The Last Jedi The Last Jedi Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 1

[Mjölnir]

To a point. I certainly get the complaint that The Force Awakens should not have gone straight back to a scenario that resembles the beginning of the first trilogy.

But only to a point. The reason being: historically (meaning in our world), revolutions against tyranny don't produce stable, just, democratic institutions immediately, or without continued struggle.

To take one example, the French revolution violently overthrew a religious monarchy, installed radical reforms, then there was a reaction against it, and Napoleon established what amounted to a military dictatorship about 10 years later. Most of the 19-century is spent flip-flopping back and forth between the republic and various unsuccessful attempts to restore the monarchy.

The early history of the United States isn't particularly stable either. And there are countless other examples.

So the fact that the Empire was defeated, and then another authoritarian group rose to prominence, and threatened the Republic... it's not much of a stretch to imagine that something along those lines would happen.

Historically, that's exactly the type of thing that can happen.

Going from Return of the Jedi to an era of perfect peace and galactic unity would be the unrealistic thing.

The thing is that this isn't the Empire being defeated and then a new group rises up. The First Order is the Empire, just with a new name and a new leader. They were never defeated according to the new canon, just pushed back a bit.

And Star Wars also isn't historical in feel, ANH is an actual fairytale complete with a princess in distress, the helpful wizard, the evil black knight, etc. But the point isn't that everyone lives happily ever after, that's not what I'm after at all. I just want the OT to actually be about the defeat of the Empire and the overthrowing of the Sith once and for all. That gets completely undercut when the same Empire just comes back some years later with a powerful force user and his apprentice at the lead. The only difference being a name change and that the force users don't call themselves Sith.

 

[Romannen]

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...ys-jedi-mind-trick-isnt-working-china-1075177

Sigh.

 

[Mjölnir]

At the time, no one talked about originality when the prequels came out. In fact, many complained that the prequels weren't enough like Star Wars and the story starting over trade franchises and disputes was lacking.

I think we can go back and forth on what's original all day long, but while there are things even I like about the prequels, I would just say I disagree with the idea that all of what they created was gold.

I feel it's quite obvious that when something new is presented with such bad execution people will complain about it. Any points into originality was far outnumbered by what they lost in making things poorly, and making many poor choices.

I don't think everything they created was gold either, but the premise and the rough meta plot was great imo. It's a story with better potential than the OT, but it was executed to be worse. I don't think there's more potential in much of the new trilogy though. Kylo Ren has a lot of potential, but it's not fully realized since we don't get to learn some important things about why he's doing what he's doing. That could really be something special and it's different from Vader even though he's in a similar position. Rey on the other hand just feels like a copy of Luke that's actually made less interesting.

 

[Iceman]

this.

people have waited 30+ years for grandmaster luke to just mess $#&* up ONE TIME on screen with modern fight choreography and specialFX

completely annihilating everybody and outclassing everybody. people wouldn't mind him dying if he went out in a blaze of glory or did something incredible

instead the film not only didn't do it, but did the exact opposite and neutered his character to a point where it'll go down in sci-fi infamy as character assassination

poor word of mouth spreads quick, kennedy and rian have nobody to blame but themselves. hopefully iger wakes up after solo because i think most people think that's going to flop

How much is Solo going to make in China?! I think it will struggle to get screens there after what just happened.

 

[gerrym51]

Non-China international grossed $19 million over the weekend vs $12 million domestic and $36 million comp for the prior weekend.

$32 million more to go to reach $1.3 billion global cume as of yesterday. That probably happens next weekend or shortly thereafter. RO had done 96.3% of its domestic total by w/e #6. Percentage wise TLJ is now tracking well below RO and slightly below in dollars. So let's be generous and say TLJ can go 4% more after next weekend. Crossing the $1.3 billion line in week 6 with 4% fumes left in the tank is pretty much the definition of limping across the line.

the slog has arrived

 

[JeetKuneDo]

I have no clue as to why fans are so troubled by Luke "dying". As a Jedi it means that he's become one with the Force - something that all Jedi strive for in life or death. As a kid I always felt that Obi-Wans presence loomed large over Luke in Empire and Return despite his brief appearances and I fully expect Luke to play a larger role as a Force Ghost in IX. Irony of ironies because fans will probably get their "wise" Jedi Master Luke in this form.

