• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Kathleen Kennedy Damaging Star Wars....?

No, it wasn't. You just got the wrong idea. Avengers 2 was already planned at that point and there was no way Tony wasn't going to be armored Iron Man in Avengers 2. Just like there was no way he wasn't going to be armored Iron Man in Avengers 1. See a pattern?
The future of the character was never in doubt... except among the credulous.

He was literally in contract negotiations at that point. Nothing was guaranteed.

And Avengers 2 is infamous for having a rather haphazard development. As in ‘literally being rewritten whilst filming.’

But sure man. Keep being ‘incredulous’ by...clinging real hard to the idea that Marvel has never improvised and changed their ‘plan.’

In other words, the exact same place he's in at the end of the first film. So I guess that one's a "send-off" too. Why not?

Nope. And yes. He wasn’t at the same point, but it was complete enough to act a possible send-off. Marvel didn’t know how well it would do.

But I’m not sure how someone misses that Tony’s decision at the end was meant to be short-sighted and arrogant, explicitly to differentiate him from the usual responsible and humbled heroes. Its not like sequels (and even the movie’s own stinger) didn’t keep coming back to it, and hammering it in that he really wasn’t thinking of anyone’s but himself.

Yeah, an ultimately pointless gesture designed to appease his girlfriend. Fragile masculinity, remember?

Yeah, nah. Although funnily enough, this comment smells a bit of it.

To see it as an effort to ‘appease’ Pepper, you’d have to:
(1) Ignore what Pepper was saying throughout the movie
(2) Ignore what Tony was saying at the end. Which is a task, considering it was a pretty blunt monologue to the audience. (Or so we thought.)

And just kinda assume that he really wants to get laid.

Because that's what audiences came to see, right? If they can stay awake, that is. Though I guess more trips to Wal-Mart could have been entertaining.

1. The Avengers are not an Iron Man movie.
2. All of Tony’s plot contributions in Avengers 2 happen out of the armour. They’re very much Tony Stark problems. He could easily have not used it at all, and everything would essentially be the same. Especially with War Machine being present during the climax.

So...no. That apparently wasn’t what the audiences paid to see.

(Although, funnily enough: I’m sure certain tie-in merch featuring an armoured Iron Man has caused a few trips to Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart does sell toys, doesn’t it Americans?)

And... saving the world through empathy?

giphy.gif

Err, yeah? You may not have noticed, but not all heroes are motivated by the same thing.

For eg. Widow is on a penance quest.

Punisher is vengeful.

Hulk just likes to smack things that irritate him. And sometimes protects the people he’s close to. Depending.

And up to that point Tony has largely been pushed by personal motivations and ego. He appointed himself to police the entire world, because he wanted to hunt down the terrorists who kidnapped him and killed his friend.

He kept it up, because he didn’t personally consider himself answerable to anyone, nor was anyone else capable of doing ‘his job.’ To the point where even the branch extended to Rhodey was on his terms.

Even though Tony had proven time and again that he wasn’t truly responsible enough for all that power either, Meanwhile, his personal privileges and resources (both the suit, and in general) guaranteed that no one else could do anything to change the situation.

That’s done by the end of 3. He finally gained humility.


(Also, advice from an Australian? Don’t use a gif of Karl Stefanovic to try and be condescending. Especially if it’s a clip from the Morning Show, and in reference to anything Avengers related. It’s incredibly self defeating.)
 
Last edited:
Someone in this thread said he thinks how the last Star Wars movies have had female leads may have directly "poisoned" Solo

Someone has poor reading comprehension on multiple levels. What happened is Ron Howard is the one suggesting TLJ poisoned the well and he made no mention of why TLJ failed.

http://comicbook.com/starwars/2018/06/10/ron-howard-star-wars-fans-skipping-solo-the-last-jedi/

If he's walking back the tweet then it's purely a PR issue but the thought (i.e. excuse) presented is pretty unequivocal.

You you do have a combination of people who didn't like TLJ for non-political and political reasons. The problem is TLJ defenders focus on the political aspects, which in turn expose their own political obsession (which is exhausting to deal with, IMHO).

BTW, as to the continued assertion that TLJ was a success:

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/24...pening-day-as-the-last-jedi-in-its-entire-run
 
Last edited:
Someone has poor reading comprehension on multiple levels. What happened is Ron Howard is the one suggesting TLJ poisoned the well and he made no mention of why TLJ failed.

http://comicbook.com/starwars/2018/06/10/ron-howard-star-wars-fans-skipping-solo-the-last-jedi/

If he's walking back the tweet then it's purely a PR issue but the thought (i.e. excuse) presented is pretty unequivocal.

