The Last Jedi Why are some fans disappointed? - Part 1

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

It's he said she said as far as the WOM goes. People who love it say most love it and vice versa. Further, why are we so obsessed with which side has more people? I couldn't care less if more people hated it than loved it, doesn't change the fact that I loved it.

Oh I agree, I just wouldn’t say people who disliked the movie are the majority simply because I personally didn’t like the movie. I don’t care which side has more ‘fans,’ I just think saying the people who disliked the movie are in the minority isn’t accurate. I don’t even hate TLJ, it’s more of mixed bag for me, I do seriously like some of the choices Johnson made though.

If anything, I would say the fan reaction to the movie was mixed. I would never deny that plenty of people like the movie though.

 

[BatLobster]

People want to demonize him, so they make outlandish claims. Tale as old as time. I see a man who tried making the best Star Wars film he could, others want to see him as intentionally trolling everyone. Because you spend 200 million dollars and years of your life to troll fanboys on purpose and do your best to make a movie many people hate. That's how reality works apparently for some.

It is quite bizarre to me. I mean, I guess it sorta comes with the territory because Lucas certainly was the recipient of a lot of fan psychoanalysis and personal attacks, etc. It is kind of a different beast though, because Lucas himself is an incredibly interesting figure in his own right. He made a movie that pretty much changed the world, and it became this crazy empire that defined his life. The movies are also admittedly autobiographical for him, so he very much is/was the centerpiece of the whole thing. And at certain points, he absolutely bit back at the fans, so there was a real strained relationship there. As a sidenote- I think that is partly why Luke's characterization in TLJ worked for me...Luke has always been a stand-in for Lucas himself. Lucas sold Star Wars, Luke turned himself away from the Force. That parallel just felt right to me, after everything that's happened.

Star Wars clearly finds itself going through some growing pains as it attempts to move beyond all of that and seeks to expand what it can be without alienating too many people. But like you I really just see Johnson as a guy who ended up in a dream gig and tried to make the best Star Wars film he could. There's nothing wrong if you think he fell short, or if the choices didn't work for you, but I think it's severely misguided to think he's any more "selfish" (I hear that a lot) than any other writer/director out there. They all want their vision up on the screen. Any filmmaker worth their salt, dealt the hand Rian was dealt, would've absolutely relied on their creative instincts and sensibilities to tell the story they felt needed telling. You have to do that, otherwise you're just making fan fiction and doing an imitation of what you guess what people will like...which is not a good way to go. With any artist, you're always trying to make something that you like first- and the hope is that enough other people will like it too. Countless writers, directors, musicians, etc. have said this before. This is nothing new whatsoever. I suppose part of the reason for the backlash is that Johnson is the first to get a "written and directed by" credit on a SW film since Lucas himself.

And before people pivot to, "Kathleen Kennedy should've never hired him or given him such creative freedom in the first place"...why, exactly? By all accounts he is a pleasure to work with, and before TLJ he was a geek darling, always being suggested to helm various franchise movies. Regardless of whatever revisionism exists now, he was universally seen as an exciting choice to direct a Star Wars movie and big part of the appeal was that people believed he'd do something unique. This is the catch 22 we find ourselves in with fandom today. What is more important- universe building at the executive level, or actual filmmakers being given substantial creative freedom to play in these sandboxes and tell personal stories? Well, it all depends on the filmmaker right? Your mileage is gonna vary there.

Now, it's TOTALLY valid if you were unhappy with the result. I feel like I have to keep reiterating that. But when people talk about Rian as if he's this evil filmmaking troll that clearly should've never been hired, or this was all part of some elaborate scheme on Kennedy's part to "stick it" to old time fans...the arguments start jumping the shark for me big time.

 

[Spider-Fan]

It is quite bizarre to me. I mean, I guess it sorta comes with the territory because Lucas certainly was the recipient of a lot of fan psychoanalysis and personal attacks, etc. It is kind of a different beast though, because Lucas himself is an incredibly interesting figure in his own right. He made a movie that pretty much changed the world, and it became this crazy empire that defined his life. The movies are also admittedly autobiographical for him, so he very much is/was the centerpiece of the whole thing. And at certain points, he absolutely bit back at the fans, so there was a real strained relationship there. As a sidenote- I think that is partly why Luke's characterization in TLJ worked for me...Luke has always been a stand-in for Lucas himself. Lucas sold Star Wars, Luke turned himself away from the Force. That parallel just felt right to me, after everything that's happened.