Rey says that she feels "peace and purpose" from Luke. He's not finished.

Mostly because it was the new "Jake Skywalker" character that they invented out of nowhere who died.

But I have to ask why Jedi think they become "more powerful than you could possibly imagine" when they die? Obi Wan made that claim and it never happened. He just gained the ability to talk to people as a ghost. Yay?

I guess Yoda is able to shoot lightning. Sounds like something the Sith do already.

And if they now have all these dead Jedi who can come back and shoot lightning at stuff....what are they waiting for? Sure could have used them against that battering ram thing on "New Hoth".

A lot of people were underwhelmed with Luke, and/or annoyed at how they changed his core characteristics, so to these people it becomes annoying that he died since the end showed that they had a shot of redeeming him, yet it became anticlimactic and didn't lead anywhere.

Luke had an enormously powerful display with the force, but ultimately it didn't amount to much more than a fancy "hey, look over there" kind of distraction that only helped a handful of people, while so many had already died partially because of Luke's absence. That's a pitiful amount of action taken by Jedi master Luke, whom fans had longed for so long. The guy that in the OT would never stop doing what he felt was right to protect people he cared for, and would never give up on people. The breaking of his character traits didn't become the speed bump, it became 95% of what the character was.

Exactly.

I think they should at least end this copy meta plot of the OT (empire vs rebellion). They should end that and start giving us something new like they should have in the first place.

Agreed. It's really feeling "been there done that".

Would be nice if what they accomplished in the OT actually mattered and they moved on to a new problem.

A new problem I can get behind. Don't need more Sith or Empire. How about a natural disaster of some kind that effects the entire galaxy which Luke and his new band of Jedi would have to solve? Maybe a disease of some kind. A new type of race from another dimension. Just pick one...there are countless possibilities other than a rerun of the OT conflict.

To a point. I certainly get the complaint that The Force Awakens should not have gone straight back to a scenario that resembles the beginning of the first trilogy.

But only to a point. The reason being: historically (meaning in our world), revolutions against tyranny don't produce stable, just, democratic institutions immediately, or without continued struggle.

To take one example, the French revolution violently overthrew a religious monarchy, installed radical reforms, then there was a reaction against it, and Napoleon established what amounted to a military dictatorship about 10 years later. Most of the 19-century is spent flip-flopping back and forth between the republic and various unsuccessful attempts to restore the monarchy.

The early history of the United States isn't particularly stable either. And there are countless other examples.

So the fact that the Empire was defeated, and then another authoritarian group rose to prominence, and threatened the Republic... it's not much of a stretch to imagine that something along those lines would happen.

Historically, that's exactly the type of thing that can happen.

Going from Return of the Jedi to an era of perfect peace and galactic unity would be the unrealistic thing.

True that this is more realistic.

But that's why so many stories have the "happy ever after" thing. BECAUSE it's not realistic.

Like you said, we've already got all that stuff in real life. We get up in the morning and live it. Why do I need a movie about that? During the Depression, movie goers didn't want movies about how terrible life was or how bad the Depression was. They wanted the OPPOSITE of that.

 

[gerrym51]

1.1 million on discount tuesday probably means less than 1 million weekdays starting wednesday. I say probably because not sure how monday holiday affects discount tuesday

 

[TheVileOne]

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...ys-jedi-mind-trick-isnt-working-china-1075177

Sigh.

I think movie studios need to stop being so fixated on catering to Chinese box office. It's become problematic. I'm just glad Deadpool wasn't even released there, so they didn't have to do anything about that.

Apparently, The Force Awakens didn't do huge business there either. The Last Jedi is still going to break $700 million overseas.

China is big and has a lot of people. I get it. But the box office split for overseas gross is minimal anyway.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

During the Depression, movie goers didn't want movies about how terrible life was or how bad the Depression was. They wanted the OPPOSITE of that.

