The Rise of Skywalker Does Kathleen Kennedy get fired after ROS?

[Iceman]

Solo's production troubles aren't something your casual fan has any idea about. I bet I could ask 100 people at random about it and find hardly anyone who knows about them (willing to try this too ):. Also bombing profit-wise is one thing, but the problem with Solo was that it didn't bring in much gross revenue regardless of budget for a Star Wars property. Yes it's a spinoff but it shouldn't be finishing more than $100m behind Ant Man! Rogue One had the initial hype, so you can't expect another billion, but I was expecting spinoffs to make $6-700m, $800m if really good. Coming in below $400m was crazy, regardless of overblown budget and production troubles and everything else.

 

[Flint Marko]

Solo's production troubles aren't something your casual fan has any idea about. I bet I could ask 100 people at random about it and find hardly anyone who knows about them (willing to try this too ):. Also bombing profit-wise is one thing, but the problem with Solo was that it didn't bring in much gross revenue regardless of budget for a Star Wars property. Yes it's a spinoff but it shouldn't be finishing more than $100m behind Ant Man! Rogue One had the initial hype, so you can't expect another billion, but I was expecting spinoffs to make $6-700m, $800m if really good. Coming in below $400m was crazy, regardless of overblown budget and production troubles and everything else.

Your average joe probably didn't know about Solo's production, but the biggest issue is your average joe didn't even realize a Solo movie was coming out until it was too late. Due to said production issues the marketing didn't really kick in until a couple months before release and showed a completely skippable Star Wars movie.

 

[TheRandomWhoa]

Your average joe probably didn't know about Solo's production, but the biggest issue is your average joe didn't even realize a Solo movie was coming out until it was too late. Due to said production issues the marketing didn't really kick in until a couple months before release and showed a completely skippable Star Wars movie.

Rouge One had almost the same type of trouble as Solo & that made money. Fatigue or The Last Jedi did not hurt Solo it was simply an unwanted Star Wars movie with silly recasts that NEVER should have been made to begin with

 

[Iceman]

Your average joe probably didn't know about Solo's production, but the biggest issue is your average joe didn't even realize a Solo movie was coming out until it was too late. Due to said production issues the marketing didn't really kick in until a couple months before release and showed a completely skippable Star Wars movie.

I think it’s a case of all the factors everyone here has mentioned combining including a TLJ hangover for a bunch of people. No one factor could keep this to such a low global figure.

 

[Flint Marko]

Rouge One had almost the same type of trouble as Solo & that made money. Fatigue or The Last Jedi did not hurt Solo it was simply an unwanted Star Wars movie with silly recasts that NEVER should have been made to begin with

True, no one was dying for a Solo movie, but I think marketing is also key here. The very first teaser for Solo (teaser!) was released just 3 months in advance whereas Rogue One's first teaser came out about 7 months in advance. That's a big headstart.

I think it’s a case of all the factors everyone here has mentioned combining including a TLJ hangover for a bunch of people. No one factor could keep this to such a low global figure.

Most certainly, it isn't just one thing. But I still think the production issues are what ultimately sunk it, combined with the fact that it was a movie no one was really dying for.

 

[TheRandomWhoa]

Most certainly, it isn't just one thing. But I still think the production issues are what ultimately sunk it, combined with the fact that it was a movie no one was really dying for.

What type of marketing could get people interested in a movie no one wanted ? Put Darth Maul all over the posters ? In a movie that does not even explain his return ? Solo was simply unwanted I dont think theres anything that could have been done with it

 

[Iceman]

Rouge One had almost the same type of trouble as Solo & that made money. Fatigue or The Last Jedi did not hurt Solo it was simply an unwanted Star Wars movie with silly recasts that NEVER should have been made to begin with

Whatever the truth of the matter for the overall population, I liked the lead (given that a young Harrison Ford is irreplaceable) and was well up for spinoffs, but TLJ had killed a part of my SW engagement. I watched this once and thought it was fine but my rewatch hunger for SW wasn't the same any more. I've seen TROS only once too and I'd been expecting to watch the final SW Episode at least 10 times (like I did with IW). With Solo it seemed like a toxic ****storm of factors combined to bludgeon it into oblivion!

 

[Iceman]

Most certainly, it isn't just one thing. But I still think the production issues are what ultimately sunk it, combined with the fact that it was a movie no one was really dying for.

