Star Wars: John Favreau's Sequel Retcon Rumors [Discussion]

[rhorle]

Now imagen you pay 4 billion for a IP, spend about 1,5 billion in making and market 5 films, and get about 4,5 billion in proffit.... how mutch money have you done? Yes you are -1.0 billion back (the number is only approximate but it show the scale)

It has only been 7 years since Disney acquired Star Wars. Recouping such a big investment in nearly 10 years is still good. The deal was also for half cash half Disney stock. Disney stock was around 50 a share in 2012 and is now, as of today, $119 a share. The deal has more then paid for itself even with some of the lackluster movies. It is not a economic failure.

[PaladinSum]

Make a Revan movie with a Sith as a protagonist.

Sounds like fun. I don't think we can have a good one since we have people that treat protagonist as short hand for good and sith as short hand for evil.

And we can't have a movie where an evil person is the good guy. Too problematic is the word.

[unbound]

TLJ definitely lost money. Star Wars movies almost always do, it’s the merch sales where they take it in. That did not happen with TLJ, it being the worst movie ever made.

No, TLJ did *not* lose money. Here's the math:

Domestic Box Office = 620.2 million (studio got about 60% because of the deal they made of 65% of receipts initially). Studio take = $372.1 million
International Box Office = 712.4 million (studio usually gets about 1/3...TLJ probably got more due to similar deal as they pushed domestically). Studio take (minimum) = $237.5 million

Budget = $317 million
Advertising = $200 million (it was a big advertising campaign)

Revenue = $609.6 million
Costs = $517 million

Profits = $92.6 million

I get that some people didn't like TLJ, but it was not remotely "the worst movie ever made". If you want to be taken seriously, stop with the hyperbole.

[tikcol]

Sounds like fun. I don't think we can have a good one since we have people that treat protagonist as short hand for good and sith as short hand for evil.

And we can't have a movie where an evil person is the good guy. Too problematic is the word.

Revan is a weird case because as far as I know he's all over the place when it comes to the force and his view of being a Sith. But yea I agree that most people would have a problem with having an "evil" character as the main lead in a star wars movie.

I think it would be a great breath of fresh air for the franchise.

[PaladinSum]

Revan is a weird case because as far as I know he's all over the place when it comes to the force and his view of being a Sith. But yea I agree that most people would have a problem with having an "evil" character as the main lead in a star wars movie.

I think it would be a great breath of fresh air for the franchise.

How about we follow Jolee around leading up to Revan? His storys were interesting, he has a much more relaxed view on light vs dark and he can connect us to Revan.

[Crillam]

The Rise of Skywalker has 51% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes, and a 53% critic score on Metacritic. It was not well reviewed.

Well that means that atleast more than 50% of the critics liked it. Could have been much worse imo.

[shadowmatrix]

TLJ is the worst movie I have ever seen also.

You say that like its a bad thing, there are far worse out there and that statement has nothing to do with liking or disliking the movie.

[Dundebuns]

Revan is a weird case because as far as I know he's all over the place when it comes to the force and his view of being a Sith. But yea I agree that most people would have a problem with having an "evil" character as the main lead in a star wars movie.

I think it would be a great breath of fresh air for the franchise.

They've written themselves into a corner with the Sith. Instead of it being an alternate view point to the Force (passion and emotion vs calmness and balance) they're now just archetypal baddies.

[Jotaux]

No, TLJ did *not* lose money. Here's the math:

Domestic Box Office = 620.2 million (studio got about 60% because of the deal they made of 65% of receipts initially). Studio take = $372.1 million
International Box Office = 712.4 million (studio usually gets about 1/3...TLJ probably got more due to similar deal as they pushed domestically). Studio take (minimum) = $237.5 million

Budget = $317 million
Advertising = $200 million (it was a big advertising campaign)

Revenue = $609.6 million
Costs = $517 million

Profits = $92.6 million

I get that some people didn't like TLJ, but it was not remotely "the worst movie ever made". If you want to be taken seriously, stop with the hyperbole.

