Star Wars: Disney deliberately destroyed old characters/universe for royalties

[threads]

idk the disney stuff doesn't feel the same. i honestly like the prequels more than this new stuff.

[PACOX]

Funny thing is that Yoda actually appeared in the last movie and The Emperor appears to have at least something to do with the next one.

The also lean heavily onto Vader outside of the movies. Vader was in Rebels, there's a Vader game, Vader comics.

They aren't doing a good job of killing Lucas's creations.

[StillMcfuu]

idk the disney stuff doesn't feel the same. i honestly like the prequels more than this new stuff.

1 - 6 have Lucas, whether at the helm or as producer.
R1 did a fantastic job of emulating that style.

The others have been very much projects of their respective directors, it's one of the reasons the movies don't really pass the Starwars litmus test for viewers.

[Dwarfhamster]

George Lucas did a pretty good job shitting on his own stuff with the prequels and "remastering" the original trilogy (e.g., making Greedo shoot first, etc.).

[Highelf]

that's not how it works at all. the old EU have been made into legends that can be made canon or proven wrong.

What does that even mean? They publicly declared EU non canon, even though they use what they want without giving credit when they see fit. And yes I know they technically don't NEED to give any kind of credit, but when you say it's not canon and not part of our universe then take idea, designs, stories, etc from it...kind of a subtle dick move if you ask me. But it doesn't really matter to me. The originals are Star Wars and nothing will capture that magic again. The EU has a lot of great stuff in it that I grew up on and to me it's still part of the universe.

[PACOX]

We talked about the Extended U. strictly technically: whether "young Solo" revenues belong to Lucas or Disney. But thanks for the lecture... i guess...

You people keep mentioning Ford wanting to leave, or the age of the actors... No one expected them to do backflips in Star Wars 28 in 2048. This trilogy should been their graceful goodbye. Instead they desecrated them, destroyed everything the first trilogy built and then spit on their graves. All for what? Money. They don't even have a scene together... just listen to what Mark Hamill said about what they did with Luke. Or look at how they try course correct the last movie after the huge fuckup with TLJ.

And that's what this rumor explains. Why they did it. And honestly, it could have worked if they offer new exciting, interesting, lovable characters. They fucked that up too.

So stop arguing things no one said.

- - - Updated - - -



He was fired long time ago, Dumb & Dumber from Game of Thrones will make the new trilogy. But hey, according to some commenters TLJ was the best film ever and a great success

Rian was not fired. The Ds were a different project, which is kind of questionable now because they also signed to Netflix.

[Skroe]

No. That is a mangificiantly stupid theory.

What actually happened is simpler.

Disney dropped $4 billion to buy Star Wars. And the best Star Wars is widely agree to the be classic Rebels vs Empire Star Wars.

Problem: The movies were from the 1970s an early 1980s and their casts were old. They dropped $4 billion on a franchise whose foundation and most beloved element was nearly 40 years old. The prequels themselves were 10-15 years old by that point.

Disney primarily markets to children. Having their $4 billion investment, for something to be marketed toward children, be based on a 40 year old movie franchise isn't a viable way to recap that $4 billion.

What is the logical thing to do? Reboot! Retell the story of Luke Skywalker, Darth Vader and all that for 'todays' audiences. Make a movie that would excite today's children. In another world, this is exactly what would have done.

But Star Wars is a pop cultural landmark. A reboot of Star Wars would pit the classic versus the new in a competition the new would never win.

So they did the next best thing: they made a sequel that is essentially the Soft reboot.

The mixed up the back stories, motiviations and personalities of the classic big three plus some EU characters, and made the new big three. Separating Luke Skywalker the Jedi and Luke Skywalker the ace pilot into aspects of Rey and Poe made the most sense. The brought back the most familiar iconic imagery of the original series, but all slightly different. We have our slightly different next gen Storm Troopers, Tie Fighters, X-Wings. We have a guy who looks kinda like Darth Vader mixed with Revan (a very popular EU design, for good reason). We have a Death Star like thing that isn't. We have a Empire-thats-not in the First Order and a Rebellion-by-another-name in the Resistance.

We go back to basics with the Force... more original trilogy "religion" (repeatedly refereed to as a religion) than its prequel iteration (which it was never referred to as a religion).

The sequel trilogy is, of course, a legitimate follow up. But it's foundation is as a kind of Soft Reboot to retail a spin on the original trilogy story, with similar character archetypes, similar events, and new takes on the iconic (and ever marketable) imagery. Why? To sell merchandise. Why else. Movies make a lot of money. Merchandise makes way more. And now they have the new big three to sell merchandise for the next 10-15 years, rather than rely on pictures taken of the original big three from around 1980.


To put this in context, let's consider a thought experiment. Folks who remember Marvel Comics "Ultimate" line may be familiar with this. If you could take everything in the original trilogy, prequels, and EU over the last 40 years... if considering that you looked at the original trilogy and had the option of cutting what didn't work altering some other aspects, modernizing and streamlining some of the more nonsensical parts in the way Ultimate X-men did that to the X-Men, what would "Star Wars" look like? Probably not exactly the sequel trilogy (particularly the Force Awakens) but fairly close.

