I don't see Kathleen Kennedy going anywhere, anytime soon, unless it's by her choice. This is one misfire, but she's had three billion dollar Star Wars films before Solo. And Solo might yet at least make a decent box office run, even if it might ultimately wind up taking a loss. Still, having a disappointment or flop, real or perceived, in the Star Wars brand might tarnish her reputation, as it dings the brand overall. I can't see Disney firing Kennedy because of the various factors that might have resulted in Solo's lackluster box office beyond her involvement.
After TLJ, Is "Franchise Fatigue' now Plaguing Star Wars?
- Thread starter Kane_Steel
- Start date
Solo was an old Lucasfilm idea that Disney cracked back open. Pushed primarily by Kasdan, no less. Who apparently had so much control, that he was the one responsible for both hiring and firing it’s directors.
Meanwhile, Feige spent the first 2/3 of the MCU’s existence playing second banana to a toy producer and co., who made most of the creative decisions. For eg. Okaying what goes into production in the first place. A toy producer that managed to ostracise half the directors, writers and otherwise creative people, that brought Marvel their success.
And even when Feige finally got a greater degree of control, he still wasn’t above prioritising $$$ over creative ‘vision.’ Like hastily assembling and shoving out a Spider-Man movie the second it became available. Marvel’s ‘grand story plan’ be damned.
But yeah, obviously monetary and critical success all depends on how much ‘creators love/respect the source material.’ That’s the deciding factor.
Also note: I like the Marvel movies, but they are so not ‘respectful’ or beholden to the source material. They’re so their own thing, and are so successful in their own right, that the comics now change to be like the movies. Pity they don’t change enough to actually be, you know...accessible for new fans.
Or even old fans. Keeping up with characters shouldn’t feel like an expensive chore, Marvel!
Last edited:
If you believe the narrative that Star Wars is failing because of TLJ and Kathleen Kennedy’s liberal feminist agenda (I don’t buy any of that), like this thread’s thesis is based upon, then you might disagree with your comment. I agree with you. One misfire means nothing at this point. Star Wars has been more than profitable for Disney at this point.
It won't continue and it isn't the only reason for the negative feedback. The idea that Kennedy will be going anywhere is Internet fan wishing with no real basis in how a corporation like Disney actually works. They've endured far worse firestorms than one poorly performing film, and Kennedy's other projects have made Disney money.
The online pushback is loud-unlikely to be in a majority that is concerning. Especially given the praise heaped upon Rogue One under the same person's watch. You can't have it both ways.
ETA: I'll add this. The reason why I am so convinced that Kennedy is not going any where is because such a move would be more PR on Disney's part. It would basically be kowtowing to a vocal minority who are convinced Star Wars is "ruined" (how, I don't know. Maybe because is doesn't conform to what Star Wars "should" be) rather than allowing themselves to guide their own business, which is what Lucas did, despite fan push back at times.
Also, it is hugely premature to sit there and suggest on opening weekend that the pushback is "building." It's a movie that failed at the box office and Disney can absorb those. They'll recalculate, prepare marketing for Episode IX and move on. Why do we insist upon wishing ill will at a franchise supposedly so beloved?
Last edited:
Spider-Man Homecoming didn't make Marvel Studios a single penny.
1. Sure it didn’t. Because there’s no other way for Marvel to make money from a movie, than netting all the ‘profit.’ Even though ‘profit’ is apparently the worst way for anyone to make money in Hollywood.
2. I’m sure they didn’t/won’t make a dime from Civil War and Avengers 3&4 either. The former of which coincidentally had Spidey front and centre in its advertising.
Dude, we all heard you the first time. It matters as much now, as it did then.
2. I’m sure they didn’t/won’t make a dime from Civil War and Avengers 3&4 either. The former of which coincidentally had Spidey front and centre in its advertising.
Dude, we all heard you the first time. It matters as much now, as it did then.
Spider-Man Homecoming was a Sony production from beginning to end. Marvel made the movie, but Sony paid for it and made every dime of the profits. Marvel got the merchandising and rights to use the character in 3 of their own movies.
You said Kevin Feige and Marvel Studios agreed to the Song partnership and "rushed" Spider-Man Homecoming into production because of money; I pointed out the blatant falseness of that by offering a reminder that the film itself made them nothing.
