Is Lucasfilm killing Star Wars?

[Rodders]

No reason why we can't have a Star Wars story set apart from the part of the Galaxy that we have visited already.

I'm not sure what this obsession is with Trilogies is, either.

 

[Onyx]

No reason why we can't have a Star Wars story set apart from the part of the Galaxy that we have visited already.

I'm not sure what this obsession is with Trilogies is, either.

Just a long form of the three act play.

I agree that any part of the Star Wars universe could be visited, but I think it makes sense to dote more on the pivotal history that the first movie established. That's why I don't get Solo - it is a movie about the minor actions of a character that has yet to emerge from obscurity. That was the magic of Han Solo - he was a sketchy freighter captain that stepped up despite every instinct to go back to normal life. Depicting his life before becomes nothing more than a slice-of-life piece compared the sweeping events of the main films.

Someone at Disney needs to be reminded that Star Wars is about extraordinary people saving the galaxy from evil, and nothing less. If they keep trying to milk things, we're going to end up with a fictional Tatooine cable access show about fiber arts with bantha hair.

 

[Vladd67]

Part of the obsession with trilogies is that when Star Wars came out Lucas said it was the first part of a trilogy and that he had planned sequel and prequel trilogies but that he started with Star Wars as it contained the characters and storyline he liked best. Of course years later he denied saying anything of the sort but those of us around for the original Star Wars buzz remember.

 

[night_wrtr]

I'm not sure what this obsession is with Trilogies is, either.

Because it has become the gold standard for epic storytelling and breaking the mold is hard to do. I think this is why Marvel has become a huge success. Close-focused individual movies that tie into a grand overall story arc that is now coming together in a big way.

The A Star Wars Story movies could have branched out into new parts of the galaxy in single episode-style films, but they rehashed the familiar instead. I hope they take a long hard look at this before trying again.

Honestly, they need to get a dialogue going between Lucas Film and fans so that they can actually hear from their target audience. There will be a danger in Rian Johnsons trilogy just for the fact he is doing it after the backlash from TLJ. People may not be ready to move on from that, so it could be doomed before it gets off the ground.

 

[Rodders]

As if to illustrate the Lucasarts failure, I see that Lucasfilm now seem to be In something of a quandary on how to proceed after the disappointing returns from Solo.

 

[The Crawling Chaos]

I thought Solo was the best Star Wars film to come out since Disney bought the franchise, and probably even the best since Return of the Jedi.

I'm really disappointed that fans didn't give the movie the chance it deserved, and even more sorely disappointed that Disney is now reconsidering their Obi-Wan and Boba Fett projects.

The Expanded Universe was always the best part of the Star Wars universe, and what kept the franchise going for so long. The real meat is to be found in those parallel stories, not in the main Skywalker saga (which could/should have been over after RotJ, to be honest). It's time to end it and focus on the smaller stories that actually matter. I'm tired of the fate of the entire universe being at stake, and of rebellions and Jedi saving the day.

 

[Onyx]

The Expanded Universe was always the best part of the Star Wars universe, and what kept the franchise going for so long.

Are you saying that expanded universe is better than the original trilogy?

 

[The Crawling Chaos]

Are you saying that expanded universe is better than the original trilogy?

On the whole? Yes, I would agree with that statement. Of course, without the OT there wouldn't be an Expanded Universe, so the OT enjoys a privileged status as the spark that brought it all into existence. I think deep down, people revere the OT because of the universe it created rather than because of the three movies' inherent quality. There are many more great stories in the EU than there are in the movies.

I've been a Star Wars fan for nearly 30 years, but I'm a fan of the universe created by Lucas first and foremost, not of the films he made/oversaw.

 

[WaylanderToo]

I find the behavior of people on social media appalling.

But I do not understand the casting decisions made for many of these films. They seem to have purposely replaced heroic characters portrayed by attractive, self assured actors with the cast of Goonies. And I'm not picking on Ms. Tran - I don't get the casting and characterization of Poe, Finn or Rey. Rey is getting better, though, but the rest have gotten more ridiculous. Andor was another really weak character portrayal while Erso was reasonable - but still just along for the ride.


I don't see how they are ever going to recapture the original films if they can't field characters that are as motivated and bad-ass as Luke, Leia, Han, Ben, Lando and Chewie. Star Wars was not a kids' movie. These recent films seem to be. We've gone from Seven Samurai to Wizard of Oz for heroes.

I'll agree and disagree with your post. The treatment of actresses (especially Ms Tran) on social media has been disgraceful and people really need to have a good, hard look at themselves.

IMO Star Wars is a kids movie, or at best, a YA one. To be fair I do base this upon going to see it on original release with my grandmother when I was 13

The elephant in the room here, and what has caused a lot of strife for a portion of fans (and not even the loons mentioned above on social media) is the SJW angle running through them, both subtle and not so subtle. Don't politicise our films/memories, which would be bad enough - but then the films themselves have not been brilliant.

