After TLJ, Is "Franchise Fatigue' now Plaguing Star Wars?

[WarpFactorZ]

I've been thinking about this, and I'm of the growing opinion that the Star Wars franchise is not going to be the success that the Marvel universe has been. Comics appeal to a much, much wider audience than SW does. The lore of the superheroes can be traced back more than 50 years, and it's those characters that keep one going back to the theatre.

SW, however, is going a distinctly different route: making movies in the universe without the characters. TFA was a success because it reunited us with Han and Leia, and as a result we rooted for Rey and Finn as they foiled Kylo Ren's diabolical plot. TLJ did a similar thing with Luke (criticisms of how notwithstanding), but by this point the new characters could swim on their own. Even the PT worked because it was the story of central characters with whom we were already familiar. Episode IX will be the first film supported only by the new cast.

I believe this is where things will end for SW, unless they're very clever about how they do it. Rian Johnson's new trilogy is set in an unknown era -- I submit that unless it involves characters and stories we know, it will not reap the rewards of all other trilogies. The floundering success of the stand-alone films provides evidence to this effect. Hell, even a recast Han Solo isn't enough to bring butts to seats.

Unless they tell new stories -- e.g. post-ROTJ with recast Luke et al., or post Ep IX with aged Rey et al. -- I can 't see the franchise as sustainable.

 

[Jayson1]

One idea I have heard is not firing Kennedy but bringing in someone new to work with her. Someone who might have a better handle on what Star Wars fans want to see. At the very least you think she might want her to keep a low profile from now on. When you think of the new movies you should be thinking more about the Directors and their visions. If that is even possible in the internet age.


Jason

 

[Jayson1]

I've been thinking about this, and I'm of the growing opinion that the Star Wars franchise is not going to be the success that the Marvel universe has been. Comics appeal to a much, much wider audience than SW does. The lore of the superheroes can be traced back more than 50 years, and it's those characters that keep one going back to the theatre.

SW, however, is going a distinctly different route: making movies in the universe without the characters. TFA was a success because it reunited us with Han and Leia, and as a result we rooted for Rey and Finn as they foiled Kylo Ren's diabolical plot. TLJ did a similar thing with Luke (criticisms of how notwithstanding), but by this point the new characters could swim on their own. Episode IX will be the first film supported only by the new cast.

I believe this is where things will end for SW, unless they're very clever about how they do it. Rian Johnson's new trilogy is set in an unknown era -- I submit that unless it involves characters and stories we know, it will not reap the rewards of all other trilogies. The floundering success of the stand-alone films provides evidence to this effect. Hell, even a recast Han Solo isn't enough to bring butts to seats.

Unless they tell new stories -- e.g. post-ROTJ with recast Luke et al., or post Ep IX with aged Rey et al. -- I can 't see the franchise as sustainable.

So your saying it's kind of gone the Trek route were everything must always be connected to the "TOS" show to get people interested in new Trek? You would think that would benefit "Solo" though. I agree that idea of a trilogy in a new part of space could end up being a epic fail. At what point would this not jut be some random Space Movie about humans encountering weird aliens which sounds more like Trek than Wars.


Jason

 

[WarpFactorZ]

So your saying it's kind of gone the Trek route were everything must always be connected to the "TOS" show to get people interested in new Trek? You would think that would benefit "Solo" though.

Every incarnation of Trek was originally connected to TOS (or later TNG) to get people interested. Apart from TNG, I'd argue that the only truly successful spinoff was DS9, but even that appeals only to a largely fandom audience. And Trek eventually suffered from franchise fatigue as a result of flooding the market. As we saw, the only way to maintain each of the series was to directly infuse them with TOS/TNG blood (this was the MO of Enterprise...). Borg. Q. Thomas Riker. Soong Augments. etc....

Second: my point about Solo is that familiarity with characters might even itself not be sufficient to keep the franchise going.

 

[Campe]

The negative word of mouth about her is growing substantially.

I couldn't be happier with that.

Its still all speculation. And your negativity in regards to someone losing their job is very disheartening.

 

[JD]

The floundering success of the stand-alone films provides evidence to this effect. Hell, even a recast Han Solo isn't enough to bring butts to seats.