Yes it did lose money. What is the opportunity cost of 4B spent on the franchise? TLJ lost money for investors, they could have invested into literally anything else. You're advertising is off by about 100m as well.

[Biomega]

No, TLJ did *not* lose money. Here's the math:

Domestic Box Office = 620.2 million (studio got about 60% because of the deal they made of 65% of receipts initially). Studio take = $372.1 million
International Box Office = 712.4 million (studio usually gets about 1/3...TLJ probably got more due to similar deal as they pushed domestically). Studio take (minimum) = $237.5 million

Budget = $317 million
Advertising = $200 million (it was a big advertising campaign)

Revenue = $609.6 million
Costs = $517 million

Profits = $92.6 million

I get that some people didn't like TLJ, but it was not remotely "the worst movie ever made". If you want to be taken seriously, stop with the hyperbole.

It's very hard to accurately gauge from the outside how profitable movies are, because of something called "Hollywood Accounting" - it's common practice for big studios to deflate or even eliminate profits on the books to reduce the expenditures that scale off profit, such as e.g. taxes or royalties. The numbers are purposely obfuscated and the practice - while controversial - remains (mostly) legal. In addition, a lot of the peripheral numbers such as e.g. merchandise sales are not made available to the public in the first place, and even in investor earning calls may be "creatively" booked. Companies are reluctant to present an accurate picture of their profit/loss and will do everything they can to make themselves appear in whatever way seems most advantageous for their current strategy.

We can SPECULATE on what has been going on, though, and that does not look all that great for SW. It might not be 100% accurate, but it's also unlikely to be 0% accurate.

[Itori]

Disney knows that the new ones are basically just bad remakes of 4,5, and 6. It would be in their best interest to just kick them out, call them a non canon alternate universe, and continue from where 6 left off with luke rebuilding the order. If they wanted to bank hard on it they would make a trilogy based on Revan, never show their face as to keep the mystery due to the player being male or female.

[Zorachus]

Is this rumor all based on what one guy says in his shitty YouTube videos, Doomcock guy? Or Midnight's Edge? Both are fucking tool bags.

Both those channels, get off on being negative Nancy's and Debbie downers, and just trashing most of Star Wars and Star Trek too. I recall them totally trashing all Star Trek stuff when Discovery first came out on CBS All Access, saying it would never make it to Season 3, will be cancelled, and that Star Trek Picard was so bad will be cancelled and never see a second season, blah, blah, blah. Well Discovery has been renewed through Season 5, and Picard guaranteed 3 seasons, and then there's the new Captain Pike in the works.

So per Doomcock, will the sequel trilogy be retconned or wiped from history as an alternative Legends story only? Not a fucking a chance Disney does this, they spent billion$ to get the Star Wars IP, they will never admit fault or mistake. What most likely happens, Kathleen Kennedy's contract runs out next year in 2021, and they let her retire, no big media deal about it, and then bring in Jon F or Dave F to helm the franchise. The reality is, just deal with it, the sequels sucked, but they aren't going to just disappear or vanish, or be rebooted or redone, no way. Disney needs to refocus on what works, like Rogue One, and The Mandalorian, and Clone Wars type stuff.

But I agree, the new Disney sequel trilogy was pretty bad, but not for the reasons they typically say, like it's some Democrat liberal idea to make shitty Star Wars, LOL, no. To me the characters were bland, and forgettable, and Disney royally screwed up not having one director doing all 3, and one close knit writing team working together on all three. I think Disney thought they could just throw the Millennium Falcon on screen, have some storm troopers, and lightsabers, and call it a day, and the fans would flock to go see them no matter what. But they forgot the most important parts, STORY + CHARACTERS.

Rey was an ok character, but her being the Emperor's granddaughter is silly dumb. Kylo Ren was the pussy wannabe Vader, or emo wimpy Sith. Finn was useless. Poe forgettable. Rest of the new characters LAME. Disney blew a big opportunity in having Han, Luke and Leia go on one last adventure together, those three actors absolutely should have shared screen time together in a fun chapter or two.