AFA - I enjoyed this, even though even I could see it was just a re-tread
R1 - very good
TLJ - was quite pretty but was execrable
Solo - an enjoyable romp but, ultimately, fluff

 

[picklematrix]

Prior to the disney films being released, i was holding out hope that they would utilise some of the really great material from the expanded universe, such as the Thrawn Trilogy, which is brilliant.
The new films just haven't hit the spot for me, unfortunately, as much as i tried to love them.

 

[The Crawling Chaos]

Prior to the disney films being released, i was holding out hope that they would utilise some of the really great material from the expanded universe, such as the Thrawn Trilogy, which is brilliant.
The new films just haven't hit the spot for me, unfortunately, as much as i tried to love them.

We can't blame them for doing their own thing and not merely adapting stories that the fans have been reading since the 90s, but it's true that they haven't been able to come up with stories that are equally or more compelling than the dozens of writers who built 30 years worth of Expanded Universe one book at a time.

As far as I'm concerned, my preferred post-ROTJ universe is still the one found in the likes of Dark Empire and the Legacy of the Force book series. Not that they were the most thrilling SW books ever written (they were not) but they're still much better than what we got with The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi.

The main thing these books and comics did was expand the universe the movies depicted. If anything, Disney has made it more confined, to the point of being suffocating - almost. Here's hoping that they really do throw a stick of dynamite into it in Episode IX. Killing off the Holy Trinity (Luke, Han and Leia) only to rehash the exact same storylines and dynamics as those found in the OT and PT really isn't the way to go. The SW universe needs to stop revolving around an evil empire and the Jedi and rebels standing in their way.

 

[Rodders]

To be fair to Disney, the EU wasn't all great. It also had it's fair share of weak (and dare I say rubbish) stories.

 

[Onyx]

On the whole? Yes, I would agree with that statement. Of course, without the OT there wouldn't be an Expanded Universe, so the OT enjoys a privileged status as the spark that brought it all into existence. I think deep down, people revere the OT because of the universe it created rather than because of the three movies' inherent quality. There are many more great stories in the EU than there are in the movies.

I've been a Star Wars fan for nearly 30 years, but I'm a fan of the universe created by Lucas first and foremost, not of the films he made/oversaw.

I have to say, this is crazy talk.

Star Wars was not a YA film. It isn't about growing up, making life choices or any of the YA stuff. It is an adventure in the most exotic places ever put on the big screen. The film features mass murder, multiple scenes of burning corpses, torture, strangulation and Han shooting first. It is brutal.

It is also beautiful, and if it hadn't so enthralled everyone who saw it, we wouldn't be talking about it so many years later like we do. The only other film that combined action and immersive SF exotica to such extent has probably been the Matrix. I adore Bladerunner, 2001, Alien, Terminator, etc, but Star Wars pulled off a trick of visual story telling that has been unmatched since.

I suspect that people who were born afterwards could come upon Star Wars as an overhyped product that contains no suspense because our culture knows everything about Luke Skywalker and watching the film for the first time is like watching trivia play out. But if SW could be erased from the collective consciousness and then released as a brand new film, we'd still be going crazy over it. Other films simply don't look and feel like that.

 

[HareBrain]

Star Wars was not a YA film. It isn't about growing up, making life choices or any of the YA stuff.

It's an adolescent's coming of age story. There's nothing about Luke that necessitates him being older than a physically strong 14-year-old. Eps 4 and 5 are all about him starting off an ignorant farm-boy and learning about the wider world, the political situation, his strengths and weaknesses, and his true parentage. If that isn't classic YA adventure fodder, I know not what is.

 

[night_wrtr]

To be fair to Disney, the EU wasn't all great. It also had it's fair share of weak (and dare I say rubbish) stories.

Yeah, any good series is bound to have a couple that fall a bit short.

To add onto @HareBrain 's point. George Lucas once said, "It’s a film for 12-year-olds."

 

[Onyx]

It's an adolescent's coming of age story. There's nothing about Luke that necessitates him being older than a physically strong 14-year-old. Eps 4 and 5 are all about him starting off an ignorant farm-boy and learning about the wider world, the political situation, his strengths and weaknesses, and his true parentage. If that isn't classic YA adventure fodder, I know not what is.

Luke doesn't grow up in the film. At the start of the film he's an accomplished pilot and an armed adult capable of roaming Sand People infested wastes alone in the speeder he owns. He shows no fear when confronted by murderers in the cantina, sheds no tears at the loss of his adoptive parents when he finds their grisly corpses, and participates in the assumed strangling and stripping of two storm troopers. Then he leads Han and Chewie in an audacious rescue, remaining quick thinking throughout, faces down a squad of storm troopers trying to avenge Ben and then confidently assaults the death star in an X-wing he's never flown before.