Star Wars clearly finds itself going through some growing pains as it attempts to move beyond all of that and seeks to expand what it can be without alienating too many people. But like you I really just see Johnson as a guy who ended up in a dream gig and tried to make the best Star Wars film he could. There's nothing wrong if you think he fell short, or if the choices didn't work for you, but I think it's severely misguided to think he's any more "selfish" (I hear that a lot) than any other writer/director out there. They all want their vision up on the screen. Any filmmaker worth their salt, dealt the hand Rian was dealt, would've absolutely relied on their creative instincts and sensibilities to tell the story they felt needed telling. You have to do that, otherwise you're just making fan fiction and doing an imitation of what you guess what people will like...which is not a good way to go. With any artist, you're always trying to make something that you like first- and the hope is that enough other people will like it too. Countless writers, directors, musicians, etc. have said this before. This is nothing new whatsoever. I suppose part of the reason for the backlash is that Johnson is the first to get a "written and directed by" credit on a SW film since Lucas himself.

And before people pivot to, "Kathleen Kennedy should've never hired him or given him such creative freedom in the first place"...why, exactly? By all accounts he is a pleasure to work with, and before TLJ he was a geek darling, always being suggested to helm various franchise movies. Regardless of whatever revisionism exists now, he was universally seen as an exciting choice to direct a Star Wars movie and big part of the appeal was that people believed he'd do something unique. This is the catch 22 we find ourselves in with fandom today. What is more important- universe building at the executive level, or actual filmmakers being given substantial creative freedom to play in these sandboxes and tell personal stories? Well, it all depends on the filmmaker right? Your mileage is gonna vary there.

Now, it's TOTALLY valid if you were unhappy with the result. I feel like I have to keep reiterating that. But when people talk about Rian as if he's this evil filmmaking troll that clearly should've never been hired, or this was all part of some elaborate scheme on Kennedy's part to "stick it" to old time fans...the arguments start jumping the shark for me big time.

You and I are basically on the same wavelength in this discussion. Plenty of people accuse the Marvel movies of lacking any sort of style or directorial imprint in their films, but we all love the MCU. Star Wars gave Rian Johnson the ability to make the movie he wanted to make and make something he definitely had more creative control over, and people are demonizing him for seeking to do that. It's an odd Dynamic we have going here. Like you I don't care if you like or hated the movie. Once you see any movie you are allowed to have whatever opinion you want. But to twists Rian Johnson into this evil figure some have, it's just baffling it's stupid to me

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

Hundreds of Russian bots must have paid to become Netflix subscribers because the reviews for The Last Jedi are negative on Netflix.

 

[Agent Orange]

Hundreds of Russian bots must have paid to become Netflix subscribers because the reviews for The Last Jedi are negative on Netflix.

It's in good company on Netflix.

 

[godisawesome]

That said, claims like "Johnson intentionally made a movie that would only appeal to older white people" is outlandish, stupid, and shows total disrespect to the filmmaker. Rian Johnson may have made a movie you liked/hated, but regardless, he set out to make the best movie that he could make. Not to troll your childhood. People need to get off that crap. It's baseless and makes you look foolish.

Yeah, I may be a full blown critic of TLJ's plot and character arcs, but there was no malevolence in Johnson's intentions, and all the creative investment in the world. I'm just inclined to think that he was blind to some of his flaws in the script when viewed from a different perspective than his own. And that's not so much an artistic failing as much as a simple artistic fact.

Like, I firmly belief that an opinion on TLJ likely snowballs down from what story element, character, or theme each individual is invested in. If you prioritized Luke, and like the story, you'll probably love how all the subplots reinforce the themes around Luke. If you prioritized Luke and found the story wanting, you're more likely to find the subplots underwritten. If you prioritized Rey, and the Random reveal and Kylo Ren relationship clicked with you, you'll enjoy the subversive nature of the rest of the story. If you find Rey horribly miswritten here and her potential undercut by the film, than other characters will seem out of character to you.

None of the negative effects were intentional, and while it's possible that a second writer could have maybe enhanced RJ's ideas even further and maybe reformatted some of them in ways that simply wouldn't occur to him, Johnson is still a fantastic director and a talented writer, and those rare talents are the kind of people you want working on a project and that you want to have freedom. It's just that sometimes, Spielberg's going to make 1940 or The Lost World instead of an instant classic, or Ridley Scott is going to make Gods and Kings instead of the Martian.

If you're a critic, it's more likely that you're issue is that Johnson misfired this time rather than he just sucks or hates you. It's kind of like Lucas, actually, in ways both good and bad.