Also, your attempted dig at the facts by referencing Civil War and the third and fourth Avengers movies falls flat because it's Sony that doesn't make any money off of those movies.
Disney has already made back what it paid Lucas for on these films. One misfire won't damage the franchise but it probably will guide how they release movies in future. I only hope that Obi Wan still gets made after this.
Probably the negative reaction to TLJ, the release date so soon after and the trouble with the Directors was partly responsible for the weaker box office, that and squeezing the film inbetween Avengers and Deadpool. It just didn't feel like the event movie that Avengers was. It probably would have done better in December.
Probably the negative reaction to TLJ, the release date so soon after and the trouble with the Directors was partly responsible for the weaker box office, that and squeezing the film inbetween Avengers and Deadpool. It just didn't feel like the event movie that Avengers was. It probably would have done better in December.
Yeah, but I never claimed they rushed the film into production to reap the profits.
I said they rushed the film into production (and shoved him into movies where he originally wasn’t intended to appear) in order to make money off him. ASAP. ‘Muh artistic vision’ be damned.
And they did so very successfully.
That was literally the only point being made. So what are you attempting to disprove?
When the point is simply that Marvel (and Disney) made a lot of money off putting Spidey in their films, how does anything to do with Sony make said point ‘fall flat?’
Last edited:
Marvel -Making a movie ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise marketing we could have a "John Carter" or bounce too close to a "Green Lantern" and that'd end your opening week profit real quick, wouldn't it?
Seems like Disney distribution chief Dave Hollis is aware they have some recalculating to do.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...use-disney-rethink-star-wars-strategy-1115233
Yup. And they have far more information than the armchair quaterbacks wishing doom and gloom upon the franchise ever will.Marvel -Making a movie ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise marketing we could have a "John Carter" or bounce too close to a "Green Lantern" and that'd end your opening week profit real quick, wouldn't it?
Seems like Disney distribution chief Dave Hollis is aware they have some recalculating to do.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...use-disney-rethink-star-wars-strategy-1115233
I like armchair quarterbacking too but at the end of the day, I know that there is so much I don’t know about the box office and what studios look at in regards to box office successes or failures.
What I do know is this: since the Disney acquisition, Lucasfilm has grossed $4.6 BILLION! 74% of that money was made by the saga films. The other quarter by the standalones. Like I said, I’m just an armchair quarterback here, but if I were to take the simplest rationale for why Solo and Rogue One have made less than the saga films? I’d come to the conclusion that audiences just aren’t as interested in the standalones as they were in the saga films. I can’t see any rationale suggesting whatever conspiracy theory of the week is out there about the failure to listen to listen to the fans or backlash because LFL didn’t do what the fans wanted. I simply see a failure to lure in the fans on the current film.
If the numbers on Rogue One and TLJ were reversed, I could potentially buy into the idea that TLJ was problematic for audiences but instead, I’d be more likely to think it was diminishing returns.
This isn’t the end of the world. No one is going to be laughed off the stage at Star Wars Celebration. And they will keep making Star Wars films. Maybe they’ll rethink their approach a little bit. But not in the ways some believe.
Thanks. I actually do think Kennedy is pushing said agenda but that still doesn't mean the troubles with Solo will result in her ouster like some in the boycott/anti-Solo/anti-Disney Star Wars/anti-Kennedy faction do. I think some of those people, and the celebrants, are jumping the gun.
I mean, if Disney fired Kennedy today or this week it would look really bad for them, like the Star Wars brand is in free fall, and they don't want that perception. There might be some behind-the-scenes meetings though, some reassessments, as the Disney distribution rep Dave Hollis (who is stepping down himself) has suggested, and there might be some adjustments made, but it doesn't make sense IMO to fire Kennedy after this stumble, when there is no clear (IMO) indication that it was the new creative direction of Star Wars alone that resulted in Solo's failure, or even more important, had led to a string of under performing films or flops. If there is a notable drop in merchandising sales, if the anti-Kennedy drumbeat grows, if Solo's box office continues to drop to even more embarrassing levels, if the Hollywood press turns more to Star Wars troubles than its thus far glittering successes, I still think Disney will keep their powder dry until Episode IX. I can't see Episode IX not being a financially successful film. But that being said, the box office has been dropping since TFA, it's just who cares when each installment, until Solo, made a billion. So that created the perception of a still strong, still popular and obviously wide accepted franchise. Solo adds a wrinkle to that story, but it's just one wrinkle.
