and worldwide about $1.4 billion.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Huh I guess Star Wars really is dead and TLJ killed it. Good job, you proved it. Haha

Nope, Star Wars is in decline, and I’ve said nothing about TLJ being the cause, just that Disney’s strategy hasn’t worked, which is a reasonable conclusion, if the objective is growth, a conclusion supported by the recent analysis of bloomberg:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-07/star-wars-is-struggling-to-win-over-the-marvel-generation

What then would you say is Disney’s strategy that has been so disastrous?

Out with the old, in with the new. The Galaxy Edge theme park is the best evidence, that Disney gambled on the strength of the new canon. In the process they alienated a subsection of the previous generations of fans, whilst not being able to win over the new generation. They essentially rebooted the franchise with characters that aren’t as compelling, and so people lose interest.

I see you are unaware of what has happened at Disneyland. It is not the failure you think it is. The access to Galaxy’s Edge has been full up. Crowds have been good. What has not been good is overall attendance because no one wanted to compete with the crowds they expected for the opening period. Disney made plans to address that, but not before people had made their vacation plans and skipped over this summer. I expect next year to be one of Disney’s best at the two parks with Galaxy’s Edge.

And it is your opinion that they rebooted the franchise. That completely ignores the cyclical nature of the story and how much the ST is paralleling the EU stories that so many fans are familiar with. I don’t see any issue with attracting a new generation at all. A number of people who are more casual fans like the ST more then the previous movies. And the box office numbers (adjusted for inflation) show that the ST is more popular than the PT was. The only group I see with a big problem with the ST are those who had expectations of what the ST would and would not include and don’t like that it doesn’t live up to that. A repeat of the PT all over again. Let the writers tell their story and sit back and enjoy. I indulge in spoilers so I can divest myself of all expectations and just enjoy how the story unfolds. Your theories of deconstructing and rebooting over analyze the trilogy and widely miss what the movies say about themselves. The ST was always going to involve the death of Luke in the first Episode (the first one he was in) and Harrison has been saying Han should die for 30 years. They passed the torch and Carrie’s passing forced that to be even more complete. This is the Rey, Finn, Poe trilogy and the OT characters are really just enlarge cameos. You had expectations, perhaps not of exactly what the characters would do, but definitely what they shouldn’t do. It is almost as if Lucas, Abrams, and Johnson set out to make a trilogy that was exactly what you didn’t want to see. I see symmetry in the repetition. I see the parallels in myth, history, and pop culture (Star Wars is a more serious take on Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers after all) and I’m enjoying the tale. It is very much what happens after the great war is over and how things move on. Often it is ghosts of the past that haunt the future and bring back a defeated enemy. I find the story of the ST to be very mythic and very classic and not repetitive at all. Certainly not a reboot. If you want to know what I call a reboot, just look over at Star Trek under CBS. The ST has nice echos of the Zahn trilogy while being new and fresh. Just in the ST, they took 30 years instead of 10 years to regroup and attack the Republic.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

So far the performance of the Star Wars movies has not surprised me in the slightest. There really aren’t strong figures to go on for the OT and with all the re-releases of Star Wars in those early years it really slants things. It was a game changer on many levels. The rest of the OT had to live up to that and did a great job. They were able to craft a sequel that was better than the original in many ways, though the younger version of myself did not appreciate it.

But since TPM, I have been tracking things. Box Office numbers can be fun to look at. TPM had along run. AOTC had a shorter run. ROTS had the shortest run, but the biggest opening. Just from what I’ve seen, this is likely to be the trend for the ST.

Another trend I’ve noticed is that complaints reduce over time. As time goes on the lasting impression of the films improves. The initial complaints mellow out and more attention is paid to what was done well.

Ultimately the only two statistics that we can track long term are box office numbers and home video numbers.

But here are some variables to consider to interpret the Google stats presented here. Age of fans. Social media use of fans. Dedicated online sites for fandom. Quality of trailer. Quality of toys. Variety of toys. Collectableness of toys. Well, I could go on and on with different things that can very widely and affect stats. Harry Potter fans were largely young when the first books came out and were of an internet savy generation. Marvel fans came in all ages. There had been a few movies, but mostly comic books. But the age of some of the characters means you have a mix of fans covering a wide range of ages and duration. Star Wars has a huge and varied fan base. Fans have come on board with every film and every decade. The thing Star Wars has are many online communities (like this one). So when looking at statistics from Google we have to ask if things are different. What stats are going to give the full picture.