Incidentally, I think the snowball effect can probably be best seen by examining different elements of the fandom:

Luke fans: divided on the film but very passionate either way; if they liked Luke's story, they loved the film, and if they hated it, they hate the film.

The "Reylo" fans: generally far more likely to love the film.

Finn fans: generally far more likely to hate the film.

Etc.

 

[BatLobster]

godisawesome, appreciate your clarification. I think that's an interesting breakdown of how different camps may respond to the film.

You and I are basically on the same wavelength in this discussion. Plenty of people accuse the Marvel movies of lacking any sort of style or directorial imprint in their films, but we all love the MCU. Star Wars gave Rian Johnson the ability to make the movie he wanted to make and make something he definitely had more creative control over, and people are demonizing him for seeking to do that. It's an odd Dynamic we have going here. Like you I don't care if you like or hated the movie. Once you see any movie you are allowed to have whatever opinion you want. But to twists Rian Johnson into this evil figure some have, it's just baffling it's stupid to me

Yeah, I don't mean to keep repeating it but it's a genuine relief to find at least one other person that thinks the reaction is as overblown and crazy as I do. I really feel like I stepped into a bizarro universe when I saw just how personally people took this film.

I mean, I really do love Star Wars and I really do get having a deep emotional attachment to the characters and not being cool with certain decisions but...I'm sorry, it's still just a freaking movie. At a certain point you just need to take a deep breath and accept that some films are gonna be divisive and EVERYONE has been on the positive and negative side of a divisive film before, that's just the way it goes. Maybe just as I'm getting older I'm starting to see the more unhealthy side of fandom in general and trying to break away from it myself. I don't know. There has to be a healthier way to engage with our entertainment, even when we don't like it. It just seems it's so easy for any fandom to turn toxic real quick these days. But then again, maybe it's always been a problem just now being heightened by social media .

 

[jmc]

I don't think Johnson made a movie for any specific audience. I do think he made a movie that appealed to himself however. But like Zack Snyder I can't blame him for being allowed to do that because the studio are the ones who gave the green light. Now, is there an argument that he should have known better than to do something that appealed to mostly himself? I think there is. I think people like Snyder and Johnson were more concerned with tailoring the material to their tastes instead of letting the material by the driving force behind their ideas. These type of properties unfortunately come with the stipulation that they have to cater to an existing fan base, and that means having to give up certain creative control. Yes, it sucks creatively, but that's part of the game you play when you sign on.

 

[Aximili86]

AVEIT, this has been covered ad-nauseam since December. But let's go over it again.

Look, you'd probably agree the hardcore nerd-fanbase is split about 50/50 on it, no? That seems generous, but for the sake of argument let's say among people that read movie news sites and post on forums it's half "loved it" and half "ruined my childhood and Rian eats puppies in his spare time". I can get on board with the idea that the negatives rise to half of that population, fine.

But in addition to that, the broader "what was the name of the old hippie guy in EpI?" I-don't-know-jack-about-Star-Wars-but-I-like-movies Average Joe/Jane types, they liked the movie to the tune of 1.3 billion dollars. That means repeat viewings among a portion of them. Yes, it's less than The Force Awakens, granted - but every movie short of Avatar and Titanic was less than The Force Awakens. TLJ was still an enormous monster of a movie that the public ate up.

In addition to that, critics. 91% average score on Rotten Tomatoes a consensus does make, young grasshopper.

So, just plain rationally, yes, it's 50/50 among the hardcore nerds. Thing is, one half of that equation has the agreement of the broader public and the snooty critics. Those are people too. The balance just logically works out in favor of the "yea" rather than the "nay", all things considered.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

AVEIT, this has been covered ad-nauseam since December. But let's go over it again.

Look, you'd probably agree the hardcore nerd-fanbase is split about 50/50 on it, no? That seems generous, but for the sake of argument let's say among people that read movie news sites and post on forums it's half "loved it" and half "ruined my childhood and Rian eats puppies in his spare time". I can get on board with the idea that the negatives rise to half of that population, fine.

But in addition to that, the broader "what was the name of the old hippie guy in EpI?" I-don't-know-jack-about-Star-Wars-but-I-like-movies Average Joe/Jane types, they liked the movie to the tune of 1.3 billion dollars. That means repeat viewings among a portion of them. Yes, it's less than The Force Awakens, granted - but every movie short of Avatar and Titanic was less than The Force Awakens. TLJ was still an enormous monster of a movie that the public ate up.