Okay, this is completely taken out of context, and its time to ONCE AND FOR ALL, set this straight.

Ron Howard RESPONDED to a tweet that was negative on The Last Jedi. That tweet read:

zeasLkm.png


Ron Howard's response was:

HtsjoVu.png


Where does Howard suggest that TLJ poisoned the well? He did not reference TLJ. He did not suggest there were underlying factors. He was diplomatic in suggesting that the film he and his cast and crew worked on was good and its unfortunate that people are not seeing it. There's no blaming there. People really need to stop conflating blame of another entry in the franchise and feeling sorry that fans are not going out to see the new entry in a franchise. The honest to God truth is we don't know why Howard thinks that Solo failed or if he believes that TLJ is a factor in all of this.

You you do have a combination of people who didn't like TLJ for non-political and political reasons. The problem is TLJ defenders focus on the political aspects, which in turn expose their own political obsession (which is exhausting to deal with, IMHO).

I'm fine if you don't like TLJ. I enjoy it but realize that there are different tastes out there. But when discussions of SJWs of namecalling, whether that be those in the film or who made it, that's when I get to rolling my eyes. But please don't mistake me. I know there are those who have legitimate complaints against the film.
 
There is a distinct possibility that the general public is simply over Star Wars. The Force Awakens does $2.1 billion, The Last Jedi does $1.3 billion, Rogue One does $1.1 billion and now Solo does dismal business. I'm pretty sure Disney signed off on every creative decision along the way. All the numbers come from BoxOfficeMojo.

Everything eventually runs its course.
 
There is a distinct possibility that the general public is simply over Star Wars. The Force Awakens does $2.1 billion, The Last Jedi does $1.3 billion, Rogue One does $1.1 billion and now Solo does dismal business. I'm pretty sure Disney signed off on every creative decision along the way. All the numbers come from BoxOfficeMojo.
Which is not that unusual as much as people want every Star Wars film to break records and demolish the competition. That simply isn't realistic any more. But, we are in the world now were only doing 1.3 billion is considered a failure.
 
But, we are in the world now were only doing 1.3 billion is considered a failure.

$1.3 billion isn't a failure, but there is a definite trend of diminishing returns on these films. If (a big if) Episode IX continues the trend, it will do around $700 million dollars.

At that point, Disney will re-evaluate everything about the franchise.
 
$1.3 billion isn't a failure, but there is a definite trend of diminishing returns on these films. If (a big if) Episode IX continues the trend, it will do around $700 million dollars.

At that point, Disney will re-evaluate everything about the franchise.
They will? I keep wondering how everyone knows so much about Disney's inner workings that I don't know. :shrug:
 
They will? I keep wondering how everyone knows so much about Disney's inner workings that I don't know.

If your lead product drops 33% with every release, wouldn't the first thing you would do is evaluate why it is dropping?
 
If your lead product drops 33% with every release, wouldn't the first thing you would do is evaluate why it is dropping?
They are already doing that. It doesn't mean you change course automatically, depending on the huge variety of factors that are at play in the market.
 
It doesn't mean you change course automatically, depending on the huge variety of factors that are at play in the market.

I never said they would change course, I said they would re-evaluate everything about the franchise. Which they will if they lose another third of ticket buyers for Episode IX.
 
I never said they would change course, I said they would re-evaluate everything about the franchise. Which they will if they lose another third of ticket buyers for Episode IX.
Again, I already think they already are based upon comments from Solo.
 
Here is something to think about. What if Star Wars needs even the more toxic fanbase to make the money they want to make? Even if we don't like it and these aren't going to be nicest people, their money counts just as much as the next person. I don't see how something as big as "Star Wars" could have ever gotten as big as it has or wants to keep doing if you just assume only the good people are going to show up. What do you do then? You clearly don't want to give into sexist and racist demands but you still want the money to keep coming in as well. Even if you got ride of ever toxic fanboy could the franchise really be what it has been when it comes to making money? Is it okay to settle for less money and simply embrace what they are doing now for fairness? I think it comes down for me is I just don't really know how much of these people really are the minority and if so what percentage. Do they represent 20% of fandom or 30 % or what is the exact, number?