Yeah, I'm sure they could have done a much better marketing job with more funds.

 

[TheRandomWhoa]

Whatever the truth of the matter for the overall population, I liked the lead (given that a young Harrison Ford is irreplaceable) and was well up for spinoffs, but TLJ had killed a part of my SW engagement. I watched this once and thought it was fine but my rewatch hunger for SW isn't what it was. I've seen TROS only once too and I'd been expecting to watch the final SW Episode at least 10 times (like I did with IW). With Solo it seemed like a toxic ****storm of factors combined to bludgeon it into oblivion!

In a way The Force Awakens & The Last Jedi could have played a small part in no interest. The Force Awakens Han was no different than the last time we saw him & that likely hurt his character. Followed by a crappy death before even being reunited with Luke on screen. So in SMALL WAYS I think the previous movies could have hurt Solo. This Trilogy did do no favors for the OG characters after all

 

[TheVileOne]

Solo gets killed by Aquaman if it was a December release

Who even said december?

 

[TheRandomWhoa]

Who even said december?

2018 was a crowded year wasnt it ? Was there any ideal time for Solo ?

 

[Iceman]

In a way The Force Awakens & The Last Jedi could have played a small part in no interest. The Force Awakens Han was no different than the last time we saw him & that likely hurt his character. Followed by a crappy death before even being reunited with Luke on screen. So in SMALL WAYS I think the previous movies could have hurt Solo. This Trilogy did do no favors for the OG characters after all

Yeah I wasn’t a fan of the death in TFA either. I would have liked that to happen early in TLJ with more time for establishing the relationship with his son. Overall yes, the OG characters have been implemented in a disappointing way. It really could have been so much better, and all the ST films play some part in that.

 

[writer0327]

2018 was a crowded year wasnt it ? Was there any ideal time for Solo ?

December would've been ideal. Marketing usually begins 5 months out, but 5 months before Solo was TLJ, and it was a contentious film to say the least. Drop Solo in December and you could ramp up the marketing in August like most SW films have done recently.

 

[BatLobster]

Kennedy isn't going to be fired, nor should she be. At worst, she'll step down when her contract is up in 2021, and it's possible by then she'll want to move on by then anyway.

Personally I don't think they should even announce new films yet. IMO they'd be fine just continuing to focus on the Disney+ stuff for now with the mega-success of The Mandalorian, and not announce anything or set a release date for a new movie until they know they're good and ready. Sounds like we'll be getting an announcement in Jan. though.

 

[Patrick77]

We talk a lot about story and character choices, because that's the part of it that is most interesting to discuss, and we care a lot about it as fans. But these are also blockbuster movies, the raw entertainment value matters a lot to their success.

I don't know that these movies rise above mediocrity in that area. The working assumption shouldn't be that Star Wars is just innately awesome and amazing. It's always been a mish-mash of appealing fantasies. Space western, the Jedi Knight futuristic Samurai thing, the aerial dog fight sequences.

At one time that mish-mash was incredibly cool and impressive because there wasn't anything like it, but a lot of it feels a little tired and dated now. Even the classic Star Wars ambiance can feel antiquated in certain respects. That worked great for The Force Awakens, because of built up nostalgia, but I don't know that just perpetually doing that forever is the right choice.

Many of the individual aspects of the Star Wars concept can still work, of course. Guardians of the Galaxy relies pretty heavily on the space outlaw idea.

But, if I were the studio, I would be thinking about how to express these concepts in a way that feels fresh and spectacular. Less predictable and less obviously a mish-mash maybe as well. I have that reaction quite a bit while watching these movies. The duel, the dog fight, the saloon, the shoot-out. Yes, Star Wars was basically a bunch of disparate cool stuff thrown together originally, but I don't know that it always has to be that.

 

[jmc]

What about the children? Won't someone think of the children?

Seriously, if they don't attract new fans, the existing older fans are going to die eventually

Kids are likely to be introduced to Star Wars via their parents. In other words, it's still the same fan base who are merely passing on the story to their kids. That's within the existing fanbase. What doesn't exist is some mythical audience outside of this that Disney have been trying to attract. The world has had 40 years to fall in love with this story, if they haven't done that already they never will. Star Wars is a property that for better or worse is reliant on the same group of people supporting it now passing its love to their kids and grandkids. There is no room for growth in Star Wars and we need to stop acting like there is.