Foundering success? You do realize Rogue One made a billion dollars, right?
Solo has also only been out for 4 days, so there's always a chance it could pick out. OK, maybe not a great chance, but it could still happen.

 

[Trekkin]

LOL.... what are you even talking about?

I’m addressing your original claim that MCU is ‘diversity done right.’

In spite of the MCU not, you know... being very diverse. Some might even say you like it’s approach because it’s not diverse.

You’ve then gish-galloped into ‘Its well loved because Feige having respect for the blah blah’ and ‘it’s made money, so it was right.’

The former claim of which is incorrect on several levels (Feige didn’t run the MCU until recently, it was run by literal toy manufacturers who really didn’t give a crap outside of $$$, and it’s brand of ‘respect’ gives comic fans the sort of conniptions that detractors of TLJ can’t even imagine.)

The latter (‘they make money and do well critically!’) is beside the point. In fact, it actually hurts your claim. Because:

1. All the previous Star Wars movies (including TLJ, and excepting AOTC) were massive critical and commercial successes. Both Lucasfilm and Disney’s.

2. Solo (which I saw last night) is the SW movie most in the vein of MCU. Everything, from its production to the content of the movie itself, practically follows a goddamn early MCU template. And guess what? That’s the one which was SW first true stumble outside the Clone Wars movie.
​

Oh, and the MCU is pretty much Marvel’s only success story in the last thirty years. Born from a decades long string of failure. Sure some of that can be blamed on outside parties (for eg. Sony, Cannon Group), but crap like the apparent death of Marvel Knights, the loss of their valuable properties during the Crash, and the (kinda) slow death of their comics themselves, is on Marvel. That history of bad decisions is part of the reason why the MCU is churned our like it is.

Meanwhile, Star Wars has...one underperformer. Oh no.

 

[Campe]

Amusingly, even Collider [Notorious Disney Star Wars Shills (Red Letter Media makes fun of them all the time because of this)].. admits that there is a significant Fan backlash against Lucasfilm and Kathleen Kennedy now, thanks to TLJ;

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

This is going beyond the 'angry blogger' phase. Soon industry trades will join in with the negativity.

A significant regime change is inevitable if Disney wants to win the people back, and there seems to be a target from fans beginning to be aimed at Kathleen Kennedy's head.

The negative word of mouth about her is growing substantially.

I couldn't be happier with that.

By the way, you pushing the narrative that TLJ destroyed the Star Wars saga ignores that it is NOT the only reason posited in this video. These included:

1. Alden Ehrenrich as Han (can't replace Ford)
2. Release date and five months since TLJ
3. Quality of Solo as a film
4. Drama behind the scenes
5. Marketing
6. Apathetic reviews
7. Not attached to the new trilogy
8. TLJ's divisiveness; boycott of regime at Lucasfilm
9. Competition from Deadpool 2 and Infinity War
10. Poor word of mouth

Yes, they do focus a bit on this issue. But its certainly not the only thing they've posited. So, you can continue to push this narrative that its the only reason that Solo has failed, but you can't ignore that there are other issues that have been brought up in the discussion.

 

[fireproof78]

By the way, you pushing the narrative that TLJ destroyed the Star Wars saga ignores that it is NOT the only reason posited in this video. These included:

1. Alden Ehrenrich as Han (can't replace Ford)
2. Release date and five months since TLJ
3. Quality of Solo as a film
4. Drama behind the scenes
5. Marketing
6. Apathetic reviews
7. Not attached to the new trilogy
8. TLJ's divisiveness; boycott of regime at Lucasfilm
9. Competition from Deadpool 2 and Infinity War
10. Poor word of mouth

Yes, they do focus a bit on this issue. But its certainly not the only thing they've posited. So, you can continue to push this narrative that its the only reason that Solo has failed, but you can't ignore that there are other issues that have been brought up in the discussion.

By the way, the narrative against Kennedy falls apart with those details, as well as the wonderful little detail that Bob Iger and Lawrence Kasdan were the ones who spearheaded Solo, not Kennedy.

