Question about the size of the backlash

It's definitely a shame. But at least Episode IX will be an event, and will absolutely make a bunch of movie regardless. People want to see the end of the trilogy, after all.


As to this forum question, you get the same from everybody. There are certain people on this forum that feel validated of their opinion, by mentioning how many people agree with them that the movie is good. It's just simple human psychology. Nobody wants to be the lone one out.

 

I was just looking through page one of this thread when I saw this post... fast forward a few months and we've seen a Star Wars film that lost money. So something is up. Personally, I don't buy the idea that it is "Star Wars fatigue." I think it is a combination.

Backlash: There is a backlash. I'd say it is somewhere near 15-25% of the hardcore fans. TLJ missed the conservative estimates of making $1.6 billion by what, 15%? The drop off after opening weekend was quite large. More than I would have thought. And, as Bob Ross said, it made 90% of what TFA did. So to say there is no backlash, or it's just five white guys in their mom's basement is incorrect.

Solo: Solo was a film no one really wanted. Heck, I saw AOTC in the theaters twice (a record low for me when it comes to Star Wars) and saw Solo only twice as well. For me part of the problem is the fact that there is just no plan to these films. There appears to be no rhyme nor reason as what is released and how these things are being done. I hope the pause that they are taking in moving forward with films means they will start to plan these things out.

There was too much bad press attached to this film as well. Removing the directors from it, as well as removing CT from IX, abandoning the Boba Fett film, and the rumors about problems with both Rogue One and TFA doesnt' speak highly for the ability of KK and co. to hire directors. I hope this trend changes.

War with fans: How this effects things is debatable, but the tone LFL and it's employees have taken with the criticism is, in my mind, detrimental to the brand. Both Ron Howard and Colin T. have shown how to deal with critics. I'm constantly surprised at how much time RJ and Chuck W. spend on twitter. Arent' they busy writing stuff? Stop attack the customers. Let the idiotic complaints roll of the back. Take the valid ones to heart and do better next time.

Finally, if you aren't sure about the reality of the problems with LFL and Star Wars, think of this: Jumangi is releasing against IX. Two years ago that would have been seen as suicidal. Today not so much. Heck even the rebooted Jumanji did much better than I thought (I thought it would be DOA thanks to TLJ).

 

I would upvote this post twice if it was possible.

 

Assuming your higher estimate of 25%, what percentage of the audience for Star Wars films can be considered 'hardcore' fans?

If it's like 98% then that might be a problem. It also probably means Star Wars survives solely on a cult following. Do you think that's the case?

If on the other hand it's more like 2% then, well, 25% of that 2% of the audience is hardly worth being concerned about.

And what was the drop-off of takings for AOTC compared to TPM?

According to Box Office Mojo, when adjusted for inflation, TLJ is a number 43 in the all-time box office domestic grosses. It puts it at #6 in the Star Wars box office chart - above R1, ROTS and AOTC.

TPM is at #3, so it seems to me that AOTC suffered more relatively speaking! Also it's all 'first episodes' in the top three, which suggests there was always going to be a depreciation with the sequel.

I'd say most people probably only go to see a movie once at the cinema. How important is multiple viewings at the cinema to any movie's box office success?

For what it's worth, I saw Solo three times! The last time I saw a SW movie that many times was for TFA. Since TPM I see each one at least twice. The second time is to watch it without the burden of expectations and to just enjoy it for what it is. (I didn't see those three times out of any preference for them though - just circumstances led me to seeing them three times )

Lots of films have had changes to the director during production. 'Wizard Of Oz', 'Gone With The Wind' and 'Spartacus' to name a few. It didn't do them any harm!

(UK critic did a pod cast about it - might be region sensitive though, so apologies if not everybody can watch)

 

i saw TFA twice as many times in the theatre as i saw TLJ.
zero to do with my love of the films--just circumstance and opportunity.

to be fair, the movie industry was much different in those days and catastrophic directorial overturn actually fed the media frenzy around GWTW. people were going to line up to see that film no matter whether the press was good or bad. in the case of Oz, the film flopped. whether this had anything to do with bad press is debatable.

the general audience doesn't know anything about the directorial drama surrounding Solo. maybe some saw tweets or headlines about it, but at the end of the day people will go see stuff that excites them. i suspect the problem with Solo is that it was too niche: casual fans are afraid of the sprawl of this franchise and of trying to keep up with it. despite Ehrenreich's success in the role, he didn't have the star power to bring in casuals. word of mouth was good, but not great. the boycott likely had little impact, but there was clearly a general malaise about the film. no one i know was excited about going to see it and many of them put off a theatrical viewing (these are casual fans who aren't running out to see the Marvel movies either, per se).

if Lucasfilm made a miscalculation, it was in their conservative marketing (but again, i think they'd already written the film off).