For instance, you can wander over to YouTube to the official Star Wars channel and look up how many views the various trailers have had. The thing you have to keep in mind is that those numbers are not static and keep growing. And the channel isn’t old enough to cover the PT, much less the OT, so it is only useful for comparing the ST and the stand alones. The first teasers in order of release are:
TFA: 24 million
R1: 45 million
TLJ: 44 million
Solo: 13 million
TROS: 31 million
There was a second teaser for TLJ that has 82 million

Then there are the official trailers, not including TROS which hasn’t come out yet:
TFA: 103 million
R1: 38 million
TLJ: 53 million
Solo: 18 million
There was a second trailer for Rogue One that has 27 million

And then the box office from Box Office Mojo (adjusted domestic gross and including all the films):
ANH: 1,286,033,500
TESB: 710,548,800
ROTJ: 729,660,300
AHH SE: 271,395,100
TESB SE: 132,691,800
ROTJ SE: 89,256,800
TPM: 764,280,500
AOTC: 468,630,500
ROTS: 534,514,500
TCW: 44,123,400
TFA: 974,117,000
R1: 544,579,000
TLJ: 609,026,300
Solo: 205,860,700

Of the new films, Solo has done the worst in all areas. If you go by this list and the number of views just of the first trailer for TROS, I’d predict the teaser gets 5-10 million more views by the time the movie is released, the full trailer will have 50-60 million views, and the box office will be better than TLJ, but under $700,000,000.

And to me it isn’t a mystery why Solo bombed. It was the combination of too close to TLJ, the casting, the subject matter, and stiff competition in the theaters. The views of the trailer show the lack of interest.

But my question again is if the Google stats are so informative and show a lack of interest in TROS, why the views of the trailer are so high? And if it is so accurate, why didn’t Rogue One overtake TFA at the box office? Rogue One made more than ROTS, but less than TFA or TLJ, even though by these graphs it should have made more than at least TLJ. But it didn’t. Statistics can be very flawed. The trick is to find solid and repeatable statistics that do provide useful predictive information.

And as a side note, Avengers Endgame is #16 for adjusted box office for all time, between Avatar and ROTJ.

You see, that’s where you’re wrong. With statistics there’s always an amount of uncertainty, and so even if the relationship is strong (correlations > 50%), a movie that shows higher interest can get lower box office returns or vice versa, meaning that interest x will result in y +/- e, where e is a measure of uncertainty, and so the prediction for the box office of RO may be 1300 M +/- 300 M, and TLJ 1100 M +/- 300 M. In any case the relationship between google searches and toy sales has proven to be even stronger, and so the decline of interest in Star Wars can not only be expressed in terms of google search volume, but in toy earnings, which we know have decreasing significantly over the last few years. Many attributed this to decreasing toy sales in general, but now we can show it is simply related to less interest in the brand in general.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Huh I guess Star Wars really is dead and TLJ killed it. Good job, you proved it. Haha

Nope, Star Wars is in decline, and I’ve said nothing about TLJ being the cause, just that Disney’s strategy hasn’t worked, which is a reasonable conclusion, if the objective is growth, a conclusion supported by the recent analysis of bloomberg:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-07/star-wars-is-struggling-to-win-over-the-marvel-generation

What then would you say is Disney’s strategy that has been so disastrous?

Out with the old, in with the new. The Galaxy Edge theme park is the best evidence, that Disney gambled on the strength of the new canon. In the process they alienated a subsection of the previous generations of fans, whilst not being able to win over the new generation. They essentially rebooted the franchise with characters that aren’t as compelling, and so people lose interest.

I see you are unaware of what has happened at Disneyland. It is not the failure you think it is. The access to Galaxy’s Edge has been full up. Crowds have been good. What has not been good is overall attendance because no one wanted to compete with the crowds they expected for the opening period. Disney made plans to address that, but not before people had made their vacation plans and skipped over this summer. I expect next year to be one of Disney’s best at the two parks with Galaxy’s Edge.

And it is your opinion that they rebooted the franchise. That completely ignores the cyclical nature of the story and how much the ST is paralleling the EU stories that so many fans are familiar with. I don’t see any issue with attracting a new generation at all. A number of people who are more casual fans like the ST more then the previous movies. And the box office numbers (adjusted for inflation) show that the ST is more popular than the PT was. The only group I see with a big problem with the ST are those who had expectations of what the ST would and would not include and don’t like that it doesn’t live up to that. A repeat of the PT all over again. Let the writers tell their story and sit back and enjoy. I indulge in spoilers so I can divest myself of all expectations and just enjoy how the story unfolds. Your theories of deconstructing and rebooting over analyze the trilogy and widely miss what the movies say about themselves. The ST was always going to involve the death of Luke in the first Episode (the first one he was in) and Harrison has been saying Han should die for 30 years. They passed the torch and Carrie’s passing forced that to be even more complete. This is the Rey, Finn, Poe trilogy and the OT characters are really just enlarge cameos. You had expectations, perhaps not of exactly what the characters would do, but definitely what they shouldn’t do. It is almost as if Lucas, Abrams, and Johnson set out to make a trilogy that was exactly what you didn’t want to see. I see symmetry in the repetition. I see the parallels in myth, history, and pop culture (Star Wars is a more serious take on Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers after all) and I’m enjoying the tale. It is very much what happens after the great war is over and how things move on. Often it is ghosts of the past that haunt the future and bring back a defeated enemy. I find the story of the ST to be very mythic and very classic and not repetitive at all. Certainly not a reboot. If you want to know what I call a reboot, just look over at Star Trek under CBS. The ST has nice echos of the Zahn trilogy while being new and fresh. Just in the ST, they took 30 years instead of 10 years to regroup and attack the Republic.