 

[Trekkin]

3. Quality of Solo as a film
5. Marketing
6. Apathetic reviews

Honestly, having seen the damn thing now, that’s where I’d place my bet. I love Star Wars. But Solo was just a complete nonevent for me. Not bad, but just not notable. Certainly nothing I’d run around trying to hype up.

Whereas even though some SW knock-offs like Battle Beyond the Stars (or even the Prequels) are technically worse movies, at least I have something to say about them. Other than ‘there’s gonna be some non-cartoon watching fans who are very confused.’

Solo has also only been out for 4 days, so there's always a chance it could pick out. OK, maybe not a great chance, but it could still happen.

I wouldn’t bet on it either.

But after the absolutely confounding legs and success of The Greatest Showman, apparently anything’s possible.

 

[BillJ]

If you fire a creator after a string of successes and one sub-performer, you will create a scenario where you are constantly jumping from person to person. Chasing elusive "fan approval" will do nothing but damage the brand.

Witness what happened with Star Trek Into Darkness, with Paramount trying to backpeddle away from it after fans bitched and moaned. Even sending Abrams on an apology tour over Alice Eve in her underwear. So they turned around and gave fans what they "wanted" in Star Trek Beyond, and they had their worst underperformer since the reboot started in 2009.

 

[DarKush]

If you fire a creator after a string of successes and one sub-performer, you will create a scenario where you are constantly jumping from person to person. Chasing elusive "fan approval" will do nothing but damage the brand.

Witness what happened with Star Trek Into Darkness, with Paramount trying to backpeddle away from it after fans bitched and moaned. Even sending Abrams on an apology tour over Alice Eve in her underwear. So they turned around and gave fans what they "wanted" in Star Trek Beyond, and they had their worst underperformer since the reboot started in 2009.

That is a very interesting comparison. In a way, I do think Into Darkness broke cinematic Star Trek, and Beyond caught the backlash of that. Though similar to the TLJ and Solo, there was some fan disgruntlement, but also a delayed, lackluster marketing campaign for Beyond. And there's also the added restrictions placed on fan films that came before Beyond. So, perhaps whatever apologies were made were not reinforced by more actively engaging the fans, and also Paramount-CBS totally whiffed on celebrating the 50th anniversary of Trek and tying Beyond more into that.

From what I recall, there was some 'vocal minority' dissent over the 2009 Star Trek, but that film was so big and caught on with the masses that it was ignored. (I liked the 2009 film BTW). And that division grew over Into Darkness (which did better overseas than here), and finally it metastasized with Beyond (which unfortunately turned out to be a better film than Into Darkness, IMO). And to me, that sort of is similar to at least what we've seen with Disney Star Wars. TFA was celebrated, but over time some people started to reassess that film and lower their regard for it. Rogue One did well, but it was TLJ that caused the biggest schism (and it also made less domestically TFA, though it made less globally as well, unlike Into Darkness), and now Solo (which from what I've learned from spoilers seems like a good, or at least adequate film) is receiving the backlash that resulted from TLJ.

Perhaps the air is out of the Star Wars balloon now like it was for the Abrams-Lin Trek films and it's going to be hard refilling it, but I do think Disney should try, because Star Wars is a much bigger franchise, in terms of global reach and pop culture acceptance than even Trek is, and therefore the fans might not be as willing to part with it, if they feel they are respected and listened to. For me, Lucasfilm doesn't have to apologize, and they shouldn't, if they don't believe there is anything to apologize for. But perhaps they could just tell the dissenting fans, 'we hear you' and make some moves to prove that they do, like bringing in Dave Filoni or even George Lucas as a consultant (and actually listening to his ideas this time), but firing Kathleen Kennedy at this point is a bridge too far and would indicate a Lucasfilm in free fall, and it shouldn't be at this stage, with only one disappointing outing that still might recoup some of it's money before it's theatrical run is over. Warner's hectic shakeups and announcements over the DCEU, while perhaps attempting to mollify fans, have been done in such a way that they haven't restored confidence in the brand. Star Wars is a long way off from becoming the DCEU, but it could head that way. I still think it needs another failure or two though before Lucasfilm/Disney goes into a full on panic.