That's not accurate at all. While there were certainly happy, fairy tale-esque films (ex. The Adventures of Robin Hood), the Depression was also the heyday of gangster films (ex. Little Caesar, Scarface), historical films (ex. All Quiet on the Western Front, Mutiny on the Bounty), and monster movies (ex. Frankenstein, King Kong), that were far from happy and frequently had downer endings.

The biggest hit of the 1930s (and to this day the biggest film in American history adjusting for inflation) was Gone with the Wind. A film about the collapse of the civilization, which features lengthy sections depicting starvation and squalor, and has an ending in which pretty much every character is either dead or broken. Other than maybe the New Hollywood Era of the late 60s and 70s, Depression Era cinema may be the darkest it has ever been.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

That's not accurate at all. While there were certainly happy, fairy tale-esque films (ex. The Adventures of Robin Hood), the Depression was also the heyday of gangster films (ex. Little Caesar, Scarface), historical films (ex. All Quiet on the Western Front, Mutiny on the Bounty), and monster movies (ex. Frankenstein, King Kong), that were far from happy and frequently had downer endings.

The biggest hit of the 1930s (and to this day the biggest film in American history adjusting for inflation) was Gone with the Wind. A film about the collapse of the civilization, which features lengthy sections depicting starvation and squalor, and has an ending in which pretty much every character is either dead or broken. Other than maybe the New Hollywood Era of the late 60s and 70s, Depression Era cinema may be the darkest it has ever been.

You do have a point, but even the "dark" movies were not "realistic". It was escapist fantasy. Gone with the Wind was a hugely popular book and movie during that time because it had nothing to do with the Depression. The gangster films were a fantasy of striking back against the weight of the Depression.

Here are the most popular films each year in the 30s:

1930: Tom Sawyer (1930)
1931: Frankenstein (1931)
1932: Shanghai Express (1932)
1933: King Kong (1933)
1934: It Happened One Night (1934)
1935: Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)
1936: Modern Times (1936)
1937: Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937)
1938: The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938)
1939: Gone With The Wind (1939)

All escapist fantasy with no connection to the reality of the Depression..

Then when you look at the top 35 grossers of the decade you see the same thing:

Gone With The Wind (1939)
Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937)
The Wizard of Oz (1939)
Frankenstein (1931)
Tom Sawyer (1930)
King Kong (1933)
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939)
Hell's Angels (1930)
Cavalcade (1933)
Saratoga (1937)
Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)
A Star Is Born (1937)
Modern Times (1936)
Ingagi (1930)
The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938)
San Francisco (1936)
Shanghai Express (1932)
All Quiet on the Western Front (1930) (tie)
City Lights (1931) (tie)
Three Smart Girls (1936)
I'm No Angel (1933)
Boys Town (1938)
The Sign of the Cross (1932)
The Kid From Spain (1932)
It Happened One Night (1934)
Test Pilot (1938)
Whoopee! (1930)
One Hundred Men and a Girl (1937)
42nd Street (1932)
Grand Hotel (1932)
You Can't Take It With You (1938)
She Done Him Wrong (1933)
Alexander's Ragtime Band (1938)
Emma (1932)
Top Hat (1935)

A high percentage of the movies are actually about rich people or others with no real money worries. (Top Hat, A Star is Born, Cavalcade, Three Smart Girls, The Sign of the Cross, Grand Hotel, You Can't Take It with You, Alexander's Ragtime Band, Emma) That played into the fantasy of the gangster films too. Those guys didn't worry about money! Others were about hucksters who found a way to come into money (I'm No Angel). Others are just pure escapist fantasy like King Kong, Frankenstein, Snow White.

Clark Gable ruled the decade with various romantic comedies in addition to his adventure stuff like Mutiny on the Bounty and Test Pilot. No wonder they called him "The King"! Holy smokes!...the guy blew away every other star of the day at the box office.

Boys Town is one of the few that fit in with "reality"....mostly because it was based on a true story. Modern Times fit in with the Depression too...but of course it's a comedy and that's exactly what people wanted to see...a way to laugh at their troubles so not really a "downer". All Quiet on the Western Front is the rare exception on the list. 42nd Street is actually about the Depression and people losing their jobs....and of course they win in the end as their money problems are solved.