In addition to that, critics. 91% average score on Rotten Tomatoes a consensus does make, young grasshopper.

So, just plain rationally, yes, it's 50/50 among the hardcore nerds. Thing is, one half of that equation has the agreement of the broader public and the snooty critics. Those are people too. The balance just logically works out in favor of the "yea" rather than the "nay", all things considered.

The thing is though, a lot of the people who made up that 1.3 billion ‘monster’ went to see the movie due to the critics reviews and good will brought from TFA. Just because a lot of people went to see it doesn’t mean all of them liked it.

Quick example, I am the only hardcore movie fan ( who goes on forums, etc) in my family, however if we like a movie we will try and see it at least twice at the cinema. We did for TFA for example. However, literally when the credits rolled up my family said they wouldn’t see TLJ again. I eventually went to see it again on my own to give the movie another chance. So I saw the movie twice, but walked out disappointed each time. I bet there were a lot of people like that.

So again I think your statement that more of the GA like it is also wrong, the BO drops certainly give an indication of that. Also, not all disliked the movie are the ‘Johnson is the devil types,’ I have never and will never call him that.

In regard to the critics, as I get older I find I am caring about them less and less, just because they like a movie doesn’t mean most people. JW2 currently sits at 50% on RT but will probably make the same or even more than TLJ.

So again, I can’t agree more people liked the movie than not as it’s something you will never prove. However there are things we can go off like the BO drop offs.

 

[jmc]

AVEIT, this has been covered ad-nauseam since December. But let's go over it again.

Look, you'd probably agree the hardcore nerd-fanbase is split about 50/50 on it, no? That seems generous, but for the sake of argument let's say among people that read movie news sites and post on forums it's half "loved it" and half "ruined my childhood and Rian eats puppies in his spare time". I can get on board with the idea that the negatives rise to half of that population, fine.

But in addition to that, the broader "what was the name of the old hippie guy in EpI?" I-don't-know-jack-about-Star-Wars-but-I-like-movies Average Joe/Jane types, they liked the movie to the tune of 1.3 billion dollars. That means repeat viewings among a portion of them. Yes, it's less than The Force Awakens, granted - but every movie short of Avatar and Titanic was less than The Force Awakens. TLJ was still an enormous monster of a movie that the public ate up.

In addition to that, critics. 91% average score on Rotten Tomatoes a consensus does make, young grasshopper.

So, just plain rationally, yes, it's 50/50 among the hardcore nerds. Thing is, one half of that equation has the agreement of the broader public and the snooty critics. Those are people too. The balance just logically works out in favor of the "yea" rather than the "nay", all things considered.

You know what was also just 50/50 amongst fans? Batman v Superman. You know what we heard for the best part of 18 months? That it would have no effect on Justice League, that it was just the fans who were the ones complaining and that they didn't matter to the overall success. It was guaranteed a billion dollar. Guess what? BvS turned enough people off, not just fans, to make JL a complete and utter failure. Justice League was 'too big' to fail, until it wasn't. What's surprising to me, especially coming out of this forum, is the number of people who seem to flat out refuse to believe the same thing could happen to Star Wars over the misguided notion the bad reaction to TLJ was just a minority, despite the fact that the two films have shared a similar response from audiences. I get liking TLJ, that's an individual thing. What I don't get is why people don't see the similarities between this and BvS.

 

[Aximili86]

Batman V.S. Superman did 872 million dollars worldwide and has a 27% review average. It's so not even close to the same thing as far as reception to the movie.

And if Justice League was a great movie, it would have done megabucks regardless. Word of mouth travels, and fast.

If word of mouth among the broader public those first two weeks over TLJ was that it was a gigantic turd, the reviews were crappy, and the nerds hated it, it never would have crossed a billion.

AVEIT, as for your "my family didn't go see it twice" thing, that's an example in a vacuum. One person's experience doesn't reflect the whole, as anyone else can come along with an "me and my buddies saw it 4 times!" and it cancels that out. You go on the monetary numbers and you go on the reviews. Neither alone, but both together. You take those factors together with TLJ and it reflects a positive. This "it dropped from TFA!" stuff doesn't fly, as it wasn't ever expected to do as well as TFA from the moment they decided to produce the damn thing. TFA was a one-off perfect storm situation, which doesn't take away from TLJ still doing a crapload of money.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

AVEIT, as for your "my family didn't go see it twice" thing, that's an example in a vacuum. One person's experience doesn't reflect the whole, as anyone else can come along with an "me and my buddies saw it 4 times!" and it cancels that out. You go on the monetary numbers and you go on the reviews. Neither alone, but both together. You take those factors together with TLJ and it reflects a positive. This "it dropped from TFA!" stuff doesn't fly, as it wasn't ever expected to do as well as TFA from the moment they decided to produce the damn thing. TFA was a one-off perfect storm situation, which doesn't take away from TLJ still doing a crapload of money.