 

[INACTIVESamusAranX]

That is a very interesting comparison. In a way, I do think Into Darkness broke cinematic Star Trek, and Beyond caught the backlash of that. Though similar to the TLJ and Solo, there was some fan disgruntlement, but also a delayed, lackluster marketing campaign for Beyond. And there's also the added restrictions placed on fan films that came before Beyond. So, perhaps whatever apologies were made were not reinforced by more actively engaging the fans, and also Paramount-CBS totally whiffed on celebrating the 50th anniversary of Trek and tying Beyond more into that.

From what I recall, there was some 'vocal minority' dissent over the 2009 Star Trek, but that film was so big and caught on with the masses that it was ignored. (I liked the 2009 film BTW). And that division grew over Into Darkness (which did better overseas than here), and finally it metastasized with Beyond (which unfortunately turned out to be a better film than Into Darkness, IMO). And to me, that sort of is similar to at least what we've seen with Disney Star Wars. TFA was celebrated, but over time some people started to reassess that film and lower their regard for it. Rogue One did well, but it was TLJ that caused the biggest schism (and it also made less domestically TFA, though it made less globally as well, unlike Into Darkness), and now Solo (which from what I've learned from spoilers seems like a good, or at least adequate film) is receiving the backlash that resulted from TLJ.

Perhaps the air is out of the Star Wars balloon now like it was for the Abrams-Lin Trek films and it's going to be hard refilling it, but I do think Disney should try, because Star Wars is a much bigger franchise, in terms of global reach and pop culture acceptance than even Trek is, and therefore the fans might not be as willing to part with it, if they feel they are respected and listened to. For me, Lucasfilm doesn't have to apologize, and they shouldn't, if they don't believe there is anything to apologize for. But perhaps they could just tell the dissenting fans, 'we hear you' and make some moves to prove that they do, like bringing in Dave Filoni or even George Lucas as a consultant (and actually listening to his ideas this time), but firing Kathleen Kennedy at this point is a bridge too far and would indicate a Lucasfilm in free fall, and it shouldn't be at this stage, with only one disappointing outing that still might recoup some of it's money before it's theatrical run is over. Warner's hectic shakeups and announcements over the DCEU, while perhaps attempting to mollify fans, have been done in such a way that they haven't restored confidence in the brand. Star Wars is a long way off from becoming the DCEU, but it could head that way. I still think it needs another failure or two though before Lucasfilm/Disney goes into a full on panic.

A very reasonable perspective and good comparison to the similar line Nu-Trek has taken.

That said, I think there’s a lot of overreaction in this thread. Solo fell on its face, yes, but there are so many factors that could play into that; it might be a bit soon to say the franchise is fatigued or fans are too upset of TLJ and sticking it to the Mouse. Correlation does not always equal causation. Now, if Disney continues to double down and release more anthology films, regardless of if it’s ‘needed’ or not (Rogue One wasn’t needed and it grossed a billion dollars; Solo wasn’t needed either and it’s heading into bust land.) I could see the franchise wearing down. As I stated in the Boba Fett thread, let’s wait until Episode 9 comes out; if the next tentpole does lower than TLJ, then there might be room for concern. I think it’s premature to make judgement calls.

For the record, while I dislike some of what Kennedy had done and said, I will never root for someone to lose their job. Yes, I know she’d fall on her feet seeing her years in Hollywood, but to bear ill will towards someone over fiction...not so sure about that. If it meant the health of the franchise, i would support a move but because of pure monetary concerns and keeping Star Wars going, not because of hatred. But I don’t think we’re at that point yet.

 

[Campe]

A very reasonable perspective and good comparison to the similar line Nu-Trek has taken.

That said, I think there’s a lot of overreaction in this thread. Solo fell on its face, yes, but there are so many factors that could play into that; it might be a bit soon to say the franchise is fatigued or fans are too upset of TLJ and sticking it to the Mouse. Correlation does not always equal causation. Now, if Disney continues to double down and release more anthology films, regardless of if it’s ‘needed’ or not (Rogue One wasn’t needed and it grossed a billion dollars; Soli wasn’t needed either and it’s heading into bust land) I could see the franchise wearing down. As I stated in the Boba Fett thread, let’s wait until Episode 9 comes out; if the tent pole does lower than 8, then there might be room for concern. I think it’s premature to make judgement calls.