The Zahn trilogy does not have Empire vs rebels 2.0, or have the New Republic wiped out of existence, such that we reset the galaxy to an OT state. It does not have a Darth Vader wannabe, who also was a former Jedi pupil of the hero’s Jedi mentor. It does not have a fascimile Emperor. It does not have another Death Star like super weapon. It does not have another Jedi prodigy from a Tatooine clone. It does not have another ground battle involving walkers on a white plane. It does not have another throne room scene, where our hero has to witness the destruction of the rebel fleet, and an apprentice betraying his master to save the life of the hero. The Zahn trilogy was new and fresh. I can’t say the same for the ST. I’m not saying the films aren’t entertaining, and there are new elements, and nuances, but the so called cyclical nature is a poor excuse for resetting the story, and essentially giving us the OT with a new coat of paint. I’m not saying I dislike the ST in general, or that they’re bad movies. I’m saying it could have been a whole lot better, if they hadn’t undone most of the OT’s victories, and in stead given us a new and original story with new and original heroes, and villains, that weren’t in some way a slight variation of characters and stories we have seen before.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Can merchandise over saturation also be a factor? You have at least three different scales of SW action figures competing with each other now.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

SilverWook said:

Can merchandise over saturation also be a factor? You have at least three different scales of SW action figures competing with each other now.

It can be a factor, but since the toy sales are related to the search volume for Star Wars in general, I would say it is brand recognizability in general, where the saga films have been competing with the standalone films for the audience’s attention. The MCU get away with multiple standalone films, and cross-overs, because the films are interconnected. It might have been a better idea to finish the trilogy before introducing standalone films. The standalone films could have filled the hiatus between trilogies.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Huh I guess Star Wars really is dead and TLJ killed it. Good job, you proved it. Haha

Nope, Star Wars is in decline, and I’ve said nothing about TLJ being the cause, just that Disney’s strategy hasn’t worked, which is a reasonable conclusion, if the objective is growth, a conclusion supported by the recent analysis of bloomberg:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-07/star-wars-is-struggling-to-win-over-the-marvel-generation

What then would you say is Disney’s strategy that has been so disastrous?

Out with the old, in with the new. The Galaxy Edge theme park is the best evidence, that Disney gambled on the strength of the new canon. In the process they alienated a subsection of the previous generations of fans, whilst not being able to win over the new generation. They essentially rebooted the franchise with characters that aren’t as compelling, and so people lose interest.

I see you are unaware of what has happened at Disneyland. It is not the failure you think it is. The access to Galaxy’s Edge has been full up. Crowds have been good. What has not been good is overall attendance because no one wanted to compete with the crowds they expected for the opening period. Disney made plans to address that, but not before people had made their vacation plans and skipped over this summer. I expect next year to be one of Disney’s best at the two parks with Galaxy’s Edge.

And it is your opinion that they rebooted the franchise. That completely ignores the cyclical nature of the story and how much the ST is paralleling the EU stories that so many fans are familiar with. I don’t see any issue with attracting a new generation at all. A number of people who are more casual fans like the ST more then the previous movies. And the box office numbers (adjusted for inflation) show that the ST is more popular than the PT was. The only group I see with a big problem with the ST are those who had expectations of what the ST would and would not include and don’t like that it doesn’t live up to that. A repeat of the PT all over again. Let the writers tell their story and sit back and enjoy. I indulge in spoilers so I can divest myself of all expectations and just enjoy how the story unfolds. Your theories of deconstructing and rebooting over analyze the trilogy and widely miss what the movies say about themselves. The ST was always going to involve the death of Luke in the first Episode (the first one he was in) and Harrison has been saying Han should die for 30 years. They passed the torch and Carrie’s passing forced that to be even more complete. This is the Rey, Finn, Poe trilogy and the OT characters are really just enlarge cameos. You had expectations, perhaps not of exactly what the characters would do, but definitely what they shouldn’t do. It is almost as if Lucas, Abrams, and Johnson set out to make a trilogy that was exactly what you didn’t want to see. I see symmetry in the repetition. I see the parallels in myth, history, and pop culture (Star Wars is a more serious take on Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers after all) and I’m enjoying the tale. It is very much what happens after the great war is over and how things move on. Often it is ghosts of the past that haunt the future and bring back a defeated enemy. I find the story of the ST to be very mythic and very classic and not repetitive at all. Certainly not a reboot. If you want to know what I call a reboot, just look over at Star Trek under CBS. The ST has nice echos of the Zahn trilogy while being new and fresh. Just in the ST, they took 30 years instead of 10 years to regroup and attack the Republic.

The Zahn trilogy does not have Empire vs rebels 2.0, or have the New Republic wiped out of existence, such that we reset the galaxy to an OT state. It does not have a Darth Vader wannabe, who also was a former Jedi pupil of the hero’s Jedi mentor. It does not have a fascimile Emperor. It does not have another Death Star like super weapon. It does not have another Jedi prodigy from a Tatooine clone. It does not have another ground battle involving walkers on a white plane. It does not have another throne room scene, where our hero has to witness the destruction of the rebel fleet, and an apprentice betraying his master to save the life of the hero. The Zahn trilogy was new and fresh. I can’t say the same for the ST. I’m not saying the films aren’t entertaining, and there are new elements, and nuances, but the so called cyclical nature is a poor excuse for resetting the story, and essentially giving us the OT with a new coat of paint. I’m not saying I dislike the ST in general, or that they’re bad movies. I’m saying it could have been a whole lot better, if they hadn’t undone most of the OT’s victories, and in stead given us a new and original story with new and original heroes, and villains, that weren’t in some way a slight variation of characters and stories we have seen before.