With my family thing, yeah I agree, but it’s was never meant to be anything more than that. However, I know of other people who did the same, and the repeat business wasn’t as strong which showed in the weekly BO drops. If TLJ was universally loved, it would have made more money, I have no doubt of that. The drop off from TFA wasn’t expected to be as much as it was.

As for the reviews, I clearly gave examples of when critics reviews haven’t meant squat to a movies BO,so that just doesn’t fly with me. Critics and the GA can often be far apart on movies. So no I don’t think critics matter in this instance. Especially when there are a lot of people who disagreed with them with TLJ

As for the weekly BO drop offs, they were worse than Rogue One’s, let alone TFA’s, that says something. It could also be argued that the reaction to TLJ had an effect on Solo’s box office.

We may just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Aximili86]

Critics and the GA can often be far apart on movies.

They can be, but they don't seem to be here. It's the hardcore who hate this more than the generals, and even then it's only half of the hardcore.

 

[BatLobster]

You know what was also just 50/50 amongst fans? Batman v Superman. You know what we heard for the best part of 18 months? That it would have no effect on Justice League, that it was just the fans who were the ones complaining and that they didn't matter to the overall success. It was guaranteed a billion dollar. Guess what? BvS turned enough people off, not just fans, to make JL a complete and utter failure. Justice League was 'too big' to fail, until it wasn't. What's surprising to me, especially coming out of this forum, is the number of people who seem to flat out refuse to believe the same thing could happen to Star Wars over the misguided notion the bad reaction to TLJ was just a minority, despite the fact that the two films have shared a similar response from audiences. I get liking TLJ, that's an individual thing. What I don't get is why people don't see the similarities between this and BvS.

I mean, there's definitely a similarity in that they were both highly divisive films within fandom. No question there. Without having done any type of research, my general read on the ground is that BvS probably leans a bit more towards a majority disliking it and I also feel that it was more divisive with the general audience than TLJ- admittedly though, that's a guess. BvS also had the issue of following another highly divisive film in MoS, which I think contributed to the crazy box office drop off (critically lashing combined with a "fool me once" mindset).

I think we will simply have to wait until Episode IX comes out to see how well the parallel holds up. I know the temptation is to blame Solo's failure squarely on TLJ, but there really were a number of contributing factors there. And the funny thing is, for as much as BvS damaged the DC brand- the following two spinoff films in the franchise (SS and WW) both did well at the box office. It wasn't until JL that the cumulative effect of being a direct sequel to BvS, and the shaky receptions to all of the DC films besides WW, and yet another Rotten scoring DC film truly caught up with them. I just think we need to be fair and recognize that, because if we're making the parallel to DC, it should follow logically that Suicide Squad would've suffered a box office fate similar to Solo. Point being that spinoff films can kind of be their own animal, for better or worse. Unless you want to argue that TLJ was more damaging that BvS, but again- I just don't think we're there yet to know. While I think SS was pretty crappy and Solo was at least OK, the difference to me is clear. SS had a HELL of a marketing campaign, they actually made it look like it was a must-see cinematic event. Solo, it was like they didn't even try, and I think they made a huge miscalculation about how willing general audiences were to care about a non-Harrison Ford Han Solo to begin with. And I know this is just anecdotal, but I know so many people who actually did like TFA/TLJ and just had 0 interest in seeing Solo. There was just widespread indifference towards Solo, whether you loved or hated TLJ.

I think Episode IX will be revealing. Honestly, I don't know what will happen. Some are convinced that it's DOA. I'm not going to risk getting egg on my face and say it's absolutely going to be a smashing success, but I'll just say I'm still have a healthy amount of skepticism of it being a bomb at the moment. My main reason is I think the SW brand is still has more inherent appeal to families/kids, and people know the "Episodes" are the main event. The DCU films never really attempted to appeal to that demo and were criticized for being way too dark, and then made a sudden tonal course correction with JL.