 

It is hard to say what the size of the "hard core" fan is compared to casual fans. But I'd say (i think I did say it) there is no doubt there is a backlash. Is it good for the brand??? You know, the old PT Barnum saying that all publicity is good? I don't know.

When it comes to TLJ, someone pointed out on one of the threads that it was, after 3 days, at 90% of TFA. Take out those 3 days, just for argument sake, and what do you get? I went to see it opening day cause I was excited as heck to find out what happened to Rey, Finn, Snoke, Poe AND to finally see Luke again.

I would HOPE TLJ is above Rogue One and AOTC! That's not saying much. I LOVE LOVE LOVE Rogue One. Personally it is tied for first place for me (with Empire and ANH). But I never expected it to do crazy insane Box Office numbers. I could also point out that toy sales, dvd sales also fell. I'm sure yo'll then counter "no one buys that stuff anymore blah blah blah." And I get it. I do. For the first 5 months or so after TLJ released I argued it WAS a good film. Part of it, and I'm NOT criticizing you (I'm criticizing myself), is that as a fan boy I hate the idea of Star Wars failing and going back to, heaven forbid, the 1984-1987 era when there was NOTHING new . No books, no games, no films, nothing. But noting there is a problem and then FIXING the problem is how we prevent those dark times from returning. We don't prevent that by putting our head in the sand and denying that there is a problem.

Solo failed for numerous reasons. As FN notes, too niche. I'm a HUGE fan and even I wasn't excited about a Solo origins film. It was fun, but that isn't enough apparently. The hard core base that has been alienated didn't turn out. The marketing wasn't solid (a bit conservative and a bit late). The release timing was crap. The bad press didnt' help, and while other films recovered, I'm sorry are you REALLY comparing Solo to GWTW??????? Different time, different film, different everything.

Hopefully this causes LFL to rethink what they are doing and how they are doing it. Release films in a way that makes sense. I mean why Solo and why now? Why restart Star Wars with TFA using a TON of characters no one knows, especialy if you are going to take Luke and totally change him? I would have released Rogue One first. Then a lead in to VII. Call it Luke: A Star Wars Story and show him rebuild the Jedi Order and fail. Show the formation of the Knights of Ren. Develop depressed and angry/war torn Luke. THEN go to VII. After that, try a one shot on Rey and Luke training. THEN VIII. One film building on the other. With a plan.

Like @FN-3263827 says, there is a general malaise amongst casual fans about "one shot" films, be they Star Wars or Marvel. You need to build excitement and have films build on each other, not just release things hilly nilly. Supposedly LFL wanted to emulate Marvel. Releasing Solo and Rogue One as one shots doesn't really make any sense if you are attempting to do what Marvel has done.

I think, at the end of the day, we ALL want Star Wars to be successful. I know I do.

 

- WARNING -

The following post contains SARCASM:

Don't let FeFe's keep you from laughing....​

They never told you what happened to our TV special, Lucas hated it... because we loved it.

We got Ewoks cause G.Walton Lucas didn't want to pay for Wookiees.

There is only so much CGI and talk of trade disputes that a fan can take.

Ironic. The Syfo Dyas typo ruined mine.

By that point, most were glad that end was near.

Damn, I love Attack of the Jangos now.

Nah. He just took a MASSIVE crap on it.

Darth Opey played it safe and didn't really ruin anything.

Prolly. He answers to KK and she has always wanted to make SW in her Social Justice loving image.

 

To all people, who say their childhood is raped over and over, I can say this: maybe your childhood should stay home at night at stop going to the same place it keeps getting raped at. Just sayin.

 

Why do you assume that all of those who dislike the movie, do this?

 

I guess we will all find out in December of 2019. I boycotted solo cause of tlj. I will also boycott part 9. It is obvious that we can’t truly prove who is right and wrong at this point.

I don’t think it’s fatigue or bad marketing. All Disney should have to do is make a commercial that shows the title Star Wars and the date and the fans will go...if the product didn’t have the problems tlj had.