The odd one to me is Ingagi. That was just audience titillation. Probably a surprise mega hit due to the subject matter.

 

[Flemm]

But that's why so many stories have the "happy ever after" thing. BECAUSE it's not realistic.

I'm not saying that the choices in The Force Awakens were all perfect. Certain things felt a little stale and repetitive.

What I'm saying is: I don't think that there is anything in the movie that calls into question the value of what happened in the original trilogy.

Just because you don't establish a galactic utopia immediately, doesn't mean that your victory over tyranny meant nothing, or that it might not lead to a better future eventually.

The Last Jedi seems to think that the events of the prior Star Wars movies must be futile and cyclical because they are still having the same type of problems.

My point earlier was simply to note that it is perfectly normal for those problems not to disappear right away. The opposite would be strange. So I don't think that The Last Jedi's interpretation of The Force Awakens is necessary or very perceptive.

The First Order is the Empire, just with a new name and a new leader. They were never defeated according to the new canon, just pushed back a bit.

Well, they are like a remnant of the Empire that built itself up and returned to challenge the Republic. But I think that the basic point remains. It's not unusual, for example, for a deposed leader to go into exile, then try to return to power later. Or an apparently defeated enemy to rise again as a threat in the future.

You're right, of course, that Star Wars is a traditional fantasy, but that type of thing is a recurring idea in heroic fantasy.

Tolkien is basically the father of modern fantasy, and the Lord of the Rings is built around exactly that type of idea: Sauron was defeated in the past, but not completely. He rises again in the present time, and must be defeated again.

The reasons that he wrote the story that way are complex, and we've already touched on some of them. Maybe we could say that the fantasy resonates strongly with the real world because it takes into account some important aspects of the real world, one of them being that it is hard to defeat evil permanently.

It always comes back, in one form or another. So, anyway. It's an interesting topic. But traditional fantasy, like Tolkien or Star Wars, usually takes that idea into account.

 

[Aximili86]

To each their own, but I disagree. The settings? I think some of the ideas for the settings are cool, but a lot of them lack immersion. They look fake, and they feel fake. A lot of them look too clean and static, making them feel faker as a result. Something looks off about the ones that were shot on digital and converted to film. They don't hold up very well.

Uhm. That's the very definition of "execution", like he said.

There are pretty big problems with the way it was all brought to life, but conceptually it's all pretty great stuff.

 

[Agent Orange]

It's been many years since I've read an old expanded universe novel but I remember the Imperial Navy lingering for years following the Battle of Endor. They retained a lot more territory than the fledgling First Order and almost brought the disorganized, bickering New Republic to it's knees under Thrawn's leadership.

I can't recall much from the 30 years after RotJ stories but the Galactic Empire didn't just... disappear. Things turned really ugly within the Skywalker clan too. Arguably worse than the corruption and turn of Ben Solo.

And then Chewbacca had a planet fall on him lol

 

[TheVileOne]

Uhm. That's the very definition of "execution", like he said.

There are pretty big problems with the way it was all brought to life, but conceptually it's all pretty great stuff.

I there are a lot of things about the prequels that are not great conceptually. Like the Clone Army all being Boba Fett clones basically.

 

[Roose Bolton]

I never gave much of a **** about that, or Boba for that matter but that's just me.

 

[Mjölnir]

Well, they are like a remnant of the Empire that built itself up and returned to challenge the Republic. But I think that the basic point remains. It's not unusual, for example, for a deposed leader to go into exile, then try to return to power later. Or an apparently defeated enemy to rise again as a threat in the future.

You're right, of course, that Star Wars is a traditional fantasy, but that type of thing is a recurring idea in heroic fantasy.

Tolkien is basically the father of modern fantasy, and the Lord of the Rings is built around exactly that type of idea: Sauron was defeated in the past, but not completely. He rises again in the present time, and must be defeated again.