Counterpoint: Luuke

DuracellEnergizer: “^He’s embraced the absurd. Don’t expect to gain any conventional understanding from his posts.”
A New Hope Technicolor Recreation (Released!)
The Force Awakens Restructured (V2 Released!) and The Starlight Project

Author
Time

DrDre said:

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Huh I guess Star Wars really is dead and TLJ killed it. Good job, you proved it. Haha

Nope, Star Wars is in decline, and I’ve said nothing about TLJ being the cause, just that Disney’s strategy hasn’t worked, which is a reasonable conclusion, if the objective is growth, a conclusion supported by the recent analysis of bloomberg:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-07/star-wars-is-struggling-to-win-over-the-marvel-generation

What then would you say is Disney’s strategy that has been so disastrous?

Out with the old, in with the new. The Galaxy Edge theme park is the best evidence, that Disney gambled on the strength of the new canon. In the process they alienated a subsection of the previous generations of fans, whilst not being able to win over the new generation. They essentially rebooted the franchise with characters that aren’t as compelling, and so people lose interest.

I see you are unaware of what has happened at Disneyland. It is not the failure you think it is. The access to Galaxy’s Edge has been full up. Crowds have been good. What has not been good is overall attendance because no one wanted to compete with the crowds they expected for the opening period. Disney made plans to address that, but not before people had made their vacation plans and skipped over this summer. I expect next year to be one of Disney’s best at the two parks with Galaxy’s Edge.

And it is your opinion that they rebooted the franchise. That completely ignores the cyclical nature of the story and how much the ST is paralleling the EU stories that so many fans are familiar with. I don’t see any issue with attracting a new generation at all. A number of people who are more casual fans like the ST more then the previous movies. And the box office numbers (adjusted for inflation) show that the ST is more popular than the PT was. The only group I see with a big problem with the ST are those who had expectations of what the ST would and would not include and don’t like that it doesn’t live up to that. A repeat of the PT all over again. Let the writers tell their story and sit back and enjoy. I indulge in spoilers so I can divest myself of all expectations and just enjoy how the story unfolds. Your theories of deconstructing and rebooting over analyze the trilogy and widely miss what the movies say about themselves. The ST was always going to involve the death of Luke in the first Episode (the first one he was in) and Harrison has been saying Han should die for 30 years. They passed the torch and Carrie’s passing forced that to be even more complete. This is the Rey, Finn, Poe trilogy and the OT characters are really just enlarge cameos. You had expectations, perhaps not of exactly what the characters would do, but definitely what they shouldn’t do. It is almost as if Lucas, Abrams, and Johnson set out to make a trilogy that was exactly what you didn’t want to see. I see symmetry in the repetition. I see the parallels in myth, history, and pop culture (Star Wars is a more serious take on Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers after all) and I’m enjoying the tale. It is very much what happens after the great war is over and how things move on. Often it is ghosts of the past that haunt the future and bring back a defeated enemy. I find the story of the ST to be very mythic and very classic and not repetitive at all. Certainly not a reboot. If you want to know what I call a reboot, just look over at Star Trek under CBS. The ST has nice echos of the Zahn trilogy while being new and fresh. Just in the ST, they took 30 years instead of 10 years to regroup and attack the Republic.

The Zahn trilogy does not have Empire vs rebels 2.0, or have the New Republic wiped out of existence, such that we reset the galaxy to an OT state. It does not have a Darth Vader wannabe, who also was a former Jedi pupil of the hero’s Jedi mentor. It does not have a fascimile Emperor. It does not have another Death Star like super weapon. It does not have another Jedi prodigy from a Tatooine clone. It does not have another ground battle involving walkers on a white plane. It does not have another throne room scene, where our hero has to witness the destruction of the rebel fleet, and an apprentice betraying his master to save the life of the hero. The Zahn trilogy was new and fresh. I can’t say the same for the ST. I’m not saying the films aren’t entertaining, and there are new elements, and nuances, but the so called cyclical nature is a poor excuse for resetting the story, and essentially giving us the OT with a new coat of paint. I’m not saying I dislike the ST in general, or that they’re bad movies. I’m saying it could have been a whole lot better, if they hadn’t undone most of the OT’s victories, and in stead given us a new and original story with new and original heroes, and villains, that weren’t in some way a slight variation of characters and stories we have seen before.

The Zahn trilogy does have a reminant of the Empire. It does have a unique Jedi student situation. The Republic is unsteady so the players are pretty much the same as Empire vs. Rebels 2.0. And in The ST, the republic has not be wiped out, only the government. We won’t know what the state of the galaxy is until TROS comes out since only days or weeks have passed since the Hosnian system and the fleet were destroyed. I feel you are making too much of what you see as parallels and you aren’t seeing how different the ST is from the OT. I do not share any of your feelings as to what the story of the ST is. I see closer parallels to the Zahn Trilogy. But in any case it is supposed to be similar. Read or seen the Cloud Atlas? Lucas has been going for a simlar story telling feel in Star Wars. Different generations face similar trials and handle it different ways. Anakin failed. Luke redeemed Anakin. What will Rey do? TROS will reveal it. And I think if they create the right trailer and buzz, the movie is going to do very well.