MOD EDITED

 

It's a form of numbers fallacy; popularity fallacy. A "million screaming fans can't be wrong" fallacy. People are emotional beings, highly illogical. They like to think they are operating with reason, but they're not. People want to see themselves as experts in every field of thought; the enlightened. But they're not. And the truth is like an acid bath. So what they're really doing is forming conclusions based on emotion, then backward engineering "reason" to build a protective wall around their emotional conclusions. This isn't to say anyone is bad people or something negative, it's just that they're, well, human. But their "reason" is not reason, it is emotion masquerading as reason, and subjective disguised as objective.

Most people mistakenly believe that their subjective reactions to subjective experiences (such as movies) are based on objective realities. But they're not, they're based on emotional responses to a subjective experience. But that's not what is in their mind. In their mind, their reaction is based on an objective reality, and thus their reaction is a reasonable conclusion based on objective facts. It's "simple logic" as it were. They will create "objective reasons" for their dislike (or, like, people who like the movie can engage in numbers fallacy as well) of the film. These reasons are seen as being objective and based on reason even though they're not. If someone then disgrees with their "objective reasoning" then that person or group is perceived as engaging in a debate based on counter-reason, and the unstated proposition is that, the person or group who dislikes the movie and stated their 'reasons' are in fact, wrong. And of course "wrong" is perceived as equal to "ignorant" by a person or group who views their dislike as based on objective reasoning.

So people (generally men - sorry brothers it's true) don't like that. Being called 'wrong' or 'ignorant' is a burning hellfire. So now they have to 'prove' that they are right at any and all costs; their very dignity is now at stake (in their mind). And the first thing illogic does when a fight is at hand, is call for popularity. Strength in numbers. Summon the mob. The more people on my side, the more 'right' I become. This is why aggregators like Rotten Tomatoes will default into the argument. Numbers. The idea is that the more people in agreement, the more true something becomes. Reality is agreement.

But of course that's not the way reason works. When something is subjective, numbers become irrelevant. The more people in agreement doesn't mean anything; now it's just naked peer pressure. But the fundamental problem here is that subjective is being misperceived and passed off as objective. So the illusion has become the real, and any assault on the illusion is an assault on the real. Any assault on the illusion is an assault on the intelligence of the one misperceiving subjective as objective.

So that is the reasoning. Subjective being misperceived as objective, and illogic perceived as logic. At the heart of the illogic is a numbers fallacy being employed as a means of creating the illusion of being 'right'. And for all intents and purposes, the backlash that exists now, is not the backlash that existed at the first. This is because the backlash has moved quickly (as it always does) from "I disliked TLJ" to "I am right, you are wrong". It is no longer about the movie, it is about, who is right and who is wrong. An illusory war, fighting against phantasms of misperception. This is always the way it goes. I spent years posting on various religious forms and what I found was that people are generally not interested in what is true and what is not true, but that they are obsessed with proving "I am right and you are wrong". "My words are objective reality and any disagreemtn with my words is a disagreement with reality, and carries with it the unstated proposition that I am ignorant and wrong".

That is pretty much what is going on in all human thought: science, religion, politics, even movies. Everything. Truth lies face down in the street; trampled underfoot by the illogic and emotion of pride. All that exists is an illusory war of "I am right and you are wrong, and I will 'prove' it using whatever illogic can be mustered and you can't win and I can't lose because no one can tell what is reasonable and what is not, and we will continue fighting a phantasmal war of smoke and mirrors until kingdom come."

But yeah, that's the reason for numbers fallacy. The more the mob agreement, the more right one becomes, which means conversely the more wrong the opposition becomes. So "me and my friends" is more "right" than just "me", and if you disagree, "me and my friends" makes you more "wrong" than just "me". "My entire theater" makes one even more "right" than just "me and my friends" and "the RT audience score" makes everyone just about evenly "right", with the ones who disliked the movie being "more right"

 

I think this is one aspect of it, and its fed by both sides of the argument. However I think the motivations of people on both sides of the argument can't all be swept up by one definition. I also think to those arguing and discussing, they have different goals. Being one who dislikes TLJ, I wanted to understand what was appealing about it. I've had several discussions and I think I understand, I just don't feel it. To me going to watch TLJ was like going to watch Metallica, only to have them cover Taylor Swift's music for 3 hours, in their own style. Not what I was expecting, not what I wanted.

So speaking solely for myself, I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, and I don't need anyone telling me I'm right. I'm happy and still feel the belonging when a fellow fan with an opposite view point simply says "I understand". I don't need "your right", but simply the acknowledgement of my issues, even if you were able to move past it. I think this often gets lost in the discussions, because a lot of people don't know what they want. They only know that they like/dislike what they saw and it's fresh, and raw, and emotional and the topic is subjective. I don't think people are used to arguing about topics that are subjective, because usually when those come up, are hearts are not into it.