The reasons that he wrote the story that way are complex, and we've already touched on some of them. Maybe we could say that the fantasy resonates strongly with the real world because it takes into account some important aspects of the real world, one of them being that it is hard to defeat evil permanently.

It always comes back, in one form or another. So, anyway. It's an interesting topic. But traditional fantasy, like Tolkien or Star Wars, usually takes that idea into account.

Tolkien did not make this mistake. There's almost 5000 years between Morgoth's fall and The Lord of the Rings. There's also about 1700 years between Morgoth's fall and the time where Sauron comes into any real power to threaten the elves. And Sauron never amounts to anything even close to being Morgoth's equal, his threat is on a different scale, especially in LotR where he's not whole.

What I said about undercutting the climax of the OT is that they now made it so it only amounted to a relatively short time of inactivity of the Empire. They didn't defeat the Empire, and it came back looking pretty much the same in quite a short time. If anything they were more powerful than ever, given Starkiller Base.

I was clear that I wasn't looking for happily ever after, I just didn't want them to completely undercut what came before. This isn't real life, it's fiction and entertainment where we can take appropriate payoff into account.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

I'm not saying that the choices in The Force Awakens were all perfect. Certain things felt a little stale and repetitive.

What I'm saying is: I don't think that there is anything in the movie that calls into question the value of what happened in the original trilogy.

Just because you don't establish a galactic utopia immediately, doesn't mean that your victory over tyranny meant nothing, or that it might not lead to a better future eventually.

The Last Jedi seems to think that the events of the prior Star Wars movies must be futile and cyclical because they are still having the same type of problems.

My point earlier was simply to note that it is perfectly normal for those problems not to disappear right away. The opposite would be strange. So I don't think that The Last Jedi's interpretation of The Force Awakens is necessary or very perceptive.

I've got "perfectly normal" every day when I wake up. I can turn on the news and see that stuff any time I want. I don't find it particular clever to write "realistic". What's hard about that? The great writers come up with ideas that are more than them just reading the newspaper and copying down what happens. It's called being creative.

I don't like that the characters from the OT don't really get to see a victory. We were left with the impression they did after RotJ. Now that's changed to Han dying by the hand of his son after reverting to being a smuggler and losing Leia...and Luke dying alone on a deserted planet after years of running from a challenge.

What happens to Leia is anyone's guess but obviously the character can't see the victory unless they go the CGI route. I guess Chewy will be a Porg herder and convert to vegetarian. The robots will be used for spare parts I suppose.

I can see this is going to be my Alien 3 and Lonesome Dove sequels. I just pretend it doesn't exist so the previous movies are not undercut.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

Dipped below a million daily for the first time yesterday.

Wednesday (Day 34)
Jurassic World: $2,202,240
Marvel's The Avengers: $1,862,060
The Force Awakens: $1,814,233
Rogue One: $1,007,131
Avengers Age of Ultron: $973,884
The Last Jedi: $861,084 (TFA -52.54%, RO -14.50%)

 

[Iceman]

Those top 3 really were in another league.

 

[BatLobster]

Tolkien did not make this mistake. There's almost 5000 years between Morgoth's fall and The Lord of the Rings. There's also about 1700 years between Morgoth's fall and the time where Sauron comes into any real power to threaten the elves. And Sauron never amounts to anything even close to being Morgoth's equal, his threat is on a different scale, especially in LotR where he's not whole.

Tolkien also wasn't making films or in a situation where you had actors reprising their iconic roles 40 years. I would've been down for a massive time jump, but there was no way that was ever going to happen with all 3 original stars alive (at the time ).

I definitely can appreciate wishing the ending of the OT had more of a lasting impact, but the moment the ST was announced I knew then and there that it inevitably mean that peace didn't last.

I would've preferred to see the new Republic explored more and actuallh see how the First Order comes to power, but I can totally see why they may have looked at it as either being too similar to the PT or too similar to the OT can going with the latter when they made TFA. I still have mixed feelings about it, but I'm enjoying the films enough that I'm mostly over it by now. And if somehow Episode 9 ruins the saga for me, I'll always have 1-6 (or even 1-8 as I think 8 has a strong thematic ending).