The main thing I will concede here is I think because of the nature of of TLJ's divisiveness- strong critical reception/divided audiences, good reviews won't be able to carry Episode IX. A 95% Tomatometer probably won't convince folks who hated TLJ. So I really think it's going to live and die by the marketing and word of mouth ultimately.

 

[Aximili86]

Because you're rational.

 

[godisawesome]

I mean, there's definitely a similarity in that they were both highly divisive films within fandom. No question there. Without having done any type of research, my general read on the ground is that BvS probably leans a bit more towards a majority disliking it and I also feel that it was more divisive with the general audience than TLJ- admittedly though, that's a guess. BvS also had the issue of following another highly divisive film in MoS, which I think contributed to the crazy box office drop off (critically lashing combined with a "fool me once" mindset).

I think we will simply have to wait until Episode IX comes out to see how well the parallel holds up. I know the temptation is to blame Solo's failure squarely on TLJ, but there really were a number of contributing factors there. And the funny thing is, for as much as BvS damaged the DC brand- the following two spinoff films in the franchise (SS and WW) both did well at the box office. It wasn't until JL that the cumulative effect of being a direct sequel to BvS, and the shaky receptions to all of the DC films besides WW truly caught up with them. I just think we need to be fair and recognize that, because if we're making the parallel to DC, it should follow logically that Suicide Squad would've suffered a box office fate similar to Solo. Point being that spinoff films can kind of be their own animal, for better or worse. Unless you want to argue that TLJ was more damaging that BvS, but again- I just don't think we're there yet to know. While I think SS was pretty crappy and Solo was at least OK, the difference to me is clear. SS had a HELL of a marketing campaign, they actually made it look like it was a must-see cinematic event. Solo, it was like they didn't even try, and I think they made a huge miscalculation about how willing general audiences were to care about a non-Harrison Ford Han Solo to begin with.

I think Episode IX will be revealing. Honestly, I don't know what will happen. Some are convinced that it's DOA. I'm not going to risk getting egg on my face and say it's absolutely going to be a smashing success, but I'll just say I'm still have a healthy amount of skepticism of it being a bomb at the moment. My main reason is I think the SW brand is still has more inherent appeal to families/kids, and people know the "Episodes" are the main event. The DCU films never really attempted to appeal to that demo and were criticized for being way too dark, and then made a sudden tonal course correction with JL.

I tend to think that the only real impact that TLJ had on Solo would have been in that TLJ is inherently less of a "hype maker" than TFA was, and that TFA's "hype maker" aspect may have bled a bit more into Rogue One's box office success than TLJ did into Solo, though Solo's issues were much more ones of scheduling, marketing, a dubious concept for a film with the kind of budget and Box Office expectations they expected, and behind the scenes drama with the director being replaced and the budget ballooning out of control. Solo's story and characterizations are far more in line with TFA and the other Kasdan movies than they are with Johnson's TLJ, and from what I've seen TLJ haters have enjoyed Solo in general. The only real fallout I can see is that apathy towards Solo May have only worsened a bit after TLJ, and that may have been more because of TLJ giving answers to the speculative questions that kept both hardcore and mainstream fans buzzing for two years.

And I'm kind of with you in that IX's going to be the rubber match in terms of the long term view of TLJ. Though I'd argue even there, we're facing a possibly confusing situation, since Box Office turnout in any direction could be used by debaters on both sides for their points: "IX made the least money of all three, because Abrams failed to follow in Johnson's footsteps"/"IX made the least money of all three because Johnson torched the trilogy with his one film" vs "IX made more money because Abrams managed to right-the-ship after TLJ"/"IX made more money because Johnson gave Abrams a perfect setup movie."

It's probably going to come down more to overall audience reception, plus box office totals, and all run through a assessment of the stylistic and possible story differences Abrams and Terrio may introduce. I mean, let's face it, there's a somewhat decent chance that at least one or two elements of IX might be radically redefined if not outright retconned, or at least that's what my TLJ-loving friend feels like; he seems certain Rey's getting her parentage redone in IX. And he's not alone; on the Jedi Council Forums, one of TLJ's staunchest and most eloquent defenders is convinced that she'll be revealed as Rey Kenobi in IX. Which leaves me in the wired position of being the TLJ hater who despises the Rey Random reveal, but thinks that changing it in IX would come off badly for TLJ and Johnson, and as much as I've whined and moaned about Johnson, I don't actually want vast portions of a labor of love from him to be made "meaningless." Yet I'd probably like a Rey Related reveal anyways, and there's a. Decent chance that of IX appeals to me, I'll end up owning a sequel Duology where I skip over TLJ every time I watch them.