Think about it, if someone likes a different genre of music, we accept it, even if we disagree (at worst we tease them I good spirit). If someone dislikes an artist in a genre we generally like, we just move on to something we do like. With SW, it isn't that simple. In the end, I think there's a fear that something that we were once so passionate about has changed hands and will no longer give us new material that we will feel passionate about. On the other side, you have something that you feel equally passionate about and want more of this.

Our motivations are alike, but driven by different tastes and perspective, wants and fears of loss.

Edit: lol, I don't think the human desire to be right has gender. It's pretty universal ... just look at the silly topics people argue about. Toilet seat up or down, toilet paper roll ect...

 

or even if disagree with those issues being issues at all. ; D

even if the intent is not to "be right" or convince the other of that "rightness", the language often does not match up with the intent and that also contributes to friction.

saying that for both sides. because ultimately we're always "right" to ourselves.
opinions, and all critique of art is purely subjective.

even if you think there are models and standards and expectations and "rules".
sorry, no, the creative process is emotional and human and therefore messy and surprising.
and we respond to it in emotional, human, messy, and surprising ways.

and honestly, the less we treat it like a formula of rules and "should" and "has to" and "must" and "needs", the more likely we are to be happy.
but applying those rules is equally emotional, human, messy, and surprising. which makes it totally valid ~ but it will always be a lot harder to satisfy.

 

Bear in mind I wasn't talking about the motivations of everyone, but the motivations of a person who is employing a numbers fallacy. The reason to employ numbers fallacy is to increase the sense of rhetorical "rightness" of the proposition. The more agreement among numbers, the more justification for the claim.

I'm not meaning to say, anyone who disliked the movie is engaging in this line of thought. But if someone is saying something like "Me and my friends" or "my entire theater" or something like that, then they're employing a numbers fallacy and by that saying that in their line of thought, this is a "right or wrong" issue, thus the need to employ the fallacy to increase "rightness" by appealing to numbers. It's strength in numbers; might makes metaphysical right.

I don't think that analogy works, but might be saying something. I don't think it works because with Metallica you're talking about music that's in the past. You know it. You know what to expect. Star Wars is different in that you don't know what to expect. Most of the top franchises like Marvel, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, you know what to expect. They're all based on source material. They're really just, adapting something already known and beloved onto the screen. When people talk about the accolades of Keven Feige or Peter Jackson, I'm not sure about that. It's like doing a cover-song of something everyone already knows and likes. That scenario fits the analogy. Note that I'm not saying these men aren't talented, I'm saying that I think a lot of thier success is based in large part on the success of the material they're adapting to the screen. I don't think Kevin Feige is in remotely the same boat as Kathleen Kennedy or Rian Johnson, or, JJ Abrams at this point.

But with Star wars, you don't have that source material. These aren't adaptations of pre-existing material. The only one that comes close to that is maybe TFA, and TFA kind-of pays the price for doing that, in that a lot of people harp(ed) endlessly about it being too derivative of the source material of the OT. So I don't think comparing Star Wars to a Metallica concert in which your expectations are justified since you already know what to expect because you know the music by heart, is a right analogy. A right analogy with Metallica would be something like, at the release of the black album, a person says "That sucks and Metallica is ruined. Their ability to write music is terrible now. That isn't the proper way to write good music. The pacing is all off, you can't write in those time signatures it's bad music writing; and what is up with that cheesy 'Nothing Else Matters' rock ballad. This is not Metallica."

BUT I do think the analogy is saying something in your statement "Not what I expected." Expectations. But were they justified? Should they have even been there? I'm sure that all of the fan theorizing played a huge factor in much of the antipathy. People tend to take their theorizing as something more than theory. A lot of the time on these forums, I can see certain people setting themselves up to be disappointed. It's not that the film itself is bad or disappointing, it's that their expectation doesn't happen, or, someone else's does. And really, it again comes down to being "right", or, being right about someone else's theory being wrong. Expectations of being right. Those expectations. It's almost quasi-religious in nature. Fortunately(?) the stakes aren't near as high. Imagine the weeping and gnashing of teeth we'd be seeing on these forums if they were.