Jason
 
Here is something to think about. What if Star Wars needs even the more toxic fanbase to make the money they want to make? Even if we don't like it and these aren't going to be nicest people, their money counts just as much as the next person. I don't see how something as big as "Star Wars" could have ever gotten as big as it has or wants to keep doing if you just assume only the good people are going to show up. What do you do then? You clearly don't want to give into sexist and racist demands but you still want the money to keep coming in as well. Even if you got ride of ever toxic fanboy could the franchise really be what it has been when it comes to making money? Is it okay to settle for less money and simply embrace what they are doing now for fairness? I think it comes down for me is I just don't really know how much of these people really are the minority and if so what percentage. Do they represent 20% of fandom or 30 % or what is the exact, number?

Star Wars is for everyone. I'm not going to suggest that the toxic fanbase shouldn't be heard. Perhaps I have in the past, but I'm trying to turn over a new leaf, While I don't agree with the toxicity from fans, the response from LFL and people who are involved in the franchise has not been great either, and while I don't think the toxic fans need to be bowed to, they should not be dismissed completely. And of course, there's no way to know exactly what the number is, but I'm going to guess its closer to no greater than 5% who are the racist, sexist kind. Those with actual beefs against the production might be much greater than that. But a film doesn't bring in $1.3 billion with a fanbase that is that fractured. It just doesn't make sense.
 
Someone has poor reading comprehension on multiple levels. What happened is Ron Howard is the one suggesting TLJ poisoned the well and he made no mention of why TLJ failed.

http://comicbook.com/starwars/2018/06/10/ron-howard-star-wars-fans-skipping-solo-the-last-jedi/

If he's walking back the tweet then it's purely a PR issue but the thought (i.e. excuse) presented is pretty unequivocal.

You you do have a combination of people who didn't like TLJ for non-political and political reasons. The problem is TLJ defenders focus on the political aspects, which in turn expose their own political obsession (which is exhausting to deal with, IMHO).

BTW, as to the continued assertion that TLJ was a success:

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/24...pening-day-as-the-last-jedi-in-its-entire-run
The Last Jedi simply was not as entertaining as Force. It totally screwed Luke over and established a lesser Universe feel in the franchise. I feel sorry for the production of Solo but there is always a risk doing a secondary version of a character. They very rarely appeal the same way as the original portrayal. I mean Harrison Ford versus some no-name.
 
The Last Jedi simply was not as entertaining as Force. It totally screwed Luke over and established a lesser Universe feel in the franchise. I feel sorry for the production of Solo but there is always a risk doing a secondary version of a character. They very rarely appeal the same way as the original portrayal. I mean Harrison Ford versus some no-name.
And yet, they made a very good movie that, by all rights, could have been terrible. Yet, the Internet insists on treating Solo like it was contaminated with super-Ebola. It's ridiculous.
 
And yet, they made a very good movie that, by all rights, could have been terrible. Yet, the Internet insists on treating Solo like it was contaminated with super-Ebola. It's ridiculous.
It's always a bit sad when that happens. I've seen movies that the critics and or fans adored and have not warmed to them at all. I have a particular dislike for open-ended 'endings'. Then it can work the other way. A movie is hyper criticised and in the context of seeing it myself (often months later), I think that wasn't so bad. In fact it might have been good.
 
Star Wars is for everyone. I'm not going to suggest that the toxic fanbase shouldn't be heard. Perhaps I have in the past, but I'm trying to turn over a new leaf, While I don't agree with the toxicity from fans, the response from LFL and people who are involved in the franchise has not been great either, and while I don't think the toxic fans need to be bowed to, they should not be dismissed completely. And of course, there's no way to know exactly what the number is, but I'm going to guess its closer to no greater than 5% who are the racist, sexist kind. Those with actual beefs against the production might be much greater than that. But a film doesn't bring in $1.3 billion with a fanbase that is that fractured. It just doesn't make sense.

Depends on how toxic they are. If their Nerdrage is largely "Ooooooh, Jar Jar is evil and ruins everything and the Death Star didn't have that feature in ANH but suddenly has it in Rogue One and that ruins my childhood" then yeah, keep listening to and trying to engage them for as long as your patience with embarrassingly obnoxious nerd behavior lasts. If the Nerdrage is "too many women and people of color in these new Star Wars films and everything is evil liberal SJW cuckoldry that weakens American kids and turns them into whiny snowflakes who hate on white people" then no, they don't need to be heard nor engaged except to the extent that you can make fun of them. Embracing these kinds of fans who are so bigoted and so full of unrestrained rage that anybody who isn't a pasty white person or Billy Dee Williams is a lead in a Star Wars film is not going to convert them to logic and reason and tolerance nor is it going to reduce the amount of toxic B.S. they spread throughout the fandom.

They'll pay to see the new movies because they're hypocrites. The fracture is there, but it just isn't big enough to hurt Disney's bottom line.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top