 

[Yellow Cyclone]

having both of your directors (originally 3) of your trilogy not on the same page and taking potshots at each other through their quarter billion dollar films is sheer lunacy and a captain not in charge of the ship

imagine the russos making fun of strange because they didn't like what derrickson did, or peyton reed taking a shot at the avengers because he didn't like civil war using ant-man lmao

absolute clown show

 

[writer0327]

Kids are likely to be introduced to Star Wars via their parents. In other words, it's still the same fan base who are merely passing on the story to their kids. That's within the existing fanbase. What doesn't exist is some mythical audience outside of this that Disney have been trying to attract. The world has had 40 years to fall in love with this story, if they haven't done that already they never will. Star Wars is a property that for better or worse is reliant on the same group of people supporting it now passing its love to their kids and grandkids. There is no room for growth in Star Wars and we need to stop acting like there is.

Disagree. Despite my efforts, my kids have never cared for SW in the slightest, but right now can't stop talking about Baby Yoda and The Mandalorian. Different generations have different feelings for different things.

 

[Sithborg]

Yeah, I think there would be a different generational response if we had gotten an Ahsoka movie instead of a Solo movie.

In the end, I think the issues with the new movies can be put down to time crunch. Which, I would not put on Kennedy's hands.

 

[jmc]

And I don't understand why Disney wouldn't have allowed the 3 year gap as what happened in previous trilogies. They have enough Marvel and live action remake movies to fill in the space.

 

[TheVileOne]

True, no one was dying for a Solo movie, but I think marketing is also key here. The very first teaser for Solo (teaser!) was released just 3 months in advance whereas Rogue One's first teaser came out about 7 months in advance. That's a big headstart.



Most certainly, it isn't just one thing. But I still think the production issues are what ultimately sunk it, combined with the fact that it was a movie no one was really dying for.

The first Rogue One teaser came out at Celebration 2015.

2018 was a crowded year wasnt it ? Was there any ideal time for Solo ?

There's something big almost every week now. It's almost always going to be crowded. But I don't think pushing the movie back would've hurt its box office all that much.

 

[TheVileOne]

And I don't understand why Disney wouldn't have allowed the 3 year gap as what happened in previous trilogies. They have enough Marvel and live action remake movies to fill in the space.

It's very simple. Lucasfilm was not a publicly traded company. Disney is. They have stockholders to answer to. And having a new Star Wars movie coming out every year and saga films two years apart looks better than just three.

It's sort of like us seeing a new Call of Duty or Madden game every year and the product suffers. Also, recall how Ubisoft at one point was doing multiple Assassin's Creed games a year? Except when you do that. When you've got the golden goose, you risk killing it by using it that much.

 

[Patrick77]

What Marvel Studios was able to do drove everybody else nuts, I think, that's the reality.

We saw it with the DC films initially, in the rush to Justice League, we saw it with other properties trying to concoct a cinematic universe out of nothing, and we saw it with Star Wars.

We're probably going to see it with James Cameron and Avatar also, though he might be the only one who manages to create something that can compete. Maybe. I can only guess that he is thinking in those terms.

It's not just the money made by any single Marvel studios film that did this, it was the idea of being able to crank out hit movies on the regular for years and years, which is what Marvel studios has done.

 

[jmc]

It's very simple. Lucasfilm was not a publicly traded company. Disney is. They have stockholders to answer to. And having a new Star Wars movie coming out every year and saga films two years apart looks better than just three.

It's sort of like us seeing a new Call of Duty or Madden game every year and the product suffers. Also, recall how Ubisoft at one point was doing multiple Assassin's Creed games a year? Except when you do that. When you've got the golden goose, you risk killing it by using it that much.

And if stockholders had any brains they would know that anticipation and build up are paramount to generating buzz for something this. Not exactly a good look when in the space of 4 years Star Wars has gone from a property capable of pulling in $2B worldwide to losing literally 50% of it's box office value.

 

[Patrick77]

They are more greedy than patient. We saw exactly this with WB and the rush to Justice League.

Once the numbers start to show that there is a problem, there will be a course correction, but they don't want to hear about it until then.