I don't disagree there at all. I've said before that we like what we like, and don't like what we don't like, and that's pretty much all the logic there is to it. Dislike of any form or piece of artistic expression is a given. If I'm in a discussion such as this, I'm not trying to change someone's likes or dislikes; it won't be about likes and dislikes. It will be about, right reasoning and just judgment. I won't be saying, this is good and you should like it, I'll be saying, whatever your likes or dislikes, that premise you're using to condemn is unreasonable and unjust. If there's anything I'm up to, across all of the internet in which I internet, it's to challenge bad reasoning and, especially, unjust judgment. Because I think, I know, we can do better. All of the world's problems are founded on bad reasoning and unjust judgment. Someone once said, all our dignity lies in thought, let us strive, then, to think well. If you're seeing me on a Star Wars site, it's because I'm using it as a means to an end which goes far beyond Star Wars.

And as the proverb goes, iron sharpens iron. I get as much as anyone else possibly does. It's for my own benefit as well, I won't deny it. I'm surrounded by teachers, teaching me things I need to understand; whether they know what they're doing or not, we're all in this together.

All I can say is that in my experience, being "right" at all costs is the indisputable domain of man. Are there women who tend the same? Sure. But from my point of view, they have are an atypical that has entered (willing or not) into the arena of behavior typical to the man.

 

Well I can now say that I have watched solo and enjoyed it thoroughly. I was looking forward to seeing it when I heard it was being produced. I was apart of the boycott due to the fact of how much I disliked viii. I am a huge Star Wars fan. I’ve read over 400 Star Wars books. I enjoyed episodes 1-6 and rouge 1. I wasn’t happy about Han dying in episode vii but understood that Harrison didn’t want to have to keep doing this character. I personally think that over time solo will be considered a great movie. It’s unfortunate that it had to pay the price of the backlash/boycott.

I know people are still not convinced that the boycott is very large, but numbers don’t lie. I know Disney is hoping to end the skywalker saga and move on. I think that’s a bad plan. The die hard Star Wars fans that have read all the books love the way the books carried on the story. We like the story of the characters we are familiar with. Now I know I can’t speak for all people on this issue, but I’m sure that I’m not the only person to think this way.

I hope Disney has done a great deal of research by reading the posts that the fans have expressed about the reasons why they are unhappy about episode viii. Hopefully they took the research a step further and researched what upset the fans with the books. And most importantly learn that you can’t just title a movie with Star Wars and think that it’ll make billions. Star Wars fans are intelligent and passionate about Star Wars.

Hopefully they have learned that a trilogy needs to flow properly and if that trilogy is apart of two other trilogies, it should flow with them. I know jj Abrams is a great writer and director. I don’t believe he can fix the mess that was created with episode viii in episode ix. I firmly believe that episode viii needs to be stricken from cannon.

I hope jj can fix this mess. But you can’t fix it with bringing back dead characters in a non-corporeal state of existence, in my opinion.

I love Star Wars and hope that Disney will make things better. I know they can’t please everyone, and I don’t expect perfection or to like everything about the movies. But I think the backlash is real and sizable.

I have started to re-read the books. I just started re-reading the books that introduce the yuuzhan vong. I wish Disney would’ve started episode vii with these books. They were great.

 

I don't think the "boycott" hurt Solo that much, but I do think the backlash did. A boycott presumes people got together to avoid this movie, and I don't think that happened. I think it's more a lot of people were upset with TLJ and simply didn't want to see anything SW for a while. IX being an extension to TLJ I think will suffer as well, just not to the same degree as Solo. Time will heal some wounds, and I think people will still be curious to see how they include Leia and Luke. There will be draws for even the "haters". I'm guessing 1B, + or - 100 million or so. This is all conjecture however without any scientific data to back anything up lol.

As for the Vong, I think you'd get an equal split, if not more, going that route. The problem with the Vong series is the same with the perception of the ST. It feels like there was no plan. Authors jumped in and out putting their own spin on things. They worked themselves into a hole and their solutions felt contrived. They lacked direction and a goal to the story. It was all shock value with little depth or substance. Sounds a lot like the arguments said about the ST and TLJ, doesn't it?

Personally, I would have preferred they had gone with a modified combo Thrawn/Jedi Academy trilogy. Keep the finer elements of both, picking highlights of a few other series, eliminate the corny ones like Sun Crusher, Luuke ect.... Daala as a strong female villain. Karrde as a minority cast. Thrawn as the main big bad. Mara Jade as kind of an anti-hero and strong female lead. The OT3, Jacen, Jaina (or Kylo and Rey, they'd basically serve a similar purpose). I would have skipped out on Anakin Solo. I think it could have been a stronger script. I think they could have pulled off something like what Marvel is doing adapting elements of comics into the movies, but in different ways.