Where's the self doubt, the blossoming of new confidence, the fears to overcome or the difficult decisions normal of a coming of age plot line? Luke is a stone cold killer - a wrecking ball of potential violence whose natural abilities and frontier lifestyle have left him with no self doubt. There's no chink in his armor until halfway through Empire. It would be difficult to name a more naturally brave, confident and capable hero in any film or literature.

I mean, that's what we actually see on the screen in the six hours we get to know Luke. What we bring to Luke's character culturally might be different than what we see.


If anything, Han is the one that grows up. Leia seems to have grown up imperious.

To add onto @HareBrain 's point. George Lucas once said, "It’s a film for 12-year-olds."

What adventure film isn't exactly what a 12 year old wants to see? It is a more violent adult film than LOTR. It's a film for 12 year olds because it isn't all wrapped up in adult angst or full of cuteness like something designed to please an even younger audience.

 

[soulsinging]

Because it has become the gold standard for epic storytelling and breaking the mold is hard to do. I think this is why Marvel has become a huge success. Close-focused individual movies that tie into a grand overall story arc that is now coming together in a big way.

The A Star Wars Story movies could have branched out into new parts of the galaxy in single episode-style films, but they rehashed the familiar instead. I hope they take a long hard look at this before trying again.

The key difference is that Marvel was drawing on 50+ years of character development and storytelling that fans already knew. Each of those movies focused on a character that was well established and plugged it into a larger arc. It's very impressive, but Star Wars was in no way the same, particularly once Disney announced they were tossing out the EU.

I can't agree with the person above that said the EU is better than the OT, but it does have some great stories, and has already been very successfully integrated (witches of Dathomir into Clone Wars, Thrawn into Rebels). Had Disney decided to build upon that and incorporate those stories/legends, they might have been able to put together something like what Marvel has. Since they opted for all original stories though, it seems impossible to build out a brand new expanded universe like Marvel has done and not lose fans with occasional misfires when you don't have established characters to draw them back.

The big problem though, isn't that SW isn't doing the Marvel thing, it's that they ARE doing the DC thing. Drunk on the success of Nolan's Batman trilogy, the DC team handed their movies to the atrocious Snyder who has turned Superman and the Justice League, symbols of hope and aspiration, into depressing, lifeless affairs with half-hearted attempts at poignancy. Last Jedi makes me think of nothing more than Man of Steel... a structural mess with a tone that feels completely off.

And boy is it a mess. Leia's death and resurrection seems to serve no purpose, Fin and Rey's engaging chemistry was tossed aside for an unconvincing "bond" between Rey and Kylo (compare to the way Lucas wisely deferred to the Han/Leia chemistry and abandoned Luke/Leia), Fin and Poe's entire plot was a total boondoggle, they're desperate to recapture the magic of lively secondary characters like Yoda and Boba Fett so you have pointless roles for Laura Dern and Benicio Del Toro, and above all Mark Hammill is right that Luke Skywalker, the beacon of hope in this warring universe, whose unwavering faith in love and goodness brought Darth Vader himself back from the dark side, is completely wrong as some gruff, angry hermit who has reverted back to acting like a petulant teenager after we last saw him finally become a true Jedi master.

Once I read that Disney had no overarching plot/plan for this trilogy and that each director gets to just pick up wherever the last one left off and take the story wherever they want, I was out. Those experiments are fun exercises for writers on forums like this, but they have no business guiding an ostensibly cohesive trilogy of big budget movies. Even the Matrix was building towards a specific vision, even if that turned out to be gibberish.

 

[thaddeus6th]

Agree entirely, soulsinging.

A trilogy with Thrawn as the antagonist (watched a Youtube vid about his background, and saw the entertaining comment that he's effectively space Rommel) could've worked very nicely.

I won't spoil it, but there's a scene in TLJ which has some really clunky dialogue in, crowbarred into place to try and make the scene work. Not a fan.

 

[Edward M. Grant]

Star Wars was not a YA film.

No. The original market for Star Wars was eight-year-old boys.

I just about remember when the movie first came out, and there wasn't an eight-year-old boy in town who could wait to see it. Adults weren't so impressed.

 

[Dave]

Well, I was 16. I was impressed with the cinematography. I was impressed with the scope. I liked that the vehicles were old and battered, and not shiny and new. The story was a typical fairy tale, reluctant young hero, mentored by old wizard to fight evil empire, so nothing too special. I liked the one-liners and humour. I thought Darth Vader with his psionic powers was superb. (However, I always preferred the much darker Empire once that had been released.)

It was definitely made for a younger audience than me though. I can't remember "eight-years old" being mentioned specifically but it was certainly a children's film. Nevertheless, it wasn't eight-year old boys who stood around the block waiting to see it multiple times, it was teenagers. Most adults would never watch science fiction then anyhow - it was too low brow. It was only after Star Wars that things changed.