 

[dhandler01]

Batman V.S. Superman did 872 million dollars worldwide and has a 27% review average. It's so not even close to the same thing as far as reception to the movie.

And if Justice League was a great movie, it would have done megabucks regardless. Word of mouth travels, and fast.

If word of mouth among the broader public those first two weeks over TLJ was that it was a gigantic turd, the reviews were crappy, and the nerds hated it, it never would have crossed a billion.

If that was true than Solo wouldnt have cratered. It was rated "fresh" by critics (god what a worthless metric) and according to many around here it is a good movie and everyone who saw it liked it (I didnt like most of it) yet it opened flat and completely crapped the bed.

I think you overestimate how many people like TLJ. (in the same way haters overestimate how many truly hate it) If it was a clear majority then at least the opening weekend of Solo would have been good. TLJ alienated enough fans that Solo opened meager and even when the reviews were positive no one really gave it a shot. That isnt Russian Bots and trolls messing with the numbers, that is Star Wars fans choosing NOT to see Solo. That would have been unheard of before TLJ. Now maybe you can blame some of it on the movie being in a crowded May/June, or some of it might be that it is too soon after the last film but that would be minuscule. People who want to see a film will see it, people didnt want to see Solo.

Now maybe Episode IX will prove me wrong and everyone will show up again and love the film and it makes a quadrillion dollars. But as of now the only point of evidence we have is Solo which despite pretty good critic reviews was dead on arrival.

Look I get it, you are the Star Wars board version of the people who defend Zack Snyder and BvS to the end and there is zero wrong with that. I just think it blinds you to the problems that do exist and that the complaints many of us had about TLJ are legit and fixing them could have made it a better film.

On another note for as much as I hate TLJ I hold no animus towards Rian Johnson. He made the movie he wanted, he took chances, and to me it failed. It sucks but he wasnt out to destroy the film. No director does that.

edit: I dont think Episode IX will bomb or anything but I think it will underperform in a significant way. I think it will open less than TLJ and have similar dropoffs.

 

[Aximili86]

Look I get it, you are the Star Wars board version of the people who defend Zack Snyder and BvS to the end and there is zero wrong with that.

Jesus Christ, learn to read. BvS was universally panned, with a tiny few diehards who love the thing. TLJ is split right down the middle with fans, with critical praise about as high as it gets.

If you think that's the same thing, nothing can be done for you.

 

[Travesty]

I think we will simply have to wait until Episode IX comes out to see how well the parallel holds up. I know the temptation is to blame Solo's failure squarely on TLJ, but there really were a number of contributing factors there. And the funny thing is, for as much as BvS damaged the DC brand- the following two spinoff films in the franchise (SS and WW) both did well at the box office. It wasn't until JL that the cumulative effect of being a direct sequel to BvS, and the shaky receptions to all of the DC films besides WW, and yet another Rotten scoring DC film truly caught up with them. I just think we need to be fair and recognize that, because if we're making the parallel to DC, it should follow logically that Suicide Squad would've suffered a box office fate similar to Solo. Point being that spinoff films can kind of be their own animal, for better or worse. Unless you want to argue that TLJ was more damaging that BvS, but again- I just don't think we're there yet to know. While I think SS was pretty crappy and Solo was at least OK, the difference to me is clear. SS had a HELL of a marketing campaign, they actually made it look like it was a must-see cinematic event. Solo, it was like they didn't even try, and I think they made a huge miscalculation about how willing general audiences were to care about a non-Harrison Ford Han Solo to begin with. And I know this is just anecdotal, but I know so many people who actually did like TFA/TLJ and just had 0 interest in seeing Solo. There was just widespread indifference towards Solo, whether you loved or hated TLJ.

I think TLJ was way more damaging to the SW brand than BvS is to the DC brand, which is something you have to take into account: the overall brand. I see your point about the spinoff movies, but again, overall, the DC brand is still fine. And the main reason for that, is because these movies in the DCEU aren't canon to these characters. We just had Nolan's TDKT, people liked Burton's Batman movies, the Reeves Superman movies, WW, SS, etc. I think people are aware that while they may not like BvS, they can still enjoy WW or SS, and in a few years, this will all be rebooted, and in no way is going to damage the overall brand to the DC characters. But with SW, if you hate what they did with the character progression in TLJ, and you think it was stupid to do a Solo movie, etc, well, that's canon. That's your SW for life. No reboots, no do overs, no new interpretations: this is it. That was a fatal error on Disney's part, to tell everyone that everything produced by Disney is now canon. If WB came out, and said Zack Snyder's Superman and Batman are now canon to the characters, and that's what everyone had to follow in the comics, movies and games, it would be a s**t show. You don't just give a guy creative freedom to do whatever he wants, and tell people, "hey, if you don't enjoy this, you're stuck with it. This is how the characters are viewed for life".