Author
Time

On the criticism/negativity side I think the overview of the films remains pretty consistent - ROTJ cops it for Ewoks and childishness, the prequels cop it for Jar Jar, kid Anakin, and flat acting/romance, the SEs cop it for ‘Greedo shot first’ and ‘Jedi Rocks’, TFA cops it for being a rehash, and TLJ cops it for not answering TFA’s questions, overpowering Rey contrary to the lore, sending Leia flying through space, and diminishing Luke Skywalker. Yes, there are wide variations within these basics, and the internet obviously compounds things in a special way, but to deny TLJ’s having been something of a bummer to the franchise is ridiculous. I’m not saying this to be confrontational, and I can’t say exactly how big a detriment this has been to the Disney SW project overall, but I think it’s pretty obvious that TROS has to ‘redeem’ the series to quite an extent.

Author
Time

NeverarGreat said:

DrDre said:

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Huh I guess Star Wars really is dead and TLJ killed it. Good job, you proved it. Haha

Nope, Star Wars is in decline, and I’ve said nothing about TLJ being the cause, just that Disney’s strategy hasn’t worked, which is a reasonable conclusion, if the objective is growth, a conclusion supported by the recent analysis of bloomberg:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-07/star-wars-is-struggling-to-win-over-the-marvel-generation

What then would you say is Disney’s strategy that has been so disastrous?

Out with the old, in with the new. The Galaxy Edge theme park is the best evidence, that Disney gambled on the strength of the new canon. In the process they alienated a subsection of the previous generations of fans, whilst not being able to win over the new generation. They essentially rebooted the franchise with characters that aren’t as compelling, and so people lose interest.

I see you are unaware of what has happened at Disneyland. It is not the failure you think it is. The access to Galaxy’s Edge has been full up. Crowds have been good. What has not been good is overall attendance because no one wanted to compete with the crowds they expected for the opening period. Disney made plans to address that, but not before people had made their vacation plans and skipped over this summer. I expect next year to be one of Disney’s best at the two parks with Galaxy’s Edge.

And it is your opinion that they rebooted the franchise. That completely ignores the cyclical nature of the story and how much the ST is paralleling the EU stories that so many fans are familiar with. I don’t see any issue with attracting a new generation at all. A number of people who are more casual fans like the ST more then the previous movies. And the box office numbers (adjusted for inflation) show that the ST is more popular than the PT was. The only group I see with a big problem with the ST are those who had expectations of what the ST would and would not include and don’t like that it doesn’t live up to that. A repeat of the PT all over again. Let the writers tell their story and sit back and enjoy. I indulge in spoilers so I can divest myself of all expectations and just enjoy how the story unfolds. Your theories of deconstructing and rebooting over analyze the trilogy and widely miss what the movies say about themselves. The ST was always going to involve the death of Luke in the first Episode (the first one he was in) and Harrison has been saying Han should die for 30 years. They passed the torch and Carrie’s passing forced that to be even more complete. This is the Rey, Finn, Poe trilogy and the OT characters are really just enlarge cameos. You had expectations, perhaps not of exactly what the characters would do, but definitely what they shouldn’t do. It is almost as if Lucas, Abrams, and Johnson set out to make a trilogy that was exactly what you didn’t want to see. I see symmetry in the repetition. I see the parallels in myth, history, and pop culture (Star Wars is a more serious take on Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers after all) and I’m enjoying the tale. It is very much what happens after the great war is over and how things move on. Often it is ghosts of the past that haunt the future and bring back a defeated enemy. I find the story of the ST to be very mythic and very classic and not repetitive at all. Certainly not a reboot. If you want to know what I call a reboot, just look over at Star Trek under CBS. The ST has nice echos of the Zahn trilogy while being new and fresh. Just in the ST, they took 30 years instead of 10 years to regroup and attack the Republic.

The Zahn trilogy does not have Empire vs rebels 2.0, or have the New Republic wiped out of existence, such that we reset the galaxy to an OT state. It does not have a Darth Vader wannabe, who also was a former Jedi pupil of the hero’s Jedi mentor. It does not have a fascimile Emperor. It does not have another Death Star like super weapon. It does not have another Jedi prodigy from a Tatooine clone. It does not have another ground battle involving walkers on a white plane. It does not have another throne room scene, where our hero has to witness the destruction of the rebel fleet, and an apprentice betraying his master to save the life of the hero. The Zahn trilogy was new and fresh. I can’t say the same for the ST. I’m not saying the films aren’t entertaining, and there are new elements, and nuances, but the so called cyclical nature is a poor excuse for resetting the story, and essentially giving us the OT with a new coat of paint. I’m not saying I dislike the ST in general, or that they’re bad movies. I’m saying it could have been a whole lot better, if they hadn’t undone most of the OT’s victories, and in stead given us a new and original story with new and original heroes, and villains, that weren’t in some way a slight variation of characters and stories we have seen before.