I don't think they could have done much more than a trilogy with this, but at the age the OT3 are at, I doubt more than a trilogy would have been expected. Though I'm sure some fans hate or dislike this idea, I think it would have pleased more fans than the ST currently has. I'm fairly certain it wouldn't have caused the same type of backlash as TLJ.

But that's in the past, the moment is lost. We have what we have, for better or worse.

 

I agree about the thrawn/Jedi school, but I doubt there’d be as big of a backlash. Luke, during the vong series didn’t give up. I like anakin solo. There was a backlash when they killed him off actually, just like when they killed chewy. I just mentioned the vong cause the timing of the books would have been close. By rights they could’ve started at the legacy era.

As far as backlash/boycott, to me it’s all the same. People are upset and expect better. I hope it gets better. Movies in general these days aren’t as well written in my opinion as they were in the 80’s and 90’s. They depend to much on special effects and not dialogue. But that’s just my opinion.

They can’t please everyone, but they should try. Cheers.

 

Today there has been an unusual surge in people looking at old fanzines and reading old SW opinions.They look familiar...

 

Vocal negativity can be overwhelming to behold. Especially in the social media age. And we're also in an era where so-called "fan outlets" have come to recognize that there is increased server traffic / money to be made in pandering to negativity. It's a formula that has been growing in the media landscape for a long time and it has been amplified by social media. And all of that swirling negativity can leave some people with an impression that lots of people share that opinion. But is that true? I think not. What we see from some segments of "fandom" (and I deliberately used quotes because I truly question if some of these people are stll truly fans) is that some are a very vocal minority. Sometimes the loudest voice in the room can overwhelm the conversation.

Lots of people have a range of opinions about the direction of Star Wars and Lucasfilm in the post George Lucas era. Take them for what they're worth, but always bear in mind what they are: opinions. Take the time to observe the material and form your own opinion.

One common refrain that I hear is that Star Wars has lost some of its magic. Is that true? I don't know, but I think that it's a debatable on a number of fronts. For many of the OG fans who saw the Original Trilogy when it was first released, Star Wars was a world changer. I remember seeing the first film in '77 at the age of 5, and I was amazed! And that astonishment carried through when I saw TESB in 1980 and ROTJ in 1983. The kind of impression that was made was indelible, and I think it was due in large part to the age of the audience. Kids are incredibly impressionable! And the place that the OT held in the heart of those original fans is almost certainly linked to associations that they have of those films with their childhoods. Nostalgia is incredibly powerful.

And then you also have the transformative effect that Star Wars had on the film industry. George Lucas along with Stephen Spielberg have given us some great films. And they're also largely responsible for the creation of the summer Hollywood blockbuster. That impacted the way movies have been both produced and marketed. Special effects were now a major component of Hollywood movies thanks to many of the techniques that came from the OT. Much more attention was paid to the musical score because of John Williams work. But a lot of what was special in those first three films became a FORMULA. And while some may say that imitation is the greatest form of flattery, the normalization of filmmaking techniques that were the results of so much innovation in the OT made them less special for movies that followed.

Lucasfilm has had to contend with these factors ever since. Nostalgia can be great for marketing purposes, but it can also set up very high expectations. And filmmaking innovations that were groundbreaking in the 1980's are viewed as old hat for 21st century movie-goers. Fans were critical of the Special Editions when they came out in 1996. Expectations were high when Episode I came out. Initially, a lot of fans loved it. But did it strike the same chord for a 30 year old who saw ANH at the age of 8? That didn't seem to be the case. And I attribute much of this reaction to the negative aspects of nostalgia: who can live up to expectations that have built up over a generation?

This is where I believe the vocal minority enters the scene. They want Star Wars to live up to expectations that may be unrealistic. The visions they had in their heads of classic OT characters like Luke Skywalker and Han Solo taking part in new adventures probably should have happened 10 or 15 years ago when those actors were in their prime. And we saw the tragic effects of time and personal demons come to pass when Carrie Fisher died unexpectedly before the release of THE LAST JEDI. They had visions of a Sequel Trilogy that would be structured around print stories that people have enjoyed for decades. These are daunting challenges for any film franchise to overcome.

The point? Don't let someone else's opinion sway your own feelings. Film is ultimately subject to our own impressions as members of the audience. And try to respect the boundaries with filmmakers/actors while taking into account that filmmaking is not a crowd-sourced creative endeavor.