So these analogies to Snyder don't really hold up to me. I get what you guys are trying to say about studios giving directors creative freedom, and about spinoff movies, and the overall reception with fans, but at the end of the day, Snyder and Rian Johnson are in two completely different situations. So you don't like Snyder's Superman or Batman? Cool, you can still have your comics, tv shows, videogames, and a new set of movie will be rebooted a few years down the line. You hate what Rian Johnson did to Luke Skywalker? Tough s**t, you're stuck with it. This is your SW. That's a HUGE difference.

 

[Aximili86]

but again, overall, the DC brand is still fine.

How do you figure? At least, why is the DC brand still strong and Star Wars somehow isn't? Lucasfilm under Kennedy has been way more successful than DC under Tsujihara & Johns. Man Of Steel did pretty well, but really Wonder Woman's the only major hit in the DCEU so far. Hopefully that turns around with Reeves' Batman stuff, but as of now...

 

[jmc]

I think TLJ was way more damaging to the SW brand than BvS is to the DC brand, which is something you have to take into account: the overall brand. I see your point about the spinoff movies, but again, overall, the DC brand is still fine. And the main reason for that, is because these movies in the DCEU aren't canon to these characters. We just had Nolan's TDKT, people liked Burton's Batman movies, the Reeves Superman movies, WW, SS, etc. I think people are aware that while they may not like BvS, they can still enjoy WW or SS, and in a few years, this will all be rebooted, and in no way is going to damage the overall brand to the DC characters. But with SW, if you hate what they did with the character progression in TLJ, and you think it was stupid to do a Solo movie, etc, well, that's canon. That's your SW for life. No reboots, no do overs, no new interpretations: this is it. That was a fatal error on Disney's part, to tell everyone that everything produced by Disney is now canon. If WB came out, and said Zack Snyder's Superman and Batman are now canon to the characters, and that's what everyone had to follow in the comics, movies and games, it would be a s**t show. You don't just give a guy creative freedom to do whatever he wants, and tell people, "hey, if you don't enjoy this, you're stuck with it. This is how the characters are viewed for life".

So these analogies to Snyder don't really hold up to me. I get what you guys are trying to say about studios giving directors creative freedom, and about spinoff movies, and the overall reception with fans, but at the end of the day, Snyder and Rian Johnson are in two completely different situations. So you don't like Snyder's Superman or Batman? Cool, you can still have your comics, tv shows, videogames, and a new set of movie will be rebooted a few years down the line. You hate what Rian Johnson did to Luke Skywalker? Tough s**t, you're stuck with it. This is your SW. That's a HUGE difference.

I never actually thought of it like that. Cannon is a huge part of Star Wars and the fandom and if this is now canon there's no going back. You've got me thinking that this actually might be a worse situation than the DCEU now, because at least WB can move on and choose to ignore Snyder's movies, which they effectively have done already. Worst case scenario they can reboot. Lucasfilm is stuck with the canon they are creating, they can't reboot anything. You're right, the situations aren't the same, WB has at least options up their sleeve to dig their way out.

 

[Brother Jack]

Jesus Christ, learn to read. BvS was universally panned, with a tiny few diehards who love the thing. TLJ is split right down the middle with fans, with critical praise about as high as it gets.

If you think that's the same thing, nothing can be done for you.

You're being needlessly antagonistic.

 

[Travesty]

How do you figure? At least, why is the DC brand still strong and Star Wars somehow isn't? Lucasfilm under Kennedy has been way more successful than DC under Tsujihara & Johns. Man Of Steel did pretty well, but really Wonder Woman's the only major hit in the DCEU so far. Hopefully that turns around with Reeves' Batman stuff, but as of now...

I thought I went over this in my post? I don’t know what to tell you? Maybe go back and read my post again? Your question is explained there.

 

[Aximili86]

Nothing of the sort. You've basically said DC's had misses, but people liked Wonder Woman so the brand's still optimistic going forward.

That exact same train of thought could be attributed to Lucasfilm about now. They've had a misfire in solo, a divisive hit but a hit all the same in TLJ, and the brand is still hot property.