Counterpoint: Luuke

Yeah, the Luke clone is lame.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Huh I guess Star Wars really is dead and TLJ killed it. Good job, you proved it. Haha

Nope, Star Wars is in decline, and I’ve said nothing about TLJ being the cause, just that Disney’s strategy hasn’t worked, which is a reasonable conclusion, if the objective is growth, a conclusion supported by the recent analysis of bloomberg:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-07/star-wars-is-struggling-to-win-over-the-marvel-generation

What then would you say is Disney’s strategy that has been so disastrous?

Out with the old, in with the new. The Galaxy Edge theme park is the best evidence, that Disney gambled on the strength of the new canon. In the process they alienated a subsection of the previous generations of fans, whilst not being able to win over the new generation. They essentially rebooted the franchise with characters that aren’t as compelling, and so people lose interest.

I see you are unaware of what has happened at Disneyland. It is not the failure you think it is. The access to Galaxy’s Edge has been full up. Crowds have been good. What has not been good is overall attendance because no one wanted to compete with the crowds they expected for the opening period. Disney made plans to address that, but not before people had made their vacation plans and skipped over this summer. I expect next year to be one of Disney’s best at the two parks with Galaxy’s Edge.

And it is your opinion that they rebooted the franchise. That completely ignores the cyclical nature of the story and how much the ST is paralleling the EU stories that so many fans are familiar with. I don’t see any issue with attracting a new generation at all. A number of people who are more casual fans like the ST more then the previous movies. And the box office numbers (adjusted for inflation) show that the ST is more popular than the PT was. The only group I see with a big problem with the ST are those who had expectations of what the ST would and would not include and don’t like that it doesn’t live up to that. A repeat of the PT all over again. Let the writers tell their story and sit back and enjoy. I indulge in spoilers so I can divest myself of all expectations and just enjoy how the story unfolds. Your theories of deconstructing and rebooting over analyze the trilogy and widely miss what the movies say about themselves. The ST was always going to involve the death of Luke in the first Episode (the first one he was in) and Harrison has been saying Han should die for 30 years. They passed the torch and Carrie’s passing forced that to be even more complete. This is the Rey, Finn, Poe trilogy and the OT characters are really just enlarge cameos. You had expectations, perhaps not of exactly what the characters would do, but definitely what they shouldn’t do. It is almost as if Lucas, Abrams, and Johnson set out to make a trilogy that was exactly what you didn’t want to see. I see symmetry in the repetition. I see the parallels in myth, history, and pop culture (Star Wars is a more serious take on Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers after all) and I’m enjoying the tale. It is very much what happens after the great war is over and how things move on. Often it is ghosts of the past that haunt the future and bring back a defeated enemy. I find the story of the ST to be very mythic and very classic and not repetitive at all. Certainly not a reboot. If you want to know what I call a reboot, just look over at Star Trek under CBS. The ST has nice echos of the Zahn trilogy while being new and fresh. Just in the ST, they took 30 years instead of 10 years to regroup and attack the Republic.

The Zahn trilogy does not have Empire vs rebels 2.0, or have the New Republic wiped out of existence, such that we reset the galaxy to an OT state. It does not have a Darth Vader wannabe, who also was a former Jedi pupil of the hero’s Jedi mentor. It does not have a fascimile Emperor. It does not have another Death Star like super weapon. It does not have another Jedi prodigy from a Tatooine clone. It does not have another ground battle involving walkers on a white plane. It does not have another throne room scene, where our hero has to witness the destruction of the rebel fleet, and an apprentice betraying his master to save the life of the hero. The Zahn trilogy was new and fresh. I can’t say the same for the ST. I’m not saying the films aren’t entertaining, and there are new elements, and nuances, but the so called cyclical nature is a poor excuse for resetting the story, and essentially giving us the OT with a new coat of paint. I’m not saying I dislike the ST in general, or that they’re bad movies. I’m saying it could have been a whole lot better, if they hadn’t undone most of the OT’s victories, and in stead given us a new and original story with new and original heroes, and villains, that weren’t in some way a slight variation of characters and stories we have seen before.

I’ve always seen the ST as the first shot into a larger scope of quite different films and TV shows. The balance had to be a familiar trilogy of movies that hearkens back to the OT but also merges with the new characters going forward. That the ST is as you say makes sense to me. Where I will agree with you much more is if the SW franchise stays on that trajectory going forward.

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

On the criticism/negativity side I think the overview of the films remains pretty consistent - ROTJ cops it for Ewoks and childishness, the prequels cop it for Jar Jar, kid Anakin, and flat acting/romance, the SEs cop it for ‘Greedo shot first’ and ‘Jedi Rocks’, TFA cops it for being a rehash, and TLJ cops it for not answering TFA’s questions, overpowering Rey contrary to the lore, sending Leia flying through space, and diminishing Luke Skywalker. Yes, there are wide variations within these basics, and the internet obviously compounds things in a special way, but to deny TLJ’s having been something of a bummer to the franchise is ridiculous. I’m not saying this to be confrontational, and I can’t say exactly how big a detriment this has been to the Disney SW project overall, but I think it’s pretty obvious that TROS has to ‘redeem’ the series to quite an extent.