I'll say again, look at them breaking up the fighter pilot and jedi aspects of Luke Skywalker into parts of Rey and Poe. You can't have your single lead both dueling the big bad and doing the Death Star trench run during the climax of the film. He cant be in two places at once. So best option: split up the jobs. True, this doesn't mean Luke Skywalker makes his name as the guy who blew up the Death Star anymore, but you can find something else to attract the villian's attention.

[Highelf]

No. That is a mangificiantly stupid theory.

What actually happened is simpler.

Disney dropped $4 billion to buy Star Wars. And the best Star Wars is widely agree to the be classic Rebels vs Empire Star Wars.

Problem: The movies were from the 1970s an early 1980s and their casts were old. They dropped $4 billion on a franchise whose foundation and most beloved element was nearly 40 years old. The prequels themselves were 10-15 years old by that point.

Disney primarily markets to children. Having their $4 billion investment, for something to be marketed toward children, be based on a 40 year old movie franchise isn't a viable way to recap that $4 billion.

What is the logical thing to do? Reboot! Retell the story of Luke Skywalker, Darth Vader and all that for 'todays' audiences. Make a movie that would excite today's children. In another world, this is exactly what would have done.

But Star Wars is a pop cultural landmark. A reboot of Star Wars would pit the classic versus the new in a competition the new would never win.

So they did the next best thing: they made a sequel that is essentially the Soft reboot.

The mixed up the back stories, motiviations and personalities of the classic big three plus some EU characters, and made the new big three. Separating Luke Skywalker the Jedi and Luke Skywalker the ace pilot into aspects of Rey and Poe made the most sense. The brought back the most familiar iconic imagery of the original series, but all slightly different. We have our slightly different next gen Storm Troopers, Tie Fighters, X-Wings. We have a guy who looks kinda like Darth Vader mixed with Revan (a very popular EU design, for good reason). We have a Death Star like thing that isn't. We have a Empire-thats-not in the First Order and a Rebellion-by-another-name in the Resistance.

We go back to basics with the Force... more original trilogy "religion" (repeatedly refereed to as a religion) than its prequel iteration (which it was never referred to as a religion).

The sequel trilogy is, of course, a legitimate follow up. But it's foundation is as a kind of Soft Reboot to retail a spin on the original trilogy story, with similar character archetypes, similar events, and new takes on the iconic (and ever marketable) imagery. Why? To sell merchandise. Why else. Movies make a lot of money. Merchandise makes way more. And now they have the new big three to sell merchandise for the next 10-15 years, rather than rely on pictures taken of the original big three from around 1980.


To put this in context, let's consider a thought experiment. Folks who remember Marvel Comics "Ultimate" line may be familiar with this. If you could take everything in the original trilogy, prequels, and EU over the last 40 years... if considering that you looked at the original trilogy and had the option of cutting what didn't work altering some other aspects, modernizing and streamlining some of the more nonsensical parts in the way Ultimate X-men did that to the X-Men, what would "Star Wars" look like? Probably not exactly the sequel trilogy (particularly the Force Awakens) but fairly close.

I'll say again, look at them breaking up the fighter pilot and jedi aspects of Luke Skywalker into parts of Rey and Poe. You can't have your single lead both dueling the big bad and doing the Death Star trench run during the climax of the film. He cant be in two places at once. So best option: split up the jobs. True, this doesn't mean Luke Skywalker makes his name as the guy who blew up the Death Star anymore, but you can find something else to attract the villian's attention.

That was a long winded way of trying to put lipstick on a hog. This new trilogy is nothing more than riding on the coattails of something passionate, creative and established and using that influence to make them money. Nothing new was added to the universe, nothing more, nothing less.

[Skroe]

That was a long winded way of trying to put lipstick on a hog. This new trilogy is nothing more than riding on the coattails of something passionate, creative and established and using that influence to make them money. Nothing new was added to the universe, nothing more, nothing less.

Of course nothing new was added.

Let's be very clear about what Star Wars is: a merchandising vehicle. Folks talk of it like some great creative enterprise. It never has been. From the first moment that George Lucas sold away distribution rights but kept merchandising rights, Star Wars has been about selling T-Shirts, Toys, Posters, Cups, theme park rides and McDonalds tie ins. It was the prototype to the way movies have done that this century. In fact, Star Wars Shadows of the Empire was created purely to test-run the merchandising machine before Episode I hit.

When Disney dropped $4 billion on Star Wars, they weren't thinking about spending $4 billion to engage in some creative enterprise for artistry's sake. They were thinking about spending $4 billion to eventually make $20 billion over the next 20 years of Star Wars, only about $4 billion-ish would be in actual ticket sales, with the other $16 billion in merchandising and other tie ins.

So what did they do? They soft-rebooted Star Wars in the form of the sequels. Because classic Star Wars is the most marketable Star Wars, but they didn't want to be saddled with actors who were now in their 60s and movies that were filmed 40 years ago.