And then The Last Jedi, what a disgrace, so many things set up in The Force Awakens, that wasn't even touched on in TLJ, as if Rian Johnson didn't even watch TFA or read the script before making TLJ. And then Rise of Skywalker, was just a mess, yeah it looked cool, but story wise was a train wreck.

Anyways, Disney may be best for TV now. The Mando is the best show so good. Season 7 of the Clone Wars was fantastic. Mando season 2 should be great. Obi-Wan with Ewan McGregor should rock.

- - - Updated - - -

Disney knows that the new ones are basically just bad remakes of 4,5, and 6. It would be in their best interest to just kick them out, call them a non canon alternate universe, and continue from where 6 left off with luke rebuilding the order. If they wanted to bank hard on it they would make a trilogy based on Revan, never show their face as to keep the mystery due to the player being male or female.

Yes, I would love to see the classic Dark Horse comics Dark Empire made into a live action movie or series. That was the best of post RoTJ stuff.
https://www.darkhorse.com/Books/17-4...ire-Trilogy-HC

That's what I want to see, takes place around the same timeline as The Mandalorian TV show. They could recast a young Luke Skywalker, with the right actor, just like they did with Captain Kirk with Chris Pine, or James Bond or Batman movies with different actors in the famous role.

- - - Updated - - -

Recasting the OT characters can be done, and has been in Hollywood tons of times, with some great results, and bad results;

- James Bond has had, what? 6 different actors play the character
- Batman has had like 8 different actors in the role of the long period he's been around
- Superman has had over half a dozen different actors
- Chris Pine did great as the young Captain Kirk reboot

My point, the right young actor could play the Luke Skywalker character in a Dark Empire trilogy.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

They've written themselves into a corner with the Sith. Instead of it being an alternate view point to the Force (passion and emotion vs calmness and balance) they're now just archetypal baddies.

Sith have always been archetypal baddies the dark side it self Mabye not but pretty much every group of sith in the old Eu was evil to one extent or another.

[Ragedaug]

IMO, they would recast all of them with people that look similar enough but a little older. That's how I'd do it.

P.s. The sequels did not excite me or fascinate me, they seemed to lack imagination and a rehash of 4-6 with all the gender swapping social politicking. there was very little that jumped out at me about any of their locations, .. it was very safe. But I think that's what they wanted.

I'm thinking the same as far as recasting it with similar looking actors, as for the "why" they would do it, it lines up with what you noted next. There's very little excitement for the universe going forward. Movies sales are way down from expectations, as are toys. I'm not sure about the books or comics, but I would guess they are down as well.


As some folks have noted, Disney is looking for a bigger ROI for the franchise. When you consider the $4B price tag, in the last couple movies you have one that might have made 100M in profit, and the previous one straight up lost money (so you can add that to the $4B). With the current story, where do you go from there? The consensus from those who don't want 7-9 rebooted seems to be to make new movies that use completely new characters. Disney could have done that without spending $4B. The reason they spent $4B was for the rights to the characters already created, as fans are more likely to come back to watch characters or actors they already know and enjoy then something new. So I don't know that generic space opera with good & bad magic warriors is worth the $4B. I think they know they have to tie the story back to the Skywalkers to keep getting billion dollar box offices.

[rhorle]

I'm thinking the same as far as recasting it with similar looking actors, as for the "why" they would do it, it lines up with what you noted next. There's very little excitement for the universe going forward. Movies sales are way down from expectations, as are toys. I'm not sure about the books or comics, but I would guess they are down as well.

There is a lot of excitement around the Disney+ shows including the Mandalorian. It is silly to say there is no excitement for the Star Wars universe going forward. It's Star Wars. The notion that there is little excitement just reeks of a projection of a personal disdain for Disney's direction.