I don’t get the Luke thing here. Although he did not spin around with his saber like a top and bring a mountain down on Kylo with the force pull he did project his image across a galaxy and save the resistance in doing so. The latter act being much closer to the Jedi way than hacking and slashing. The issue, imo, was that it wasn’t as action oriented for many fans. I thought it was epic.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Huh I guess Star Wars really is dead and TLJ killed it. Good job, you proved it. Haha

Nope, Star Wars is in decline, and I’ve said nothing about TLJ being the cause, just that Disney’s strategy hasn’t worked, which is a reasonable conclusion, if the objective is growth, a conclusion supported by the recent analysis of bloomberg:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-07/star-wars-is-struggling-to-win-over-the-marvel-generation

What then would you say is Disney’s strategy that has been so disastrous?

Out with the old, in with the new. The Galaxy Edge theme park is the best evidence, that Disney gambled on the strength of the new canon. In the process they alienated a subsection of the previous generations of fans, whilst not being able to win over the new generation. They essentially rebooted the franchise with characters that aren’t as compelling, and so people lose interest.

I see you are unaware of what has happened at Disneyland. It is not the failure you think it is. The access to Galaxy’s Edge has been full up. Crowds have been good. What has not been good is overall attendance because no one wanted to compete with the crowds they expected for the opening period. Disney made plans to address that, but not before people had made their vacation plans and skipped over this summer. I expect next year to be one of Disney’s best at the two parks with Galaxy’s Edge.

And it is your opinion that they rebooted the franchise. That completely ignores the cyclical nature of the story and how much the ST is paralleling the EU stories that so many fans are familiar with. I don’t see any issue with attracting a new generation at all. A number of people who are more casual fans like the ST more then the previous movies. And the box office numbers (adjusted for inflation) show that the ST is more popular than the PT was. The only group I see with a big problem with the ST are those who had expectations of what the ST would and would not include and don’t like that it doesn’t live up to that. A repeat of the PT all over again. Let the writers tell their story and sit back and enjoy. I indulge in spoilers so I can divest myself of all expectations and just enjoy how the story unfolds. Your theories of deconstructing and rebooting over analyze the trilogy and widely miss what the movies say about themselves. The ST was always going to involve the death of Luke in the first Episode (the first one he was in) and Harrison has been saying Han should die for 30 years. They passed the torch and Carrie’s passing forced that to be even more complete. This is the Rey, Finn, Poe trilogy and the OT characters are really just enlarge cameos. You had expectations, perhaps not of exactly what the characters would do, but definitely what they shouldn’t do. It is almost as if Lucas, Abrams, and Johnson set out to make a trilogy that was exactly what you didn’t want to see. I see symmetry in the repetition. I see the parallels in myth, history, and pop culture (Star Wars is a more serious take on Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers after all) and I’m enjoying the tale. It is very much what happens after the great war is over and how things move on. Often it is ghosts of the past that haunt the future and bring back a defeated enemy. I find the story of the ST to be very mythic and very classic and not repetitive at all. Certainly not a reboot. If you want to know what I call a reboot, just look over at Star Trek under CBS. The ST has nice echos of the Zahn trilogy while being new and fresh. Just in the ST, they took 30 years instead of 10 years to regroup and attack the Republic.

The Zahn trilogy does not have Empire vs rebels 2.0, or have the New Republic wiped out of existence, such that we reset the galaxy to an OT state. It does not have a Darth Vader wannabe, who also was a former Jedi pupil of the hero’s Jedi mentor. It does not have a fascimile Emperor. It does not have another Death Star like super weapon. It does not have another Jedi prodigy from a Tatooine clone. It does not have another ground battle involving walkers on a white plane. It does not have another throne room scene, where our hero has to witness the destruction of the rebel fleet, and an apprentice betraying his master to save the life of the hero. The Zahn trilogy was new and fresh. I can’t say the same for the ST. I’m not saying the films aren’t entertaining, and there are new elements, and nuances, but the so called cyclical nature is a poor excuse for resetting the story, and essentially giving us the OT with a new coat of paint. I’m not saying I dislike the ST in general, or that they’re bad movies. I’m saying it could have been a whole lot better, if they hadn’t undone most of the OT’s victories, and in stead given us a new and original story with new and original heroes, and villains, that weren’t in some way a slight variation of characters and stories we have seen before.

The Zahn trilogy does have a reminant of the Empire. It does have a unique Jedi student situation. The Republic is unsteady so the players are pretty much the same as Empire vs. Rebels 2.0. And in The ST, the republic has not be wiped out, only the government. We won’t know what the state of the galaxy is until TROS comes out since only days or weeks have passed since the Hosnian system and the fleet were destroyed. I feel you are making too much of what you see as parallels and you aren’t seeing how different the ST is from the OT. I do not share any of your feelings as to what the story of the ST is. I see closer parallels to the Zahn Trilogy. But in any case it is supposed to be similar. Read or seen the Cloud Atlas? Lucas has been going for a simlar story telling feel in Star Wars. Different generations face similar trials and handle it different ways. Anakin failed. Luke redeemed Anakin. What will Rey do? TROS will reveal it. And I think if they create the right trailer and buzz, the movie is going to do very well.