While writing this, I kept thinking about the Transformers franchise, a franchise I loathed since the first film, but for the life of me I just couldn't get why so many people seemingly loved those movies. I get they were big on action, good summer popcorn movie junk, but they were just so bad. And that train kept rolling, right up to Age of Extinction, the reboot of sorts that earned a good chunk of money but not as much as the Shia LeBeouf era, and then the lackluster box office of The Last Knight and it took a year but it seems Paramount pulled the plug on that franchise, with the upcoming Bumblebee possibly being the last in this universe of Transformer films, whereas a few years ago they were dreaming of doing a Transformers cinematic universe. Paramount ended it pretty quietly, I haven't read about any shake ups with the suits, but still that franchise was ended, likely to rebooted at some future date. It makes me wonder if Star Wars eventually could just wind down to general disinterest and then is shelved for an indefinite period. As it stands right now, I'm not opposed to that. I didn't like the sequel films, Solo isn't doing well. I liked Rogue One more than I thought I would, but even then, there wasn't a good reason to even do that film. Star Wars has much farther to fall than Transformers but it can still fall. Solo showed that Star Wars is a mortal franchise after all.
And Solo's performance has been compared to Justice League and the DCEU. Warner Brothers is twisted in knots trying to figure out what to do with the DCEU. There have been shake ups and projects tossed out to the public, likely to gauge interest than will actually be made. Star Wars isn't at that point, but the DCEU is a cautionary tale. Once it lost the faith of some (many?) fans, the mass audience and the critics (which Star Wars has not done yet, though Solo could be the start), the DCEU was in a pit that it never climbed out of. It almost got to the top with Wonder Woman, but then that was followed by Justice League. The upcoming Aquaman will be the next attempt. Even if that film is successful, I can't see it rescuing the whole of the DCEU which has become a tarnished brand, and a brand that it's 'okay' to criticize or even mock in ways that it comes across as sacrilege for Star Wars, among some fans. Even though several of the DCEU characters were icons long before anyone heard of Luke, Leia, or Han, and definitely Rey, Finn, or Poe.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...use-disney-rethink-star-wars-strategy-1115233
http://variety.com/2018/film/news/dave-hollis-disney-stepping-down-cathleen-taff-1202718750/
Star Wars is supposed to be a big Epic story.
"Solo" is a side-story, NOT Epic or necessary. So, it's TOTALLY skippable.
"The Last Jedi" killed any enthusiasm for more "Star Wars" with the general public. That movie was the biggest mistake! It made "Star Wars" feel like Disney arrogantly has no vision or grand story in mind- just cynical "product" to peddle every year.
Disney is gonna have a heck of a time drumming hype for Episode 9. Disney has their work cut out for them: not only wrapping up that Trilogy in any satisfying way, but to leave Audiences wanting more after Episode 9.
"The Last Jedi" was the turning point.
"Solo" is a side-story, NOT Epic or necessary. So, it's TOTALLY skippable.
"The Last Jedi" killed any enthusiasm for more "Star Wars" with the general public. That movie was the biggest mistake! It made "Star Wars" feel like Disney arrogantly has no vision or grand story in mind- just cynical "product" to peddle every year.
Disney is gonna have a heck of a time drumming hype for Episode 9. Disney has their work cut out for them: not only wrapping up that Trilogy in any satisfying way, but to leave Audiences wanting more after Episode 9.
"The Last Jedi" was the turning point.
You said the exact same thing in your previous post. Twice. Three times ain’t the charm, dude.
Also: I’m the general public and so is my wife!
My wife and I also fall into that category. We loved TLJ.
Disney purchased LFL for $4 billion. They have grossed $4.6 billion on the films alone. That does not include merchandise or any other ancillary deals. They knew exactly what they were getting into. Because I hate to break it to you, at the end of the day, Disney doesn't give a crap what a certain part of the fanbase thinks. They care about the general public's perspective AND if they can sell stuff. Fanboys are a minor component in all of that.