What I definitely would not have wanted is some of the stuff I see suggested about some "other" type of thing, like an outside the galaxy threat or natural disaster. That wouldn't feel like part of the same saga and more just like some other tacked-on thing. Plus, Star Wars had always drawn on real world history despite being escapism. I think the ending of ROTJ will always kind of be "the" ending of the saga for me because it's what I've known for so long, but I've had enough time to come to terms with the fact that this direction keeps the drama and emotional richness of Star Wars going the way it needs to in order to justify continuing the saga (imo).

 

[Mjölnir]

Tolkien also wasn't making films or in a situation where you had actors reprising their iconic roles 40 years. I would've been down for a massive time jump, but there was no way that was ever going to happen with all 3 original stars alive (at the time ).

I definitely can appreciate wishing the ending of the OT had more of a lasting impact, but the moment the ST was announced I knew then and there that it inevitably mean that peace didn't last.

I would've preferred to see the new Republic explored more and actuallh see how the First Order comes to power, but I can totally see why they may have looked at it as either being too similar to the PT or too similar to the OT can going with the latter when they made TFA. I still have mixed feelings about it, but I'm enjoying the films enough that I'm mostly over it by now. And if somehow Episode 9 ruins the saga for me, I'll always have 1-6 (or even 1-8 as I think 8 has a strong thematic ending).

What I definitely would not have wanted is some of the stuff I see suggested about some "other" type of thing, like an outside the galaxy threat or natural disaster. That wouldn't feel like part of the same saga and more just like some other tacked-on thing. Plus, Star Wars had always drawn on real world history despite being escapism. I think the ending of ROTJ will always kind of be "the" ending of the saga for me because it's what I've known for so long, but I've had enough time to come to terms with the fact that this direction keeps the drama and emotional richness of Star Wars going the way it needs to in order to justify continuing the saga (imo).

If you want a more comparable situation (although it's of course still not a perfect comparison, but I wasn't the one that dragged Tolkien into this anyway), then take The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. LotR didn't just repeat the meta plot and situation of The Hobbit, it created a new conflict. Even though things got worse in LotR than it was in The Hobbit the latter still felt like it had a conclusion that matters, and it's not undercut by latter events.

If the Fellowship of the Ring had been about a bunch of dwarves taking Frodo, instead of Bilbo, to take back the treasure in Moria from a dragon that would have been equally annoying, despite that it would actually be a different dragon (instead of the very same empire coming back with a new name in TFA).

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Tolkien did not make this mistake. There's almost 5000 years between Morgoth's fall and The Lord of the Rings. There's also about 1700 years between Morgoth's fall and the time where Sauron comes into any real power to threaten the elves. And Sauron never amounts to anything even close to being Morgoth's equal, his threat is on a different scale, especially in LotR where he's not whole.

What I said about undercutting the climax of the OT is that they now made it so it only amounted to a relatively short time of inactivity of the Empire. They didn't defeat the Empire, and it came back looking pretty much the same in quite a short time. If anything they were more powerful than ever, given Starkiller Base.

I was clear that I wasn't looking for happily ever after, I just didn't want them to completely undercut what came before. This isn't real life, it's fiction and entertainment where we can take appropriate payoff into account.

Tolkien's timescale is ridiculously exaggerated to unrealistic levels in comparison to actual human history. The Pyramids aren't even 5000 years old.
By comparison, the Exodus in modern Christian mythology occured less than 3500 years ago. Actual history isn't like that. Actual history has "The War to End All Wars" only to have an even worse one twenty years later. Then follows that with three other major wars in Asia within a decade and a Cold War that lasts for decades. It isn't a problem to me within his mythology, but it isn't fair to expect everything to be like it.

In Star Wars, it isn't fair to say that the characters didn't get to celebrate their victory in ROTJ. Now granted, I haven't read any of the Extended Universe material, but it is four decades since ROTJ. That's a long time in the lifespan of a human being. We don't know what happened after ROTJ. There could have been 30 years of relative peace prior to the New Order.