[ParanoiD84]

Would have no problem if they retconned that sequal trilogy mess, last couple movies was very meh and last one i enjoyed was rogue one i think.

Personal opinion of course but not even hyped when hearing about new SW stuff anymore. Mandalorian is alright though.

[Zorachus]

Disney got two things right;

- Rogue One = Great
- The Mandalorian = Fantastic

They got a lot bad or just shit;

- TFA = A New Hope 2.0 reboot
- TLJ = Easily the worst Star Wars movies of all 11 films
- RoSW = mediocre at best, but when we sit back and actually think about the story, you realize it's pure garbage.

What they got so so;

- Solo movie, not bad, not great, it was good.


To me the future for sure is TV for Star Wars. The Mandolrian is excellent, and I'm sure season 2 will be better. Obi-Wan should be great. Clone Wars season 7 was very good. And the other TV shows coming to Disney+ in the next couple years all sound potentially promising.

I think Disney needs to move Star Wars in a fresh direction, and try new stuff, something different, new characters, no reboots or telling the same story again. Create something brand new and original from scratch, but set in that universe.

But to be selfish, would totally love a Dark Empire series, with a good young actor playing a 30 something year old Luke Skywalker, showing Luke as almost God like powers, and tempted by the dark side.

[Triceron]

Disney knows that the new ones are basically just bad remakes of 4,5, and 6. It would be in their best interest to just kick them out, call them a non canon alternate universe, and continue from where 6 left off with luke rebuilding the order. If they wanted to bank hard on it they would make a trilogy based on Revan, never show their face as to keep the mystery due to the player being male or female.

That doesn't really work for an audience that will expect to empathize with the character at some point, and aren't looking to do so with a mute/robot of a main character.

Silent protagonists work spectacularly in say a Videogame medium, not so much in a blockbuster movie. I'm not sure how else you'd keep the mystery, unless you're talking about gender neutral voice modulation which seems kinda messy.

[PACOX]

Now imagen you pay 4 billion for a IP, spend about 1,5 billion in making and market 5 films, and get about 4,5 billion in proffit.... how mutch money have you done? Yes you are -1.0 billion back (the number is only approximate but it show the scale)

Imagen if you invested 6,5 billion in "safe" S&P 500 stock insted of making Star War movies. You will have made atlest 10 billion in proffit insteed (in the long run)

In the eyes of a big corperation Star Wars is a economic faliur... the yield is horibel for the money invested, and its not like the Star Wars IP have increased in value.

They didn't buy production rights, they bought Lucas.
The IP is more than films...

- - - Updated - - -

It's very hard to accurately gauge from the outside how profitable movies are, because of something called "Hollywood Accounting" - it's common practice for big studios to deflate or even eliminate profits on the books to reduce the expenditures that scale off profit, such as e.g. taxes or royalties. The numbers are purposely obfuscated and the practice - while controversial - remains (mostly) legal. In addition, a lot of the peripheral numbers such as e.g. merchandise sales are not made available to the public in the first place, and even in investor earning calls may be "creatively" booked. Companies are reluctant to present an accurate picture of their profit/loss and will do everything they can to make themselves appear in whatever way seems most advantageous for their current strategy.

We can SPECULATE on what has been going on, though, and that does not look all that great for SW. It might not be 100% accurate, but it's also unlikely to be 0% accurate.

In that case ALL financial assessments of movies are unreliable - for praise or for criticism.

[Zorachus]

Not to go far off topic, but what should or could have happened in 2014 when George Lucas was ready to sell his Star Wars family for $4.5 billion?

Would a different company have handled it better than Disney? I really don't know.

A different creative team at Disney, would helped? ( Kathleen Kennedy seemed like a smart choice way back then, as she had a golden track record of giant blockbuster success in Hollywood. No one knew 6 years ago, she'd have done such a mediocre to bland job in her position, maybe she just doesn't truly get Star Wars like Jon F and Dace F do? )

Keeping George Lucas on board as a background role, manager over seeing stuff?