For one the PT is far less similar to the OT than the ST is. Secondly just because Lucas used similar trials to highlight the choices made by Anakin, and Luke, which unlike the ST were part of a single narrative with a beginning and an ending, doesn’t mean that he meant Star Wars to be an endless cycle of similar characters facing similar situations. Lucas also made it very clear he feels each trilogy needs its own visual style:

“They wanted to do a retro movie. I don’t like that. Every movie, I worked very hard to make them different,” Lucas said. “I made them completely different – different planets, different spaceships to make it new.”

So, Lucas obviously felt TFA was too much of a repeat of what we had seen before. Apparently he doesn’t share your views on similar storytelling to the extend that it was used for the ST.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

It sounds like he meant that from a visual standpoint in particular.

EDIT: Also wanted to say that I’m really enjoying how we’re having an interesting discussion about this even though we have different opinions!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

RogueLeader said:

It sounds like he meant that from a visual standpoint in particular.

EDIT: Also wanted to say that I’m really enjoying how we’re having an interesting discussion about this even though we have different opinions!

Well considering Lucas stated the following about his plans for the ST, I suspect this opinion isn’t just restricted to the visuals, even though that quote seems to focus on that aspect of the film:

GL: [The next three Star Wars films] were going to get into a microbiotic world. But there’s this world of creatures that operate differently than we do. I call them the Whills. And the Whills are the ones who actually control the universe. They feed off the Force.

GL: If I’d held onto the company I could have done it, and then it would have been done. Of course, a lot of the fans would have hated it, just like they did Phantom Menace and everything, but at least the whole story from beginning to end would be told.

Lucas thus clearly feels the whole story as he outlined it to Disney during the sale has not (yet) been told, and while I suspect certain elements of his outline ended up in the final product, he obviously had something very different in mind for the core narrative. That’s not to say his movies would have been better, but they would definitely be more original, and expanded the universe and the lore to a greater degree.

Author
Time

That sounds like a Star Wars version of Fantastic Voyage.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Combined with Inception, maybe.

“That Darth Vader, man. Sure does love eating Jedi.”

Author
Time

DrDre said:

RogueLeader said:

It sounds like he meant that from a visual standpoint in particular.

EDIT: Also wanted to say that I’m really enjoying how we’re having an interesting discussion about this even though we have different opinions!

Well considering Lucas stated the following about his plans for the ST, I suspect this opinion isn’t just restricted to the visuals, even though that quote seems to focus on that aspect of the film:

GL: [The next three Star Wars films] were going to get into a microbiotic world. But there’s this world of creatures that operate differently than we do. I call them the Whills. And the Whills are the ones who actually control the universe. They feed off the Force.

GL: If I’d held onto the company I could have done it, and then it would have been done. Of course, a lot of the fans would have hated it, just like they did Phantom Menace and everything, but at least the whole story from beginning to end would be told.

Lucas thus clearly feels the whole story as he outlined it to Disney during the sale has not (yet) been told, and while I suspect certain elements of his outline ended up in the final product, he obviously had something very different in mind for the core narrative. That’s not to say his movies would have been better, but they would definitely be more original, and expanded the universe and the lore to a greater degree.

Iv’e read what GL had planned for an ST and I’m sure as hell glad he didn’t.

Author
Time

Creox said:

Shopping Maul said:

On the criticism/negativity side I think the overview of the films remains pretty consistent - ROTJ cops it for Ewoks and childishness, the prequels cop it for Jar Jar, kid Anakin, and flat acting/romance, the SEs cop it for ‘Greedo shot first’ and ‘Jedi Rocks’, TFA cops it for being a rehash, and TLJ cops it for not answering TFA’s questions, overpowering Rey contrary to the lore, sending Leia flying through space, and diminishing Luke Skywalker. Yes, there are wide variations within these basics, and the internet obviously compounds things in a special way, but to deny TLJ’s having been something of a bummer to the franchise is ridiculous. I’m not saying this to be confrontational, and I can’t say exactly how big a detriment this has been to the Disney SW project overall, but I think it’s pretty obvious that TROS has to ‘redeem’ the series to quite an extent.

I don’t get the Luke thing here. Although he did not spin around with his saber like a top and bring a mountain down on Kylo with the force pull he did project his image across a galaxy and save the resistance in doing so. The latter act being much closer to the Jedi way than hacking and slashing. The issue, imo, was that it wasn’t as action oriented for many fans. I thought it was epic.

I’m not necessarily agreeing with the general assessment, I’m just stating it as a kind of sidebar to Dre’s more scientific analysis. While I’m not so sure about Luke’s having given up entirely, I really liked his showdown with Kylo and the way he died. I thought the idea of Luke appearing as aggressor whilst actually pulling the wool over Kylo’s eyes was brilliant and very much in keeping with his ROTJ stance.

I was stating all of this as more of a general reaction to TLJ in the wider world and how that may have impacted Dre’s stats.

Author
Time

Don’t forget Innerspace. 😉

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?