If you want a more comparable situation (although it's of course still not a perfect comparison, but I wasn't the one that dragged Tolkien into this anyway), then take The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. LotR didn't just repeat the meta plot and situation of The Hobbit, it created a new conflict. Even though things got worse in LotR than it was in The Hobbit the latter still felt like it had a conclusion that matters, and it's not undercut by latter events.

If the Fellowship of the Ring had been about a bunch of dwarves taking Frodo, instead of Bilbo, to take back the treasure in Moria from a dragon that would have been equally annoying, despite that it would actually be a different dragon (instead of the very same empire coming back with a new name in TFA).

This I agree with. But it was primarily a problem with TFA as it established the conditions of the sequel trilogy. I felt Rian Johnson did pretty well given the hand he was dealt. TLJ does do things differently, except largely in those areas where it was handcuffed by things established in TFA. The main criticism of TFA is that it was too similar or a blatant copy of what came before, particularly ANH.

 

[Mjölnir]

Tolkien's timescale is ridiculously exaggerated to unrealistic levels in comparison to actual human history. The Pyramids aren't even 5000 years old.
By comparison, the Exodus in modern Christian mythology occured less than 3500 years ago. Actual history isn't like that. Actual history has "The War to End All Wars" only to have an even worse one twenty years later. Then follows that with three other major wars in Asia within a decade and a Cold War that lasts for decades. It isn't a problem to me within his mythology, but it isn't fair to expect everything to be like it.

In Star Wars, it isn't fair to say that the characters didn't get to celebrate their victory in ROTJ. Now granted, I haven't read any of the Extended Universe material, but it is four decades since ROTJ. That's a long time in the lifespan of a human being. We don't know what happened after ROTJ. There could have been 30 years of relative peace prior to the New Order.



This I agree with. But it was primarily a problem with TFA as it established the conditions of the sequel trilogy. I felt Rian Johnson did pretty well given the hand he was dealt. TLJ does do things differently, except largely in those areas where it was handcuffed by things established in TFA. The main criticism of TFA is that it was too similar or a blatant copy of what came before, particularly ANH.

Star Wars hasn't really differed that much when it had its extended universe. The time between the empire that preceded the republic we see in the prequels and the one that Sidious created spans thousands of years. That certainly left way more than enough time between similar concepts (and those empires differed far more than the First Order differs from the Empire in the OT).

For me it's perfectly fine that things go darker after a few decades past RotJ, that's enough time of peace to be rewarding. It's when you just come back with the exact same Empire, with a new name but very similar leadership, that things become problematic. It's not the absence of peace in the new trilogy, it's that it's now established that the rebels actually never defeated the Empire, they just pushed them back for some years and then they are back more dangerous than ever.

I agree that this isn't an issue with TLJ, it's an overall trilogy issue that was established with TFA.

 

[InCali]

I big part of the appeal of Eps. 7-9 was that it DID bring back the iconic characters of the OT. That naturally leads us to a span between 6 and 7 of 30-40 years. The dark side HAD to play a central role in these episodes (and will most likely continue to do so). So, if not setting things up the way they did, what then? I'm not saying it wouldn't be possible to have gone in another direction, but it isn't really fair to say "They should have gone in another direction" without throwing out possible alternatives. Kylo being a Skywalker descendent makes sense. Of course they could have found another non-Skywalker related antagonist (Snoke for example), but how is that more compelling?

Also, I agree that TLJ had less options because it followed TFA.

 

[Yellow Cyclone]

I think movie studios need to stop being so fixated on catering to Chinese box office. It's become problematic. I'm just glad Deadpool wasn't even released there, so they didn't have to do anything about that.

Apparently, The Force Awakens didn't do huge business there either. The Last Jedi is still going to break $700 million overseas.

China is big and has a lot of people. I get it. But the box office split for overseas gross is minimal anyway.

there is 0 chance of this going forward, china is #2 now and will eventually be #1, if it isn't already, they're building like 20 screens a day over there.

if anything Ep9 will probably address 8's critique from mainlanders and throw in more "hollywood attractive" people and go with bigger names for supporting