Nothing new will ever be added to Star Wars. Not really anyway. Its entire purpose is sell merchandise. A "creative" Star Wars movie may go over well with classic fans, but the target audience is kids who want to download the tie in app and spend $40 of their parents money on it, or what to buy Hasbro action figures, or want a poster for their bedroom.

[tyrlaan]

That was a long winded way of trying to put lipstick on a hog. This new trilogy is nothing more than riding on the coattails of something passionate, creative and established and using that influence to make them money. Nothing new was added to the universe, nothing more, nothing less.

You seem interested primarily in shitting on the new Star Wars stuff, but ironically, the two films we have so far from this new trilogy have added more to the universe than any of the prequels, so "nothing" is a bit of an exaggeration. A bit.

This is entirely independent of whether you liked them or not, mind you. It's irrefutable fact that TFA and TLJ (especially TLJ) added to the universe.

[Ehrenpanzer]

Not only all of this, but they created the coolest goddamn Darth Vader scene in the entire saga at the end of Rogue One, made an ENTIRE FUCKING MOVIE about Han Solo, and they resurrected the Emperor for Episode IX.

But yes, they are intentionally killing the "old" universe.

Morons.

1. No. Although I would point out what the "coolest scene" will vary from person to person.

2. And it was terrible.. like... to the point they cancelled other backstory movies because it was so bad.

3. Out of desperation from the debacle that the shithole they called a movie that 8 turned out to be.


All that being said, Lucas put the dagger into Star Wars long before Disney bought it, why they shelled out that much money for an empire (pun intended) on the decline is beyond me, especially since they seem to have put the B team in charge of the SWEU.

[Frontenac]

Oh, it's Midnight's Edge.

This is not the youtuber you're looking for. Move along.

[Jastall]

I mean, since Empire released, Star Wars produced three good things in my books: the Thrawn trilogy, KOTOR 1 and 2, and Rogue One. Everything else ranged from mediocre to bad, to awful. Before TLJ there was Episodes 1 and 2, and before that there was the Star Wars Holiday Special. The franchise has had a lot more downs than ups, so I'm left uniquely unfazed by conspiracies such as these as while Disney did deliver a very bad movie, they also delivered the second best (on some days best IMO) SW flick, and still delivered two less terribly awful movies than Lucas did.

[qwerty123456]

Last I knew, both were getting their own, separate trilogies. D&D's is set somewhere in TOR, Johnson's in the modern timeline.

I thoroughly enjoyed TLJ, and I've been accused of shitting on things just because it's popular to (like GoT, which I shat on long before season 8). To me, it was a good movie, but it thoroughly departed from what a Star Wars movie traditionally is, and that rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. Mostly people who invest too much in this sort of thing.

Yeah I haven't seen anything saying Johnson's trilogy is done and his Wikipedia still says its going on.

For me TLJ was entertaining in the theater and it didn't bring me out of the movie every 20 seconds like the Force Awakens did. I feel like Rian gets too much flak when 99% of the problem with the film is because of the steaming pile of shit that JJ left him. He had the impossible task of taking the stuff JJ left him and trying to make a coherent plot while still leaving enough for a third film and apparently they didn't even leave him any notes on where shit was supposed to go.

Had JJ not tried to cash in on nostalgia and "improve" everything by making a poorer and more powerful luke, an older and quirkier yoda, a smaller and sillier R2-D2, a more powerful planet killer, etc.... And maybe done a storyline to explain how another evil group came into power in such a short time taking over the galaxy and making Leia a rebel again then maybe Rian Johnson could have created a better middle movie but for fucks sake JJ decided to turn the heroes into a small resistance again while also wiping out 5-6 planets and blowing up the super weapon. There was literally nowhere for him to go and leave enough meat for a third movie so he tried to do some side stories while keeping the plot going.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Yeeeeaaaaah, i guess you missed the news where as part of the Disney deal the whole expanded universe was declared non-canon and anything beside the 6 films is treated like never existed.

You said "Young solo is a new creation and 100% belongs to Disney." That's not accurate. Parts of Solo are taken specifically from the old canon.

[Shadowferal]

The Star Wars fanbase is fucking scary.

Sadly, there are worse ones.

Yeah...it's like Disney can do no wrong..on anything.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

What does that even mean? They publicly declared EU non canon, even though they use what they want without giving credit when they see fit. And yes I know they technically don't NEED to give any kind of credit, but when you say it's not canon and not part of our universe then take idea, designs, stories, etc from it...kind of a subtle dick move if you ask me. But it doesn't really matter to me. The originals are Star Wars and nothing will capture that magic again. The EU has a lot of great stuff in it that I grew up on and to me it's still part of the universe.

it kinds sounds like you know what it means already.

[Anastacy]

Yeah...it's like Disney can do no wrong..on anything.

Quote someone who said that.

I dare you.

I can dislike the Star Wars fandom and dislike things Disney does.

[Thontor]

I disagree with the premise. Star Wars is better than ever. The Force Awakens, The Last Jedi, Rogue One, and Solo are all great movies.

[Aurrora]

I thought Rey toys sold really well?

They did, it’s Rose and Holdo that don’t sell.