I'm not going to say that this TLJ boycott isn't playing a part in this. I think it is. However, as you suggest, I think its effect is highly overstated by the vocal minority. As suggested in that Collider video, this was the perfect storm against it. While I enjoyed Solo, it wasn't particularly groundbreaking in any way. It was a prequel. There was behind the scenes drama. It was Memorial Day weekend. Its only been a few months since TLJ came out. Its marketing was terrible. And, ya know, it might just not have been the Star Wars movie anyone wanted.

For the record, while I dislike some of what Kennedy had done and said, I will never root for someone to lose their job. Yes, I know she’d fall on her feet seeing her years in Hollywood, but to bear ill will towards someone over fiction...not so sure about that. If it meant the health of the franchise, i would support a move but because of money, not because of hatred. But I don’t think we’re at that point yet.

I just don't think any of this talk is warranted. Yet.

 

[Spot261]

I’m addressing your original claim that MCU is ‘diversity done right.’

I can't believe anyone could make this claim with a straight face to be honest. That something has been commercially successful is no indicator of being "diversity done right".

We've had, what, one black lead? How many females? Oh that's right, none except the yet to be released Cap Marvel. Every other lead character has been a white male supported by mostly white males, with the odd female typically thrown in as a love interest and the black buddy trope being used in order to get some racial diversity in without upsetting the apple cart of having the star being a straight white guy.

That isn't diversity done right, that is diversity done as conservatively as possible whilst still having someone on screen who can be pointed to and say "look, there's a woman and a couple of black dudes on the team, plus we had a latino guy as the comedy sidekick once"

As for the MCU being "beloved worldwide", hmmmmm

It's been popular sure, but beloved seems quite a stretch. Independence Day was immensely popular and made a fortune, but you'd be really stretching to call it "beloved", much the same applies to the MCU. It's formulaic non challenging popcorn stuff, it's enjoyable but not much more.

 

[fireproof78]

If you fire a creator after a string of successes and one sub-performer, you will create a scenario where you are constantly jumping from person to person. Chasing elusive "fan approval" will do nothing but damage the brand.

Exactly.

 

[EnsignRicky]

I love ID4.

 

[Campe]

^Fun movie? Yes. Good movie? Eh. Sequel fun or good? Nope.

 

[Butters]

I'm not going to say that this TLJ boycott isn't playing a part in this. I think it is. However, as you suggest, I think its effect is highly overstated by the vocal minority.

I have massive doubts that a fan boycott would even register as a whole number against the general movie going population.

I haven’t read a single bad review about the Last Jedi, but to be fair I haven’t read any review at all. I saw it at the cinema, in 3D, I thought it was ok. I also bought the DVD, I don’t keep up with the fans.

Star Wars is one of those ‘have you seen it yet movies’ that non-fans can gather round and chat about for a couple of weeks and then forget about till next time. Star Wars money has never been in the die hards and the collectors, it’s in the mass Market appeal. It’s not the fans that buy their kids and grandkids Star Wars pyjamas and lunch boxes for Christmas, the cheap consumables that need replacing everything few months with the next greatest thing printed on it. It’s the regular joes, that need to buy kids -pyjamas anyway, and Star Wars is a hug winner.

There’s no conspiracy, no boycott. Solo is suffering from nothing more than the lack of mass appeal.

 

[BillJ]

And, ya know, it might just not have been the Star Wars movie anyone wanted.

I won't see it until this weekend, but it looks fairly entertaining to me. Which is all I ask.

Perhaps the air is out of the Star Wars balloon now like it was for the Abrams-Lin Trek films and it's going to be hard refilling it

I really don't think the air is out of either one. I think both companies gave us movies they thought we wanted instead of allowing creators to create within the boundaries of the universe they were working in. They began moving towards the niche crowd. Much like Star Trek: Discovery. Where nostalgia is the driving force.

I don't know if I qualify as a "hardcore" fan, but I've seen The Last Jedi three times and enjoyed it each time. My wife is "hardcore" and she loves it. We were split on Rogue One. I don't care for it, she loves it.